(no subject)

Before going to bed, because I stayed up past my bedtime again. I should warn flist that I've been swiping icons again. Why? Because you have great ones and I'm too lazy to find, make my own. Only swiped from the folks with over 30 and only swiped the ones that weren't closely associated with them. Anywho - the lucky people were emberslog, ann1962, and superplin.
I did credit everyone who made them and that I swiped from. New default is from superplin embers log, because if sort of fits my current frame of mind best. Points at icon. Subject to change without a moment's notice. (as demonstrated by recent update.)

Journeyman - an unconventional time travel series

Woke up in an irritable mood for some reason - although did manage to thirty minutes of pilates exercises on my mat after a shower (yes, I know it would have made more sense to reverse the two, which occured to me while I was in the shower). Then made the mistake of reading the reviews in Entertainment Weekly - the reviewers in that mag used to be good, now they just grate on my nerves much the same way someone pulling their fingernails down a chalk board would. The television and movie reviews are *too* subjective, which I didn't realize was possible, and self-congratulatory. Providing me with very little insight on whether or not I'll them. In some cases they read like rants that I can read for free on the internet. Which begs the question - has the internet negatively affected the art of reviewing or was it always like this? Gillian Flyn is the worste of the bunch - she sounds like Carrie Bradshaw from Sex in the City, without the class.

Speaking of reviewing things....this is the first in a series of reviews on lesser known or below the radar tv shows that I think deserve a second look.

Journeyman

I've seen about four episodes of this one so far, which is enough to review it. Not that I don't judge tv shows on the basis of one episode - I do, there's too bloody many of them not to, but the ones that spark my interest - get four or five before I committ to them.

Journeyman on the surface appears to be yet another in a long series of shows about a guy or gal who helps strangers each week often to their own detriment. This trend started with the highly successful men on the run from (you fill in the blank) threat, typified by The Fugitive. It was followed by the man because of a weird science experiment must save others - The Incredible Hulk, The Six Million Dollar Man, and then jumped to the man who must redeem himself by saving others - Highway to Heaven, Angel, Forever Knight, and finally the man who gets stuck or lost or is part of an agency that travels through time - must save others to get back to his own time - Quantum Leap, TimeCop, and Time Tunnel.

I have never been much of a fan of this format - find it repetitive and predictable. It also has a tendency to leave me unsatisfied since the show keeps you by never resolving the problem at the center - which is why the person is forced to keep saving people even though he'd clearly be happier doing something else. With Angel - it was the curse and the hope for a possible shanshue which would make him human and allow him to be with Buffy, his one true love. Of course the character never achieves this - an apt metaphor for how life is about the journey not the destination or the proverbial carrot which in truth is little more than an illusion we have created to motivate ourselves. With Sam on Quantum Leap - it was saving enough people or hitting the perfect time solution so he could go back to his wife and family. Which of course never happened - instead he discovered that he became "saved" and left the earthly plain or something like that, the last episode of Quantum Leap was annoyingly surreal. The Fugitive may have been the only series that had a satisfying and/or optimistic ending - and it was a two hour movie event that set a record.

The time travel television series, episode on sci-fi tv shows, book, or film is not a favorite genre of mine either. Because they tend to focus too much on "the coolness" of traveling back in time. The main character spends a lot of time wandering around in the past, may even change a few things, but is the same - that character remains unaffected by what they've done, their lives aren't changed that much, no one seems to have missed them or noticed that they've left, and whatever they did in the past was clearly meant to be. Instead of using the idea to explore the potential problems of traveling through time - this is ignored.The only film I've seen that delved into the problems was The Butterfly Effect - not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination, but at least it explored what happens when you try to fiddle with your past. And how nothing ever turns out perfect. There is always a trade-off or price to be paid. Tweak one thread in the pattern of life - you tweak them all. Also, the last episode of Star Trek Next Generation - entitled All Good Things Must Come to An End did an interesting examination of how our choices affect what comes next in our lives and how we are the sum of all our experiences not just a few isolated ones.

What never interested me that much in regards to time travel or science fiction tv shows in general is the science. I go into the show not expecting the science to be accurate. Heck, TV can't even do an accurate legal show - why would they be able to do one that deals with quantum physics? As long as it isn't silly or really out there? I'm fine. Also helps that I don't know that much about quantum physics or physics in general - unlike law or criminal procedure, which I do know something about.

Journeyman, despite what it looks like, is not your typical time travel tv show or man saving strangers to his own detriment each week or for his own salvation. It is interested in exploring something the others in this genre weren't - which is what happens in the present when the guy is sucked back into the past? What effect does his absence have on his current life? And does whatever he accomplishes in the past justify what goes wrong when he is sucked backwards? The whole metaphor of losing one's present by dwelling too much on one's past is examined in great depth here. The other issue it explores is what effect does his ability to time travel have on the people he loves the most? How does it help or hurt them? The B plot line is not how saving lives is making Dan (the time traveler) a better person or changing the world in a great way, but how it is affecting his life in the present and his loved ones, how they are dealing with it or not as the case may be.

Unlike most sci-fi/fantasy shows - Journeyman is more interested in examining its characters. The action, the time periods, the science of it - are all secondary to the character exploration. I've never seen a time travel show do this before. It sticks closely to Dan's point of view, only veering to include his wife, Katie, and brother, Jack to get a glimpse of how his travels are affecting his current life. We don't know why he's traveling any more than he does. We aren't given any more information than Dan is given.

Each time Dan goes back in time, his current life is affected but not by what he is done in the past - but by his mere absence. In one episode, his wife finds herself alone on a plane that they boarded together. She has to explain to the authorities how he disappeared from the plane when it was in the air. The result is that both Dan and Katie (his wife) are barred from plane travel and the newspaper where Dan works - does an article on the gaps in security at that airport. That's just one example. Also time works differently - unlike Doctor Who, where the Tardis can take the Doctor and his companion back to the exact time they left or for that matter Back to the Future, where Marty McFly reappears and his family never knew he was gone - in Journeyman three days may have passed when for him it was no more than a couple of hours or vice versa. Also unlike Doctor Who or Marty, he has no control over it and little warning. In the world of Journeyman - time travel is not fun and an apt metaphor for how little control we have over the events in own lives and the lives of others. We are stitches in the fabric of life, not weavers of the fabric. We also get bits and pieces of Dan's life - since he only travels back in time in his own neighborhood and surroundings - so we see who owned his house before he did, what he used to do, what his wife used to do, what his relationship with his older brother had been like and where he came from.

The show is by no means perfect. Some of the A plot lines or savings of the week feel a bit cliche and underdeveloped. The twists are often telegraphed - such as last week's episode where Dan saves a man by thrusting him into danger. Or the delivery of a baby on an airplane during the 70s, they went a bit too far with the costumes, those of us who lived in the 70's know people did not dress quite that colorfully. But those are minor points and are floating more and more to the background as the series advances and its B plot lines come to the forefront. The only drawback of the B plot line taking center stage is that you can't just jump into the series and be able to follow it. You sort of have to watch from the beginning.

If you haven't tried Journeyman yet and have zip to do at 10 pm on Monday nights, now's the time.

Michael Clayton...movie review

Applied for yet another position at HBO - this makes four applications in the last two years, and three within the last three months. I have no idea why I keep bothering. The only way in HBO appears to be if you know someone or have a friend who works there, and I emphatically do not. Oh well, did get a few things done today - cleaned my apartment more or less, still can't quite get rid of all the clutter, went grocery shopping, went to the movie Michael Clayton with Wales - and had drinks and dinner later, where I proceeded to bore her with my job lay off woes. I've passed the stages of shock and denial and am now full throtal in anger mode. But as luck would have it - there's no one I can take my anger out on. So it is festering inside like an angry boil screaming to be popped. I keep having little ranting sessions inside my head which go no where except to make me despise myself for having them.


Michael Clayton

Interesting flick. Demands quite a bit from the audience - and is reminiscent of the 1970s and early 1980's character films such as Five Easy Pieces, They Shoot Horses Don't They, Save the Tiger, Network, The Verdict, Absence of Malice, and Taxi Driver. These were films that you had to sit and think about, concentrate on, and listen to. You didn't just escape into. Also there isn't much action in them, they unravel slowly and often will often be filled with long gaps of silence.

Michael Clayton stars George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, Sydney Pollack (who I've met in person and listened to a Q&A in an intimate session in college - he's the one who told me that the problem with Hollywood was whatever you created and poured your soul into, regardless of the awards you got? It's never ever good enough. And they are always asking you about your next picture. OR what you've done for them lately. Making movies is a bit like being stuck on an endless treadmill reaching for and never quite getting the proverbial carrot), and Tom Wilkinson (one of my all time favorite character actors). It's about a man's crisis of conscience and the circumstances that lead this main, the title character, to do what he decides to do and how he feels about it along the way. It is not a story about a court case or a political piece, but a story about a man who has sold out and now feels stuck, and is struggling desperately to get unstuck.

Ken Levine in his review compared the film favorably with Network, Erin Brokanvich, and The Verdict. Of the three films, it reminds me the most of Network - and Tilda Swinton's performance reminded me quite a bit of Faye Dunway's.
If you've never seen Network - you really should, if anything it will send a chill up your spine on how closely it resembles the world we are living in now - even more than it resembled the world it was depicting at the time.

Clayton is set up in a similar manner to the tv series Damages - in that we start the movie four days in the future, then flashbackwards until we eventually catch up to those four days and everything is finally played out. The device works - which is an accomplishment in of itself, since I've seen tv shows and films where it did not work. Jumping around in time is about as dicey as jumping point of views. Clayton also is into details, visual details. Such as listening to a voice over as we star at blank office rooms being cleaned by janitors - a metaphor for what the lead character does for a living - he's the Mr. Fix-it, the miracle worker, the cleaner, the janitor - who cleans up the company and the company's client's messes. Another image that sticks in my head long after the movie finished was Tilda Swinton scrunched up in a ladies bathroom, touching her sweaty armpit and staring in stressed hope at a bag with UNorth on it. I've met the character Tilda Swinton plays in this film. She has an icy cold veneer yet at the same time gets across a fragile and scared interior - like a fox perpetually caught in the headlights of an on-coming car. Her character is all the more frightening because I know it is real.

Unlike most films, we know at the end of this one who these people are, we as an audience, like or not, have walked ten miles in Michael Clayton's been under his skin. We know what he is thinking even if he doesn't say it and we know why. And in some absurd way, we know that Michael Clayton is us or known to us.

One of the best metaphors in the film is shown at the very beginning on a screen on the wall of Clayton's son's room during a tracking shot that flows over the child's action figures, and a huge green spider - the shot is repeated twice in the film - and both times the camera settles for a minute on the screen - a huge red circle with the words REALM+CONQUEST spelled out in the center. It is - we learn part of a game the son plays with his father - a type of card game. It is also a book he loans to his father's friend, Arthur, portrayed by Tom Wilkinson. Shortly after the words are shown to us - we see one of Clayton's co-workers ask about the on-coming merger with the big London firm. The merger hangs in the background just as those words do. Realm+Conquest.

What, the film asks, are we prepared to do to conguer the realm of another? What is more important? Karen Kroder defensively tries out different answers to the question of "life-work balance" in front of her mirror as she dresses for work. Finally deciding to merely side-step it. She is so defined by her job she ceases to exist outside of it. While Clayton has lost almost everything in an attempt to be able to walk away from his - he's only staying with it because his gamble did not work out but one can see how his job has beaten him down, stooped, heavy bags under his eyes, and tired beyond all reason, he shuffles as opposed to walks. So intense is Clooney's performance that even the body language conveys who his character is and what his character is feeling. It is not until close to the end that we see a glimmer of the trademark Clooney charm - but it lasts no more than a second and makes perfect sense when it does show up.

This may be amongst the best films I've seen this year. It plays with my head, it's images rolling about, asking to be contemplated. Examining again and again the difficult and complex emotions that inhabit its characters and how those characters choose to act on them.

Overall Rating:A+