|
Post by miniglik on Apr 5, 2008 19:10:05 GMT -5
Subtle. I think y'all have done a great job with that. I find the contrasting moralities of the major players pretty interesting. Ellison too. (I guess you could have meant him when you said "four main characters" although I took it to mean the four "people" living in Sarah's house.) Ultimately, when I think about it, John's moral journey could be pretty awesome too. Yeah, the almost shooting innocent men for no good reason pretty clearly underscored that he's not just hard ass, but messed up. (Although, I imagine there are all kinds of internet message boards debating whether Jack Bauer is actually a hero or a morally repulsive character.)
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Apr 5, 2008 20:27:32 GMT -5
Seriously, I don't want to enter too far into the debate here, because it's no fun to have the writers impose one reading on characters and scenes that are meant to contain ambiguity and multiple possible interpretations. I will say, though, that the contrasting moralities of the four main characters is one of the main engines of drama on the show. Sarah's place at the start of the series is pretty clear: she's a good person who's struggling to defeat a ruthless and lethal enemy without completely losing her own moral standing. That still leaves her with some very interesting places to go, but it's a journey that you don't want to rush. Derek, in contrast, is meant to be a much more ambiguous and slippery character, which makes him both controversial and fun to watch and write for (Deep Space Nine fans out there may recall Garak filling a similar role in the show's early seasons). He is most emphatically not Jack Bauer-- the hardass hero who you're meant to applaud as he does what needs to be done to protect us all. But it's up to the audience whether you want to read him as a good guy with a disturbingly ruthless side, a crazed loose cannon and corrupting influence, a good man who's been deeply wounded and warped by his experiences, or possibly all of the above. And in no way is Derek meant to undermine Sarah's own badassness, which has and (hopefully) will continue to be expressed in multiple ways. I also completely reject the idea that evolving Sarah of 2008 from the ranting, half-crazed Sarah of 1995/7 who emptied a clip in Miles Dyson's direction represents a softening or a walking back of the character. Turk, you're awesome. But now, I have to ask... Is the alley scene from What He Beheld supposed to be one of those ambiguous moments? I still lose sleep over it. Dammit Sarah shoot him!!! NOOO! Don't let Derek save John!! That's your whole mission in life! FRAK. Pretty important moment for Sarah to freeze up. Like I said, still losing sleep. Can you throw me a bone so I can get some rest? Is that moment over and done with (meaning we're left to continue our nonstop debates about it) or will it be addressed next season? I like TSCC Sarah a lot. Given the context of this show, I find her to be a logical progression from T2 Sarah. She's emotional, vulnerable at times, but can still kick your ass. I like the depth and I don't think she's weak. If I actually thought Sarah was weak, that scene wouldn't have bothered me. But I know she's not, so it felt out of character.
|
|
|
Post by theturk on Apr 5, 2008 21:23:18 GMT -5
I don't want to get into trouble by saying too much, but if what you got out of that scene was "badass Derek saves the day while Sarah dithers" instead of "Derek takes a crazy risk that luckily turns out well," then we perhaps didn't convey our intentions as well as we wanted to. If (fingers crossed!) we get a second season, you'll be seeing much more of the Sarah/Derek/John/Cameron dynamic, with layers and complications that have only been hinted at thus far. Stay tuned.
|
|
|
Post by miniglik on Apr 5, 2008 21:29:57 GMT -5
That depends on who of us you ask... I thought it was obvious that Derek took a crazy risk, and he acted so quickly (perhaps, on autopilot?) that it prevented whatever action Sarah would have taken. Others, however, feel that it should have been highlighted more in the episode that Derek's action was risky and not okay with Sarah. I tend to think it was an issue y'all would have dealt with in the next few episodes. Darn shortened season.
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Apr 5, 2008 22:16:02 GMT -5
I don't want to get into trouble by saying too much, but if what you got out of that scene was "badass Derek saves the day while Sarah dithers" instead of "Derek takes a crazy risk that luckily turns out well," then we perhaps didn't convey our intentions as well as we wanted to. If (fingers crossed!) we get a second season, you'll be seeing much more of the Sarah/Derek/John/Cameron dynamic, with layers and complications that have only been hinted at thus far. Stay tuned. Thank you! I will sleep much better tonight knowing how it was intended. Layers of complications? I'm liking the sound of that already. So say we all. So mini, I guess this means I should ease up on Derek now... a bit.
|
|
t101
Major
Posts: 716
|
Post by t101 on Apr 6, 2008 6:29:31 GMT -5
I know it's been answered but I still want to comment. I never saw it that way because it would assume shooting the guy was the unquestionably correct thing to do. Which is hardly so simple.
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Apr 6, 2008 12:16:37 GMT -5
I know it's been answered but I still want to comment. I never saw it that way because it would assume shooting the guy was the unquestionably correct thing to do. Which is hardly so simple. Here's why that scene bothered me so much: 1) Sarah's spent the last 16 years of her life with the #1 mission of protecting John. 2) Sarah was in a much better position to take the shot than Derek. 3) Sarah didn't say anything to Derek to indicate she was upset about what he did. I think that last point is really what was lacking. If it was too big of a risk to John's life for her to take that shot, then why didn't she confront Derek about it afterwards? She should have said something to him. She threatened to kill him if he ever lied to her again, but hey, no problem if he fires a bullet past John's face? A harsh "Don't you ever risk my son's life like that again," was definitely in order. I needed something more than a couple of silent glares for that scene to work.
|
|
k8ie
Corporal
Posts: 1,482
|
Post by k8ie on Apr 6, 2008 12:36:16 GMT -5
Geez, AG, it's almost like you're tired of having the exact same MSB conversation across the length and breadth of the Interwebz. ;D Yes, rather. Hurrah. Thanks for the insight, Turk. I like Derek as a character, I like the potential for conflict he brings with him and the fact that there's rather more of a level ground between Sarah and Derek than Sarah and Cameron. Sarah yells at Cameron and I occasionally feel like Sarah's just kicked the puppy (the very scary killer robot puppy - the dichotomy between Summer Glau affect and her character's purpose is awesome). Giving Sarah a peer who actually knows where she's coming from to play off of is fun to watch. Obviously, that's a role that neither Ellison nor Charley can fill. But I tune in each week for Sarah's story and as a girl who's been watching scifi since the 70s, well, I suppose you never get over the discussion of which Star Wars character you can play in the school yard and being offered the choice between Ion Canon Control and Princess Leia - neither of who got light sabers and blasters of their own. Needless to say, the idea of Sarah needing a guy to save her butt kind of grates. Unless her butt is shot up and bleeding and the guy's a terminator or something. At the same time, I find the evolution of Sarah from T2 to someone who's actually functional in her life fascinating viewing. It must be a difficult line for the writers to walk. I don't envy you guys (oh, who am I kidding? I totally do. The writers have the coolest job).
|
|
|
Post by miniglik on Apr 6, 2008 14:43:56 GMT -5
Total tangent here, but you made me think of something.
I introduced a friend to TSCC recently. After the second or third episode, she tells me she's having trouble warming up to Sarah because of how Sarah treats Cameron. This friend admitted that it was probably a silly reason, and I'm not making any judgement on the emotion -- I think it's kind of a natural reaction to watching one character snark on another character who doesn't really know how to answer back.
Anyway, my response to that was "ha, wait until you meet Derek." But when she did "meet" Derek she still wasn't bothered by his treatment of Cameron. And yet, still was with Sarah's. Which I found interesting.
I don't agree, in that it never bothers me how Sarah treats Cameron (Cameron is a tool, and a useful one, for Sarah, but there's no reason to treat her like a friend). But then there is this visual thing going on, where Cameron just looks like a pretty girl that's getting snarked on and ordered about for no reason.
I... don't think I'm going anywhere with this. Just a random tangent thought.
|
|
t101
Major
Posts: 716
|
Post by t101 on Apr 6, 2008 15:06:59 GMT -5
I guess I'm the opposite. In that I believe less is more. And that not everything needs to be spoken or shown clearly for it to be understood. When there is no explanation I just deduce it from my understanding of the characters and I'm happy unless I'm clearly proven wrong.
As far as confronting Derek. I guess for one he did actually pull it off, so he is the 'hero' of the moment - a fact I can see is grating on many people. I'll be happy if her silent judgment of Derek from all these things that he does is going to pay off later for the audience. But I didn't really see the need for an immediate confrontation.
Sarah lashes out sometimes, but I think she also does a lot of observing quietly and making conclusions. Whether it's watching Uncle Bob interact with John or how he talks to Cameron in the pilot or all the trust issues in Vick's Chip. She sort of makes notes to herself and there isn't always an immediate visible reaction.
I'll also say the controversial thing, I could see why having all these guns pointing in such close proximity to her son in a situation she hasn't faced before (hostage) could make her loose her cool just a little. After all, arguably the best bodyguards or hostage rescue specialists are the ones who are not emotionally invested in the situation. I know everyone wants Sarah's badassness be more prominent, but it's not something that bothers me, at least here.
I can see why she treats Cameron the way she does and that's because, aside from being prejudiced, Cameron is completely amoral at this point. But I don't agree with the 'tool' judgment and that's because in T2 she comes to respect the Terminator and actually learn something about humanity from him. I think she could clearly see from past experience how making this machine understand, be a 'friend', could be of major benefit.
I also have a theory that the fact John treats Cameron kindly is going to pay off big time for him in some way. If it hasn't already in the future.
|
|
k8ie
Corporal
Posts: 1,482
|
Post by k8ie on Apr 6, 2008 15:50:39 GMT -5
One of the things I really like about TSCC is that it leaves space for the characters to be smart. The scene with Derek revealing that he knows Kyle is John's father is a good example. Sarah figuring out (or knowing - there's a possibilty that she was never convinced by what Derek told in her jail but was overtaken by events) is another. I think smart characters translates into smarter writing and better viewing but it still must be dramatic. The aftermath of the alley scene and the end of "Heavy Metal" were two times when I wanted a bigger pay-off.
With "What He Beheld", my take is that the ramifications of that episode were meant to play out throughout the next few episodes. I agree that Sarah tends to work on a slow burn - she tries to keep herself under control because the stakes are too high - so it would be in character for her to wait to get into it with Derek until they're a) "safe" and b) John wasn't around.
With "Heavy Metal" John disobeys and gets himself trapped in a nuclear fallout shelter with a terminator. Although most of the episode is Sarah working out (in as far as she can) her ambivalence about letting John put himself at risk, at the same time, I wanted more of a confrontation between John and Sarah at the end. Her decision or judgement that now is not the right time to confront the kid was good parenting but dramatically left the ending a little flat (of course, I thought that whole episode had pacing problems so YMMV).
We're biologically programmed to protect and love gormless creatures with big, blank eyes - particularly women (I wonder if that explains anime?). Added to that is that Cameron's cover is as Sarah's daughter (or step-daughter) - the natural impulse is to expect Sarah to nurture or educate Cameron, whereas she treats her like the lawnmowever - a necessary but unbeloved tool. I kind of love it for the way it holds society's preconceptions of female behaviour up to the viewer and say O, RLY?
It does make me wonder what the long-term game-plan is for Cameron and how her relationship with Sarah plays into that (beyond the Sarah/Cameron threads). Billy Wisher talks about not being able to reassure the mind he created. At the end of T2, Sarah talks about a terminator learning to value human life. Does Sarah have a responsibility to educate, to raise, this sentient being living in her household?
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Apr 6, 2008 16:15:28 GMT -5
I guess I'm the opposite. In that I believe less is more. And that not everything needs to be spoken or shown clearly for it to be understood. When there is no explanation I just deduce it from my understanding of the characters and I'm happy unless I'm clearly proven wrong. For me it depends on the situation. Sarah is generally a woman of few words (and lots going on in her head), but when it comes to John's safety? Subtle doesn't come to mind. This is definitely where Lena Headey does such an awesome job as Sarah. She plays the subtext of a scene really well and says so much with her eyes and subtle expression. You can always see the gears turning in her head. No!!!!! We've come full circle again. That interpretation shouldn't even be in the mix. The fact that it is (plenty of people read the scene that way) means less is not always more and the scene didn't work. I'm starting to sound like a broken record though (yeah, heh, starting to). -- On Sarah/Cameron - I'm probably in the minority on this because I don't think Sarah treats Cameron all that harshly. Sometimes sure, but she also talks to her like a person a lot of the time. It's a confusing relationship all around. Cameron lives with them like a member of the family, yet she's a machine. I don't think Sarah always knows quite how to deal with her. And then there's this whole other level of Cameron being sort of the machine version of Sarah. And how Cameron knows so much about Sarah from her time with John in the future. And have I really become this big of a nerd?
|
|
k8ie
Corporal
Posts: 1,482
|
Post by k8ie on Apr 6, 2008 16:44:01 GMT -5
No!!!!! We've come full circle again. That interpretation shouldn't even be in the mix. The fact that it is (plenty of people read the scene that way) means less is not always more and the scene didn't work. Agreed. The idea that Sarah would freeze when John was in trouble for any reason is the sort of thing that drives me to tin-hat brigade extremes and standing around with my copy of Terminator 2 writing things like "in minute 3:23 of scene 12, you clearly see Sarah..." and, just, NO. I don't want to go there. Either the editing or the direction or the way that scene was set up in the script didn't work otherwise we wouldn't be discussing it, we'd be discussing how awesome the swimming pool shoot-out was and whether Sarah Connor like Johnny Cash (I vote for yes, BTW, there was a man who sang like he knew every scrape and scar along life's highways and byways). If it was a story beat meant to be picked up in the next episode, that's unfortunate from the perspective of the series but it doesn't make the individual episode any more effective. At least it's a duet? Not all the time but there are definitely moment where even I felt "ah, don't kick the puppy!" Sarah definitely exists in the middle between John (too invested) and Derek (too hateful). I think John needs to appreciate that she's a KILLER ROBOT and Derek needs to get over it somewhat (which is a bit like encouraging a Holocaust survivor to give Wagner a try) and Sarah's sort of the only one in the room with an objective eye on the situation. That doesn't mean I always find it easy viewing (damn Summer Glau for being good anyway). As for the other, can foreign nationals plead the 5th?
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Apr 6, 2008 17:06:40 GMT -5
I was just talking to my husband about Sarah/Cameron (yes, I've even managed to pull him into this) and he was adamant that he doesn't like how mean Sarah is to "dear, sweet Cameron" (his words). He said the problem is the Sarah treats Cameron like a bad teenage daughter who's back-talking her all the time.
|
|
k8ie
Corporal
Posts: 1,482
|
Post by k8ie on Apr 6, 2008 17:42:31 GMT -5
I was just talking to my husband about Sarah/Cameron My mind went some place else for a moment. I'm never into slash. Never. But there was something about that scene where Cameron warned off Charley that SCREAMED "girl crush" to me and Lena Headey is just so generally awesome, Sarah/Cameron is a fairly easy step for me (ongoing concerns about Cameron's ability to consent aside). Anway... So, you were talking to your husband about Sarah and Cameron. ;D I love the level on which Sarah and Cameron have the mother/daughter relationship from hell but it does make Sarah look like a bitch. Then again, it is the new black. ;D
|
|