?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Screw "24." - Sauce1977 [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Sauce1977

[ Userinfo | Sauce1977 Userinfo ]
[ Archive | Sauce1977 Archive ]

Screw "24." [Jan. 15th, 2007|09:49 pm]
Sauce1977
[Tags|, , , , ]
[Current Location |Detroit, MI, USA]
[Special Music |Curb Your Enthusiasm Theme Music]



That's great. They killed Curtis.

It makes no sense to his character. None.

Maybe run a serrated knife through Chloe.

Let's take a bullet to Jack Bauer's head, too.

LOL, a nuclear bomb detonation. Shark - jumped.

I'm done with you, Fox network. Burn in hell.

linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: ellie
2007-01-16 03:06 am (UTC)
I think I'm more upset over Curtis than the bomb's detonation, especially considering I've read that this season they were really going to make a sharp difference between reality and 24's reality. I was okay with things happening that might not happen in reality.

It is after all no secret there are some terrorists who would love to let a nuke go off in downtown Manhattan. They just can't get a nuke.

I could have dealt with Curtis going down in a firefight, trying to defend the US. But this was out of character.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:08 am (UTC)
He put up with Ol' Gray Area Jack Bauer over the years. Suddenly he can't figure out that the former terrorist leader was committed to working with the USA? Fucking please!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:22 am (UTC)
It's more than that though, with Curtis. He was aware, I understand, of the former terrorist's position change. He was angry over what had happened to his unit at that guy's hands. But for him to disregard the good of his country with no ability to temporarily put his resentment aside with that former terrorist leader, for him to absolutely come up weak in the first episode, try to act out of selfishness through revenge, throwing the mission to thwart the real threat to the country, and then refuse to back down like the dumbest yokel on the block, well, that to me, uh, is unforgiveable.

It's a Shyamalan Twist.

What a twist!

Here's my remote, flipping the channel.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ellie
2007-01-16 03:27 am (UTC)
I think we agree.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:32 am (UTC)
Major anger, here . . . the first response was pure anger, not directed at you, but I felt I could have worded it better. Apologies for the overkill, lol.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 06:11 am (UTC)
I totally expected Curtis to be more like Bauer, with regard to the dude he aced on the sub platform . . . after he helped Bauer defeat the bad dudes. That would be Curtis's level of sophistication with regard to this current terrorist side-switcher. Considering the story painted this terrorist ex-leader to be finished with the cause and genuinely interested in working a bridge between the Middle East and the United States . . . I figured that Curtis would be a character that would allow his loyalties and common sense to avoid lesser but selfish conflict in favor of the greater good.

I can understand that Curtis's character could not forgive or let go what happened to his unit. I can see Curtis begging off of detail, or having a major confrontation short of murder that would lead to his removal from the operation. But removal by Jack Bauer's hand is a pretty bush league way to treat the situation. It's below standard.

I felt rather dissuaded with the previous season, with regard to the first director of CTU. He was a person so lacking in common sense to the point where I could not believe he was handed a major government position. Such a boob, as I felt him to be, would never have achieved such ranks. In a private sector? Anything's possible. CTU's gov't internal, and I think better of non-elected positions such as those. They resolved him, too, by death in the gas attack on the complex. They have a love affair with permanent write-out of supporting characters. It's below standard, and it's a dangerous way to play.

As for bending reality in the show, I felt the way the show's been handled, in the first few hours, was such overkill to the point of breaking reality. They showed absolutely no regard with Curtis's character. Why spend three years on development, only to exit him upon a gun blast in the first four hours of the new season?

"24" did a decent job of weaving headlines and plausibility into the vehicle of over-the-top action thriller. Unfortunately, the staff is falling too much in love with "The Shyamalan Twist." The staff has now achieved a most displeasing habit of killing off significant characters. The staff has reduced the quality of "24" to that of an evening soap opera.

Sounds like fun for most. Not for me.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: jackwilson
2007-01-16 03:06 am (UTC)
yeah, but it's time for the triumphant return of Bluetooth Guy!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:11 am (UTC)
Kal Penn (Ahmed) did a nice job, but I think it was a little too soon to see Kumar be a bad guy.

It would be analogous to Robin Williams playing a serious villain. When it works, it's rare (Insomnia). One Hour Photo wasn't so hot.

Maybe if Costanza was a diabolical villain in a show, that would be another odd duck moment to consider.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ellie
2007-01-16 03:29 am (UTC)
I actually thought Kumar did a very good job and seemed more believable than half the villians in the show. That the family he dealt with was so undeniably stupid wasn't his fault.

I'm ready for the jerk doctor from ER to get slapped around a bit. I'm sure Dr. Bashir can assist with that.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:34 am (UTC)
I'm also not cool with Palmer 2. Killing Palmer last season was a bit much. If they didn't want the comparisons, and they wanted more of a mirror of reality, a Palmer 2 would have been better suited to be active from outside the political arena. Inside it, there's too much red tape.

I didn't mind Edgar's death because he was a weak character. Loveable, but enough to the point where you absolutely wanted to see the bad guys get theirs.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ellie
2007-01-16 03:50 am (UTC)
I liked Wayne last season, when he had a gun and was doing the right thing. He acted with a sense of direction. This season it's like he's Logan without the treason.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:53 am (UTC)
I really believe that the wisest shows "lose" essential characters for a while, not "kill" them.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: billhelm
2007-01-16 03:12 am (UTC)
man, i haven't watched it yet this week. dang.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:14 am (UTC)
My advice - it's crap, lol.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 03:18 am (UTC)
Don't get me wrong - it's slick as hell, like all high production shows.

But it's reached soap opera level.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: billhelm
2007-01-16 12:34 pm (UTC)
they've sort of run out of things to do on it, I think...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 12:58 pm (UTC)
Possibilities with stories are endless.

Why did they drop the China angle? That was uncharted territory, instead of returning to Middle East and terrorism.

Why continually kill characters that are significant to the story? It's just as easy to "retire" or "jail" or whatever else, only to bring them back maybe later. Killing characters means they can never come back to the story. They kill their best characters, and they waste all those years of character development. All for a short term audience bang? Delivered so poorly?

There's a lot of explanation going on in the last two years, much less action/demonstration. Why suddenly explain to the audience that Curtis served in military unit that was decimated by that terrorist side-switcher? All of the sudden, Curtis, a character who was even-keel and straight in his priorities, shrewd enough in mind to work with Jack Bauer, of which Bauer's the king of all rogue and black ops . . . Curtis was straight man, straight-up. He didn't act that rash, ever. I can't stress this enough, really. Suddenly the audience finds out with no prior demonstration that not only is it explained that the side-switcher butchered guys in his unit, but they see Curtis act like a lunatic, completely out of character?

Curtis's sudden bad write-off was horrible. They could have used the brash and wild Tony to do something like that, but they killed him off last year. Who knows, maybe they'll stoop to lower soap opera levels and write in that Tony faked his death. Why not replace Tony's actor with someone completely different in every way, too, that would work, yeah, lol.

I can't stress horrorshow upon Curtis's demise enough. Bauer was more brash and wild, and even ol' Jack was shrewd enough to use a mortal enemy long enough to achieve a goal . . . and waited to kill him until after the mission was a success. Curtis was shrewd like Bauer, arguably more so for being able to put up with Bauer. No way that ever flies, his demise.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 01:02 pm (UTC)
The first four hours of story were a colossal failure on Playstation 3 levels. It will take a while for "24" lovers to realize it - fans always see it last. Not everyone will view it like I do, but I was a fan and was able to keep an objective view of the show.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 04:25 am (UTC)
You're missing some cool things about it, but ultimately, I've watched it on and off, and it's off for good, from this episode.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 04:48 am (UTC)
I may not be very normal. I have my quirks. One of which is hating the shit out of soap operas.

24, this year, feels like it. 24, last year, was borderline flirting with that.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 04:50 am (UTC)
There were two major characters last year, Tony and Prez Palmer, of which both found their maker.

This year, they wasted no time (like last year with Palmer) in the killing of Curtis.

Curtis was one of my favs.

Unlike the majority, if you're a show, and you do things like that, then I don't come back.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: jackwilson
2007-01-16 06:45 pm (UTC)
curtis was my favorite non-jack character. at times he was the only link between jack's insane vigilate shit and the by-the-book bureaucracy guys. he was always conscious and supportive of jack's most farfetched behavior, at times the only one willing to let jack do his thing. a few things about it bother me, but most of them being how sudden this turn was. i've only been watching for two years, but i don't rememeber ever seeing curtis lose it over anything. jack does in every scene, but always for a good cause. curtis was in situations just as intense as jack, but never lost it. and here he snaps, no warning, no foreshadowing except for what was within the actual episode. you just can't do shit like this without earning it beforehand. i could buy jack himself blowing this mission by killing assad before i could believe curtis would do it.

HOWEVER ... what we've seen is jack is willing to kill or injure anyone, anytime, if his country's security depends on it, and we've seen curtis willing to allow jack to do that. curtis was always directly implicit in jack's violence. the only character thing i can see that would justify (story-wise) him doing this is if we're supposed to believe that curtis was so used to jack killing people that he just couldn't see any other way to deal with assad, and if jack wasn't going to do it, he would. curtis wasn't making an evil choice, just an incorrect one. the lesson of 24, as far as i can tell, is jack is always, always, always right.

the "he killed my friends" stuff was total throwaway halfass and not even worth considering for character insight. the only interesting issue, for me, is the way these two were used to working together, and curtis being unable to adapt to a new way. i don't hate it. i'll keep watching, but i see why you're turned off.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: jackwilson
2007-01-16 06:47 pm (UTC)
by "he killed my friends" i mean curtis' excuse.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-01-16 09:47 pm (UTC)
I agree. The casual mention of this was a bit much. If they had any backstory in previous seasons, it was never fully developed to the point where sudden explanation leading up to that moment would justify itself.

At best, they could have had a nice sub complication that could gnaw at Bauer, Curtis, and Assad for the duration of the season. Curtis wants Assad dead for 10 or so eps, kind of like how Bauer wanted his nemesis dead, but never really brought himself to be able to do it until much later in Season 5. Bauer, of course, would realize Assad's importance, and be working to keep Curtis away from doing this for those eps. Then Assad would realize, after such a confrontation, that working with the States, it's not as easy as he originally perceived, and he could complicate things further.

Thank you for seeing why this moment dropped way below my level of sufficiency.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)