"STAR TREK DISCOVERY" Commentary: (2.01) "Brother"

 

"STAR TREK DISCOVERY" COMMENTARY: (2.01) "Brother"

I just did a recent rewatch of the Season Two premiere of "STAR TREK DISCOVERY", (2.01) "Brother" on CBS All Access. On one hand, the episode struck me as a solid entry for a Trek show that set up the second season's story arc and introduction of new characters. This is nothing knew. I have witnessed similar set ups for shows like "BABYLON 5" and "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER". But what I did not count on were some differences and characters that would leave me scratching my head.

I do not think I have ever encountered a Trek show that has generated so much conflict and controversy as "STAR TREK DISCOVERY". I take that back. There has been one other series that has generated controversy close to the same level as "DISCOVERY" . . . namely "STAR TREK VOYAGER". This does not strike me as surprising, since both shows featured leading characters who are women. "DISCOVERY" took it to another level in which its leading character, Commander (formerly Specialist) Michael Burnham, is not only portrayed by an African-American actress, but is not the starship/space station's commanding officer.

I noticed that a great deal of what struck me as vague and nitpicking complaints had been inflicted upon "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" during and after its first season. One of those complaints proved to be certain characters, including Michael Burnham, lacked full development by the end of Season One. I found myself scratching my head over this complaint. I mean . . . what on earth? I have never heard of a fictional character in a television show that is fully developed by the end of its first season, let alone before the end of its run. Never. And "DISCOVERY" had only finished its first season. Why on earth were so many of the franchise's fans either criticizing that most of its characters are not fully developed or demanding that they should be after one season? This is not miniseries or television show. If "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" is allowed to complete its full run and the characters are still "not fully developed", then I believe they would have something to complain about.

Another complaint that left me scratching my head was the lack of humor during its first season. In fact, this particular complaint has led many to compare "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" with another science-fiction series that had begun around the same time - "THE ORVILLE". The Trek franchise has never been a franchise that was dominated by humor. And I do recall a good deal of humor in Season One of "STAR TREK DISCOVERY", especially in episodes like (1.07) "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad" or in scenes featuring Mary Wiseman as Cadet Sylvia Tilly. Aside from those scenes featuring Wiseman and even Rainn Wilson (as con man Harry Mudd), most of the humor featured in Season One tend to be more subtle.

I am relieved to notice that in regard to character development, the show runners for "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" did not rush to portray Michael Burnham or any of the other characters fully developed. The Season Two premiere, "Brother", hinted that the show planned to explore Burnham's past experiences as a member of Ambassador Sarek's household and especially, her relationship with adoptive brother Spock. Judging from the Season Two previews I have seen, Burnham's relationship with Ash Tyler/Voq will also be touched upon. So, if Season Two does not feature the full character development of the series' leading lady and the other supporting characters, I will not be disappointed. If anything, I might feel a sense of relief. The last thing I want is for the series to engage in rushed storytelling.

But one aspect of the Season Two premiere that left me scratching my head was the level of humor featured in the episode. It almost struck me as out of place. Now, "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad" featured some rather heavy humor. I found nothing wrong with this. Many of the Trek series have aired the occasional humorous episode. The problem with the humor in "Brother" is that there was nothing about the plot or the characters that should have marked it as a humor-filled episode. Many of the familiar characters - including Burnham - were either spouting lines or reacting to situations that made me wonder if screenwriters Ted Sullivan, Gretchen J. Berg and Aaron Harberts may have went a bit too far.

"Brother" also featured the introduction of Commander Denise "Jett" Reno, Chief Engineer of the U.S.S. Hiawatha, who had been rescued by a landing party from the Discovery after spending ten months caring for wounded crew members on an asteroid, during the Federation-Klingon War. Reno, portrayed by actress-comedian Tig Notaro, managed to spout more jokes in a space of five minutes than any other actor or actress who had appeared in a Trek series or movie. I think Notaro might proved to be a rival for Wiseman on who can be the funniest member of the cast. In the end, the humor in "Brother" struck me as a bit over-the-top, especially for an episode that is not obviously a humorous one like "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad".

So what were the screenwriters thinking? Did they change the tonal style of "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" to appease those fans who had complained that the series was "too serious" or "too angsty"? If so, they have made a mistake. I found this tonal shift for Season Two rather forced and mind boggling. I do not see the necessity of changing the series’ tonal style. I want to watch "STAR TREK DISCOVERY", not some borderline copycat of "THE ORVILLE". Not even the other Trek series from the past had such a drastic tonal shift. After all, the edgier style of Season One did not prevent "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" from being a hit or creating an entire new stable of fans. Had the show runners forgotten this? Or were they too busy paying attention to the narrow-minded fans who wanted the series to simply re-create the past?

I noticed that the introduction of Anson Mount as Captain Christopher Pike of the U.S.S. Enterprise had also contributed to this tonal shift. Mount's Pike came off as slightly humorous and yet, somewhat bland. To me, Pike seemed like the epitome of the white male leading man that so many science-fiction/fantasy geeks seemed to long - especially in the past three to four years. The problem I have with this is that as an old fan of the AMC series, "HELL ON WHEELS", I know that the talented Mount is capable of portraying a character more interesting than Pike. At one point in "Brother", Pike had expressed his regret that the Enterprise did not participate in the Federation-Klingon War. Was this regret a consequence of survivor's guilt? Or is this nothing more than the regret of someone in the military, who wished he or she could have been in the center of the action. I hope that it is the former. On the other hand, watching Pike participate in the landing party that found Reno and the remains of the Hiawatha makes me wonder otherwise. As the Discovery's current temporary captain, his presence in the Away team struck me as questionable. This is not "STAR TREK" circa 1966-68. And so far, I do not find the character’s regret for not participating in the war against the Klingons as not very interesting.

And why is the Christopher Pike character a regular on this show? Why is he a regular for Season Two? Why was Pike, along with two Enterprise officers, needed to investigate those seven red bursts that had appeared in the Alpha Quadrant? The Discovery is originally a science vessel. The Enterprise is not. Why did the show runners have Starfleet order Pike to take command of Discovery in the first place? Mount could have been cast as the Discovery's new captain who was other than Pike. Or Saru could have been promoted as the Discovery's new commander. He deserved it. After all, ever since the discovery that Captain Gabriel Lorca was an imposter from the Mirror Universe, Saru had more or less acted as the ship's captain. He was the one who led Discovery and its crew out of the Mirror Universe. And he stood behind Burnham, Tilly and Tyler when they exposed Starfleet's plot to destroy the Klingon homeworld. Instead, either Alex Kurtzman or Aaron Harberts and Gretchen J. Berg drummed up some lame reason to brng Pike aboard the Discovery so that the show can have some slightly bland and familiar character as the main authority figure in order to soothe the nerves of some very loud and negative fans.

Is it possible that these fans could not deal with the chaotic Gabriel Lorca as captain or who still cannot deal with the non-white Michael Burnham as the show’s lead. Or do they simply want to recapture the past? Right now, it seems as if Kurtzman, Harberts and Berg want to please these fanboys, who want the show to recapture the past. After watching "Brother", I blame them for listening to these fanboys, instead of basking in the success of Season One and moving forward with more innovative stories. It just seems a crime that producers like Kurtzman, Harberts, Berg, the Warner Brothers suits and Kathleen Kennedy are so afraid of the loud and narrow-minded fanboys that they would rather keep their respective franchises either mired in the past or borderline bland to please these fans. And in doing so, they end up ignoring the fact that when their franchises were innovative, they were also box office or ratings successes.

Right now, I find the Trek fandom, along with those for other franchises, rather frustrating and narrow-minded. These fans would rather cling to the past, rather than enjoy something different or innovative. And when producers and show runners like Harberts, Berg or Kurtzman kowtow to the loud and rather conservative-minded fans and critics, entertainment and art in pop culture becomes in danger of declining into a sad affair. Does this mean that Season Two of "STAR TREK DISCOVERY" await such a fate? I hope not. I hope that the season's future episodes might prove to be just as fascinating and innovative as those from Season One. I hope so. Because if I have to be honest, I found "Brother" to be jarring and something of a head scratcher.

"VANITY FAIR" (2018) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "VANITY FAIR", the 2018 adaptation of William Makepeace Thackeray's 1848 novel. Created by Gwyneth Hughes and directed by James Strong, the ITV miniseries starred Olivia Cooke:





"VANITY FAIR" (2018) Photo Gallery

"MURDER AT 1600" (1997) Review

 

"MURDER AT 1600" (1997) Review

Remember the action films from the 1980s and the 1990s? I do. Several days ago, I found myself thinking about them and realizing that the Hollywood industry rarely, if ever, made them anymore. I ended up searching my collection of old DVDs and found my copy of the 1997 action thriller called "MURDER AT 1600".

Directed by Dwight Little and starring Wesley Snipes and Diane Lane, "MURDER AT 1600" begins with the discovery of the dead body of a Presidential secretary named Carla Town inside one of the bathroom stalls at the White House. Much to the Secret Service's surprise, National Security Advisor Alvin Jordan requests that the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police investigate the murder. The police sends homicide Detective Harlan Regis and Detective Stengel to serve as the investigators. Secret Service Director Nick Spikings assigns Agent Nina Chance to serve as liaison between the Metropolitan Police and the U.S. Secret Service.

The murder inside the White House proves to be the latest scandal to mar President Jack Neil's administration. The President is also dealing with an international crisis in which thirteen American servicemen are being held hostage by the North Korean government. Although President Neil wants to resolve the situation without starting a war, many within his circle and the press wants him to send troops to rescue the hostages. While Neil deals with the crisis, Regis and Stengel's investigation leads to a major suspect - a White House janitor named Cory Allen Luchessi. However, Regis eventually realizes that Luchessi is innocent. He also manages to convince Agent Chance to help him find the real culprit, leading her to finding herself at odds with Spikings and her fellow Secret Service agents.

"MURDER AT 1600" is not some classic Hollywood action movie. It has never been regarded on the same level as the "DIE HARD" franchise or something like "BULLITT". I could see why during my recent re-watch. Like many action films from the late 20th century, "MURDER AT 1600" featured some cliched dialogue. On two separate occasions, a character mentioned details from the John F. Kennedy assassination. Why? What did the homicide of a secretary had to do with the assassination of president? Some people might regard its plot as a bit over-the-top. I mean . . . a Washington D.C. homicide detective investigating a murder committed inside the White House? I doubt very much such a thing would actually happen . . . or be allowed. And like many action films from the 1980s and 1990s, "MURDER AT 1600" has - thankfully - a small share of cheesy dialogue that became popular with the early DIE HARD movies.

I have not seen "MURDER AT 1600" in years. Before I had started this latest re-watch, I had assumed that my positive feelings for this film would change. And you know what? I was wrong. I ended up enjoying "MURDER AT 1600" even more than ever. Despite certain implausible aspects of the movie's narrative, I actually enjoyed the story. Thanks to screenwriters Wayne Beach and David Hodgin's script, "MURDER AT 1600" provided a well-executed combination of a mystery, an action thriller, and political intrigue. Regis's hobby of constructing tabletop miniatures of Civil War battles and sites played a role in the movie's final action sequence. I enjoyed how the film's scandals and political intrigue allowed Regis to comment on the toxic nature of Washington D.C. politics and intrigue. Regis's conflict with the Secret Service provided a character arc for Nina Chance, allowing her to choose between protecting the First Family's secrets on behalf of the agency and doing the right thing. Even the implausible aspects of the movie - Regis's appointment as investigator and mentions of the JFK assassination - ironically ended up serving the plot's political intrigue. Not long after Regis and his partner, Stengel, arrived at the White House, Spikings had expressed the implausibility of two local homicide detectives investigating a murder inside the White House - which is Federal property. As it turned out, Regis's appointment played a substantial role in the movie's political intrigue. And the comments on the JFK assassination served hints to what was really going on. My recent viewing of "MURDER AT 1600" reminded me that Beach and Hodgin's screenplay seemed to feature a great deal of red herrings, along with an interesting bait-and-switch plot point.

Lest we not forget, "MURDER AT 1600" is also an action thriller. And thanks to director Dwight Little, film editors Leslie Jones and Billy Weber, and Shane Cardwell's stunt team; the movie featured some very effective action sequences. But there were at least three action scenes that stood out for me. They include Agent Chance's theft of the murder victim's appointment book from the Secret Service's archives and her flight from the building, along with Regis and Chance's encounter with two assassins at a suspect's Maryland home. But the film's pièce de résistance proved to be the final action sequence that involved the pair and Stengel's infiltration of the White House via a tunnel, another deadly encounter with a government assassin and Regis' attempt to reach the President.

If there is one thing I can say about "MURDER AT 1600", it is a lovely movie to view. Cinematographer Steven Bernstein provided a visual feast of Washington D.C., Maryland and Virginia locations, thanks to his sharp and colorful photography. Christopher Young's score served the movie well with its rich, yet mellow score that emphasized the narrative's political intrigue and murder mystery. Not only did Jones and Weber's editing serve the movie's action scenes very well, but also the movie in general. In fact, I honestly believe "MURDER AT 1600" was a well-paced film - not to fast, but at the same time, it did not drag.

I do not know what to say about the movie's performances. I had earlier stated that the movie had some cheesy dialogue that was prevalent in action movies thirty to forty years ago. I do not believe the dialogue was bad enough to sabotage the performances, thank goodness. But I cannot honestly recall a performance that stood out above the rest. All or most of the performances - aside from one in particular - struck me as pretty solid. More importantly, Wesley Snipes and Diane Lane both did great jobs in carrying the film. Frankly, either one of them could have done the job alone. But they managed to form a pretty damn good screen team. Both Dennis Miller and Diane Baker also gave solid performances, but I felt they had been somewhat underused in "MURDER AT 1600" - especially Baker, whose only lines were part of a speech at a fundraiser scene. And Miller seemed to be used mainly as the occasional comic relief. But that one performance that seemed off-kilter to me came from Charles Rocket, who had portrayed a recently fired government employee threatening to kill himself in the middle of a D.C. thoroughfare. I found his performance a bit over-the-top. Ironically and tragically, Rocket committed suicide some eight years later.

"MURDER AT 1600" has its shares of what I believe to be minor flaws - some contrived plot points and cheesy dialogue. But overall, I believe it is a more-than-solid action film and political thriller. I thought it held up very well after so many years, thanks to Wayne Beach and David Hodgin's screenplay, Dwight Little's direction and a solid cast led by Wesley Snipes and Diane Lane. It also led me to long for a return of the action films of the 1980s and 1990s - something I believe that is sorely needed.

"VICTORIA" Season Two (2017) Episode Ranking

 

Below is my ranking of the Season Two episodes of the ITV series called "VICTORIA". Created by Daisy Goodwin, the series stars Jenna Coleman as Queen Victoria:

"VICTORIA" SEASON TWO (2017) EPISODE RANKING



1. (2.06) "Faith, Hope & Charity" - Horrified by the Great Famine in Ireland, both Queen Victoria and the Reverend Robert Traill try to persuade Prime Minister Robert Peel's government and the British clergy in the country to take action.





2. (2.09) "Comfort and Joy" - In this Christmas episode, a pregnant Victoria receives a "gift" from King Gezo of Dahomey in the form of a young African princess who had been his political prisoner. Meanwhile, Prince Albert desperately tries to introduce the German Christmas custom to the British court, despite the tension from unwelcome guests and personal problems.





3. (2.01) "A Soldier's Daughter" - While Victoria deals with postnatal depression following the birth of her oldest child, Princess Victoria, Albert and Peel scramble to hide the grisly details of the Retreat From Kabul near the end of the First Anglo-Afghan War.





4. (2.07) "The King Over the Water" - Following two assassination attempts, Victoria and Albert travel to the Scottish Highlands becomes guests at the 6th Duke of Atholl's home, Blair Castle, for a private retreat. However, the retreat is nearly ruined when the couple ends up lost in the countryside.





5. (2.08) "The Luxury of Conscience" - Albert unwittingly creates more political problems for Peel, when he supports the latter's efforts to repeal the Corn Laws.





6. (2.04) "The Sins of the Father" - Victoria gives birth to a second child, Prince Albert-Edward (future King Edward VII). While she deals with postnatal depression for the second time, Albert's father dies. Albert travels to Coburg and learns an ugly family secret from his uncle, King Leopold of the Belgians.





7. (2.05) "Entente Cordiale" - Victoria drags Albert and the British Court to France in an effort to convince the country's King Louis Phillippe I to deter the latter from arranging a marriage between his son Duke of Montpensier and Queen Isabel II of Spain.





8. (2.03) "Warp and Weft" - Moved by the plight of a silk weaver in Spitalfields, Victoria throws a lavish medieval ball at Buckingham Palace with all attendees wearing outfits made in the impoverished area. Meanwhile, she becomes aware of former Prime Minister Lord Melbourne's failing health.





9. (2.02) "The Green-Eyed Monster" - Victoria becomes pregnant with her second child and develops a jealous suspicion that Albert might be attracted to Ada King, Countess of Lovelace, who is a mathematician associated with the Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge.