An article in the Wall Street Journal about 24 asserts that the series recent drop in ratings is the direct result of the dip in President Bush's popularity. Even showrunner Howard Gordon appears to agree with this theory, assuming the accuracy of the piece.
But I don't buy it. Frankly, that sounds like a copout, a way for the creators to justify their diminishing returns. I doubt many will argue that 24 doesn't lean right, but if the series is a giant ad for the Bush administration, how come it gets nominated for (and occasionally wins) all of these awards in Hollywood, a town that despises the president? Would the likes of Bill Clinton be praising the show if that was akin to supporting Bush? Note that not once does the series mention "Iraq" or "Afghanistan," for those thinking it's a commercial for war.
If I had to guess, I'd propose that there are likely about as many 24 fans who are on the left as there are on the right, though perhaps they usually don't have the connection to it that their ideological opposites do. Allow me to forward a few real possibilities as to why the show's rating declined last season:
1. DVD - With the emergence of TV on DVD, viewers no longer have to insist on watching every episode of a series as it airs. In fact, many fans of series such as 24 prefer to get the DVD set and watch it all in a row instead of going week by week.
2. Age - Like it or not, we get old, and so do TV shows. Even if what we're seeing are Jack Bauer's best exploits yet, there isn't much question as to what will happen: shooting, twists, turns, terror, screaming, a little physical coercion here and there.
3. Serial Format - Whereas a show like Law and Order or CSI can easily be watched one time and forgotten about, watching a season of 24 requires a viewing commitment, the labyrinth plot, grim setting, and constant action demanding the viewer's attention. If people have done it before, they might not do it again, even if they enjoyed it once.
4. Quality - Fans and critics alike simply didn't care for season 6. While I maintain that it had many great moments and works much better upon a continuous repeat viewing, the show's quality dropped from 5 to 6, and that explains the ratings drop better than some loony theory about President Bush's poll numbers ever could.
And one last note; from what I could tell, it seems highly unlikely the writer of the piece, nor any of the show's critics she interviewed, have ever watched the show. Remember how Michael Moore fans would scold people who heaped scorn on his films without seeing them? This is worse, because where Michael Moore's films are basically one man shows with a clear partisan opinion, 24 has 144 episodes of TV developed by hundreds (or thousands) of people, making it impossible to single out the politics of one or two men in general to account for every action in the series. Actual fans will note that torture fails as often as it works in 24, and certainly does not provide any character, good or bad, a guarantee of success.
Edit: I forgot to mention that I am glad the produces opted not to gut the show and label Jack Bauer a bad guy, but instead decided to defend it. The earlier idea would have broke my heart, but the new one sounds pretty rockin'.
5 comments:
All solid arguments, but none of them account for the "everything is Bush's fault" factor. Obviously, your logic is faulty.
(I'm often embarrassed to be a leftist, in case you were wondering.)
In other news: Is that a half-hearted defense of Michael Moore I see there? *GASP!* :-)
Haha, I'm embarassed to be a right-winger every time I see Sean Hannity open his mouth.
It would be hard to catch me defending Michael Moore, though I'll always check out what he's saying before I attack him. At this point, his views are well-known enough that I wouldn't blame someone for bashing his films in advance, as long as their criticisms are based on accurate information about what he actually says.
You're embarassed by Hannity, but like watching O'Reilly. Even to your good friends you are something of a mystery James.
You may already be aware, but Henry Winkler said in an interview a while ago that Jack Bauer has firmly taken over the definition of cool from Arthur "Fonzi" Fonzarelli.
Ryan:
I suspect you've fallen victim to the misconception that O'Reilly is an extreme right-winger; he's not. Fairly close to the center, I'd say. But he'd also one of the best interviewers I've ever seen, regularly able to call interviewees on BS and political doublespeak. Though I tend to watch him in seaons, because for a while he'll be good, and then he'll spend a month talking about some missing 18-year-old girl.
But I don't dislike Hannity because he is ultra-conservative, I dislike him because he is pompous asshole incapable of recognizing shades of gray or subtlety of any kind. "Yes or not, have you always worshipped Hitler?" is his interviewing style.
In fairness, I did catch him talking to a Democratic focus group the other night, and when just about all of them said they supported Obama, he asked if one person could name an accomplishment or specific issue they like about Obama, all 20 of them were unable to come up with an answer, and he made fun of them. So I liked him for about two minutes.
I'm definitely Left wing, but I like to to think I am towards the middle. One thing from this article that made me think the interviewed had no clue what they were talking about was when they said "in almost every episode, the characters use torture", I saw the first 3 seasons, and I could only recall 4 instances of torture. Maybe I missed something.
Anyway, my only object to the show is, and always has been, that it is just not very realistic (in my opinion). Jack Bauer always triumphs at the end of the day. If it looks like he is about to win a victory before the season comes to a close... what a surprise, there is a whole new obstacle for him to overcome, and it will take exactly 24 minus N hours for him to solve where N is the number of the current episode.
I know that this was never an issue for James, and so despite the fact that I thought the plot was always a bit contrived, I enjoyed watching the show. But it wasn't something I would ever commit to watching. It had nothing to do with me thinking it was an advocate of the Bush administration. If I thought that were the case, I would be much more ardently opposed the the show.
Post a Comment