In This Section
|
« Masters of Science Fiction
Episode Recap: "A Clean Escape"
Well, as John Kessel (the author of the short story adapted for this first broadcast episode of the series) advised us, the acting by Judy Davis and Sam Waterston in "A Clean Escape" was excellent; it was particularly good to see Waterston away from the harness of Law and Order (and he even got to be the U.S. president in this one, as opposed to district attorney or ADA for NYC).
Good performances are crucial in this kind of context; as several have noted elsewhere, this was largely a two-character drama, one which with not much revision could be nearly as powerful as a "legitimate" theater/stage play, particularly given the stark and sweeping ethical dilemmas involved: personal responsibility, the (necessary?) abuse of (always corrupting or at least reason-distorting?) great political and military power, real and metaphorical losses reinforcing one another as the drama plays out. Literary sf (along with other forms of fantastic literature, such as fantasy and surrealist fiction) and stage drama both lend themselves to this kind of concrete metaphor even more than, say, most film or contemporary mimetic or "realist" fiction... in the latter, the need to replicate enough reality to allow the audience to accept the story being told can crowd or obscure the point or points the artists want to make... and, conversely, the stylization of stage drama and fantastic fiction, if they're in any way ambitious, can lead to a certain preachiness. Certainly, much of the more ambitious television science-fiction drama has attempted, with greater or less deftness and sophistication, to impart Heavy Messages (Rod Serling's too-often one-punch scripts for The Twilight Zone come to mind)... all art tries to say something about something, but sometimes letting the message trump the artistry can be an utter bore or, possibly worse, unintentionally hilarious.
This episode, thanks to those performances, good scripting and source material, and decent direction, manages to avoid those pitfalls, but I can foresee complaints from those who find it too schematic an indictment, or even no longer relevant to the post-Cold War world (the short story was published in 1985, after all, when "Star Wars" suddenly was also the derisive nickname for potential space-based anti-missile weapons... which could easily become weapons against all sorts of targets). One could wish that it was merely an outdated concern, in a world still rife with nuclear weaponry and various sorts of ambitious fanaticism. Alynda Wheat, reviewing this episode for Entertainment Weekly, probably speaks for a number of people when she suggests she'd "rather be scared by stuff that (probably) can't happen"; of course, she's therefore asking for something other than a science-fiction series, since the distinguishing factor between sf and other fantastic fiction and drama is precisely that it is meant to be about things that could conceivably happen.
Little details in the episode certainly helped keep it grounded, even the way Waterston stumbles backward onto a chair when his character is threatened with a pistol... it isn't an obviously choreographed dance, as it often is in "action" films (or as in a Dick Van Dyke or Chevy Chase comic scene), nor does he simply fall back into the chair as if this was the fifth take and he knows exactly what's supposed to happen. He convincingly stumbles, doesn't quite fall.
I was reminded of the old adage about the commercial networks being resistant to drama that was too good and would cause viewer resentment of the commercial breaks; the breaks certainly interfered with pacing of this episode, which will play that much better uninterrupted on DVD (or might've on cable, had this series joined its sibling Masters of Horror on Showtime). The ads also had another jarring effect: Some of the dialogue is delivered in whispers or at least hushed tones, including that coming into or going out of the breaks, which didn't go that well with the much-louder pitches for yogurt and laxatives (ABC's confusion about this series seems to have been reflected in their odd mix of sponsors as well, ranging from denture adhesive to X-Games promos, while failing to promote any of their sf or fantasy drama series aside from Cavemen, nor seeking much in the way of sf or fantasy film or electronic-game advertising, a natural "synergy").
Several people have wondered why Stephen Hawking has been employed to deliver opening and closing narration for the series; aside from the odd novelty of a having as "host" a man who remains alive and able to communicate only with the help of recently developed technology, and one who is famous for attempting to bridge the gap between the cutting edge of physics and cosmology and science-popularization work such as the book and film A Brief History of Time, I suspect that the nostalgia for the hosts of yesteryear (Boris Karloff for Thriller among others, Alfred Hitchcock for his anthology show, Serling for his series, et al.), and the radio anthology-show hosts that preceded and inspired them (and inspired the comic-book "hosts" of such influential titles as Tales from the Crypt), has become less a matter of fondness than of expectation... how can you have an anthology show without a host? Certainly all the network series of any duration seem to have them, to give the nervous executives if not the audience someone to hang onto from week to week (never mind that Police Story did fine without one... that was in the 1970s, who remembers?... or Monsters... that was a low-budget syndie series, they could afford to gamble...). Odder still, for this episode, Hawking wasn't seen, only his voice synthesizer was heard, giving us no real reason to know, aside from his onscreen credit, that it was his electronic voice we heard. Perhaps this, too, is a bit of metaphoric fun on the part of the producers.
In the Philadelphia area and probably elsewhere, the closing images were squeezed to make way for a lottery drawing, while an ABC promo rushed on the heels of the closing narration... for another "reality" series, with viewer-supplied content, no less. Just in case ABC hadn't made the message clear enough already.
(And if you liked this episode, you might well like... Death and the Maiden.)
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 12:31 AM
|
I thought the episode had fantastic acting, as Waterston ranged from confusion to anger to arrogance to an acceptance of his guilt while trying to justify his actions. And the stumbling backwards was well done.
Judy Davis, too, was excellent. I hope her appearance was due to makeup for Deanna's cancer rather than her own aging. She looked terrible. Waterston is 15 years older & looked younger!
I rarely stay up for a 10 pm show except for Lost (and I have to nap to stay up for that--my husband & I get up VERY early). Even Boston Legal is recorded for next day viewing. But this was worth staying up for. I hadn't read the story, so I was hoping that the people who were watching could send someone back in time to stop him. . .I was wrong!
I'm looking forward to next week's episode with John Locke, Kate Lockley/Serena Southerlyn, and the Cigarette Smoking Man.
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 6:20 AM
|
I really enjoyed this. Judy Davis and Sam Waterston were both superb and carried the story. I only wish their scenes (or sessions were longer). Maybe deleted scene extras on DVD release? In the limited 40 minutes or so allotted, it felt a little rushed. For me a 2 hr movie to get to know the characters better and to add detail to flesh out the story would've been better. This definitely would have played better without all the commercial interruptions. Cable networks would've treated this better and I hope a cabler will step up to the plate and pick up the series.
One beef: I would've lost the music... it was terrible and in all the wrong places.
PS: No squeezed images at the end due to anything like a lottery drawing in San Francisco Bay Area.
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 8:08 AM
|
TV888: I heartily agree that the music was more intrusive than it should've been.
LMZADI: I can recommend that you check out Kessel's original story, though as I remember it (I didn't take the opportunity to re-read it), it's no more cheering...
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 10:08 AM
|
|
I will also look forward to reports from the Trinoc*Con about John Kessel's live presentation (presumably also without Lotto interruption!)
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 10:09 AM
|
|
Todd--It's Imzadi, as a true sci-fi fan would know. It means "beloved" or "the first" in Betazoid. Deanna Troi called Will Riker that name, and it was the name of a ST:TNG novel.
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 10:25 AM
|
|
Duly noted, Imzadi! I have been known to enjoy TNG episodes, but have never been anything like a completist fan, nor ever read the tie-in novels, and if I heard that in dialogue, it had slippped my mind. Sorry for the mis-ID!
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 1:32 PM
|
I thought it was "meh".
The acting was pretty good, but nothing I hadn't seen Davis or Waterston do before. The story hardly qualifies as science fiction. It was about a post-apocalyptic future. But that isn't enough to make it sci-fi for me.
The plot was OK. The best thing were the mini-twists/reveals before the commercial breaks. And man, there were a LOT of commercial breaks.
The end result was not surprising. The final conclusion was not too shocking.
I will keep tuning in because there are only a few episodes. But I am afraid we might only be getting something at about the level of the last Twilight Zone series. And that's not a good thing.
|
|
Aug 5, 2007 2:15 PM
|
I wanted to watch this because I enjoy Sam Waterston and wanted to see his performance. I think he did a great job - this is, with what they gave him. The dialog reminded me of something someone would write for a high school play. It was stiff and lifeless. Frankly, I am also not sure what made this science fiction - the fact that it took place in the future? Which brings me to another annoyance. I've seen so many shows/movies (going back to the Twilight Zone at least) that are based on a post-apocalyptic scenario that the story really didn't seem original. And I agree that it would have played better without commericals and the music. The commercial breaks seemed to really mess up the flow of the story.
But, it was enjoyable to see Sam in another role outside L&O. I've been a long time fan of his (pre L&O) so it's nice to have him get out of the box. I'm also glad he's fronting for Unity'08 as well.
|
|
Aug 6, 2007 7:59 AM
|
I am not a fan of science fiction at all. However,I have been a Sam Waterston fan for over 25 years. I absolutely love him as Jack McCoy in Law & Order. I thoroughly enjoed watching "A Clean Escape." I taped the episode and saw it for a second time on Sunday afternoon. I loved the focus on the two characters. This really drew you into their dialogue and watching the two actors play off one another so perfectly made each scene that more believable. Sam was simply awesome!!
I am looking forward to watching the entire Masters of Science Fiction series. Though I can not imagine Elisabeth Rohm's episode being good as she was lousy her entire stay on Law & Order.
Just glad Masters of Science Fiction is not airing on NBC ("the No Body Conscious" network) as I began boycotting it after the cancellation of Jill Hennessy's Crossing Jordan.
Regards,
|
|
Aug 6, 2007 8:34 AM
|
|
I didn't think Elisabeth Rohm was that bad on Law & Order--at least not all the time. But I liked her very much as Detective Kate Lockley on Angel. And, as we Losties agree, Terry O'Quinn rocks!
|
|
Aug 6, 2007 8:46 AM
|
I really enjoyed the episode and it reminded me of "12 Angry Men" more that a science-fiction story.
I will be tuning in for more!
|
|
Aug 6, 2007 12:19 PM
|
|
I enjoyed the episode also but one thing really annoyed me. The opening music completely drowned out everything Stephen Hawking said. I couldn't understand a word. I didn't have a problem with the commercials since I never watch anything live and always ff through them on tiVo. Best thing to happen to TV ever.
|
|
Aug 6, 2007 1:16 PM
|
|
|
