Tuesday, December 31, 2019

Best TV of the Decade: #3 - Breaking Bad

#3 - Breaking Bad
Aired 2008-2013 (5 seasons) on AMC
Created by Vince Gilligan
Currently streaming on Netflix

For a brief introduction to this countdown, click here.

You do not need me to tell you that Breaking Bad is great.  Indeed, it is clearly one of the most famous and beloved programs of the past decade.  The story of Walter White's transformation from "Mr. Chips to Scarface" is equal parts iconic and meticulous.  The performances are absurdly good and have been showered in awards by the television industry.  The cinematography is memorably unique and showy without ever slipping into self-parody.  And the world-building that makes up what I lovingly call the ABQ Universe was so strong and precise that it facilitated the creation of another show good enough to end up on this countdown, Better Call Saul.

What I would like to do instead is talk about how we talk about Breaking Bad.  In other words, I would like to address The Discourse surrounding the show.  While Vince Gilligan's creation never reached Game of Thrones-level media saturation, Breaking Bad was still a work of high art that gained enough mainstream attention to become subject to the content machine of our popular culture.  Taken one way, this meant that many people not used to moral ambiguity in their entertainment were forced to engage with just that.  This went well for some and less than well for others.  Taken another way, this phenomenon effectively obligated every professional and semi-professional (and amateur) critic to share their take on the series, which likewise went better for some than it did for others.  The total effect of all this is that much of the nuance that differentiates the show from pale imitators got lost in the shuffle.

While such a flattening of opinion may seem like the necessary cost of a niche show out-punching its weight, I think it's best to push back against that impulse.  This is essential because even the most informed and well-intentioned part of the discourse sometimes missed the mark, similarly to what I wrote about in my Better Call Saul piece.  But more importantly, there's an almost physical pain that comes with one of my favorite things I've ever watched reduced to something that it's not in the cultural memory.  More than for anything else on this list, it's worth establishing precisely what Breaking Bad is and is not.

The most obvious place to start is with the viewers who grew to idolize Walt.  This subset of fans is far from the largest or most toxic such subgroup in modern pop culture (Star Wars, anyone?) but such a reaction to the show still managed to suck up a lot of oxygen and did actually have some effect on those who made it.  It does not take much imagination to refute the veneration of Walter White - Walt's actions throughout the show (murder, terrorizing his family, complicity in the production of a trash drug) are clearly bad by any moral framework.  And the events of the show backs this up, as it clearly depicts how Walt's choices lead him to a life of despair, dying slowly, alone with his last remaining bin of money in rural New Hampshire.

Another error is focusing too much on one potential theme of the show while ignoring everything else.  Unlike the last paragraph these takes are not necessarily wrong or wrong-headed, but they're still very simplistic ways of looking at the series.  The most pernicious example of this is shown through the myriad iterations of the meme that suggests the events of Breaking Bad wouldn't happen in a country where healthcare isn't a prohibitively expensive commodity.  While it's true that subsidizing the cost of Walt's cancer treatments are part of his stated motivation for making meth, this ignores a lot of everything else that happens in the show.  For one, the costs of his treatments are only relevant for a relatively short time - he doesn't decide to treat his disease until five episodes in and he's in the clear for a long time after his surgery at the end of season two.  Also, his former business partners Gretchen and Elliott offer to pay for the treatment, but he refuses out of pride (more on this later).  Most importantly, Walt directly spells out his primary motivation right in the middle of the pilot:


This leads to one more interpretation that is both common and at least partially correct, which is that Breaking Bad is something of a morality play about the character of Walter White.  It is certainly true that his descent into evil is the central journey of the show, but this does not obligate the show to administer punishment for Walt's sins.  The Hays Code which dictated such retribution was ended over 50 years ago.  As such film and TV now largely treats us as adults that can make our own moral discernment.  Clearly not everyone feels this way.  This disconnect was most evident in some critics' negative reception of the finale "Felina," which allows Walt a measure of redemption.  For an example of this, here's Willa Paskin's take:

"But as effective as the finale was at this, I really do think it dampens the moral vision of the show. Walt didn’t get a happy ending—death, disgrace, estrangement from one’s family do not a happy ending make—but he did get a sympathetic ending. Walter White—child-poisoner, murderer, drug lord, liar, manipulator—got to prove he really did have a heart."

This critique is especially odd because the show never denies that Walt has a heart, as obscured as it often is.  Even in his lowest hour ("Ozymandias," right after he kidnaps his daughter) he has the good sense to return Holly, absolve Skyler of responsibility for his crimes (through the phone call), and leave town.  More to the point, it's downright strange to consider Walt's lack of a happy ending primarily as punishment rather than a logical outcome of the events of the show, especially given how meticulously plotted Breaking Bad is.

I'm not the only one who thinks such analysis is flimsy.  Interviews with Vince Gilligan confirm that he feels the same way (We here at Blogacz fully subscribe to the concept of death of the author, but hey if the author agrees with you why not resuscitate him?).  In this interview, he says the following about force-feeding the audience:

"I always am reluctant to tell the audience afterward what to think or how to feel. I really prefer it when the audience comes to their own conclusions."

And here's another interview where he rejects the need to punish Walt for punishments' sake:

"It’s in the eye of the viewer. Dying is not necessarily paying for one’s sins. I certainly hope it’s not, because the nicest people that have ever lived are going to die eventually. So it could be argued instead that he did get away with it because he never got the cuffs put on him. [...] So it could be argued that he pays for his sins at the end or it could just as easily be argued that he gets away with it."

It's clear that Gilligan wants us to reject easy analysis and simple explanations.  Like most creators who aspire to making something more than pure entertainment, he wishes for the audience to engage with the work and reflect on what it means to them.  As such, he has clearly produced a work that's up to the task.

So now here's where I have to actually say something in the affirmative.  What then does Walt's journey mean to me?  What do I think is the best way to think about Breaking Bad?  For me, the answer is to think big.  In true Western fashion, Breaking Bad often feels like a small, self-contained story.  But if you take a peek under the hood, the show has a lot more to say about society at large than you might expect.  One of the themes that's been running through my TV essays is that you're doing yourself a disservice if you examine characters through too narrow of a lens.  Focusing entirely on personal moral choices often causes one to miss the forest for the trees.  Jimmy McGill is happy to take the easy way out, but that perspective is shaped his time in a corrupt and self-serving industry (the law).  Amy Jellicoe wants to burn everything down, but only because she understands from her time at Abaddon that the system is fundamentally broken.  And Forrest MacNeil becomes a monster to everyone he knows and loves largely at the behest of his producer, Grant.  People can be agents of change or scions of evil, but they usually don't arrive at that destination entirely of their own becoming.  To both summarize this and further validate my opinion, I turn to Walter White himself, Bryan Cranston:

"This speaks to my point that everyone has the capacity of being evil. Whether or not you play it out in your mind, or whether you play it out physically in real-life, we have that capacity of dark thoughts. And I think people just need to own up to it and say, “Yeah, we do.” Given the right set of circumstances, education, parenting, loving, hugging, or lack thereof, you can become the best of who you’re supposed to be or the worst of you’re supposed to be." 

The best place to start with this analysis is the first episode, which is paradoxically both a great pilot and a bad episode of Breaking Bad.  I say that because it does all the things a great pilot should do (establish the story, invoke the relevant themes, give us a reason to keep watching), but most of that is antithetical to what the series does best (move through plot deliberately, pay close attention to character development). 

The most noteworthy deviation in this regard affects two of the show's most important characters, Skyler and Hank.  Throughout the series, Skyler plays the role of a crime boss' wife with the requisite amount of nuance.  She's a fundamentally moral character who nonetheless understands that she has to balance Walt's misdeeds with her own desire to protect herself and her family.  In the pilot though, she's far more one-dimensional as a nagging housewife more concerned with her online auctions than with Walt.  Similarly, Hank doesn't appear to be the thoughtful, vulnerable brother-in-law we get to know later in the series.  Rather, he's brash, cocksure, and everything else you might expect from a run-of-the-mill DEA agent.

But all of this is fine and actually good!  We don't need (or even want) a full understanding of the supporting players, because that's not what the pilot is about.  Remember that the episode begins in medias res with Walt filming what he believes to be his own suicide note.  This means the rest of the episode is effectively the events that led to this impasse filtered through Walt's last-minute "flash before your eyes" vision.  And through that lens he sees himself as emasculated by his wife, one-upped by his brother-in-law, and disregarded by his students.  And it's this perspective that informs both Walt and the viewer and adds a layer of meaning when he tells Jesse "I am awake."

We come back to this later in the season in the fifth episode "Gray Matter".  After dealing with the situation with Crazy 8, Walt swears off the life of crime and appears to be resigned to his fate.  When Skyler finally finds out about the diagnosis, she calls a family meeting to urge Walt to seek treatment.  In a touch of the show's wry humor, everyone gets a chance to air their thoughts with the "speaking pillow" before Walt does.  When he finally wrests it away he frames his decisions as a matter of choice.  "Sometimes I never feel like I actually make any of my own choices," he begins.  "All I have left is to choose how I approach this," he continues before he describes how he'd rather die peacefully at home than in the throes of chemo.  Walt is a man with (almost) every possible advantage to lead a successful life in our hyper-individualized society.  And in many respects he has done just that!  But the cruel irony of this scene is that, whether he's being honest with himself or not, he doesn't feel like he's been able to take the reins and reap the benefits of this privilege until it's too late. 

What furthers this irony is that our individualistic society also makes you pay for your own healthcare.  Which means Walt's perspective on his treatment is further informed by the fact that he has two options to pay for the treatment: 1) become a drug lord, or 2) accept a gift from his old business partners, Gretchen and Elliott.  So he does indeed have a choice, but it's an extremely constrained one.  And while the latter option may seem like the obvious choice in a vacuum, there are specific complications that make it significantly less desirable for Walt (which is why he ends up choosing option #1).  We get some sense of this earlier in the same episode.  When the Whites attend Elliott's birthday party it's clear that Walt feels uncomfortable in such an extravagant setting and at least a touch resentful of his rich friends.  Later in the season two episode "Peekaboo," Walt's aborted lunch conversation with Gretchen keys us in further when he calls her a "little rich girl just adding to your millions."  There's clearly some class resentment here, even if it's never quite spelled out explicitly in the text.  Luckily, we have some extra-textual evidence of this from Alan Sepinwall's book, which I have copied here:


It's clear the Walt we see in Breaking Bad is driven by failure and resentment.  Whether that resentment is fairly earned or not (this is a separate debate from the subject of this essay, but probably a little bit of both!), this is how he feels and this is what will inform his decisions from here on out.  And as we see over the next couple of seasons, these decisions lead to victory for Walt and death and destruction for all who get in his way.  By the time he's ascended his to throne, this desire for his own glorification above all else has calcified itself in Walt's mind.  When he invites Jesse over for dinner in the season five episode "Buyout," Walt shows him that his meth empire is all he has left and as such he is in the "empire business."  His desire to control his destiny has lead him to a place where he has as little choice as ever, so what can he do but trudge on and continue to up the body count?

But this is all fundamentally a lie.  Walt has always had the choice to stop all of this and atone for his sins, but due to a combination of stubbornness and circumstance he holds out until the final episodes.  It is then, when sitting alone in a bar in New Hampshire that he finally makes the (correct) choice to end all of this and do what he can to free those who remain from their burdens.  Is this decision driven in part by spite at seeing Gretchen and Elliott on the TV?  Yes, but it's clearly also motivated by a desire to fix what he's broken.  When he returns home and confesses to Skyler ("I did it for me.  I liked it.  I was good at it.  And I was....I was alive."), it's perhaps his first truly honest moment of the show.*  Throughout the show, Walt uses his agency to make terrible choice after terrible choice.  What the finale communicates then is that no matter what you've done, you always still have the choice to do something that at least resembles good.

*The dishonesty Walt refutes here is his constant use of the excuse that everything he does is for his family.  But when everything comes to a head in "Ozymandias" and he's left screaming "we're a family" to them, that facade begins to fall.  I think it's in that moment that he begins to realize that his conception of what it means to support his family was completely wrong, and that moment as much as anything drives his actions over the rest of series.  Just another reason why it's one of the best episodes of TV ever.

In the end, whether or not Walt "deserves" redemption is besides the point.  As I hinted at earlier, it doesn't take a particularly developed sense of morality to be able to condemn his actions.  What does take a more discerning eye is understanding how a human being could become so broken as to cause all of this destruction.  And what takes the temperament of a saint is allowing even the greatest of monsters a window for reconciliation.  If we're being fair, Breaking Bad probably doesn't spend enough time on the latter, which likely contributed to the sense of whiplash for both the viewer and the critic alike.  But because of the show's careful and meticulous commitment to showing us what drives Walt to make the choices that he does, it's clear that Breaking Bad wants us to take full accounting of Walt as a human being, extremely significant warts and all.  That it avoids judgment for judgment's sake is a virtue, and is a large part of what makes it one of the best shows of all time.

Friday, December 27, 2019

Best TV of the Decade: #4 - Party Down

#4 - Party Down
Aired 2009-2010 (2 seasons) on Starz
Created by John Enbom, Rob Thomas, Dan Etheridge, and Paul Rudd
Currently streaming on Hulu

For a brief introduction to this countdown, click here.

On my recent trip home for Thanksgiving my parents were kind enough to cede control of the basement TV primarily to me (sports) and my three-year-old (cartoons).  This made a mildly stressful trip across five states with two small children a little more pleasant for all involved.  My dad still took the reigns from time to time, which meant either news or in one case whatever was on TCM.  One movie we watched was Sullivan's Travels, a film precisely as old as my dad (so pretty old).  Based on the title you might expect it to mirror Gulliver's Travels, but it really doesn't.  Rather than a meditation on human nature or a satire of contemporary culture, the film is the story of a movie director looking to find fulfillment through his work.

Does this sound familiar?  If not, allow me to gesture towards...basically all of modern TV.  Creative work about those who make creative work is not new, but in the era of "Peak TV" it's become nearly ubiquitous.  If you don't believe me, here is a real category on Netflix:


The proliferation of this genre has its merits.  "Write what you know" is a cliche, sure, but it's not wrong.  By centering narratives on the world they inhabit, creators are often able to draw on their experience to tell stories about more universal themes.  Movie studios are after all just another workplace, albeit an often peculiar one.

The flip side of this is that TV about TV by its very nature is prone to uncritically magnifying problems with the industry at large.  One such problem in modern TV is the lack of diversity.  Taken one way, this means that the opportunities for women and persons of color have not been as plentiful as they should be.  Taken another way (one more relevant to this piece), this means that the stories that do get told on the small screen primarily reflect the experiences and the worldviews of those writing them.  And the most relevant experience shared by all of these creators is that they were successfully able to get a TV show made.

Enter Party Down (finally thank God).  My favorite comedy of the decade (and perhaps every decade) is yet another show about showbiz, but one that avoids the pitfalls inherent to this milieu.  Part of this is because it existed before the current onslaught of semi-autobiographical shows.  It also helps that it's set just outside of the world of show business, focusing instead on the exploits of a bunch of Hollywood hopefuls working for a second-run catering company.  The show's ever-changing setting allows it to shift focus each episode, which does sometimes pull us into the orbit of stardom (eg. award shows, movie premieres, and parties for the rich and famous).  If nothing else, the show's flexible premise is a clever stroke of genius that never gets stale.

But the primary reason for Party Down's greatness is that unlike many tales about showbiz, this one isn't telling a preordained success story.  While the characters are clearly portrayed as having (varying degrees of) talent, the show casts no aspersions to the certitude of their success.  Casey is funny as hell*, Kyle is good-looking and charismatic, and Henry can act the shit out of a scene, but all that talent is met with heartbreak and little tangible benefit.  This isn't about the promise of the destination; it's about the interminable grind, which is more plainly compelling and relatable story than one concerning the existential ennui of success.  The dichotomy between the haves and have-notes even serves to drive a lot of the show's humor - the caterers want success and the successful they cater to want normalcy.  Which is how you get Roman both consulting on an orgy and literally trading places with a rock star named Jackal Onassis.

*Every single cast member is fantastic, but Lizzy Caplan is the best and it's not close

Beyond this farcical humor, the show also manages a sly commentary on the virtue of trying to make it in Hollywood.  In this way it resembles another show on my list, Review.  But whereas the aspirational nature of that show is derived from its very specific artifice (Forrest's attempt to review life itself), Party Down lives in something more resembling the real world.  And while the reality of show business has plenty of artificiality in it, there is something more nakedly real about the struggle portrayed here.  Take Kyle's story.  He is the most straightforwardly ambitious member of team with many of the necessary ingredients (good looks, talent, willingness to get "friendly" with producers) for stardom.  But even this guarantees nothing.  When he meets an old acquaintance at the aforementioned orgy his wide-eyed optimism is met with her earned cynicism.  The thought that he might just be a "grain of sand" who never becomes a star is enough to make even beautiful, simple Kyle question if this is all worth it.  These realizations and moments of introspection come for each character, and dot the goofy landscape of the series with a air of poignancy.

The Hollywood-specific focus never becomes overwhelming, though.  This is in part because of odd man out Ron Donald, played with sweaty aplomb by the ever-versatile Ken Marino.  As the lone member of the crew without his sights set on stardom, his existence helps to provide a counterbalance.  His motivations are necessarily less glamorous than everyone else - at first he hopes to run a restaurant franchise (the beautifully named Soup'R'Crackers, which I so wish was real), and when that fails he turns towards management roles within the Party Down company.  But these dreams still represent the same fundamental aspirations as the rest of his team.  When he caters the college republican group in the second episode, Ron internalizes the concept of being what they call "an achiever," and this becomes his modus operandi for the rest of the show's run.  In true Party Down fashion, most of what this mindset drives him to do is patently absurd.  Leading team-building exercises, conceptualizing the Ron Donald Do's and Don't's, and trying to rehabilitate his image by catering his high school reunion are all terrible ideas that clearly demonstrate how the urge to do something just to do something is foolhardy.  As pie-in-the-sky as everyone else's hopes are, at least they are tethered to a tangible idea of success.

As compelling as all this is, the undeniable thematic center of the series is Henry Pollard, played with the usual amount of charm by Adam Scott.  Whereas everyone else is striving, he spends the entire length of the series explicitly giving up.  This is not an exaggeration as the pilot begins with his return to catering following his burnout at the hands of his iconic ad work (the way his catchphrase "Are we having fun yet?" becomes more and more tragic of a line reading throughout the series is a brilliant touch) and the finale ends with his first audition since quitting.

As such Henry's story consists of him re-adjusting to working for work's sake.  While everyone else does this job to support their larger efforts, Henry is emphatically just a caterer and is not looking for any sort of fulfillment in his work.  Given the failure Henry has experienced in his other life this attitude seems healthy at first, but it's quickly revealed to be untenable.  When Ron's absence leads to a leadership vacuum at the end of season one, Henry steps in to save face.  This leads to a full-time offer to become the new manager and not coincidentally a relationship with rival caterer Uda Bengt,* who is impressed by his effort.  Henry tries the life of responsibility, but nights of watching The Mentalist with Uda in between firing employees that care about the job as little as he used to doesn't suit him any better.

*I told someone I loved Kristen Bell recently and then realized this love was based primarily on her appearance in a grand total of two episodes of this show, as I never saw Veronica Mars and am extremely lukewarm on The Good Place

Once he realizes this, he abandons both his responsibilities (by giving them back to Ron) and his relationship.  He then reconnects with Casey, which is mildly ironic given that their previous fling ended when she took a job on a cruise ship.  This is probably the happiest we've seen Henry as he's now free to stop acting like he cared about something that he didn't really care about.  But this too cannot last as Casey still desperately hopes to break through in her career.  When her potential big break falls through, Henry tries to comfort her to no avail.  "If you’re not crazy enough to believe it for you, how are you going to believe it for me" she asks through tears, unable to receive meaningful consolation from someone who's given up.  So he stops giving up and takes the audition for his dream job.

The culmination of Henry's arc is the clearest demonstration of the show's central ethos that what you strive to be is central to who you are as a person.  Every character faces the choice of whether or not to keep going over the course of the series.  Even goofy old Constance isn't truly herself until she finds her love in the finale.  When characters choose to stop pushing forward they are met with depression and dissonance.  But when they do keep trying, there's always at least some measure of solace in following your heart.

In the series' finest half-hour "Steve Guttenberg's Birthday Party," the titular actor finds himself identifying with the plight of the crew.  He tells them that their struggle reminds him of the beginning of his own career, which he calls the best time of his life.  Of course they push back and say isn't your life better now with all the money and such, and Guttenberg's subsequent loss for words is played for laughs, but that's really the whole show right there.  The people who are lucky enough to tell their own story may romanticize the path that got them there, but that's a blinkered view that obscures the reality of the situation.  And until we get more stories like Party Down on TV, the medium itself will continue to be biased toward the survivors.

Sunday, December 15, 2019

Top TV of 2019

As I promised last year, my giant year-end TV posts are a thing of the past.  You might think it's because the kids take up all of my time and yes that's certainly part of it.  But the main reason for my deviation is that there is simply too much very-good-but-not-great TV.  Not only is the sheer volume of this impossible for a layperson to keep up with, but I also don't feel there is much value in sorting out which B+ shows I like better than the others.  And if I can barely bring myself to care about my own opinions, I'm not sure how I could ask that of you dear reader.

There were a number of A- shows this year, but once again I do not feel the need to remark upon them further.  These shows were quite compelling and you should watch them: Ramy, Pen15, Barry, Tuca and Bertie, Lodge 49, Mindhunter, Big Mouth, Handmaid's Tale, Sorry For Your Loss, and the final seasons of Veep, Catastrophe and Mr. Robot.  Also, the Deadwood and Breaking Bad movies were fantastic.

And now for the A shows:

#6 - Russian Doll (Netflix)

High-concept stories aren't well-suited for TV.  The need to sustain everything over the span of episodes and/or seasons often leads to too many complications and excess silliness.  Take Orphan Black, which went from a taut thriller in its first season to a muddled mess later on.  But Natasha Lyonne and friends managed to pull off a neat trick with Russian Doll.  They did it by being brief, having a lot of fun with it, and basing the drama on the characters instead of an endlessly labyrinthine plot.  What a concept.

#5 - Fleabag (Amazon)

The second and final season of Phoebe Waller-Bridge's creation is great throughout, but I want to call attention to the first episode which takes place entirely over the course of a single engagement dinner.  While it might not be the defining episode of the year it's probably the best because it demonstrates everything great TV should be without breaking a sweat.  Re-familiarizing us with the characters and the story?  Check.  Telling a compelling self-contained story?  Check.  Introducing the hot priest and setting up all the conflicts for the season?  Check.  Using its unique storytelling device (the in-time confessional cutaways) for maximum affect and comedy?  Yup.  Both seasons of Fleabag conclude in devastating fashion, but those endings are made possible by flawless beginnings and great storytelling.

#4 - I Think You Should Leave with Tim Robinson (Netflix)
Saturday Night Live is the Pizza Hut of sketch comedy in that I'm not sure if it's gotten worse or my tastes have improved.  As currently construed it often aims for the lowest common denominator, has an unhealthy obsession with current events, and has too superficial of a worldview to say anything meaningful anyway.  Which all might explain with the seemingly brilliant Tim Robinson didn't last very long there.  It's all for the best anyway, because ITYSL is possibly the most consistently hilarious show of its kind since....Mr. Show?  Short and sweet, goofy as hell, and not afraid to crank up the absurdity all the way....that's the stuff.

#3 - Unbelievable (Netflix)

For most of the eight-episode run of Unbelievable, I had to keep telling myself that all of this actually happened.  The story of Marie, a pseudonymous rape victim who was actually fucking charged with false reporting, is so full of incompetence, ambivalence, and rancor that it's often, well...unbelievable.  But the way the show handles its righteous anger is what elevates it to greatness.  If it simply spent all its time chasing the bad guy and sticking it to the people who failed to believe and/or support Marie, it would certainly be compelling.  But it would also be incomplete (and given the subject matter, a little gross, too).  What instead makes Unbelievable transcendent is its concurrent focus on both the personal cost of such institutional failure and how restorative justice can offer a path forward.  This dichotomy is never more evident than at the end of the penultimate episode which shows the detectives finally connecting the dots at the same moment Marie shares the depths of her despair with her therapist.  "Even if they really care about you, they just don't," she says as its made clear her name will finally be cleared.  Gutting, ultimately hopeful, and maybe the most necessary show of the year.

#2 - Chernobyl (HBO)

Chernobyl, the five-episode miniseries about the disaster of the same name, is poorly served by its promotional materials.  Take the tagline that reads "What is the cost of lies?"  Not only does this appear to draw a dumb parallel to the literal elephant in the room (if only Trump told the truth all the time everything would be great!) but more importantly it misses the point of a rich and deeply-layered series.  Chernobyl takes great pains to convey that the myriad causes of the disaster were not just simple moral failings.  And much like the previous entry on this list, the blame game isn't even its primary focus.  By taking a holistic view of how the (literal) fallout affected everyone and how those same people came together to pick up the pieces, Chernobyl works best as a tale of the strength of human hope and perseverance in the face of impossible adversity.

#1 - The Righteous Gemstones (HBO)

At first blush, The Righteous Gemstones looks like a logical continuation of the McBride/Hill oeuvre. The first few minutes of the pilot reveal that the evangelical Gemstone family is an entitled force of nature that, in the grand tradition of Kenny Powers, makes everything around them worse.  But even though I absolutely loved Eastbound & Down, there's a pretty good chance this will end up as the masterpiece of the form.  This is partly because the subject matter (megachurches) is more germane to our society's rot than are athletes or vice principals.  Even more though, Gemstones excels because its centering of the Gemstone family (rather than one or two main characters) allows it to explore every iteration of this pathology.  The oldest son trying to maintain his birthright, the uncle trying to wedge his way in, the overqualified daughter still hoping to fit in, and the patriarch lost without his partner.  This wide focus adds depth to both the text and the subtext of the show and makes it the best thing of the year.  Oh yeah and it gave us the best brainworm of a phrase ever with "Uncle Baby Billy."

Friday, December 6, 2019

Best TV of the Decade: #5 - Eastbound & Down

#5 - Eastbound & Down
Aired 2009-2013 (4 seasons) on HBO
Created by Ben Best, Jody Hill, and Danny McBride
Currently streaming on HBO

For a brief introduction to this countdown, click here.

The first episode of Eastbound & Down does all the things a good TV pilot should do.  It begins the story (flameout ballplayer returns home), establishes the setting (small-town North Carolina), and creates the conflict that will drive the narrative throughout the series.  But all of that is secondary to its main goal: Giving us a grand introduction to the star of the show, Kenny Fucking Powers.  Danny McBride's portrayal of Kenny is an homage to the real-life excess of controversial sports stars like John Rocker with everything (most notably the hair) turned up a notch.  He's brash, arrogant, and so full of himself that he listens to his own audiobook on repeat.  His self-confidence borders on delusional but his charisma and magnetism are still readily apparent.  He feels entitled to whatever he wants and gets violent and angry when people push back.  Thirty minutes into the series it's clear that Kenny Powers is American id personified, and we're all along for the ride.

Contrast this with the premiere of the fourth (and final) season, which is a re-introduction of sorts.  Definitively done with his major league aspirations, Kenny is now a family man with a normal job.  In spite of his wildly changed situation, he is still fundamentally the Kenny we already know.  What makes this interesting then is how his specific pathologies manifest in different but telling ways.  Take the moment midway through the episode when Kenny, dressed in almost foreign-seeming button down shirt and khaki shorts, attends a small function in honor of his wife, April.  She accepts an award and gives a speech about her accomplishments.  But then she turns the focus of her gratitude towards Kenny.  "Thank you for standing right behind me" she says as her co-workers applaud Kenny for his support.  She's clearly not lying - Kenny has been supportive of his family which has allowed them to thrive.  But the dissonance of this moment - balancing a supporting role in his own life against the self-image he has constructed - is too much.  In true Kenny Powers fashion he runs off to the parking lot to smash things in anger.

A series that can establish a worthwhile premise is usually good.  A series that keeps tweaking and reinventing that premise to speak to deeper themes is usually great.  Eastbound & Down is one of the very best comedy series of the decade because it goes a half-step beyond this, telling the same fundamental story each season and adding layers and layers to its message without ever becoming stale or purposeless.  In between the two episodes I described above, Kenny continuously learns the folly of his ways and then seemingly forgets those lessons almost immediately.  He wanders to Mexico to pass the time and find his father and then ends up in Myrtle Beach trying desperately to salvage his career.  And after achieving his dreams of returning to the big leagues he gives it all up and fakes his death to be with April.  And sure, all this could be waved away as just the necessary shuffling required to maintain an ongoing television series.  After all, the show (and the story) must go on.

But on the contrary, Kenny's constant reinvention reveals the true genius of the show.  A lesser series might use Kenny's story as a parable about the righteous downfall of an entitled white man, but McBride and company never let things be that one-dimensional.  Others still would paint this as a straightforward redemption arc, but Eastbound & Down resists the simplicity of such an approach.  Kenny Powers may be a cartoon of a man and the arc of his story may bend towards his better angels, but both him and his journey are more complex than their premise may lead you to believe.  Only through repeatedly painful lessons, meticulous self-discovery, and incremental change is Kenny able to become the man we see in the finale.  All of this gives us a lot to digest about what it really means to be Kenny Fucking Powers.

The Protagonist of The Story



The common tenet of the Hill/McBride creative universe, from the film Observe and Report to the currently-airing series The Righteous Gemstones, is that the central characters view themselves by default as the sole protagonist of their worlds.  This tendency is most obvious in Eastbound & Down as Kenny is literally narrating his life story throughout the series (more on this later).  The show clearly takes him to task for this extreme myopia as the conclusion of each seasons' second act leaves him abandoned and alone (take for example his sparsely-attended July 4th party in Myrtle Beach).

To its credit, Eastbound & Down digs deeper and avoids relatively simplistic moralizing.  Rather, the show demonstrates how this narrow worldview limits Kenny's own personal growth, irrespective of his relationship with others.  When Kenny first faces adversity in the first season, he knows nothing other than trying to be the greatest ("I had no choice when it came to being great, I just am great").  So his only available response to hardship is to do the opposite of what he was doing, which means he shuns his idea of greatness and (temporarily) quits baseball.  Later, when Kenny reconnects with his father (played with the appropriate amount of sleaze by Don Johnson) he is unable to comprehend that his failures are the necessary result of living a life with no regrets.  "It's time I take my dad's advice," Kenny says with almost no self-awareness "stop thinking about other people and start thinking about me for once."  When Kenny returns to the states and faces a challenge for playing time in Myrtle Beach, he confesses that his "whole reign of power is being challenged," and that he's "never been nervous before."  And when he's separated from his family near the end of the series he justifies his choices by ignoring the past entirely.  "A real man knows there's only one way to face, and that's forward."

What this conveys is that for all his considerable strengths, Kenny has the emotional cognizance of a child.  This comes not from any functional deficiency but from a moral imagination so limited as to be inhibiting.  And so Kenny repeatedly finds himself  isolated not simply because he's an asshole but because his own image and self-worth are inexorably tied to a mindset that isn't compatible with real human connection.  Through this lens Kenny is an almost tragic figure; an Alexander constantly conquering but feeling nothing.

Winning is Everything

"They say greatness comes at a cost.  If you want to achieve legendary status, you must make certain sacrifices.  The demands of others often conflict with the demands of an exceptional life.  Is it even possible to reconcile the needs of others with the need to win, when winning often means defeating your rivals at any cost?  Suppose it remains to be seen, but there is one simple truth you can always rely on in this fucked-up world: Victory is its own reward."

This portrayal of Kenny's self-centeredness comes with a good deal of nuance.  His obsession with himself is routinely conveyed in obvious manners and yet it rarely causes problems in and of itself.  This allows us to enjoy some guilt-free laughs, but it also helps to show that the harm Kenny heaps on others comes from something a little different: His need to defeat those in his way in order to achieve happiness.  And while this zero-sum mentality is clearly not unique to Kenny, the series makes it clear that the main contributor to this is his life as a ballplayer, where the black and white truth of winning and losing papers over shades of grey.

As you might guess, this attitude is reflected throughout the series.  When he enjoys success on his Mexican team he uses it to justify his mistakes.  "Did this tale end the way I thought it would?  Probably not, but as long as I win who gives a shit" he says ignorant of the friends and family he left behind.  When he needs inspiration he often turns to Stevie who uses the same motif for inspiration.  Kenny "always emerges victorious" and so he should continue on.  "They say to the victor goes the spoils," Stevie continues in the final season, "we conquered the universe so where are our spoils?"  And in the final season this is made most explicit as he has to drive several co-stars from the Guy Young show (including eventually, Guy Young himself) in order to achieve his goals.  Throughout this all, the drive to win is used to paper over other concerns and calcify Kenny's resolve against his better angels.  In this light, his selfishness can actually be seen as a by-product of the inherent need to emerge victorious against your foes, whether they be real or imagined.

The show refutes this ethos subtly but powerfully.  Take the monologue at the start of this section, which ends with the visual of Kenny on a lake, hovering above it with his new water-jet-pack.  It's an exorbitant marker of status symbolizing his ascension to fame and fortune.  But whereas past escapades on the lake found Kenny celebrating with others, he's now alone and sullen.  As usual he's won but at the cost of ever being able to enjoy that victory.  And so when he says "victory is its own reward" he's clearly lying to himself because it's the only thing he can say to justify what he's done.  This can't be the victory Kenny is looking for.  For that, he'll have to look outward.

Heaven is Other People

Because Kenny is necessarily the center of the story, the other characters in Eastbound & Down are not so much their own distinct entities as they are people sucked into Kenny's orbit.  Of course, not everyone's gravitational pull is the same.  For the people that Kenny treats as lesser than him, he exhibits little respect.  He routinely abuses his brother's hospitality.  He spends all of Stevie's money and subjects him to near-ritual abuse.  And he so often gives the finger (literally and figuratively) to the fans that it is literally his trademark.

At the same time, Kenny is dependent on these same people to provide him with the validation he requires to perform.  When the fans of his Mexican team are initially lukewarm to his antics, he explains away his under-performance by saying "if I don't have the love I don't have shit."  Similarly, he doesn't get his pitch back in the first season until April shows up to cheer him on.  He later sloppily tries to recreate the same dynamic with his college-aged girlfriend in Myrtle Beach to much less avail.  The recurrence of this theme betrays that Kenny knows deep down that he needs others to be his best self, but his masculine pride and self-image interfere with any self-actualization.

A similar irony defines Kenny's interactions with the powerful, albeit with a predictably reversed dynamic.  When his goals are aligned with the people pulling the strings (think Will Ferrell as the dealership tyrant Ashley Schaffer or Michael Peña as the owner of Kenny's Mexican team), everyone is happy.  But when their demands don't align with Kenny's self-image, he's more than likely to blow everything up.  When Kenny doesn't want to throw pitches as part of a promotion for Ashley the stated reason is his lack of confidence but he later justifies it by saying "I made a promise to myself and I'm not going to break it for capitalism."  This same story plays out in the final season when he happily joins Guy Young's TV show when it suits him and then eventually works to defeat Guy once he challenges Kenny's desire to conquer.

What all this dissonance helps to establish is that Kenny is not some unthinking monster.  Instead, he has developed an inherent understanding of power dynamics that he uses to further his cause, for better or worse.  In spite of his boorishness and his cavalier attitude towards the needs of others, Kenny can still comprehend the meaning and importance of his relationship with others.  And thus his character development in each season isn't simply him learning about this co-dependency.  Instead it's that he grows by making the conscious decision to forsake his previous ways, abandon his power, and be supportive of those in his life.

The Story You Tell Yourself

For as consistently good as the series is, its ending is probably the best part.  That this is true in spite of an odd closing that is more disorienting and confusing than anything is even more remarkable.  Like many series, Eastbound & Down flashes forward to see how future events play out.  Or at least it appears to do that.  Among other things, April's tragic death and Kenny's new life in Africa (?) give the feel of an escalating tall tale that's too much for even this show, and indeed that is the case.  After the fantasy concludes we zip back to reality where Kenny is putting the finishing touches on his life story, projecting out the future with a flair for the dramatic.  He's been writing his autobiography since before we even met him but in this moment it feels like he's finally done, content with his life and the choices he's made.

The way the ending of Kenny's story differs from his prior versions reflects precisely how he's changed.  The stories from the first season and from Mexico clearly reflect dominion over others as his solitary goal.  After settling down as a family man, his rough draft at the start of the final season reads "In the end Kenny Powers didn't get what he wanted, but he got what needed.  He didn't win baseball but he won life."  These words show progress in that they evoke a sense of contentedness, but it still rings hollow.  It's centered on Kenny's wants and needs and still uses the language of winning and losing.  This is the old Kenny that was short on wisdom and was barely masking his seething rage.  The Kenny of the finale has moved past that, largely by looking outside himself and focusing on the future.  He begins his closing thoughts with "If you don't have a dream the soul begins to die.  So if you've accomplished your dreams the best thing to do is to come up with new dreams" and then ends his story with fulfillment at the thought of the "seeds" he's put out into world.  Kenny has not only accepted his life as a family man but has embraced it, and as such he orients the tale of the rest of his life around this new conception of himself.

But even though the changes in Kenny's story accurately reflect his personal development, what's most revealing is that he's telling his own story in the first place.  The entire motif of Kenny's narration throughout the series stealthily serves as the show's central parable about the true power a man wields over his life.  Yes, Kenny becomes wizened enough to understand that only through growth and change will be gain the fulfillment he's been searching for, but it's only because he can tell himself an all-encompassing and self-affirming story about it that he's able to follow through.  Shaping these truths that appear self-evident to the viewer through his own personal narrative is how Kenny reckons with his life.  And even though we may think of ourselves as morally superior to Kenny, it's only through this story that we fully gain understanding of his character.  And so we circle back to the show's rejection of its seemingly simple premise, which we now understand to be the whole point.  Eastbound & Down is both Kenny's gift to himself and to us.

Monday, December 2, 2019

Weekly Playoff Probabilities - Week 14

As always, explanation here, ranking below, thoughts after.

Rank Team Agg Rank CFP Prob Change
1  Ohio State 1 98.6% 3.6%
2  Clemson 2 95.1% 5.2%
3  LSU 4 91.7% 7.1%
4  Georgia 5 40.8% -2.1%
5  Oklahoma 6 26.8% -1.1%
6  Utah 10 15.6% 1.0%
7  Baylor 15 9.0% 0.0%
8  Penn State 11 7.3% -2.6%
9  Florida 7 6.5% -0.3%
10  Notre Dame 14 3.8% 0.0%
11  Wisconsin 8 1.8% 1.0%
12  Oregon 13 1.2% -0.1%
13  Minnesota 19 0.9% -1.4%
14  Alabama 3 0.8% -8.2%

For the first time in the CFP era, Alabama will not be a part of the national title proceedings.  Obviously this is a boon for everyone that is not a Crimson Tide fan, but 1) this was probably the most fun Alabama team of the Saban era so it's still a little sad, and 2) a one-loss Alabama would have been a fun test for my model.  As you can tell from the table above, their SOS is garbage (their best win is....7-5 Texas A&M?), so my model thinks they would have been an unlikely selection at 11-1.  At the same time, they're clearly one of the four "best" teams and the committee had them at #5 before the loss, suggesting they were one upset away from inclusion.  At this rate, the committee is going to make it through the whole 4-team playoff era without having to make a truly difficult decision.  Bully for them.

But not so fast my friend.  The fifth and sixth spots in the Playoff odds hint at the possibility of selection day intrigue.  Oklahoma has a mildly better SOS than Utah so they're ahead of them for now.  Assuming a Georgia loss (don't actually assume this....their defense is gooood) and Utah/Oklahoma victories, the committee would have their first truly interesting decision on their hands.  Oklahoma has played a better schedule (mostly because their conference is better), but Utah has absolutely destroyed everyone over the back half of the season.  I would guess a 12-1 Oklahoma ultimately makes the cut, but....maybe they don't?


Championship Week Preview

Home Away Home Win Prob Playoff Teams Lost
LSU Georgia 57.9% 0.247
Ohio State Wisconsin 84.3% 0.073
Oklahoma Baylor 69.5% 0.072
Utah Oregon 55.6% 0.041
Clemson Virginia 94.2% 0.018

It may not look like there is potential for chaos this weekend.  And indeed, Selection Sunday may end up being a pre-ordained decision.  But all five major conference title games have Playoff implications, which is not something you can say every season.  So let's see what flavor of chaos each game promises.

NO CHAOS: Ohio State-Wisconsin - It would certainly be weird if the Badgers beat perhaps the best team of the decade.  But it wouldn't change the fact that Ohio State is already in the Playoff.  The Buckeyes have three wins over 10-win teams, and road wins over Michigan and Indiana, and almost every single one of those contests has been a blowout.  No result short of a Wisconsin landslide would change anything here and that's not happening.  Sorry, I don't like it either.

THE ILLUSION OF CHAOS: LSU-Georgia - There's a perception that the Tigers are the best team in the nation, so an upset here would feel like something big.  But LSU's defense has been mediocre enough to make this game a near coin flip.  And if Georgia wins it's extremely likely that both teams make the field over other, weirder teams.  So feel free to enjoy this game as a contest between two great teams, but don't expect anything earth-shattering to happen.

A TASTE OF CHAOS: Utah-Oregon - Utah will be 5th or 6th in the penultimate Playoff rankings when they are released tomorrow.  This means that a Ute loss here doesn't equate to a sure Playoff team will get knocked out, especially because this game takes place before all the others.  Still, an Oregon win would represent the first conference title loss by a "contender" to a "non-contender" in the Playoff era so don't write this game off.

SCHROEDINGER'S CHAOS: Oklahoma-Baylor - If the Sooners win this game and Georgia loses, they are probably in.  Boring.  If on the other hand Baylor wins this game, it clears the way for a Playoff that includes 3 13-0 juggernauts and...Baylor?  Should Georgia, Oklahoma, and Utah all lose, the Bears would be the only one-loss team from a power conference so they would appear to be the obvious choice.  This suggests the absence of chaos.  But the committee would have to know that Baylor would be probably the worst team selected to the Playoff (you're off the hook 2014 Florida State!), which would mean fans of Penn State, Florida, and yes, Alabama could all get a little bit excited for the committee to put their foot down and select an (admittedly better but less "deserving") blue blood.

ALL OF THE CHAOS: Clemson-Virginia - Should the Cavaliers pull the massive upset, a 12-1 Clemson team is probably still one of the four "best" teams in the country.  But the Tigers face the same problem that I described for Alabama earlier - their SOS is garbage.  Clemson's best win in this scenario would somehow also be a 7-5 Texas A&MThe Tigers' second-best win would be...a thrashing of Wake Forest?  A last-second win at North Carolina?  Dabo's already been complaining about his team getting no respect...can you even imagine what would happen if they lose and end up #5?  Fingers crossed.

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Weekly Playoff Probabilities - Week 13

As always, explanation here, ranking below, thoughts after.

Rank Team Agg Rank CFP Prob Change
1  Ohio State 1 95.1% 1.7%
2  Clemson 2 89.9% -0.6%
3  LSU 4 84.6% -1.1%
4  Georgia 5 42.9% 12.3%
5  Oklahoma 7 27.9% 7.3%
6  Utah 11 14.6% 3.4%
7  Penn State 6 9.9% -9.6%
8  Baylor 19 9.0% 5.3%
9  Alabama 3 9.0% -1.3%
10  Florida 9 6.8% -0.8%
11  Notre Dame 14 3.8% 0.7%
12  Minnesota 17 2.3% -0.6%
13  Michigan 8 2.2% 0.7%
14  Oregon 13 1.3% -17.7%
15  Wisconsin 12 0.8% 0.0%

1.  Once again we got just one big upset, so things don't change too much.  Penn State is still propped up by a very good SOS, but in reality they would need basically all of the one-loss teams to lose again to make it.  Oklahoma and Utah both find themselves in decent enough shape, but realistically they need something to happen ahead of them.

2.  An eventful week shook out a lot of division winners.  UVA-VT and Minnesota-Wisconsin will decide their divisions this week, while WMU, Memphis, and Utah all face win-and-in scenarios.  And then there's the CUSA which boasts the only division with a three-team race (Southern Miss can still win the West).

Conference Favorite Perc   Runner-Up Perc
ACCA Clemson 100.0%      
ACCC Virginia 63.4%   Virginia Tech 36.6%
AMEE Cincinnati 100.0%      
AMEW Memphis 77.6%   Navy 22.4%
B10E Ohio State 100.0%      
B10W Wisconsin 60.6%   Minnesota 39.4%
B12 Oklahoma 100.0%   Baylor 100.0%
CUSAE Florida Atlantic 83.7%   Marshall 16.3%
CUSAW Louisiana Tech 52.2%   UAB 39.3%
MACE Miami (OH) 100.0%      
MACW Western Michigan 83.4%   Central Michigan 16.6%
MWCW Hawaii 100.0%      
MWCM Boise State 100.0%      
P12N Oregon 100.0%      
P12S Utah 95.2%   USC 4.8%
SECE Georgia 100.0%      
SECW LSU 100.0%      
SUNE Appalachian State 100.0%      
SUNW Louisiana-Lafayette 100.0%      


Week 14 Preview

Home Away Home Win Prob Playoff Teams Lost
Michigan Ohio State 22.9% 0.089
LSU Texas A&M 82.8% 0.049
Oklahoma State Oklahoma 25.0% 0.035
South Carolina Clemson 7.4% 0.022
Auburn Alabama 31.9% 0.014
Minnesota Wisconsin 38.9% 0.010
Florida Florida State 90.4% 0.007
Georgia Tech Georgia 2.2% 0.005
Kansas Baylor 9.8% 0.004
Stanford Notre Dame 11.3% 0.004
Utah Colorado 95.1% 0.004
Oregon Oregon State 93.6% 0.001
Penn State Rutgers 99.3% 0.001

Rivalry week is good as usual, but with a slightly different flavor.  There isn't really a single big game, but rather a bunch that have some potential to cause chaos.  Also, five of the top six games feature home underdogs which always gets me a little more excited, even when the odds are long.  Finally, the top six games are distributed evenly with two in each of the main Saturday time slots.  Should be fun.