August 08, 2005

Weinkauf Award Nominee

Here's New York Times TV critic Virginia Heffernan, on last night's episode:

But the ideal of sincerity has long ago been devalued, rendered commercial or quaint. Today, for example, it is associated with Coldplay, mewling God-and-country Republicans and weepie cable-television dramas like "Six Feet Under" that appeal mostly to women and gay men.
That paragraph is just so, so wrong, wrong, WRONG, on so many different levels. Sincerity is NOT devalued, it is NOT only associated with "god-and-country Republicans," and I know all sorts of straight men (myself included) who have long enjoyed SFU, and Coldplay too. And no, last night's episode -unlike several others this year- had nothing to do with politics.

Good episode though- it had the right amount of gravitas for a rare episode about the death of a protagonist. But why all the flashbacks to the Beavis-like villain who kidnapped David last year, in what was undoubtedly the worst hour of the show's history?

And Karol doesn't want to hear spoilers- but she probably woudn't mind if I pointed out that the young Claire in the dream sequence looked just like Karol.

Posted by Stephen Silver at August 8, 2005 05:14 PM

I took the appearances of the red-hooded spook to be about David's loss of his big brother, his protector. Who is going to keep the demons away now? (Keith seems the obvious answer, right? Dave has to learn to trust his partner more. Hah.)

I liked it. I was skeptical for the first half, but the second half was wonderful. I'm glad they did what Nate wanted.

Oh, and I didn't hate George in this episode. I've never liked that character very much, but I do like what he said about Nate.

Posted by: Caryn at August 9, 2005 12:41 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?