I’ve watched the 3 episodes of this latest season. Something’s off. The characters are not behaving like themselves. I can feel the hand of the writers, moving them around like chess pieces. There’s something that feels false, pushed, orchestrated.
— While I do not find it unbelievable that someone as conservative as Rico would be completely undone by having a one-night stand with a stripper, I do not find it believable at all that he would suddenly set himself up as the stripper’s sugar-daddy. Not believable. No. What would be more interesting would be to watch what has happened in Rico’s marriage because of that one secret indiscretion. He’s not a slick guy. I would imagine he probably had never been with anyone else but his wife. He’s strongly Catholic. What torment would he go through? But this whole stripper side-plot seems contrived, silly, and not realistic.
— I have a message for Nate: BUY A STROLLER. I am so SICK of seeing Nate walking around with that kid in his arms. Nate, there are things called STROLLERS. Buy one.
— The whole plot of Claire being fascinated by the Mena Suvari character is also not realistic. Claire, I think, is too cynical to fall for what is, essentially, a pose. Mena Suvari plays a platinum-blonde performance-artist hottie, who wears leather, and says “irreverent” things that are supposed to be shocking and at one point, Claire asks her friend, “So is she bi?” And her friend replies, “She’s a hardcore radical lesbian feminist.” I admit that I yelled at the television. “She is NOT.” I know some hardcore lesbian feminists, and count some of them as my friends – and only on the planet STUPID would Mena Suvari’s character be a “lesbian feminist”. It is a male fantasy of a lesbian. I don’t get why Claire thinks Mena is cool. Mena seems like a little girl playing dress-up, trying to shock “Daddy”, and her performance art is stupid. Claire is a true subversive, a true artist, someone who smells artifice and phoniness from miles away. Doesn’t make sense. My guess as to what is really going on is that Mena Suvari, since American Beauty hasn’t done much, her career has stagnated. So Alan Ball created this character for her just to jump-start her career again.
— I hope Arthur hasn’t left the house for good. He added that creepy American Gothic sensibility which seems to be the core of the show, but I’m not feeling that creepy core in this season. Not at all.
— I can’t let it go: Nate: BUY A STROLLER.
— I am bored with Brenda now that she has “gotten healthy”. Her downward spiral added such tension to the show, such a disturbing quality and I miss that. Nobody else was as messed up or as brilliant as she. Maybe the writers have something in store for her, but I miss the pot-smoking sex-addicted genius.
— Justin Theroux is hot, and also odd and neurotic, and I hope his plot line continues. I remember thinking, “Who is that smokin’ hottie??” when I saw Mulholland Drive and so I’m glad to see him again.
— I don’t think Nate should leave the funeral business. That’s the whole point of the show. Two brothers inherited this business: Nate is the more free-spirited one (and yet righteous in that kind of “I ran an organic food co-op in Seattle” brand of righteousness), David the more conventional. But seeing Nate in that environment was always so interesting, because you knew he was suppressing half of his impulses. Suppression of impulses is one of the KEY elements of drama. Somehow, this season is missing that.
— Oh, and here’s another message for Nate: GET YOUR OWN APARTMENT. Only on television do full adults linger about in their parents’ houses, with no questions asked, for seasons on end.
— There’s also something off about the production values. The colors are different, they are brighter, more garish. The “sets” don’t have the same empty creepiness, like an Edward Hopper seen slightly askew. A glance through a wavery mirror into American life. That’s what the production values always said to me before. The kitchen in the house is not filmed anymore with that same sense of isolation, and cleanliness. Perhaps it is because of the advent of George (the brilliant James Cromwell). George is up to no good. I’m sure he’s a serial killer, or maybe a secret agent for the United States government (his ominous comment about how “controversial” geology is because of the “oil” is a clue of things to come).
— Speaking of George, since Mrs. Fisher (brilliant actress, love her) married George and has gone all domesticated, she has somehow disappeared from the radar. I miss being a part of her journey, which was always so weird and compelling and moving. The mother, trying to find her own way, after being widowed. Now she’s married again … but … I have no idea how she feels anymore about things. I miss her context.
— I think Nate is hot. Okay? I also think that Peter Krause is good. He is so open. But now all he seems to do is walk the sidewalks endlessly, holding his daughter in his arms because he has never heard of strollers, and goes to play-dates, and … I miss the angry Nate. I miss the rebel, the guy who would explode, who had a sense of humor too. I want a scene where that kid is not in his arms, too.
Sheila-
I’m certainly with you, although I didn’t think this week’s was so bad, and the premiere was more an extension of last season than than the start of a new one.
But yea- the Rico plot is bullshit, the Hollywood stuff is totally out of place on a show like this, and yes- there’s no way in hell someone as cynical as Claire would fail to see through the bullshit of a non-artist like Mena Suvari.
Still, like you, I’ll keep watching :)
I live in hope.
Some days, I wish I got premium cable…
Great review in general- but one strange nit-pick. I know some hardcore lesbian feminist strippers who are JUST LIKE the Mena Suvari character… Odd but true. Apparently male fantasies about lesbians are also some lesbians’ fantasies about lesbians.
So you must be watching on Jen’s cable hook-up, no?
Also, tip to the Obsessed One. Without Love. Kate. Spenser. Lucille Ball (!!!). Rent it. Watch it. You’ll love it.
She’s not subversive enough, though. It’s a pale reflection of the real thing. Her “hardcore feminism” on display in her performance-art is trite. Which is fine – a lot of performance art is trite. But it doesn’t make sense that Claire wouldn’t see through it.
I was in a show in Chicago once with a bunch of lesbian strippers (er – it’s not on the resume) – but they would never have described themselves as “hardcore radical feminists”. Most of them shunned labels anyway, and made sure I knew that they were “sex-positive”. Meaning: not the phobic anti-sex lesbians but “sex-positive” lesbians.
They would rant: “I hate those anti-sex bitches, I hate those prissy lesbians, I hate Andrea Dworkin…”
These women were hilarious.
Michael: Yes. I love Jen, but I use her for her cable.
No, just kidding.
We lived together for years, and our 6 Feet Under dates were sacred. We have continued the tradition.
And thanks for the recommendation – I will check it out!
If you look at Claire’s history of friends and love interests, she’s not a great judge of character. She’s always made bad choices about who she surrounds herself with and cares about.
Other than that, I agree with every point, Sheila. I still have hope that it will get better, though.
Oh gosh, please let us continue to discuss 6 Feet Under with desperate seriousness for the rest of the day.
I LOVE IT.
Jess: I see what you mean. Yes, Russell was a nut-case, and that sleaze-bag MUSTACHE he is sporting now!! He’s a very interesting character – but I always thought that he was on the verge of stabbing Claire or something.
Perhaps it’s Mena Suvari that I actually have a problem with.
But I’m sticking to my guns when it comes to the stroller.
Do you know, I was watching it thinking, this is just not as good as it was. Totally with you on Rico, it’s awful. And not only is Nate living at home, but he’s moving out of the carriage house and back into the main part. Whatever.
I kind of like the Brenda storyline, though. She’s still not really normal. The thing they were discussing at the end was that “normal” is sort of an illusion. Or is boring.
Plus, look at all the time Claire spent with that wretched Parker McKenna.
Re: Brenda. I do think it’s sort of interesting to see her making healthy choices, and it does always seem like she could lose it at any minute and ruin everything. And she probably will – so that’s something to look forward to.
Sports Night was the most underrated show ever.
Yes, there’s still some suspense about Brenda. I’ve been thinking more about Claire, and I find that the Russell angle is so painfully true (“how the fuck did I go out with this loser?”)that it lends some credibility to the Mena Suvari thing. How she could be off guys in general after dating him, and how Mena looks much more interesting when compared to him, rather than as a stand-alone figure. That is, I feel the way it’s written is to deliberately set up a comparison to hide Mena’s (otherwise obvious) flaws.
Could obsess about this all day. Thanks for providing the forum. :)
Oh Anne, you know about me and how much I approve of obsessions!!
What was the name of the wacko Middle Eastern art teacher that Russell messed around with? That whole thing was so bizarre, so upsetting.
The art prof was Olivier.
Total creepazoid.
Oh yeah. Olivier. He was gross.
And speaking of gross, I really miss Brenda’s mother. Hope we get to see more of her.
Under-Performing
Sheilas as disappointed as I am by this season of Six Feet Under. I personally thought Sundays episode was much better than the previous one, but its still not the same show it used to be. But we both plan…
Sheila~
Steve Silver is my cousin, and we have a SFU dialogue every sunday night. Here are my thoughts:
You’re right about the stroller…it’s going to bug me every time I see him now.
The reason nate initially didn’t have an apartment is because lisa lost her job. Perhaps in a family business, they take a pay cut?
The thing about the kitchen…i think it’s very intentional…we don’t see that light shining down anymore on the centerpiece…especially since George moved in and switched the table…I never knew what it meant before, but maybe it was Nathaniel in some way. We saw him sobbing at Ruth’s wedding, and maybe now he feels his presence is not needed in the house anymore. Perhaps one day it will pop back up, and we’ll think, “ooh, something’s going to go down.”
Yes, the Mena Suvari this is obnoxious, but I’ve got to think that the SFU crew is smart enough to know what they’re doing, and that they’re intentionally making these changes to stick something to us later that says “OH..THAT’S what they were doing.” At least I hope so.
Perhaps most of these changes within the characters and the general feel of the show in general is about creating this contrast…by starting off the new season on a lighter note, we will see the contrast more drastically when things start to get darker, mainly with george, and we’ll have needed to see the positive first to find the negative. Last season, everyone was in a bad state except Ruth and George. This season, it is starting to change…everyone may get their shit together (eventually) but Ruth and George will fall probably apart. This up-beat part may have been a release for the show…after such a rough season, they had to show that life goes on and that people are trying to move on with their lives in a positive way.
Maybe I have too much faith in the show, but I think these writers know what their doing, and yes, I too will keep watching.