After the Emmys

Was happy to see Michael Emerson (Best Supporting Actor, as Ben Linus on "LOST") and PBS Masterpiece Classic miniseries "Little Dorrit" (Best miniseries, as well as in six other categories for writing, directing, art direction, costumes and cinematography) take home Emmy awards.

I cannot think of any other actor who could bring more to the Benjamin Linus character --- a character that was originally a bit part on the show until Emerson fleshed him out. Fleshed him out, indeed, into the most devious, creepy, sly, lying / prevaricating, and brutal screen character ever. The man who always has a plan, and with complicated schemes, almost always gets what he wants. Credit the show's writers for subsequently crafting Ben into all that he is. It includes the qualities above, but what makes Ben such a great character is his ability to reconnect with the audience, and even make us feel pity for him, even after the darkest of his turns. It's the wry sense of humor, our knowledge that he holds so many secrets to the mysteries of the island that we want to find out about, the losses he endures as he watched his leadership crumble (as well as the humor-in-defeat philosophy this produces), the hilarious silent scene with Hurley and the Apollo candy bar outside of Jacob's cabin, and the sense that this man is destined to be screwed by fate. To this point, the best moment in the series was the scene where Ben moves the island. Emerson won the Emmy this year for his work in "The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham" alone. I also appreciate Emerson's own level of interest in the show. In so many interviews celebrities talk about themselves ad nauseum, but in a show where virtually any character can be killed off at any moment, his enthusiasm for the work shows. Emerson is as much a fan as us.

I was thinking last night while watching the "Inspector Lewis" series that I've been really impressed with the redesign of Masterpiece under Rebecca Eaton. A couple of seasons ago, it was divvied up into Masterpiece Classic, Mystery, and Contemporary, given much better intro and end graphics, along with less stodgy hosts that give a brief introduction --- among them, Alan Cumming, Laura Linney and Gillian Anderson. High-definition television has really helped the program as well --- technology that PBS was the first to really embrace. It's brought new life to the series, and it's nice to see them get recognition. "Little Dorrit" in particular was a very good Andrew Davies adaptation of the rags-to-riches-and-back-to-rags classic. The character of Rigaud was overplayed (then again, it was overwritten by Dickens), but Matthew MacFadyen, Claire Foy and Tom Courtenay were top-notch. Also, an under-valued performance from James Fleet as the pitiable Frederick Dorrit.

'Course, I didn't watch the Emmy Awards. Honestly, who does?

Masterpiece in the Making

It was a farmer's holiday today (that is to say... it was raining) and I had the television on to PBS for most of the day in the background while I did some household chores. Then, I heard the Masterpiece Classic theme music trumpet and I looked up to see that David Copperfield (1999) was beginning. I missed it when it aired a couple of weeks ago (and was told then that the pledge-drive cut-ins made it almost unbearable), so I was pleased to find that it ran both parts without interruptions.

I've become a big fan of Masterpiece Theatre (now shortened to Masterpiece followed by subsections of Mystery!, Classic and Contemporary each airing at different sections of the year) in the time since we've went to over-the-air only television. PBS is nearly our only respite for prime-time shows, aside from LOST on ABC. Since getting the HDTV near the holidays, there was the fear that television viewing would skyrocket and the electricity bill would follow, but I find that I'm watching it less than ever. It may be a combination of the previously stated dearth of good programming and that standard definition broadcasts look terrible in comparison when you've seen HD programs. I've been reading quite a bit more recently than I have in a while. Reading more printed books, specifically. Dashed through the Lord of the Rings series and am starting to re-read Sister Carrie for a reason that I'm going to keep quiet for now. Oh... well... no one reads this anyway, so I will say it. I'm intending to write an adapted screenplay. There now, what do you think? I doubt anything will come of it, but I'd like to try my hand at it. There are a lot of ways scenes from this novel would be friendly to film, ways it has much relevance to today's world, and it would be nice to see Theodore Dreiser get some recognition through a continued revival of his works, and blow a little dust off of the 1940s adaptation.

I guess that's why I'm liking Masterpiece so much and why many more movies/films lately are adaptations. It takes classic works of fiction and breathes some new life into them in the modern form of story. Let's face it, the only way most people will ever hear about Carrie, Hurstwood, et al is in movie version. Studios seem to be gravitating more toward adaptations for financial reasons as well --- it takes a known work, presumably with some following, therefore increasing chances of success. I would add that this pecuniary interest is also a reason why we're seeing so many remakes of classic movies in recent years. But I'm also of a mind to say that, creatively, we're running short on good ideas for new stories. Conceptually, we're hitting a dead end. That's not to say that some new work or other will be a smashing success and blaze its own path. But, original ideas for story, new characters facing new situations in unexplored territory and new things to discuss --- I can't say that's happening. This country and this writing world is largely stagnant. And in the face of that, the powers that be are frequently turning to the past.

Anyway, David Copperfield was fair enough. Big screen names, contemporary and one, Daniel Radcliff, who has become a "star" since. Then, the first part of Little Dorrit was featured tonight. I'm finding that the Dickens dramas this year (and Bleak House a couple of years back) are quite approachable on-screen. Oliver Twist (2007) started off with its first hour quite colorful with catchy accordion-like music that lightened the darkness of the goings-on (Oliver's betrayal at the hands of the Artful Dodger and Fagin). The second half went straight into the darkness, though --- Fagin essentially becomes a Jewish martyr, choosing to hang rather than "accept Christ," Sykes displays the violence he had mostly threatened while Dodger, at the end, starts on Sykes' same path. Oliver's rescue by the beautiful, unswerving Rose and Mr. Brownlow didn't leave me with a particularly feel-good ending. More like, is the point that our lot in life teeters on a small edge that can tip either way, and that we are largely a product of our surroundings. This is despite the dialogue from Oliver intending to show that gentlemanly manners are an innate quality that come through even in the most desperate of circumstances.