Harry Potter: The Epic

Both the story of Harry Potter and the story of how Harry Potter came into existence are fascinating. Author J.K. Rowling started with almost nothing in 1995 when she finished the first book, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (Sorcerer's Stone in the States), and finished writing the final book Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows in 2007 as the first person to earn $1 billion for writing books. Over those 12 years, the world fell in love with the boy wizard with the lighting bolt scar on his forehead, and with good reason. Rowling spun a tale of good vs. evil, coming of age, moral choice, and family history. She made it extremely layered, funny when appropriate, and very dark. And best of all, she planned out the entire story from the beginning (or at least the major developments and relationships), so when twists came along in later books, they made total sense in addition to shocking us.

The outermost layer of the story is the age-old tale of good vs. evil. Harry Potter had the misfortune of being born at the height of the reign of Lord Voldemort, an immensely powerful and insanely evil wizard. He is sadistic, racist, and heartless. Sadly, Harry had the even greater misfortune (in one sense) to be the subject of a prophecy that would bind his destiny to that of Voldemort's; believing Harry to be the only person who could defeat him, Voldemort hunted him down, killed his parents, and attempted to kill Harry. But then something happened. Harry's mother and father were willing to die to protect him, and this selfless, unconditional love shielded Harry from Voldemort's curse, causing it to rebound on Voldemort, nearly killing him. For the next 10 years, Harry grew up with his despicable aunt, uncle, and cousin, who despised the fact that Harry possessed magical abilities. But around his 11th birthday, Harry learned of his true heritage, and learned that he would be going to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, where he was a celebrity. It would be at this school where Harry would learn how to become a wizard so that one day, he could hopefully fulfill his destiny of defeating the dark lord once and for all.

But while Voldemort was evil incarnate, to call Harry a paragon of good would be completely inaccurate. Harry was never tempted by the dark side (which would certainly tempt many people who had been abused and neglected throughout childhood), but he had a lot of growing up to do before he could hope to fight Voldemort. He starts the series off as a wide-eyed prepubescent boy, goes through his angry teenager phase, fueled by mistrust and paranoia, and tries to develop himself into the man he wants to be. It isn't easy for him to be looked to as the last hope for peace, as people expect incredible things from him. But even worse, his celebrity sometimes gets in the way of his friendships and other relationships. Some people are his enemies because they resent him, while even his own friends come to dislike him because they think that he is a black hole of attention. Although his two best friends, Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger, know that he truly is a good person, their relationships are sometimes tested by Harry's unwanted status.

Harry and his two friends represent the three "types" of wizards: purebloods, half-bloods, and muggle-borns. Ron is a pureblood, meaning that all of his ancestors are wizards and witches. Hermione, on the other hand, is muggle-born (muggles are non-magical humans); these are witches or wizards who were born to non-magical parents. Harry is a half-blood, meaning that not all of his ancestors are magical; both of his parents were wizards, but his mother was muggle-born (most other half-bloods in the series have one parent who is magic and one who is not). This distinction among wizards is the basis for the series' major morality issue, that of racism. Voldemort and his followers were of the opinion that only pureblooded wizards were worthy of using magic. Muggles and muggle-borns (or mudbloods as Voldemort and his followers called them) were lower than dirt, while half-bloods were tolerable at best. Any pureblood or half-blood who associated with muggles and muggle-borns were seen as just as bad. The great irony was that Voldemort himself was a half-blood; his mother was an inbred witch (Ron pointed out that if wizards hadn't intermarried with muggles, magical humans would have died out) and an arrogant muggle father who was under the effects of a love potion when Voldemort was conceived. The even bigger twist regarding Voldemort's belief about the worth of purebloods has to do with... no, I can't ruin it.

Hermione, the muggle-born, has to put up with a lot of ignorance from certain kids at school. Hogwarts uses the house system, where the school is divided into 4 houses, each representing different values. One house, Slytherin, represents cunning and ambition. Unfortunately, the members of this house tend to go dark more often than members of the other three houses combined, and many of the students in Slytherin harbor racist feelings. I would like to say that one thing I wish Rowling would have changed would be to have included a few sympathetic Slytherins. A person can be cunning and ambitious without being an asshole or evil. She proved with the character of Horace Slughorn, who I really wish had gotten more stuff to do in the final book. Along those lines, there was a certain character in the Griffindor house that I am still scratching my head over how he made it into that house, which valued bravery (his initials are P.P.). The irony of the fact that Hermione has to put up with so much is that she is far and away the brightest student in her year at Hogwarts. With one exception (broomstick flying), every subject comes naturally to her, and she devours books in an effort to continually improve her abilities. In spite of what some see as a potential handicap (which in some ways is; unlike Ron, she didn't grow up around magic and wasn't prepared to enter that world), there is almost no spell she can't do.

That doesn't mean that she is perfect; she also has growing up to do, as does every character in the book. Along with her intelligence comes an obsession with being the best that alienates many people (including Harry and Ron for the first few months of school). And along with her heritage comes a certain naivety about the magical world. When she learns about the way in which house elves are treated (they are basically slaves), she begins to campaign for their freedom. What she doesn't realize is that, in a way, the elves are not only ok with their servitude, but enjoy it in a sense. They have been slaves of wizards for millennia, and wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they were free. Ron, on the other hand, is a great friend, but he is somewhat immature and doesn't realize that there are times when a more serious attitude is required.

Over the course of the seven books, we watch these characters grow, and we learn that there are shades of grey in absolutely everyone. Even characters who we have nothing but contempt for show some humanity by the end of the series. There is no such thing as a paragon. Even Voldemort, for all of his atrocities, has a tragic past. Granted, he is the closest thing to an absolute in the series, but based on how he came to be the man(?) he is today, there is a reason for that. On the other side, Albus Dumbledore, the headmaster of Hogwarts, is very often viewed as an agent of absolute good, but he wasn't always that way. He was always a truly good person, but he did some things in his youth that he wasn't proud of, and almost acts out of fear of reverting back to who he used to be. And even in the present, he does a few things with less-than-pure motives. But if there was ever an example of a character who is truly composed of shades of grey, it would be Severus Snape. Like Voldemort and Harry, he is a half-blood with a tragic past. He joined the Death Eaters, Voldemort's followers, as a young man, then supposedly repented. Throughout the series, he tormented Harry and his friends while showing favoratism to the bullies in Slytherin who tormented Harry and his friends. Harry had every reason to hate him, and Snape had every reason to hate Harry. When Snape was in school, Harry's (very popular) father tormented Snape, who was unattractive and unpopular. But Snape's true motives and loyalty come from an entirely different place.

Up next: Family matters...

The Wizard of England

I don't know why I haven't gotten to this yet. I actually planned on doing a post series on this much earlier (I think I mentioned doing it way back when I was writing about His Dark Materials, and I'm sure I've mentioned it often). But today, I overheard a few of my classmates discussing this series (and dressing up as the characters... these are law students, remember). What am I talking about? Harry Potter.

This series may have started out as a children's series, but it became so much more. The underlying themes were very realistic and heavy parables for racism and hate, and this series tackled these themes better than some adult stories.

In this series, I want to examine the story, the themes, and the mythology of the Harry Potter series. I will also give a few opinions on what I think could have been done if author J.K. Rowling had not been trying to make an all-ages book (though a few of my ideas could have been incorporated into the books in the manner that they are in now), and I will also briefly look at the film series.

Up next: Magic words...

Catch-22: Going Crazy Is The Only Sane Thing To Do

Joseph Heller's Catch-22 takes place during an actual shooting war, World War II, and follows the lives of the members of the fictional 256th Airborne Division, stationed on the fictional Mediterranean island of Pianosa. The story examines the insanity of war in two ways; on one hand, soldiers would have to be crazy to fight in a war, and bureaucracy does nothing but create confusion.

Capt. Yossarian is a bombadier in the squadron who wants nothing more than to go home. When he reported for duty, he was told he would have to fly 30 bombing runs, then he would be sent home. Unfortunately, Col. Cathcart, his squadron's commanding officer, wants nothing more than to become a general, and he believes that the best way to do so is continually increase the number of missions his men have to fly. He believes that this will show the general he serves under that his men are the toughest men in the US military, and that he is responsible for this fortitude. Early on, Yossarian learns of Catch-22, a military rule that will potentially allow him to go home early. All he has to do is tell the base doctor that he thinks he's going crazy, because crazy people can't fly bomging missions. The problem is that the military is of the belief that crazy people are incapable of knowing they are crazy, so if you think you are crazy, you are truly sane. But the doctor cannot seek out crazies, they have to come to him. As the book goes on, Catch-22 comes to have other meanings as well, all of which lead to circular logic that never truly makes sense.

The craziest part is that Yossarian is likely the most sane person in the book. Heller likely was influenced by Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland because Yossarian is often the only person who ever makes sense. The people Yossarian encounters win arguments through flawed logic because they are in authority. Furhtermore, military bureaucracy is seen as almost being the word of God; even if all the evidence points to one conclusion, if the paperwork says otherwise, that is what is viewed as truth. For example, there is the dead man in Yossarian's tent who isn't really there. This refers to a man who was transferred to the base on Pianosa; his stuff arrived before he did, and he was to be tentmates with Yossarian. While en route, his plane was shot down, so he was never able to check in. Because he never arrived, he couldn't claim his stuff, and the Army was unable to dispose of it because the man was not stationed anywhere at the time of his death, and was, in a sense, not part of the Army at that time. It makes no sense, but the clerical error made it so. Another time, the doctor was believed to be on a plane that crashed, and he was marked dead. A letter of condolence was sent to his wife. But he wasn't actually dead, but because he was dead on paper, everyone pretended that he was dead, even when he was speaking to them. The doc sent his wife a letter to explain what happened, but the Army kept sending her letters telling to ignore the cruel pranks.

The book also examines the idea that soldiers would have to be crazy to put themselves in such dangerous situations. As I said in the intro post, WWII was in many ways a noble fight, but even so, I cannot imagine being on the front lines of combat. Yossarian argued this point with one of his colleagues, who was very idealistic, and knew that defeating the Nazis would serve the greater good. But Yossarian countered that he has no interest in the greater good if he is not around to enjoy it. Fortunately, most soldiers aren't that selfish/pragmatic, otherwise we wouldn't have an army (but if every soldier in every country believed this, maybe there would be no armies; how would countries wage war then?!).

The style of the book reflected the idea of insanity; the story was told out of chronological order, and things were referenced that the reader was not yet aware of. The book is a bit confusing, but the pay-off is worth it if you pay attention.

Up next: Do you believe in magic?...

Dr. Strangelove: Let's Talk About Sex

I'm not even sure how to start. Dr. Strangelove; Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb is one of the most incredible movies ever made. Very few movies can simultaneously show off the horror and the insanity of war in a way that is consistently funny, but this one pulls it off. The events of the film take place over the course of what is very likely the last evening on Earth, because the pressure of living in the Cold War finally caused a high-ranking USAF General to snap and launch a preemptive strike against the USSR. The movie follows the events in three locations: on General Ripper's Air Force base, he uses fear to turn his troops against the rest of the American military; in Washington, D.C., President Merkin Muffley has convened the Joint Chiefs of Staff in his "War Room" to figure out how to deal with the crisis; and Major "King" Kong commands his B-52 bomber into Russia on its fateful mission that could end the world.

Why is the fate of the world in danger if the US is attempting to launch a preemptive strike to eliminate the Soviet threat? For those of you unfamiliar with the term, "brinksmanship" refers to the practice taking a dangerous situation as far as you believe your enemy thinks it is possible to go in order to make them believe that you are willing to do harm to both yourself and the enemy to get what you want. Mutually Assured Destruction is also relevant; basically, this is meant to show that if your enemy attacks you, you will respond with such force that the enemy will also be destroyed, and it is in the enemy's best interest to leave you alone. The arms race during the Cold War was an attempt by the US and the USSR to engage in brinksmanship and MAD to ensure that neither side would attack the other. Well, in Strangelove's world, the cost of the arms race finally took its toll on the Soviets, and they came up with a new solution: the Doomsday Device. The Soviets placed nuclear bombs in strategic places around the world, hooked them up to a central computer, and programed the computer to detonate them all if the USSR were ever to be attacked. And if anyone were to try and disable the device, the computer would send the detonation signal. Unfortunatley, the Soviets hadn't yet made this public knowledge yet (which defeated the purpose of such a deterrence).

Meanwhile, Gen. Ripper, who was completely unaware of the Doomsday Device (but probably would have gone through with his plan anyway), found a way to supersede a supposedly foolproof plan that would allow him to launch a nuclear strike without presidential approval. He gave his wing group a top secret order that was only meant to be used if Washington had been attacked, and when his XO tried to prove that everything was fine, Ripper convinced his men that any evidence to the contrary was an elaborate Soviet trick. So why did Ripper choose to attack the Soviets? He had begun to fear that the Soviets were trying to poison American water supplies by adding fluoride and sapping away our vitality. How did he come to this conclusion? After sexual intercourse, he felt an intense feeling of fatigue.

Yes, this movie blames most aspects of the Cold War on sexual inadequacy. In many ways, the arms race was a pissing contest, meant to show which side had more money and more firepower. And the two superpowers were fighting over different ideals, and trying to win over the world. The US felt it was its duty to stop the spread of communism and preserve the American way. Therefore, sex permeates the movie. President Merkin Muffley's name is derived from the words merkin (an 18th century female pubic wig) and muff (slang for the female groin). The President was kind of a pushover or, as his name would lead you to believe, a pussy. On the B-52, the crew is going through the survival kit in case they get shot down, and most items in the kit are meant for sex purposes (it includes a condom, nylons, and a small amount of rubles). Kong commented how a person could have "a pretty good weekend in Vegas" with the contents. There is only one woman in the entire film, and she is basically the sex slave of one of the Joint Chiefs. And at the end, when the government officials are trying to decide how to carry on the human race, they decide to create underground societies in abandoned mineshafts, and reason that there should be 10 females to every male.

General Turgidson, one of the Joint Chiefs, also points out that the Americans have to ensure that they will have more shaft space than the Soviets, in order to prevent a "mine shaft gap". In addition to all the sexual references, the film points out the absuridity of various Cold War actions. The mine shaft gap goes back to the idea of a missile gap, where each side feared having fewer nukes than the other. One of my favorite jokes was the "peace race"; the Soviet ambassador explained that the Soviets could no longer afford to keep up with the arms race, the space race, and the peace race. As I said, the Cold War can be likened to a pissing contest, and the US and USSR competed to get more weapons and to get a man in space first. Then, when the world wanted the Cold War to be over, each side wanted to look like it was doing more to promote peace. Hence the peace race.

And then there is the good doctor himself. It's weird to think about how the Soviets were our allies during World War II, when we needed their help to stop the Nazis, but as soon as we lost our common enemy, we became adversaries. But even stranger is that both sides employed ex-Nazi scientists in the building of our bombs and space rockets. I doubt either side would have gotten a man in space at the times we did if we hadn't used the German scientists. Dr. Strangelove serves as an expository character, revealing how the Doomsday Device works, explaining brinksmanship, and being all-together hilarious. He is an odd fellow who seems pathalogically loyal to Hitler despite the war being over for a few decades.

This is one of the greatest movies ever made, and I guarantee it will make you wet your pants from both laughter and fear.

Up next: Yossarian on Pianosa...

Slumdog Millionaire: It Was Written

The Oscars are on this Sunday, and although I've only seen two of the five Best Picture nominees (and don't have a whole lot of respect for the Academy), I really want to talk about the movie I feel should win (even though I haven't seen three of the nominees). When Slumdog Millionaire first started getting a lot of good press, I was intrigued as to how a movie about Who Wants To Be A Millioniare could possibly be so good. But more and more people praised it and I learned that it was more about growing up as a poor child in India. Still, I was unsure of what I was getting myself into when I saw it. I'm so happy I took the chance...

Slumdog is definitely a fairy tale in the sense that the gameshow element is very fantastical. But the gameshow was barely more than a frame for the tale of a young "slumdog" in Mumbai, India. Jamal Malik was born into poverty, and he was a Muslim in a nation of Hindus that hated him and his religion. So when he got to the $1 million question (or 20 million rupee question) on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, the host came to the only logical conclusion: he cheated. After all, how could a boy from the slums who had almost no schooling possibly get that far? Doctors, lawyers, and scholars barely made it 3/4ths of the way through the questions, so Jamal had to cheat... right?

He and his brother Salim had to figure out how to live on their own after a Hindu mob killed their mother. The two of them lived on the street, scammed tourists at the Taj Mahal, and worked for a group of people similar to Fagan from Olvier Twist; they picked pockets and begged for money, then turned it over to their "caregivers". And as Jamal grew up, various noteworthy moments in his life supplied him with the information that gave him the answers for the show. When he was running from the mob that killed his mother, he saw a boy dressed as a Hindu god, and the image stuck with him. When a question asked him what item that god was traditionally depicted carrying, Jamal knew the answer.

Jamal and Salim meet a young girl named Latika, and Jamal falls in love with her. As happens in many fairy tales, Jamal and Latika are kept apart by various twists of fate, and Jamal makes it his mission to always be reunited with her, even if he has to overcome insurmountable odds. When he learns that she likes to watch Millionaire, he goes on the show, hoping beyond all hope that she would be watching.

Latika explains that for many people in India, Millionaire is an escapist fantasy; the idea that someone can turn their life around in one night is too good an opportunity to pass up, and viewers want to live the contestants' dreams vicariously. The same holds true for the viewers of the movie; we like love stories because we want to feel like something like that could happen to us. We want to overcome impossible odds to be with the person we believe we are meant to be with.

Slumdog also has a kind of twisted beauty to it in the scenes of poverty. Watching Jamal, Salim, and Latika put up with the various trials of living in such deplorable conditions is mostly horrifying, but we keep believing that there will be something better out there. Also, they are poor in some very beautiful places. The Taj Mahal is a lone landmark of wealth, and even the slums had a kind of beauty of decay thing going.

If you haven't seen this movie yet, do so as soon as possible. I don't think I've yet met a person who has disliked it (and one person I know who loved it went into it believing she would hate it).

Up next: Sexual healing...

The Insanity of War

I've wanted to write about Dr. Strangelove for a while, but I could never figure out the context in which to do so. Over break, I finally read Catch-22, and I realized that I could look at the two works as examples of the insanity inherent to war. Each world is a satirical look at the idea of war and the people who fight in them.

Dr. Strangelove examines the Cold War, while Catch-22 takes place in World War II. The insanity involved with the Cold War involved mistrust, brinksmanship, and paranoia. World War II (and any other shooting war, for that matter) was insane because people were fighting battles that they would likely die in, because their country told them to. I will grant World War II a slight reprieve; Hitler certainly had to be stopped, but putting one's life on the line probably seemed like not the best idea at certain times.

I don't want to discuss the themes too in-depth in this introductory post because I want to keep them for the actual posts. However, before I start, I want to do one unrelated post. You'll see why.

Up next: Who wants to be a millionaire?...

Dollhouse: In The Beginning

Friday finally introduced us to Joss Whedon's newest show, Dollhouse. I will admit that after about a year and a half of following the development of the show through the alterations to the pilot (that is putting things lightly), the schedule shift from Mondays after 24 to Firefly's Friday night death slot, and the numerous pre-emptive Save Our Show campaigns, my rock-solid belief that this show would be off-the-charts incredible became not-so-rock-solid. After finally seeing it, I can say that while it isn't the best thing I've ever seen Joss do, it kept my attention, and will probably hold on to me as a viewer (on the internet the next day) for at least the entire season.

On one hand, it's very unfair to judge an entire show based on its pilot, especially when the first seasons of Buffy and Angel were among the weakest for those two shows. However, while I can make that argument for a new viewer of those two shows and still justify sitting through the early stuff, Dollhouse is a brand new show that needs to establish an audience. Whedon has had three shows before this, and by now he should know how to make an effective pilot. I'm not saying the show was bad; I liked it enough to immediately want to see the next episode, but I acknowledge that there are problems that need to be worked out.

My biggest gripe is the character dynamics; it seems like there are groups of characters who exist in Venn diagrams, where some will interact very often, some will rarely interact, and some will never interact (at least for a while). Echo is in contact with the other actives (like Sierra), her handler Boyd, and Topher the tech. She had a brief prologue scene with DeWitt, the head of the Dollhouse, before she became an active, but I doubt the two of them will see each other much more in the coming weeks. And, Echo's interactions with Boyd will likely be inconsequential, because anything meaningful they say to each other will be wiped away with the rest of the implanted personality whenever Echo's engagement is over. One review I read referred to Boyd as the Giles to Echo's Buffy, but every time Echo will need a Giles will be when she's engaged, and those memories are ultimately destroyed (or so we think). As for Agent Ballard and Lubov, the Russian mobster, they likely won't have any interaction with the Dollhouse for quite some time. I rank this as such an important problem because the character interaction is what makes Whedon's shows worth watching. Watching the complex relationships develop and seeing how the various characters deal with each other was such a pleasure in the first three shows, and now, two main characters are nothing but blank slates, while most of the rest only exist in defined circles.

I know that Whedon has long-term plans for this show (when does he not have long-term plans for his work?), but I don't know how long he can stretch out the story of Echo self-aware again. There are other plotlines, such as exploring who Echo was before becoming an active (we have seen brief glimpses of her life as "Caroline"), and the story of Alpha, a rogue active (who has ties to Echo and Ballard), but the plotline that we have been aware of from the beginning is the one involving Echo retaining her memories. The tagline of the show reinforces it (You can erase a memory, but can you wipe away a soul?). For one thing, how long will it take until Echo begins to realize what's going on? And where do we go from there? Does the show pull an Alias and have Echo leave the Dollhouse partway through Season 2 and join up with Ballard? Speaking of story arcs, I pointed out to a friend of mine that Topher reminded me a lot of Warren from Buffy. At first it was just physical (they both have HUGE noses), but then he started talking, and their personalities align. Topher isn't as maniacal as Warren (yet; remember that Warren also began as a harmless (relatively) asshole), but he shares a few of Warren's views on peoples' "places in the world". My friend believes that Topher will somehow (he isn't sure how Joss would pull it off) evolve into a major villain on the show. I certainly understand where he's coming from, but I'm not ready to say that Topher could pull something like that off. Then again, I've seen one episode, so I'm sure there are plenty of character twists coming that no one can anticipate right now.

And then there's the big complaint that at least 2/3 of reviewers mentioned: the practicality of the Dollhouse (which even the characters in the show address in one scene). The plot of the pilot certainly begs the question of why someone would pay millions of dollars to hire an active to help get his kidnapped daughter back if he only wanted her as a negotiator. He could get a real negotiator, with real experience, for much less. An argument could be made that an active would be absolutely perfect, but as we saw, imperfections are built into the personalities. Maybe sending Sierra in to kill the kidnappers was part of the plan all along and he only wanted Echo's negotiator as a front. However, the Dollhouse makes perfect sense for engagements such as dates and crimes. An active is much better than an escort because the active truly believes that he/she cares about the client, and doesn't know he/she is being paid. As for criminal jobs, the client probably wants someone trustworthy, competent, and off the radar. The police would have to do some serious investigating to find the active, and if they were to find him/her, he/she wouldn't remember anything.

I am still excited to see where this series is going. Sadly, I'm not as optimistic as I once was, but I still have faith that Joss Whedon knows what he's doing.

Up next: Warnderland...

LOST: Let's Do the Time Warp Again

These early episodes of LOST's fifth season seem to be slowly setting up some major revelations for later episodes this year. "Jughead" was very good, and gave us some substantial revelations, but it didn't exactly advance the plot outside of bringing up a few NEW questions. And "The Little Prince" had a lot of good action on the island, but the story with the Oceanic 6 was a little weak. Basically, I want everyone back on the island. So far, very few things this year have happened off-island that do not contribute to the overall story of the show. Desmond's scenes off the island (he's not one of the Oceanic 6) were great (Desmond's off-island exploits always are) and tied in well with the island action, but so far, the stuff on the island has been the best stuff this year.

The time travel aspect allows the writers to show us what was happening on the island before the arrival of the DHARMA Initiative, which, as it seems, was pretty much what it was like after DHARMA; the Others were defending their Island from outsiders. Speaking of which, now we know that there is (very likely) a giant bomb buried on the Island. That won't end well... Daniel failed to realize that just because it hasn't gone off yet doesn't mean it won't go off at all. Oh, and is it just me, or is anyone else perplexed as to how no one who meets the islanders in the past seems to remember them in the present, even though LOST operates under the time travel theory that you can't change things because the "changes" you make lead to the present you remember? How did Rousseau (who is so hot as a young woman) not remember Jin? How did Desmond and Daniel not remember each other? I know, I know, it's a TV show, and they didn't plan that far ahead, so there are going to be some inconsistencies, but I have come to expect a lot from this show, because the writers have had such long-term plans.

Still, despite the slow pace right now and the slight time travel inconsistencies, LOST remains an incredibly engaging show. I have a few theories about certain things going on right now, but the only one I will reveal is my most bizarre theory (my main one has basically been confirmed by an ABC press release, and I don't want to put something up that I know is a spoiler; if I weren't sure, I would post it, but I can no longer do so in good faith). Basically, the producers have made a point of saying that Vincent the dog will be around until the show ends. In "The Little Prince", the characters noted that, in the future, Vincent got off his leash. Then I remembered the webisode where Christian Shepherd's ghost (?) told Vincent to wake up Jack because Jack had work to do. This led me to remembering a story Locke told in Season 1 about how his foster sister died, and his foster mother was inconsoleable. One day, a dog showed up and slept in his sister's bed and did a few things that made the mother think it was her daughter reincarnated. Maybe Vincent is someone reincarnated?

Up next: Decisions...

Battlestar Galactica: To Hell and...

It's been an eventful few weeks. Now that the 40,000 remaining humans and the rebel cylons have left the nuclear wasteland that is Earth, the question is, "What next"? For 3 or 4 years, the humans kept themselves going with the promise of Earth driving them forward. Now, they are a group without a mission (a reviewer at the AV Club pointed out that Pegasus suffered a similar affliction, and look how well that turned out), and tensions are running high. Most humans aren't happy about trusting the rebel cylons, because getting over a near genocide and an oppressive regime are not things easily forgiven. But cylon technology is better than human tech, and Adama concedes that, with limited fuel, they will need to exploit every advantage they have if they hope to find a habitable planet soon.

If you thought this series was dark before, you haven't seen anything yet. After 4 seasons of planning, Tom Zarek finally got what he wanted, a revolution that put him in charge. And right alongside him was Felix Gaeta, one of the most idealistic characters on the series, whose faith in everything was lost earlier this season, along with his leg. **HUGE FRAKKING SPOILER ALERT** I actually was hoping that the execution of Adama had actually happened. Don't get me wrong, I love Admiral Adama, and the fleet would be in trouble without him, but that is exactly why I wanted him to die. First of all, it would prove once and for all that Galactica has some of the biggest metaphoric balls out there, and it would cause a ton of problems for the crew. And it's not like Edward James Olmos wouldn't be out of work anyway; the show is at its end.

I'm excited to see how the other 3 cylons will factor into the ending, and I can't wait to see how everything ends.

Up next: Getting back to the island...

Scrubs: My Supermen Return

After a subpar (by Scrubs standards) seventh season, it looks like Scrubs is getting back into form. I don't know if the writers felt rushed last year because of the impending strike or network mandates made writing difficult (the show was required to do a "green" episode, requiring it to have an environmental-friendly message, which was probably the worst of the season, and I got the feeling that NBC no longer had any love for the show), but things just didn't work. J.D.'s abrupt break-up with Kim didn't feel right, Turk learning Spanish didn't have the emotional impact it should have, and Dr. Kelso's forced retirement happened before the characters could truly appreciate what had actually happened (also, the so-called "series finale" was blatantly aired out of order, because Kelso was still Chief in it). The one part of the season I really enjoyed was Josephine, the fun-sized intern because of the way Cox hated her but couldn't help but love her (and her voice was hilarious).

But this year, everything is clicking again. Kelso's new role as the annoying guy that everyone wishes would go away, even though he gives out sage advice is hilarious, and Cox's role as the new Chief of Medicince is a great way to explore new relationships. The episode "My New Role" really caught me by surprise; the title led us to believe that it was referring to Cox's role as Chief, but the title actually refers to J.D. (I won't explain why, though). I will admit that I really didn't want J.D. and Elliot to get back together because of what happened at the end of Season 3, but the writers are handling it well (and they acknowledged those events, which placated me a little).

It looks like the writers are moving towards a planned ending that should tie everything up nicely. The characters have certainly grown over these past eight years while remaining true to who they are at their core, and it is going to be interesting to see how everything ends.

Up next: Looking for a home...

24: Real Time, Real World

I try very hard to avoid political discussions in The Other Worlds; the point of this website is to discuss entertaining films, television shows, and books, not to put forth my own insignificant political leanings. However, 24 has become a lightning rod for political debate due to the real world debates regarding its subject matter. The show is extremely conservative; the heroes have been known to utilize torture and circumvent the law to get information that allows them to stop the terrorists at the last minute (usually).

There is a bit of a chicken-or-the-egg phenomenon going on with the show; many of the events in the show simultaneously occurred in real life, and it was hard to keep track which happened first. Or, I guess I should say that many things that did happen in the show were debated in real life. In Season 6, in response to a series of terrorist attacks, the government set up interment camps for people suspected of terrorism. This was similar to Guantanamo, except in the show, the people rounded up were actually American citizens. I remember when it was airing, I spoke to a professor of mine who was actually concerned that American citizens would soon be shipped to Gitmo. Throughout the show, characters have used torture to get information and justified it by preventing catastrophes. Torture was a big deal during the Bush Administration, and there were numerous debates about whether torture was justified. A few politicians actually cited 24 as a reason why we should torture terrorist suspects (I used to have a link to back up this allegation, but it is gone, so you will have to take my word for it). Apparently, these politicians are unaware that the show is fucking fiction. At the same time, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA have criticized the show for its depiction of torture and the use of the ticking time-bomb scenario.

One thing I think the show takes too much crap for is its depiction of Muslims. In Seasons 4 and 6, Muslim Awareness groups balked at the fact that the terrorists that year were Muslims. Sadly, the way Muslims have been treated in real life in America in the wake of the September, 11 attacks has been horrible. But to say that 24 has singled them out and continually used them as villains is (pretty much) bullshit. Yes, some of the terrorists in Seasons 2, 4, and 6 were Muslim. But the worst terrorists have always been white. In the first season, the terrorists were American mercenaries and Serbian warlords. In Season 2, there were American terrorists working below the Muslims and American and German terrorists working above them. In Season 3, a rogue British spy was pulling the strings of Mexican drug lords. In Seasons 5 and 6, the Russians were behind things. And in Seasons 4-6, the Chinese have made their presence known as villains. The bottom line: no one group of people has been singled out as "THE VILLAINS". In fact, in Season 2, there was a multi-episode story involving a Muslim special agent who was attacked by a bunch of rednecks (sorry), who had to be taught some manners by Jack Bauer.

I'm surprised that women aren't more up in arms about the show than Muslims. The show has consistently been straddling the line of mysogony. With few exceptions, every woman on the show is either crazy, clueless, or evil. Kim Bauer was kidnapped so often that fans would refer to the incidents as "Kimnappings", and most women who were in similar situations became basket cases. Then there were the evil ones. In Season 1, two very important female characters turned out to be evil (ok, one was more of a Lady MacBeth, but she was still pretty bad). I think that the only woman who was ever completely competent was Michelle Dessler. The other two "strong women" of the show are Chloe O'Brien and Martha Logan, but both of them were still pretty crazy.

I like this show because it is entertaining, but I sometimes have a hard time swallowing its politics. However, I think it would be much easier if so many of the deplorable things that happened in it weren't the subject of actual debates. But that would mean that our world was not complex, which it certainly is.

Up next: A few updates...