OK “The Sopranos†. . . cool, yipee, etc. BUT. I’m really enjoying “Big Love.†At first I had a hard time finding my way in (as if I want to watch a show about a man who worries about having too much sex), but this show has a strange Lynchian bite to it. In fact, it’s downright creepy in the way it makes normal and human a practice that couldn’t be any stranger and, maybe, attractive. Chloe Sevigny is, as always, remarkable. And Harry Dean Stanton, Bill Paxton, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Grace Zabriskie, Mary Kay Place–all turn in good work. But the writing . . . the storylines are just so damned weird and, at times, uncomfortably titilating and frightening. Is anyone else watching?
oh look, this became a topic of its own!
sunhee is watching, i am not. i will try to force her to post about it.
At this thing on campus today, a local poet/colleague made a connection between “Big Love” and Raise the Red Lantern; I’ve seen (and loved) the latter, but haven’t seen past episode one of the former. Does the comparison make sense to you, Jeff?
Another great episode last night. Sunhee, where are you? Yes, Raise the Red Lantern is an appropriate analogue, particularly as we watch the political machinations between the three wives. This show confounds me on so many levels and delights me continually. The scene last night between Bill Paxton and his son in which Paxton gives blessing to his son’s desires to pursue plural marriage because he has such a big heart; but then contrast that scene with Bruce Dern being bought off by Paxton to legally marry his mother now that Wife #1 has passed; or the freaky child bride of Harry Dean Stanton whose very presence is cause for consternation. The show is full of tricky contradictions and never quite moves in the direction you think it is headed. And the plot grows more and more baroque (which is good . . . in my mind).
Bill Saletan over at Slate has written an interesting story on Big Love. It articulates many of the engaging complexities at work in this series.
My students from Utah say that this show is so “real,” which I thought was very interesting. I wonder if it really is real or if they think it is real.
I like the show. It’s kind of soap opera-ish but a smart one. I don’t find it as creepy as you do, Jeff. The situation of the show seems very natural, and what intrigues me is precisely that, how a particular structure of life renders certain conflicts and events normal. For instance, I loved the “affair” between Bill Paxton and the first wife. There’s a sense that this occurs frequently with polygamy (since the second wife guessed very quickly what was happening). Also it suggests an advantage to polygamy; you can rekindle passion between spouses by creating a situation that resembles transgression.
Last comment–when I watch this show I am always conscious of watching as a woman. And from a feminist perspective, I am ambivalent about the show. I don’t like the simple fact of women competing over one man (I wish the opposite was possible as well but it isn’t), but I like the subversiveness of a character like Chloe Sevigny’s (the last episode was great in this respect). Since I keep watching, I guess the enjoyment I get from the show overrides whatever problems I see in it.
Is anybody watching the second season? It is damn, damn good–far superior to the first. Sun Hee, what do you think? I find each ep this summer to be riveting; I’m continually on the edge of my seat trying to figure out what’s going to happen next. I’ve gone on record as a true fan of Chloe Sevigny, but it’s Ginnifer Goodwin’s work as Margene that truly astounds. She played a small but memorable role in Walk the Line, but here she’s nearly transcendent; her character always undermining every and all expectations.