Why do you like 'The Hand of Saint Sebastian'?

[Guest ModernDayMoriarty]

Season Two did not bring focus, it merely lost the focus of Season One in favour of a new one.

The tag-line for Season One was 'Who Cares?'; the implication being that Frank cares when everyone else had stopped. The Season is the struggle of one man to do all he can for a people and a world without even the hope to want or expect any help. It was about the emotional cost, the pressures of the job with so much riding on his actions and decisions and it was about the need for stability in the form of his family, to avoid sinking into that despair he always stood so close to. Faustus, to say that the Season didn't address what someone would do when faced with evil is a very strange thing indeed. It is crucial to S1, it is the whole reason Frank is suffering; he has chosen at great risk to his sanity and his family/friends, to continue his fight against evil (not that he understands the true enormity of what that entails yet). Who Cares? The Millennium Group cares, because they help Frank, they realise the need for people like him. The Season adequately displays that a chosen few is all there is and that will have to be good enough as the Gods simply don't care (Powers, Principalities). Good and Evil, Law and Chaos are covered very well but in a subtle way. The devil's influence is present in many episodes, especially in the excellent arc involving Legion. It is implied that both sides have abandoned humanity to its fate through clauses of non-intervention. Thus society is crumbling, people have lost hope and direction. Legion is someone who steps over the boundary, he interacts with human but he cannot be said to be purely evil in all his actions. He is not a black and white character (reference his killing of the wicked in 'The Judge'. Samiel banishes him but not for the good of humanity. Can he be said then to be a good character?

Season Two, as I have already explained, simply does not hold together as a Season. Up until 'Owls/Roosters' even, the Millennium Group is still portrayed as a force for good. The inclusion of the Marberg Virus knocks all this down, where are their beliefs in the end times when they suddenly pull that? Having them as some cult just played back into old, safe turf. You may disagree but the whole 'We know best, we're doing it for a greater good' style of organisation had already been done in the X-Files and much more believably. I will agree that catherine leaving Frank was a good idea (although I disagree with why she left). However I must disagree in the strongest possible terms over the portrayal of evil - Morgan and Wong cannot do evil well. They couldn't in the X-Files and they don't here. None of their villains seem particualrly evil, there is no tension at all. The whole Season drowns in a sea of songs and bright colours that dispels utterly the mood of S1 with it's cold light, long shadows and oppressive atmosphere. So many episodes are overly melodramtic (monster, single blade of grass, midnight of the century, luminary). It loses the realism, loses the raw reality that made Millennium such a standout show. S1 tackles the effects of cults on young minds (Gehenna), child abuse and despair in the young (Blood Reletives, Well worn lock, Wide Open), the means by which 'righteous' people stand up to the world (The Judge, Maranatha). Season Two doesn't do any of this because it is too busy setting up its cultish millennium group and asking questions that were already asked.

I know Season Two has some merits but I really can't stand how they developed the Millennium Group. It had no real credibility because it just seemed like another version of the Syndicate from X-Files. It set up stories and then didn't deliver on them. Frank doesn't go back to his yellow house, Lara Means' character never really goes anywhere, the character of Giebelhaus is reprised but not developed, Peter Watts seems all over the shop in terms of characterisation. There is the Group's bizarre reliance on Roedecker for all its hacking and security needs when he isn't even a member of the group! There is the newly appointed elder that never really appears again, the conflict of the Owls and Roosters that doesn't matter past that one two-part episode. There is humour introduced, not because the series wanted or even had any business including it, but because Darin Morgan is Glen Morgan's brother and can't write scripts that aren't humourous (though the quality of that humour varies) as well as the fact that it might win over some X-Files fans who love Darin (not me!)

Faustus, if you like Season Two, that's great. But Season One was the best for me and I take exception to people claiming it had no great narratives or purpose. Not an accusation, just a statement. I will post a topic sometime on the things I liked about Season Two as I did enjoy some of it. But for now...

[Guest Faustus]

Well for starters I don't have anything against season one. I liked it as much as you I'm sure. It, like the rest of us, was what got me hooked on the show. And yes, I agree that season one had some really good episodes which addressed these issues. I fully agree with what your saying in your first paragraph. And I don't get why you think I have something against it. In fact my initial post merely stated that I don't see the radical break between the two seasons that others do. I see season two as adding to the quality of season one, where you see it as taking it away.

But I still don't understand how you can see that the groundwork for season two was not laid in season one (episodes such as 'Powers, Principalities, Thrones and Dominions', 'Force Majeure' and 'Maranatha' come to mind). I didn't say that season one didn't address the concept of evil, my argument was that instead of placing the characters in a fairly common scenario in TV at the moment as "People as bulwarks against societal evil' that it instead placed the characters, and viewers, as participants forced to choose sides in an upcoming conflict. And I think Lucy Butler rates as a fairly evil character (the bat wings did it for me).

I will reiterate what I said in my initial post about how I don't actually like the whole Marburg virus story arc (something we can agree on) and that I think it was due more to politics than the desire to create continuity that it was implemented.

You seem to be unable to realise that as this is a TV show made up of a series of different writers and that things are always going to have some variability. Season one wasn't flawless either, as attested to in episodes such as 'Broken World' and 'Weeds' which I don't personally rate. As for your criticism that Morgan and Wong can't do evil, well I guess I can compete with your theatrical knowledge over what is 'melodramatic', but what I can say is that 'Monster' is one of the most chilling episodes I have seen, easily comparable to anything in season one. Lauren Diewold performance as Danielle Barbakow was just evil. 'In Arcadia Ego' is another great episode. As for the other episodes you mentioned, none of them were written by Morgan and Wong (But I think we can all agree 'A Single Blade of Grass' was terrible. Buffalos. What were they on?). I can't argue with you over the X-Files connection because, frankly, I'm not that big a fan, so I'll take your point at face value. However, I will dispute with you that the Millennium group is just a clone of the big group in the X-Files. While they may come to serve a similar antagonistic purpose, that's where the similarities end. I never went for the whole Alien invasion theory, but to each their own.

As for loosing realism, come on. The show is entitled Millennium. Frank Black is a forensic profiler who has the gift (or curse) of being able to see what the killer saw. He fights supernatural entities. The whole series in inherently full of supernatural references and motifs. Although you may not like the way the Millennium group developed, at least it developed from the amorphous being it was in season one. Having the group turn from an ally, to a far more sinister force was a move which kept the show fresh. The viewer was able to feel the same betrayal Frank does, especially over the friendship of Peter Watts. And also I can't see how you can argue that Peter Watts developed less in season two when he was relegated to Frank's offsider for much of season one. I'm also surprised at your dislike of the darkly humourous episodes in season, considering most people I've talked to really rate them. I always thought that these episodes were used as lulls in tension before you bring the audience something more dramatic, which is standard dramatic theory. Although, then again I could be wrong.

I also have to disagree with your criticism of Morgan and Wong's use of colours and music. I think that using such discordant songs with such sinister images was a good effect in creating cinematic tension. The sequence of Lara Means madness at the end of season two was, I found, really mind blowing. I guess why I liked this kind if stuff was because it was different to many similar shows at the time. I would agree that many of the story arcs created in owls, roosters, etc weren't fully explored, but I think that perhaps they would have, or could have been, if things at 1013 didn't fall apart between the writers.

I guess at the end if the day that's what forums are for, healthy debate. And I'm glad that I have the opportunity to do that here. No worries ‘A Stranger’. I don't consider you response a cop out. I found your posts, like ‘A Modern Moriaty's’ to be lucid and stimulating. We all just happen to disagree.

Cheers.

Faustus.

[Guest se7en]

...the using of happy little pop songs did not ceate tenision in myself either,except for "love is blue" and 'horse with no name",it broke any tension that may have been building. at least to my mind.

....any ground work that was built in S1,as far as the group goes,just went from realistc w/ an air of mystery,with the addition to the legion mytharc,to,for me,the in your face deicdedly non-convincing cult with little dramatic tension after it's revealed what the group's "supossed" true nature or purpose is. ...i really do not see how all the above was groundwork bult by S1. They are entirely different,with different themes,most of which i enjoyed but DID NOT agree with. for me,S2 is noted for most of it's standalone episodes. the mytharch was was just too silly and contrived after awhile. all i can honeslty say is:thank the lord for S3.-(and damn FOX for no S4!)

...but you know what they say about opinions and arseholes? "everyone's got one!

[Guest A Stranger]

...the using of happy little pop songs did not ceate tenision in myself either,except for "love is blue" and 'horse with no name",it broke any tension that may have been building. at least to my mind.

You know, I loved those scenes although I might have a hard time defending them as "dramatic." Escpecially the "Mother's Day Massacre" scene from "The Fourth Horseman." I remeber having the same reaction as to the murder scenes in The X-Files episode "Home" (another Morgan and Wong script from the same era) It was shocking and hilarious in a very dark way all at the same time. I was on the edge of my seat... trying not to laugh because it seemed so wrong. This is the same response many friends had to this same techinique. Very entertaining but almost comical. But it was dramatic in a sense to me but I can see how it really takes one out of the story becuase you're so taken back by it's surrealism or just plain ridiculousness.

[Guest ModernDayMoriarty]

Hello again.

No-one would deny that the end of Season One left the door open for the exploration of supernatural evil. The episodes that Faustus mentions (with the exception of Force Majeure which I don't consider supernatural), clearly show a greater power at work. However it is worth noting that nothing is conclusively proved in either 'Lamentation' or 'Powers, Principalities'. Frank can be reasonably certain that something more than simply human evil is behind this but I suspect that deep down he still reckons Lucy Butler to be just an evil woman here. He is slowly coming to terms with the ideas that Fabricant left with him before he died. The whole Season is handled beautifully to my mind, with the slow build to the shock ending (Bletcher's death alone is a moment unsurpassed in S2) and the promise for a uncertain future. As to choosing sides, S1 is awash with imtimations that Frank must choose whether or not to fight the evil at work. S2 sets up the question but then knocks it down; it dilutes the validity of the question by making the Millennium Group evil. 'Beware of the Dog', 'The Curse of Frank Black' and 'Owls/Roosters' all point to the choice: Will Frank join the Group against the gathering darkness or will he choose his family life and sit it out in return for a stay of execution granted by the evil for doing so? But to up-end this in such a bizarre way is a last minute shock that just doesn't work. It means that the question posed through the whole season had no credibility and thus is never really answered (because Frank chooses option three; don't join the Millennium Group and still fight the darkness).

This question is not new though; it is asked throughout Season One and to greater effect I think because Frank is made to feel the consequences of his actions in 'Lamentation' and 'Powers, Principalities...' as Legion decimates his friends and means of support (Bletcher is an old friend, a reminder of his old, safe life and Mike Atkins represents the stability that the Group brought him after his breakdown; Legion shows how easily he can defeat the Group here). S2 makes several dubious stabs at this, the best being Catherine leaving him and forcing him to face the darkness alone. The problem is that it isn't built on enough; 'The Curse of Frank Black' is the only episode that shows effectively how much the strain is telling on Frank. Other than that he seems remarkably happy (or as happy as he gets) during S2. An opportunity wasted I feel.

As to writers... I am fully aware that writers do vary. However it was Chris Carter who created the series, he knew what he wanted to do with it. Morgan and Wong also knew what they wanted to do with it. They were not the same idea. Therefore you have a Season that is so different as to be almost unrecognisable; the grim brooding cityscapes and lonely wilderness is replaced with the quirky townsfolk of Buckshoot, the world where murders are never far away from someone playing a CD of the Talking Heads etc, a world of German cops who ape american cop shows and where aliens from Space, Above and Beyond stride nonchantly down the street. I'm not saying Season One was perfect in execution but I found the world it created to be much more credible and haunting than S2 ever was. Which leads nicely onto the subject of evil. 'Monster' is one of the most unconvincing studies in child abuse/evil children that I've ever seen. Danielle is so obviously to blame for starters. For a creature that is wise enough to try and frame Miss Penny and Frank, she seems oblivious to the fact that children of that age don't talk like she does; they don't sit laughing at people dying gruesome deaths in films either. To remain hidden it would have been much more prudent to appear a regular girl doing normal things. It would have been far more chilling if we had NOT known it was her until late on. As it stands, she has no real presence as an evil character. The cardboard cutout 'angry mob', the DA who wants the quick collar 'who cares if they did it or not', the completely unsatisfying Lara Means... it all dilutes the episode so much that there is no tension at all. Unlikely characters, often quite silly events and 'solid' (read unremarkable but not bad) acting made this an episode to be endured rather than enjoyed in my opinion. 'In Arcadia Ego' was acceptable, nothing more. It has a strong finish but the rest of just fades really. I just consider that episode to be an inferior version of 'The Wild and the Innocent' from S1 actually.

Now, as to the Millennium Group and the Syndicate. They both seem to have near unlimited legal influence and power. They both conceal their true agendas from everybody including many of their own members. They both believe that they must serve the greater good by means of sacrifice. They both believe that the knowledge of the end times (biblical or colonisation) must be borne by a chosen few, that the masses aren't ready to know. They both have rival factions that believe in alternative methods (Owls/Roosters versus Project enthusiasts/Project Sceptics) I think that is plenty to suggest they are very, very similar don't you? (A rhetorical question as you haven't really seen the X-Files it seems but perhaps we can get someone to back me up on it for greater validity).

Character development, tension et al.

You said something like you disagreed over my interpretation of what seemed evil (monster) and the use of colours and music. It is indeed an old trick to show a happy scene with a sinister scene, play jangly music whilst murder is committed. There are fans and opponents of this and I would not say that I am wholly against it. However it is extremely overused in S2, sinister and slow building tension music also have their place and suit Millennium far more in my opinion. The former should be used sparingly or the effect diminishes (as happened). The sequence with Lara Means going insane is one of the silliest, most contemptible ideas on Millennium. The extended 10 minute sequence is favouritism by Morgan to his wife of the worst time and it's inclusion implies that the only reason it is a two-parter is to allow for this sequence. The 'humourous' episodes have never sat well with me. I want a serious show with a serious attitude to exploring evil. The two Darin Morgan episodes (and elements of the Morgan/Wong episodes) just don't fit the show. 'Jose Chung's' is by far the better of the two episodes but only because it is basically a re-write of 'Clyde Bruckman's Final Repose' from X-Files. I will admit that this episode fits S2 (because S2 it was so unlike S1 in atmosphere it didn't feel anymore out of place than all the rest of the episodes really) but 'Somehow Satan got behind me' is just an appalling and largely unfunny mess that smashes it's messages over the viewer's heads and lack any subtlety or credibility. It is the 'War of the Coprophages' of Millennium. The humourous episodes were introduced into S3 of X-Files to offset what was otherwise, an incredibly dark Season's worth of television. I didn't agree with it being there but I could understand why it was there. S2 of Millennium isn't dark at all really so it wasn't necessary to have them.

I think I have discussed Peter Watts before. In short, he develops in 'The Beginning and the End' but by the next episode he has changed utterly into a rather antagonistic character which he was not previously. He veers all over the place in terms of character and generally fails to leave a clear impression of what he is like even after all his screen time. Also, despite how much he shows up, his actual contribution to cases mirrors that of Frank's supposedly strengthened gift; it is greatly diminished. Wheras in S1, Chip Johanessen in particular strove to make him a useful asset, vital to proceedings, S2 has him trailing around after Frank and generally going through the motions.

A final word on melodrama. I consider Catherine's performance with the Polaroid Stalker in the basement to be so, blubbering and shrieking in a very unconvincing way (in fact, most of Catherine's speeches in Seasons 1 and 2). Frank talking to Danielle's parents in 'Monster', Frank and (her name escapes me, female archeologist) discussing the 'other plain' in 'A Single Blade of Grass', Frank and his dad in 'Midnight of the Century', the monologues of the teenager in 'Luminary'... The list goes on. Realistic dialogue ditched in favour of these unfortunate speeches, even Lance's acting doesn't save them as they often seem to involve the stage direction of 'must be crying or near tears'. It always looks ridiculous, maybe he just can't deliver when pretending to cry but the lines are so bad it really makes no odds.

So, there we are. Thanks for that Faustus, nice to see someone standing up for what they believe in. To partially echo Seven, I think S2's merits largely lie with its standalones, rather than the mytharc. I'll just quickly restate my Top Five Likes and Dislikes of S2 to illustrate:

Best Episodes (in no order).

1. Beware of the Dog.

2. The Curse of Frank Black.

3. Jose Chung's 'Doomsday Defence'.

4. The Mikado.

5. A Room With No View.

'Beware...' and 'The Curse...' show how good S2 could have been, Jose Chung's is an example of how humour can be effectively used (though it is only included to make 5 really and given that I really dislike most of the rest of S2).

Worst Episodes (again, no order).

1. A Single Blade of Grass.

2. The Hand Of Saint Sebastian.

3. Owls/Roosters.

4. Siren.

5. The Fourth Horseman/The Time is Now.

As you can see I have 7 episodes in my Top 5 worst! That is how little I liked S2 I guess. Plus they are mainly all mytharc I noticed after the fact and 4 of them (6 really I suppose...) are by Glen Morgan and James Wong.

Anyway, enough! Cheers again.

[Guest A Stranger]

Melodrama isn't necissarily a bad thing, if done well and I think it was many times in MM. "Luminary," for example is a very beautiful and emotional expierence. If it's themes don't appeal to you or you don't like the style, that's another issue. And Chirs Carter has a lengthy history, in fact every show he did, of lengthy over dramatic dialogues. Take Franks' "I become the thing we fear the most, what we know we can become only in our heart of darkness." Or "Lamantation"'s "The base sum of all evil, the devil's leige..." That is melodarma as it is very over the top and meant to be very emotional dialogue. It is good but very melodramtic.

[Guest Faustus]

Hi.

You make some valid points about season one. I agree Bletcher's death is one of the defining moments of the show. However instead of reducing the power of Frank's dilemma as you describe it, by allowing him a third option S2 showed that free choice is possible in a situation where it is seemingly not. Making the Millennium group an antagonist doesn't destroy this choice, but instead defines the boundaries more clearly and adds a morale dilemma to Franks choices where he sees a group that was once his friends now at odds. It also adds to sense of a foreboding climax that spans both S1 and S2, but doesn't appear so much in S3. This is clearly shown in all the activities and mythos of the Millennium group, even in S1. I also don't get where you see Frank as being happy in S2.

Your assessment of 'Monster' is interesting, but I really can't accept it. The reason it is such a good episode is because it doesn't conform to those standard expectation of a TV drama, like in SVU or something where you know the story will led to expect two or three other people before the actual perpetrator is revealed. It wouldn't have been more chilling because it's a tripe cliché. If anything, you could hassle Morgan and Wong for ripping off Arthur Miller, but in both cases the device is used to the same effect. We, the audience, know that Danielle is to blame. Like you said, it's obvious. But that's the point. She is meant to have that supernatural evil thing going. The audience is left frustrated that the rest of the people in the village can't or purposely can't realise what is going on. It's when she feels threatened that she turns on Frank and we again feel concern our protagonist, because we know they are vulnerable (as established with Bletcher's death).

It is fair to say that the writers had very different ideas about what they wanted the series to do. And like them, you and I have very different ideas about the respective merits of the show. The brooding cityscape was nice, a good idea, but even then it was becoming cliché (even more so now). The oddball approach of M and W was a different style (X-Files excluded) which added to the tension by contrasting light and dark with more serious, philosophical overtones (I can hear you now having a coronary of disagreement). I like the darkness and brooding of Millennium just as much as you, but the more active sense of a coming apocalypse/confrontation (as I still maintain it is evident in S1) added to it for me. The city of S1 was perhaps more believable (well as believable as you get) but more haunting, I'm not so sure.

The Millennium group/syndicate comparison sounds convincing, but if I remember correctly (and I may well be wrong) wasn't the whole alien colonisation thing developed after Millennium? Also wasn't it Chris Carter who set up the whole idea of the 'Syndicate' early on in the X-files? Why you may argue that M and W may have developed in a certain way, again I say that at least they did something with the Millennium group as opposed to being a plot device.

I think the fact that we can't figure out where Peter Watts stands is part of the way his inner turmoil is shown. He has to figure out his allegiances before we can know where he stands, and the whole time the audience if left wondering, "can we trust him?". And I would go as far as saying that he was made useful in S1. He did about as much as he did in S2 as he did in S1. He was a useful plot device and the rapport he had with Frank was nice, but he was his best when the audience wasn't quite sure what he was up to.

As for melodrama, well if I could be bothered I could probably go through S1 and find episodes where there are episodes of melodrama of the same calibre, some of which 'A Stranger' pointed out. TV drama is melodrama. I liked some of the more melodramatic parts of the series and one of the reasons why it was such a good series was because it was done well. Maybe I'm a bit of a sucker in that respect.

At the end of the day it seems we both liked very different things and ideas in the show. Perhaps one day we could start a thread on things we both liked in Millennium, although I get the feeling it wouldn't be quite so comprehensive.

Cheers.

[Guest ModernDayMoriarty]

Oh I don't know, I suspect we could agree on many things. We'll see. As to your points... The idea that free will and choice is possible is besides the point though isn't it? Whilst it is undoubtably a factor, the whole Season had revolved about the difficulty of making up his mind to join the Group because of the consequences which are promised if he does. He doesn't know if the Group is powerful enough to defeat the darkness and his veering between light and darkness, the 'will he, won't he?' was the point I saw. Knocking that all down to have the 'well, actually the Group are evil too' just made the whole Season seem pointless; like we had been following a red herring all along. Now that could have been jarring and sinister but it really didn't seem that way. We had already been messed about with too much. Morgan and Wong play their hand too quickly in making Frank suspect the Group are up to no good, then they try and make us trust the Group again in 'Owls/Roosters' because they appear to be redeemed at the point of no return by the sacrifice of the Old Man. And then they are just evil again. Like the character of Watts, it just feels all over the place. BTW, my point on Frank being happy was more that he doesn't seem as emotionally desolated as S1 intimated very strongly that he would be without Catherine and Jordan - S3 is much better for that.

I don't have issues with the structure of 'Monster' (and I assure it, it treads no new ground), just that I feel it was rather uninspiring. I am not moved by any of it in the same way as I was for 'Blood Reletives' or 'Wide Open' in S1. It was closer to the corny melodrama of 'The Well worn lock'. The only thing I like about 'Monster' is the conversation between Catherine and Watts. It shows Watt's belief that the chosen must perform their role and gives Catherine a chance to shed her tiresome winsome image for a while. The girl just isn't convincing or frightening for me; it just feels so pedestrian. You can find all the elements of this episode in any telethriller starring Brian Denehey.

Contrast between light and dark is something that is handled well in S1 and S3 in my opinion. The light of having Jordan and Catherine around, being able to come home to them and just talk about paying the rent etc. The quiet pleasure of having a nosy old man poking into your affairs (because he is harmless), just living a normal life. And then the horror of 'real' life, the things he see, that he must see. The struggle inside him seeing the flashes of terror and the need to help others gain their own moments of light. S2 just isn't dark enough for me, I was never even remotely unsettled by what I saw (with the exception of 'The Mikado' perhaps). The knowledge that it was supernatural diluted it too much (though it needn't because 'Lamentation' and 'Saturn dreaming of Mecury' for example, are very tense supernatural episodes. The only time I felt the coming apocalypse is in any meanigful sense was in 'The curse of frank black'. An excellent episode but there just wasn't enough of that dread that the viewer experiences when Frank is staring at the screen that proclaims how much time he has to make his decision. S1 is more haunting for me because there seems to be no reason for the evil, no hope for anything more. People are evil because they simply are and that is how things have become. The twist in 'Lamentation' is welcome despite this because it feels 'so' evil that it really seems worse than there being no reason. But this isn't sustained in S2, evil is not represented well in my opinion at all.

It is very hard to say when CC came up with his (awful) idea of alien colonisation and the woeful Syndicate idea. They are in evidence at the end of S2 however which predates Millennium S1 so... I firmly believe that the Millennium Group would have developed under Carter or someone else other than Morgan and Wong, just not in the cult way which I found so derivative and disagreeable. As for Watts... the problem was that by the end of S1 he was Frank's friend. They had established a strong working relationship and Peter had gone behind the Group's back on more than one occasion to help him out. It just didn't track to have him so belligerent. And him going from a supernatural sceptic to a full believer... no, it didn't work for me. I find his contributions to S2 to be very, very limited indeed. He offers almost no useful insights on any of the cases he assists Frank with and that displeased me too.

Melodrama... well, I consider S1 to be largely composed of a very high standard of acting with some tremendous monologues. I do not think that of S2 as there are very few speeches I watch again and again. From S1 I am in danger of wearing out my copy of 'Gehenna' at the interrogation scene and Frank's interview with Fabricant also. Basically S2 episodes lack the raw power that scenes like the angellic children from 'Covenent' bring, that Galon Calloway shows in 'Kingdom Come', the thunderous white noise hynoptising Frank from 'The Sound of Snow'. 'The Curse of Frank Black' has the interview with Crossell in the loft which I watch quite a lot but other than that... The talk with the Old Man from 'Beware of the Dog' is the only one that stands out really.

Have to dash but the Season Two merits thing is looking more and more attractive. I assure you that I did like some parts of it and I'll try and elaborate on them again.

Thanks.

[Guest Pencil Machine Operator]

I've been thinking that some of the divisions over seasons 1/2 could revolve around opinions on the nature of criminal behaviour, eg, determinist versus essentialist.

In Season one there is, however small, a little sympathy towards the killers, like in Kingdom Come and Wide Open (the little conversation at the end).I would say, with a certain amount of caution, that season1 is determinist/realist in its attitude towards violent crime. There are attempts at humanising the killers.(Is this what you meant by "human element", MDM?)

In season2, though, M&W complicate (or simplify, depending on your bias) the issue, bringing in a very real Manichean (Good vs Evil) world view.( In season1 i think this was more of a background motif). The anti-determinist view perhaps culminates in The Mikado, where the killer is faceless, cloaked + there's the added distance of the WorldWideWeb (A distance which, coincidentally, lets me type all kinds of rubbish like this! )I'm not accusing M&W of being right-wing or anything; season2, i think, is, paradoxically, more humane than the first. I mean, just because, on the surface, its about angels and devils, doesn't mean that it is'nt essentially about humanity. There are certain academics who would argue that religion itself (and therefore theology) is inherently social...and this is why an atheist like myself can still fall in love with a show like Millenium.

Initially I was put off by this non-determinist direction, because yes, I'm a freakin' liberal. But soon it became my favourite season because... ah, okay, to say why i like season2 would take up a squillion pages and wouldnt be read by anyone...

I have only seen both seasons properly once through, so perhaps my understanding of its view of 'evil' needs a little broadening.

perhaps there should be another thread entitled "Millenium and the Nature of Evil"?

A smiley, just for luck:

[Guest ModernDayMoriarty]

I disagree most strongly that S2 is more humane; the 'Human element' is most in evidence here and teaches us that this is what it is to be human. Good people are swallowed up by grief and hopelessness, evil often exists in the hearts of otherwise decent people who simply didn't have any luck. S2 loses this impact by clearly defining this good and evil in my opinion. It all but dismisses the actions of people and society as being inevitable and therefore of secondary concern to 'the Big Picture'. It dispels the notion throughout Season One that the answer lies within us, that we have the power to change things. Season One prizes the individual and shows how fragile harmony is, how any of us could become the monsters under the right circumstances. S2 promotes the notion that only certain extraordinary people can change things and that this evil can be fought and it can be beaten. This is oversimplication to the point of absolute absurdity and ignores the reality of the human condition and the social body politic. Season Three returned the focus back to the core principals of S1. I do very firmly believe that a Season like S3 unpolluted with the poor choices of S2 (evil MLM group being the big offender) would have ensured the continued survival of the show.