Fox’s Gotham must focus on corruption, not fan service

Fox’s latest foray into comics adaptations, the new television series Gotham, premiered to strong ratings this week. The series follows future Police Commissioner James Gordon in his early years on the police force of Batman’s hometown, Gotham City. The early ratings show how strong the Batman franchise is, with the pilot drawing 8 million viewers. Critics seem to enjoy the show as well, believing it could be the strongest hit of the new season.

But Gotham will only live up to the expectations if its writers quickly figure out what they want the show to be. Should it be the story of Jim Gordon and his mission to clean up the city of Gotham and its corrupt police department? Or should the show be about fan service, winking and nodding at the audience while introducing an 8-year-old Clayface?

Gotham’s first episode tried hard to be both, spending most of its first half with pointless sightings of young Catwoman, Poison Ivy, The Riddler, and The Penguin, before settling into a very strong plot in the second half hour. After getting past those useless Easter eggs, Gotham became an intriguing show, with Gordon realizing the police aren’t necessarily the good guys and coming to terms with what needs to be done to survive. Gordon ends the episode with a new mission to extricate the scum from his new home, and the audience is drawn in to join him on his futile mission, despite us knowing that Gordon will ultimately be unsuccessful. (If Gordon did succeed, there would be no need for a now-8-year-old Bruce Wayne to ever don the cape and cowl.) But the struggle to change the corrupt system from within is intriguing in itself and offers a lot of opportunities for future story lines.

Focusing the story of the first episode on the murder of Thomas and Martha Wayne was another good choice, as it reminds the viewer of the future in store for Gotham while also allowing Gordon an opportunity to utilize his detective skills. Unlike the extraneous cameos of other Batman characters, Bruce’s early meetings with Gordon are internally consistent and in step with the larger scale mythology due to their personal relationship as well as the prominence of the Wayne family name in Gotham City.

Gotham City, just as much as any of the heroes or villains, has always been its own character within the DC Universe. Gotham is almost always seen in the dark, features gothic architecture, and seems to house the worst of the worst in criminals, politicians, and police officers. Bruce Wayne is a victim of the city, having been traumatized by his parents’ senseless murder at a very young age. As Batman, Bruce sets out every night to fight an endless war on crime, supposedly hoping that his actions will eventually make his city safer. But Gotham always fights back.

Organized crime in the city is controlled by demi-warlords, with battles over turf leading to the deaths of innocent victims all the time. When Batman is able to stop the traditional criminals, he is met by more ludicrous and theatrical challengers who often show signs of poor mental health, likely a direct result of living in a corrupt city with no viable social safety net and, consequently, a complete lack of hope.

The Gotham City that existed before Batman emerged has been explored in comics for years but never as extensively as Fox’s new show promises to do. The potential is intriguing right from the start, but it appears as though the writers are short on ideas, with the first episode showing a stark reliance on characters whose relevance is almost completely dependent on the existence of Batman. Catwoman is not interesting as an 8-year-old pickpocket; she’s interesting as the bad girl who boils Batman’s blood. She is interesting in Frank Miller’s interpretation in Batman: Year One because she is the first civilian to adopt Batman’s idea of theatricality. Poison Ivy is not an intriguing character because her father probably beat her; she is an intriguing character because of her power over plants and her use of toxins to incapacitate her foes. Both characters rely heavily on their sex appeal as weapons, often catching Bruce Wayne and other opponents off guard. These characters in their prepubescence are completely useless to a show that should be about police corruption and moral ambiguity.

Gordon, however, has always been one of the most impressive characters in DC Comics, and is certainly a deserving protagonist. Gordon, created by Bill Finger and Bob Kane, was introduced in Detective Comics #27 — the same first issue as Batman himself — and has been a comic book staple ever since. In a world of vigilantes and super-powered aliens, Gordon is a workaday every man, struggling to make the streets safer. Gordon has no superpowers and, unlike Batman, is not motivated by a personal vendetta or a traumatic experience. Gordon just does the right thing because it is the right thing. He is the incorruptible man in a city that thrives on corruption.

One definition of bravery is that it is not the absence of fear, but the presence of fear and the willingness to overcome it. By that standard, Gordon is a braver man than even Bruce Wayne. Batman does not fear his own death and would unflinchingly sacrifice his life for the betterment of mankind. Gordon, however, has constructed a life and a family and does not live with a death wish like his counterpart and friend. Gordon makes mistakes, like when he cheated on his first wife, and he has suffered great tragedy, including seeing his daughter shot and crippled by The Joker. But he fights on, maintaining his moral compass and owning up to his few errors in judgment. Gordon is so compelling as a hero, in fact, that IGN voted him No. 19 in its list of the Top 100 Comic Book Heroes, placing him higher than Green Arrow, Shazam, and most X-Men.

The writers of Gotham will do well to remember the strength of their lead character and build around him instead of focusing on the exciting, theatrical villains of Batman lore before they actually become exciting, theatrical villains. The police corruption plot, unveiled 28 minutes or so into the first episode, is enough to make the series great. We don’t need to see Selina Kyle pouring milk for cats in back alleys.

Spoilers can be a nightmare — or a favorite pastime

Spoilers are the bane of many fans’ existence — and the lifeblood for many others. Depending on your point of view, spoilers can either ruin an epic twist in your favorite series, or tide you over through those interminable days, weeks, or months between episodes. They can detract from your enjoyment of a program or, as a recent article from Wired argues, increase it.

And they can create tense rifts between the spoilerphobes and spoilerhounds in a show’s fan base — especially as everyone’s definition for “what is a spoiler” is different, as is everyone’s idea of the timeframe for how long something remains a spoiler.

If you’re in the camp of those who either don’t care about spoilers or even actively seek them out, Netflix has a new website just for you. As for me, I do my best to avoid any and all spoilers for my favorite shows. I don’t mind vague references to things that are coming up; in fact, it’s nearly impossible to avoid those because I spend a lot of time reading entertainment news. However, I don’t like when a major plot twist or character death is given away without warning. I’ll be forever scarred by seeing a friend’s Facebook status update about the death of a certain Irish sheriff before the episode of Once Upon a Time I was missing had even finished airing.

The author of the Wired article argues that humans really don’t enjoy surprises or twists as much as we think we do, but I disagree. For me, a show is all about the journey, and every twist and surprise is an important part of that trip. I enjoy the feeling I get when a TV show takes me completely by surprise; so rarely do shows manage to accomplish it.

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. pulled it off last season, and I loved every minute of it. Then, the burden of spoiler-protection fell to me, as I had to go all summer without revealing (here comes that spoiler!) Agent Ward’s betrayal of S.H.I.E.L.D. to certain members of my family because they hadn’t finished the season. I recently re-watched that first season with a friend and, even though I enjoyed it just as much the second time around, I still appreciate the thrill I got from being surprised the first time. It just wouldn’t have been the same had I known what to expect.

Yes, not knowing what’s around the corner is naturally uncomfortable for a species built to survive. Being in the dark can be nerve-wracking at times, but when it comes to being entertained, I love that tension and suspense. I learned that lesson 15 years ago when I was accidentally spoiled on the ending of The Sixth Sense just days after it came out in theaters. I still lament the fact that I’ll never be able to see that film without knowing about the twist; I feel so deprived of that shock. I think that’s the moment when I really began avoiding spoilers as much as possible.

Whether you avoid spoilers or not, it’s important to try to at least have respect for any member of your fandom who has different views on the subject. But what constitutes a spoiler?

With such variation in definitions from person to person, we may as well turn to the crowdsourced Urban Dictionary, where the top definition of “spoiler” is: “When someone reveals a previously unknown aspect of something which you likely would have rather learned on your own.” By this definition, almost anything about a show you haven’t seen yet would qualify as a spoiler. I prefer to know as little information as possible about an episode that hasn’t aired yet, but there are certain things I don’t consider spoilers: previews for a new episode, casting announcements, and other promotional and logistical items. More specific details about an episode, such as whether someone dies or turns out to be a double agent, for example, qualify as spoilers in my book.

Of course, not everyone agrees with where I draw the line. I know fans who won’t even watch previews for upcoming episodes because they don’t want to know anything before they see the episode. Some show runners even agree with this harsh standard; Matthew Weiner is known for supplying AMC with such vague and disjointed episode previews for Mad Men that no one can glean any worthwhile information from that credits-sharing sequence. But it’s good to remember that not everyone is this strict. With so much variance, when you do accidentally come across spoilers, perhaps whoever posted the information did not consider their comment to be a spoiler.

One thing to keep in mind if you’re trying to avoid spoilers is that social media is a virtual minefield of spoilers. If you’re not going to watch the latest episode of The Walking Dead live but feel the need to check your Twitter feed, don’t be surprised if you glimpse something you’d rather not see.

If I know I’m going to be missing an episode of a show that I definitely wouldn’t want to find spoilers for, I avoid social media as much as possible. I even limit my online exposure during the few hours between the time Doctor Who airs in the United Kingdom and when I can watch it here in the United States.

On the flip side, if you know you have followers or friends who are behind, it’s only polite to avoid posting explicit spoilers. I know this is hard. I often tweet while I’m watching television shows, but I try to avoid posting anything too detailed about what is happening. Sometimes, vague tweets can be even more fun.

But the question becomes: at what point is a spoiler no longer a spoiler? By now, if you don’t know that Darth Vader is Luke’s father or that Dumbledore doesn’t make it out of Hogwarts alive, you’re either really out of touch or really good at avoiding spoilers. There are just some things that have become a part of pop culture and there’s no way to avoid knowing how they end. I just watched Psycho for the first time a few years ago, but I’ve known about the ending for as long as I can remember. In that case, knowing how the movie ended didn’t at all lessen my enjoyment of the film.

I hope the same will hold true for a recently completed TV series. I plan to watch all of Breaking Bad someday soon and am trying to avoid spoilers, but I know I can’t expect everyone around me to refrain from posting them. In fact, I have already been partially spoiled as to the end of the series — but that’s the price I pay for not watching the series when it was originally airing. However, others may be irate if you were to spoil the end of the series for them.

My general rule of thumb is to give a television show at least 24 hours before I post anything I would consider a spoiler (unless I have friends who I know haven’t seen the episode and won’t want to be spoiled). It frustrates me when people post about big twists before the episode has even ended — at the very least, you should wait three hours until the West Coast has gotten to see the episode. After 24 hours, if you still haven’t watched the episode, you better just be good at avoiding spoilers, because it’s open season, in my opinion.

It’s a little different for books or movies. With movies, I try to wait at least a week or two after their release, and with books, at least a month. Usually, by then, those who are most interested have already seen the movie or read the book.

That doesn’t mean you should intentionally spoil somebody. If your friend tells you they’re marathoning Lost for the first time, don’t go and tell them how the series ends. Have some respect and let them experience the show for themselves. If anyone asks you not to spoil something specific, be it a book, movie, or TV series, common courtesy says you just don’t do it.

If you don’t think you can handle not posting about what you’ve seen or read, find a discussion board or someplace dedicated to spoilers where you can talk about it. There are plenty of places online where you spoiler fans are welcome.

There really is no common ground where spoilers are concerned, but we can all try to respect our fellow fans when it comes to spoilers.

And whatever you do, please don’t tell me how Breaking Bad ends. I already know more than I want to.

Fall changes have potential to bring new TV faves

Fall doesn’t officially start until Tuesday, but the cooler temperatures in my part of the country over the past week prove that the change of seasons is definitely upon us. As I pointed out last week, the arrival of fall also means the arrival of fall television. Last week, I shared some of the returning shows I was happiest to have back on my screen. This week, I’ll take a look at the new series I’m looking forward to checking out.

I don’t tend to watch a lot of sitcoms as they air live. The Big Bang Theory and How I Met Your Mother were exceptions to that rule, and for each of them, I came in after several seasons had already aired. I’m a fan of New Girl, though I’m usually a season behind and watching on Netflix. Last season, I enjoyed The Crazy Ones, then was disappointed when the series was canceled and even more heartbroken when we lost Robin Williams last month.

This year, I am planning to give Selfie on ABC a chance — despite its annoying pop culture title. I have to admit, if the series wasn’t starring Karen Gillan and John Cho, I probably wouldn’t even consider watching … although the idea that it’s loosely based on My Fair Lady also has me intrigued. I loved Gillan as Amy Pond in Doctor Who, but she really impressed me this summer as Nebula in Guardians of the Galaxy. I can’t wait to see how she does in an American sitcom. Early reviews for the series have been really positive, so this may be a case of “don’t judge a series by its title.”

Speaking of former Doctor Who stars, the Tenth Doctor himself will be starring in Gracepoint on Fox this fall. Gracepoint is a 10-episode television “event” based on the British series Broadchurch. David Tennant will be reprising his role from the original series, this time with an American accent. The show centers on the investigation into the murder of a young child in a small seaside town.

Broadchurch was absolutely fantastic, and if you enjoy suspenseful crime drama, I highly recommend it. The cast and the writing were brilliant; it was easily one of the best series I watched last year. At first, I was disappointed to hear that Fox was making its own version of the series, and I was determined not to watch: there is no way they could even come close to the quality of its predecessor. But the casting of Tennant has made me curious, and I’ll willingly watch anything in which he appears.

According to Fox, the story will not play out exactly as the mystery in Broadchurch did. The writers have apparently changed the ending so fans of the original won’t know what’s going to happen. However, the trailers I’ve seen for the show so far make it look like the series was shot matching the original, frame by frame. Changes must have been made, though, to accommodate the fact that the American version is 10 episodes long versus the eight episodes of the British series. Hopefully, those changes do not lessen the suspense or drama that was so effective in the original series.

While Marvel has proved that it can easily dominate the box office, DC has seen a lot of success on the small screen over the years. This fall, NBC, the CW, and Fox will all premiere new series based on DC comics staples.

There has been a lot of hype and anticipation for Fox’s Gotham, which tells the story of James Gordon, the future police commissioner, prior to the existence of Batman. The series will also provide origin stories for many members of The Rogues Gallery. So great is the excitement for this series that Netflix has already acquired the exclusive rights to stream it after the episodes’ first runs. I tend to be skeptical of any genre show that Fox airs — not because I don’t believe it will be good, but because even if it is, there’s a high chance of Fox pulling the plug without really giving it a chance. The success of Sleepy Hollow last year, though, has given me some measure of hope.

Gotham will bring a talented cast into our living rooms. I’m particularly excited about Donal Logue playing Gordon’s partner. Logue has the ability to pull of great comedy or serious drama, and I’ve really enjoyed every performance of his that I’ve seen. I wasn’t a fan of The O.C. or Southland, so I know nothing of Ben McKenzie, who will be playing Gordon, other than that he’s more clean-cut than I was expecting. I’m really curious to see what he’s like. Lastly, a bit of trivia for the Doctor Who fans: Alfred, the butler for the Wayne family, will be played by actor Sean Pertwee, the son of the Third Doctor, Jon Pertwee.

Constantine is probably the series I know the least about but am still looking forward to watching. I’m not very familiar with the source character, beyond his appearances in the The Sandman comics and the Keanu Reeves film (or the knowledge that he inspired the look for Supernatural‘s Castiel), but I’m still intrigued by this series. Series star Matt Ryan certainly appears to have the look and attitude of John Constantine.

I haven’t heard much about this series over the summer, aside from the news that Lucy Griffiths‘ character, one of the main characters in the pilot, had been written out for creative reasons. I was a little disappointed by this news, as I’ve been a fan of Griffiths since she played Marian on BBC’s Robin Hood. Since I haven’t heard as much hype about Constantine as some of the other series on this list, my expectations for it are not as high. Of course, the lack of buzz also makes me a little more concerned about its fate at the network. (NBC doesn’t have a much better reputation than Fox when it comes to giving series a chance.) I also have a feeling my lack of knowledge about the comics will work in my favor, as I won’t be comparing it to the comics or criticizing certain creative decisions.

The new series I’m most excited about this fall is probably The Flash. I wasn’t sure about casting Grant Gustin as Barry Allen at first, but I could have been a little biased by his appearance on Glee. However, I really enjoyed his two-episode appearance on Arrow last season, and I am now looking forward to seeing what the show looks like. I’m also excited that it appears The Flash and Arrow will remain closely connected, as Stephen Amell has already confirmed his appearance in the pilot episode, and a crossover is set for episode 8 of each show’s upcoming season.

I’m also a fan of the rest of the cast, which includes Tom Cavanaugh, Jesse L. Martin, and the former Barry Allen himself, John Wesley Ship, as Barry’s father. Recurring cast members will include Robbie Amell, Stephen’s cousin and the star of last seasons ill-fated The Tomorrow People, and Prison Break‘s Wentworth Miller. The previews for the series so far have looked great, and I can’t wait for it to premiere. I just hope it doesn’t take as long to draw me in as Arrow did.

There are all the new series I’m most excited about seeing premiere in the next few weeks. What new shows are you looking forward to? Are there any here I forgot that you think are worth a mention (or worth checking out)? Leave your thoughts in the comments!

Episode VII wouldn’t be Star Wars without VFX

The producers of Star Wars: Episode VII have declared they have learned from the supposed mistakes of the film franchise’s prequel trilogy: they will avoid extensive use of computer generated imagery in the sequel trilogy, now in production. Haters of the prequel trilogy jumped for joy knowing that CGI will not ruin their return to the galaxy far, far away. But this attitude toward visual effects, specifically toward Star Wars movies, is absurd.

Of the top 10 highest-grossing films of 2014, eight are live-action movies that are only possible thanks to visual effects, and the remaining two are computer-generated cartoons. Several more movies this year promise to break into that top 10 list, and all of them are visual-effects-driven. These VFX — the effects created in post-production and added to live-action scenes — have become essential to create the modern cinematic spectacles that people all over the world love. And in most cases, these high-grossing, VFX-driven movies do not get by on spectacle alone, but they also tell good, fun stories.

The Star Wars franchise, despite sparking the visual effects revolution, is no longer being allowed the freedom to utilize the CGI that the films’ own company, Industrial Light & Magic, made famous. Whether Episode VII director J.J. Abrams wanted to use VFX or not, so-called Star Wars fans really left him no choice. The decision to minimize CGI was forced upon Abrams by the visceral hatred some have for the Star Wars prequels and by their claim that one of the biggest problems with Episodes I, II, and III was their over-reliance on CGI, as opposed to the puppets and set pieces that helped define the original three films.

This criticism is silly. It focuses on only a few scenes out of hundreds and penalizes them for not achieving “realism” in a movie that is based on laser fighting in space. This narrow lens lets the critic ignore the massive leaps in filmmaking made by ILM and Lucasfilm. ILM’s work since the 1970s has been on the cutting edge of movie effects, bringing incredible, unbelievable, escapist stories to life.

Movies about escapism require imaginative production techniques. This is nothing new in filmmaking. In Hollywood’s Golden Age, films such as King Kong and Metropolis relied on stop motion and model building to create worlds we could never otherwise envision. Willis O’Brien and Ray Harryhausen set the standard for special effects in movie making, creating masterpieces still admired today for their innovation. But while their work certainly was groundbreaking for their time, those techniques could not be used on such a grand scale today to create the movies consumers have come to expect.

Nonetheless, O’Brien and Harryhausen did inspire generations of new filmmakers who sought to replicate the magic they felt upon first viewing the work of those men. Among these movie titans are Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, and George Lucas. Each of these filmmakers, who have a combined box office take higher than the annual gross national product of most countries, have always been on the cutting edge of moviemaking. And some of their most famous and successful movies rely largely on the visual effects made possible because of the technological leaps made by Lucasfilm and ILM.

The much-loved original Star Wars trilogy was put together using practical special effects. But at the time Lucas was working on the movie, the effects necessary to tell his story did not exist. Lucas assembled a team that would become ILM to work on the effects for the film. The result was one of the most stunning visual pieces in cinematic history. The practical effects were incredible, but their production was also daunting, tiring, and limited. Lucas wanted to create scenes as he imagined them, no matter how absurd or unworldly they seemed. ILM and computer generated imagery would be the only viable response to that desire.

Ironically, the first movie franchise to use a completely computer-generated sequence was not Star Wars, but Star Trek. The Genesis sequence in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was created by ILM and set the stage for the next three decades of moviemaking. ILM followed up a few years later in Young Sherlock Holmes by presenting the first completely computer-generated character, then went on to produce effects for some of the most breathtaking films in history, including Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, and Jurassic Park.

With each new movie came another new milestone, and ILM was making a habit out of changing cinema. Every new film was praised for its innovation and the way it was changing movies into an even greater medium for dreamers. It was around this time in the mid-1990s, with his company changing the film world, that Lucas realized he could create the long-hoped-for Star Wars prequel trilogy, complete with fantastical worlds straight from his imagination. Practicality was no longer a concern for effects in filmmaking.

What Lucas created was another revolutionary work, filled with cinematic firsts. Episode I — The Phantom Menace used visual effects in almost every scene, including the extensive pod race. It even included a major alien character, completely animated in 3D. Unfortunately, that alien character, Jar Jar Binks, angered a lot of old fans of the film series to the point that, to this day, they complain about the movie.

Jar Jar Binks and the entire Gungan society were huge visual breakthroughs. Unfortunately, they faced a backlash due to complaints about the writing. Critics bury the entire film because of the character’s personality traits, then they pile on complaints about the visual effects. What they forget is that many of the effects used in Phantom Menace led directly to the modern epic cinema we enjoy today. Without the fight on Naboo, the war scenes of The Lord of the Rings trilogy may not have been possible.

Such complaints continued throughout the prequel trilogy, with some criticisms holding more weight than others. Certainly, Lucas did go too far at times; almost none of the classic practical effects were used in Episode III — Revenge of the Sith. But each movie pushed the envelope of moviemaking with never-before-seen visual effects creating expansive worlds and realistic characters. Episode II — The Attack of the Clones was even the first movie shot in all-digital. These movies set the stage for the next decade of filmmaking, giving rise to Marvel Studios and the first truly realistic superhero movies. Without Harryhausen, there would be no Star Wars. Without Lucas, there would be no Avatar.

Unfortunately, the perpetual complaints about CGI in the Star Wars prequels have forced Abrams to insist he will be utilizing practical effects wherever possible, potentially robbing audiences of another game-changing moment in cinema. But all hope is not lost.

Where Lucas admittedly went wrong with the prequel trilogy was in finding balance. The new Star Wars trilogy should be the visual successor to all six of the previous movies. Using practical effects for set pieces and a few monsters is a great idea, and doing so can create some incredible movie magic that is absent from today’s big-budget blockbusters. But when it comes time to create vast new worlds and expansive battles in space, the producers should allow ILM to do what it does best. Lucas was notorious for letting the visuals speak first and writing the story around them. Abrams need not go that far, but he should certainly let ILM’s incredible talent shine through wherever possible.

Interestingly, Andy Serkis has been announced as a cast member for the new Star Wars movie. Serkis is famous for portraying some of the most incredible motion-captured characters in cinema, including LotR’s Gollum, King Kong, and Cesar from Rise and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. It seems likely that Serkis will use his incredible talents to portray an alien character that will make everyone forget about Jar Jar Whatshisname.

In the end, Star Wars VII will probably turn out to be another filmmaking landmark, as it will integrate the best of visual and practical effects to create another world in which we can all get lost in excitement.

Favorite shows return to lineup in new fall TV season

If you are a Binge Watcher and are lagging behind on Sleepy Hollow, The Vampire Diaries, Arrow, Supernatural, Once Upon a Time, or Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., you should probably skip this season preview until you’re all caught up.

It’s that time of year again. The weather is turning colder, days are getting shorter, and pumpkin spiced everything is available anywhere you go. This is my favorite season — the time of year for hoodies or warm sweaters, bonfires, and hot apple cider.

It is also when fan*s start counting down to the start of the fall television season. In the next two weeks, our favorites will return and an interesting new lineup will begin. I thought I would take some time this week to look at the returning shows I’m most looking forward to, then next week discuss some of the new shows I’m planning to check out.

As you know if you’ve been reading this column, I am a huge fan of television, and I watch quite a wide range of shows. There are some that I continue to watch simply out of habit or because other members of my household still enjoy them: NCIS, Hawaii Five-O, Blue Bloods, etc. I like the characters and continue to watch, though I’m not as invested in those shows as I am in some others. The majority of my favorite shows have some sort of science-fiction or fantasy aspect to them, but there are a few straight dramas I enjoy. (Not coincidentally, most of them star actors I first discovered on genre shows.) Bones and Castle are probably my favorite crime dramas currently on television.

There are quite a few more genre shows that I’m excited about, starting with Sleepy Hollow. When I added this show to my to-watch list last fall, I thought it looked interesting, but I really didn’t know how the premise was going to hold up. Based on prior experiences with genre TV on Fox, I also didn’t have a lot of hope for it to stick around. Then the show surprised everyone with the quality of the scripts and a brilliant cast. I was pretty sure I would like it, but I never expected it to receive the response it did. Fox rarely makes decisions I agree with when it comes to programming, but I think it made a good choice in keeping the first season short; one thing I’ve learned from British television is that shorter seasons can really add to the quality of a season since writers don’t have to spread out the storyline so far and fill in the gaps.

The first season finale reveal that sin-eater Henry Parrish was not only Ichabod’s son but also one of the Four Horsemen took me completely by surprise, which is something few shows manage to accomplish. With Katrina now in the present and Abbie stuck in limbo, I am anxious to see how they resolve the cliffhanger from season 1 and carry on the second season. I’m also extremely excited about John Noble being added as a regular this year. He is an incredible actor, and the fact that he was never nominated for an Emmy for Fringe is nothing short of criminal.

I’m also looking forward to the return of my CW shows — Arrow and Supernatural much more so than The Vampire Diaries and The Originals. The first season of The Originals was vastly more compelling than anything that’s happened on The Vampire Diaries in the last couple years, though I am very excited that Alaric is returning as a VD regular; I’ve really missed Matthew Davis on the show and have been hoping for his return ever since the CW cancelled Cult (which I just could not get into).

Arrow really stepped up its game last season, especially in the episodes leading up to the finale. I’m a little disappointed that the end of the Slade storyline means we likely won’t see more of Manu Bennett any time soon — and he’ll be unrecognizable in The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies. Still, I’m curious about the direction they’re headed this season, as it seems the flashbacks are moving off of the island. It will also be interesting to see Roy make the transition into a regular member of Team Arrow as he dons the Arsenal costume. I only wish the writers would do something about Laurel. I don’t know whether it’s the writing or Katie Cassidy herself, but I struggle with the fact that I couldn’t care less about her character, which is difficult when I love everything else about the show.

Supernatural will be starting its 10th season this fall, which seems like a miracle to those of us who were waiting on pins and needles back in 2006 to see if it would even get a second run. The show kind of lost its way in seasons 6 and 7 after creator Eric Kripke stepped back from running the show. However, another change in leadership after season 7 has set it back on track, with seasons 8 and 9 being a huge improvement on the previous two.

This season, Supernatural is adding a fourth season regular for the first time, as Mark Sheppard joins the cast. Sheppard’s Crowley is one of those villains everyone loves to hate, and Sheppard himself is well-loved in the genre community. When last we looked in on the Winchester brothers, Sam was mourning and Dean was resurrected as a demon. I have no idea what this coming season has in store for us — aside from the rumors of a “musical” 200th episode — but I’m hoping they let the demon Dean storyline play out. I’m really curious to see what Dean is like as a demon and feel like this is a storyline that would feel rushed if they try to wrap it up and make him human again within the first couple episodes of the season.

One of the returning shows I’m possibly most excited about is Once Upon a Time. When the season ended with a glimpse of Elsa from Frozen, I wasn’t sure what to think. At first, I was a little disappointed because Frozen, though a lovely movie, is everywhere you look, and this felt like the writers were just jumping on the bandwagon. However, I’ve since read numerous interviews in which the creators have stated that Disney had absolutely nothing to do with this decision; the show runners are fans of Frozen and thought the characters would fit well into the series. I’m now willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and see how the Frozen storyline turns out.

Aside from Frozen, I’m really looking forward to seeing all my favorite Once Upon a Time characters again. I am still a little sad they killed Neal last year, but Hook and Emma have such great chemistry, I can’t wait to see what’s next. Then there is the question of how Regina will react now that Robin Hood’s wife is alive and in Storybrooke. Regina is such an easy character to hate, but in so many ways, her character’s arc is the most interesting. I just hope she doesn’t fall back to season 1 Regina. Lastly, I’m really excited about Once Upon a Time in Wonderland‘s Michael Socha joining the cast as a series regular. Socha’s Knave of Hearts was by far the best character of the spin-off series, and the reveal that he’s also Will Scarlet means he has a lot of history with Robin Hood and should fit in well with the Storybrooke residents.

The other returning show I’m most excited about would, of course, be Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. The show had such a slow start, but it hit its stride around episode 6, then really went into high gear with the release of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. The end of the season left Coulson tasked with picking up the pieces of the shattered S.H.I.E.L.D. after Director Fury handed over the reigns. I cannot wait to see where the show goes from here. From the casting announcements I’ve been hearing, we’ll be seeing a lot more Marvel characters this season and getting some glimpses of Agent Carter in flashbacks — possibly as a sneak peak of what to expect from the Agent Carter series set to premiere mid-season.

S.H.I.E.L.D.’s second year will also be picking up with a team that is already unified and already knows each other, so they can jump right into the mission. I’m curious to see what role Agent Grant Ward will be playing now that we know he’s a Hydra agent. Will his character have a redemption arc? Is he capable (or deserving) of redemption? I can’t wait to find out.

These are just some of the shows I’m looking forward to having return in a few weeks. I also can’t wait for the new seasons of The Walking Dead and Grimm, plus Haven‘s final, double-sized season begins tonight.

What returning shows are you looking forward to? Share them in the comments! And tune in next week when I share which new series I’m most interested in checking out.

Winter Soldier, set for home release, lives up to trailers

Nothing gets a fan excited for a new film like a movie trailer. The three-minute teasers of potential cinematic high points pump our adrenaline and prepare our wallets to lose a few dollars. But trailers are a double-edged sword. Many trailers expose too much of the plot, give away all of the big jokes, or showcase too much of the action.

The trailers for Captain America: The Winter Soldier made many fans reasonably fearful. The film looked too good to be true, with previews promising an action epic with a thrilling political spin and a critical look at the security state. Too many movies that have not lived up to their trailers have made audiences wary, leaving some filmgoers to cautiously anticipate nothing but a popcorn adventure flick. But with Captain America 2, Marvel Studios delivered, as they always do. Despite its runtime of two hours and 15 minutes, the second Cap never slows down, never bores, and never fails to deliver on all of the hype.

It’s easy to look at its trailers and assume that Winter Soldier is just a summer blockbuster — action porn for the short attention span. And if the movie was only about action, it would still be worth the price of admission or the cost of the Blu-ray, being released Tuesday. Winter Soldier is one of the best action movies ever made; the movie is one epic scene after another: Captain America fights a jet and wins. Nick Fury engages in an epic car chase scene that could have come from a Die Hard movie. Black Widow and Cap show their martial arts skills in creative and impressive ways, including one fight with Georges St-Pierre as Batroc. And you can’t forget the explosions. Oh my, the explosions.

But Winter Soldier is so much more. The first scene of the flick establishes that comedy will never be far from a Marvel Studios production. Cap and Black Widow have tremendous dialogue, playing off of the characters’ obvious differences. Both are shown to be so good at what they do that they continue to discuss seemingly petty topics during very dangerous situations. The jokes about Steve Rogers’ advanced age are priceless and show how good-natured the man can be about his life’s great tragedy.

And the Russo brothers direct the compelling narrative about that tragedy. Cap spends the movie adjusting to the changes that occurred in the 70 years since World War II, and while he can be light-hearted about it, he is also confounded by the shades of grey in which the world now operates. There are no mustache-twirling Nazis expounding on their villainous plans — the bad guys have been passing off as heroes for decades, and the real heroes lie to Cap constantly.

Rogers misses the life he lost. Throughout the movie, Cap remembers his fallen comrades and spends time with his former love, Peggy Carter — now in her 90s and seemingly on her deathbed. Captain America realizes, however, that he cannot be defined by his tragedy. Cap is a symbol and a tremendous man: relatable, despite his exceptionalism. Winter Soldier is the story of Rogers realizing his place in this new world, finding new friends and fighting new threats.

When Rogers first meets Sam Wilson, soon to be called The Falcon, they quickly bond. Wilson is a veteran of recent American conflicts, and Cap is able to relate to the man and the horrors he’s suffered. It’s a moment of tremendous symbolism that links America’s current struggles in the Middle East to its long martial history.

Cap and Falcon form a strong friendship, but Rogers finds himself questioning everyone else around him. S.H.I.E.L.D. has been infiltrated by an old enemy, and Cap is unable to tell whom he can trust. We see early on that Black Widow and Fury practice their spy tactics even with their supposed friends. Rogers, a military man who understands the value of trust and its necessity in situations of war, is unable to adapt to the world of spies and surveillance.

The Winter Soldier makes the viewer question the motives of everyone in the movie, especially those who follow the Marvel Cinematic Universe closely. Some S.H.I.E.L.D. agents who are in on the Hydra conspiracy appear in multiple episodes of Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. television show, and the plot to the movie is directly linked to the show’s entire first season. This is an added bonus to the movie, as it stands alone as a great piece of cinema that is only enriched by knowledge of The First Avenger, The Avengers, and Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

Of course, while the Hydra conspiracy sets up a great plot, it is the mystery of Cap’s rival, the Winter Soldier himself, that intrigued viewers of Captain America 2’s trailers. The combat between the two warriors appeals to anyone who enjoys a good martial arts film. But added to the great fights is the element of mystery. Who is this skilled man?

The Winter Soldier is a mysterious assassin who was formerly associated with the Soviet Union. His history has taken the form of a legend, with sightings of the man dating back decades. Many agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. have dismissed the sightings as rumor, and Cap even calls the tales a ghost story. But the actions taken against Fury prove that the assassin is real. Cap and Black Widow seek the man out for a confrontation, which proves to be anything but disappointing.

The fight scenes are great, the big screen action is incomparable, and the conspiracy involved makes you question everything you know about the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But most importantly, Winter Soldier asks the difficult questions about American ideals and the role of security in the post-9/11 world. Captain America and Fury’s conflicting philosophies regarding national security set the stage for the debate that every American should have for himself.

Casual fans who have only seen a few of Marvel’s movies in the last six years need to check this one out. Winter Soldier is easily the biggest, best, and most important of Marvel’s Phase Two movies, all of which are great. It is Captain America 2, more than any of the other Phase Two works, that alters the world in which the heroes live and sets the stage for the next set of Marvel stories.

YA readers: Have no shame, hold books high

When it came to writing this week’s column, I realized I had absolutely no idea what I wanted to write about. Summer TV is ending, fall TV is still three weeks away. I’m sure I could write an entire column on my complaints about Doctor Who* or True Blood**, but I’ve talked about the Doctor the last two weeks and Sookie Stackhouse is best soon forgotten. I just didn’t know what would be topical to write about this week.

Then I updated my Goodreads account and realized I’ve read 11 books in the past month — five of those just within the past week. Four were young adult novels (even if only three were classified as such — more on that later). This started me thinking about the debate over adults reading YA novels. I know there are a lot of people who judge adults for reading books ostensibly targeted at teens. And I admit, when I was working as a bookseller, I developed the bad habit of judging everyone for what they were reading — particularly anyone who read James Patterson or nearly anything found in the romance section.

Which will probably make me sound like a hypocrite when I say that I don’t think it’s fair to judge adults who read YA fiction. There is nothing wrong with reading YA fiction. I certainly wouldn’t be caught dead reading a Clique novel or any similar series, but there are a lot of YA novels that I do enjoy, and people have a lot of different reasons for reading YA literature.

Some people choose to read YA novels because they’re just good. Naturally, I’m not talking Twilight here. I recently read Paper Towns by John Green and was really impressed by how well it’s written and how the story could ring true with readers from just about any walk of life. The only other novel I’ve read by Green has been the much more hyped The Fault in Our Stars, but while that too was well written, I think Paper Towns was a much more interesting novel. It has more to do with finding yourself and discovering who you are, which, granted, seems to be a teenage concern on its surface, but everyone can feel a little lost at any point in their lives.

There are many other authors out there aside from Green who publish thoughtful, well-written novels for teens. When I was a teenager, the only novels I remember reading that were targeted for my age range were The Face on the Milk Carton and Whatever Happened to Janie?, both by Caroline B. Cooney. Many of the other novels offered at the time were trivial and seemed like a waste of time. (I do admit to being a big Sweet Valley fan: Twins, High, University — I read everything I could about the Wakefield twins, though I grew out of them earlier than most.) By the time I was 13, I was already reading more John Grisham, Michael Crichton, or Tom Clancy novels than YA fiction. Now, however, there seems to be a lot more variety for teens, and not everything being offered is trivial nonsense.

Some people choose to read YA fiction as a form of research: either they want to write novels themselves or they are either parents or teachers who want to familiarize themselves with what is popular among the age group they interact with. I think this is a very logical reason for reading YA novels. If you interact with teenagers on a regular basis, knowing what they’re reading can give you a look at what kinds of things they are interested in or what motivates them.

Then there’s the fact that, sometimes, you just need a break from reading adult fiction and want the light, trivial nature of YA fiction. I read a wide variety of books, but every once in a while, I want something that doesn’t take much time or effort to read. I love Anna Karenina, but getting through that entire novel was work. Sometimes it’s nice to read a novel that you can finish in less than a day. Even if it’s not the next great American novel, it may still be an enjoyable read.

Besides, adult fiction isn’t always any deeper or more literary than YA fiction. Give me the Twilight books over a novel with Nicole Richie or Snookie‘s name on the cover any day.

I picked up a copy of The Witches of East End last week out of curiosity, since I’ve been watching the television version, and I was surprised by the simplicity of the novel and the lack of plot. This is supposed to be an adult novel. I found it in the teen section, but the jacket proclaims it is Melissa de la Cruz‘s first adult novel. Aside from a few more explicit scenes, there is nothing that sets it apart from any other supernatural romance novel on the YA shelves. (If anyone was at all curious like me, just skip it and pick up Deborah Harkness‘ All Souls trilogy instead; that is a much better series of adult novels concerning witchcraft.)

So I don’t think there is a problem at all with adults reading YA novels. Some stories are timeless and can impact you no matter what your age, and others are just fun reads for when you have a few hours to kill and don’t want anything too dark or deep. I would, however, recommend balancing your YA reading with some adult novels. Variety is good, and it probably isn’t wise for an adult mind to constantly be reading stories from the viewpoint of lovesick/moody 17-year-olds.

However, there is so much literature available these days, in so many various forms, that you should never allow anyone to tell you what you can and cannot read. Reading should be enjoyable no matter what book you choose.

* — What’s up with the Doctor suddenly deviating from his “Nobody dies” mantra by sacrificing one to save the rest in last week’s episode? Seriously, I love Peter Capaldi, but I really am a little concerned about what’s going on there, and why he’s suddenly so much colder than previous Doctors.

** — How bad was that True Blood series finale?? I know it aired a couple weeks ago, but I’m still not over it; it made the controversial finale of How I Met Your Mother look like fan fiction.

More than just Holocaust, Maus addresses fathers, sons

Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man’s parents are all dead. The superheroes live and fight in the memory of their fallen family members. Luke Skywalker grew up without a father, and upon finally meeting the man, he had to fight him to the death in order to save the galaxy. Mythological heroes, more often than not, have fathers who are literal gods, and the heroes must live constantly in the shadows of their superior parents. Whether it is movies, books, television, or mythology, it is a fact that “daddy issues” are among the most common traits of characters across all forms of fiction.

In some stories, this trope exists to allow the main character room to grow, as life without parents forces a young character to grow up quickly and take on a greater burden than would otherwise be expected of him. But the absent parent trope also exists as a reflection of societal realities: many children do grow up without one or more of their parents, but those who are lucky enough to have parents around also often find themselves at odds with those who raised them. Parents, reasonably, have expectations for their children and may assume their offspring will grow up a certain way. In turn, children often grow up seeing their parents as heroes, only to become disillusioned upon discovering their flawed humanity. And for many, even a father who is physically present is often emotionally distant. The absent father in fiction often hits too close to home.

So what happens when a boy aims to discover the true personalities of his parents? Will he be disappointed at their human failings, or proud of their surprising accomplishments? Is the generation gap bridgeable, or does the difference in time make it impossible for us to truly understand the world of our parents?

Maus is the story of Art Spiegelman’s attempt to understand his parents, specifically his father. Spiegelman’s work is a journey to discover the man who always felt distant and the mother who left him long ago.

Maus follows Spiegelman as he tries to learn about his father’s struggle during World War II. Vladek Spiegelman was a Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust through resourcefulness and intelligence, even using his skills and likability to make it out of Auschwitz alive. In the graphic novel dramatization of his father’s struggle, Art Spiegelman uses animals to create an extended metaphor, casting the Jews as mice and the Nazis as cats, with other nationalities filling out the animal kingdom.

Instead of simply telling his father’s story, Spiegelman tells about the journey to get the story out of his father — making himself a character in the book, whose own goal is the completion of the book in which he is a part. It sounds confusing, but is actually an impressive storytelling device that makes the book more than just a journey of a man but the story of a man and his son.

The fictionalized Art wants to write a book about his father’s story but often finds himself at odds with the man who raised him. To Art, Vladek is insufferable for his numerous traits that likely developed during his time in Nazi Europe. Vladek is cheap, lies to get his son’s attention, and complains frequently, causing Art to voice his frustration with these traits by noting that his father is acting like the terrible stereotype of Jews prevalent in antisemitic thought. Vladek is not a distant father to Art, but overbearing, and someone to whom is son is unable to relate. But throughout the book, even while the character of Art doesn’t appear to be gaining any new insight into his father, the matter-of-fact writing about their interactions seems to indicate the real-life Art’s greater understanding of his father’s nature. Perhaps writing the book truly helped Art to discover Vladek, even though he was unaware of it at the time.

Chapters often begin with Art and Vladek speaking to one another, with Art growing frustrated as he tries to push his father toward talking about his life in World War II. Art learns about his long-dead brother and mother through his father’s narration, and Spiegelman transposes his words in a way that makes the reader feel as though Vladek is speaking directly to them.

The narrative device used to set up the scenes of Nazi-occupied Poland allows the reader to better understand the humanity of the man who survived Auschwitz. We have all had a parent or grandparent whose quirks and pushiness have gotten on our nerves. Showing this frustrating side of Vladek allows us to relate while we also learn about his heroic triumphs. Vladek survived the concentration camps by using his skills as a worker and his knowledge of the English language. He also flashed his business savvy, often making valuable trades for the necessities of his survival. He even managed to keep his wife protected when they were separated by making friends with the right people. These survival traits also earn Vladek the grudging admiration of his son.

Art experiences a great deal of survivor’s guilt, knowing that he will never have to suffer the way his father did. He takes for granted all that he has been given and, during the time he interviews Vladek, is unable to relate to his father’s story. Art knows that he can never understand his father’s struggle but hopes to at least be able to retell it to others.

There is no point in the story where Art and Vladek reconcile their differences, but the writing makes it clear that Art did ultimately love and respect his father, especially after hearing about his struggle. It appears as though Spiegelman’s realization of who his father was only came about after he began writing Maus. While the story ultimately exists to discuss the horrors of the Holocaust, Maus also does a great job tackling a common issue that is rarely discussed in a real way. Hopefully, those who read the tale will be able to learn its lessons and work harder to understand the trials and quirks of different generations.

Capaldi shines as 12th Doctor, creates dark first impression

Earlier this week, a friend of mine shared on Facebook a link to a cartoon that perfectly sums up what conversations between Doctor Who fans have been like ever since the arrival of the Twelfth Doctor on Saturday night. When it comes to the British sci-fi show, fans are passionate about the cast, the characters, and the writing, and they are not afraid to voice their opinions. Today, I thought I’d share some of my first impressions of the Twelfth Doctor and his premiere episode, “Deep Breath.”

I loved “Deep Breath” when I was watching it for the first time Saturday. Peter Capaldi won me over almost immediately, which is probably the fastest I’ve accepted a new Doctor. From the moment he peeked out of the TARDIS and told Strax to “shush,” I knew I was going to enjoy this Doctor. When I watched it again Monday night at a movie theater, I found I still enjoyed it, but it wasn’t as engaging on repeated viewings as some episodes have been, particularly the recent 50th anniversary special, “The Day of the Doctor,” which I also saw in a theater. However, I still enjoyed the episode overall, especially Capaldi’s performance.

One of the things I really liked about the way this episode was written was how the Doctor’s companion, Clara, was almost a surrogate for the audience member. In so many ways, she voiced all the doubts a fan has ever had about a Doctor’s regeneration throughout the episode: Why was he old? Why couldn’t he just change back? Do we still know who the Doctor is? Clara had to walk the same path from surprise, denial, then loss, to eventual acceptance right along with the fans.

One thing I particularly liked about Clara in this episode was how, even though it appeared as though the Doctor had completely deserted her when she needed him the most, she still held out her hand, confident he would be there. She knew some things about the Doctor would never change.

I have read a lot of negative feedback this week about Clara’s reaction to the Doctor’s regeneration. She knew it was coming, she knows the Doctor has already had many faces — has, in fact, seen all of them prior to the Twelfth Doctor — so why is she so disturbed by this regeneration? I think, for the most part, it comes down to the difference between knowing something and experiencing it. Fans all know the Doctor regenerates, but that doesn’t always make it easier for us to accept a new actor in the role.

Then there was the added complication of this new Doctor being somewhat addled at first. He didn’t seem to know how to fly the TARDIS and evidently managed to get them swallowed by a Tyrannosaurus rex. After spending so much time with a man that always seemed so in control of the situation, a man she could trust to lead her, it must have been extremely disconcerting for Clara to not have any idea what the Doctor was going to do next.

Clara also may not have fully understood just how much the Doctor’s personality can change from one regeneration to another. Her only experiences have been with the War Doctor, Ten, and Eleven. Ten and Eleven have a lot in common, plus the War Doctor always held himself together. So to see the Doctor suddenly so confused and unpredictable really couldn’t have helped Clara with the transition.

As for Capaldi, I thought he was brilliant in the role. He really felt like the Doctor right from the beginning, even if that Doctor was somewhat uncharacteristically confused. I had heard so many rumors about how much darker this Doctor would be — and we’ll get to that in a minute — that I was concerned he would not be a remotely likable person in this incarnation, but as he stood there in the end, begging Clara to just see him, my heart broke for him, and I couldn’t help but love him.

I was also impressed once again by how wonderful an actor Capaldi truly is. I had already known this, of course, but it really stood out Saturday night. Over the past couple months, I have been watching The Musketeers on BBC America, in which Capaldi plays Cardinal Richelieu, who, naturally, is not a likable character. I was afraid this would cloud my perception of him as the Doctor. However, I didn’t think of Richelieu once while I was watching “Deep Breath” — nor did I find myself comparing him with John Frobisher, another rather unlikable character from the Doctor Who spin-off Torchwood. Capaldi’s acting range and ability drew me in and made me completely forget about any other role I’ve seen him in. (And before anyone asks: no, I haven’t seen him as Malcolm Tucker, but I plan to as soon as I can find a way to view The Thick of It.)

I really enjoyed all the subtle references to previous Doctors, from the allusion to a long scarf to the Doctor mentioning that he sometimes misses Amy when Clara’s legs couldn’t reach the sonic screwdriver. I also liked the reference to the “round things” in the TARDIS — a nice callback not only to an earlier TARDIS, but to a similar comment made in “The Day of the Doctor” last year. There was also a slightly more obvious tie-in between this episode and the Tenth Doctor episode “The Girl in the Fireplace,” as these droids’ ship is the sister ship of the SS Madame de Pompadour featured in that earlier adventure.

Probably my favorite scene of “Deep Breath” was near the end, when Clara receives a phone call from the Eleventh Doctor, placed by him just before he regenerated. The call helps Clara to finally say goodbye and have closure, and I think it did the same for many fans. It was nice to see Matt Smith as the Doctor one last time.

Then, as I mentioned above, the dialogue between the Twelfth Doctor after the phone call and Clara’s final acceptance of him as the Doctor was very well done. My heart broke for this Doctor, who just wanted to be recognized and accepted by Clara. The vulnerability of the Doctor in that scene pretty much cemented my opinion of him: Capaldi is going to be great.

The one concern I have as this season continues is just how dark the Doctor will be. We’ve already had the suggestion that he may have pushed the half-faced man out of the escape pod — and that was a rather ominous look they showed on his face afterward. It is evident that the rumors of this Doctor being darker are true, but the question is just how much darker is he? I’m hoping not too dark, as the Doctor is supposed to be a good person.

The other questions this episode left us with are: who is Missy, and what is this place she referred to as Heaven? I’ve heard many theories about Missy’s identity, ranging from the Master to the Rani to an earlier incarnation of River Song to Romana or even, possibly, a dark Clara who merged with the Great Intelligence after splitting off in the Doctor’s time stream. All these theories seem interesting, and I’m not sure which would be most plausible. I would love if Missy were some character from the Doctor’s past that we have not yet met in the new series; the Master would also be an interesting option.

One thing I do know is that “Heaven” is also the same garden Amy was trapped in when she was quarantined in “The Girl Who Waited.” If this were any other series, I could say that was just a coincidence and a reused set piece, but given that Steven Moffat wrote this episode, I’m having trouble believing that.

Overall, I thought this episode was enjoyable and a great introduction to the new Doctor. I can’t wait to see what the interaction between the Doctor and Clara will be like moving forward, and how the dynamic between them changes. I have a feeling Clara will have to keep a closer eye on this Doctor, as well as watch out for herself more often than she is accustomed to.

What are your thoughts on the Twelfth Doctor?

Outlander: Claire heals, hopes to return home

Last week, the Starz adaptation of Outlander made some creative choices that separated it from the books upon which it is based — and I, for one, became concerned. In the series’ third episode, “The Way Out,” additional small changes were evident, but they served as effective tools to help with the transition from the written word to the small screen.

The episode opens with a flashback in which Claire Beauchamp, who has traveled through time to 18th-century Scotland, is back in her own world, bidding farewell to her husband Frank as she embarks on a train to the front lines to serve as a combat nurse in World War II. This scene emphasizes that Claire’s independent nature, illustrated so far during her time in and around the ancient Castle Leoch, is a characteristic of her 20th-century self as well: she is unwilling to play the role of the stereotypical housewife. Frank asks her to reconsider joining the war effort, but Claire insists on being of service. With resignation, Frank laments, “Woe betide the man who stands between you and what you set your mind upon…”

Claire finds herself in her room at Castle Leoch. Mrs. Fitz is fussing over Claire when Claire turns to tell her that she has fallen through time at Craigh na Dun, the circle of stones near Inverness. Mrs. Fitz clearly is afraid when Claire says that she is from the future and that her husband, who everyone thinks is dead, actually hasn’t been born yet. Claire reveals she is from 1945 and has unwittingly found herself in 1743. Claire isn’t sure if she can even go back to her own time. Claire pleads for Mrs. Fitz to help her get back to the stones. Mrs. Fitz slaps her in the face and accuses her of witchcraft. At this point, I am seething, as nothing remotely similar to this scenario takes place in the book.

Seconds later, however, I am relieved to find that this scene was imagined by Claire. As far as this interaction strays from the book, it does serve an important purpose here. The Highland people of the 18th century were (and, to some degree, still are) a superstitious bunch. Their folklore is filled with fairies, spirits, witchcraft, and the constant need to defend oneself against Satan’s ever-present seduction. This background may not be clear to someone not already familiar with Scottish history or anyone who has yet to read the novel. The beliefs of the locals are pivotal to the storyline, and this daydream helps to establish the backdrop for future events.

Mrs. Fitz reveals that The Gathering is coming. The Gathering is an event at which all of the men living on the land of Clan MacKenzie come and swear allegiance to their laird. Claire feels this might be an opportunity to get the Clan’s leader, Colum, to trust her — by “physicking” the ill and earning her freedom. She sets about organizing the medical suite unknowingly left to her by the late Davey Beaton, the castle’s previous healer. Her healing skills are becoming a respected and much-sought asset.

It is revealed to Claire that one of the maids’ sons has died. Claire is told that the child, young Lindsey MacNeill, succumbed the previous night. When Claire inquires as to why she wasn’t called upon, Mrs. Fitz tells her that the boy died of nothing mere mortals could cure. The boy, she says, has died because he visited “The Black Kirk,” the ruins of an old Benedictine monastery. She, as well as everyone else in the area, believes he was taken by evil spirits who dwell in the stony rubble.

Claire, of course, believes none of this but says nothing. She is then called to Colum’s rooms, where he is found having a hilarious conversation with a tailor about the length of his coat. Colum is offended that the tailor is attempting to measure Colum for a frock coat considerably longer than the standard knee-length. The tailor assumed that Colum wanted his deformed legs covered, but clearly Colum does not.

Colum requests from the new healer a massage for his pain, as Beaton used to do. He and Claire get into a conversation about the cause of Lindsey’s death; Claire is vague about her belief that Lindsey was killed by demons. Colum says, “What, you don’t have demons in Oxfordshire, Mistress?” Claire pauses and returns with, “Well, we do … but we call them Scots.” Colum appreciates her humor and invites her as his personal guest to hear a famous Welsh bard, Gwyllyn, perform in The Hall that night.

At The Hall, Claire formally introduces herself to Mrs. Fitz’s granddaughter, Laoghaire MacKenzie. The girl obviously admires Jamie, the young man who saved her from punishment in the previous episode. Laoghaire admits that, while she likes Jamie, he does not return her affection. Claire promises to steer Jamie in her direction. However, her attempt is unsuccessful. Several times, Claire tries to encourage Jamie to attend to Laoghaire, but he is just shy of rude to her in order to converse directly with Claire.

Jamie and Claire discuss the talents of the bard, which are extraordinary. This musician, played by renowned medieval Gaelic singer and poet Gillebride MacMillan, is a marvel. The snippets of his performances alone make Outlander a must-see: the gorgeous vocals, rich in emotion and depth, further complement the already glorious set designs of this series.

Jamie notices that Claire has been imbibing Colum’s Rhenish wine. He asks her to attend to his bandages, although this is just an excuse to escort her safely from The Hall. Sparks fly when Claire and Jamie are alone in her surgery. The chemistry portrayed by the leads is fantastic. This is one thing that makes this adaptation successful. The almost karmic relationship between Jamie and Claire, established from the first book, is a key element in the entire Outlander series.

On a visit to the castle’s herb garden, Claire meets Geillis Duncan, who tells her that Mrs. Fitz’s nephew, Thomas Baxter, is taken with the same illness that killed the boy’s friend Lindsey. Geillis further informs Claire that the local priest, Father Bain, is going to exorcise the boy. Geillis warns Claire to stay away, for fear that she will be associated with evil spirits. Claire goes anyway, much to the consternation of her guard, and encounters the strident, almost psychotic, Catholic priest. He undertakes an exorcism, while Claire, realizing the boy has been poisoned by an unknown source, stands by helplessly.

A parallel storyline emerges here, with Claire recognizing her attraction to Jamie and witnessing Jamie and Laoghaire kissing quite passionately in an alcove. Claire teases Jamie about it at dinner, but one of the men warns Claire that if Colum or Laoghaire’s father hears of it, Jamie could get more than a beating — he could get a wife, “And that’s not the wife he should have …”

A happy turn of events has Claire being escorted to Cranesmuir, a village near the castle, to visit Geillis, the procurator fiscal’s wife. The Clan’s military leader, Dougal, suggests that Claire might stock her medical shelves in preparation for The Gathering. Claire is quite shocked to see that, as attractive and charming as Geillis is, her husband, the Fiscal, is much older, quite unattractive, and in ill health.

When a boy in the town confesses to stealing a loaf of bread, Geillis tells Claire that the boy will lose his hand. Claire is horrified and asks if the sentence is necessary. Her new friend asks probing questions, such as, “Do they not have that in Oxfordshire, then?” However, to appease her friend, Geillis, in a quite bewitching fashion, convinces her husband, whose job it is to settle disputes and determine punishments, to be lenient. The boy gets an hour in the pillory with one ear nailed. Claire again cannot believe that this is considered leniency, and Geillis continues her questions, making Claire worry that Geillis somehow knows that Claire is from a different time.

Claire is able to avoid further explanation when Jamie comes to escort her back to the castle. Before they go, Claire asks if Jamie can do something to help the boy, whose ear has been nailed to the pillory all day. He agrees, and Claire creates a diversion while Jamie pulls the nail, which saves the boy from having to tear himself loose.

Reminded of the plight of the violently ill Thomas Baxter, Claire asks Jamie if he can take her to The Black Kirk. Here, she discovers that a plant that everyone takes for wood garlic is, in fact, a very similar-looking — and deadly poisonous — lily-of-the-valley. This plant is commonly eaten by boys who visit the Kirk as a sign of their bravery. Claire knows the cure and, despite the angry and threatening protestations of Father Bain, gives the boy an anecdote. Soon after, the boy is cured. Instead of being delighted, Father Bain is humiliated and threatens Claire that “God will have the last word. I promise you that.”

The episode ends with another performance by Gwyllyn the Bard. This time, Claire is treated — by Jamie — to a translation of the Welsh lyrics. The song, it turns out, is about a woman who touched a stone at a fairy ring near the celebration of Samhain and was transported to another time. She made a life for herself in that other time, finding friends and lovers. But she longed for her home and the man she had left behind, and at another time near Samhain, she returned to the stone circle, touched the stone, and was transported once again to her own time. This story echoes Claire’s own journey through the stones, which also took place at a stone circle near the time of Samhain. She decides a return to 1945 — and her dear Frank — is possible, and she determines to find a way back.

No gratuitous nudity distracted from the storyline in this episode. While it varied a bit from the novel — for instance, the poisoning of the boys at The Black Kirk didn’t happen in the book — the changes were necessary to translate the plot to screen and to provide a platform for the story’s progression.

curiata

provoke your curiosity