treonb (
treonb) wrote in
theamericans2015-07-21 10:12 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Entry tags:
Question of the week #55
The Americans has received widespread critical acclaim, but has thus far failed to grow an audience equal to the size of a lot of other "prestige dramas." What do you think the reasons are for that?
You can expect spoilers for the entire first three seasons in the comments.
(There's no expiration date on these questions, so if you're reading this post months later and feel like jumping in, please do.)
You can expect spoilers for the entire first three seasons in the comments.
(There's no expiration date on these questions, so if you're reading this post months later and feel like jumping in, please do.)
no subject
I've become convinced that The Americans doesn't tend to work for people who don't (for whatever reason) want to watch it with their brains fully engaged--it's a verrrrrrrry subtle show that relies on you not only remembering but fully comprehending the various layers of things that have happened in past episodes without shoving reminders in your face first. There are actually things in it--sometimes crucial things!--that are so subtle that I sometimes don't fully understand them until second viewing, and I already watch pretty attentively the first time around. That means that if you're not watching carefully, you only end up seeing the frame of an episode rather than the meat, and the frame is just so very much not the point of that show.
-J
no subject
no subject
-J
no subject
no subject
-J
no subject
no subject
But there have been a lot of things beyond that too. It'll be easier to mention them as they occur throughout season four, I suspect; remind me in our discussions.
-J
no subject
But really that's where most of the drama on the show takes place, in those little moments where people show their positions on things and the other person has to adjust to it or whatever.
It's related to things like the rape because just as you miss the significance if you forget that Elizabeth was raped and that's motivating her in a scene, in a scene like that you need to think about who Gregory was, what he was doing, what choices he made, how Elizabeth wants to present it, how it comes across to Paige, how Paige is presenting it, what that means for Paige's potential recruitment, what the indications are for Paige and Elizabeth coming to an understanding or not...
Elizabeth and Paige both get that in the scene fro their own perspectives. But it's very easy to just read the only important in the scene as being that Paige looked up Gregory's history and is telling Elizabeth about it.
no subject
For what it's worth, though, I really don't think Treon counts as a shallow viewer of the sort I meant in my original comment. I mean, Treon, even if you are in fact the shallowest of shallow in your original viewing, anybody who then subsequently discusses each episode to death in this community is going to have a different view of the show than the sort of casual viewer who's maybe walking in and out of the room while the show airs.
-J
no subject
I think that I didn't understand you at first because those subtle points are more related to the drama of the show, not really to the 'spy story' aspects (which do appeal to me more). To take the 'bug' example above, that's what spying is all about.
no subject
-J
no subject
no subject
-J
no subject
Where really all that stuff is the meat. I was thinking last night a lot about how I imagined, character-wise, how Philip and Elizabeth would react to Paige telling Pastor Tim and for me, at least, it felt like there were all these passing character moments that seemed like they could lay the groundwork for it. That's the sort of thing that usually matters.
It was also doubly interesting to think about because with Elizabeth you had a specific backstory to apply to the situation, while with Philip it was just patterns of behavior which made it even *more* subtle. Because you didn't even have flashbacks or past incidents that were discussed, it was just noticing what things he's reacted to in the past and how and what that might say about his character without having any explanation. Not to mention, too, that with characters like Elizabeth we're sometimes meant to understand more about her than she understands about herself. So again, you often have to look at things characters have done rather than even what they say, and what people say always takes precedence in the mind of the viewers. (Here too there's Jared claiming he killed his family out of loyalty for the cause, but that's totally not what happened.)