ChillerPop

Your swank lounge of nightmares!

ChillerPop

ChillerPop
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Birthday
July 01
Bio
An afficionado of the weird, fantastical, horror-y and speculative with too many mad thoughts on the brain that need to get out of my skull. I don't necessarily review things, I just spew my thoughts on them out....hopefully it will make some kind of sense? Here I will discuss all aspects of horror and fantastical fiction - TV, cinema, film, literature. I may venture outside the genre on the rare occasion. Oh yeah. I'm an Amazon associate.

MY RECENT POSTS

Editor’s Pick
MAY 18, 2010 1:08AM

Remake Redux: V

Rate: 7 Flag

V-Diana-Anna-1  

 

With the season finale approaching tomorrow (Tuesday May 18), I’m going to offer up some quick flash thoughts on V, the science fiction TV classic that enthralled me as a kid in the 1980s and has just completed a first season of a current remake from ABC. 

 

The points of reference here are V: The Miniseries, V: The Final Battle, and the remake which began in November of 2009. There are spoilers below for both, so please beware.  Also, if anyone reading this is unfamiliar with either series, I apologize for just assuming you know what I’m talking about.  Let me know how I’m doing in terms of explaining my thoughts cohesively.

 

Long story short.  Aliens arrive on earth, looking just like us, choosing names from Earth, calling themselves “Visitors,” and offering us friendship and advanced technology in exchange for a few basic earth materials.  Sound good?   It isn't.  What follows doesn’t bode well for the U.S. or the world.  And the Visitors, we learn, are not what they appear to be, a point very strongly underscored by their eating habits.  Humans band together as a Resistance.  Some dissenting Visitors form a Fifth Column.

 

How do some of these elements compare from original to remake?  And before I start the discussion, let me say that ABC is commendably making this remake distinct from its predecessor.  My point in the comparison is not to say that the current V should follow the previous one note for note.  Quite the contrary: I very much admire the remake’s refusal to reference the original.

 

The politics.  One could argue opposing political viewpoints for both original and remake.  V 2009 has gotten a lot of press for its sinister allusions to the Obama administration, as Visitor leader Anna arrives offering us all “universal” healthcare (actress Morena Baccarin has said that she studied Obama’s speech and mannerisms for the role). 

 

I say this as a liberal supporter of our President, but my advice to ABC is: run with it.  Have fun with it.  Make V about a teabagger’s worst paranoid fears.  The zeitgeist is there for you and you’d be foolish not to tap into it. 

 

What’s even more interesting is that the original V had a very strong ‘liberal’ (for lack of a better word) sensibility.  Not only was it a thinly veiled allegory for Nazi Germany, right down to an alien glyph that’s essentially a swastika, there were even shout-outs to resistance movements in Central America, a hotbed of Reagan-era Soviet and U.S. adventurism in the 1980’s. 

 

Of note are the funny and chilling lessons in media and public relations that both shows offer, via the characters of ambitious newscasters Kristine Walsh (1980s) and Chad Decker (2009).  The remake is doing this better, taking it to a more subtle and devious level.  Anna’s greatest and most devastating weapon is not some alien doomsday device or laser weapon.  It’s an expertly managed PR campaign.

 

The resistance.  Unfortunately, this is where I think the original vastly outshines its remake.  We become engaged in the lives of very normal people who suddenly find themselves faced with a deep crisis and forced to become guerillas.  This gave us an array of characters that are vastly more interesting than the leaden, glossy action-figure leads of the 2009 version of the resistance.  The Robert Altman ensemble narrative approach of the 80’s version gave us many great character threads to follow, as well as a few unfortunate stereotypes (a black LA criminal named Elias and an illegal Mexican worker named Sancho – and damn if he wouldn’t be a topical character now!).

 

In the 80’s, the lovely Faye Grant portrayed Julie Parrish, a medical student who becomes the Resistance’s leader.  She was smart, tough, and compassionate and a female character like that was a rarity in television back then.  I’m having more trouble buying into Elizabeth Mitchell’s Erica Evans. Of course, you can’t talk about V without discussing the great Marc Singer (Mike Donovan).  He was an action-figure too, but a very charming one who captured the show’s female fan base and gave the kids the male character to look up to.  In 2009 that slot seems to be going to the character of Father Landry, a Thorn Bird-y priest wrestling with all kinds of questions about faith as he’s forced to do questionable things as a Resistance member.  I also miss Michael Ironside’s character Ham Tyler, a flinty Reagan-era CIA badass who was there to provide the Rambo/Clint Eastwood vibe.  That character in the remake is now a vaguely defined and rather pointless “mercenary”.

 

Perhaps the most important difference I can point out comes via the characters of Abraham and Ruby, two Holocaust survivors living in LA who became the heart and soul of the 80’s miniseries.  A poignant scene shows Abraham teaching some kids spray painting graffiti in defiance of the Visitors how to turn that lashing out into a powerful symbol of hope, reviving the “V for Victory” of World War II.

 

In 2009, V literally stands for Visitor, so that it becomes shorthand for the aliens themselves.

 

The aliens.  In the 1980’s, they were Nazis in bright red jumpsuits and cheap rubber skin disguises, whereas now, they look like a weird Scientology cult in their soothing, dull gray suits, with cloned human flesh disguises.  ABC hasn’t gone all the way in highlighting the Visitors reptilian natures, but there is one thing we do know: this new batch of Visitors lack normal human emotional response.  Anna believes empathy and compassion to be threats to her rule.  It’s suggested thatwhile they don’t have an innate capability for emotion,  it develops through contact with humans.  Anna also keeps her people hooked on some kind of telepathic religious crack called “The Bliss.”  There’s a lot of material out there on the R-Cortex or “reptilian brain” and sociopathic behavior.

 

But the 1980s Visitors are capable of a full range of human emotion and behavior.  Their history of atrocities and political development parallels ours.  They may have faster than light space travel, but they still maintain all the horrors and flaws and empathy and kindness that people on Earth have. 

 

I’m not sure which is the more relevant lesson (if lesson there needs to be at all).

 

And what about the dissenting Fifth Column?  The original had the affable conscientious dissenter Martin, who risked life and limb for a noble higher purpose.  The remake’s Fifth Column, we’re told, are rebelling because they somehow discovered human emotion.  There’s Morris Chestnut’s sleeper agent Ryan Nichols, a very attractive-looking man who has now fathered a hybrid baby with his human girlfriend, and who is a great action hero character, but I can’t for the life of me think of him as an alien, even when we’re told at great lengths that he is.

 

The Lizard Queen.  And finally how could we not talk about the uber-dragonesses of both series, Jane Badler’s Diana and Morena Baccarin’s Anna (pictured above)?  Jane Badler was fantastic as the ruthless and imperious Diana.  It strikes me that viewers probably enjoyed her hair drama, her shoulder pads, her catty feuds with other female Visitor commanders – essentially, she was Joan Collins as a Nazi she-lizard from outer space.

 

Anna, though, is the chief reason to watch the remake.  She’s brilliantly realized by the gorgeous Morena Baccarin, who expertly and subtly telegraphs Anna’s creepy sociopathic reptilian nature to the viewer. 

 

Both characters brought forth each series most memorable WTF moments (I hate Internet terms like “wtf” but in this case I can’t help it).  There’s of course Diana’s midnight snack, a very talked about moment, and Anna’s Praying Mantis scene.  But the latter doesn’t even begin to compare with this unspeakably disturbing bit.  If Diana was the Joan Collins space lizard, Anna is the Joan Crawford space lizard!

  

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I'm a huge fan of the original V, so I was rooting for this new version to succeed. So far though, I've been bitterly disappointed. The remake just hasn't shown any creativity, in my humble opinion. I'm glad that ABC is still giving it a chance, though, and I hope it gets better and lives up to fans' expectations, and hopefully attracts a bigger audience.
This was a pretty good breakdown of the comparison between the two. I still wish they would have hybridized it a bit more, but overall it's not "bad."

You're right about Anna..she carries the show.
Nick - I can understand that sentiment, especially from a fan of the original.

Doug - I'm curious what you mean by "hybridized."

Thanks both of you for posting.
You forgot to mention Robert Englund as good-guy alien Willie in the original series. This was before he became Freddy Krueger.

I loved the original so much, I don't think I can watch the new one. Even if it's good, it can't match the sheer awesome cheese of Diana inhaling a guinea pig or the lizard/human baby's tongue.
It had the advantage of being campy in the '80's, something it's not totally carrying in the current version.
I prefer Thomas Pynchon's version.
AR - yes, I forgot to mention Robert Englund and the fact that his character underscores the "we are all the same" viewpoint of the 80's version. And the new version does have its few moments of "staggering cheese" - try to watch those Anna scenes I mention on Hulu (there may or may not be youtube clips).

Kathy - see above. Especially note the "Mommie Dearest" sequence with Anna and the way she adjusts her jacket after delivering a backhand slap!

Robert - you may have inspired a summer reading project, although I'm told Gravity's Rainbow is his better work.
I'm a huge fan of both. I love how the new version plays on terrorism and media. It breathes new life to this wonderfully cheesy and immensely entertaining remake.

I can't wait to see what hellishly devious thing Anna does next.
I simply meant it should have incorporated more elements from the original mini-series.

Of course insanopaths from BSG said the same thing about that re-imagining, as well.

We are a small, but important camp, on the fringe of the viewership.
Tomreedtoon - yeah, that stereotype exists for a valid reason. So what? Many of us are "huge fans," ie geeks and fanboys (I'll happily own that term). We've still managed to get dates, own or rent our own homes, master personal hygiene and hit the gym every now and then.

Now, as to your point about the quality as conveyed by compelling characters, as I say in the article, the 80's version did have that (for me, at least) in the various characters of the resistance. And no, I don't mean Marc Singer, although he was great as the action hero lead. In the current, I find Anna the most compelling thing of all, and if I'm not getting an "emotional impact" from her or any other of the show's characters (I'm mostly not, I admit), I am getting the pleasure of looking at Morena's fascinating portrayal of a creepy utterly alien leader campaigning to win the Earth.
V. is sort of a prequel to Gravity's Rainbow. Or Gravity's Rainbow is sort of a sequel to V. Read V. first, then if you like it, go on to Gravity's Rainbow.
I think it's a really good sign when you can read an article on a show you know nothing about and really get something out of it. I feel that way right now. Your analysis is sharp. rated.