Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

subego · Feb 3, 2006, 02:23 PM

God damn, I love, love, love this show.

One of the things I find most interesting is it's political dichotomy.

On one hand, you have Jack Bauer, poster-child for brutally illegal prisoner interrogation, as well as the depiction of ridiculous resources being dumped into counter-terrorism... in Los Angeles for f's sake. Imagine what CTU would be like in a city that actually matters.

On the other hand, you have the not so thinly veiled resemblance to major political figures. It seems to me one is supposed to draw an unflattering parallel between President Logan and President Bush, just as one was supposed to draw a parallel between Palmer and Clinton.

That the current season has decided to make the White House Chief of Staff engineer a plot to give terrorists WMDs, so it can be proven to the world that the terrorists are a threat...

Well, they are pushing the envelope now, aren't they?

Does this piss anyone off? What are people's opinions of the political commentary going on in "24"?

Monique · Feb 3, 2006, 03:09 PM

How can it be a spoiler, nobody knows where the show will go and according to Kiefer Sutherland, the writers write 1/3 of the season then they have some idea where it might go but not a definitive one.

I do not think there is actually a political commentary; just they try to make the show as interesting as possible.

subego · Feb 3, 2006, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by Monique

How can it be a spoiler, nobody knows where the show will go and according to Kiefer Sutherland, the writers write 1/3 of the season then they have some idea where it might go but not a definitive one.

My post was a spoiler if you haven't watched the last few episodes.

Better safe than sorry

Originally Posted by Monique

I do not think there is actually a political commentary;

None?

None at all?

I'm dubious that casting a black man as the President of the United States isn't political commentary in some form or fashion.

Originally Posted by Monique

just they try to make the show as interesting as possible.

You've put the cart before the horse. Writers don't write something because it's interesting, something they've written is interesting because the choices they've made have purpose.

Busemann · Feb 3, 2006, 04:10 PM

With all the stuff that's going on in the Whitehouse (not just this term), it's not totally far fetched.

Face Ache · Feb 3, 2006, 10:31 PM

The real Whitehouse writes better fiction IMHO. Fewer holes in the plot.

Nevertheless, the WH should maybe consult the Hollywood writers for the upcoming wars - Episode 6 of Season 5 was edge-of-the-seat stuff.

aberdeenwriter · Feb 3, 2006, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by subego

God damn, I love, love, love this show.

One of the things I find most interesting is it's political dichotomy.

On one hand, you have Jack Bauer, poster-child for brutally illegal prisoner interrogation, as well as the depiction of ridiculous resources being dumped into counter-terrorism... in Los Angeles for f's sake. Imagine what CTU would be like in a city that actually matters.

On the other hand, you have the not so thinly veiled resemblance to major political figures. It seems to me one is supposed to draw an unflattering parallel between President Logan and President Bush, just as one was supposed to draw a parallel between Palmer and Clinton.

That the current season has decided to make the White House Chief of Staff engineer a plot to give terrorists WMDs, so it can be proven to the world that the terrorists are a threat...

Well, they are pushing the envelope now, aren't they?

Does this piss anyone off? What are people's opinions of the political commentary going on in "24"?

I NEVER ONCE made the connection between Palmer-Clinton and Logan-Bush. But thinking about it right now for the first time, I suppose they made the characters sufficiently different to prevent any obvious comparisons

Pushing the envelope? I guess you could call it that.

Looking at it from a storytelling perspective they took current events and situations we are all familiar with and then posited from there. "What if..."

They are trying to tell a story that will provide for the greatest numbers of viewers. To do that they take a scenario that many people suspect has happened, is happening or could happen and write the story.

What if "the White House Chief of Staff (engineered) a plot to give terrorists WMDs, so it (could) be proven to the world that the terrorists are a threat?"

Piss me off? Nah.

It reminds me of any of our more or less objective posters here if they tried to produce a show. They have their suspicions, they are aware of what many other posters/viewers/Westerners secretly or openly believe, they know what makes for good drama, they know what Bush supporters know and a bit about actual military/intelligence procedure and they pour all of that into the writing and directing and editing a story which explores what it would look like if that scenario were to be true.

Close enough to be compelling and hard to dispute. How do any of us know that some of these plot points and twists really can't happen?

I bailed out on the show last season as I thought they were not pushing any envelopes but reaching for relevancy after exhausting the premise. Well, this season is great so far.

Kevin · Feb 4, 2006, 07:23 AM

What is 24? I am betting most people don't even know what this show is.

RAILhead · Feb 4, 2006, 07:26 AM

You're reading too much. There's never been a parallel to any of the Presidents you mentioned, and the writer have shut those theories down for years.

subego · Feb 4, 2006, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by RAILhead

You're reading too much.

Well, not for me.

That's part of my question though. For those who don't read in too much, what fills this massive entertainment-shaped hole left empty by not reading into it?

Originally Posted by RAILhead

There's never been a parallel to any of the Presidents you mentioned, and the writer have shut those theories down for years.

Can you make the PotUS a main character without asking your audience to draw parallels? It seems to me only a very poor writer would do something that practically begs your audience to draw parallels, and then not draw any.

Likewise, I can certainly see the benefit to the writers in not admitting any parallels. I'm curious if your opinion of the show would change were it made known the writers put in plenty of intentional parallels?*

None of these things are proof obviously, only bits of circumstantial evidence.

*Well, even with all I'm reading into it, I'm guessing Andy Card probably isn't a traitor... at least not a very big one.

Originally Posted by Kevin

What is 24? I am betting most people don't even know what this show is.

Are you pulling my leg?

If not, I'll gladly give you the lowdown.

SpaceMonkey · Feb 4, 2006, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

What is 24? I am betting most people don't even know what this show is.

The longest-running gimmick in television history.

subego · Feb 4, 2006, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

The longest-running gimmick in television history.

It's only run 4 1/2 days...

[ba-dum, crash]

Thanks. Try the veal.

RAILhead · Feb 4, 2006, 11:52 PM

Maybe you need to re-watch Season 1 if you think Palmer=Clinton. One doesn't even have to argue politics to know that the two are polar opposites. The only similarity was that both were Democrats.

aberdeenwriter · 09:40 PM

I just heard Frank Gaffney say that there's evidence that Vladimir Putin's FSB, while he was still head of it, actually blew up a couple of buildings and attributed it to the Chechans and that's how Putin was able to rise in power to become president or Premier or whatever he is. (Gaffney also says Putin's trying to reconstruct a 21st Century version of the Soviet Union).

So, there's the echo for the 24 plot point.

Jawbone54 · Feb 5, 2006, 11:03 AM

I had never watched 24 until maybe a month ago. I watched the first season on DVD. Now I'm in the middle of the second season. In other words, I'm behind everyone in this thread. By the time I get done with the 4th, the 5th season realease date will still be pretty far away. Patience..

Doofy · Feb 5, 2006, 09:09 PM

I haven't read the comments above, as the word "spoilers" is included and I've only just done season 4.

But, finishing up season 4 today, one thing struck me. There's actually people out there watching the show who hate the US so much that they don't want Jack to win.

Seriously. What's up with that?

placebo1969 · Feb 5, 2006, 10:45 PM

Finally got caught up. If anything, Logan's hairline and paranoia reminds me of Nixon.

I can see how people would have the Palmer/Clinton connection. Especially since he was the first black President. (Both of them).

Sherri reminded me of Hillary with her overwrought ambition.

subego · Feb 6, 2006, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Maybe you need to re-watch Season 1 if you think Palmer=Clinton. One doesn't even have to argue politics to know that the two are polar opposites. The only similarity was that both were Democrats.

I'll admit, I didn't watch season 1 too closely (GF had it on in the BG), but he was only a senator then.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

I had never watched 24 until maybe a month ago. I watched the first season on DVD. Now I'm in the middle of the second season. In other words, I'm behind everyone in this thread. By the time I get done with the 4th, the 5th season realease date will still be pretty far away. Patience..

See Monique?

FWIW I enjoyed watching it on DVD much better. It was nice to always get immediate resolution of a cliff-hanger. Me and my GF try and store up as many episodes as possible on the PVR, but you're always running the risk of hearing a spoiler.

Originally Posted by Doofy

Seriously. What's up with that?

No idea.

Who?

I love how ridiculously pro-American the show is. One of my initial comments was that considering how bad-ass the Los Angeles branch of CTU is, what must it be like in, say D.C.?

w3 0wnz j000 t3rr0r1sts!!!!!!

subego · Feb 15, 2006, 12:49 PM

Anyone catch the cameo last episode?

It was right after a commercial, when the clock is still going and the screen is split. A man walks into the CTU conference room and drops off a folder to Buchanan. I think I know who he is, and as he faces the camera to walk out, I see that unmistakable set of cheeks...

I'm like, holy ****, it's John McCain!

Too cool for words.

davesimondotcom · Feb 16, 2006, 10:40 AM

I've not watched 24 for the past 2 1/2 seasons. Basically, I got bored halfway through season 3 (isn't that the drug cartel one?) and have only seen half of each of the last two episodes.

However, I would say this:

If David Palmer was a real man and he ran for President, he'd win in a landslide.

subego · Feb 16, 2006, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

If David Palmer was a real man and he ran for President, he'd win in a landslide.

Yup. We'd be in good hands.

aberdeenwriter · Feb 16, 2006, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by subego

Yup. We'd be in good hands.

With Allstate!

Nice setup line. Thanks!

aberdeenwriter · Feb 16, 2006, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by subego

I love how ridiculously pro-American the show is.

In my mind that is the model and anything else is an aberration or an unrealistic, unacceptable intrusion upon my view of reality or the way things SHOULD be.

That comment is only partially serious.

aberdeenwriter · Feb 16, 2006, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by subego

Anyone catch the cameo last episode?

It was right after a commercial, when the clock is still going and the screen is split. A man walks into the CTU conference room and drops off a folder to Buchanan. I think I know who he is, and as he faces the camera to walk out, I see that unmistakable set of cheeks...

I'm like, holy ****, it's John McCain!

Too cool for words.

I missed the first 20 minutes!