TV Dungeon: Six Feet Under

(2001 – 2005, USA)

Creator: Alan Ball
Cast: Peter Krause, Michael C. Hall, Frances Conroy, Lauren Ambrose, Mathew St. Patrick, Freddy Rodriquez, Rachel Griffiths

5 Seasons (63 Episodes)


‘Every Day Above Ground is A Good One’

Alan Ball, the screenplay writer of American Beauty, once again displays his darkly comic view on suburban life (and death) in a series of marvelous splendor. This time around we follow the Fishers, a family that runs a funeral parlor in Los Angeles. After father Nathaniel Sr. (Richard Jenkins) dies in the pilot episode (comically getting crushed by a bus while lighting a smoke in his new hearse), his funeral business is left to his two sons Nate and David.

Nate (Peter Krause), the oldest son, is a good-looking, somewhat egocentric guy who never had much interest in the family business. David (Michael C. Hall) on the other hand has almost made it a sacred task to become a skilled mortician. He is frustrated that his father was always more fond of his brother Nate that he has now left half of his business. But mostly he resents himself for his homosexuality. This is communicated to the audience through conversations between David and his deceased father. Talking to the dead is a normal phenomenon in Six Feet Under. It is also used as a device to let the characters self reflect and express their feelings to the audience.

The youngest sibling is spontaneous daughter Claire (Lauren Ambrose) who is introduced while she is taking crystal meth with her new boyfriend Gabe when hearing the news of her fathers death. Mother Ruth, portrayed with great intensity by Frances Conroy, deals with her husband’s loss by throwing herself in a series of relationships. She frequently expresses her strong need to share more with her family, but never really opens up herself. She is a character that can easily switch from sympathetic to sometimes downright abominable. A trait all the major characters in the series share at some point during the five season stretch.

All the characters and their relationships evolve greatly throughout the series. From Nate’s difficult relationship with the initially self-centered Brenda (Rachel Griffiths), a young woman who was exposed to psychiatry at a young age and is now living the self fulfilling prophecy that everything will go wrong, to David’s relationship with the handsome black policeman Keith (Mathew St. Patrick) who also went through a difficult childhood. Then, there is also the ambitious mortician Federico (Freddy Rodriquez), the very conventional and often bourgeois apprentice of Nathaniel Sr. who wants a partnership in the Fisher’s business. Both Ruth and Claire go through several relationships throughout the series that basically all fail at a certain point.

All the cast-members perform exceptionally well. Nate is portrayed with great confidence by Krause, who can switch from selfish to empathetic in no time. Nate’s AVM seizures are nailed with frightening accuracy by Krause. Hall, who hardly had any acting experience at that point in his career, is unforgettable as David, the character that arguably goes through the biggest development during the course of the series. The excellent Conroy and Ambrose as Ruth and Claire complete the dysfunctional Fisher family with their tantrums and occasional outbursts. The regular cast is often accompanied by guest-actors such as Lili Taylor, James Cromwell and Kathy Bates.

The theme death is off course elaborately explored throughout the series. Every episode starts with the death of a one time appearing character. These deaths are always perfectly in line with the feel of the series as they range between sad, dramatic, disturbing and funny. The mourning process is also fantastically observed and much attention has been given to the prosthetic effects used to create the often mutilated corpses that the Fisher’s have to embalm. The themes are all beautifully interwoven and composed with subtle visual symbolism, clever humor and poignant situations. The beautiful cinematography is evident from the brilliant opening credits on to the dreamy sequences later in the series.

There is a political agenda as well. David and Keith struggle with the unfair treatment of homosexuals and Claire’s left-liberal ideas clash with George Bush’s America. Six Feet Under is one of these shows where everything fits in perfectly. The greatest triumph is perhaps the shimmering final act (more specifically the final four episodes of season 5). It is beyond much doubt that Alan Ball and his team of writers, actors and directors have created the most memorable ending to a TV series to date. Not to say that the preceding stuff is not worthwhile. It is a powerhouse series on both comical and dramatic grounds and I urge you strongly to watch it. It might change your outlook on life, and it will certainly affect your view on death.

Double Bill #03: The Terminator & Terminator 2: Judgment Day

Forget all the sequels for a minute, and consider the first two The Terminator movies as a diptych. As a diptych, they work perfectly. The first one is a hyper tense thriller, the second one a sensational action movie. The major downside of The Terminator movies, I always thought, is that you have to accept an extremely unlikely plot point. We’re supposed to buy that in the future, the resistance somehow found out about the machines’ new time travel capabilities, and destroyed their one and only time machine after they used it for the very first time. Not only that, the resistance also managed to send through one of their own soldiers before they blew it up. Since the humans are shown to be pretty much cannon fodder in their own environment, how would they be able to penetrate the machines’ base of operations? Anyway, this plot device was necessary to get a futuristic killer robot into the present to stalk the Conners (Sarah in the first, John in the second). Once you accept this unlikely scenario, the execution of both movies is pretty much perfect. In the first Terminator, Schwarz is truly scary as the ultimate hunter-killer. A great move by writer-director James Cameron is that Arnie’s T-800 joins the good team in part 2, but it is now technologically outdated. The new and improved terminator – the T-1000 – is perhaps the coolest non-human character ever created for a film. These movies have inspired countless others with their stories and special effects. The Matrix would never have happened if it wasn’t for these terminators. With more than a whiff of philosophy (“it is in your nature to destroy yourselves”), the two The Terminator movies also deliver deeper, underlying messages apart from just giving us the spectacle. Although there is more than enough from that. In T2, it even goes on pretty much non-stop. You could consider that another downside or just as a realistic screenplay measure following the unlikely time travel plot. After all, once you have a killer like the T-1000 on your tail, a non-stop rollercoaster is what you would get.

The Verdict – Crimes of the Future

The Master of Body Horror, David Cronenberg (now 79 years old), returns with a concept typical for him. In an unspecified future, evolution has taken a weird turn; humans don’t feel pain anymore and some grow new organs at rapid speed (‘accelerated evolution syndrome’). One of these persons is Saul Tensor (Viggo Mortensen, also getting older but he still ‘has it’). He forms a performance duo with Caprice (the always excellent Léa Seydoux). Together they perform the live removal of Saul’s newly developed organs in front of excited audiences. When Saul has a zipper in his stomach installed, which his partner finds sexually arousing and then performs fellatio on it, the movie reminds of a mix of Existenz (Cronenberg’s last science fiction film in which humans have a portal in their spine to connect them to virtual reality) and Cronenberg’s Crash (in which a group of people get sexually aroused from car crashes). It is typical of the Canadian writer/director to try to turn his audience on with images of grotesque organically shaped technology and horribly morphed bodies and their insides. It is a weird movie, even by the standards of the King of Venereal Horror, but those who have become accustomed to his style know it is probably also strangely fascinating. And it is. What also helps is the eerie music by his regular composer Howard Shore and the great cast, which also includes Kristen Stewart. How did he ever prepare his actors to get into character for this freakish story?

Crimes of the Future is now available on Amazon Prime

The verdict: to stream or not to stream? For Cronenberg completists, to stream. For all others it depends; can you stomach a dancer with his mouth and eyes sewn shut and ears attached all over his body?

5 redenen waarom Twitter ZUIGT (en waarom ik er toch nog op zit)

Al lang voor de overname door Elon Musk was Twitter al een digitale poel van menselijke excrementen geworden. En de komst van de multimiljardair gaat het er niet beter op maken. Donald Trump weer toelaten zou genoeg moeten zeggen… Wat maakt Twitter tot zo’n depressief zooitje?

1. Trends die je woedend maken
Twitter Trends zijn de onderwerpen die het platform je voortdurend toont. Klik op een trend en je kunt alle fijne dingen lezen die de mensheid vindt en denkt. Het algoritme is erop ingesteld om je boos te maken. Stel dat bijvoorbeeld klimaatontkenning je woedend maakt, dan krijg je de hashtag ‘klimaathysterie’ regelmatig te zien. Het algoritme wil je zo lang mogelijk vasthouden en woede is de beste manier om dat te doen. Dus probeert Twitter je voortdurend te verleiden dingen te lezen die je hartslag en bloeddruk opvoeren en testosteronproductie flink doen stijgen.

2. Spreekbuis van extreem rechts
Of het nou Forum voor Democratie, Wilders of Trump is, allemaal maken ze volop gebruik van Twitter om misinformatie te verspreiden, te liegen, tegenstanders te beledigen en hun vele volgers op te hitsen tegen iedereen die het niet met ze eens is.

3. Anonieme trolls
Twitter barst van de trolls; mensen die allemaal lelijke dingen schrijven en complottheorieën steunen onder een alias. Deze anonimiteit stelt hen in staat over het randje te gaan als het aankomt op racistische opmerkingen of zelfs bedreigingen. Ik had gelezen dat Elon Musk overwoog anonieme profielen te verbieden. Dat is wat mij betreft de enige manier waarop het platform misschien nog wel te redden is. Maar sinds de daadwerkelijke overname heeft hij hier niks meer over gezegd.

4. Heersende reptielen en insectenburgers
De belangrijkste complottheorie op Twitter, verspreid door miljoenen trolls, is ‘The Great Reset’. In deze blog leg ik uit wat het inhoudt, maar in het kort komt het erop neer dat het World Economic Forum (WEF) bezig is een communistische wereld-overheid te installeren. Oftewel, het WEF zijn Baudet’s heersende elite reptielen. Enkele middelen die het WEF hiervoor inzet zijn: een deel van de mensheid uitroeien met coronavaccins, de klimaathoax verspreiden, de boeren uitkopen en de woke-ideologie verspreiden. Het eindspel is de wereldbevolking tot slaaf maken middels digitale ID’s en een dieet van insectenburgers. Aanhangers van dit complot hangen ieder nieuwsbericht hieraan op (zonder enig bewijs uiteraard) en dragen zo bij aan:

5. Toxische onenigheid
Een discussie voeren online kan best leuk zijn als het op basis gaat van wetenschap en goed beredeneerde argumenten. Op Twitter is hier geen enkele sprake van. Het platform is verdeeld in twee kampen die voortdurend oorlog voeren. Bij de anonieme trolls, #Greatreset aanhangers en Forum voor Democratie-stemmers, heeft het helemaal geen zin om met argumenten te komen. Ze zijn er alleen op uit om uitdrukking te geven aan hun anti-alles gedachtengoed. Dit alles draagt weer bij aan het woede opwekkende algoritme en zo is de cirkel weer rond.

Wat doe ik hier dan nog?
En zo komen we bij de vraag; als het zo ellendig is, wat doe je er dan nog? Hier zijn verschillende (egoïstische) redenen voor. Ik heb een eigen blog en hoewel ik het niet voor volgers en traffic doe is het voor een mini-uitgever toch wel fijn als er af en toe wat bezoekers komen. Ik zit niet op andere social media-kanalen, dus Twitter is – naast direct verkeer via Google en mails – met mijn 3338 volgers (waaronder ook bots en Oost-Europese prostituees) het enige platform dat ik heb om bezoekers te trekken.

Maar als ik depressief wordt van het lezen van Tweets, is dat het wel waard? Nee. Daarom probeer ik zo weinig mogelijk te lezen, deprimerende trends uit te zetten en trolls te blokkeren. Dat lukt inmiddels aardig. Dan is er nog wel de principiële vraag; wil je bijdragen aan iets dat haat verspreidt en de samenleving verder polariseert? Dat lijkt me een duidelijke ‘nee’. Maar hier kan ik de zelfrechtvaardiging gebruiken dat ik een journalist ben en via Twitter in verbinding sta met wat er in de samenleving speelt. Uitvergroot en vertekend weliswaar, maar dit is wel wat veel mensen echt denken, hoe lelijk dat ook is.

Update maart 2023
Ik heb eind februari toch besloten mijn Twitter-account permanent te verwijderen. Ik ben van mening dat Twitter een te schadelijk medium is om voort te mogen bestaan. Er worden geen politieke ideeën meer uitgewisseld: het is een propogandakanaal geworden dat masaal wordt misbruikt door kwaadwillende individuen en groepen, en de eigenaren van het platform doen daar helemaal niks aan. Hier wil ik op geen enkele manier aan bijdragen. Het voelt als een #bevrijding om er vanaf te zijn.