Now this one has been in the making for a long time. Much longer than I ever intended, but life and other stuff interfered and made it hard to sit down for several hours at a time. At least I’ve finally finished it and can begin my adventure into the third and final act of this epic story that I’ve come to love so much. But I’m getting ahead of myself; first comes the review, and then I can continue onwards.
The overall events of the second season of “Deadwood” are what you could expect. The savage and wild camp is growing steadily more civilized and less barbaric by the minute. Or rather, it would seem that way on the surface, but beneath it all things haven’t changed much. They never really do.
But this season brings us some steps forward in several important areas. The characters are developing and showing us new sides to their faces and the intrigue has thickened to the level that you really have to pay attention if you’re going to catch every detail. This is made increasingly difficult by the fact that dialogue has taken a turn down the Shakespearian alley, which I find strange since the manner of speech should by all accounts become more modern if anything. However, I won’t profess that I don’t enjoy the dialogue - it’s actually my favourite thing about the show - but I have to say that I find it a tinsey bit peculiar. Maybe the writers are becoming more proficient in catching the tone of that particular era, or maybe they’re just becoming way too fond of their dictionaries…
My favourite thing about this show is still Al Swearengen. He’s just as magnificent here as he was in the first season, but not always in the same ways as before. It seems there’s a heart in there after all. I also loved following the new character, Mr. Walcott, who was completely bonkers in a totally sane way. Gotta love that in a fellow, right?
So overall I’d say that the show is progressing nicely. There are some episodes in the middle that were a bit too slow for my liking and I do feel that they could progress matters a little more speedily than what they usually do. Now we end up having a lot of action in the start and towards the end while the middle just skims off the most recent events without evolving them more than the bare minimum. This means that I can’t give season 2 a perfect ten, but it’s damned close, ’cause Television just doesn’t get much better than this.
9,5 /10
Posts
Walcott, who’s that again?
And no, TV really doesn’t get much better than this, at least not in season 2 of something.
As for the dialogue, I’ve got to tell you, I love it. The dictionary-thing always struck me in what little westerns I’ve seen - seems that cowboys used a whole lot of long, weird words we wouldn’t expect anyone but college professors to use frequently nowadays. But Deadwood really doesn’t set itself apart in that manner. I guess it’s either a genre-convention or, more likely, an attempt at revitalizing a language not yet fully broken down by the ever-present subconscious needs to abbreviate, shorten and make effecient. In fact, I’d sort of assume such processes to have gone incredibly slowly up until telephones, radio, TV and the Internet. So hopefully, it’s a rather accurate description.
But even if it isn’t, I lovelovelove it. Then again, I also love listening to college professors, so what the flying fragmite do I know.
9. February 2008 @ 16:32 ( Permalink )
Whoops; I got the name wrong. It’s actually Wolcott, which in my defense sounds very similar to “Walcott” and is also a much more common surname.
He was the guy who killed all those whores and bought all the gold claims save Alma Garret’s.
10. February 2008 @ 03:00 ( Permalink )
I hold Season 2 in very high regard; despite the fact that it’s been a while since I watched it. Al was smashing as always, more screentime and plot involvement for Mr. Wu.
Not to mention George Hearst, a name on everyone’s lips throughout the season. And despite the fact that he does not make an appearence until the very end, his name looms over Deadwood like a dark, ominous cloud; heralding a storm to come.
Also, gotta love Al’s coversations and discussions wih the Chief.
10. February 2008 @ 04:29 ( Permalink )
Ah, right, yes. I liked him a lot, too, though I strongly dislike it when shows recycle actors like that - that man had already played Buffalo Bill’s murderer in the first season. So while I loved the charater, I kind of oppose his existance on general principle anyway.
10. February 2008 @ 04:32 ( Permalink )
I mean, I kept sitting there griting my teeth with annoyance every time he came on screen for the first half a season before I started being able to forget about it for some minutes at a time.
10. February 2008 @ 04:32 ( Permalink )
I agree with you Shirgaal; all those things were nothing but superb. Gotta wonder what kinda smell the Chief is emanating, though. He’s been in that box for quite some time now.
@Loki: It seems that the mastermind behind “Deadwood” really likes using the same actors. For example, both Mr. Wolcott and the guy playing Elseworth appeared briefly while I watched some twenty minutes of his new show, “John From Cincinnati” (note to self: that’s not a good show to jump into the middle of. I didn’t understand shit of what was going on).
10. February 2008 @ 10:15 ( Permalink )
(I can imagine none of this guys shows would be. Deadwood certainly isn’t)
Recycling good actors between shows is grand. Recycling good actors in guest spots on the same show is to be frowned upon. Recycling good actors in recurring roles on the same show is horrendously bad form.
10. February 2008 @ 19:02 ( Permalink )