What is it with killing off ...
Question: What is it with killing off people?
Threshold has already killed off someone (albeit a very minor character).
Lost is advertising it for upcoming sweeps. Last season was a myriad of "someone won't make it" plot twists. It is just getting old — especially when they advertise it. It is not nearly as much of a plot twist/shocker if they tell you someone is going to die, especially if it doesn't live up to the hype. I love
Threshold and was bummed at the idea of killing off one of the characters. I am thrilled that they killed off such a minor character and not one of the regular characters, but am disappointed that they resorted to such desperate advertising tactics. What is your take?
Answer: With a show like
Threshold, any tactic that might get people to tune in is OK by me at this point. And I agree that it was smart for them to sacrifice someone who meant a lot to the main character but didn't directly affect the makeup of the "Red Team" itself. As you indicated in this question, the issue of character mortality came up a lot last season. The key problem in today's hype-intensive media environment is how — in an age of spoilers — to execute (so to speak) these plot twists while somehow maintaining a sense of surprise.
Lost, no doubt, failed in regard to the upcoming twist.
24 probably does it best, when Fox's promo department doesn't ruin things too much. I wish we could enjoy these shows unblemished, but that seems too much to ask nowadays. But if you're asking if the fatal twists themselves are a bad idea, I'd have to disagree. If the stakes aren't high for the characters in these gripping thrillers, and if we aren't to believe that at least a few of the recurring players might be expendable, where's the suspense?
On a related Threshold question, John writes: "Is it me or is it becoming a little disturbing to see individual rights trampled over week after week? The Department of Homeland Security seems to be able to hold people (aliens or not) indefinitely. And on last week's episode, the only person to bring this up (the senator) turned out to be the villain of that episode. I struggled with some of the same issues on 24 last season. I know that these are somewhat escapist TV shows, but it seems to be getting a little excessive. The only show that seems to be interested in balancing authority and individual rights is Battlestar Galactica, with its depictions of the Cylon prisoner Sharon. So what's the deal? Is this just a sign of the times?"
As I noted last season when addressing this topic on 24, I think we're meant to be disturbed by the notion that our heroes often have to resort to antiheroic and maybe even despicable measures to save the world. What I like about Threshold is how it turns the usual conspiracy-theory show (like The X-Files) on its head. Here, we're inside the conspiracy, and even if we don't agree with everything the Threshold team is doing to keep the public in the dark, we're meant to understand why.
