HBO Programming - Overrated Often Disgusting

[CVX]

Thoughts about this? Do you agree or disagree with the author?

By Michael Goodspeed

Thunderbolts.info



"Televison -- a medium. So called because it is neither rare nor well done."

--Kovacs



The pay-cable network HBO has been credited with forever changing the face of television programming. Over the past 10 years, an increasing number of cable TV shows have been nominated for Emmy awards, with vanguard HBO dominating, sometimes outnumbering the "free" networks in total nominations.



Critics have heaped nearly universal praise on virtually every HBO original series. The New York Times once referred to The Sopranos as "the greatest work of pop culture in the last quarter-century." In case you've been living on another planet for the last several years, The Sopranos is a gritty crime-drama whose protagonist happens to be a mob boss.



Other HBO shows to receive lavish critical acclaim include the now-defunct Sex and the City (a comedy centered around the sexual escapades of four "hip" New York women), Six Feet Under (a drama about two brothers running their deceased father's funeral service), Deadwood (a graphic western coming off its inaugural season), and numerous documentary programs that explore the darkest aspects of the human condition (Taxicab Confessions, Autopsy, Real Sex).



As a viewer who has long since tired of the homogenized and dumbed-down programming of the "free" networks, I've been a fairly loyal fan of HBO for many years. My favorite comedy of all time is probably the Larry Sanders Show (a hilarious parody of late-night talk shows), and I've seen every episode of Six Feet Under. Many of these shows have earned their critical praise, but I'm bothered by some disturbing themes that run through several HBO series.



The worst pattern that can be found in more than one HBO show is an apparent celebration of sociopathy. On the aforementioned Sopranos, viewers are essentially given only one rooting interest: a mob guy who commits murder whenever it serves him. Call me close-minded if you wish, but I've never understood the public's fascination with obese, inarticulate, linguini-guzzling "wise-guys" who kill at the drop of a hat, and generally lack any redeeming qualities.



I've only watched the show sporadically since the end of the second season, so maybe I've missed something, but I cannot remember Tony Soprano -- a fat, cruel, infantile pig of a man -- ever saying or doing anything of interest. The episodes that I saw were occasionally funny, but they provided no real insight or drama, and were utterly bereft of uplift. To call this show "the greatest work of pop culture in the last quarter-century" is a ludicrous exercise in hyperbole.



As foul and oafish as Tony Soprano is, he is a saint compared to the protagonist of HBO's latest dramatic hit, Deadwood. The show centers on a late-19th century saloon and brothel owner -- the aptly named Al Swearengen. This is a man whose mouth is so foul, it would mortify a young George Carlin. Swearengen blusters a dizzying variety of "curses," many of which were almost certainly not in use over a hundred years ago. But Al's tongue is nowhere near as sharp as his blade, which he uses often and remorselessly. Like Tony Soprano, he kills whenever "necessary," i.e. whenever the act will increase his wealth.



The closest thing to a "hero" on Deadwood is Seth Bullock, a young business owner and ex-lawman who spends much of his time raging against the injustices perpetrated by Swearengen and his ilk. But Bullock himself is a near-homicidal maniac, using extreme violence or threats of violence to "persuade" his antagonists.



I don't object to shows like Deadwood and The Sopranos simply because they feature dark story lines and cruel characters. I'm all for an honest and even painful exploration of every aspect of the human condition. What bothers me is the apparent attitude of the shows' writers and producers that sociopathic behaviors are not objectively bad, and perhaps even admirable. Millions of Americans actively ROOT for Tony Soprano. Is that not the least bit troubling?



But even the most graphically violent HBO shows are nowhere near as twisted or bizarre as the network's sexually oriented programming. One of HBO's longest-running programs is the documentary series, Real Sex. One would think that any show with the word "sex" in the title would necessarily carry at least a smidgen of erotic appeal, but not in this case. That is, unless you are aroused by such "hot" topics as "midget-hermaphrodite nudist colonies" or "penis puppeteers" or "transgender escort services." It is almost as if the show's producers intend to make sex look as weird, aberrant, and unappealing as possible.



Disgusting sexual images are also common on the documentary series, Taxicab Confessions. This show features taxi drivers recording the comments of unguarded passengers on hidden cameras. The ones who make it on the air are usually the most drunken, drug-addicted, mentally ill, obliterated folks imaginable. Hookers of every variety, particularly transgenders and transsexuals, are frequently taped offering graphic and stomach churning descriptions of their "work." Couples are also sometimes taped engaging in animalistic, backseat sex.



Watching these "titillating" shows has the same effect on one's libido as an ice-cold shower. For what alien life-form is this brand of "erotica" intended?



In depicting human "eroticism," HBO does not shy away from homosexuality. The aforementioned Six Feet Under focuses on the romantic lives of multiple gay or bi characters. Let me make it clear that this is not something I object to on a priori grounds. I have no problem with a show portraying gays in a realistic and positive light, and it's only logical that this would include an exploration of same-sex romance. But by the end of the fourth season, I noticed a peculiar thing: all but a handful of the show's characters are either gay, bi, or have had (or attempted to have) at least one gay experience.



The show is centered on a family-run funeral service. The patriarch of the family recently died, and his two adult sons have taken over the business. David, the younger of the two men, is gay, and has an ongoing relationship with a cop named Keith.



In season three, Claire (David's college-age sister) breaks up with her boyfriend Russell after finding out he slept with her male art teacher. Brenda (the on-again, off-again flame of David's brother Nate) has a dysfunctional brother named Billy, who reveals that he has also slept with Claire's male art teacher. And in season four, Claire finds herself deeply attracted to an avant-garde bisexual female, and the two make an aborted attempt at physical intimacy.



If Six Feet Under is intended to be about gay people, that is fine. But it seems to me that as the quality of the writing declined (which most critics agree began in season three), the show became less about exploring the characters' humanity than making "socially conscious" statements. I'm all for tolerance and diversity, but I don't appreciate attempts to manipulate me. And I don't require a TV show to know that gays deserve to be treated with parity.



What makes me most uneasy about the creative minds at HBO is the apparent contempt they feel towards so-called normalcy. I suppose they think it's not interesting to center a show on kind, compassionate, law-abiding human beings who have only one sexual partner. They may even believe they are providing viewers with educational insights into the "real world." I guess I've been asleep for all 29 of my years on planet Earth, because the world I see on HBO looks nothing like the REAL WORLD I live in.



And no, I don't live in Mayberry.