The Man in the High Castle

[MikeKardec]

Yeah, despite my guilty concenrs about what it is doing to - in the words of a higher-up in Waterstones - "real bookshops" - I do use amazon a lot.

I try to see everything just because I'm in the business of staying on top of what's out there in entertainment. Every so often I subscribe to a new service and cancel the last, binge watching what I missed by not being subscribed to them all. I agree, the quickest way to go broke (besides drinking, gambling, burning your money ... oh yeah, having to go in the hospital), is to have a bunch of semi useless TV subscriptions!

Amazon is a very mixed blessing. As a guy in the book biz I have very little respect for how many bookstores were run and how inefficient the book business used to be (this goes back way before Amazon but includes the forces that created Amazon) but I love book stores. I grew up playing hide and seek with my sister in the greatest bookstores in the country. It is worth noting that having large numbers of bookstores was almost a passing phase (though a glorious one). Before WWII there were only 500 true bookstores in the whole country and most of them were centralized in a dozen cities in the NE. 50% of all the books produced by American publishers sold less than 2,500 copies. By the end of the 1960s many hundreds of millions of copies were being sold and bookstores were everywhere. Now Amazon's Kindle direct business (people electronically "self publishing" their own work ... though that is misleading because a lot of it is extremely professional) is possibly larger than all the ebooks they sell for the traditional publishers. The lesson the book biz never learns is that price is king ... lower the cost and people will read a shocking amount of stuff!

Did anyone see what they did in New York to advertise this show? Lots of blowback on it and Amazon has taken it down. So I don't know if they either thought 1) it's really bad to put these Nazi-American flag on a NYC subway train but it will be GREAT publicity! or 2) It's just advertising and no one will get offended. I'm thinking it's the first one.

I'd go for #1 though Amazon tends to be pretty tone deaf. There is nothing in existence today that can't be deemed insulting to someone.

Ok - I finished wtching the entire season. Initial impression: incredible. I want to take a few days to really think about it and maybe I'll write up a review.

PLEASE DO! With your interests and expertise I'd love to read it!

(if anything, the generations here who have grown up with the Hollywood fetishisation of WW2 seem to be more sensitive about the whole thing that the generation who actually faced the Nazi threat; certainly they appear much more responsive to a media campaign telling them to be offended). I'd have thought the Japanese stuff would have been more of an issue than the others in the USA, but perhaps not.

Hollywood, a very Jewish culture ... and the cultural aspects include many like myself who are either partly Jewish or have simply absorbed it from the community, has never shied away from Nazis (that's rather obvious) or even complex and human portrayals of them. That's the lesson, I guess, it could be in us all, so watch out! Thank you, Hannah Arendt.

I was nicely surprised that the series did not shy away from the Japanese. Too many times Western writers get glossed with racism when writing about Japan. Nazis are okay because they are Caucasian. I was very impressed at how wonderfully portrayed even the most "evil" Japanese (Inspector Kido) were. Joel de la Fuente is an amazing actor but no actor can do their job without writing and Kido was beautifully done. Of course this has been one of TV's greatest contributions to drama in the last 20 years, fully realized BAD bad guys who are also worthy of our admiration and pathos. They can be very frightening without being loathsome.

 

[Edward]

IThe lesson the book biz never learns is that price is king ... lower the cost and people will read a shocking amount of stuff!

Yes, there is that side to it. I'm always horrified by how expensive a lot of books can be.... though thi leans mostly in the academic side of things. I'm currently putting in a proposal for a second edition of a volume I co-edit/co-author, and the publisher intitally wanted to raise the price ot nearly GBP100 - for a book aimed at students, largely! I'm hoping they'll see the sense in a cheaper price (with a nice hardcover edition for the big money spenders in law firms). I've known folks who've written (and even contributed to myself) books that the authors can't really afford to buy. I suppose I'd be less bothered by it if a significant chunk of the money in publishing was going to the creatives, but.... It's crazy in academic publishing. For peer-reviewed journals, they pay you nothing (usually crying poverty..... but somehow the publishers still think it's worth publishing... hmmnn.... they ain't charities....), charge a lot for subscriptions, and even try to take over your copyright in your own work. It's a total racket.

Hollywood, a very Jewish culture ... and the cultural aspects include many like myself who are either partly Jewish or have simply absorbed it from the community, has never shied away from Nazis (that's rather obvious) or even complex and human portrayals of them. That's the lesson, I guess, it could be in us all, so watch out! Thank you, Hannah Arendt.

I was nicely surprised that the series did not shy away from the Japanese. Too many times Western writers get glossed with racism when writing about Japan. Nazis are okay because they are Caucasian. I was very impressed at how wonderfully portrayed even the most "evil" Japanese (Inspector Kido) were. Joel de la Fuente is an amazing actor but no actor can do their job without writing and Kido was beautifully done. Of course this has been one of TV's greatest contributions to drama in the last 20 years, fully realized BAD bad guys who are also worthy of our admiration and pathos. They can be very frightening without being loathsome.

It's an excellent point to make; I find the very most chilling villains are always the ones to which I can relate as a person, often to the point where I wonder, if given a different time and place, different experience, whether I would be better than them. It's an irony of a lot of fiction based on the Nazis that in preaching their evil of dehumanising so many, it can dehumanise the perpetrators, which isn't reflective of historical fact. I think one of the more unsettling photos of SS troops I've seen was the one of some of them, off-duty, playing with a kitten. Concentration Camp guards, these uys were, who presided over some awful stuff, but they retained the humanity to be taken with a cute kitten.

 

[MisterCairo]

I just read about this in a magazine delivered to the ship. I'm adding it to my post-deployment list next year, once/if available through physical means.

 

[AmateisGal]

I just read about this in a magazine delivered to the ship. I'm adding it to my post-deployment list next year, once/if available through physical means.

I think you'll really enjoy it!

 

[AmateisGal]

It's an excellent point to make; I find the very most chilling villains are always the ones to which I can relate as a person, often to the point where I wonder, if given a different time and place, different experience, whether I would be better than them. It's an irony of a lot of fiction based on the Nazis that in preaching their evil of dehumanising so many, it can dehumanise the perpetrators, which isn't reflective of historical fact. I think one of the more unsettling photos of SS troops I've seen was the one of some of them, off-duty, playing with a kitten. Concentration Camp guards, these uys were, who presided over some awful stuff, but they retained the humanity to be taken with a cute kitten.

This is, IMO, one of the best strengths of this series. Rufus Sewell's character, a Nazi named John Smith, is 100% behind the cause - yet his humanity and his struggle with the ideology he's following comes to the forefront. It's fascinating to watch.

 

[MisterCairo]

As an aside, Rufus Sewell's performance in Cold Comfort Farm was brilliant!

"Oversexed sons on farms are ALWAYS called Seth or Reuben"...

 

[MikeKardec]

This is, IMO, one of the best strengths of this series. Rufus Sewell's character, a Nazi named John Smith, is 100% behind the cause - yet his humanity and his struggle with the ideology he's following comes to the forefront. It's fascinating to watch.

The same issues to a vastly lesser degree appear in all of our lives. Our business or family causes us to make moral compromises. We close our eyes to things that could be an issue because there is a higher (or simply more powerful) cause that comes first ... or just simple convenience. We know we are doing wrong but we don't choose to be better or buck the system. I've helped out at colleges that were giving grades away or had programs that while well intentioned had the effect of causing unhappiness and strife. No one wanted to hear a different point of view so I remained silent. I've done things in business that hurt people but the business wouldn't go forward without doing them. Objecting forcefully would have gotten me fired or sidelined and since I knew I'd ultimately have no effect, I spoke up yet took no further action.

At the greatest extreme, I have often wondered if the recent rash of vampire movies hasn't been because our lives have become so easy there are many people who can not imagine killing an animal in order to eat ... in the end they recognize they'd have a hard time choosing themselves over their food. Vampires are fascinating because they kill to live forever and contribute virtually nothing. I wonder if some people could choose to be so moral that the only thing to do would be let yourself die. I had students who seemed almost on the verge of contemplating that ... though mostly they questioned the choices of others!

We all do things we find distasteful or difficult. We are all hypocrites who carry out Nuremberg trials but fail to follow events like My-Lai or Abu Ghraib up the chain of command, not even to truly discover the guilty parties but just to root out where policy went wrong.

The questions that The Man in the High Castle raises without preaching, just by allowing us to witness these people's lives is a nice definition of where art intersects entertainment. It's sure not the best piece of TV there has ever been but it succeeds in this goal very nicely. I'm always impressed to see this sort of stuff show up in film and TV because the morals and ethics in the production of films and shows are so compromised (that's where I felt I compromised unacceptably as mentioned above) it's ironic and appropriate because most film people know that world intimately from the point of view of the abused and the abuser.

 

[Fading Fast]

Based on Amateis Gal'sand Worf's strong recommendation - watched the first episode today - can't wait to see more. Really well done.

 

[AmateisGal]

Based on Amateis Gal'sand Worf's strong recommendation - watched the first episode today - can't wait to see more. Really well done.

Yay! And believe, it only gets better from here on out.

 

[AmateisGal]

The same issues to a vastly lesser degree appear in all of our lives. Our business or family causes us to make moral compromises. We close our eyes to things that could be an issue because there is a higher (or simply more powerful) cause that comes first ... or just simple convenience. We know we are doing wrong but we don't choose to be better or buck the system. I've helped out at colleges that were giving grades away or had programs that while well intentioned had the effect of causing unhappiness and strife. No one wanted to hear a different point of view so I remained silent. I've done things in business that hurt people but the business wouldn't go forward without doing them. Objecting forcefully would have gotten me fired or sidelined and since I knew I'd ultimately have no effect, I spoke up yet took no further action.

At the greatest extreme, I have often wondered if the recent rash of vampire movies hasn't been because our lives have become so easy there are many people who can not imagine killing an animal in order to eat ... in the end they recognize they'd have a hard time choosing themselves over their food. Vampires are fascinating because they kill to live forever and contribute virtually nothing. I wonder if some people could choose to be so moral that the only thing to do would be let yourself die. I had students who seemed almost on the verge of contemplating that ... though mostly they questioned the choices of others!

We all do things we find distasteful or difficult. We are all hypocrites who carry out Nuremberg trials but fail to follow events like My-Lai or Abu Ghraib up the chain of command, not even to truly discover the guilty parties but just to root out where policy went wrong.

The questions that The Man in the High Castle raises without preaching, just by allowing us to witness these people's lives is a nice definition of where art intersects entertainment. It's sure not the best piece of TV there has ever been but it succeeds in this goal very nicely. I'm always impressed to see this sort of stuff show up in film and TV because the morals and ethics in the production of films and shows are so compromised (that's where I felt I compromised unacceptably as mentioned above) it's ironic and appropriate because most film people know that world intimately from the point of view of the abused and the abuser.

Agreed. We all do make moral compromises sometimes, though the consequences don't involve someone getting sent to a concentration camp (thank goodness!). That's why I love to see how complex John Smith is (Rufus Sewell's character) and how he deals with these issues of morality and policy within the Nazi system - even when they will directly affect him (I won't say anymore because of spoilers!).

 

[MikeKardec]

It's worth noting that although John Smith is played by a British actor who could easily have been hired to play a GERMAN, the character however, as you can tell by his name, is American. "John Smith," American Everyman. Not a random choice of names.

This TV series is also interesting in the way it shows it's alternate world Nazis as the ultimate in establishment compromiser's, not even a whiff of outlaw skin head "neo Nazis." Thus John Smith.

 

[AmateisGal]

It's worth noting that although John Smith is played by a British actor who could easily have been hired to play a GERMAN, the character however, as you can tell by his name, is American. "John Smith," American Everyman. Not a random choice of names.

This TV series is also interesting in the way it shows it's alternate world Nazis as the ultimate in establishment compromiser's, not even a whiff of outlaw skin head "neo Nazis." Thus John Smith.

Agreed. I think the creator, Frank Spotnizt, really put his finger on this when creating the show. Here's an interview with him:

http://zap2it.com/2015/11/man-in-the-high-castle-humanizing-wwii-axis-powers/

 

[MikeKardec]

Some new thoughts ... and a spoiler alert (personally, spoilers never spoil anything for me and I'll try to be careful, but just in case):

There were some things that seemed quite poorly directed or written at certain moments, especially the whole plot surrounding the character of "The Marshal," which just seemed to be spinning its wheels. The alley ambush on John Smith was also goofy with its ambushers having no sense of tactics. Had they moved for a better angle on Smith after their initial fusillade failed they would have looked less idiotic and he would have had an opportunity to seem more in jeopardy and for it to not look like the man with superhuman accuracy vs. the guys who can't hit the broadside of a barn. I wonder if some of that situation didn't come from a production issue like it getting too late in the day for more angles to be shot, or some other scheduling or cost reason that forced them to keep all his attackers locked up in one area. Production problems cause compromises like that all the time.

This is not just an idle set of complaints, however. It made me wonder about the scene where we finally run into a man in a high castle who just may be The Man in The High Castle. Throughout the earlier parts of the show this man is said to be "frail" or possibly declining and rarely seen. When you do finally see him he is portrayed by a relatively large man of straight posture and firm voice. Yes, he could be in his 70s but he does not seem to be losing it physically or mentally. I hope that was not a mistake, not a miscalculation in the performance or an error forced on the film makers by budget or anything else. We'll be in for a much more interesting ride if it was very much on purpose.

A note on Frank S. When I was made aware of him about 6 or 8 years ago he was living in England. As I watched this show I've often wondered how being an American living in the UK informed the work or if it did at all.

 

[AmateisGal]

Some new thoughts ... and a spoiler alert (personally, spoilers never spoil anything for me and I'll try to be careful, but just in case):

There were some things that seemed quite poorly directed or written at certain moments, especially the whole plot surrounding the character of "The Marshal," which just seemed to be spinning its wheels. The alley ambush on John Smith was also goofy with its ambushers having no sense of tactics. Had they moved for a better angle on Smith after their initial fusillade failed they would have looked less idiotic and he would have had an opportunity to seem more in jeopardy and for it to not look like the man with superhuman accuracy vs. the guys who can't hit the broadside of a barn. I wonder if some of that situation didn't come from a production issue like it getting too late in the day for more angles to be shot, or some other scheduling or cost reason that forced them to keep all his attackers locked up in one area. Production problems cause compromises like that all the time.

This is not just an idle set of complaints, however. It made me wonder about the scene where we finally run into a man in a high castle who just may be The Man in The High Castle. Throughout the earlier parts of the show this man is said to be "frail" or possibly declining and rarely seen. When you do finally see him he is portrayed by a relatively large man of straight posture and firm voice. Yes, he could be in his 70s but he does not seem to be losing it physically or mentally. I hope that was not a mistake, not a miscalculation in the performance or an error forced on the film makers by budget or anything else. We'll be in for a much more interesting ride if it was very much on purpose.

A note on Frank S. When I was made aware of him about 6 or 8 years ago he was living in England. As I watched this show I've often wondered how being an American living in the UK informed the work or if it did at all.

Yes - that scene in the alley wasn't very well done. I was kind of wincing when I watched it because it seemed so amateurish. Also: SPOILERS: I had a problem with Julianna not losing it after seeing her sister killed. She cries at the scene, yes, but then goes home and watches the film. Wouldn't she cry or collapse into a heap and sob? I would think so, especially after how she reacted to almost being killed by the SD man on the bridge in Colorado. She completely lost it there.

So, yeah - a few glitches here and there and things that don't quite jive, but it's pretty rare to see a show that doesn't have its head scratchers.

 

[MikeKardec]

I'm always unhappy with the way movie characters experience grief, often with a great wailing in the moment and then (as you said) nothing. My own experiences and my observation of others suggests reality runs to shock (sometimes with vocal expression) then numbness then long term somewhat occasional and private grieving. As a writer you don't want to slow the story down or turn it off but that means you have to be more inventive. It's also true that you don't want to tie your protagonists down and make them unhappy long term or a bummer to be around. It's hard to deal with. My thought: I wouldn't have made her a sister. I suspect, however, that's one of the hold over's from the novel.

I wrote and produced a cable movie where we eventually had our hero in a fight with machetes with a very tough old man who is very good at it. Hero-guy has never swung one of these unwieldy tools in anger in his life. We found an absolutely devilish looking guy who probably looked 15 years older than he really was and was amazingly agile, a marshal arts aficionado of some ilk, he could do all the close up stuff the stuntmen could not do without being seen. So far so good. Two week before we have to do the scene the director comes to me and says, we only have two days to shoot it (there were other hold ups and another production company pressuring the property owner to get us off the set). I'm new to all this so the director has to explain: To show Devilish Old Guy is really good with a machete will take some very specific film making and stunt work. Since we don't have time to do it right he (the director) is afraid it will look like our Hero-guy (Billy Zane in this case) will be beating up a little old man as opposed to a scary sprightly old man who can kick as high as his own chin.

New Plan: We pay off Devilish Old Guy and hire a 6'5" 350lb Maori dude ... an advertisement for menace who you'd never be tempted to feel couldn't handle himself. The scene looses its nuance and interesting color but the threat to Hero-guy is retained and now we can actually get done on time. I'm not happy but, you know, you can't let perfect be the enemy of good. When I saw the alley shootout I was pretty sure I was seeing either 1) a director who really should never be shooting action and who had no sensitivity to what being in a situation like that is like for either group of people or (vastly more likely since director are often pretty good at that sort of stuff) 2) a production oriented accommodation to conditions that were less than optimal like the example from my life. Basically there was no time to reset the camera and lights so the dufuses on the truck just emptied their guns without trying to flank the guy that got away and then tried to reload without taking cover so he could kill them. I get it. Anything more would probably have taken another day.

 

[AmateisGal]

Wow. I had no idea this was all so complex. Thanks for sharing your story. I sometimes think we don't realize how difficult it is to actually make a film. I don't know that I'd have the first idea where to start.

 

[MikeKardec]

Wow. I had no idea this was all so complex. Thanks for sharing your story. I sometimes think we don't realize how difficult it is to actually make a film. I don't know that I'd have the first idea where to start.

Sure you do because it's the world you live in ... the script. If that's not good you don't stand a chance. The tough part is the sort of thing I was describing when the script has to change to deal with production issues. That's the great art of compromise. The horrible part is when the script starts changing to deal with people who actually don't know what they are doing or when it's all because of someone's ego or fear. I've got a file around here somewhere of FAXs where the studio debated if an actress should use the word "should" or "could" in one line of the script. It's probably 25 FAXs and took the about 4 days for them to decide ... all seemingly without realizing that the actress's performance could be directed to have whatever meaning they wanted with either word. It was just an endless stupid argument with themselves over theory. We kept changing the script and then changing it back depending on what they were saying.

Outsiders never really get it but your show is only as good as the creative executive the studio assigns to you. They are the boss. Actors, producers, directors and especially writers tremble when they mumble. They like to keep their names out of the press and the press likes to throw the names of directors and producers around as if they are making all the decisions but they are not. The truly good thing about TV series is that, unlike features or the now nearly defunct movies of the week, it's the only place where the writers actually have some clout and there is sort of a fusion between the Executive Producers (who are usually the show's top writers) and the studio or network creative executives ... it's not like there is no executive interference but there is a good deal less.

Just to be confusing the Executive Producer position is not the same in features, there it's sort of a catch all. In TV the Executive-Producer/showrunner/head writer is the top guy/gal. In features its the "producer," with no hyphen who is the boss.

Films are nuts (lots of tension but sort of fun), it's a giant game of beat the clock and "the clock" is running at a around $10,000 per hour ... which is just what it costs when you have 100 fairly highly paid people standing around waiting to do the things they do. The financial tension, and the fact that no one really knows if it will all pay off in the end, makes people panicky and miserable. You've got to retain a sense of humor!

 

[navetsea]

it was a great series, amazing set and prop too, and the opening theme was haunting. I liked it, would there be another season or just a one off?

 

[AmateisGal]

it was a great series, amazing set and prop too, and the opening theme was haunting. I liked it, would there be another season or just a one off?

I think it depends on how well this season does as to whether or not they will make a second one, but if early reviews/audience enthusiasm are any indication, I'd say they will definitely make more.

 

[AmateisGal]

Sure you do because it's the world you live in ... the script. If that's not good you don't stand a chance. The tough part is the sort of thing I was describing when the script has to change to deal with production issues. That's the great art of compromise. The horrible part is when the script starts changing to deal with people who actually don't know what they are doing or when it's all because of someone's ego or fear. I've got a file around here somewhere of FAXs where the studio debated if an actress should use the word "should" or "could" in one line of the script. It's probably 25 FAXs and took the about 4 days for them to decide ... all seemingly without realizing that the actress's performance could be directed to have whatever meaning they wanted with either word. It was just an endless stupid argument with themselves over theory. We kept changing the script and then changing it back depending on what they were saying.

Outsiders never really get it but your show is only as good as the creative executive the studio assigns to you. They are the boss. Actors, producers, directors and especially writers tremble when they mumble. They like to keep their names out of the press and the press likes to throw the names of directors and producers around as if they are making all the decisions but they are not. The truly good thing about TV series is that, unlike features or the now nearly defunct movies of the week, it's the only place where the writers actually have some clout and there is sort of a fusion between the Executive Producers (who are usually the show's top writers) and the studio or network creative executives ... it's not like there is no executive interference but there is a good deal less.

Just to be confusing the Executive Producer position is not the same in features, there it's sort of a catch all. In TV the Executive-Producer/showrunner/head writer is the top guy/gal. In features its the "producer," with no hyphen who is the boss.

Films are nuts (lots of tension but sort of fun), it's a giant game of beat the clock and "the clock" is running at a around $10,000 per hour ... which is just what it costs when you have 100 fairly highly paid people standing around waiting to do the things they do. The financial tension, and the fact that no one really knows if it will all pay off in the end, makes people panicky and miserable. You've got to retain a sense of humor!

Yeah, I'd have the story part figured out - it's just all the other stuff.