255 replies to this topic

[clinkeroo]

It is just about that time again, folks. Season four will be underway in a few days, and after the gut-renching at the end of last season, it is anyone's guess where things are going to go.

Someone "spoiled" the events at the end of season three for me, so I waited a few months to watch it. Sad to watch the events unfold, but it was amazingly well done. Now, I'm hungry for more, and I'll have the old bit torrent ready to go for the night of the 11th.

[Qwerty]

Don't see anything about the US release of season three.

[marktmurphy]

Import it. It's out here.

And the first story is a two-parter, spooks fans. Be sure to tune in on Monday and Tuesday for it.

[Qwerty]

Import it. It's out here.

I'd certainly like to, but because it's available in the UK, it's doubtful the Region 2 formatting will be compatible with my DVD player.

Hopefully the US release will come soon.

[spynovelfan]

Anyone watch the first two-parter on BBC One this week? Thought it was very good - much better pacing. But mainly, I thought Rupert Penry-Jones, playing Adam Carter (precisely the same character as Tom Quinn, minus the angst) was very very Bondian. Blond, but Bondian.

Sign the guy now, before he signs to play the Green Lantern or someone.

[clinkeroo]

Yes, very well done. Nice to see an updated theme segment without Tom & Company. They kept the themes in line, kept the strong focus on character, very smooth transition, and very well edited. Not to mention the lass from Love Actually , Martine McCutcheon.

Penry-Jones would be great as Fleming's Bond, but I don't think we're going to see that on the screen for some time to come. Eon will draft someone light and fluffy who looks good in a tux as well as a clown suit.

[Lazenby880]

The two-parter was very well executed, well-paced, quite complex, and further proof that Spooks does not rely on the 'old guard' of Tom, Zoe et al (after that shaky episode in season three with that codswallop about a rock star's baby). Juliet, bitch on ice and strangely arousing, is a great character to take over Quince's role and I enjoyed the political side-dealing between herself and Harry, which is of course a running theme throughout Spooks and one of the reasons I marvel at it so. Adam Carter, who is I agree pretty much Tom mark two, is quite 'Bondian'; possibly, one might suggest, moreso than some cinematic incarnations of the James Bond character in certain films. And yes Rupert Penry-Jones would be a stellar choice for OO7.

My only problem with the two-parter was that, probably as a result of the actual terrorist attack on July 7th, the terrorists were more reminiscent of grubby lefty students than mass-murderers. Their barmy justification, that humans will destroy the earth and so on, is riddled with inconsistency - although I do not doubt that some idiots out there do share their beliefs and said inconsistencies were highlighted by the programme.

Most of all I liked the end bit where Adam puts on the radio to hear someone criticising MI5 for not having averted the first terrorist attack, completely unaware of the operation and successful averting of further attacks. There is a parallel to be drawn there for those who insist on criticising the security services in real life.

I also last night watched the next episode on BBC Three about the team trying to stop a BNP-style party winning a seat at a by-election. Another great episode though I was disappointed (and offended) by the depiction of a major political party.

Spooks: The best of British televisual programming.

Edited by Lazenby880, 16 September 2005 - 02:29 PM.

[spynovelfan]

Adam Carter, who is I agree pretty much Tom mark two, is quite 'Bondian'; possibly, one might suggest, moreso than some cinematic incarnations of the James Bond character in certain films. And yes Rupert Penry-Jones would be a stellar choice for OO7.

I tihnk most of the dialogue in it could have been Tom's. There's not so much angst, and he's got a wife so none of that fake name stress stuff - he's more straightforward. But I could easily see McFadyen doing the scene holding the guy over the edge and then explaining it all to Martine McCutcheon.

My only problem with the two-parter was that, probably as a result of the actual terrorist attack on July 7th, the terrorists were more reminiscent of grubby lefty students than mass-murderers. Their barmy justification, that humans will destroy the earth and so on, is riddled with inconsistency - although I do not doubt that some idiots out there do share their beliefs and said inconsistencies were highlighted by the programme.

Yes - surely it would be a suicide cult if that's how they felt? Also seemed unlikely the toerag would confirm he talked online to the Prof when his codeword is his online handle.

Most of all I liked the end bit where Adam puts on the radio to hear someone criticising MI5 for not having averted the first terrorist attack, completely unaware of the operation and successful averting of further attacks. There is a parallel to be drawn there for those who insist on criticising the security services in real life.

Well, yeah! A parallel to be drawn, of course. It was quite clever and neat, but I'm afraid I didn't like that bit. Smacked, frankly, of Soviet propaganda. During the Cold War, Russian TV was littered with spy shows and films, and they all made this very point. I think it's refreshing to see a show that doesn't suggest the security services are stupid and/or evil for a change, but I do think SPOOKS is sometimes a little too much like a recruitment ad for MI5. Imagine what you'd think if you saw something similar on China's state TV.

I also last night watched the next episode on BBC Three about the team trying to stop a BNP-style party winning a seat at a by-election. Another great episode though I was disappointed (and offended) by the depiction of a major political party.

Presumably you don't mean the BNP?

[Lazenby880]

[quote name='spynovelfan' date='16 September 2005 - 14:41']Well, yeah!

Edited by Lazenby880, 16 September 2005 - 11:08 PM.

[clinkeroo]

I disagree here (and am somewhat puzzled with your point about the Soviets). I take it you are trying to say that the Soviet spy shows were actively discouraging its citizens from questioning the security services (which I doubt many of them would do in the first place) and that the point being made in Spooks reminded you of them? It was an interesting message, in a country where we all have the right to express our opinions on MI5 and other organisations. and served as a timely reminder to those who are quick to judge when they have no inkling of the work our security services do on our behalf or the attacks that have been averted. And quite frankly, I have had enough of that criticism. That is why I like the point that was made (and I have just realised how convoluted I have been in making mine).

Not that convoluted; I thought it was very well stated, and although I'm from the other side of the pond, I agree wholeheartedly. Spooks, although brilliant in its characters and pacing, is often very negative in its portrayal of the British government, and almost without exception, completely negative when it comes to its cliched and simplistic approach toward American politics and government. In political respects, the show is much more a mirror of the BBC's bias than a recruitment tool.

If someone in China submitted a script that was even minutely critical of the establishment, such as Spooks, they wouldn't just find themselves unemployeed, they would find themselves jailed, without charges, without communication with the outside world, and without hope.

[Lazenby880]

Spooks, although brilliant in its characters and pacing, is often very negative in its portrayal of the British government, and almost without exception, completely negative when it comes to its cliched and simplistic approach toward American politics and government.  In political respects, the show is much more a mirror of the BBC's bias than a recruitment tool.

Agree wholeheartedly clink. The only consistent downfall of Spooks is its portrayal of the United States government and intelligence officials, most of whom seem to be arrogant, condescending, presumptious gun-toting men who have little understanding of the complex world of espionage. As you say such a naive characterisation is cliched, and we saw another example of it on this week's episodes, even though I did enjoy Harry's abrupt change of tone when the Americans from Grosvener Square entered the room. I do not mind the depiction of the British government as much, particularly as the message is often that all politicians have an agenda to pedal. That said, Harry's comments about the fictional Home Secretary showed a degree of nuance, being one of the 'very few' decent and honest politicians.

Despite being made by a company independent of the BBC, the bias of the programme makers and writers does reflect that (state-funded) organisation's (inappropriate) political persuasion.

Spooks is, nevertheless, one of my favourite television programmes.

[clinkeroo]

Doesn't really bother me that much. Every show needs its antagonists, and there are many Westerners, and Americans in particular, who enjoy seeing themselves portrayed in this light. The first season, the relationship between Tom and the American agent (was her name Christine?) was such blunt foiling with that "special relationship" between our two countries that I felt as if I were in a Python skit (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean, know what I mean?).

Great, great stuff. I don't even see the above points as being that critical of the show; it is simply the field which the producers, writers, etc. play upon. There are so many quality aspects of the production, that they make it very easy to look beyond such concerns. I've just finished downloading episode three, and am salivating at the chance to find a spare hour to watch it.

Edited by clinkeroo, 18 September 2005 - 08:26 AM.

[spynovelfan]

Okay, Lazenby880 and Clinkeroo, my knuckles are well and truly rapped! Sorry sorry sorry, all points taken. I suppose this particular two-parter veered slightly the other way for me, and I did find that ending a bit 'Look, don't criticise our great men of the Security Services, people - look at all the work they do you don't know about.' Clever, yeah, but it grated a touch.

But you can't have it all ways. Easy to say they're anti-MI5 oneminute, and pro the next - pretty hard to be neutral all the time. And as for the Americans, they did have the CIA guy say 'Contrary to popular belief, we're not responsible for all the problems in the world.' Admittedly, he turned out to be the villain, but still...

Was it just me, or was the countdown with the bomb extremely suspenseful and a little bit moving? Or am I getting a bit sentimental in my old age? But compare to recent Bond films, where you know he's going to stop it. Very little suspense. After Danny being killed off, were we really *sure* Adam would survive? I wasn't. In hindsight, obviously, yeah, they were never going to be so daft as to kill yet another lead character... but it was a brilliantly done trick, and you did (or I did) actually feel sweaty and anxious and think the two were really going to die.

I think that double-parter was, in some ways, more like a Bond film than the last couple of Bond films: cleverer and more entertaining, too.

I don't see Penry-Jones as Fleming's Bond at all, though. I think he's pretty much straight down the line Eon Bond, and would be able to do it very well and very commercially and would be absolutely perfect for CR. Seems unlikely to happen, but there you go - I think it's a no-brainer. Moore was the Saint on TV, known in the UK and US. Brosnan was Steel, ditto. Penry-Jones is Carter. Right age, look, profile, nationality, class, height, can act, looks good in a suit... What's not to cast?

Sorry for my ratty self. I am an awkward argumentative little bugger sometimes, I know.

[Bond Bombshell]

I'm enjoying the current series of Spooks more than I've enjoyed Bond in recent years. Bond could certainly learn a lesson from its combination of intelligent plot lines and moments of genuine excitement and tension. Also, why can't Eon find a Bond candidate with the obvious merits of Rupert Penry-Jones?

Despite its claims of impartiality, I agree with posters in this thread that the BBC's anti-American bias is as plain as the nose on your face. Not sure that this is true of Spooks though. True, Americans are portrayed negatively and stereotypically gung-ho, but my impression is that in Spooks nobody escapes unscathed, including the British establishment. Interestingly, it has also caught some flack from the liberal brigade for its depiction of Muslim extremists. Indeed, one episode from series two on this subject was one of the most complained about programmes of the year! I guess you can't win when dealing with contemporary and contentious issues. I have to say though, that I also did not like the idea that MPs from a mainstream party would cross over to a racist party. Surely this has never actually happened in British politics.

[spynovelfan]

Well, Oswald Mosley!

I saw last night's episode. Was I the only one wondering why the hell they sent in the blond and very unArab looking Adam Carter in to impersonate a Syrian when they have an Asian on the team? Seemed pretty bizarre - and the whole 'Yeah, he's Circassian' thing highly implausible.

Great stuff otherwise, though.

[clinkeroo]

Well, Oswald Mosley!

I saw last night's episode. Was I the only one wondering why the hell they sent in the blond and very unArab looking Adam Carter in to impersonate a Syrian when they have an Asian on the team? Seemed pretty bizarre - and the whole 'Yeah, he's Circassian' thing highly implausible.

Great stuff otherwise, though.

Yeah, first or second season they most likely would have brought in an outside character. Can't entirely blame them though for attempting to give Penry-Jones the spotlight and establishing his character a little more, but the Lawrence of Arabia stuff was way over the top . I'm going to watch episode five this afternoon , can't wait.

[spynovelfan]

Can't entirely blame them though for attempting to give Penry-Jones the spotlight and establishing his character a little more, but the Lawrence of Arabia stuff was way over the top  .

Yes, that was clearly the reason for it, but I wish they had taken more than 25 seconds to do the whole thing, from him coming up with the idea to announcing that it would easily work, he'd pretend to be a Cricassian, etc. I mean, really!

A Circassian:


Adam Carter:


Didn't he also say 'D E Lawrence' instead of 'T E Lawrence' or did I imagine that? Anyway, he said it in a very 'I'm the scriptwriter and I'm making a smug reference to Lawrence of Arabia' way. They could at least have had five frames of him being disguised a bit or something. The English bloke in the truck was totally suspicious of this 'White Arab' but what did he do? Just hit him and then walked off, muttering his unacted on suspicions. Quite a lazy way of getting round it! Just found that whole thing very weak. But the terrorist character was very good. It does kind of knock the spots off the last few Bond films. And obligatory final note:

Sign Penry-Jones for Bond now!

[Roebuck]

I'm enjoying the current series of Spooks more than I've enjoyed Bond in recent years. Bond could certainly learn a lesson from its combination of intelligent plot lines and moments of genuine excitement and tension.

Thought the crossbow scene near the end of episode three had a touch of Fleming about it. Goes to show that a good action sequence doesn't have to be an expensive one.

And I like the toys that Colin and Malcolm have been coming up with in the last couple of series.

[clinkeroo]

Just finished episode seven of the fourth season. Without dropping too many spoilers...OMFG... The show has not lost its edge one bit.

[Bond Bombshell]

Just finished episode seven of the fourth season.  Without dropping too many spoilers...OMFG...  The show has not lost its edge one bit.

Agreed. I don't understand some fans who think that the show has gone downhill since the departure of the original cast. IMO this season has maintained the quality and has delivered some of the most tense, gut wrenching scenarios yet. I dread to think what's in store in the finale, if I can bear to watch.

Now we know that blond bonds are acceptable to Eon, what a shame that Rupert Penry-Jones was overlooked!

[Dunph]

I think Season three dropped the ball a bit in places with its propensity for ridiculous storylines, but I've yet to see a bad episode in this series of Spooks. The team is well cemented, even the newcomer (Jo Portman) has slid almost effortlessly into the cast. There is exactly the right balance of fantasy and realism for me and enough tension to ensure I dont need to buy nail clippers until at least December.

After Season Three I doubted the longevity of Spooks: I missed McFadyen too much and some episodes contained plotholes as big as a clown's pocket, but if this is the quality of episodes and series to come then I shall be more than satisfied.

[marktmurphy]

SPOILERS for Season 4

I think it has definitely gone downhill, meself. Were we supposed to care about Fiona this week? Surely the fact that she's only had anything to do in one episode this series slightly dented her importance? I just don't care, I'm afraid. It has improved from the first few episodes this year, but it's nowhere near as good as Series 1/2.

[Roebuck]

SPOILERS for Season 4

I think it has definitely gone downhill, meself. Were we supposed to care about Fiona this week?

As a character, Fiona never really meshed for me and I can't make up my mind of it was the writing or the actress that wasn't working out. My wife had her pegged for as this seasons sacrificial lamb pretty much by episode two. I appreciate Spooks isn't meant to be a realistic depiction of how MI5 goes about it's business, but it's hard to imagine anyone as handless as Fi ever being getting through basic training.

[Bond Bombshell]

I agree that Fiona wasn't that prominent or popular a character for her to be missed that much. However, IMO its the effect on the usually cool and controlled Adam that provides the emotional impact, rather than the loss of Fiona. These events have the potential to bring more depth to his character and change his working relationships. Is it just me, or does there seem to be a mutual attraction between him and Jo? I've already seen episode eight and thought that the fallout was handled superbly.

As a sidenote, in case anyone doesn't know, Fiona hasn't featured much and was written out because the actress was pregnant and wanted to leave.

[marktmurphy]

I agree that Fiona wasn't that prominent or popular a character for her to be missed that much. However, IMO its the effect on the usually cool and controlled Adam that provides the emotional impact, rather than the loss of Fiona.

I think you're absolutely right about that.

As a sidenote, in case anyone doesn't know, Fiona hasn't featured much and was written out because the actress was pregnant and wanted to leave.

Yes, I had heard that (as I was so curious previous to this episode as to why she hadn't appeared)- it's just that to play an episode as if the audience is supposed to care about a character doesn't feel right: we should only have been interested because Adam cares about her and we care about him- i.e. do it from his POV.

[Lazenby880]

Last week's episode was, in my opinion, one of the best of the series. While I do accept that Fiona was not a character whose death would make too much of an emotional impact on the viewer, the inspired way in which the scene was shot certainly would. The way the sunlight hit the camera, Fiona's last words and - as has been mentioned - the normally detatched Carter's breaking down all made for a highly poignant scene. It should also be quite interesting to see how Adam deals with the loss of his wife, from the clip at the end of Thursday's programme it seems not very well.

Perfectly plotted and executed episode and with the detail of Fiona's backstory she became a far more interesting character. Moreover, like Bond Bombshell I can see Adam and Jo being set up for a relationship; the two shared some obvious chemistry when she first started. And yes, one does wonder whether the Bond producers have been watching this series to see what genuine suspense and good action scenes look like; as well as wondering whether David Arnold has been taking note of how effectively a score can accentuate the impact of said scenes. Unlikely, but one can hope.

[Dunph]

Discuss the series four cliffhanger in this rather convenient thread:

http://debrief.comma...showtopic=26940

Word to your mothers.

[Qwerty]

http://debrief.comma...showtopic=28013

[Qwerty]

http://debrief.comma...showtopic=28013

[clinkeroo]

I have the first episode of season five downloading right now. Geeked as always, and looking forward to a little resolution.