"The Wire" fans

[Brock]

Download the "The Wire" bible. Early conceptual drafts of what, who, where, and when. Fun reading by David Simon.

http://leethomson.myzen.co.uk/The_Wi...re_-_Bible.pdf

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by BuckinKaeding

Awesome. Did you like season 2? I noticed its last on your list.

Rewatch and see if you like it better, thats the case with most people. I loved it the first time through.

I need to re-watch this show.

Like I said, it's much like UP's simile: its like picking your favorite child.

Originally Posted by Reaper16

It is still literary fiction (in TV form), so Season 5's plot was working fine on an artistic level. I wouldn't say that the serial killer plot was any more unrealistic than the Hamsterdam plot or the entire Omar story arc.

While I found the fake serial killer plot to be somewhat unrealistic, comparatively (I don't see a problem with legalization - in fact that is one of the aspects that made Season 3 rank higher than 2. I loved the thought behind that decision. It made sense. As for Omar, I'm not sure what's unbelievable about his story arc.), it was more that the season seemed contrived. It was paced faster and written almost truncated. They knew they were ending and it's like they decided to race towards it. I LOVE the ideas behind all the arcs in the season, but they felt rushed and almost betrayed because of it. For example, while I understood Gus' plight with Templeton, it seemed emotionally unattatched. I mean I wanted Gus to win but the loss (the girl reporter) I felt was unemotional and a "who gives a shit" moment. I hated the managers of the paper - like you were supposed to - but I felt like they had a side of the story that wasn't completely told.

I'm half-tempted to rank them like so: 4 & 1, 3, 2, 5. But I don't think I can because there's much of 5 to like. And 2 seems like the black sheep in that many of it's storylines don't continue. Sure, the Greek comes back and has a job in the later seasons but aside from that, it didn't offer the overlapping storylines that made most of the seasons great.

Like I said though, it's a tough choice regardless because each has their own merits. I loved the dock setting, for example.

[Buck]

I have a tough time ranking the top 2, but I think I go

4, 1, 2, 5, 3

[Buck]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

D'Angelo: "Where's Wallace, Stringy? Where the **** is Wallace?"

[Ultra Peanut]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

I'm half-tempted to rank them like so: 4 & 1, 3, 2, 5. But I don't think I can because there's much of 5 to like. And 2 seems like the black sheep in that many of it's storylines don't continue. Sure, the Greek comes back and has a job in the later seasons but aside from that, it didn't offer the overlapping storylines that made most of the seasons great.

Like I said though, it's a tough choice regardless because each has their own merits. I loved the dock setting, for example.

I find such exercises unnecessarily difficult and ultimately pointless.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Like I said, it's much like UP's simile: its like picking your favorite child.



While I found the fake serial killer plot to be somewhat unrealistic, comparatively (I don't see a problem with legalization - in fact that is one of the aspects that made Season 3 rank higher than 2. I loved the thought behind that decision. It made sense. As for Omar, I'm not sure what's unbelievable about his story arc.), it was more that the season seemed contrived. It was paced faster and written almost truncated. They knew they were ending and it's like they decided to race towards it. I LOVE the ideas behind all the arcs in the season, but they felt rushed and almost betrayed because of it. For example, while I understood Gus' plight with Templeton, it seemed emotionally unattatched. I mean I wanted Gus to win but the loss (the girl reporter) I felt was unemotional and a "who gives a shit" moment. I hated the managers of the paper - like you were supposed to - but I felt like they had a side of the story that wasn't completely told.

I'm half-tempted to rank them like so: 4 & 1, 3, 2, 5. But I don't think I can because there's much of 5 to like. And 2 seems like the black sheep in that many of it's storylines don't continue. Sure, the Greek comes back and has a job in the later seasons but aside from that, it didn't offer the overlapping storylines that made most of the seasons great.

Like I said though, it's a tough choice regardless because each has their own merits. I loved the dock setting, for example.

1.) It would be very difficult to set up a Hamsterdam area for a number of weeks and not have anyone catch on, in "real life" that is. Just about as hard as it would be to fake some murders. As for Omar... stick up men don't do the superhuman shit that he does, nor do they live for nearly as long as Omar did. Not the ones that target the wolves at night like Omar did, anyway.

2.) Odd that you say the media plot of season 5 was emotionally unattached, as it was the most personal of plots for David Simon. I understand the criticism that the editors were not portrayed as fully as other characters, but they aren't the first ones. Characters like Andy Krawchek or Commish Valcheck are similarly one-note. It doesn't serve the story to reveal more about them, and I would argue that we don't need to know. We can easily extrapolate what the motivations of the editors might be; what "their side" would be.

3.) It didn't serve the story to continue following the dock workers. Nothing changed about their situation. All the necessary follow-up was found in the season 5 cameos: Nick Sobatka complaining about the same ol, same ol with riverfront development & about the robots taking away even more jobs, and also Johnny Fifty's cameo as one of the homeless under the bridge that McNulty saw. Having Vondas and The Greek pop up a few times was conducive to the story because they were the connect. But it would have done nothing to further the messages of the show to continue following the dock workers just to follow them. Simon & Burns said what they wanted to say.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by BuckinKaeding

I have a tough time ranking the top 2, but I think I go

4, 1, 2, 5, 3

Why no love for 3?

Originally Posted by Ultra Peanut

I find such exercises unnecessarily difficult and ultimately pointless.

Yep.




By the way, I gotta say one of the most fascinating character rises for me was Bodie. Hated his guts first season because of what he did. But then I was really sad to see him go.

I still think Wallace may have been the death that most got to me.

[Buck]

BODIE IS THE SHEEEEEEEEEEEIT

[KCUnited]

Its not my favorite, but I'm partial to season 2 as my girlfriend works in transportation and deals in ocean containers on dailey basis. It was an excellent insight into the unions as well.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

1.) It would be very difficult to set up a Hamsterdam area for a number of weeks and not have anyone catch on, in "real life" that is. Just about as hard as it would be to fake some murders. As for Omar... stick up men don't do the superhuman shit that he does, nor do they live for nearly as long as Omar did. Not the ones that target the wolves at night like Omar did, anyway.

Okay, I'll grant you that aspect of it being unrealistic.

FYI, the 4 story jump was actually 2 stories less than the event it was based on. True event, btw.

2.) Odd that you say the media plot of season 5 was emotionally unattached, as it was the most personal of plots for David Simon. I understand the criticism that the editors were not portrayed as fully as other characters, but they aren't the first ones. Characters like Andy Krawchek or Commish Valcheck are similarly one-note. It doesn't serve the story to reveal more about them, and I would argue that we don't need to know. We can easily extrapolate what the motivations of the editors might be; what "their side" would be.

Well, I don't think I'd compare with Valcheck. While he provided the catalyst for Season 2, he wasn't integral to it. The editors were in this season. I completely understand their side and the symbolism when they get their Pulitzer. I just felt the whole arc was underdeveloped. Bubble's Reporter was an awesome line but felt disconnected from the whole newspaper line. And that's a shame. I never really got Gus' real motivations for wanting him to go do this. Other than the obvious, that's what journalism is when compared with Scott.

3.) It didn't serve the story to continue following the dock workers. Nothing changed about their situation. All the necessary follow-up was found in the season 5 cameos: Nick Sobatka complaining about the same ol, same ol with riverfront development & about the robots taking away even more jobs, and also Johnny Fifty's cameo as one of the homeless under the bridge that McNulty saw. Having Vondas and The Greek pop up a few times was conducive to the story because they were the connect. But it would have done nothing to further the messages of the show to continue following the dock workers just to follow them. Simon & Burns said what they wanted to say.

Well, yes, but that's why I consider it to bee the black sheep when looking at the whole series. It's the only season that's virtually entirely self-contained. Granted, they all are to some extent, but it's the only one that really doesn't have much throughout the rest.

I loved Nick Sobatka's cameo. I also loved the Law and Order guy at the bar. Another small tidbit I liked (Can't remember what season it was in) was Rolles at the gay bar. And that's an example of something that didn't need more explanation. Something better left unsaid or unexpanded upon.

[KCUnited]

Season 2 was also my favorite version of Way Down in the Hole.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Season 2 was also my favorite version of Way Down in the Hole.

If I had to rate those I'd go:

5, 3, 2, 4, 1

[Reaper16]

City folk out there: read the metro/local section of your paper. It will depress the shit out of you how often the stories of The Wire repeat themselves in real life. I was reading a story yesterday about the ultra-miserable Kansas City school district. They have a new superintendent, hired with much fanfare, and this story was about his plans in place that will unify the curriculum and boost standardized test scores by six percent or more. I punched the paper away from me in disgust.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

City folk out there: read the metro/local section of your paper. It will depress the shit out of you how often the stories of The Wire repeat themselves in real life. I was reading a story yesterday about the ultra-miserable Kansas City school district. They have a new superintendent, hired with much fanfare, and this story was about his plans in place that will unify the curriculum and boost standardized test scores by six percent or more. I punched the paper away from me in disgust.

Reminding me of another awesome tidbit: The Kansas City Star shout out. Of all the papers.....

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Well, I don't think I'd compare with Valcheck. While he provided the catalyst for Season 2, he wasn't integral to it. The editors were in this season. I completely understand their side and the symbolism when they get their Pulitzer. I just felt the whole arc was underdeveloped. Bubble's Reporter was an awesome line but felt disconnected from the whole newspaper line. And that's a shame. I never really got Gus' real motivations for wanting him to go do this. Other than the obvious, that's what journalism is when compared with Scott.

The season was bookended by two examples of quality journalism: the adversarial piece about the council president & the quid pro quo, and the narrative piece about Bubbles. There were plenty of good people in that newsroom that made good content despite the out-of-town ownership mucking things up. Those two stories didn't feel disconnected to me. Gus' motivation for wanting the Bubbles story was simply being a good editor and having a good idea of what would make a quality story.

I'm not sure what you are wanting to be further developed. You might just be sad that the show is over, heh.

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Well, yes, but that's why I consider it to bee the black sheep when looking at the whole series. It's the only season that's virtually entirely self-contained. Granted, they all are to some extent, but it's the only one that really doesn't have much throughout the rest.

I loved Nick Sobatka's cameo. I also loved the Law and Order guy at the bar. Another small tidbit I liked (Can't remember what season it was in) was Rolles at the gay bar. And that's an example of something that didn't need more explanation. Something better left unsaid or unexpanded upon.

Season 2 wasn't entirely self-contained. We didn't revisit the docks, yeah. But we didn't revisit the schools from season 4 outside of a cameo or two. I don't see the difference.

[KCUnited]

Plus Nick Sabatka's girlfriend had them tittay's!!!