Reason Writers Watching TV: Peter Suderman on Homeland in The Washington Times

Reason Associate Editor compares Showtime's new war-on-terror procedural, Homeland, with its predecessor, 24, in today's Washington Times: 

Osama bin Laden is dead. But TV's war on terrorism — long identified with "24" — didn't die with him. Instead, it has changed with the times, reflecting a decade-long shift in the public mood about the costs and consequences of how America pursues terrorists. The vehicle for this evolution is Showtime's "Homeland."

Like "24," the new series is a terrorism thriller that chronicles a high-stakes hunt for an elusive terrorist mastermind suspected to be planning some sort of attack. But where "24" captured the Bush-era zeal for revenge with a combination of vicarious violent thrills and absolute moral certainty, "Homeland" offers a far less enthusiastic, far more ambiguous picture of an uncertain campaign against an uncertain enemy — and a security infrastructure that is often as invasive as it is effective.

Whole thing here. 

Reason on 24 here, here, and here. 

Comments

[Almanian]

"Reason Writers Watching TV"

You guys taking applications for these jobs? Cause this is RIGHT in my wheelhouse!

I think my knowledge, skills and experience are a good fit for your needs. I appreciate the opportunity to further discuss how employing my talents at Reason could work to our mutual benefit in achieving our goals.

[T]

a security infrastructure that is often as invasive as it is effective.

Let's make this reflect reality a bit better. Try: a security infrastructure that is more invasive than it is effective. Thx.

[John]

There is only one important thing about Homeland. Morena Baccarin has gotten her kit off on several episodes. Does anything else really matter?

[The Implacable Mr. Dean]

Well, goddam, why didn't you say so?

Now, if we get Claire Danes to peel off, we'd have a hit on our hands.

[Mike G]

Morena Baccarin versus Jewel Staite-- the Ginger vs. Mary Ann of our time. (I pick Gina Torres.)

That said, there was plenty of ambiguity about Bush-era tactics (real or imagined) in later seasons of 24, confused and poorly plotted as they often were.

[John]

I wouldn't kick Staite out of bed. But I would have to go with Baccarin in a rout. Baccarin is just amazing. And Torres does nothing for me.

[Alan Vanneman]

I'd call this a Washington Times friendly review. There's no mention of 24's enthusiastic endorsement of torture, nor does the new show suggest that 99% of the "War on Terror" is simply bureaucratic empire building that diminishes rather than enhances American freedom. I thought you Reason guys cared about that shit.

[Audrey the Liberal]

"I'd call this a Washington Times friendly review. There's no mention of 24's enthusiastic endorsement of torture, nor does the new show suggest that 99% of the "War on Terror" is simply bureaucratic empire building that diminishes rather than enhances American freedom. I thought you Reason guys cared about that shit." Pointing these things out might make the Hit & Republicans cry, and we can't have that now.

[John]

What are you talking about? You apparently don't read much here do you?

And it is a good thing that we elected Obama so we could stop growing that bureaucratic empire.

Did it make you cry when Obama didn't even leave you cab fair the next morning?