quote:

Originally posted by philosopherEric:
Without getting tied into this ongoing argument (I'm with bob that it's just entertainment, and I don't get too emotionally involved with fictional characters), I should point out that Dennis Haysbert (who played President Palmer) lodged a similar complaint in recent interviews. His complaint was about killing off beloved characters, although his issue was that, by killing Palmer, you've killed off one of the strongest and most honorable black characters on TV. The implication was, I think, a racial one. But I think the killing of David Palmer had everything to do with the imaginary world of 24 and nothing to do with race.

Killing off Palmer was a good move on the writers' part, simply because it was incredibly lame to keep bringing him back after he was no longer president. When he popped up last season as Logan's special advisor for the terrorist threat, it was one of the biggest eye-rolling moments on the show.

Haha, TV affirmative action...gotta love it.

So um, back to the show. I'm happy they finally brought Wayne back into the plot line. I was wondering when he was going to show up again. I guess the biggest, and most obvious, point of discussion would have to be Audrey's alleged involvement. I totally thought Audrey was a mole last year. This year, I don't think so. Does anyone know if William Devane is scheduled to appear again, because I think that could be one way they could spin it. Either way, I don't believe it will get to the point where Jack has to shoot her in the leg.

quote:

Originally posted by PRG:
So um, back to the show. I'm happy they finally brought Wayne back into the plot line. I was wondering when he was going to show up again. I guess the biggest, and most obvious, point of discussion would have to be Audrey's alleged involvement. I totally thought Audrey was a mole last year. This year, I don't think so. Does anyone know if William Devane is scheduled to appear again, because I think that could be one way they could spin it. Either way, I don't believe it will get to the point where Jack has to shoot her in the leg.

I think the Audrey thing is a red herring, at least for the time being. They may rule her out as a mole for now, only to find that she really is a mole in the end. But they sort of already did that with Nina in the first season, so it would be sort of lame to do that again.

My own personal theory is that Chloe's a mole. She was one of the few people that knew Jack was alive, and she's the only one of them still alive. If that did turn out to be the big twist, it would be incredibly awesome.

Yeah, but Robocop seemed to know what was going on too, and I still feel there's something "off" about the Palmers.

That's a good point, that you don't want to go too far in either extreme.

If the body count is too high, you stop caring. If the body count is too low, the 'bubble of protection' around the main characters seems too obvious and the tension is deflated.

I do sometimes get emotionally involved in fictional characters, but only while I'm watching the show. A lot of the fun of fiction for me is temporarily immersing yourself in a fictional world and suspending disbelief for a moment that it's all real. But, TV goes off, you're back in the real world, it's just a TV show and they're just fictional characters.

I don't think race needs to get dragged into this. Killing off Palmer I think was a strictly ratings move because he no longer had a major role in the story. Ratings are colorblind.

I missed Monday's episode . I need a new VCR.

quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:
My own personal theory is that Chloe's a mole. She was one of the few people that knew Jack was alive, and she's the only one of them still alive. If that did turn out to be the big twist, it would be incredibly awesome.

I think I would be sad if she was the mole. I mean, who doesn't love Chloe? I also think it would be tough to make it believeable. Chloe has been such a major character the last few seasons that it would be difficult to all of a sudden spring something like that. I'm not saying they can't, just that it would really be coming out of nowhere in my opinion.

I don't know about those Ed Norton rumors, but I think they have to be considered plausible.

Why?

Well, let's put it this way. There aren't very many actors who could carry a show like 24 as well as Kiefer Sutherland. Ed Norton is one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobthespirit:
There aren't very many actors who could carry a show like 24 as well as Kiefer Sutherland. Ed Norton is one of them.

I was thinking the exact same thing when I read that.

Ed Norton rumors? explain. I have always thought Ed Norton was fairly overrated as an actor, and I never seem to like his movies as much as my testosterone-infused friends do (American History X, Rounders, Fight Club), but I guess I could watch him in a TV show.

quote:

Originally posted by paxsoprano:
Ed Norton rumors? explain. I have always thought Ed Norton was fairly overrated as an actor, and I never seem to like his movies as much as my testosterone-infused friends do (American History X, Rounders, Fight Club), but I guess I could watch him in a TV show.

Apparently, Norton's name appeared on the 24 part of the IMDB site for the 2006-2007 season. The folks at 24 have refuted those rumors thus:

http://www.24weblog.com/

I like Norton alot in The Italian Job, Am History X, and Fight Club. I agree with Bob that he does have the charisma to carry a show like 24 where, honestly, you need a rock solid lead because the rest of the cast is, at best, replaceable at the drop of a hat. Consider the number of main players who have been killed over five season: Teri Bauer, Nina Meyers, Tony and Michelle, Edgar Styles, David Palmer, and so on. You need an "A" lister to be the focal point, and Norton could do it, I think.

Kiefer's an executive producer on 24. I wonder if he would really LEAVE the show, or simply take a supporting role...

quote:

Originally posted by philosopherEric:
You need an "A" lister to be the focal point, and Norton could do it, I think.

Like I said above, I believe Norton could definitely carry the show, but it's kind of funny to think that now 24 needs an "A" list actor. I mean, can anyone really remember what Keifer Sutherland was doing right before 24? Not only has he resurrected his career, but turned the role of Jack Bauer into a choice one.

quote:

Originally posted by PRG:
Like I said above, I believe Norton could definitely carry the show, but it's kind of funny to think that now 24 needs an "A" list actor. I mean, can anyone really remember what Keifer Sutherland was doing right before 24? Not only has he resurrected his career, but turned the role of Jack Bauer into a choice one.

Yeah, but he was an A-list actor at one time. Wasn't he married to, or at least dating Julia Roberts at one point? That's about as A-list as you can get.

quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:

quote:

Originally posted by PRG:
Like I said above, I believe Norton could definitely carry the show, but it's kind of funny to think that now 24 needs an "A" list actor. I mean, can anyone really remember what Keifer Sutherland was doing right before 24? Not only has he resurrected his career, but turned the role of Jack Bauer into a choice one.

Yeah, but he was an A-list actor at one time. Wasn't he married to, or at least dating Julia Roberts at one point? That's about as A-list as you can get.

I don't think I would have ever considered him A-list. The closest I think he came was his run of films in the late 80's. And I don't think you can be A-list by association. After all, I don't consider Julia Robert's current husband A-list. Whatev. Bottom line, he's been great on 24.

I think Kiefer was on the B list (maybe even C?) when 24 started. It became a real "back door" hit...there were critical raves about it the first season but not high hopes for good ratings. But the show gets good enough ratings now and has high enough of a profile that to replace Kiefer would require someone reasonably big, presumably an A-lister. I haven't seen Kiefer carry his 24 success to the big screen though...the only thing I've seen him in recently was as the sniper in "Phone Booth".

quote:

Originally posted by philosopherEric:
I haven't seen Kiefer carry his 24 success to the big screen though...the only thing I've seen him in recently was as the sniper in "Phone Booth".

The only other thing I saw him in was that movie Taking Lives. Like his father, he also does a lot of voiceover work in commercials. I think it will be interesting to see what kind of projects he does after 24. Since he had such a low profile before the show, I think most people have come to associate him with Jack Bauer.

Wow Audrey was the first major twist of the season and easily the largest since Nina. Though she's possibly being framed, since its almost a repeat of Nina's circumstances, and for her to actually be a terrorist would just be overdoing it I believe. So far this season definitely surpasses the 4th.

I first knew Sutherland from his small role in Fire Walk With Me.

But then again, I'm among those pissed Twin Peaks never got a proper ending.

David Lynch: "Damn network bastards cancelling our series. Ooh, know what would be funny? Let's put four or five characters on the brink of death and put the biggest twist in the entire series right in the lsat scene! That'll piss people off!"

Anyway, he's an A-lister now. The question is, whether he can get a really great action flick and really cement that status.

I wouldn't be surprised if Audrey Haines was a collaberator, but...well, 24 likes to do things you don't expect. I'm not sure they would have the exact same thing happen to a major character that happened to another one. But...well, how about this? What if the real collaberator told her her name was Audrey Raines? Heck, isn't Audrey smart enough NOT to use her real name when collaberating with terrorists?

If the terrorist attacks were successful, the person must have known that what's her name would eventually either get caught or get killed. If she got caught, she would probably talk in exchange for immunity. Suppose she mentioned the name of somebody working in a high profile counter terrorist unit? That person would become the scapegoat. Maybe she would eventually be exhonorated and proven innocent, and maybe not. Either way, this gives the collaberator time to escape while the finger is pointed at somebody else.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobthespirit:
Anyway, he's an A-lister now. The question is, whether he can get a really great action flick and really cement that status.

I just saw a trailer for a new movie called The Sentinel where he plays a Secret Service Agent or something. He plays opposite Michael Douglas. We'll see.
I agree with you about the whole name change thing. It seems like she'd be smart enough not to use it. But then again, maybe she had to use her name so the terrorists would know it's credible information. I still think she's not involved, but you never know...