The Sopranos Vs. The Wire

I was thinking about starting a thread about people who are OMG FRONTING with the Wire

― @kanyewest (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, May 15, 2009 12:35 PM (4 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

whiney come on. this is worse than u in the adventureland thread

Why do you assume The Wire is "accurate"?

― @kanyewest (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, May 15, 2009 12:57 PM (4 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i mean this from a dude who is constantly talking about what REAL people are into & concerned w/ shattering our illusions about how popular x y or z is ... & you dont think alex can make some arguments about the show's verisimilitude? i mean thats one of the key things folks talking about the show discuss, & a large part of the show's power is derived from the way it resonates as an extremely accurate & nuanced examination of a particularly place & time

is there something about the Wire's didacticism that's more appealling to ILE than the Sopranos psychodrama...? Halfway through Season 2 of the Wire and I'm struck by how much of its weight feels like it comes from this sledgehammer "YOU ARE LEARNING HARD TRUTHS BY WATCHING THIS SHOW" kind of presentation. The acting isn't as good as the Sopranos. The direction/cinematography aren't anywhere close. The writing and dialogue are much more surface-level, not as nuanced - there are scenes I don't even need to watch with the sound on, they're so repetitive and predictable in "character A presents position A, character B counters with position B" way (for ex. every single scene with Daniels and his wife, or every single scene with McNulty and his wife, or every single scene with Bubbles and the cops - play out the same exact way and convey the same exact information). I am enjoying the Wire for what it is but I still am completely failing to understand ILE's lopsided response here....

Maybe its the appeal of this sprawling, manichean narrative - it doesn't really take much to understand what's going on, there's no subtext to unravel, no complicated characters to to ponder over - its just like watching a really complicated puzzle being assembled. This piece goes here, this piece goes here = ta-da CRIME DRAMA. (Sopranos is more like, I dunno, watching a painter at work...? Apologies for poor hastily assembled analogies)

what on earth is manichean about the wire?

The direction/cinematography aren't anywhere close.

well, one is pointedly cinematic, and one is pointedly not. what's the point of acting as if one wins and one loses because of that?

what on earth is manichean about the wire?

um, detectives good, drug lords bad (to state the most obvious example?)

all u mean by 'cinematic' is, like, 'good', 'uses the moving image in an expressive and interesting way'.

or lolz individuals good, institutions bad!

xpost

um, detectives good, drug lords bad (to state the most obvious example?)

are you sure you are watching the Wire?

well, one is pointedly cinematic, and one is pointedly not. what's the point of acting as if one wins and one loses because of that?

because one is using all the tools at its disposal, and the other isn't? I have never, not once, watched a scene/shot in the Wire and thought "huh, that was a really creative way to use the combo of camerawork and editing to accentuate/emphasize/add to what was going on in the scene/episode"

The acting isn't as good as the Sopranos

although judging acting can be pretty arbitrary - i could not disagree more!
and that's not to say there was anything bad about the acting in Sopranos, i think both are pretty great.

xposts

Shakey, you're sure you're not watching another show?

"The Wire" has flaws, but "Manichean" characters is certainly not one of them.

um, detectives good, drug lords bad (to state the most obvious example?)

are you sure you are watching the Wire?

you think the audience is supposed to be more sympathetic to cold-blooded murdererous greedy bastards like Stringer Bell/Barksdale and NOT identify with the loveable drunken hardworking PO-lice of Bunk/McNulty/the Morgan-Freeman-is-analyzing-your-evidence! guy...? Come the fuck on

um, detectives good, drug lords bad (to state the most obvious example?

^ ya, this is seriously deep into wtf land
xposts

xpost

wait a couple more seasons before making that judgement dude, seriously...

you think the audience is supposed to be more sympathetic to cold-blooded murdererous greedy bastards like Stringer Bell/Barksdale and NOT identify with the loveable drunken hardworking PO-lice of Bunk/McNulty/the Morgan-Freeman-is-analyzing-your-evidence! guy...?

yes.

maybe more happens in subsequent seasons to change that, but in the first two seasons you don't see McNulty, Bunk, Greggs, etc. do anything "bad" (apart from minor bullshit like "gets too drunk"/"cheats on his wife" - which doesn't really compare with, "murders nephews/ex-girlfriends/random people in prison")
x-posts

I'm about halfway through S2 of the Wire, and for me, it's being totally let down by absolutely ridiculous moments that completely undermine all the good work, such as: that drug dealing prison guard sitting in his car in broad daylight, in a busy prison carpark, with loud music playing in his car, hiding drugs in sweet wrappers? wtf?

I'll carry on watching it for as long as the BBC are showing it, glad I never bought the box sets though.

well, not really. but they humanize the "murdering, scumbag" etc dealers fairly well to the point where you find yourself empathising with them to a certain extent. and alot of the cops come off a total creeps. cheating, stealing and beating on people!

xposts

I have never, not once, watched a scene/shot in the Wire and thought "huh, that was a really creative way to use the combo of camerawork and editing to accentuate/emphasize/add to what was going on in the scene/episode"

I guess I can kind of see where you are coming from with this and it certainly isn't the show's forte. But then again I think the 'theatrical' approach suits the material well; flashy camera work would have detracted from the tone.

disagree with shakey on 'manichean' but it does get a lot more manichean in 4 and 5. marlo vs anyone is pretty manichean.

if you're only on the 2nd season, D'Angelo would be a good example.

xposts

maybe more happens in subsequent seasons to change that, but in the first two seasons you don't see McNulty, Bunk, Greggs, etc. do anything "bad" (apart from minor bullshit like "gets too drunk"/"cheats on his wife" - which doesn't really compare with, "murders nephews/ex-girlfriends/random people in prison")

Again without spoilerizing a LOT happens between the point you are at now and the end of the series.

The end of the sow I mean.

*show

I spent quite a lot of time watching The Wire thinking how beautifully shot it was. Not least season 2 with those vast dockside edifices and long bleak perspectives.

by way of comparison, yesterday afternoon A&E was re-running "The Legend of Tennessee Moltesante" episode of the Sopranos and I caught the scene where Chrissie picks up Tony (after fucking up something or other, I forget which) and Tony lays into him for being such a screw-up. When Chrissie tells Tony he "can't take it" cuz he can't handle the psychological fallout of being a murderer, there is this fantastically subtle, layered exchange - Tony tries a little psychoanalysis on him, but is defensive cuz he doesn't want to incriminate himself, but also genuinely curious at finding out if Chrissie is depressed like him, covering it up with bravado and manipulation... this scene is like 2 minutes long, but there is SO MUCH going on in it. Just the way the conversation morphs from Tony telling Chrissie to shut up while he lambasts him into this weird "let's talk about our feelings" thing... AND it foreshadows stuff that comes up in the last episodes of the series re: Melfi and sociopaths treating psychonanalysis as "just another racket" to be learned and used to suit their own ends.

I don't see anything approaching this depth in the Wire.

many x-posts

it's not 'badly shot' or anything, but it lacks the drive of 'the shield' and the 'moments' of 'the sopranos' and the special effects work of 'battlestar galactica'.

xpost

if you're only on the 2nd season, D'Angelo would be a good example.

this isn't all that nuanced a development, he becomes "good" (ie, sympathetic to the audience) when he forsakes his family to try and "get out the game" (and at the same time he's an "honorable" criminal by doing his time rather than snitching)

See the thing is I am literally the complete opposite to you, Shakey. Most of the stuff you said about the Wire, I think about the Sopranos. So I dunno really...

To be fair, Shakey, Season 2 competes with Season 5 as the show's weakest, and although I liked the first season, I didn't understand the acclaim until Season 3, after which you realize that, like a good novelist, the producers and writers have laid material that only resonates later.

I'd persevere until the end of Season 4 at least, which I think most people agree is the classic season.

the wire would be much improved by the presence of 70s cylons

shakey i dont see what the difference is between tony & someone like stringer or avon in terms of the balance between sympathy & disgust that the audience feels!

well, one is pointedly cinematic, and one is pointedly not. what's the point of acting as if one wins and one loses because of that?

because one is using all the tools at its disposal, and the other isn't? I have never, not once, watched a scene/shot in the Wire and thought "huh, that was a really creative way to use the combo of camerawork and editing to accentuate/emphasize/add to what was going on in the scene/episode"

― Kitchen Paper Towel (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, June 8, 2009 11:34 AM (16 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

doesn't this assume that a) both shows have the same budget and that b) The Wire not looking particularly filmic or stylized is a symptom of laziness or inexperience or lack of vision more than a deliberate aesthetic choice?

D'Angelo is a rather straight forward example of this - but you're only in the second season - and you're comparing it to the Sopranos using examples all the way to the last episode. i don't want to give anything away (with the wire) but you're trying to draw conclusions based on having seen less than half the series in one case - and the entire thing in the other.

wow xposts

i dunno max, i never really felt much sympathy for stringer. avon becomes a more interesting character in later seasons (despite being in it less)

I wouldn't say I felt sympathy for Stringer, but respect--absolutely.

(i have not seen a single episode of the sopranos.)

u guys are making me feel totally heartless here

shakey i dont see what the difference is between tony & someone like stringer or avon in terms of the balance between sympathy & disgust that the audience feels!

Tony being the main character he gets a lot more screentime than either of those guys, for one thing - and you see all the stuff that made him the way he is (his mother, his dad, the whole mythos of the Italian-American crime family) and you see him doing a lot of things that viewers are clearly meant to identify with as "normal" (driving his family around, singing along to classic rock radio, compulsively overeating, etc.) But Tony is also pure evil, and the whole thrust of the Sopranos kinda centers around this combination of evil and magnetism, that allows him to draw everyone and everything he comes into contact with (lone, notable exception is Melfi) into his amorality.

I mean, Tony is just a different kind of character, a more central one. Bell is pretty much your straight up Machiavellian villain guy. Barksdale too to a lesser extent (cuz he does seem to have some genuine sympathy for certain people, like D'Angelo)

http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:xZ5F6Auee9DxKM:http://i.pbase.com/o4/14/684914/1/63850662.k8HwxXL0.zzz.gif

doesn't this assume that a) both shows have the same budget and that b) The Wire not looking particularly filmic or stylized is a symptom of laziness or inexperience or lack of vision more than a deliberate aesthetic choice?

of course its a deliberate aesthetic choice. Not a particularly good one though.

ya i guess i see where yr comin from shakey--but again im not sure why we cant say that stringer or avon have that same combination of 'evil and magnetism,' just accomplished in a v difft way.

i posted up above about how simon is very adamant that the wire is a greek tragedy & despite the kind of quibbles one has with that kind of sweeping statement i think its pretty helpful at getting at why comparing the sopranos & the wire is kind of dumm (fwiw i think the shield, or what ive seen of it, is a much better comparison w/ the sopranos)--simon & chase & the show itself are imo way less interested in the kind of psychological/existential questions that the sopranos is obsessed w/.

i tried to watch the first season of the shield once, and had to stop after two or three episodes--really not a good show imho.

the show itself are imo way less interested in the kind of psychological/existential questions that the sopranos is obsessed w/.

yea this is the nub of it. the wire doesn't exclude family shit but it's a different emphasis.

i was more immediately impressed by the wire but the sopranos is the one that's stayed in my bones over the years.

i say this in every thread but 1) the shield is the nuts 2) it hell of improved from season 3