Series Review: Homeland

Words by Sam Ring

WARNING. THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR SEASON SIX OF HOMELAND. READ ON AT YOUR OWN PERIL!

Now we have that out of the way, I would like to start by looking back on my earliest thoughts about the very first episode of this most recent series. I found the introduction of President-elect Elizabeth Keane to be a refreshing development for the series as, although keeping up with real world parallels by having a very against-the-grain President-elect in the frame, the series subverted real world politics and focused on Kean being a more left-leaning liberal politician, as opposed to the right-wing posturing of the real world President. 

Homeland’s reputation for its handling of its female characters who don't happen to be played by Claire Danes has been inconsistent in the past. Characters like Jessica and Dana Brody, Moira, and Astrid act more as tools to aid their male co-stars, rather than shining and functioning as their own characters contributing to the story. On the flipside, however, we have also seen great female characters like Farah and Allison alter the status quo and become meaningful players in the show’s storylines, yet this hasn't stopped them from being unceremoniously killed off whenever the writers feel like it. 

This was a big fear of mine from the opening episode (especially with regards to the fate of President-elect Keane) but despite a very tough run and being confronted with a whole host of problems, from rebellious government officials colluding with members of the alt-right, the legacy of her beloved son, killed in the line of duty, being dragged through the mud, and surviving an assassination attempt, Elizabeth Keane thankfully managed to survive to the series end and, as the finale revealed, she will go on to be perhaps the major antagonist of the last two seasons of Homeland.

On the contrary, however, I did not quite expect the series to launch into full-blown-conspiracy-to-overthrow-the-PEOTUS quite as quickly as it did. I had been looking forward to the series delving further into the conversation about home-grown terrorism in the U.S, and the questionable methods of various Homeland security agencies when it comes to dealing with alleged threats. I am, of course, referring to two of the season’s rather short-lived players, Sekou and FBI agent Conklin. The deaths of both characters were rather unexpected developments for me personally, as I had become quite invested in wanting to see more of the conflict between the two play out. Sekou, despite his best attempts to be as unlikable as possible at the start, became a much more sympathetic character when he realised how out of his depth he was and actually started to listen to what other people were telling him. 

This new-found maturity was brutally brief, as he became the first casualty of the conspiracy against Keane via Dar Adal’s false flag operation. This resulted in Sekou being unwittingly painted as a suicide bomber after the explosion of a bomb placed in the van he was driving. Killing Sekou in this way was a good move, as it injected the season with some much needed drama and intrigue, which then led to the other unexpected death in the first half of the season when Conklin, the agent tasked with investigating Sekou (but convinced by Carrie that he could have been framed for the alleged suicide bombing) being unceremoniously bumped off as well. Again, whilst this did raise the tension and accelerate the pacing of these and consecutive episodes, it quite clearly pointed the direction in which the series was headed for its remaining episodes.

Whilst the show did a commendable job in showing the inner workings of the grand conspiracy to challenge, discredit, and ultimately to kill the next POTUS, it does feel as if the latter somewhat overstepped the mark. Depending on whether or not you believe various conspiracy theories about the CIA being behind the assassination of JFK, it does not stretch that far in the imagination that dissident figures in a United States government could conspire to do something similar in the modern day, but the question, ultimately, is why? 

Think of the sheer amount of money and time already invested by the conspirators and by Dar in particular, from arranging the framing of Sekou, silencing Carrie via arranging for social services to take her child away, setting up the Alt-Fact think tank to discredit Keane, hell going all the way back to the beginning of the season with the joint Mossad operation to convince keen the Iranians are cheating on the nuclear energy deal. There was already enough in place to cause Keane's presidency to be a nightmare, and potentially fold in on itself in a similar way to how the real world expects Donald Trump's premiership to unfold. 

So why take the gamble and attempt to kill her? It makes little sense, particularly to someone as sneaky as Dar, hence why he turns his cloak at the very end and warns Carrie about the conspiracy. What I am getting at here is that Homeland is often best when it relies on real world parallels to further ground the story and setting. By sacrificing a much more interesting slow-burn conspiracy to ultimately force the President-elect from power, the show plays its hand too aggressively and the finale loses a lot of its impact because of this.

Similarly, the surrendering of the real world relevance of characters and conflict (like that between Sekou and Conklin) leaves me asking more questions about whether the show runners may have missed the opportunity to make the series more credible by grounding it in the very in-your-face reality of these stories about ordinary, but misguided, people vs the equally misguided government agencies who feel threatened, and who are unable to cope with the challenges they face in the modern day without resorting to the power of force.

On the overwhelmingly positive side of things though, the show runners deserve credit for sticking to what Keane was saying she wanted from day one, a complete overhaul of the entire intelligence community and the strategy it practices. Now, it was never really talked about in great detail how exactly she planned on doing this, but given how liberal her character had appeared throughout the season, we may have been left to assume it would involve the quiet removal from office of Cold War vets like Dar and Saul, and putting new people with new ideas in their place. 

When we see Saul being arrested and hauled from his car at gunpoint whilst Facetiming Carrie, and see the process repeated to a dozen other former colleagues of hers that she had, only minutes ago in the episode, assured on behalf of the President, that they would not be facing persecution as part of the ongoing investigation into Dar and co's conspiracy, one has to applaud the writers for their creativity. Dar and his associates were worried about her before she was elected, that she might be bad and potentially spell the end for them. I don't think any of them ever stopped to imagine they would become the architects of their own destruction. In pushing against Keane for the entire season so hard, she finally snapped and pushed back, but in a way that completely undercuts everything we had been led to believe about her and what she stood for. 

Flipping the equation of a liberal, democratic leader on its head and turning her into a potential authoritarian figure is certainly bold and completely engrossing. That last lingering shot of a seemingly nervous Elizabeth attempting to ignore Carrie’s pleas serves to undercut her once more as transitioning from a confident career politician into a quiet and isolated woman who is unable to trust her own establishment. What this will bode for the future of the series can only be guessed, but it is bound to make for more gripping television.

Finally, it would be impossible to sign off a review for Homeland without an obituary to the late, great, Peter Quinn. It initially appeared that Saul was going to be the one to bite the dust, after stepping into the doomed SUV as part of President Keane's motorcade which was bombed by rogue Delta Force operatives. But, somehow, he miraculously survived and popped up at the end of the episode (which still gives me hope that Majid Jivadi, the slimy bugger, may still be alive despite being handed over to Mossad, à la the Game of Thrones rule that they aren't dead until you see the body). Tragically, it was the much adored Quinn who heroically sacrificed himself to protect Carrie and Keane from the Delta members. 

There was much controversy at the end of Series Five, when it appeared that Quinn was not going to pull through his sarin gas induced coma, after Carrie rather desperately tried to pull him out of it too early. Many viewers and critics felt that this should be Quinn's end and he should be allowed to die with dignity, but thankfully the show runners brought him back for another season and allowed him the truly heroic death he deserved after coming to the end of his most compelling character arc yet. 

Dignity is the go-to word here, as when we caught up to Quinn at the start of the series and saw what state he had been left in after the end of Series Five, we saw the once incredibly capable killing-machine and impeccable soldier reduced to a severely disabled, traumatised version of his former self. Quinn has long been the moral compass of the show for me, frequently asking the right questions about what he and, by proxy, the agency do in their murky grey area of operation and if it is justified. 

Watching him slowly pull himself out of the hole he was in and rediscover a sense of purpose, i.e. protecting Carrie from Dar's schemes, and ultimately avenging the murder of Astrid that he indirectly caused, was nothing short of fist pumping and a worthy end to a great character. How the series will go on without him remains to be seen, as Rupert Friend brought so much heart and soul with his performance as Quinn, often at times the show was severely lacking it. The void may just be too big to fill. 

Regardless, this season of Homeland has been one of the best in the eyes of many viewers, delivering gripping and entertaining stroylines that draw perceptive parallels with the real world. The end is now in sight for the show, and there is clearly a massive agenda that the writers are building towards with the remaining two seasons. Where the show will go following this most recent reason remains, for now, a mystery. But I, alongside many others, will be looking forward to it, sleuthing and shocking its way forward to its conclusion.

The Lost City of Z

This review was first published by The Student Pocket Guide

It’s easy to forget that, as little as 100 years ago, there were areas of the planet which lay uncharted and unexplored. Unexplored, that is, by the Western world, and the jungles of South America represented the very definition of an exotic and enticing unknown. It was a temptation to which explorer and army officer Percy Fawcett yielded, conducting several expeditions to Brazil between 1906 and 1925 and becoming the inspiration for an Arthur Conan Doyle creation and, quite possibly, for Indiana Jones. Fictional characters may owe him a debt of gratitude, but The Lost City of Z recounts the very true story of the real man, and is based upon a book of the same name by The New Yorker staff writer David Grann.

After several mapping expeditions financed by the Royal Geographical Society, Fawcett (played by Charlie Hunnam) became convinced that fragments of pottery and whispers from native tribes pointed to a lost ancient city, which he named “Z”, in the remote reaches of the Brazilian jungle. Intent on proving himself (and recovering the family name from the damage caused by his hard-drinking and gambling father), he sets out to prove to a sceptical establishment that the tribes are more than mere “savages” and perhaps equal in age to European civilisations. 

From the poster and trailer, you’d be forgiven for thinking that The Lost City of Z is a rip-roaring action-adventure film, full of spectacle and wild jungle stunts. In reality, it is a much more nuanced and considered work. Much of the film does take place in the jungle: a hostile an unforgiving environment full of human and natural dangers. The cinematography captures the simultaneous beauty and foreboding of the jungle and (I mean this as a compliment) is slightly old-fashioned. 

Indeed, the whole film is weighty and shot in a hazy style reminiscent of the British heritage films of the 1980s, complete with muted tones and an overall sense of unrushed filmic quality. This fits, of course, with the subject matter, and the narrative flicks between Fawcett’s foreign adventures, his life at home with his wife (Sienna Miller) and children, and a brief excursion in the First World War.

Each component of the narrative provides the context for Fawcett’s life – and motivations – to be understood. In searching for his City of Z, is Fawcett seeking fame and professional recognition, is he driven by a desire to provide for his family and secure their future, or is he overwhelmed by a, perhaps mythical, idea which might destroy all he has? The screenplay, written by director James Gray, poses many such questions and, largely, leaves it to the audience to decide.

Charlie Hunnam is likeable and dashing in equal measure, retaining a calmness and stiff-upper-lip approach to his adventures alongside his fellow explorers, a bearded Robert Pattinson and Edward Ashley. Although Hunnam’s beautifully coiffured hair rarely falls out of place, even whilst thrashing around in the river whilst being attacked by hostile tribesmen, his performance offers just the right level of vulnerability to underpin the more philosophical themes of the script. In particular, his relationship with his eldest son (played at various ages by Tom Mulheron, Bobby Smalldridge and Tom Holland) offers some of the film’s most potent and emotionally-charged scenes. 

Ostensibly a film about a search for an undiscovered jungle capital, The Lost City of Z is much more than a period adventure. Fawcett’s journey through the dense, suffocating jungle is an analogy of the path through life we all must take, with varying degrees of success. What is universal, however, is the sense that the drive to pursue our dreams comes from a competing set of factors underscored by issues such as family and fate. The elderly gentlemen of the Royal Geographic Society initially dismiss Fawcett’s claims that the native peoples of South America may be more than cannibalistic barbarians but, at times, the script does feel a little sanctimonious: “we have been arrogant and contemptuous” declares Fawcett as he observes the ordered farming systems used by a friendly tribe. 

Fawcett’s wife acts as the constant support in his life, writing letters of support and, in a flashback later in the film, quotes Robert Browning to echo Percy’s seemingly impossible mission to prove the existence of Z: “Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp,/Or what’s a Heaven for?” Sienna Miller is fantastic in the role, demonstrating the same emotional turmoil of a wife left at home that she displayed in American Sniper. The film’s stunning ending is made by her performance.

The Lost City of Z is a substantial and often sensitive film about conviction, love, dreams and respect. Outwardly an adventure film about the search for a lost city, it becomes a much more contemplative and profound experience, thanks to a well-crafted script and engaging performances, particularly from Charlie Hunnam and Sienna Miller. We may comprehend much more of the geography of the Earth today than 100 years ago, but films such as this show that we are yet to fully map, and understand, our own emotions. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * *