"BAND OF BROTHERS" (2001) - Episode Eight “The Last Patrol” Commentary

"BAND OF BROTHERS" (2001) - Episode Eight "The Last Patrol" Commentary

Episode Eight of ”BAND OF BROTHERS”, ”The Last Patrol” saw the return of paratrooper David Webster (Eion Bailey). Last seen in "Crossroads", hobbling away from a battlefield in Holland, after being wounded; Webster returns from the hospital to find his old company recovering from the traumas suffered during the campaign in Belgium. With the Allies on the verge of victory, Easy Company begins to eye any chance of a return to combat with great wariness, during its stay in Haguenau, a town located in the Alsace region. Unfortunately, their luck fails to hold when Winters orders Spiers to select a group of men to carry out a dangerous scouting mission within the German lines. 

Recently, one of my relatives read an autobiography of one of the Easy Company veterans still living (I will not reveal his name). I was surprised to discover that he harbored some ill will toward the miniseries for allowing a major showcase of another character, David Webster. Why? Webster had never participated in the campaign in Belgium. He never bothered to leave the hospital to rejoin Easy Company in time for that harrowing experience. Many people might find that hard to believe. Yet, this autobiography had been recently published – perhaps in the last two years. This veteran continued harbor resentment toward Webster for missing the Belgium campaign after sixty odd years. Sixty years strikes me as a hell of a long time to be angry at someone for something like this. 

Screenwriters Erik Bork and Bruce C. McKenna certainly included this resentment toward Webster in ”The Last Patrol”. In fact, I would probably say that they were a bit heavy-handed on this topic, especially in the episode’s first five to ten minutes. This was certainly apparent when Bork, McKenna and director Tony To insisted upon actor Eion Bailey wearing a silly grin on his face, when his character is informed about those Easy Company men that were killed, seriously wounded or otherwise in Belgium. The episode was also heavy-handed in its portrayal of Easy Company’s reluctance to engage in more combat, whether it was a major battle or a patrol. The first half of the episode seemed to saturate with some of the veterans either commenting on their reluctance to fight or their resentment toward newcomers like the recent West Point graduate, Second Lieutenant Jones (Colin Hanks) or returnees like Webster, who missed the Belgian campaign. And I never understood why Winters and not Spiers had chosen the fifteen men to partake in the patrol. Winters was the 2nd battalion’s executive officer around this time, not Easy Company’s commander.

Although the episode eventually improved, it still had another major flaw. The major flaw turned out to be Webster’s narration. Unlike Carwood Lipton’s narration featured in ”The Breaking Point”, Webster’s narration not only struck me as heavy-handed as the episode’s handling of his return, but also ineffective. The main problem with this episode’s narration is that it had a bad habit of repeating what was already shown. Some have blamed Eion Bailey’s performance for the flawed narration. However, I blame the screenwriters for writing it, and the producers for allowing it to remain in the episode. The material, in my opinion, seemed unworthy of a talented actor like Bailey.

Fortunately, ”The Last Patrol” was not a disaster. To, Bork and McKenna – along with most of the cast - did an excellent job of capturing the weariness suffered by Easy Company, following the ordeals of Bastogne and Foy; despite some of the heavy-handedness. This was especially apparent in Scott Grimes’ performance, whose portrayal of Sergeant Donald Malarkey seemed to reek of despair and grief over the deaths of “Skip” Muck and Alex Penkala in the last episode. The episode also benefitted from a humorous scene that centered on Frank Piconte’s (James Madio) return from hospital, after being wounded during the assault upon Foy. It allowed audiences to see how the men of Easy Company (both the Toccoa men and the replacements) had bonded – especially after the Belgium campaign. This scene provided a bittersweet moment for Webster (which was apparent on Bailey’s face), who began to realize how much his lack of experience in Belgium may have cost him. However, the episode’s centerpiece turned out to be the first rate action sequence that featured the patrol crossing the Rue de Triangle (Triangle River) and infiltrating German lines to snatch some prisoners. Although brief and filmed at night, the sequence was also fierce, brutal and a painful reminder that escaping the horrors of war might prove to be a bit difficult, despite the paratroopers and the Germans’ reluctance to engage in more combat.

Aside from Scott Grimes, other first-rate performances came from both Matthew Settle (Spiers) and Donnie Walhberg (Lipton), who seemed to have developed some kind of brotherly bond; Colin Hanks, who gave a nice, subtle performance as Easy Company’s newest addition, Lieutenant Henry Jones; Damian Lewis, whose finest moment as Winters came when the latter prevented the men from participating in a second patrol; Craig Heaney, whose portrayal of the embittered and caustic Roy Cobb seemed a lot more effective than in previous episodes; and Dexter Fletcher, who has been a favorite of mine for years. Not only was his portrayal of 1st Platoon sergeant John Martin was as deliciously sardonic as ever, but he provided a strong presence in the episode’s only combat sequence. 

Although some are inclined to criticized Eion Bailey’s performance in ”The Last Patrol”, I am not inclined to do so. Yes, I was not impressed by his early scenes that featured Webster’s return to Easy Company. But I blame the screenwriters, not the actor. Thankfully, the episode moved past that awful beginning and Bailey proved he could give a subtle and well-rounded performance as the cynical Webster, who has to struggle to deal with the possibility that the men he had fought with in two major campaigns now consider him as an outsider.

”The Last Patrol” might not be one of the better episodes of ”BAND OF BROTHERS”. But for some reason, I have always liked it. I suspect that despite its flaws, I liked how the screenwriters and director Tony To gave it a world weary aura that matched both the situation and emotions that the men of Easy Company were experiencing, after eight months of combat.

"THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" (1939) Review

"THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" (1939) Review

The year 1939 proved to be a momentous time for fans of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes. The year marked the debut of two movies that featured the movie introduction of Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce as the famous literary detective and his friend, Dr. John Watson.

There had been previous movie, stage and radio adaptations of the Sherlock Holmes. But despite the recent success of Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman in the roles of Holmes and Watson, Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce would become the first cinematic pair to truly become famous in the roles. They ended up portraying Holmes and Watson in fourteen movies for Twentieth Century Fox and Universal Pictures. And their first movie together was 1939's "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES".

Based upon Doyle's 1902 novel, "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" is about Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson's investigation into the legend of a supernatural hound, a beast that may be stalking a young heir on the fog-shrouded moorland that makes up his estate in Devonshire. The investigating pair receive a visit from a Dr. James Mortimer, who believes that the last heir of Baskerville Hall might be in danger from a legendary hound that may have killed many in the Baskerville line, including the family's founder - Sir Hugo Baskerville - and Dr. Mortimer's close friend, Sir Charles Baskerville. Holmes originally dismisses the so-called "demonic hound" as a fairy tale. But when Sir Henry arrives from Canada and receives a series of threats, Holmes sends Watson to accompany the young heir and Dr. Mortimer to Baskerville Hall, claiming that he is too busy to accompany them himself. Sir Henry quickly develops a romantic interest in Beryl Stapleton, the stepsister of his neighbor, a local naturalist named John Stapleton. The new arrivals also deal with the stranger behavior of Sir Henry's servants, Mr. John and Mrs. Barryman; and an escapee from Dartmoor Prison lurking on the moor. Right before an attempt on Sir Henry's life, Holmes finally makes his appearance in Devonshire. And Dr. Watson learns that he had been making his own inquiries for quite some time, while in disguise.

Ernest Pascal's screenplay included at least one or two changes from Doyle's novel. One, Sir Henry never became romantically involved with Beryl Stapleton. The butler's name was changed from John Barrymore to Barryman, due to the existence of famous actor John Barrymore. And unlike the novel, the murderer's fate was left unknown, despite Holmes' assurances that the former would not get very far, due to constables being posted on the road. Aside from the previously mentioned, "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" remained faithful to the original novel. Even more importantly, the movie proved to be a surprise hit for the Twentieth Century Fox.

After watching "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES", it was easy to see why it became a hit. Directed by Sidney Lanfield, the movie is a well-paced and solid piece of entertainment filled with action, suspense, a little romance, and rich atmosphere. As much as I love murder mysteries, they have a tendency to drag a movie's pacing at one point or another . . . despite the movie's quality. My only real complaint about Pascal's plot was the vague manner in which he left the murderer's fate open. Why did he do it? And why did Lanfield and studio boss, Darryl F. Zanuck, allow Pascal to get away with this?

The suspenseful atmosphere re-created for the movie's Devonshire setting could have easily done this. But Lanfield and the action featured in the plot prevented this from happening. And speaking of atmosphere, I have to congratulate art directors Richard Day and Hans Peters, along with set decorator Thomas Littlet and legendary cinematographer J. Peverell Marley for doing such an excellent job in not only re-creating the mysterious atmosphere of the Devonshire moors and more importantly, late Victorian England.

Basil Rathbone had been known for the villainous roles he had portrayed in many costume dramas in the 1930s. Before "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES", he had only portrayed one or two heroic types on screen - in 1938's "THE DAWN PATROL" and 1939's "SON OF FRANKENSTEIN". For an actor known for portraying villains, it is ironic that his most well-known role would prove to be the heroic Sherlock Holmes. Not only did Rathbone seemed like the physical embodiment of the fictional sleuth, but he captured the character's sharp intelligence, wit and strong will. And his screen chemistry with Nigel Bruce was spot on. They made a perfect screen team. What I enjoyed about Bruce's portrayal of Dr. John Watson is that he was not the blustering buffoon that his character would become in the Universal Pictures. All right, Bruce's Dr. Watson has a bit of bluster in his characterization. But his Watson was a sharp and observant man, whose comments about some of the suspects would prove to be accurate. And like Rathbone's Holmes, he also had a nice, subtle wit.

The rest of the cast proved to be solid. Lionel Atwill gave a first-rate performance as Dr. James Mortimer, the man who hired Holmes to investigate the strange deaths around Baskerville Hall. Beryl Mercer gave a funny performance as Dr. Mercer's dithery wife, who was into spiritualism and seances. Morton Lowry was both charming and intelligent as Sir Henry's neighbor, who also harbored suspicions about the strange occurrences Wendy Barrie proved to be a sweet and charming Beryl Stapleton. Although I must honest that I found her character to be slightly one-dimensional at times. I could say the same about Richard Greene's Sir Henry Baskerville, whose good looks and charming personality made the character seemed a little too ideal for my tastes. Greene was credited as the film's lead character. But when the movie proved to be a surprise hit, Rathbone and Bruce - quite rightly - assumed the lead credits in future Sherlock Holmes films. John Carradine gave one of the movie's better performances as Sir Henry's mysterious and slightly sinister butler, John Barryman. Whereas Carradine was mysterious, actress Eily Malyon seemed fearful and secretive as Barryman's emotional wife.

Unless one is a stickler for a movie strictly adhering to its novel source, any Sherlock Holmes fan would find "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" to be a very entertaining and atmospheric adaptation of Arthur Conan Doyle's novel. And both Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce ended up proving they were the right men at that time to portray Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson.

"GET SMART" (2008) Photo Gallery

Below are photos from the movie version of the 1965-1971 television comedy, "GET SMART". The movie stars Steve Carrell, Anne Hathaway, Dwayne Johnson, Terrence Stamp and Alan Arkin:


"GET SMART" (2008) Photo Gallery

"NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK II" (1986) - Episode One "June-July 1861" Commentary

"NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK II" (1986) - EPISODE ONE "June-July 1861" Commentary

Judging from past articles I have written about the "NORTH AND SOUTH" Trilogy, one would surmise that of the three miniseries that have aired in the past decades (two in the 1980s and one in the 1990s) that I seemed to have the most problem with the second miniseries in the trilogy, namely "BOOK II". And if I have to be honest, one would be right. 

It is odd that I would choose the second miniseries as the most problematic of the three. "BOOK II" is set during the four years of the Civil War – a historical conflict that has heavily attracted my attention for so many years that I cannot measure how long. "BOOK III", which had aired at least eight years after the second miniseries, was set during the early years of Reconstruction and has a reputation among the "NORTH AND SOUTH" fans as being inferior to the other two. But for some reason, I have more of a problem with "BOOK II". So I have decided to examine each of the six episodes of the 1986 miniseries to determine why this chapter in the "NORTH AND SOUTH" trilogy is such a problem for me. 

Without a doubt, Episode One of "BOOK II" is my favorite in the entire miniseries. It re-introduced the main characters from the first miniseries in the story. It also set the stage for the main characters’ experiences during the war for the rest of the miniseries. It featured an excellent opening shot on the streets of Washington D.C. that introduced both Brett Main Hazard, and the slave Semiramis. It also featured a well shot sequence that centered around a colorful ball at the Spotswood Hotel in Richmond, attended by Ashton and James Huntoon, and Elkhannah Bent. Most importantly, it featured one of my favorite battle scenes in the miniseries – namely the Battle of Bull Run that was fought near Manassas, Virginia on July 18, 1861. If I have to be frank, this interpretation of Bull Run remains my favorite. Director Kevin Connors filmed the entire sequence with great style and skill and composer Bill Conti injected it with a brash, yet haunting score that still give me goose bumps whenever I watch it. Even better, the sequence ended with actress Wendy Kilbourne uttering one of the best lines in the entire trilogy.

I certainly have no problems with the miniseries' production values.  Jacques R. Marquette's photography struck me as rather beautiful and colorful.  This was especially apparent in the opening Washington D.C., the Spotswood Hotel ball and Bull Run sequences.  If I have one complaint, I wish the photography had been a little sharper.  I feel that a sharper look would have allowed the miniseries' photography to look more colorful.  Joseph R. Jennings and his production designs team did an excellent job in re-creating the United States during the Civil War era, especially in many interior shots.  Bill Conti continued his excellent work as composer for the saga's production. But if there is one aspect of the miniseries' production values that really blew my mind were the costumes designed by Robert Fletcher.  I was especially impressed by the following costumes:

I do have a few quibbles about Episode One. First of all, it introduced Charles Main’s role as a cavalry scout for the Confederate Army. Considering that he started out as a Captain in this miniseries, it made no sense to me that he and another officer - a first lieutenant - would be participating scout duties without the assistance of enlisted men. I guess one could call it as an example of the story being historically inaccurate.  And I wish someone would explain why the Mains' neighbors (or doctor) sent word to Brett Main Hazard in Washington D.C. about the injuries her mother Clarissa Main had suffered when Mont Royal's barn was set on fire by Justin La Motte.  Would it have been a lot easier (and quicker) to send word to Orry Main or Ashton Main Huntoon, who were both in Richmond, Virginia? 

I find the idea of both George Hazard and Orry Main serving as military aides to their respective political leaders - Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis - very improbable. Following their graduation from West Point in 1846, the two friends had only served at least 18 months in the U.S. Army before resigning for personal reasons. Yet, after the outbreak of a civil war some thirteen years later, the audience is supposed to believe that both were able to secure such high positions within their respective armies? Especially when one considers the fact that neither were politically active between 1848 and 1861? I find this aspect of George and Orry's characters very illogical . . . even for a work of fiction.  By the way, the regiment that Billy Hazard had transferred to - the Volunteer Sharpshooters - did not fight at the Battle of Bull Run.  In fact, the Sharpshooters regiments did not begin recruitment until November 1861.

My last major quibble featured the character of Elkhannah Bent. What was he doing with the portrait of Madeline Fabray LaMotte’s mother? The audience knew that he had procured it from an expensive whorehouse in New Orleans that he had visited in the last miniseries. But Bent had no idea that Madeline was romantically involved with one of his nemesis, Orry Main, until after Ashton Main Huntoon informed him. He only knew that she was the wife of the Mains' neighbor, Justin LaMotte.  So, why did he bother to get his hands on the painting at a time when he was ignorant of the romantic and emotional connection between Orry and Madeline?

I certainly had no problems with the episode's performances.  The cast, more or less, gave solid performances.  But I was especially impressed by a handful.  Two of the better performances came from Parker Stevenson and Genie Francis, who portrayed the recently married Billy and Brett Hazard.  I was especially impressed by one scene in which the two nearly quarreled over Billy's decision to transfer from the Corps of Engineers to Hiram Berdan's Sharpshooters Regiment.  Terri Garber and Philip Casnoff literally burned the screen in their portrayal of the early stages of Ashton Main Huntoon and Elkhannah Bent's affair.  This episode featured another quarrel . . . one between George Hazard and his sister, Virgilia, who had arrived in Washington D.C. to become a nurse.  Both James Read and Kirstie Alley were superb in that scene.  And finally, I have to single out Forest Whitaker, who did a superb job in expressing the resentful anger that his character, Cuffey, felt toward his situation as a slave and toward his owners, the Mains.

Although Episode One featured some stumbling blocks that I have already mentioned, I must say that it turned out rather well.  For me, it is probably the best episode in the entire 1986 miniseries.  Not only did it featured some excellent performances, it was capped with a superb sequence featuring the Battle of Bull Run, directed with skill by Kevin Connor.

"DEFIANCE" (2008) Review

"DEFIANCE" (2008) Review

After watching Edward Zwick’s 2008 film, ”DEFIANCE”, I am finally beginning to realize that it does not pay to make assumptions about a movie, based upon a theater trailer. I have already made this mistake several times throughout my life and it irks me that I am still making it. I certainly made this mistake when I saw the trailer for ”DEFIANCE”, a World War II drama that told the story of the war experiences of four Polish-Jewish brothers who ended up forming a partisan resistance group against the occupying Nazis between 1941 and 1942.

Based upon the book, ”Defiance: The Bielski Partisans” by Nechama Tec, ”DEFIANCE” centered around the Bielski brothers – Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber, Jamie Bell and George MacKay – who had escaped their Nazi-occupied of Eastern Poland/West Belarus and joined the Soviet partisans to combat the Nazis. The brothers eventually rescued roughly 1,200 Jews. The film tracked their struggle to evade invading German forces, while still maintaining their mission to save Jewish lives. When I had first learned about this film, I had assumed this would be some rousing World War II tale about a brave resistance against the Nazi horde. I really should have known better. I should have taken into account the film’s director – namely Edward Zwick.

The first Zwick film I had ever seen was the 1989 Civil War drama, ”GLORY”. In that movie and other movies directed by him, most of the characters are never presented as one-dimensional, black-and-white characters. Shades of gray permeated most, if not all of his characters, including most memorably – Denzel Washington in ”GLORY”, Annette Bening in ”SIEGE”, Tom Cruise in ”THE LAST SAMURAI” and both Leonardo DiCaprio and Djimon Hounsou. Zwick continued his tradition of presenting ambiguous characters and morally conflicting issues in ”DEFIANCE”. Moral ambiguity seemed to be the hallmark in the portrayal of at least two of the Bielski brothers. Both Tuvial and Zus Bielski (Daniel Craig and Liev Schreiber) are strong-willed and ruthless men, willing to kill anyone who crossed them. And both seemed willing to enact vengeance against anyone have harmed their loved ones. But they had their differences.

Daniel Craig had the job of portraying Tuvial Bielski, the oldest sibling who decides to create a community and a brigade with the Jewish refugees hiding from the Nazis and their Polish allies. His Tuvial seemed a little reluctant to take on this task – at least at first. And he also seemed unsure whether he could be a competent leader. Thanks to Craig’s performance, this insecurity of Tuvial’s seemed to slowly grow more apparent by the movie’s second half. Being the more-than-competent actor that he is, Craig also managed to portray other aspects of Tuvial’s nature – his ruthlessness, tenderness and sardonic sense of humor (which seemed to be apparent in the Bielski family overall). And like any good actor, he does not try to hog the limelight at the expense of his co-stars. Craig created sizzling on-screen chemistry with Schreiber, Bell and the actress who portrayed Tuvial’s future wife, Alexa Davalos.

Liev Schreiber portrayed Zus, the second oldest Bielski brother. And being the charismatic actor that he is, Schreiber did an excellent job of portraying the volatile second brother, Zus. Upon learning the deaths of his wife and child, Schreiber’s Zus seemed determined to exact revenge upon the Nazis for their deaths. Even if it meant walking away from his brothers and joining the Soviet partisans. Another aspect of Zus’ character that Schreiber made so memorable was the intense sibling rivalry he injected into his relationship with Craig’s Tuvial. Unlike his older brother, Zus’s volatile nature made him more inclined to exact revenge against the Nazis and other enemies. Also, Schreiber perfectly brought out Zus’ contempt and dislike toward those Jewish refugees who came from a higher social class than his family’s.

Portraying the third Bielski brother is Jamie Bell, a young English actor who had also appeared in movies such as ”KING KONG” (2005) and ”JUMPER” (2008). Bell did an excellent job of portraying the young and slightly naïve Asael, the third Bielski brother who experiences as a partisan with Tuvial enabled him to mature as a fighter and a man. His Asael does not seem to possess his older brothers’ ruthlessness . . . on the surface. But as the refugees struggle to survive their first winter together and evade the Nazis in the movie’s last half hour, Bell brought out Asael’s toughness that had been hidden by a reserved and slightly shy nature.

”DEFIANCE” also included an additional cast that greatly supported the three leads. There were at least three that caught my interest. Alexa Davalos expertly portrayed Lilka Ticktin, an aristocratic Polish Jew, whose delicate looks and quiet personality hid a strong will and warmly supportive nature. Both Mark Feuerstein as the intellectual Isaac Malbin and Allan Corduner as a professor named Shamon Haretz humorously provided comic relief in their never-ending philosophical debates that seemed to elude the less intellectual Bielskis. The rest of the cast featured supporting players and local Lithuanians portraying the refugees. Basically, they did a pretty good job in conveying the refugees’ plight. There were moments when their acting seemed like one, long running cliché. And there were moments – like the sequence featuring their fatal beating of the captured German soldier – in which they seemed very effective.

”DEFIANCE” is not perfect. As I had stated earlier, the supporting and background characters tend to drift into cliché performances sometimes. The movie’s pacing threatened to drag in two places – when the Bielskis first began to gather the refugees that followed them; and later in the film when Tuvial’s camp suffer their first ”winter of discontent”. James Newton Howard’s score did not help matters. I found it slow and unoriginal and it threatened to bog down the film in certain scenes.

But the movie definitely had its moments – including the sequence featuring the lynching of the German soldier. It was one of many that accentuated the gray and complex nature of ”DEFIANCE”. On one hand, the audience could not help but empathize with the refugees’ anger at what the German soldier represented – the deaths of their loved ones and the dark turn their lives had taken. On the other hand, the entire sequence struck me as ugly and dark. Mob violence at its worse. Even Asael (Bell) seemed disgusted by the refugees’ lynching of the soldier . . . and Tuvial’s failure to stop them. Another ambiguous scene centered around one of the refugees – a rogue soldier of Tuvial’s brigade named Arkady Lubczanski – who tries to lead a rebellion against an ill Tuvial during a food shortage. Arkady is portrayed as an unpleasant man who lusts after Asael’s bride and believes that he and his fellow soldiers in the brigade are entitled to more food than the refugees. Tuvial ends the rebellion by killing Arkady. Granted, Arkady had not harmed anyone – aside from giving Asael a shiner. On the other hand, his practice of hoarding the food could have ended with death by starvation for most of the refugees. Had Tuvial been right to commit murder? Apparently, the refugees did not seem so. They did not protest against his act of murder.

This is what Edward Zwick is all about. This is why I am a major fan of many of his movies. Superficially, he presents his story in a black-and-white situation. The Nazis, their Polish allies, anti-Semitic Soviet troops and unpleasant refugees like Arkady are presented superficially as one-note villains. Yet, the people who oppose them – the Bielski brothers, their loved ones, their Polish and Soviet allies and the refugees – turn out not to be as “good” or perfect as many would believe. In Ed Zwick’s movies, the world is not as black and white as we might believe . . . or wish it would be.

"THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" (1939) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES", the 1939 adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 1902 novel. The movie starred Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce:



"THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES" (1939) Photo Gallery

"STAR TREK VOYAGER: 'The Art of Adaptability'"

"STAR TREK VOYAGER:  'The Art of Adaptability'"

Over a year ago, I had posted an article called "STAR TREK VOYAGER" - Unfit For Command on this blog. In it, I had expressed my displeasure over the portrayal of Security/Tactical Officer Tuvok in the ”STAR TREK VOYAGER” Season Two episode, (2.25) "Resolutions". After viewing the episode for the umpteenth time, yesterday, I decided to focus upon another member of the Voyager crew, Ensign Harry Kim.

In the article about Tuvok, I had pointed out that screenwriter Lisa Klink had managed to regress and completely misinterpret the Vulcan’s character in the "STAR TREK VOYAGER" episode called (2.25) "Resolution", in order to have him clash with the crew over contacting the murderous Vidiians, who could give them a cure for Captain Janeway and Commander Chakotay. The latter pair had found themselves left behind on a planet after being infected with a disease. Klink portrayed Tuvok as a cold individual, lacking compassion, and incapable of understanding the crew’s feelings over the missing Janeway and Chakotay. I had argued that this went against earlier portrayals of Tuvok, who has shown a capacity for compassion, instinct and open-mindedness in earlier episodes. Worse, Klink’s screenplay ended up endorsing Harry Kim’s behavior in the episode.

What was wrong about Kim’s behavior in "Resolutions"? For me, it was one of the most blatant displays of immaturity, temper and insubordination I have ever seen in a fictional character that happened to be a military officer. In fact, watching Kim’s attempt to coerce Tuvok into contacting the Vidiians or start a mutiny against the Vulcan disgusted me, along with Klink’s willingness to endorse such a behavior. More importantly, it made me understand why Captain Janeway never promoted Harry Kim, during the U.S.S. Voyager’s journey through the Delta Quadrant. I could be making a mountain out of a molehill. After all, only two members of the crew ever received a promotion – Tuvok in (4.05) “Revulsion” and Tom Paris in (6.26) “Unimatrix Zero, Part I”. In Paris’ case, he merely regained his old rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade after being demoted back in Season Five. Ironically, when Paris had received his old rank, Kim tried to convey a hint to Janeway that he would also like a promotion. The good captain wisely ignored him . . . as she should.

If I must be honest, I never got the impression that Harry Kim was very good at adapting to unusual situations – unless his life or the lives of others he cared about were on the line. His plotting against the Hirogen in (4.19) “The Killing Game, Part II” is an example of this. But I never felt that he had truly learned to adapt to Voyager’s unusual situation in the Delta Quadrant. I believe that Harry was the type of person who was very comfortable with the status quo. With him stuck aboard Voyager in the Delta Quadrant, Janeway began to represent the status quo for him. If he had been serving aboard a Starfleet vessel in the Alpha Quadrant, I could see him rapidly climbing the command ladder. The Alpha Quadrant was familiar ground where he and his fellow officers could depend upon support from another starship and where he could visit his family as often as possible. Being stuck in the Delta Quadrant aboard the only Starfleet vessel around was another matter for Kim. There was no way for him to communicate with his family, until the development of the Pathfinder project in Seasons Six and Seven. More importantly, Kim never really learned to adjust being so far from home. He was not the only crew member who had missed being away from family and friends for so many years. But he was the only major crew member who constantly expressed a desire to be home or reacted in an excited or reckless manner, when the opportunity to return home appeared.

One of the many constants about Harry Kim’s personality was that he had a tendency to adhere to Starfleet policies or behavior aboard ship. Frankly, he possessed a conservative personality. He have never rocked the boat, unless his emotions drove him to that point. And in the case of his interactions with Tuvok in ”Resolutions”, his inability to leave Janeway behind and adapt to a new ship’s commander eventually drove him to the point of insurrection. Quite simply, he missed the Captain and wanted his pseudo mommy back. And instead of giving Tuvok a chance to grow into command as the new captain, he wanted to risk allowing the Vidiians to board Voyager and harvest the crew’s organs by contacting the latter. Mind you, the other members of the crew were just as guilty. But they seemed unwilling to do or say anything, until Kim openly confronted Tuvok about contacting the Vidiians and later, plot behind his back. Frankly, it was sickening to watch. What I found even more sickening was Klink’s decision to endorse Kim’s viewpoint when she allowed Kes to convince Tuvok to contact the Vidiians.

In "Resolutions", Tuvok had made it clear that he would remain silent about Kim’s insubordination to him. In other words, Kim got away with his immature bullshit, because the episode’s screenwriter wanted to portray the Vulcan in a slightly villainous light. But a part of me would like to think that either Janeway, Chakotay or both found out about Kim’s insubordination. That would easily explain why Janeway had ignored the young ensign’s hint about a promotion in "Unimatrix Zero" . . . or why he had never received a promotion during Voyager’s seven year journey through the Delta Quadrant. I could dream . . . right?