"The Wire": A Rookie's Perspective
POSTED BY JON WEISMAN (Brian Lowry's comments follow)
This is my first season watching "The Wire." I know that no apology can atone for that sin, so I won’t even try. I have forever been trying to carve out time to watch the series from the beginning, but 50-odd hours are hard to find. Finally, I decided, it was time to get on board — better late than never.
So I don’t come here as any kind of authority figure on the series, and I offer my opinions only as a perspective on the fifth season from someone who didn’t watch the first four. I know "Wire" fans are always looking to increase the series’ profile, so I thought you might be interested in how it’s playing to a newbie.
I do come as a diehard fan of David Simon’s first major show, "Homicide: Life on the Street," my second-favorite series of all time behind "Hill Street Blues," so I’ve got that going for me.
The intelligence of "The Wire" is clear from the outset, both in terms of sharp dialogue and intricate plots. The characters seem to have worlds of depth, and I say this knowing that I only have surface understanding of what makes them tick. I can’t think of any character that I don’t want to learn more about, nor can I find any plotline in the first two episodes of season five that I’m not eager to see the next chapter of.
I do think there are imperfections in the show. Some of the dialogue strikes me as on the nose. Not unrealistic, just unprofound. Understand me, 95 percent of the dialogue raises from strong to genius — in fact, I would say that the one aspect of the show that fans and media have failed most at making the world know about is the show’s clever, endearing sense of humor. But every now and then, there’s a line that I think is a dud — that could only work if you’re already in love with the character who says it.
Similarly, not every plot is "Dickensian," to borrow a word from Sunday’s episode, in stature. I’m keenly interested in the journalism plot, for example, love some of the snappy exchanges and adore "Homicide" alum Clark Johnson, but right now, it strikes me that the deck is stacked a little too heavily – the saints and sinners in the newsroom are too obvious. There’s real tension, but the impact of that tension is diminished.
However, to respond to a common fear about the show, lacking the backstory of the first four seasons hasn’t made the show too challenging to watch. I know I don’t know everything that’s going on, the significance of every appearance. But while the plots are sophisticated, there’s enough clarity that even a beginner like me can jump on. While I’m sure it’s better to start from the beginning, I wouldn’t tell a viewer to be afraid to start watching this season.
My biggest qualm with the show so far has been this: After two episodes, there hasn’t been a single moment that hit me in the gut, that really affected me in an emotional way. I’m sure these moments will come, and again, this may be the product of my being a rookie. But I still — for now — have to argue with those calling “The Wire” the best show of all time when it can be this emotionally quiet, regardless of how familiar a viewer is with a show.
“Hill Street” (left) and “Homicide” had ensemble casts, humorous lines and subplots, ongoing storylines and even season-long arcs infused with realism – carried out over 20 or so episodes a year, mind you — and yet still packed an emotional punch in each episode. I would be confident giving someone any of the first 100 airings of “Hill Street,” even if that person were viewing the show for the first time, and saying, “Watch this and tell me this wasn’t the greatest series of all time.”
Anyway, please understand, I’m not trying to render any kind of final verdict on “The Wire.” Someday, I will get a look at those first four seasons, and maybe I’ll change my opinion of it from “great” to “the best.” But if you’re wondering why even some sophisticated drama watchers haven’t gone hog-wild about the show, they may feel they’ve seen better stuff.
— Jon Weisman
Brian Lowry sez
If Jon Weisman is a newbie to "The Wire," I've been there from the beginning and confess that to having no idea how dense and rewarding the series would become based on that first smattering of episodes.
Allow a brief personal note, however, from the perspective of someone who lived through part of this year's media theme as a former reporter at the Los Angeles Times, which — like the Baltimore Sun, the fictionalized newspaper featured in this year's show — is owned by the Tribune Co.
Series creator David Simon clearly has axes to grind against a few former bosses in his depiction of the newspaper, and there's obviously a little exaggeration involved. For all journalism's modern failings, there aren't many Jayson Blairs out fabricating stories. (Or at least God, I hope not.)
Still, the series does capture the weariness of veteran reporters and editors, the pressure of job cuts and bureau closings, and the manner in which some editors are willing to overreach and sensationalize reporting in an effort to get noticed, generate awards attention and (in a trend that's developed since Simon left journalism) drive web traffic. Some ambitious reporters, moreover, are more willing than others to oblige — which explains, as Simon illustrates, how news values can be bastardized along the way.
It's always amazing, by the way, how the producers almost seamlessly layer each season upon the previous ones, introducing a new bureaucracy without short-shrifting the underlying cops/drug dealers story line. In terms of sheer emotional impact the current season probably doesn't reach the heights of season four, but the continuing threads regarding those high school students remain absolutely terrific.
One more thing: I have no idea what his long-term fate is, but if Omar (Michael K. Williams) survives this thing, someone should damn well give the character his own spinoff series.
To get another veteran "Wire"-watcher perspective on Sunday's episode, click here.







Variety's Team TV -- Cynthia Littleton, Stu Levine, Jon Weisman, Andrew Wallenstein and A.J. Marechal -- provides a roundup of stories big and small, as well as opinions and analysis from across the TV dial.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Paracelsus believed that dreams are the shadows of a wisdom that exists in all people.
Posted by: Mens Sunglasses | June 08, 2011 at 01:45 AM
Whenever we look into the obscene memories, a sexy debaucheries, a merciless plus tortuous xecutions, a undeniable vindictiveness by using which will over fifty percent a Word of god is definitely filled up, it would extra dependable that him and i get in touch with them the idea of on the satanic force versus the tatement with The lord. This is the track record with wickedness who has provided so that you can dodgy plus brutalize humankind; plus, to get this section, I actually genuinely do not like them, when i do not like all that is definitely merciless.
Posted by: Ed Hardy 2011 | May 16, 2011 at 12:40 AM
Jon, you simply have to give the show more time. The past seasons have been very, very powerful and intricate. It would difficult to jump into the midst of the show and pick up the same vested interest others have had.
I honestly believe that it ranks among the top shows in television history. It is a gritty and compelling series.
Hamsterdam and that season really took us to places that challenged what society does and does not do to deal with real life dilemmas. The media, the politics, the Access Hollywood culture, all fuel simplistic sound-bite answers to very complicated problems.
I think that if you were to watch an entire season of the Wire, you'd come back to what you wrote here and you'd rethink your position. I often say that I could be wrong about many things. However, in this particular situation, I know and trust that your intellect will leave you with a very, very positive view of The Wire. I am as confident in that statement as in any statement I've ever posted online. Truly.
Posted by: paranoidandroid | January 14, 2008 at 02:41 PM
I agree with Enders. The Michael scene was left a lump in my throat. He was a kid smart enough to be above this lifestyle, determined to pull himself and his brother through the ghetto situation his parents (and society) put him in. When given the task to take down anyone coming out the back door, he simply couldn't harm another child. If that child ends up a witness, he will be dealt with. He was willing to put himself in harm's way rather than hurt a child. I suspect he might try to find a way out of working for Marlo, Chris, and Snoop.
Posted by: paranoidandroid | January 14, 2008 at 02:27 PM
I undertand. I realize that I'm coming in during chapter 51 of a long, riveting novel - and I love TV series that are long, riveting novels.
But there is a point where you have to acknowledge that TV and a book are two different formats. No book is expected to have readers starting at chapter 51, but an IDEAL TV series would have power both for new and old viewers. I think Hill Street, Homicide and a few other shows pull that off.
It may well be that Wire is the best TV novel ever, but I'm not sure it is the best TV series ever.
Posted by: Jon | January 14, 2008 at 01:56 PM
The show is very strong, very well written, and an aquired taste.
It will take some time before it takes off as a new season, it is laying the foundation for a few developing story lines.
The season with the docks and the entire Avon Barksdale/Stringer Bell storyline were very compelling and very emotional.
Give the show a few more weeks to get it's land legs under it, you won't be disappointed.
My favorite shows in this vain were/are: Homicide, The Shield, Hill Street. I watched Damages first season and liked it as well.
Posted by: paranoidandroid | January 14, 2008 at 01:42 PM
(Spoiler Alert)
I do not think Episode 2 was an episode that lacked an emotional punch. Im not saying that The Wire does not have such episodes, I just think that this episode in particular was definitely not one.
If you do not know from previos episodes, Michael, even though a kid, is a serious, cold-blooded killer. He is, because he thinks he has to be (you can watch Season 4 to find out why). That is a very strong feeling to escape. The choice he made when he saw the kid running out the house was I think, very unexpected, and therefore created a strong emotional reaction for me.
Posted by: K | January 14, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Jon, I'm glad you're on board, and that you were able to jump in midstream, but I do hope you'll go back and watch the other seasons. I think of The Wire as great literature, and like a powerful novel, you won't get the full emotional and intellectual impact by reading only the last one-fifth of it.
I agree with your analysis of the newsroom scenes, and I do think this subplot looks primed to become the worst of the many hundreds of subplots the show has explored in the last five seasons. (Although I too am a big fan of Homicide and Clark Johnson -- who, as I suspect you know, also directed the pilot of The Wire.)
(Spoiler alert)
I think the "rearrangement" of the crime scene in episode 2 would have been the scene that really affected you emotionally if you'd been watching the show from the beginning, because that character is one whom viewers have fallen in love with over the years as he tries to obey the better angels of his nature. It was really a heartbreaking scene.
In the end, it's the breadth and the scope of the show that's really most amazing. In the most recent episode there were plotlines that tie all the way back to the first and second seasons, and in ways that seem not at all forced. The Wire actually has more emotional resonance than any show I've ever seen, and those moments are more well-earned than those on other shows because they have been set up so meticulously and perfectly over time. I agree that the first two episodes have been somewhat lacking in those moments, but I also think there were such moments in the first two episodes that you may have missed due to lack of backstory.
Posted by: Eric Enders | January 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM