![]() ![]() While Season 1 was far more kinetic, season 2 is more psychological. What does season 2 have in store for the audience? Sometimes you've got to do a bad thing to stop a worse thing from happening. Once Joe enters the field himself, he releases that things unfortunately are not that simple and real life consequences make tough real world decisions less binary and far more complicated and nuanced. His idealistic position is one that has been formulated in relative safety of the classroom or round the dinner table, benefiting with the benefit of hindsight. While this is definitely a cathartic way of thinking, its also highly unrealistic, ineffective and actually unachievable. He has that youthful instinct to want to burn the broken system down, as he sees it, and rebuild. ![]() I think when you first meet Joe, he has a strong idealistic streak verging on naivety. This sort of connects to the first question. How would you describe Joe Turner’s evolution throughout the seasons of the show? Just take a look at the CIAs involvement in South America during the 20th century. I think a lot of people recognize that America has done business with the world, often using underhand and forceful tactics to ensure economic success at home. I think a lot of viewers identify with the this. In season 1 Joe finds himself complicit in this self-perpetuating system, and therefore reinforcing it. When it comes to terrorism, which is Joes area, perhaps work to treat the source of the problem, as opposed to bombing the shit out of the symptoms. Joe believes, as i do for that matter, that what goes around comes around. Joe recognizes America's economic success partly comes at the price of the suffering of others who are out of sight and out of mind. I think the writers did a very good job with instilling conflict into Joe. What’s the best part about playing Joe Turner? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |