Six Feet Under - 6/1/03 - Season Finale

Patrick Sun · 06-01-2003, 10:48 PM

Ah damn, the season wasn't a Nate dream. Poor Nate, he's stuck with this reality. Sucks to be him.

Am I the only one that thinks Brenda looks a bit like John Cameron Mitchell (in drag) from "Hedwig and the Angry Inch"?

Finally, we get to lay Lisa to rest (about damn time!).

Ruth's quickie marriage seems rash. Claire's emotional blubbering at the ceremony was a bit strange.

Glad David and Keith are giving it another shot. They lowered their fences a bit more between them.

Brenda's world is going to be complicated with Nate back in the mix, and the new neighbor.

Claire's decision to abort her pregnancy hit home in a sudden way as Lisa told her she'd be looking out for him. Claire got to make some peace with Gabe.

Nathaniel was downright scary riding shotgun with a battered and confused Nate. Nathaniel almost curling up in the fetal position in front of Ruth is a bit indicative of how the living moving on can still inflict some pain on the dead.

Todd Terwilliger · 06-01-2003, 11:45 PM

Don't forget about Rico and the stripper!

I thought this was a good way to wrap the season. I just wish the emphasis wasn't almost totally doom and gloom like it has been. I know Ruth is in a good place but it may be just me but it doesn't feel right.

Steve_Tk · 06-02-2003, 12:22 AM

I actually liked Keith for the first time in a long time tonight.

I thought Nate was going to die. And had no clue he would end up where he did.

And that was funny about the falling ice, even though it shouldn't be funny the jokes Rico and David were making, but I still laughed.

And I would say that I knew it wasn't all a dream. But as far as I know, they could start season 4 with him waking up from the dream. So I will not say anything.

Jehan · 06-02-2003, 01:53 AM

I thought the finale was really good (at least compared to the episodes this season). Somehow it just seemed to fit nicely with how the characters were evolving and an appropriate place to leave the show at this point.

Some amazing scenes in there too, Claire was great, and nearly all the scenes with Nate going off with different people were eerie. Did find it a little odd that the whole Russell situation was left untouched in this episode, I thought he might show up in the park at one point but I guess they'll save that drama for next season

. I liked the wedding, and for once the David/Keith scenes weren't tired and obnoxious. Ironic that the season ends with Nate & Brenda together (well in a certain respect). Definately not as good as the previous 2 seasons overall, but this capped it off rather well IMO (one of my favorite stand-alone episodes of the 3 seasons).

Lee L · 06-02-2003, 07:33 AM

Classic line, "f--- you car, you're locked!"

**HTF Ads**

Michael Reuben · 06-02-2003, 08:52 AM

Good episode, but my wife pointed out something that, for me, finally identified what's been missing this season.

The death from falling blue ice wasn't an integral part of the episode. At most, it provided yet another opportunity for Nate to show how badly he's losing it. And as I think back over this third season, that's been typical of the episodes -- a mark of how far into the background the funeral business has retreated. During the first two seasons, we had the Kroehner rivalry, first through Matt Gilardi and then through Mitzi Dalton-Huntley, both memorable characters. We had Nate getting his license, a visit to a convention, numerous side trips into the economics and mechanics of the business -- and all of it provided an essential background against which the Fishers' various struggles unfolded.

That element disappeared almost entirely this season, which I suspect is the reason that season 3 has been criticized as little more than soap opera. With occasional exceptions (e.g., the first episode), the death that begins each episode has played only a perfunctory role in the episode itself, and even when the death was more integrally connected (as with Brenda's father), it felt more like a plot device (we need to have Brenda stay around) than an essential element.

The entire arc leading to Lisa's death has had an arbitrary, mechanical feel to it. It's as if the writers painted themselves into a corner by marrying off Nate, and now they have to do something abrupt and credibility-straining to break themselves free, so that they can fulfill the audience's desire to see Nate go back to Brenda. We're falling back into the TV drama formulas that Alan Ball was so determined to break.

I think I'll go back to watching my season 1 discs now.

M.

Lew Crippen · 06-02-2003, 09:35 AM

Good points, Michael. For me this series has never been quite as good as it seemed on the surface. Which seems a bit of a contradiction in logic. But, for me the acting (and sometimes the directing) is so incredibly fine and consistent, that I feel the writers get away with some things that they might otherwise not. This just became more apparent this season.

Mike X · 06-02-2003, 09:37 AM

"Ruth's quickie marriage seems rash."

I firmly believe that the writers intended to take the Ruth-Arthur relationship further, but decided mid stream that it just wasn't going to work. The overall plot still called for Ruth to be happily involved, so they inserted the James Cromwell character late.

Michael Reuben · 06-02-2003, 09:57 AM

Lew, I do think the first season holds up very well on repeated viewings, in large part because both the writers and the actors were exploring a world not previously seen on TV (or, for that matter, in mainstream movies) in addition to characters who were layered and interesting. This season, it's as if the writers have lost interest in that world.

Rico is an excellent example. He was much more interesting as a talented restorer trying to get recognition for his work (in seasons 1 and 2) than as the frustrated husband of a manic-depressive wife with an obnoxious sister-in-law. The latter character feels like someone we've seen; the former was all new. This is not to take anything away from Freddy Rodriguez's work, which has been consistently excellent. It's strictly a criticism of the writing.

M.