I think the point here is that, TV teaches us, there are at least two ways (so far) to deal with the "terrorist" plot line.
One way -- and I confess a fondness for this one -- is the series FIGHT BACK which has everything to do with the "buddy movie fighting crime" arc (think, Lethal Weapon, the original) and less to do with terrorism, except as an excuse to keep the action moving with generous dollops of sex, pretty women, and action.
The other way is HOMELAND, as a strange a brew as a I have ever seen. You can compare it to some of the "thinking man's" cop shows from the 70s, you can compare it to a daytime soap opera, you can, for all I care, compare it a Cocker Spaniel. But the one thing you cannot compare it to is FIGHT BACK, because they are oil and water, chalk and cheese.
So, you may ask, why did I wait until the almost-end of the second season to walk this road? Because this episode, strange and mispaced as it is, typifies everything that is right; and everything that is wrong, with the series.
The first Act is pure 1950s daytime soap, with much gnashing of teeth over infidelity, and secret plans, and the lost innocence of youth.
Would be a yawn unless you have seen the preceding shows, and of course most of us have.
Then in the Second Act the pedal suddenly goes to the metal and we abduction, threat, blackmail, a "caper" movie, a negotiation and ... the murder of the second most powerful man in the US. The fact that the last 50 seconds has one of the "good guys" getting arrested by his own team is a nice touch.
Two different series, two different approaches to the same story. Is one better than the other? Only the viewers can decide.
One way -- and I confess a fondness for this one -- is the series FIGHT BACK which has everything to do with the "buddy movie fighting crime" arc (think, Lethal Weapon, the original) and less to do with terrorism, except as an excuse to keep the action moving with generous dollops of sex, pretty women, and action.
The other way is HOMELAND, as a strange a brew as a I have ever seen. You can compare it to some of the "thinking man's" cop shows from the 70s, you can compare it to a daytime soap opera, you can, for all I care, compare it a Cocker Spaniel. But the one thing you cannot compare it to is FIGHT BACK, because they are oil and water, chalk and cheese.
So, you may ask, why did I wait until the almost-end of the second season to walk this road? Because this episode, strange and mispaced as it is, typifies everything that is right; and everything that is wrong, with the series.
The first Act is pure 1950s daytime soap, with much gnashing of teeth over infidelity, and secret plans, and the lost innocence of youth.
Would be a yawn unless you have seen the preceding shows, and of course most of us have.
Then in the Second Act the pedal suddenly goes to the metal and we abduction, threat, blackmail, a "caper" movie, a negotiation and ... the murder of the second most powerful man in the US. The fact that the last 50 seconds has one of the "good guys" getting arrested by his own team is a nice touch.
Two different series, two different approaches to the same story. Is one better than the other? Only the viewers can decide.