|
Post by chemikalman on May 26, 2007 9:41:33 GMT -5
I have a bit of a problem with the entire premise of this season: the San Marcos murders and the subsequent Salvadoran street fair shootings. I ripped Exiled for that, mainly, but after thinking about it, the entire season is based on those two events. My problem is this: I don't think gangs indiscriminately slaughter innocents. The machete jobs on Mexican illegals "to send a message", in particular, was just too incredulous. I think gangs go after rival gang members. Family members of gang leaders might also suffer "collateral damage." I just did a quick search and apparently the proportion is not as great as I thought: www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/1376.htmlIn this article, it says "A majority of the gang-related homicide victims (64 percent) were identified as gang members, however one third of all victims had no gang involvement." But that is open to interpretation. "No gang involvement" could mean family members and it could mean people who were in the cross fire when the primary targets were gang members. I think the premise of season 6 could have been achieved by having the San Marcos murders involve the butchering of gang leaders or rank-and-file, including family members and others who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, with retaliation of the same kind, instead of random violence and random retaliation. I think all the storylines could have followed just as well had that been the case. Maybe I'm splitting hairs. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by kinglouis on May 26, 2007 9:54:26 GMT -5
I agree to an extent - the purpose of season 6 seems to be unfocused and loose after Chasing Ghosts. The effects of Lem's death have pretty much been mellowed out and we don't feel his loss as viciously and emotionally as in the first 6 episodes.
I see the San Marcos murders as something shitty that happened in the hood. The reality is that it could happen to anyone, but the point is that it presents a mystery and some shadow in Farmington. Next thing we see is that the only way to save The Barn is to close the case - and this is where I think San Marcos becomes important - to show why Farmington needs an effective strike team.
Only the strike team can solve this case, and we see how both Hiatt and Mackey handle these murders. This is a testing grounds for Hiatt - can he lead the team into solving the case to save the Barn?
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on May 26, 2007 10:43:33 GMT -5
I agree to an extent - the purpose of season 6 seems to be unfocused and loose after Chasing Ghosts. The effects of Lem's death have pretty much been mellowed out and we don't feel his loss as viciously and emotionally as in the first 6 episodes. I see the San Marcos murders as something shitty that happened in the hood. The reality is that it could happen to anyone, but the point is that it presents a mystery and some shadow in Farmington. Next thing we see is that the only way to save The Barn is to close the case - and this is where I think San Marcos becomes important - to show why Farmington needs an effective strike team. Only the strike team can solve this case, and we see how both Hiatt and Mackey handle these murders. This is a testing grounds for Hiatt - can he lead the team into solving the case to save the Barn? I agree with why San Marcos is important, I just wonder why the writers chose the victims to be innocent illegals. There's a good oxymoron, huh? There had to be some reason and I won't rest until I find out what it was, ha. Was it the Salvadorans' way of saying these illegals are symbolic to the Mexican inhabitants. Symbolic of their desire to find a better life, which is a reason a large number of Mexicans are now living in LA in the first place? So, butchering them was intended to really cut into the souls of the Mexican community? Killing Mexican illegals was symbolic in another way: simply that they were illegal. Was it the Salvadorans way of saying it doesn't matter if the contraband is drugs or human beings?--you rip them off in one form and you might have to pay the price in another form? Or was the message simply if the Salvadorans are that ruthless they must be taken seriously? Maybe it's that and I'm just overthinking it.
|
|
|
Post by kinglouis on May 26, 2007 10:55:36 GMT -5
As an Australian, I'm not privy much to the American way of life. Whether this is right or wrong I don't know, but The Shield seems to present LA as a place filled with Mexican immigrants. This seems true to an extent - from my experience listening to NPR news on Aussie radio.
I believe that the Mexican community in LA would feel so much more fear knowing that 12 random illegals were slaughtered. I mean doesn't it feel that way? If they were just bangers, who cares - another dozen losers dying being part of that life. Sure the case needs to be solved, but if 12 innocents died...
I also don't want to spoil 9 and 10 for you since you're adamant about that - these are all views from someone who has "only seen the first 8 episodes".
"Innocent illegals being butchered" also adds an element of mystery to it. Bangers kill bangers. If they kill innocents, they don't kill them by the handful. So why is it that bangers were killing such a large number of illegals? There's something amiss here. Or maybe something big is happening.
Those were my thoughts as San Marcos began to slowly unravel. I do agree that too much focus was put on it. The focus should always have been Lem's death, and whilst it was for the first half of the season - the focus was lost afterwards. San Marcos sort of "took over".
|
|
|
Post by icy on May 26, 2007 13:28:51 GMT -5
[/quote]I agree with why San Marcos is important, I just wonder why the writers chose the victims to be innocent illegals. There's a good oxymoron, huh? There had to be some reason and I won't rest until I find out what it was, ha.[/quote] I take it you plan on asking Adam, then. As far as Lem goes...everybody is running in different directions since: 1. Vic slayed the wrong guy for Lem's murder and found out Shane dropped the grenade. 2. Aceveda is on a new errand boy run toying with Claudette's puppet strings with these immigrant murders for the sole purpose of slithering up the political power pole while manipulating everybody and their livelihoods who works the barn in his process.
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on May 26, 2007 13:31:09 GMT -5
As an Australian, I'm not privy much to the American way of life. Whether this is right or wrong I don't know, but The Shield seems to present LA as a place filled with Mexican immigrants. This seems true to an extent - from my experience listening to NPR news on Aussie radio. I remember something a friend told me long ago: East LA has the 3rd larges concentration of Mexicans in the world, after Mexico City and Guadalara (I think). That rank is still probably true. Exactly. Which brings me to the other problem I had with Exiled ... the developer friend of Aceveda saying the community would consider the gang sweep a "siege." As I said in the Season 6 ep discussion thread, and as you are suggesting above, I would think the community would welcome it. I appreciate that. Good question. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on May 26, 2007 13:34:04 GMT -5
I take it you plan on asking Adam, then. Yes, the thought did occur to me. True, too. Good ol' Ass-invader is consistent at least, right?
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on May 26, 2007 23:41:14 GMT -5
Tsarina encouraged me to post to Kurt Sutter's blog and I'm glad I did. First, I commented by agreeing that a grenade was the way Shane would have done it. Then I said I would like to ask about the San Marcos murders. A little while later Kurt posted a brief blog about that. What was interesting is that the first sentence he wrote was that he ended ep S05-01 by having a bunch of gangbangers massacred, not Mexican illegal aliens. So I replied about the whole question that's been bugging me ... why "innocents" instead of gangbangers? Guess I'll find out from the horse's mouth.
|
|
|
Post by kinglouis on May 27, 2007 2:48:47 GMT -5
He's replied.
Kurt Sutter's blog kicks ass
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on May 27, 2007 10:00:30 GMT -5
He's replied. Kurt Sutter's blog kicks ass I just read it and I'm buying into his answer. Now I'll be able to sleep at night. Wow, quick reply, too. His blog does kick ass.
|
|
|
Post by -|E|- on May 27, 2007 23:42:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Nick Mills on May 28, 2007 12:23:28 GMT -5
One of them was a Mexican official or something who had his arm hacked off... think that was in one of the early episodes. So they weren't all innocent. They were all gangsters coming from Mexico. So it was a gang message, if anything (IMO) but who set it up and why is something not yet known.
|
|
|
Post by ShootFirst on May 29, 2007 10:16:02 GMT -5
As an Australian, I'm not privy much to the American way of life. Whether this is right or wrong I don't know, but The Shield seems to present LA as a place filled with Mexican immigrants. This seems true to an extent - from my experience listening to NPR news on Aussie radio. I remember something a friend told me long ago: East LA has the 3rd larges concentration of Mexicans in the world, after Mexico City and Guadalara (I think). That rank is still probably true. Exactly. Which brings me to the other problem I had with Exiled ... the developer friend of Aceveda saying the community would consider the gang sweep a "siege." As I said in the Season 6 ep discussion thread, and as you are suggesting above, I would think the community would welcome it. I appreciate that. Good question. Agreed. Very good points here. Chem you are quite right about the amount of emphasis. I believe the impact of San Marcos and the underlying "reasoning" behind the whole thing, including it's importance to S6 could have been much greater if presented in a different light. It could still be important to the whole scheme of things while clearly taking a back seat if you will to Lem's death. Shane, while only trying to protect his own ass, hit the nail on the head when he told Claudette that they hadn't done jack lately about trying to find Lem's killer and had that it had taken too much of a place on the back burner of things.
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on May 29, 2007 11:27:19 GMT -5
I remember something a friend told me long ago: East LA has the 3rd larges concentration of Mexicans in the world, after Mexico City and Guadalara (I think). That rank is still probably true. Exactly. Which brings me to the other problem I had with Exiled ... the developer friend of Aceveda saying the community would consider the gang sweep a "siege." As I said in the Season 6 ep discussion thread, and as you are suggesting above, I would think the community would welcome it. I appreciate that. Good question. Agreed. Very good points here. Chem you are quite right about the amount of emphasis. I believe the impact of San Marcos and the underlying "reasoning" behind the whole thing, including it's importance to S6 could have been much greater if presented in a different light. It could still be important to the whole scheme of things while clearly taking a back seat if you will to Lem's death. Shane, while only trying to protect his own ass, hit the nail on the head when he told Claudette that they hadn't done jack lately about trying to find Lem's killer and had that it had taken too much of a place on the back burner of things. It's funny, isn't it shootfirst, that by trying to protect his own ass with that comment, Shane might later regret it. Shane has a knack for having his plans, or in this case his mouth, backfire on him. One of them was a Mexican official or something who had his arm hacked off... think that was in one of the early episodes. So they weren't all innocent. They were all gangsters coming from Mexico. So it was a gang message, if anything (IMO) but who set it up and why is something not yet known. nickmackey: You're quite right about the Mexican official having his arm whacked off .. and he certainly didn't look too innocent in that last episode, did he? I'll have to rewatch this entire season. I do seem to remember that some gangsters were being released from Mexican jails due to overcrowding. But I don't think the smuggled aliens were all gangsters from Mexico. I think some women and children slaughtered too. For one thing, Kurt would have said that (they were all gangsters, not innocents). He was funny ... he said he can barely remember his phone number and I'm expecting him to remember what her wrote last year? heh. E is right, when the writers have to chart this season to keep things straight, how do they expect us to follow? Hey, UPS should be a sponsor this season ... though they may have to come up with a new trademark line. "What can brown do for you?" may not come across quite the way they would like, har har!
|
|
|
Post by ShootFirst on May 29, 2007 13:37:38 GMT -5
It definitley is ironic, Chem, about Shane's comment coming back to bite him in the ass. I believe that he truly was overcome with guilt and remorse over what he did. When he and Vic had the showdown, he changed instantly and went into rattlesnake mode. Protect yourself at all times and at all costs. He probably still feels bad but now it's about him and him alone. Doens't like what he did but knows, at least in his mind, that there was no other way.
And as I said before, there's just something fishy about the entire story of San Marcos. The developer is a snake and there's probably a lot more to the story that hasn't come out yet. Big stuff yet to happen I think.
|
|