TV Review: "The Great" - UCSD Guardian
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Accessed: 6/10/2020 TV Review: "The Great" - UCSD Guardian To learn more about The UCSD Guardian's coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic, click here → TV Review: “The Great” May 25, 2020 Chloe Esser “The Great” doesn’t care about history, and neither should you. From creator of “The Favourite” Tony McNamara comes another historical retelling that slides right out of the conventions typically associated with the period drama genre into a terribly clever, terrifically dark piece of its own. “The Great” covers Russian empress Catherine the Great’s rise to power as a teenage girl — with some massive liberties. The show neatly balances the courtly decadence and subtle power plays of “The Favourite” with the blood, sex, and quick wit that’s to be expected in a world where all historical dramas must compete to be the next “Game of Thrones.” Nevertheless, it’s a well-maintained balance. Heavily stylized, effortlessly witty, and maybe a bit needlessly obscene, “The Great” is a show that knows exactly what it is, whether or not that has anything to do with actual history. The show begins with German teenager Catherine (Elle Fanning), who has come to Russia to marry a man she has never met –– Emperor Peter III (Nicholas Hoult). An idealist and intellectual caught up in the wave of Europe’s Enlightenment, Catherine has big plans for Accessed: 6/10/2020 TV Review: "The Great" - UCSD Guardian her new home, and she is disappointed to find a court more concerned with hunting, sex, and booze than discussing the latest Voltaire. With Catherine caught between her own idealism and the darker waves of discontent within the court, there seems to be one obvious way to create the Russia she wants: lead a coup and murder her husband. On the surface, this matches up well enough with history, although even a cursory glance at Wikipedia shows that anything beyond a barebones description of the show is pure fiction. However, “The Great” revels in its own inaccuracies, appropriately subtitled “an occasionally true story.” Refreshingly, this pointed lack of interest in history allows the show to take liberties period pieces rarely do, including its tongue-in-cheek tone and its freedom to develop characters and plot lines however they wish. McNamara also used color blind casting, which allowed actors of color to feature in major roles within the royal court instead of being relegated to the background, as they so often are in the genre. Fanning’s and Hoult’s performances as the unhappy couple are equally compelling and hilarious. Fanning’s Catherine is stunning and headstrong –– her early portrayal may frustrate audiences with her naivety, but she also inspires with her compassion and idealism. “The Great” allows us to watch her grow from a child to a woman of great political cunning within this harsh world she’s stepped into –– but always on her terms. Hoult, in contrast, is all comedy, and perhaps the show’s biggest selling point. Peter is hilarious, petty, and nearly child-like, yet often shocking with his out-of-proportion brutality. Still, Hoult’s performance almost gives you hope for the character, even after his atrocities. The show, whose foundation is built around how badly these people fit into each other’s worlds, is at its absolute best when the two characters clash. Both begin as naive in their own way, with Catherine a genuine innocent and Peter still convinced that the world is his plaything, and their brutal back-and-forth of both admiration and hatred is easily the core of the show’s ten episodes. This core is reinforced, by a well-developed supporting cast. “The Great” establishes side characters’ private storylines and personal ambitions with the easy comedy of an ensemble-based sitcom, and it’s only when the show’s political wheels really start to turn that it becomes clear that what they’ve really been doing is laying out a chessboard. But don’t let that fool you –– at the end of the day, this is Catherine’s story, and the final moments are all hers. Still, the show is not without its flaws –– at the risk of sounding prudish, the series’ dark humor sometimes relies too heavily on its lewdness. There’s some degree to which the Accessed: 6/10/2020 TV Review: "The Great" - UCSD Guardian obscenity feels appropriate to juxtaposing the show’s obscene world against the sheltered Catherine. And then, to another degree, it’s just funny. Nevertheless, there are only so many times you can watch Peter give detailed accounts of sexual exploits before feeling like the writers just didn’t know what else to do. “The Great” is also annoyingly guilty of the all-too- common “all Europeans have British accents” fallacy so many shows seem to fall into, though this is a small offense. Overall, “The Great” juggles its material well, managing history with modern aesthetic tastes, mixing darkness with humor, and balancing its often stunning visuals with an occasional unapologetic gruesomeness oddly well. History fan or not, “The Great” is well worth the watch. Grade: B+ Creator: Tony McNamara Starring: Elle Fanning, Nicholas Hoult, Phoebe Fox, Sacha Dhawan Release date: May 15, 2020 on Hulu Rated: TV-MA Image courtesy of Den of Greek. Accessed: 6/10/2020 Head-to-head: In the age of COVID-19, Should Food Delivery Companies Provide more Benefits to their Workers? - UCSD Guardian May 25, 2020 Pankhuri Kohli In this head-to-head, UCSD Guardian Opinion writer’s Sean Kim and Pankhuri Kohli present different views on how to help food delivery workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pankhuri Kohli – Yes! During the time of COVID-19, delivery workers who work for food and grocery companies are crucial in providing normalcy. They deliver food and essential items and help local businesses stay afloat. Furthermore, since so many college students order online and participate in related jobs, this issue impacts us deeply. However, despite the significant role delivery workers play in our lives, they do not receive proper compensation and support. In the midst of a global pandemic, such conditions put delivery people and their consumers at risk. Thus, while COVID-19 remains an imminent threat, delivery companies need to provide better pay and benefits for their delivery workers. Accessed: 6/10/2020 Head-to-head: In the age of COVID-19, Should Food Delivery Companies Provide more Benefits to their Workers? - UCSD Guardian Since the pandemic began, more than 36 million people have filed for unemployment. Still, the unique demands of the pandemic mean that the gig economy, which consists of temporary and flexible job positions, has been one of the few sectors hiring. Usually, delivery workers work for supplemental income, flexible hours, and the freedom to work for multiple companies. However, current conditions have increasingly made delivery work people’s primary job. In fact, almost a third of gig workers work full-time in their jobs. Despite changing circumstances though, delivery jobs do not offer minimum wage, overtime pay, and benefits such as insurance and paid sick leave. While these conditions make sense when people have the choice to treat delivery work as supplemental, that is increasingly not the case. Thus, treating all delivery jobs as supplemental endangers the well-being of workers who work full-time and rely primarily on these jobs for basic necessities. In addition to short-changing workers, the lack of benefits and adequate pay hurts customers as well. Since companies underpay workers, delivery workers rely on customer tips to make ends meet. As a result, worker pay becomes volatile even though customers taking on the burden to pay more does not guarantee them better service. This adds stress for workers and puts additional burden on customers without benefit to either party. To make matters worse, like most essential workers, delivery workers are constantly exposed to the coronavirus. However, their limited access to protective gear, health care, or paid sick leave incentivizes working when sick, increasing the risk of infection for consumers. Consequently, delivery workers’ access to health care and paid sick leave is imperative not only to their own but also to their communities’ well-being. Moreover, bettering working conditions for delivery workers ensures that they benefit from the profit companies make from their labor. While countless companies have lost money due to the pandemic, tech companies such as those employing delivery workers have been the least affected. Ensuring that companies adequately take care of delivery workers provides them their fair share for bolstering companies in this trying time. Additionally, while companies and their shareholders make profit, many delivery workers have to use unemployment benefits to survive, despite the fact that their employers do not contribute to these payments. The need for delivery workers to use social safety nets unfairly burdens taxpayers. Furthermore, the government having to protect workers who should be protected by the employers they make money for takes away funds from other necessary services, which is particularly detrimental in this time of crisis. Additionally, in a broader economic sense, paying workers fairly is imperative to recover from the current financial crisis because without workers who can buy goods and services, we do not have consumers. Ultimately, the COVID-19 crisis continues to exacerbate inequities in our current economic Accessed: 6/10/2020 Head-to-head: In the age of COVID-19, Should Food Delivery Companies Provide more Benefits to their Workers? - UCSD Guardian system, such as the unequal burden put on workers to sustain risk. Moreover, companies need to ensure delivery workers are protected for the sake of their consumers too, especially as worker health is also community health.