Having watched "24"s first season for the second time now I'm not as impressed with the ending as I was when I saw it for the first time. I keep wondering what else the writer's could have done. Obviously they could have added a happy ending as they show in the brief alternative ending which is included on DVD. But that one doesn't feel very convincing either.
The first twelve hour part of the first season feels stronger than the second. In this last episode Jack saves Palmers life for the second time but I can't help almost being with Sherry here - he wouldn't have to save his life if he hadn't come near him in the first place.
Whereas this isn't true for the first attack on Palmer roughly twelve hours earlier, the second attempt on his life seems weakly motivated from the point of view of writing. It's also good to have Mike Novick about who's right agreeing with Sherry that the "charade" about the senator being dead is a political fault, and it's not really convincing that David Palmer only is full of gratitude and concern about his life saver Jack.
The other thing is that Sherry becomes almost unbearable when listening to her the second time, which luckily is also the growing opinion of her husband who confronts her with the consequences and finally ends it. I'm grateful for that.
Nina turning out to be the mole and Teri dying are two extremely surprising and shocking elements watching them once, but are they strong enough to also convince watching them twice? Nina was so good as Jacks support in the CTU - just like Chloe O'Brian later will be (although a completely different character) - isn't it asked too much from this character and the so far fine performance of Sarah Clarke to be turned around like that? and isn't the same true for the death of Teri? hadn't there been a chance for a happy ending which wouldn't be just a cliché? to me there's an arbitrary taste about it. The writers favorite solution of killing their characters - as we will see later so many more times - might be a better solution than to let them live happily ever after but maybe it shouldn't be the only possible ending of everything.
Also, there is a lot of other things in this episode which later we will see returning again and again, and it doesn't change the elements much that different people will play them then.
Still it's always enjoying to watch the first seasons actors again: Leslie Hope, wondering what kind of lover she would have been for Jack in the seasons to come had she survived; Sarah Clarke; Elisha Cuthbert; Dennis Haysbert; Carlos Bernard whose character Tony is only starting to form in this season and will become so much more important and central in the later seasons; and, if you ask me, on top of them all Xander Berkeley with a fine if not brilliant performance. Well, not quite above the whole crowd.. If you're a fan of Kiefers which a "24"-fan usually is (and I am no exception), best scenes are of course where he's in. (Even if his added commentary on the DVD-edition - read from some strange teleprompter or whatever - is lousy..)
The first twelve hour part of the first season feels stronger than the second. In this last episode Jack saves Palmers life for the second time but I can't help almost being with Sherry here - he wouldn't have to save his life if he hadn't come near him in the first place.
Whereas this isn't true for the first attack on Palmer roughly twelve hours earlier, the second attempt on his life seems weakly motivated from the point of view of writing. It's also good to have Mike Novick about who's right agreeing with Sherry that the "charade" about the senator being dead is a political fault, and it's not really convincing that David Palmer only is full of gratitude and concern about his life saver Jack.
The other thing is that Sherry becomes almost unbearable when listening to her the second time, which luckily is also the growing opinion of her husband who confronts her with the consequences and finally ends it. I'm grateful for that.
Nina turning out to be the mole and Teri dying are two extremely surprising and shocking elements watching them once, but are they strong enough to also convince watching them twice? Nina was so good as Jacks support in the CTU - just like Chloe O'Brian later will be (although a completely different character) - isn't it asked too much from this character and the so far fine performance of Sarah Clarke to be turned around like that? and isn't the same true for the death of Teri? hadn't there been a chance for a happy ending which wouldn't be just a cliché? to me there's an arbitrary taste about it. The writers favorite solution of killing their characters - as we will see later so many more times - might be a better solution than to let them live happily ever after but maybe it shouldn't be the only possible ending of everything.
Also, there is a lot of other things in this episode which later we will see returning again and again, and it doesn't change the elements much that different people will play them then.
Still it's always enjoying to watch the first seasons actors again: Leslie Hope, wondering what kind of lover she would have been for Jack in the seasons to come had she survived; Sarah Clarke; Elisha Cuthbert; Dennis Haysbert; Carlos Bernard whose character Tony is only starting to form in this season and will become so much more important and central in the later seasons; and, if you ask me, on top of them all Xander Berkeley with a fine if not brilliant performance. Well, not quite above the whole crowd.. If you're a fan of Kiefers which a "24"-fan usually is (and I am no exception), best scenes are of course where he's in. (Even if his added commentary on the DVD-edition - read from some strange teleprompter or whatever - is lousy..)