Wish list for Season 2

Showtime brought us three seasons of this strong television drama, featuring large weekly doses of Jason Isaacs! Find articles, reviews, and viewer comments about Brotherhood--and add your own!

Moderators: thunder, Gillian, Chari910, fruitbat, catloveyes, Helen8, kjshd05, Marie, LadyLucius

lyra70
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:25 am

Wish list for Season 2

Post by lyra70 » Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:32 am

I hope this hasn't been done, apologies if it has! If you could, what would you like to ask the writers to make happen in Season 2?

Foodie
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:55 pm
Location: Washington State

Post by Foodie » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:11 pm

One thing I would like to see for the next season is a little bit of humor. I don't need a laugh track or slapstick humor, but a line here or there just to cut the tension and give it a slightly better balance. It's a great show, but it's so very dark, which I get it, it's edgy, but life isn't all dark drama, sometimes fun and funny stuff happens too.

Oh, and how about Michael moving out into a place of his own? That way he's not the "creepy guy who still lives with his mom". That would be nice too!

-Foodie :D

lyra70
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:25 am

Post by lyra70 » Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:09 pm

You have to admit that the idea of a gangster living with his mommy and being tucked into bed is kind of funny though. Also the scene where Tommy and Michael are fighting after the movie theatre business and Rose comes to the door wearing her rubber dishwashing gloves and says "Boys!" (in the exact same tone I use with my 9 and 5 year old sons when they are fighting)...That was funny. But I agree, a bit more of that kind of humor where the situation just strikes you as funny, would be cool.

I'm a terrible romantic so I'd like Michael Caffee to fall in love, so much so that it's an emotion that surprises him. He won't go all touchy feely on us though because that would be just wrong, he'll be the same ruthless cold-blooded killer as ever, but then there'll be that part of his life that will be new to him. It will have to be a woman that would really knock him out, the kind that he hasn't been used to dealing with, maybe someone very high-class and unaware of his shady dealings and it would have to be believable to viewers that he is completely smitten. Then there can be storylines where because she is connected with certain people he'll have to struggle with decisions that he normally wouldn't have done.

I know there's already one alcoholic in Pete but wouldn't it be interesting if just as Eileen is starting to overcome her drug habit, Tommy started on the drink too much and it became something of a problem? I mean Pete's type of alcoholism is so extreme that they could make Tommy's the more subtle kind, always having to have a drink after work and losing control once in a while but never admitting he has a problem. I am sure this is very common too.

Moira
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 9:00 am

Post by Moira » Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:23 pm

lyra70 wrote:...I'm a terrible romantic so I'd like Michael Caffee to fall in love, so much so that it's an emotion that surprises him. He won't go all touchy feely on us though because that would be just wrong, he'll be the same ruthless cold-blooded killer as ever, but then there'll be that part of his life that will be new to him. It will have to be a woman that would really knock him out, the kind that he hasn't been used to dealing with, maybe someone very high-class and unaware of his shady dealings and it would have to be believable to viewers that he is completely smitten. Then there can be storylines where because she is connected with certain people he'll have to struggle with decisions that he normally wouldn't have done.
No disrespect meant, and nothing personally directed towards you for having the idea, but...to me, that's just sooo Mary-Sue Fanfic! I've read a couple BH Mary-Sue fanfics, and.... :spew2

If Michael ever fell in love, I'd stop watching the show. There's nothing I've seen so far -- no foreshadowing, no hints-- that makes me believe that he's capable of anything except a strong feeling of ownership that he labels affection, case in point being Kat. Michael Caffe thinks that not demanding that his Psycho College Girl lover let him f*** her in the @$$ is being a Gentleman. Not for one second would I be convinced that Michael Caffe could be "completely smitten." If he were, for me he'd cease being Michael Caffe, and my love for the show would be over.

Call me a cynic. ;-)

Gillian
Site Admin
Posts: 4407
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

Post by Gillian » Wed Apr 25, 2007 6:16 pm

I don't think it's all that Mary-Sue. You can't work from the premise that Michael is totally without feeling or beyond the capacity for love. If that were the case his relationship with his family would be almost non-existant and you would never see those flashes of vulnerability we've seen scattered throughout the show.

No, I believe that Michael can fall in love, but it would still have to fall within the confines of his character. Much like his mother, I think that if he did have a serious relationship he'd probably try to keep that part of his life secret. Whether or not he could successfully live that kind of double-life (without tragic consequences) is another matter altogether and probably the real question we should be asking.

lyra70
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:25 am

Post by lyra70 » Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:22 pm

No disrespect meant, and nothing personally directed towards you for having the idea, but...to me, that's just sooo Mary-Sue Fanfic! I've read a couple BH Mary-Sue fanfics, and.... :spew2
I'm not offended, Moira! I realize it does sound really squishy and swear I am not the type to read romance novels or even watch romantic movies (ew). But I have to say I do enjoy a bit of romance when it's on the peripheral of whatever else is going on, to humanize things a bit.

As Gillian said:
I don't think it's all that Mary-Sue. You can't work from the premise that Michael is totally without feeling or beyond the capacity for love. If that were the case his relationship with his family would be almost non-existant and you would never see those flashes of vulnerability we've seen scattered throughout the show.
I love that Michael Caffee is a ruthless gangster with a vicious temper and the soul of a jackal, willing to break a dog's leg with his bare hands etc. I really do love that and don't want him to get all squishy on us. But if that's all he was, if he was an asshole even to his mother for example, then it would be too one-dimensional, for me, anyway.

If he did fall in love, I'd like that he is uncomfortable about it, that in fact he doesn't accept it because it's an emotion that would interfere with his plans. So when I say that, I don't mean he does the whole flowers and courtship thing (please, no) but that it's one more thing he has to struggle against on his road to power.

Moira
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 9:00 am

Post by Moira » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:40 am

Gillian wrote:I don't think it's all that Mary-Sue. You can't work from the premise that Michael is totally without feeling or beyond the capacity for love. If that were the case his relationship with his family would be almost non-existant and you would never see those flashes of vulnerability we've seen scattered throughout the show.
But I can work from that premise. Not to give TMI, but I've known men like Michael. And IMO Michael's feeling towards his family isn't love, but possession. Having been the victim of his father, he's determined to never allow someone to have mastery over he and his ever again. Not because he has deep, abiding love for them, but because they're his. His protection of his family is based on not wanting someone else to use them, but he's not above using them himself. I think the only possible exception is Rose.
No, I believe that Michael can fall in love, but it would still have to fall within the confines of his character. Much like his mother, I think that if he did have a serious relationship he'd probably try to keep that part of his life secret. Whether or not he could successfully live that kind of double-life (without tragic consequences) is another matter altogether and probably the real question we should be asking.
Men like Michael can be at times very romantic (flowers, wooing), and then turn very, very nasty. This is why it's so often difficult for women to leave them. ("He's not all bad," as the woman looks at the roses he sent and ignores the bruises.) It seems impossible that a man can be simultaneously endearing and vicious. I don't think Michael has a sincerely romantic bone in his body. I believe, like many abusive men, he thinks he does ("I'm not a bad man.") If it came to it, I've no doubt he'd attack Psycho Girl or Kat or any woman, if she "pushed my buttons."

I actually like Romance novels. But only those who truly understand the line between a rogue with a heart of gold and an abuser. There's no heart of gold in Michael. Look, this guy tosses children off rooftops. Please don't think that a man capable of that is capable of true, sincere, mature love.

Too often women readers and viewers can't tell one from the other. Crissakes, there were people who wanted Starling and Hannibal Lector to fall in love, and Thomas Harris, the most cynical fiction writer alive, was more than happy to accommodate their fantasies. Hannibal Lector as a love interest. A man who eats people alive. That any woman would lust after a cannibal makes me despair.

Michael doesn't eat people. But he has a stockpile of bodies that exceeds Lector's. This is a guy you think can love?

Of course, Season Two may prove me completely wrong. But if Michael does fall in love, I want the writers to build up to it, to foreshadow it. Give me proof that he's always had the capacity to love. If they don't, and it happens all of a sudden, then it's absolutely out of his character as it's been depicted so far. The writers would lose all my respect. They're damn good enough to show us that Michael's character has changed, and why. But if he has an Epiphany that isn't sufficiently backed up, then they'd be coasting. And I've got no respect for excellent writers who coast.

This discussion makes me think of an Appalachian folk tale. A beautiful young woman headed to the field in the cold, misty morning finds a rattlesnake in the dirt road.

"Please help me!" cries the rattlesnake. "I'm freezing to death! Please hold me to your breast so I can warm up!"

"But you'll bite me," says the girl.

"I swear I won't hurt you a'tall," says the snake. "I would never hurt someone so young and pretty and kind!"

The girl takes pity on him. She gingerly lifts the rattlesnake, slips him into her middyblouse, and holds him to her breast.

As soon as he's nice and warm, the rattlesnake bites her.

"How could you do that?" wails the girl as she's dying.

"Hey," says the rattlensnake, "you knew what I was when you picked me up."

Gillian
Site Admin
Posts: 4407
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

Post by Gillian » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:54 pm

Men like Michael can be at times very romantic (flowers, wooing), and then turn very, very nasty. This is why it's so often difficult for women to leave them. ("He's not all bad," as the woman looks at the roses he sent and ignores the bruises.) It seems impossible that a man can be simultaneously endearing and vicious. I don't think Michael has a sincerely romantic bone in his body. I believe, like many abusive men, he thinks he does ("I'm not a bad man.") If it came to it, I've no doubt he'd attack Psycho Girl or Kat or any woman, if she "pushed my buttons."
Psycho Girl's pushed his buttons on many an occassion and has yet to come out of this with even so much as a black eye. In fact, I think he's shown a weird kind of chilvalry with her. Be interesting to see if it lasts.

No. I've been in an abusive relationship myself and from what I've seen, Michael doesn't quite fit the profile. Sure he's a thug, and a violent one at that, but he still operates from a moral code, and that doesn't include abusing women just for the sake of it. In fact there's a lot of similarities between Michael and Tommy. They're both devoted to family, their loyal to the neighbourhood, but each can be just as ruthless when it comes to getting what they want. That's just the way business is for them -- you either swim with the sharks or you're eaten. (Strangely enough, I think Micheal is more attentive to women than Tommy is. He's a lot closer to Rose as a son and a lot more intimitate with Kath than Tommy is with Eileen.)
Look, this guy tosses children off rooftops.
I don't think she was a child (?), but the girl she sexually molested was. My theory is that by doing what she did, and being what she was (a bull dyke) then Micheal no longer perceived her as a woman. Her behaviour was that of a man's, one that so deeply crossed a line that there could only be one form of punishment. But again, I think that was an extreme case. That's not to say he's an angel. Dude certainly can and does bend the rules, (Slow Charlie's sister, for instance) but that was business as far as he was concerned, and in his world, probably an acceptable if not fucked up way of conducting it.
But he has a stockpile of bodies that exceeds Lector's. This is a guy you think can love?
Probably not the best analogy. You can't compare a psychological monster to a thug. They're two entirely different creatures. I might entertain it if (and when) Michael sits down to enjoy his next victim with some fava beans and a nice Cianti, but I'm not holding my breath. :D


Interesting conversation, by the way. I'm quite enjoying it.

User avatar
Hilary the Touched
Site Registrant
Posts: 7031
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 2:11 pm
Location: The Frozen North
Contact:

Post by Hilary the Touched » Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:13 pm

Gillian, I think Moira was referring to the young Hmong drug dealer when she mentioned roof-tossing.

And I think there's a bigger question here that I'm certainly not equipped to answer: what happens to somebody to turn them into what Gillian gently labels a "thug"?
It's my understanding that there are sort of two tracks, if you will, that permit this kind of behaviour: first, there's genuine socio/psychopaths, people who are missing something. Because of a congenital brain defect or anomaly, they are incapable of experiencing the kind of empathy required to engage normally with other people, or they have suffered such trauma at a very young age (violent abuse or extreme neglect) that that capacity is atrophied and compounded by a deliberate effort to justify selfish responses that negate the significance of others.
I don't see Michael being chucked in a crib and ignored for three years. And while his mother is certainly twisted and manipulative, she doesn't seem the type to have, for example, immersed his tiny fingers in a pot of boiling corned beef or something.
So...is his propensity for violence physiological?
If it was learned and gradual, then maybe it can be unlearned, or at least modified--like Chris' in Scars.
I agree with Moira that a sudden attack of squishiness would have most of us tossing our remotes, but is Michael still capable of the biological response we qualify as "love"? Like, what if he had a child himself? He seems legitimately fond of his nieces (his interaction with the girls when he interrupted them washing the car with their Dad was delightful--but it may have been more a reflection of Jason Isaacs' instincts than Mike Caffee's.)

Gillian
Site Admin
Posts: 4407
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

Post by Gillian » Sat Apr 28, 2007 12:53 pm

...what happens to somebody to turn them into what Gillian gently labels a "thug"?
Well, hardly 'gentle'. He's still as violent as all hell. Though when it comes to women, I suspect that Rose was a huge influence -- as in it's not okay to be abusive or physically violent towards them -- especially considering his childhood and her relationship with his father. (Although we can't discount it entirely. He's perfectly capable of breaking those rules under extenuating circumstances). Men on the other hand, need not apply. He has no problems when it comes to using teenage boys as drug mules, or tossing them off roofs (as you reminded me Hil), but then the racket is a dangerous game, full of risks and dangers (which I'm sure applied to a young Michael), so why should youth exempt them now? However, when he discovers his niece smoking pot, the worst she gets is a damned good talking to.

Micheal's philosophy, at best, is a study in extremes.

Oh, btw! Speaking of Fionnula Flannigan -- and I'm so hyped about this. I rarely catch the Lost easter eggs -- did anyone watch the last episode? When Desmond goes in to see head monk dude and turn in his robe, the camera pans down and we get a brief glimpse of a framed picture on his desk.

Guess who's in it?

That's right. Ma Caffee.

Ha! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!!

lyra70
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:25 am

Post by lyra70 » Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:52 pm

I am enjoying this discussion as well. Basically we all have different ideas of the kind of man Michael inherently is. I don't put him alongside complete monsters like Hannibal Lecter, but neither do I have a starry-eyed view that under the influence of the right woman, he could change for the better (something that women believe when they hook up or stay with gangsters or inmates or whatever). This is a guy who will change his agenda for no one, not for his mother or brother, etc. But what differentiates him from the Hannibal Lecters of the world is he is troubled by his actions if they do indeed affect those he loves. And I do believe he loves Tommy and Rose, maybe the only two people in the world he does love. But he still goes through with his plans even if they end up hurting the ones he loves.

Moira
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 9:00 am

Post by Moira » Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:56 pm

I'm enjoying this discussion too, very much. So many brilliant women here! :D
Gillian wrote:Psycho Girl's pushed his buttons on many an occassion and has yet to come out of this with even so much as a black eye. In fact, I think he's shown a weird kind of chilvalry with her. Be interesting to see if it lasts.
The key words here are "has yet." And lots of abusive men stay very affectionate and loving for a long time before the first slap or punch. He's barked at her twice. Those are red flags.

And since when is a severed ear as an act of "chivalry" sane? Would you want to get one? Who cares if Michael thought it was chivalry. It's f***ing sick.
No. I've been in an abusive relationship myself and from what I've seen, Michael doesn't quite fit the profile. Sure he's a thug, and a violent one at that, but he still operates from a moral code, and that doesn't include abusing women just for the sake of it. In fact there's a lot of similarities between Michael and Tommy. They're both devoted to family, their loyal to the neighbourhood, but each can be just as ruthless when it comes to getting what they want. That's just the way business is for them -- you either swim with the sharks or you're eaten. (Strangely enough, I think Micheal is more attentive to women than Tommy is. He's a lot closer to Rose as a son and a lot more intimitate with Kath than Tommy is with Eileen.)
I've been in an abusive relationship, too, and of course every woman's experience varies.
I don't think she was a child (?)
I meant the Hmong boy, who was definitely a child.
Probably not the best analogy. You can't compare a psychological monster to a thug. They're two entirely different creatures...


And lyra wrote:
I don't put him alongside complete monsters like Hannibal Lecter...
Hm. What does a guy have to do to be labeled "evil" around here?

Let's think about this. Mr. Caffe and his best friend, Pete --who Michael is willing to kill, though perhaps with one or two tears-- took a teenage boy onto the roof of a building. Being a teenage boy, he was probably cocky and felt he'd live forever. Either with or without warning, one of the men, maybe Michael, but probably Pete, threw the teenage boy off the roof. The boy probably emitted some sound of horror on the brief way down. Michael watched the child smash into the pavement. Michael watched blood seep from the child's crushed head. Michael took a look around, probably for witnesses, who, if there'd been any, he'd also have killed, and casually left the scene.

Michael blasts a man, bit by bit, on the pavement. He's willing to watch an innocent, mentally slow man blow his own brains out. He encourages Pete to take retribution on yet another teenage boy, which Pete does. Michael is unmoved by the murder of yet another innocent young man, Freddie Cork's son's lover, and buries him, with god knows how many other bodies, with no more emotion than he has when taking out the trash.

And this man isn't a monster?

Sure, Michael kids with his nieces, and even with Kat. And he's very charming and sexy while doing it. But does this make his crimes less horrible? A lot of vicious men are fun to be around. As the joke goes, John Wayne Gacy loved kids. No one suspected his house was surrounded by bodies. Gacy killed 33 people. I'm convinced Michael's killed at least half that. so what makes him a hopeful cause and not Gacy? Remorse? Who has Michael shown remorse for killing? He didn't look happy about almost killing Pete, and I'm sure that if he did blow out Pete's brains he'd be upset, but that's it. And Michael didn't torture his victims-- well, except the guy on the sidewalk he shot mutiple times in front of witnesses. But does that really make much of a difference between Michael and Gacy? Ask one of Gacy's victims and one of Michael's whether they think there's any difference.

You could say Michael's sane and Gacy wasn't. IMO that makes Michael worse.

So what does this guy have to do to be labeled a "monster" here? Eat someone's liver? Even Freddie Cork thinks Michael's a monster. "When did I ever do that?" Freddie demands of Tommy in the first season finale.

The point I'm trying to make is, sure we find Michael sexy and charming. That's entirely due to JI's talent. No one else could make this character palatable. There's nothing wrong with liking such a sexy beast, as long as he's fiction. But c'mon, ladies! Stop the denial! Michael Caffe is indeed a biblical plague. Facts is facts.

I'll keep eagerly following Michael's story. But I think of him the way I do a great white shark. "What an incredibly beautiful and efficent killing machine. I hope to god I never meet it."

malfoygrandma

the illogical land of experts!

Post by malfoygrandma » Mon Apr 30, 2007 11:24 am

:roll: Are we all such psycological experts that we expect to do what thousands of so-called trained experts have not and will never be able to do, and that is give a real set of the signs of the psychotic, the roughneck, the thug, the bully, etc. I have been writing stories about these sorts for about forty years and have never assumed that I could tell you exactly how to spot one till he punches out your lights. But it certainly is fun to read all the interesting conjectures! Love this discussion!

lyra70
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:25 am

Post by lyra70 » Mon Apr 30, 2007 11:40 am

Ah but see Moira, no one is saying Michael's violent and gruesome acts aren't reprehensible or that his callous and sometimes downright casual attitude to killing isn't stomach-turning. The man is obviously twisted and has definite anger-management issues :), and if he wasn't played by JI but by some really ugly bloke I don't think any of us would be spending time trying to analyze the character.

The fine line (and only point) I am debating here is whether he is a psychopath/sociopath or not. I fall in the camp of "not". Why? Because I believe Michael does have the capacity to love and indeed does love his family and has shown he can care for certain people, in the normal, conventional and emotional ways that people do. Gacy or other child molesters and killers who say they love children are a completely different animal because they end up hurting or killing them anyway. It would be as if Michael had no qualms about offing Rose if she stood in his way.

Even Michael's actions with Tommy throughout the series show he loves his brother. Tommy keeps picking fights and saying he wishes Michael had never returned and Michael's response? Self-defence and hurt silence. A true sociopath would have made sure his brother suffered after that.

Michael is just like Tony Soprano who has a family and loves them but who happens to also be a gangster and kills people who get in his way. The reason Tony Soprano doesn't look so blood-thirsty about it is he has all these other hired goons who do his killing for him whereas Michael has to do most of the dirty work himself, being small-time (for now).

I'm not defending Michael because I'm hoping he'll reform or am trying to convince myself he isn't really that bad. I admire Jason's acting and of course physical attributes (ahem!) but have never had a fascination for bad boys. That's why seeing JI as Sir Mark was so great for me, and finally opened my eyes to how good an actor he really is. I am however fascinated with psychology, the human condition, what motivates people to do what they do. And that fascination ends with sociopaths, it ends and turns into revulsion and complete horror. There is a coldness in true sociopaths that is more than just chilling, it is truly looking into the face of evil and there is nothing redeeming about them. Remember the story of Karla Homolka and her husband Paul Bernardo? They kidnapped teenage girls, drugged them and raped them and the girls died of it, and it turned out she was the instigator. The most jaw-dropping thing to me about all this was that the first victim was her 15 year old sister. That is a true sociopath. That villain Syler on "Heroes" is a sociopath. To my mind Michael Caffee isn't.

malfoygrandma

for second season

Post by malfoygrandma » Tue May 01, 2007 2:14 pm

:?: Why will they not let us see Mike in hospital, in pain, in whatever, and recuperating? I was sort of hoping he might fall into the hands of some nice nursie and change his ways as his brain cells grew back, renewed or something.... boy, that's dumb. Just a thought though. I guess the script writers wanted to have him all mean and vengeful and murderous because that's the way they created him!

Post Reply