One gets the impression that the production staff knew the writing was on the wall for the series cancellation, and they weren't even trying. So writer Richard Kletter now only gives us this thriller about statehood, when statehood has never been mentioned before and they avoid saying what state they're talking about...
But we get storylines that are either irrelevant, or out-of-date. As far as irrelevant, we get the whole thing with Buck falling for Louisa. Granted, this it is the penultimate episode. But the next episode, "Obsession", has Buck falling heads-over-heels in love with another woman. If the show hadn't been facing cancellation, they might have had enough time to resolve the conflicting storylines. Or maybe Dale Midkiff was planning on leaving the series and this script was going to provide an excuse with him being on the road with Louisa. But as-is, it sticks out as like a sore thumb. It's more like Kletter and Mark Haskell Smith, who did the teleplay, wasn't paying attention and didn't "adapt" Rosenberg's story to fit into the current continuity.
The other was the bit with Ezra's temptation. It's a bit late in the show for him to be having misgivings about how his "friends" don't trust him. He's either proven himself enough (remember when he infiltrated a camp in drag for their behalf?) that they seem like a particularly unlikeable bunch. Or they still don't trust him after all that, which makes them seem like ungrateful jerks.
The story is also weird because the writers don't seem to know if Ezra _is_ trustworthy or not, or just pretentious. He spends a lot of the episode, particularly his conversation with Josiah, saying that he's offended that his "friends" don't trust him. But then in his hotel room, Ezra looks all guilty about taking the money, turning the mirror with his face away. So is his acting offended that no one trusts him just an act? Who is he acting for?
But if he's really offended, why does he take the money anyway? Again, maybe if actor Anthony Starke had been give some to resolve these conflicts, they might have eventually made sense. But he didn't, and we got what we got. Credit to Starke, who like Midkiff does the best he can with what he's given. But there's just too much there to overcome.
There are some other weak spots. Stutz Sr. Dies if presumably natural causes. Maybe he died with a prostitute, as is implied. We never find out. Other than the convenience of him dropping dead at the beginning of the episode, none of this is ever explained. Maybe there some scenes dropped?
Ron Perlman gets a weird little subplot as Josiah is tempted by the money. And has a dream where he's a Greek demi-god (??), with priestesses in Greek robes(??) offering him money and wealth. Ron Perlman looks good in a white robe, and stripping down to his long johns for bed. And it's the kind of thing he wouldn't have gotten in the first season. But it's still weird.
The rest of the Seven don't have much to do this episode. I do like the easy camaraderie between them, like Ezra and Buck at the beginning. Veteran actor Bill McKinney gets to chew the scenery as Liver-Eating Jones, and yet they didn't dedicate much development to him and he serves more as an exposition device, telling them about Zachary.
And Zachary (Jesse Bob Harper) is the obvious suspect, just because he's the only stranger in town who gets any screen time. Note to Hollywood writers: you may not have a choice in the 42-minute format, but when you only focus on one "stranger" character, you're telegraphing that they're the guilty party. And how did Zachary hear so fast that his father was dead? Do they have cell phones and the Internet in the Old West?
Vin has a bit of a subplot, as he contemplates the difference between a sniper-assassin and a bounty hunter. But it just gets... resolve. And the subplot with the Seven versus Governor Hopewell is implied that it's going somewhere and he'll be the group's major nemesis. But thanks to the cancellation, it was not to be.
So overall, "Serpents" has some good performances from Starke, Midkiff, and Dalton as Louisa. And it's a decent political-assassination. Thriller. But it jumps a few rails to get where it's going, and that makes it less than the sum of its parts.
But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. What do you think?
But we get storylines that are either irrelevant, or out-of-date. As far as irrelevant, we get the whole thing with Buck falling for Louisa. Granted, this it is the penultimate episode. But the next episode, "Obsession", has Buck falling heads-over-heels in love with another woman. If the show hadn't been facing cancellation, they might have had enough time to resolve the conflicting storylines. Or maybe Dale Midkiff was planning on leaving the series and this script was going to provide an excuse with him being on the road with Louisa. But as-is, it sticks out as like a sore thumb. It's more like Kletter and Mark Haskell Smith, who did the teleplay, wasn't paying attention and didn't "adapt" Rosenberg's story to fit into the current continuity.
The other was the bit with Ezra's temptation. It's a bit late in the show for him to be having misgivings about how his "friends" don't trust him. He's either proven himself enough (remember when he infiltrated a camp in drag for their behalf?) that they seem like a particularly unlikeable bunch. Or they still don't trust him after all that, which makes them seem like ungrateful jerks.
The story is also weird because the writers don't seem to know if Ezra _is_ trustworthy or not, or just pretentious. He spends a lot of the episode, particularly his conversation with Josiah, saying that he's offended that his "friends" don't trust him. But then in his hotel room, Ezra looks all guilty about taking the money, turning the mirror with his face away. So is his acting offended that no one trusts him just an act? Who is he acting for?
But if he's really offended, why does he take the money anyway? Again, maybe if actor Anthony Starke had been give some to resolve these conflicts, they might have eventually made sense. But he didn't, and we got what we got. Credit to Starke, who like Midkiff does the best he can with what he's given. But there's just too much there to overcome.
There are some other weak spots. Stutz Sr. Dies if presumably natural causes. Maybe he died with a prostitute, as is implied. We never find out. Other than the convenience of him dropping dead at the beginning of the episode, none of this is ever explained. Maybe there some scenes dropped?
Ron Perlman gets a weird little subplot as Josiah is tempted by the money. And has a dream where he's a Greek demi-god (??), with priestesses in Greek robes(??) offering him money and wealth. Ron Perlman looks good in a white robe, and stripping down to his long johns for bed. And it's the kind of thing he wouldn't have gotten in the first season. But it's still weird.
The rest of the Seven don't have much to do this episode. I do like the easy camaraderie between them, like Ezra and Buck at the beginning. Veteran actor Bill McKinney gets to chew the scenery as Liver-Eating Jones, and yet they didn't dedicate much development to him and he serves more as an exposition device, telling them about Zachary.
And Zachary (Jesse Bob Harper) is the obvious suspect, just because he's the only stranger in town who gets any screen time. Note to Hollywood writers: you may not have a choice in the 42-minute format, but when you only focus on one "stranger" character, you're telegraphing that they're the guilty party. And how did Zachary hear so fast that his father was dead? Do they have cell phones and the Internet in the Old West?
Vin has a bit of a subplot, as he contemplates the difference between a sniper-assassin and a bounty hunter. But it just gets... resolve. And the subplot with the Seven versus Governor Hopewell is implied that it's going somewhere and he'll be the group's major nemesis. But thanks to the cancellation, it was not to be.
So overall, "Serpents" has some good performances from Starke, Midkiff, and Dalton as Louisa. And it's a decent political-assassination. Thriller. But it jumps a few rails to get where it's going, and that makes it less than the sum of its parts.
But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. What do you think?
