This review of the finale of Homeland discusses not just the final episode but the entire season. We reflect on what is new and different about this fifth season, from the religious dimensions being crow-barred into the show to the use of Russians as the enemy image and hackers as second-level terrorists. We examine the storyline of the recruitment of the Laura Poitras character by the BND, both drawing a parallel with the real life person and identifying this as a metaphor for Homeland as a state-sponsored show. We dwell on whether the CIA staff actually hate Laura Poitras, unaware that she may be an asset of some section of the Agency.
As the conversation progress, we outline the idea that Homeland is an experiment to see how far they can make people doubt their own perceptions of not just the show itself but also the geopolitical realities it sometimes portrays. We explore the idea that Homeland is designed to assault the audience’s confidence in their own perceptions. We wrap up looking at Homeland’s obsession with predicting or commenting on current events, often events that happen during the production or broadcasting of the show. We outline Alex Gansa’s recent admissions that the major creative players in the show – including Claire Danes and Mandy Patinkin – attended four days of meetings at a private club in Georgetown. The meetings were arranged by former CIA deputy director John MacGaffin – the main consultant on Homeland – and involved currently serving CIA officers, State Department officials and White House staffers.
On this penulitamte episode of our Homeland series Tom and I begin by venting about our hatred of Alison. Next we move onto the shows continual use of women as negative characters. WE discuss the similarities between Alison and real life Russian spy Anna Chapman. We look at the parallels between these two characters and the notion that Alison will receive a hero’s welcome if she returns to Russia. Next we explore if the Russian government would actually let an attack happen, as Homeland suggests, in order to galvanize the West to fight ISIS. Tom and I lay out some of our theories as to why the Russian’s don’t talk about the Gladio operations (Boston, 9/11, Paris) that they clearly are aware of. We discuss the emergence of yet another evil female spy this time in the form of a German Foreign Office offical. Later Tom and I discuss one of the major takeaways from this season: that the CIA no longer engages in torture. Through out this season we have seen several distinct plot lines that lead us to believe that the CIA no longer uses this brutal tactic. Tom and I discuss the moral issues surrounding torture and the aspects of torture that are never brought up in the debate. We discuss how the show uses the character of Marwan to illustrate that torture doesn’t work, and how this is most likely a deliberate propaganda move to wipe clean the CIA’s hands. We also note how the show has routinely made the German’s look not only like torturers, but Nazi’s and Stasi as well. Tom and I also touch on Hollywoods false portrayal of strong female characters in movies such as Spy, and how this is really just more of the same. Later we move onto the portrayal of Laura Poitras in the show and how this may reflect the CIA’s various desires to portray her as hero and villain. We round off the conversation by discussing some very interesting listener emails and tweets.
Tom and I briefly talk about our participation in a brand new media project being spearheaded by Sibel Edmonds at the end of the podcast.
This much more dramatic episode of Homeland was the basis for a fun review discussion this week, touching on the hints towards the deep state, the portrayal of the Laura Poitras character, the implausibility of the CIA’s handling of the Russian double agent problem and Pearse’s hatred of Allison. We also discuss the mysterious origins of ‘terrorist videos’, particularly those coming to us via the SITE intelligence group, and how this is reflected in Homeland, and discuss why this episode made an explicit reference to the recent attacks in Paris. We round off talking about Pearse’s enjoyment of the Carrie-Astrid relationship in the show, any my love of post-industrial architecture as the setting for both a jihadi terrorist cell and the CIA’s discovery of that gang.
On this episode of our Homeland series Tom and I spent the first half of the episode dissecting the falsehoods that this particular episode as put forth in terms of the legality of spying. Suddenly aware of the rule of law and constitutional rights we see all the major characters in this episode pushing this agenda of doing everything by the book. Tom and I discuss how this is an obvious ploy to reassure the watchers that the CIA and other foreign intelligence agencies are now longer breaking the law when they spy on you. While all the characters are trying to gather legal evidence of Alison’s Russian mole status, Tom and I break down how the CIA would never go through the trouble of getting this sort of information let alone entertain the idea of going to a federal trial. We also touch on the series attempts to demonize the character of Alison; this time using her own sexuality as negative characteristic.
Later we move onto a topic that both Homeland and ourselves have mentioned time and time again: the gas attack in Ghouta, Syria. We discuss how Homeland has continually used the Ghouta massacre as a plot device and the meaning behind it. We talk about how the show is now advancing the narrative that not only is Assad using chemical weapons but also ISIS and other terrorist organizations. We break down how Homeland is trying to convince us that everyone in Syria is a “bad guy” and thus drastic action in Syria must be carried out. Tom and I also talk about the difficulty in actually producing and delivering Sarin, and talk about the Aum Shinrikyo attack in Tokyo as an example of a Sarin attack by a non-state actor. We talk about how this theme may be one of the overarching narratives that Homeland is pushing. Tom and I also talk about how Homeland’s ISIS cell wants UN recognition and the ridiculousness of it. We also talk about how the Islamic State already exists and has UN recognition in the form of Saudi Arabia. We round out the conversation by touching on our recent podcast with the Homeland Hackers and provide some more thoughts on why we believe they are in fact genuine.
Today Tom and I spoke to the now world famous “Homeland Hackers.” Heba Amin, Don Karl, and Caram Kapp sat down with us to discuss how they got the opportunity to work on the show and how they subverted it by filling the set with Arabic graffiti saying, among other things, “Homeland is racist” “Homeland is not a show” and of course our personal favorite, “Homeland is a watermelon.” We began the conversation by discussing how in fact they were chosen by the set designer to work on episode 2 of season 5. The artists described how the production did little to no research into what would be in a Syrian refugee camp in Lebanon, and essentially left them to their own devices once on set. Later we explored the show it self and how the propaganda with in Homeland has reached new levels of manipulation and racism. All three artists talked about how Arab’s and Arabic are used as mere window dressing and one dimensional plot devices for the show’s propaganda. Later we discussed the aftermath of the hack, and the typical media response; Muslim artist activists show the softer side of Islam. We also talk about how Laura Poitras and The Intercept got involved after the hack. As we wrapped up the discussion we got the seal of approval from Heba, Caram, and Don when we asked them about our podcast. In the outro section I talk about how Tom and I do not believe the rather crazy claims that this is some sort of CIA disinfo/ psy-op.
I have to say this was one of the most enjoyable and fascinating interviews I have conducted. Homeland is a Watermelon.
This was not the most interesting instalment of Homeland so Pearse and I talked about topics related to the episode including the history of Kosovo and NATO’s use of jihadis in the entire Balkans region, the arrest this week of a mysterious unnamed Montenegrin arms trafficker on his way to Paris, and why it is that the US Marine Corps Entertainment Liaison Office reports do not make any mention of Homeland. Pearse hypothesises that the USMC and Homeland had some kind of deniable outside-the-loop relationship and that suggests a much larger degree of co-operation than usual.
On this episode of our Homeland review series,Tom and I try to decipher this puzzle-piece of an episode. In contrast to last week’s fairly simple episode, this week’s was complex and intriguing. We explore the character of Alison and her trajectory from CIA station chief to Russian double agent. We discuss how the show is turning her into the ultimate villain, who is not only a master manipulator, but a cold and calculating egoist. We touch on the fact that Alison seems to be driven not by money or ideology, but by her ego and her desire to be seen as the smartest person in the room. Later we move onto to Carrie and the noticeable change her characterization has gone through. Previously the character we loved to hate, Carrie is now becoming the only character worth watching and caring about. Tom and I explore how this is a deliberate attempt to bring the audience back around to loving the CIA. We also touch on the character of Numan, how not only is he working for the CIA, but how his hack is ultimately a good thing for the CIA. Tom and I also touch what Otto Durring’s hidden motives may be. Next we discuss Saul’s “defection” to the Israelis and what this may mean for the future of Homeland. Tom and I round out the conversation by discussing the recent terrorist attacks in Paris and our overall response and feeling towards this awful event.
Today Pearse and I discuss the latest 6th episode of Homeland, ‘Parabiosis’ which saw the return of the classic spies vs jihadis type of storyline. We looked at the two halves of the story – Quinn holed up in a refugee hostel/terrorist halfway house and ultimately him killing the Reel Bad Arab Hajik, and Saul’s rediscovering that he is actually a skilled secret agent. Both of these storyline are less about inducing a state of hyperreality and much more about shaping our perceptions of the real world. We discuss, for example, why it is that Russia is portrayed in Homeland as a patient, sneaky, intelligent people, but in news media supposedly reporting on real life events they are portrayed as brutish thugs. In the other storyline we dissect the fight scene between Quinn and Hajik as a metaphor for the struggle between Western military-intelligence establishments and Islam.
In the latest of our Homeland reviews, Tom and I tackle the latest episode, ¨Better Call Saul.” In true form to this season, the fifth episode completely resets the original storyline and refocuses our attention to the evil Russians. Tom and I discuss this development and how it plays out in the episode. From the bombing of General Yusuf’s plane, to the hack, to the revelation of Alison being a double agent, it is now all about the Russians.
Later Tom and I explore in detail the infighting between the CIA and Mossad depicted this season. We discuss how this actually reveals several truths about the Mossad, yet masks them by protraying Russian intelligence as ultimately responsible for these squabbles. We once again tackle the concept of hyperreality in our discussion of the recent downing of the Russian Metrojet 9268 over Egypt.
As we wind down the conversation we look at a recently declassified Inspector Generals report on the CIA Entertainment Office which paints a very bizarre’ picture of how things actually work in Hollywood. We finish off the conversation by discussing the most insane example of hyperreality and this show: the artists who graffiti-hacked Homeland are making a film about it for Laura Poitras’s film unit at the Intercept.
In this conversation Pearse and I took a few detours and rambled all over the place, but mostly talked about the concept of hyperreality – the condition of a consciousness that cannot distinguish between the real and the simulated. We show how Homeland does this but also consider the question of why: why would the CIA be interested in using this effect that shows like Homeland have on their audiences? What is the advantage for the CIA in hyperreality?
Porkins Policy Review 