Sfdebris.net

http://sfdebris.com/videos/xfiles/xfiles2e24.php

The thing I noticed most out of this episode is that the actress playing the girl is Gabrielle Miller, who would go on to play Lacey Burrows on Corner Gas (probably the most successful Canadian sitcom ever aired) for 6 seasons.

Not gonna lie, I definitely had a thing for her.

It's a pretty nasty and creepy (in a good way) episode. The X-Files definitely pulled off some effective stuff for prime time 90s television (two episodes before this was F. Emasculata, another disgusting one). Not the best episode, but a decent example of a monster of the week.

And man, Chuck is harsh with this show. I wouldn't go too far out of my way to defend Our Town, but at this point I'm not even sure he'll give a positive review of Anasazi.

I certainly appreciate knowing that we all get his unbridled opinion, and I'd rather disagree with him all the time than see that change. But I'm in rough agreement with 95% of his Trek reviews (sometimes he expresses my opinion better than I could express it myself). With The X-Files, not so much.

A few thoughts - the red herring of the disease being related to chicken processing is probably a reference to Mad Cow disease (which is a variant of Creutzfeldt–Jakob) and the references to cannibalism and New Guinea probably were inspired by kuru, a disease of the Fore People, who practiced cannibalism as a funereal ritual.

The most well-known (fictional) Anasazi Indian is, of course, John Redcorn, who will remind you that his people have not practiced cannibalism for more than 700 years - although (at least in his case) they are not above sleeping with the wife of the local paranoid exterminator. (Kudos to anyone who gets the reference).

G-Man wrote:The most well-known (fictional) Anasazi Indian is, of course, John Redcorn, who will remind you that his people have not practiced cannibalism for more than 700 years - although (at least in his case) they are not above sleeping with the wife of the local paranoid exterminator. (Kudos to anyone who gets the reference).

Isn't it odd that the most paranoid exterminator in Arlen never once suspected his son, who looks nothing like him, might not be his own flesh and blood offspring?

I thought it funny that the guy playing the sheriff was named Grubbs.

There is no Dudley, Arkansas but there is a Dudley Lake community (more like a wide spot in the road) in Jefferson County. There is a Tyson plant in Crime Bluff... I mean Pine Bluff which is the JeffCo county seat.

MadAmosMalone wrote:

G-Man wrote:The most well-known (fictional) Anasazi Indian is, of course, John Redcorn, who will remind you that his people have not practiced cannibalism for more than 700 years - although (at least in his case) they are not above sleeping with the wife of the local paranoid exterminator. (Kudos to anyone who gets the reference).

Isn't it odd that the most paranoid exterminator in Arlen never once suspected his son, who looks nothing like him, might not be his own flesh and blood offspring?

Well, he did suspect that his son was an alien, due to his wife having an extra-terrestrial encounter. But then, it was long established that Dale was an idiot.

ChiggyvonRichthofen wrote:It's a pretty nasty and creepy (in a good way) episode. The X-Files definitely pulled off some effective stuff for prime time 90s television (two episodes before this was F. Emasculata, another disgusting one). Not the best episode, but a decent example of a monster of the week.

And man, Chuck is harsh with this show. I wouldn't go too far out of my way to defend Our Town, but at this point I'm not even sure he'll give a positive review of Anasazi.

I certainly appreciate knowing that we all get his unbridled opinion, and I'd rather disagree with him all the time than see that change. But I'm in rough agreement with 95% of his Trek reviews (sometimes he expresses my opinion better than I could express it myself). With The X-Files, not so much.

I can't speak for Chuck, as for myself, is that Trek, for the most part, has aged rather well in the past 30 years. The X-Files, on the other hand, is very much culturally and dramatically, a product of the early 1990s, and we have moved on very much from that point. The X-Files is very much about pseudoscience that wasn't well known at the time, and has been largely debunked today. It's why the revival miniseries didn't feel right, because most of the world has moved on from the craze of the conspiracy theory 1990s. The X-Files also constantly went out of its way regularly to villainize the military when it could. That was a standard part of 1990s post-Cold War, conspiracy theory culture. Nowadays, it seems like something from a time capsule that hasn't aged well. It's rather similar to watching a 1950s film that's about the fear of teenage motorcycle gangs, or how homosexuals are coming to get your children, and not think it's hysteria of the time.

The fact that the second X-Files movie decided to kick two hornet's nests, in having a main character be a pedophile priest, and the villains be a transgender/homosexual Russian surgeon who wanted to give his boyfriend a new body, and you can tell Chris Carter is still stuck in his trying to be topical, but not really understanding the issues he's bringing up, mindset.

The revival mini-series, in which vaccines are part of the conspiracy to spread an alien disease, and it really seems like the show wants you to embrace the hysteria of the era, while not really understanding what happened in that era.

Trek, for the most part, tried to get to the truth of an issue, or as close as they could, and advocated a rationalist, reasoned mindset. The X-Files, for the most part, embraced the silliest part of any issue, to have the world seem more terrifying, and that Mulder, the crazy guy spouting off nonsense, should always be listened to, and anyone arguing against him is either wrong, or part of the conspiracy to undermine him.

Anthropologist here, from what I can remember there is documented evidence of cannibalism among Anasazi. However it wasn't it a religious thing, it was like the examples chuck gave in modern times. It was from a time period when the Anasazi civilization was collapsing due to long term drought, think mad max style anarchy. I can post more detail later, if people are interested.

FaxModem1 wrote: I can't speak for Chuck, as for myself, is that Trek, for the most part, has aged rather well in the past 30 years. The X-Files, on the other hand, is very much culturally and dramatically, a product of the early 1990s, and we have moved on very much from that point. The X-Files is very much about pseudoscience that wasn't well known at the time, and has been largely debunked today. It's why the revival miniseries didn't feel right, because most of the world has moved on from the craze of the conspiracy theory 1990s. The X-Files also constantly went out of its way regularly to villainize the military when it could. That was a standard part of 1990s post-Cold War, conspiracy theory culture. Nowadays, it seems like something from a time capsule that hasn't aged well. It's rather similar to watching a 1950s film that's about the fear of teenage motorcycle gangs, or how homosexuals are coming to get your children, and not think it's hysteria of the time.

The fact that the second X-Files movie decided to kick two hornet's nests, in having a main character be a pedophile priest, and the villains be a transgender/homosexual Russian surgeon who wanted to give his boyfriend a new body, and you can tell Chris Carter is still stuck in his trying to be topical, but not really understanding the issues he's bringing up, mindset.

The revival mini-series, in which vaccines are part of the conspiracy to spread an alien disease, and it really seems like the show wants you to embrace the hysteria of the era, while not really understanding what happened in that era.

Trek, for the most part, tried to get to the truth of an issue, or as close as they could, and advocated a rationalist, reasoned mindset. The X-Files, for the most part, embraced the silliest part of any issue, to have the world seem more terrifying, and that Mulder, the crazy guy spouting off nonsense, should always be listened to, and anyone arguing against him is either wrong, or part of the conspiracy to undermine him.

To me, Mulder's theories are no worse than technobabble. The difference is that Trek's science purports to be rationalistic and scientific, while Mulder's theories are based on the paranormal. If anything I'd be quicker to excuse The X-Files- Mulder's theories are supposed to sound a little crazy (Seven of Nine sounds a bit like Mulder in the episode Conspiracy), since they are based on gobbledygook in the first place. Chuck calls out Trek's mumbo jumbo too, but to me the conspiracy theory stuff is treated differently even though its only superficially different from technobabble. In this case some of the background details weren't even that far off.

It's more than that though- The X-Files is all about drawing on old legends and mythologies and creating modern ones that reflect modern society. Harping on this or that not being factually correct is missing the point in a lot of cases.

It's hard to characterize The X-Files in just one way, since flexibility might be the show's greatest strength. I agree that the second X-Files movie has already aged rather badly, as has some of the technophobic episodes early in the show's run. But the show dealt with a huge number of themes and idea, beyond just paranoia (which is hardly dead). Some of the evaluation of American culture is still worthwhile. A lot of episodes do have timeless messages, in my opinion, that deal with philosophical concepts at their core.

ChiggyvonRichthofen wrote:To me, Mulder's theories are no worse than technobabble. The difference is that Trek's science purports to be rationalistic and scientific, while Mulder's theories are based on the paranormal. If anything I'd be quicker to excuse The X-Files- Mulder's theories are supposed to sound a little crazy (Seven of Nine sounds a bit like Mulder in the episode Conspiracy), since they are based on gobbledygook in the first place. Chuck calls out Trek's mumbo jumbo too, but to me the conspiracy theory stuff is treated differently even though its only superficially different from technobabble. In this case some of the background details weren't even that far off.

It's more than that though- The X-Files is all about drawing on old legends and mythologies and creating modern ones that reflect modern society. Harping on this or that not being factually correct is missing the point in a lot of cases.

It's hard to characterize The X-Files in just one way, since flexibility might be the show's greatest strength. I agree that the second X-Files movie has already aged rather badly, as has some of the technophobic episodes early in the show's run. But the show dealt with a huge number of themes and idea, beyond just paranoia (which is hardly dead). Some of the evaluation of American culture is still worthwhile. A lot of episodes do have timeless messages, in my opinion, that deal with philosophical concepts at their core.

The difference, I think, is that a lot of X-Files episodes don't hold up under scrutiny. A lot of Trek episodes don't hold up either, but they're dealing with a made up one-off culture, that can be thrown away once the credits come. Most of X-files draws from real life, and more often than not, usually 9 out of 10 times, Mulder is right. We almost never see cases wherein it's a con artist trying to attract tourists, or something easily explainable by the evidence. Whether it's Native Americans, computers, Haitians, postal workers, homosexuals, military members, the mentally ill, etc., they all receive a bad turn from an episode, labeling them as freaks of nature. Trek mostly doesn't do that, and when it does, Chuck makes sure to drag them over the coals for it. ( "Code of Honor", "Tattoo")

The show also has a narrative trap. Mulder, while proven right by the circumstances of the episode, never has Mulder and Scully actually close a majority of their cases. Like in 'Our Town', Mulder and Scully just sort of walk away from the problem. They almost never stay around to make sure things are set right, close a case, or save lives. As Chuck has noted, a lot of the time, in order for the plot to continue, Mulder and Scully have to act more like the Scooby Gang than actual cops. How many times have they left people to die, so that the easily killed monster, creature, ghost, etc. can ensure that nothing of consequence happens from this X-file.

If they actually did, Mulder would have all sorts of actual evidence from an episode, and in-universe, he would seem more credible. Instead, Mulder is such an incompetent boob, that once he gets bored with a case, he leaves the problem, allowing more deaths to happen. We rarely see Picard and company getting involved with an anomaly of the week, finding out that it's going to kill some people, and go "Well, now that we have a general idea of what's going on, but people are still in danger. Oh well, not my problem. It's time to head out. Set course for Starbase 19." The X-Files does this all the time, so that they can have their "The End, OR IS IT?" endings before the credits.

If you're watching it casually, once a week, that can seem satisfying. If you watch it regularly, or with a more analytical mindset, you start to wonder if Mulder really wants proof of the paranormal, or if he is politically connected, and has job security, no matter how incompetent he is.

Summing it up, the X-Files generally operates more on Horror Movie logic, in which people do stupid things to keep the plot going, no matter how little sense it makes, and once the protagonists are out of immediate danger, the story is considered over. That's a little hard to swallow on a constant basis, especially in a show that operates as a mystery on a weekly basis.

David Duchovny said that Mulder was the worst FBI agent of all time. Don't know if I'd go quite that far, but the complete lack of protocol is one thing that irritates me with the show at times.

As for never solving cases- it's the nature of the beast. With Star Trek, you usually aren't dealing with the existential threats you might see on The X-Files. The lack of closure (and to be fair, there wasn't always a lack of closure), it comes with the territory. Star Trek and The X-Files are telling different types of stories. A good illustration is TNG's Devil's Due. We know that in TNG, there was never any chance whatsoever that Ardra is a supernatural entity. There will be an inevitable naturalistic explanation, the plot will be exposed, Picard will get a speech condemning fear mongering and embracing rationality, etc. The X-Files would take the same premise and deal with it in a completely different way. Most obviously, there would be maybe a 2% chance that you weren't actually dealing with the devil. TNG is more like Scooby Doo in this case- the villain is just another con artist in a mask, and the plot will advance accordingly. In my opinion, one advantage The X-Files has here is that it's flexible format allows you to do almost anything with the basic premise.

Like I said, The X-Files is dealing with myths and legends, which usually aren't known for wrapping everything up neatly. A lot could be (and has been) written about Mulder's continued lack of success over the years, and whether or not that's inevitable. I guess it annoys some people more than others- my dad gave up on the show eventually because of the lack of closure/progress in the mythology episodes. Whether the lack of closure is an actual fault or just a mode of storytelling, I think you have to take it on a case by case basis. If they're dealing with a demon or resurrected spirit, there's only so much Mulder and Scully can do. In episodes like The Host or Home, they might not have fully eliminated the threat, but they took appropriate measures. In other cases, they do seem to just abandon the case at an inappropriate time.

In the case of Our Town- I can see (and agree with) the lack of protocol complaint. I don't see the problem in terms of Mulder closing the case. It seems obvious from the closing narration that they turned the case over to the appropriate authorities, who do take at least some action (even if they don't round up every last cannibal). The ringleaders are all dead. There's not a whole lot of interesting stuff left for Mulder and Scully to do.

It occurs to me that an X-Files series from the Conspiracy's point of view might be interesting. They have to deal with a universe in which ghosts, demons, aliens, super science, and magic are all completely real and must protect the human race from discovering the Horrible Truth as well as find some way of fighting these myriad of threats. They are both incredibly powerful and ridiculously outclassed.

It'd basically be Old World of Darkness Technocracy with the serial numbers filed off, but I don't consider that a bad thing.