In Episode 11 of Season 5 of “The Americans”, Philip and Elizabeth are informed that a woman named Natalie Granholm, currently living in the U.S., may be a war criminal from the Nazi era, a Russian who participated in the mass slaughter of Russian soldiers. They secretly observer her and take her picture, and gather some information. Moscow informs them that she is who they think she is and instruct them to murder her.
Philip and Elisabeth are ambivalent about the task. They arrive at her house one night and wait for her to come home. It is implied that they want to double-check the veracity of the information they were given.
They have guns. They break in. They confront Natalie.
Here this episodes loses me. What did they expect to do?
They confronted her and demanded that she tell them the truth. In TV land, that works. All right, darn it, since you’re pointing a gun at me I won’t lie any more.
Even with a transparent attempt to make it more credible– we are asked to believe that she thinks telling them the truth will lead them to spare her husband– the episode is ridiculous. It is simply not believable that Natalie, confronted by two strangers in her own house who are clearly intent on identifying her as a vicious war criminal, would not continue to deny it. Why on earth would she confess? Surely, she doesn’t expect to be spared if she admits she is the one they are looking for? And surely she doesn’t think that confessing– falsely or not (it is hinted that it’s false, or, at least, that she had some justification)– would cause these murderers to spare her husband.
Why would she think they would kill her husband anyway? He’s not the war criminal.
And if they intend to kill him (if gets home before they leave) because he is a potential witness, her offer has no realistic value. The dynamic is utterly preposterous.
Natalie’s confession is presented as an illustration of moral ambiguity. She claims that her family was murdered in front of her, and she was manipulated (much like Philip and Elisabeth are manipulated) into performing the ghastly act. Once again, Philip and Elisabeth have no reason to believe this story. Are they really naive enough to buy it? They really never thought of that kind of rationalization before they broke into her house? They really wanted to give her time to tell them her story before killing her?
The audience is bullied into believing in it because of Lydia Fomina’s performance as Natalie, aimed at extracting our tears. But surely Philip and Elizabeth, masters of deception themselves, can’t be taken in– can they?
They can be, and they are. [Spoiler alert]: they do kill her, but they feel really, really bad about it, because, well, they are no longer the ruthless spies they were in Season 1.
That kind of scene has long been an essential element of American crime dramas. The good guy, acting exactly like the bad guy, confronts the bad guy, shoves him against the wall, points a gun at his cheek, and demands the truth. And the bad guy, preposterously, gives it to him. All so the viewer can comfortably regard the subsequent atrocity– usually murder– as justified. He had the right guy. No doubt about it. He deserved it.
Nowadays, we know all about cops being convinced that they are confronting some guy who deserves to be killed. Unfortunately, we’re finding out that many times the guy had nothing to do with anything.
“The Americans” is less fun to watch as they continue to explore the increasing ambivalence Philip and Elizabeth feel about their mission, particularly after murdering the innocent lab assistant while investigating an alleged biological weapon. Really? They are deeply, deeply disturbed by a single casualty of the great cause? Are they really that delicate? Were they not all that disturbed by the other killings they’ve had to commit?
Yet the idea of ambivalence is a good one. Dramas that focus on moral ambiguity are almost always more interesting. But not when they resort to cliche and tired tropes.
We are witnessing a familiar pattern in episode dramas and comedies. The producers start polling their audiences, and they find that they like the major characters, but would prefer them bloodless. The first years of “The Americans” showed us a pair of ruthless, cold-blooded, violent Russian agents, who could be cruel and efficient when necessary. They are slowly removing their balls and trying to make them more attractive to the audience by making them more harmless and far less interesting.
They could do one thing that would really, really liven it up, and improve the quality of the show by 100%. Have them decide one night that Stan is getting too close and has to go. Philip strolls over across the street one night and shoots him in the head. No conversation, no whining, no self-recrimination. Just do it.
I must add: I could do without a single minute more of Paige moping around and around and around. Please. Maybe they could kill her off in an upcoming episode: I wouldn’t mind. But then, Elizabeth and Philip are starting to mope around a lot too.
I don’t get why the producers of “The Americans” think self-absorbed misery is good drama. I’m a bit fascinated by it: who likes watching Paige whine and mope? Why do they like it? Is it narcissism? Is it the nausea of one who becomes aware of how no one cares if you are unhappy?
[whohit]Tell the Truth or Else: The Americans[/whohit]