Culture Blues

Why Didn’t You Watch? Harper’s Island

Every month in "Why didn't you watch...?" we will take a look at a television series that was criminally and irresponsibly canceled before its time; taking a critical look at the show while also delving into what was wrong with all of you people that you couldn't tune in for 30 or 60 minutes each week. The rules are simple: the show must have been canceled, it can't have lasted for two full seasons, and we have to like it. So, why didn't you watch...

For years, I've thought that horror movies could tell more resonant stories and develop compelling mythologies if they would just get out of their own way. Stop ignoring previous movies in the first act, retconning huge amounts of backstory in the second, and wrapping everything up in the third as if we all don’t know the killer will rise again. Horror movies deal with pretty epic stuff: death, the devil, ancient mumbo jumbo, family secrets, machetes. Rather than engage in franchise-building, slasher films basically force themselves to start from the beginning with every sequel. Watching all the movies in a series generally doesn’t offer any benefit except a larger pile of bodies.

Harper’s Island is, essentially, a slasher film told over the course of 13 episodes of television. But don’t tune in expecting to see a maniac stalking around right from the beginning. The identity of the killer is naturally the big hook of the series and, at least initially, all the murders are shrouded in mystery. I was worried the creators would hold back the reveal of the killer too long, hoping people would continue to tune in just to find out who the killer was. Fortunately, this is not the case and for a significant portion of the series you will get to watch a psychopath stalk and kill yuppies - graphically.

Harper’s Island’s commitment to genre standards means that all the problems normally encountered in a slasher film are present here, and perhaps even amplified by the expanded runtime. The writing and acting slip into bad more often than great. There's a lot of time dedicated to less-than-compelling storylines that only serve to fill time between kills. In fact, the first few episodes (which would correspond to just the first 15 or 20 minutes of a film) are fairly frivolous and serve only to introduce you to characters that you don't really need much time to get to know.

On the flip side, the payoffs you get from a slasher film are similarly amplified. There is more time to explore the backstory, to chase red herrings and to, in general, thicken the plot. There are even more kills than your average horror movie (I'm certainly not saying it bests some of the most zealous films).

Is that a body, or just an ornate crucifix?

Speaking of murders, one of the prerequisites for slasher films is that we get to see blood and guts spew from victims as they are killed in unusual and gruesome ways. Seeing as how this was a show on CBS in primetime, I was pleasantly surprised by how graphic some of the murders were. I’m sure my expectations were tempered, and by actual horror movie standards it’s not going to blow anyone away, but I’d be pretty surprised if you could put all this gore into a movie and still get a PG-13. By that reasoning, you’re getting a legitimate R experience from a broadcast network show which I think is rare and noteworthy.

While Harper’s Island suffered through an unfortunate pre-premiere marketing campaign that had me convinced for weeks that it was just a horror themed reality show, some sort of unofficial sequel to Murder in Small Town X, I would argue that the show actually offers an interesting hybrid of both the past and the future of dramatic television. Television shows used to be conceptualized to run indefinitely and written to maintain the status quo. One of the biggest changes in American television over the past few years is the move toward ending a show when the story dictates rather than the ratings. Harper’s Island is perhaps the most extreme version of this possible. It was all filmed and in the can before a single episode aired.

A change that has arrived hand in hand with the increased focus on serialized story-telling is that television has now become a medium for the gaze, like film, and not the glance. Networks formerly operated under the assumption that members of the audience would not see every episode of a season, much less the series, and that people were likely to miss portions of episodes. Important events did not happen right after a commercial break because people were still coming back from the kitchen or bathroom. References to previous events were worked into the dialogue for the benefit of people who missed the beginning of the episode.

While VCRs have long made it possible for people to keep up with a show even if they can’t sit down every week, the rising popularity and revolutionary convenience of DVRs and the availability of episodes online and in complete DVD sets are what have really opened the market for serialized television. Shows that require beginning to end attention like Lost and The Wire were much more rare just 10 years ago than they are today. This is where Harper’s Island takes a cue from television’s past. Harper’s Island doesn’t require that much attention.

While giving Harper’s Island your undivided attention will certainly yield some rewards, it’s entirely unnecessary. After CBS relegated the show to Saturdays, I watched new episodes online. I surfed the internet, checked emails and paid bills. All while keeping an eye on my CBS window. With the handy ability to rewind should I feel like I missed something, I was completely satisfied watching the show in this way and don’t really feel like I missed much.

While this may seem like a clear indication that a show isn’t worth your time, it is actually an endorsement. Harper’s Island is a 13-episode slasher film, and even the best examples in the genre don’t require constant attention. Being able to zone out or crack jokes between grisly murders is part of the fun.

Just one of Harper's Island's unfortunate inhabitants.

Of course, I would be remiss if I did not point out that the last four episodes turn the entertainment value way up. I would likely burn through these in one sitting if I were watching them on DVD.

In terms of story, Harper’s Island doesn’t break any new ground. People visiting the picturesque Harper’s Island for a wedding are being killed off one by one. There is a mysterious connection to the island’s legendary killing spree of 7 years ago. It’s all pretty familiar territory, but the writers do a commendable job of setting up the pieces and then dismembering them one at a time. There are some small surprises along the way, but the major revelations will be predicted by astute viewers. What Harper’s twists lack in shock value, however, they make up for in terms of being well placed and well played. The past and present stories are both told satisfactorily, and in the end they end up enhancing each other rather than forming one convoluted mess as is the case in many slasher movies.

One thing that immediately distinguishes Harper’s Island from the slasher films it emulates is the span of time. Most slasher films take place over just a few hours once the killing really starts, taking us through a bloody prom night or one seriously traumatic night at summer camp. Typically, we don’t see too much of the characters’ psychological reactions to having their lives (and bodies) dismantled by a homicidal psychopath. Harper’s Island, on the other hand, takes place over several days.  We spend a great deal of time with these characters even after it becomes obvious that something is seriously wrong and that some members of the party are not, in fact, selfish flakes but are instead, very dead.

In a film, there’s usually one scene where a token victim loses their cool until another protagonist calms them down and, before we know it, our heroes are back on the hunt or back on the run. In Harper’s Island, the longer time span translates to more downtime for many characters. These characters are forced to face the fact that they are being hunted. This could have been the show’s undoing. I wasn’t sure anyone in the cast was prepared to offer us a compelling portrait of someone who is all at once scared for their own life and processing the sudden murders of many people close to them. However, as the series draws on, and the focus is less on grief, the acting becomes much less of a weakness. The creators don’t attempt to do psychological drama and, ultimately, whether the acting is terrific or not, the audience feels the draining effect that this experience has on the characters. As they find themselves in a situation that most people would consider unimaginable, they react believably, which is to say they completely fall to pieces. A few characters never lose sight of the goal of getting off the island and surviving. More interesting though, are the other characters who display signs of depression, and feelings of anger, hopelessness, helplessness and regret. These are all shown in enough depth that they feel genuine and earned, yet the show never wallows in them so long that it detracts from the maniac killer plot we all showed up for. There is a scene late in the series when the would-be bride puts on her wedding dress, which has become nothing more than a memento from a past life. It’s a scene that could have been cheesy, but it provides a poignant moment considering all that has preceded it, as well as a great visual. Most importantly, however, it quickly leads into some exciting killer shenanigans.

She's not running to the chapel.

The main aspect of what I referred to as the “unfortunate pre-premiere marketing campaign,” was saddling each of the recurring characters with some sort of cheap label: the bride, the groom, the sheriff, the outsider. While I don’t think announcing that the characters are easily summed up in one word is a good way to advertise a show, it’s actually a pretty accurate and honest representation of these characters. The labels are slightly oversimplified, but the characters are not complex or deep. Some of them have nice little character arcs, but for the most part they start at point A and die there as well. However, while they may not develop much, the number and variety of characters and the shifting dynamics that come with them stop things from becoming too tiresome. Furthermore, without the contrivances of complicated histories and shadowy motives that many shows foist upon their characters, the people on Harper’s Island actually seem like normal people. This is integral to making them sympathetic. And while the characters may not be terrific creations in their own right, the writers obviously know how to use them for maximum effect. There are a number of deaths that stand out, and there is even one confrontation late in the series that all by itself made me happy to have stuck with the show. It showed a flare for the dramatic and a stylistic sensibility that I, at once, wish the creators had employed more often and am happy that they kept in check, making its use more effective and preventing the show from becoming ostentatious.

The killer gets a considerable amount of screen time late in the series, and it’s not all limited to walking slowly and sticking sharp things into people. Once revealed, they get some unexpected and welcome characterization and interaction, going well beyond the emotionless killer we are used to. There’s an amusing and human moment when the killer recalls the struggle involved in one of the most recent murders. It’s great. With a deeper understanding of the killer, the murders themselves shake off the somewhat arbitrary feeling they have early on and become memorable dramatic moments that propel the story. It’s slasher protocol that the villain take a backseat to his own murderous rampages and Harper’s Island wisely breaks from this convention.

Finally, please rest assured that everything is wrapped up at the end of the series. This doesn’t mean every insignificant detail is explained and question answered. But the major storylines all come to a conclusion and the characters’ stories are completed. There is no hand rising from the grave or Jason jumping out of the lake in the last frame. I think this sort of closure is going to be a rarity for “Why Didn’t You Watch…” entries.

Not this time...

There are many totally reasonable and accurate criticisms that can be leveled against Harper’s Island. But, it’s always nice to see something genuinely different on television, especially one of the networks, and Harper’s Island delivers just what I’d hoped for: a solid slasher experience that is unlike anything you could get from a feature film. With so many great ways to entertain yourself out there, I wouldn’t uniformly recommend Harper’s Island as a must see, but it’s worthwhile for fans of the genre or people who are just looking for something different. Hopefully before too long, someone will be encouraged to give the “slasher mini-series” another shot, with a bit more support than CBS offered this time around.