Our roundtable of Ayanna “AJ” Julien, Josh Hamm, and Richard Garcia discuss the first three episodes from the third season of House of Cards.
JH: After the shocking opener in Season Two, I’m glad to see that Season Three tones down the sizzling melodrama in favor of a simmering political drama. The last two season have been building up to this moment: Frank Underwood is president, and the question is no longer “How will he do it?” but rather “Okay, now what?” The salacious intrigue is mostly gone, leaving behind a show closer to an HBO version of The West Wing rather than Macbeth. In my mind, these three episodes reveal Frank’s goal to not merely have power and prestige, but lasting glory. He’s not content to be an Ozymandias figure, forgotten in the sand, just another portrait on the wall of the White House. In the opening sequence of the first episode, as he’s on his way to visit the grave of his father, there’s wide angle shot of Frank cresting the hill at the cemetery; his upper body fades into the scene, framed by the tombstones. It’s as if he himself is a living tombstone, and his presidency is the first, slow step in engraving his epitaph. As he says later on, he want’s a vision, “a legacy.” The problem is his lack of patience with the leadership, the press, his wife, Petrov – he pushes people too hard and too fast.
Of course, the show’s not solely about Frank (and I don’t think I could do justice to unravelling Claire – is she really content to ride on the coattails of Frank’s “legacy”?). Doug being alive is one of the show’s better twists, since his potential to be Frank’s downfall and his savior make him one the most interesting characters. It’s a bold move to spend most of the first episode on his physical recovery. A move I thought was a misstep until I began to realize how it folds into Frank and Claire’s drama. Through Doug, we’re given a manifestation of the brokenness of the Underwood regime. He’s just another by-product of their rise to power, a pawn who has outlived his usefulness, and is now cast into the outer darkness. It makes it particularly ironic to hear Frank bemoan Jackie’s lack of loyalty when he is ignoring one of his most ardent supporters.
I’m curious as to what you guys think about Doug’s strange alcoholic regression; he’s off track, but keeping control of himself, using the syringe to portion out a miniscule amount of alcohol. Does it give him the illusion of control? Is he being smart, or will it all blow up in his face? I love his character, but I’m not crazy about the arc involving his obsession to find Rachel.
Random observations:
What’s with that strange sex scene at the end of the second episode? It’s framed in such as way that it seems like Claire is resuscitating Frank, coaxing him back to life after his emotional breakdown. In a show with a lot of strange and unexpected sex, this scene stands out as obviously signalling its significance.
The whole Petrov = Putin bit is a bit too clean for me. They’re trying to create a villain worse than Underwood, but it all feels a bit too on the nose. When political shows try to mirror real people or events it often dates the show and makes it the worse for wear in a few years. Petrov may turn out to be an interesting addition, and I like that the show is turning its gaze globally, but I’m skeptical it will hold up in the long run.
AJ: Interesting points Josh! It’s funny how different people tend to focus on different things. Going back to the first few minutes of the first episode of season 3, I was more drawn in by the implications of Frank’s relationship, or lack thereof, with his late father. Clearly, that relationship was one of the most, if not the most, pivotal relationship from his past; ultimately creating the complex man and borderline sociopath that exists today.
Another interesting observation that I wanted to discuss was the fact that much of the first episode focused on Doug’s recovery. I too thought that was a bold move initially and was particularly puzzled about the implications of Doug’s recovery process on the overarching storyline for the entire season. But, as you have stated and I happen to agree, Doug represents one of the few survivors in the aftermath that was Frank and Claire’s rather tumultuous and destructive path to the White House. However, it is important to note that the Underwoods have not completely cast him aside. Remember, Frank assigns Seth to check in on Doug periodically and by episode 3, he even orchestrates an inflated job offer to appease his tireless former right hand. Even more, as strange as it may seem, I do feel as though Frank and Claire genuinely do care for Doug, albeit perverted, as people like the two of them have a tendency to not cow tow to any threat, eminent or hypothetical.
Nevertheless, I agree that Doug is certainly a character to watch during this season and I look forward to his inevitable growing frustration over Frank keeping him at bay…allegedly while he recovers. I also find Doug’s obsession with finding Rachel very interesting; although it took a minute for me to embrace it. I think the writers are trying to tell us that there is something more, deeper—as eluded to back in season 2 when Doug put her up in an apartment and really became obsessed with her—that perhaps may clue us in on more about his character. Let’s face it, we’re in season 3 and we just saw his brother; the guy is a mystery all around.
Speaking of mysteries, my favorite character on the show, Claire, continues to baffle me as she is such an enigma. Although much of the time she is portrayed as a source of beauty, strength and restraint—let us not forget her rather eloquent handling of President Petrov—there are few moments here and there when we get to see her be human. One of those rare moments occurred when Frank agreed to help her win the ambassadorship during a recess special election after which she proceeded to throw up in the kitchen sink and cry. I love that this show makes a point to demonstrate that no one is one dimensional. We are all complex; whether we allow ourselves to be or not.
Random Observations:
In yet another strange display of their unique relationship, shall we say, I also feel as though the sex scene at the end of the second episode symbolized Claire resuscitating Frank after his emotional breakdown. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they rarely show Frank and Claire being intimate, which is all the more important to note that on this particular occasion it was necessitated. They sleep in different bedrooms at this point, so by my estimation, “the act” was supposed to be significant to the viewing audience. Seriously, how can I talk about this without sounding creepy?
RG: On the subject of Doug, he reminded me of a star basketball player loyal to his team. Knowingly too hurt to continue, he wanted to do whatever he could to contribute something than nothing at all and watch the leadership he helped crumble away. The pressures of rejection and his words falling on deaf ears only further his twisted ways towards keeping his sanity.
I agree that Claire is definitely a wild card. We see her buckle under pressure quite a few times between episodes two and three. When she uttered “Military is irrelevant” it was like watching someone learn to fly for the first time and as she gracefully started to dance in the air, she crashed straight to the ground. As she scrambled to regain the confidence of other Senators to patch her wings for a new flight, she summons Frank to make a sacrificial play which he agrees to.
This brings me to Petrov. Petrov is playing for keeps in Frank’s own house rules of poker. Where Frank once wielded the dominant hand each time, Petrov continues to go all-in on what is a feeble opponent in Frank. “I’m offering you a chance to make history.” Frank exclaims only for Petrov to watch him wiggle himself from his own desperation. With the chips now favouring Petrov, it’ll be interesting to see how Frank and Claire tackle an opponent like President Petrov.
One more person to watch out for is Gavin, the computer hacker from the second season. Paired with Doug, who on his own isolated world is clawing for clues as to where Rachel is; are two unstable elements just waiting to combust.
JH: I love that you brought up Claire’s humanity, AJ. This season already seems to be distancing itself from the first two in a lot of ways, and that’s one of the most noticeable: it’s not only Claire, but Frank, Doug, everybody, they seem much more grounded in reality. More maybe it only feels like that because we’re seeing everybody failing. Doug with his addiction, Frank as an ineffective president, Claire over her head as ambassador, it’s quite humanizing.
To go along with your flying metaphor, Richard, there’s a smidge of Icarus floating about this season; the Underwoods are flying to close to the sun and we get to watch their wax wings slowly melt. Even only three episodes in, this is shaping up to be my favourite season yet for that very reason; I’m intrigued by how people handle power, and it’s fascinating how powerful Claire and Frank were when they were working in the shadows, pulling strings and throwing journalists in front of trains, but once they’re staged front and centre, the artifice of their power begins to crumble. Not just because they’re out in the open, but also because the role of president is not as powerful as it seems. In a show where most of the politics are far from the realm of reality, the inefficacy of the president to rule in a house divided is one of the few which resonate as true.
This is where Petrov is the most interesting: he represents a version of authority and power that Frank could only dream of. I hope that he continues to be a foil in the same way, since I think the show loses traction when it tries to introduce a singular villain character (Tusk in Season Two).
AJ: I have to admit that I am a bit on the fence about the whole Petrov aspect of the storyline. On the one hand I enjoy watching Claire and Frank tangle with an equally vile, if not worse, adversary; as you’ve mentioned, RG. However, on the other hand I can see where the writer’s approach may also be a bit too clean; as you’ve stated, Josh. I know Petrov is pretty much despicable—this so much is obvious—but I’m still a bit perplexed about whether or not his presence is a good thing. I’ll have to see more before I make a further assessment.
Thanks for bringing up Gavin, RG. I almost forgot about him and agree that he is certainly someone to keep an eye out for. He’s a bit unhinged and on top of his legal woes and entanglements with Doug’s obsession with Rachel, it just seems as though tragedy is inevitable.
Lastly, I agree with Josh that this season is fast becoming my favorite season of House of Cards, for so many reasons. I love the fact that we are finally starting to see that despite their escaping the wrath of karma up until now, Frank and Claire are finally starting to reap what they have sewn…albeit slowly. It’s not only realistic to show this side of their path to the White House, but it’s also responsible.