A few quick words on “24: Legacy” (2017)

I hate to say it, but “24: Legacy” (2017) was mostly average stuff; I’d give the 12-episode arc a 7 out of 10 for being a mildly engaging thriller, but nothing more than that.

I was one of the few people back in the day who opined that “24” could continue even without Kiefer Sutherland.  As priceless as he was in his role as anti-hero Jack Bauer, he wasn’t the only star of the show — the show’s gritty universe and its unique format could carry on without him.  I even thought, during the early years, that Fox was grooming Tony Almeida (Carlos Bernard) to be a viable lead if Sutherland departed.

I still think the show could manage without Sutherland.  The real culprit behind “Legacy’s” failure to stand out was its somewhat average writing.  It wasn’t bad, exactly … it was just average.  (Alright — for a little while, it was bad.  We see a key subplot/cliffhanger repeated three times, consecutively, in the same season. I’m surprised that major redundancy made it past the editing process.)  But mostly, it was average — we see thin staples of characters, and a plot that seemed largely reminiscent of … well, every other season of “24.”  (Admittedly, it must be tough after nine years to think up an original story for a serialized contemporary terror thriller in real-time format.)

The sad part is this — during the show’s final two or three episodes, it started showing more promise, with truly original plotting and unexpected conflicts.

The show got disappointing ratings.  We won’t know until at least May, but I think most viewers are guessing it won’t be renewed for another season.


One thought on “A few quick words on “24: Legacy” (2017)”

  1. I didn’t even realize that it was on until I chanced across it.

    I slightly disagree. I think it’s possible for 24 to go on with Jack Bauer as long as the folks behind the show understand that Bauer was the heart of the show. There were other wonderful characters who had their own story lines in the various series and they were compelling, but at the end of the day, people cared about how Jack Bauer reacted to the main crisis. They were so good at creating the character and having that character evolve in the way he dealt with ensuing issues (the Bauer at the end was not the one who started off the show) that it gripped the audience.This was, loosely, an ensemble show, but the core of it was Jack Bauer and the journey he was on (or the journey he was forced into by circumstances in his life). He was the focal point. (and honestly to some extent, people were fascinated in how they were going to pull Jack back into a crisis every season without it getting a little ridiculous–“Oh come on, this guy is the most unlucky guy on the face of the Earth.” Usually I think they pulled it off.

    If the producers could find another character acting as that strong a focal point, then I think it could be fine. You can have the focal character and also switch focus every so often to other story lines as long as you go back to that focal character. But if they don’t do that, I don’t think the audience is really going to care. about other story lines.

    I just don’t know if you can come up with a character that strong for what he or she will need to do to make the premise work. It was such a unique premise. They might not be able to pull it off again.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s