# data[].attributes.body
A closer look at TV and its infrastructure through critique.

# data[].attributes.body
Narcos is a Netflix original series that has sought to show viewers what it was like to live in Colombia during the time period of Pablo Escobar’s drug trafficking cartel. This television series was created by Chris Brancato and stars Wagner Mourra. Narcos has been very well received by the public as a whole, as well as earning itself an 8.9 out of 10 on IMDb. But until today, there haven’t been any critical analysis’ that have dissected Narcos to this extent. Today, this literary critique will be closely inspecting the season 2 finale episode in which Pablo Escobar’ tyranny comes to an end. This work aims to inspect this episode through a critical lens while analyzing different aspects of its content, thus making connections to the real world and everyday life. To facilitate the underlying meanings behind some concepts, the bulk of this work will refer back to Victoria O’Donnell’s theoretical perspectives on how television should be criticized. And, at the same time, this essay will answer a series of questions O’Donnell proposes in a way that matches this program.

A nice place to begin would be the question “Do you talk to your friends about the program?” Interestingly enough, from personal experience I would not have found out about Narcos had it not been for my friends. One weekend when my main group of friends and I decided to have dinner, they just could not stop talking about this one television program that had them hooked. They even went as far as to call it the best and only show of its kind. This intrigued me and then, in turn, made me look into the program and surely enough I was definitely interested in it. But finding out about new programs through word of mouth is not necessarily the importance of having friends when talking about TV criticism. It is the way in which friends come together to talk about the program and offer opinions that truly matters. My friends and I, from personal experience, found ourselves theorizing numerous aspects of the show at times and discussing it in great detail. This method of decoding media with friends is just one way in which we were critiquing television without even knowing it. Having intellectual conversations with your friends about television programs can also be beneficial as well. Here is a link where you can read more about the benefits of watching television, either with friends or alone: http://connectwithyourteens.net/top-10-benefits-of-watching-television/

Next, will be the question of “What are audience expectations of this particular genre?” Well to begin, Narcos is primarily a biographical film, but I would personally argue that it is a Biographical drama. Biographical drama is a hybrid genre, and a genre that I would argue is very unique when talking about this program and its contents. Many of the aspects of Narcos, including the actor who portrays Escobar, are spot on in the way they go about exemplifying his lifestyle and looks.

But what I would argue makes this a biographical drama is the fact that some of the events seen in Narcos are overly-exaggerated. Still, that is not to say that there is not historical accuracy within this particular episode in which Pablo is finally killed. The production team had even gone through the trouble to shoot this final episode in Pablo's actual last hideout. See #8 on this editorial: https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/the-life-of-pablo-10-things-you-need-to-know-about-narcos-season-two/
Overall, many audiences expect truth when it comes to biographical series’. But as seen not only with Narcos, Hollywood has a tendency of stretching truths as far as they can possibly go in order to appeal to audiences. One thing that is for certain, is that the drama side of this show is what has kept its ratings alive and has kept numerous audiences raving about the show. Here is a more comprehensive list of films that have fully utilized the art of biographical drama for those unfamiliar with the genre: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls009007288/

While on the topic of audience expectation and appeal, it is important to keep in mind demographics. The next question posed by O’Donnell is “To what demographic is the subject of this program most likely to appeal?” This is important to keep in mind because these demographics are what essentially led to the success of this series as a whole. While analyzing the final episode in particular, the viewer can see Pablo Escobar counting down as he knows his days are slowly coming to an end. This season finale is packed with dramatic, yet realistic instances that include shock value and add to the realism of the program. This can also be heard when Pablo talks to his wife on the phone, where she then convinces him desperately to surrender himself to the authorities and to stop running from the inevitable. These combinations of events show the demographic in plain sight. This show is definitely intended for a matured audience capable of understanding these events in real time and witnessing the graphic realities. Interestingly enough, the demographic stretches even further in this program since the program is scripted almost entirely in Spanish. And while this show did appeal to many Colombian natives who live here in America, it did, at the same time, offend many others as well. Here is a discussion which takes a deeper look into the mixed reviews of Narcos in the Colombian community: https://www.quora.com/What-do-Colombians-think-of-the-show-Narcos . Demographics are very important in having a successful show, but it is important to take many others who may have been affected by the subject matter into consideration. This show had failed to do this on many levels, which did not hinder its success, but did in turn repel many demographical audiences who may have been there to witness these events happen in real life.

Another very important question that has been raised is “Can you attribute an intention to this program? Is it to persuade or to inform?” The last episode of season 2 can easily answer this question for the entire television series. The show was very dramatic in the way that it informed its viewers on the events that occurred leading up to the day of Escobar’s death. It did so in a way that included shock value and reality that may have been too real for many to accept. This episode does not make any evident persuasions to the viewer. Of course one could take this as an obvious persuasion never to traffic drugs, because the ending of this episode could easily happen to anyone who pursues such a route in life. On the other hand, another interesting perspective into television drama and persuasion comes from researchers from Ohio State University who claim that television drama programs can be more persuasive than news. More information on that here: http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/narrative.htm . Though this episode and program are both extremely informative in their exemplification of biographical events, it is always interesting to look at persuasion in a different light. For the sake of this episode, no specific lines of dialogue had been thrown in to persuade the viewer whatsoever. But only do so to inform and paint a picture.

When looking into the episode more closely, a good question to raise would be “Do you identify with any of the characters?” O’Donnell explains a concept of characterization through social types (p.77) in which viewers relate characters from television to real people who may resemble one another. She goes on to argue that social types in characters are easily distinguishable and can easily be remembered. And while I do not personally identify with any character in the program personally, I believe one of Pablo Escobar’s associates in the final episode does look similar to my uncle. So for the duration of watching this episode, I found it to be quite humorous indeed that someone who could easily be my uncle’s doppelganger, and found it very easy to identify that character in relation with someone I had already known. But digging even deeper, it is important to understand character identification from beyond a physical level. When we are talking about identifying with characters in ways that are emotional and spiritual, then a whole new way of looking into characters is born. When Pablo’s mother disapproves of all he is doing in this final episode and demands that he stop his actions, I found myself quickly empathizing with a very concerned and elderly mother. This idea of metaphysical character identification is something I quickly picked up while observing and critiquing this final episode of Narcos. An study done by Cynthia Hoffner of Georgia State University even found that young adults have a subconscious longing of putting themselves in character’s shoes while watching television programs. This study can be reviewed here: http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/young_adults_wishful_identification_with_television_characters-_the_role_of_perceived_similarity_and_character_attributes.pdf

The idea of playing pretend with characters is not so farfetched after all. And as many others would agree it is a large part of watching television and observing character presentation. But even more important than character identification is the way in which the characters are presented and the symbolism which encapsulates them.

When asked “If there are any symbols, how can they be recognized and how do they function?” Many bits and pieces of this episode come into mind. The frame of reference for all the symbolism in this episode easily comes from Colombian nationalism. This can be seen in the introduction of this episode when the narrator is explaining magical realism. The clip of this can be seen with this link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBXGrEJzJ3k&app=desktop

These symbols act as the framework for everything we are about to see in the coming episode. There is much bedlam taking place in Colombia as the authorities are working closely with the United States DEA, and time is running out. These symbols can be seen all throughout the duration of the episode and even serve as the establishing theme of this episode as well. One way Colombian nationalism is important is because of the events leading up to what is happening in this episode. Just before the DEA and Colombian authorities began the manhunt for Pablo Escobar, he had bribed the Colombian government by saying he would pay their national debt. The government had refused as they did not want to be seen associated with drug traffickers. If interested in other unorthodox things Pablo had done with his wealth and power during his time, see this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/10-facts-that-prove-the-absurdity-of-pablo-escobars-wealth-2015-9 . But these symbols serve as the structure for the events that have led to the tension which made all of these people come after him in the first place. It is almost as if it had all come down to this, which is essentially the underlying message by showing us the symbolism in the introduction of this episode.

While on the topic of the storyline in this episode and its relation to symbolism, another question to explore is “Are there elements of older stories that are retold in this narrative?” To which the obvious answer in this scenario is yes. Steve Murphy, the main DEA agent leading the op against taking down Escobar, spends most of the beginning of the episode reflecting on his time with his partner Javier Pena. He says that no other person beside his partner deserved to be there more than him, since no one had dedicated as much time to this as he did. He wanted his partner in crime to be there when it all went down. And Javier was very grateful for this as well. The way agents Murphy and Pena sit at the airport and reflect really play a significant role in how they go about this job. And often times we can even hear the two referencing things that don’t exactly make sense or what seem to be an “insider” between the two. This has also happened throughout most of the series and could be because of connection on a personal level. This has also made the art of recycling old stories a very difficult thing to do in the narrative. See why others argue that storytelling is difficult in TV in this article: http://theconversation.com/why-has-tv-storytelling-become-so-complex-37442 .

But telling old stories is one symbol of many that holds significance in this particular episode. And with Pablo Escobar counting down minutes, things only get more and more symbolic.

A lot of symbolism can be drawn from the outdoor scenes in this episode especially. So when O’Donnell poses the question “Is there symbolism in the outdoor scenes?” The clear cut answer is absolutely. And we see this symbolism in not only the scenery but in the camera angles as well. We see long shots of the architecture and many medium shots of the agents talking. O’Donnell says that strong tendencies exist in television toward medium shots; and says that there is no better way to frame a natural conversation than through the use of the medium shots (p.52) The way we see reaction shots while the DEA team is tracking Escobar is also very important to the nature of this episode and serves as an establishing archetypes of the episode. Archetypes here clearly distinguish the good guys from the bad guys and do so in a beautiful way through the use of reaction shots and dialogue. Escobar is never seen smiling, while the DEA is thrilled to be on this mission to take him down. This all happening inside of a van outside of Pablo’s last known location is symbolizing the beginning of the end. The outdoor scenery of his last hideout is a picture worth thousands of words to say the least
All of this happens while symbolically telling a story through the camera shots. To learn more about camera angles and their significance in establishing stories, I would recommend checking this article out: http://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/film-studies-101-camera-shots-styles/

Lastly, a question to be asked is “How do the objects, furniture, and other objects in the set reflect the characters?” To begin, the production team of Narcos has done an outstanding job of recreating the shack that Pablo was hiding in when he eventually was raided in the end. The wardrobe, the television, even the secret back door was all recreated perfectly to a T. Even the real life DEA agents who took down Escobar pointed out all of the accuracies of this episode. This can be seen here: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/narcos-real-dea-agents-murphy-928933 . The way that the final phone call takes place was not completely accurate in terms of dialogue, but the phone call did in fact happen. This is how the DEA was able to track down his location in the end. All of these accuracies make this show that much more enjoyable to watch. When Pablo is last seen in his hideout, he has a long gray beard and is overweight and grew out his hair to modify his appearance. This was also completely reenacted perfectly in the show up until the scene where he is finally shot dead. He can be seen wearing the exact same polo shirt and jeans in the episode. The combination of his wardrobe and the layout of his hideout all come together to portray to the viewer what it was like when all of this went down in real time. The reenactment was done flawlessly of his final death photo as well which exemplifies just about everything leading to his death

And all of this comes together to paint the ultimate picture of Pablo Escobar and how he would ultimately be remembered.

To conclude, it is always an enjoyable experience to share my own thoughts and critiques of television. I have done so on my blog since the beginning of the semester and have no intent on ever taking down the blog. I hope I have contributed to the understanding of this program and have helped viewers and fans see the final episode of season 2 in a new light. Offering my own critique has been a privilege to say the least. And until the end of time, I will always be a believe that TV will never end.