Imagine for a moment that Yellowjackets put all its cards on the table and solved its long drawn-out mysteries: Which girl got killed and eaten by he
Imagine for a moment that Yellowjackets put all its cards on the table and solved its long drawn-out mysteries: Which girl got killed and eaten by her teammates in the series premiere’s frigid open? Is there anything otherworldly about the woods in which they’re trapped? Why do sinister-seeming things keep haunting them in the present? How exactly were the plane crash survivors rescued from the wilderness? If these were answered, the question then becomes: Is there still a show there that people will watch? Whether you enjoy the Showtime thriller’s third season, premiering Friday, will depend on how you answer those questions.
After two years away, Yellowjackets still walks and talks like a mystery, introducing ominous up-to-date questions and keeping a few existing ones in circulation—even as it sweeps others under the rug. But this long into the show’s run, such teasing feels half-hearted, and in the up-to-date batch of episodes (four of which have been made available to critics), the writers of Yellowjackets seem to be toying with the idea of making a show that has less to hide.
That impulse is a good one; Yellowjackets would be much better if it ditched its proclivity for mysteries and theory bait. As uneven as the second season was, the show’s draw remained mighty: It’s a compelling story about teenage women building and breaking a social contract as they struggle to survive a nightmare, and those same women in middle age stubbornly wrestling with their mutual maladjustment. The brutal horror of the show’s ’90s half, and the suburban farce of the current half, make for a compelling diptych.
Unfortunately, season three of Yellowjackets still relies on unexplained, possibly supernatural elements to tie its two halves together. The no-eyed-man who haunts Taissa (Tawny Cypress) continues to appear; the potential existence of another unseen survivor is repeatedly teased; and the otherworldly nature of the woods where the survivors are stranded continues to impact the psyche of those alive in the present. None of this, however, is as absorbing as when Yellowjackets just does good old-fashioned television—like in the fourth episode of this season, in which the girls put a fellow survivor on trial.
Yellowjackets could stand to do more of this. Its emphasis on mystery and posing questions it can’t answer has historically been why its present-day story lacks the dynamism of the ’90s plot; if any of the present-day cast is too outspoken about what they experienced, well, that kills the tension of the flashbacks. Embracing that tension was a valuable way to get people in the door, but three seasons in, it’s outlived its usefulness.
Again, the strongest parts of Yellowjackets season three—this first chunk, anyway—seem to concede this, particularly as the present-day plot turns its attention to the characters’ relationships with each other. As the group comes together to mourn Natalie’s (Juliette Lewis) death, Misty (Christina Ricci) begins to finally internalize that the other women may not like her, Taissa and Van (Lauren Ambrose) sultry to being back in one another’s lives, and Shauna (Melanie Lynskey) deals with the fallout of her daughter Callie (Sarah Desjardins) getting far too involved in the gang’s encounter with Lottie (Simone Kessell) and her wellness cult.
Not all of these plots pan out satisfyingly. But like any TV show with its legs under it, the cast shines best when they’re given the space to bounce off each other—chafing as the mannered niceties of North Jersey are when juxtaposed against their teen horrors. That grimmer part of the show remains as mighty as ever; the past storyline jumps ahead to the spring after the girls are stranded and a up-to-date status quo in which the younger cast has established a more regimented (and ritualized) social order.
Skipping out of the dead of winter (which, as we know from the pilot, will come around once more before they’re finally rescued) is another decision that can feel like a cheat if you come to Yellowjackets for answers on who lives, who dies, and what really happened. In practice, it’s another intelligent step toward making sustainable television. The Yellowjackets have achieved equilibrium with the wilderness, freeing up the show to explore how their relationships (and lack thereof) will eventually lead to the breakdown we know is coming. The supernatural aspects remain there on the fringes in a satisfyingly troubling way—even if they are merely metaphorical. Yellowjackets’ ’90s story has accumulated enough conflict and tension to fuel the series without needing any literal magic.
Depending on what brings you to Yellowjackets, this up-to-date season will either bring disappointment or seem like a turn in the right direction. On a plot level, the show feels in danger of stagnation, drawing out up-to-date mysteries with little conviction or clear purpose. If the series continues to embrace its Lost-like penchant for riddles and symbols, it will be tough to feel good about its future. But if Yellowjackets continues to shed its puzzle-box baggage—as tough as that may be to imagine—there remains plenty of room for the series to settle into a pointed, mean survival story, complemented by biting satirical dramedy. That would be more than enough for Yellowjackets to make it through the woods.
COMMENTS