So over the past couple of weeks, I watched the 8-part miniseries Sharp Objects that's based on Gillian Flynn's debut novel of the same name. The moment Adora showed up I thought to myself, oh, this is one of those shows where the name doesn't refer to things, but to people. I immediately thought Adora was a sharp object.
Dear lord how right I was!
Of course, this is a subject of individual interpretation, but I find it hard to believe someone would disagree with me. Sure, there are actual sharp objects in the series - pins and needles and scissors and knives and what not, whatever the main character could get her hands on - but there's no way the book was named after the things alone. No way. It would be beyond lame.
So let's see. (I'll try my best not to spoil the end if you haven't seen it.) Three characters in the series present themselves as more sharp than others. First, there's Camille, the main character - an obvious sharp object. Not only does she keep people away from her, but she's also a weapon towards herself. Then there's Adora, who harms those around her first and foremost psychologically (although physical abuse isn't ruled out). The third one is Amma, also psychologically manipulative, but in addition somewhat bipolar, capable of harming others.
What strikes as curious is that literally every other character in the show are either trying-to-do-the-right-thing men, head-full-of-cotton-candy gossiping women, or sweet-and-innocent children. Compared to those three individuals mentioned above, connected by blood, no one else could even be considered a sharp object. No one else is truly dangerous, physically or psychologically, compared to them. Perhaps this is a good thing: three psychological characters are a lot to deal with as they are, so the shallowness of the others balances the show nicely. (Even if it makes picking out the killer easier.) Also, the town in itself is somewhat a character - a place that's stuck in history from 1950's ads painted on stone walls to roller skating.
A well made show in general, though.