I can't believe it is nearly Christmas. I also can't believe that Rudolph was shown so soon after Thanksgiving that B and I missed showing it to the kids. We really need a DVD player.
But that means it is time for the annual (more or less) grading of the new season's worth of shows, both old and new shows.
Where to start? How about alphabetical order?
Chuck - This season has seen Morgan derailed as the broken Intersect and Chuck rediscovering his hacker roots. It turns out that Jeff without carbon monoxide is a rather normal, moral guy who turns Lester in for trying to kill him. Casey finds a love interest as geeky about guns as he is, and our team of spies is now on the run from the federal government. Morgan as the jerk Intersect was a little dull, and bad for a character who had grown on me so much, but the last episode is a return to the best of Chuck. At the end of last season, I gave Chuck a B. I'm giving it a B+ for this season.
Community - Fans of Community were devastated to learn that NBC decided to leave Community off its spring schedule. This failure to schedule is a big indication of the network's lack of trust in this excellent comedy. And this season has been fabulous. Although I feel Britta for some reason has been drawn a little more broadly this season than in the past, the characters are all still funny and unique. Pop culture has never been skewered as well as Community. Granted, it's not everyone's cup of tea, but Community goes from a B to an A.
Fringe - As I've noted before, the disappearance of Peter from the timeline has left a few viewers in the cold, especially considering that this may be this show's final season. I've personally enjoyed watching the evolution of a Peter-less Fringe team, especially with the addition of Lincoln Lee, but I also know that Fringe is always best seen as a season, not even as a half season. I'm lowering it's grade from an A to a B. We'll see if it improves.
House - This is most likely the final season for this show as well - seems to be a theme for this post so far! Cuddy is gone, House is on parole (with Foreman holding his ticket out of jail), and he has two new team members. For the first time ever, House has a female doctor that I like - Park is a socially awkward woman who isn't "hot" and doesn't fit in. The other doctor - the one House met in prison - is fairly typical for the show. I can't even remember the character's name. Thirteen left on a lesbian love affair or to pursue her movie career (I can't remember which), but Taub and Chase remain. House continues to play his mind games on his team and on Wilson, and manages to find a diagnosis for the desparately ill patient in the last five minutes. It's good the show is ending, but it is better than last year, so far. I'm giving it a B+.
Once Upon a Time - I didn't even include this show in my list of what I'd be watching this season. See what happens when you don't get the annual TV Guide Fall Preview issue? It is, of course, right up my alley. Jennifer Morrison (quite annoying as Cameron in House) stars as Emma Swan, who will somehow save our favorite fairy take characters (you know - Snow White, Prince Charming, Jiminy Cricket, the works!) from the Evil Witch's spell. I'll not go further into this other than to say that some Lost producers are behind it. That should make clear that there's no way to explain it all in one blurb. However, I don't want to imply this show is as good or as riveting as Lost - it's not. But it is good - it just needs to find itself. I'll give it a B.
Person of Interest - Okay, I'll confess. this is probably my favorite new show. I'm a little embarrassed, mainly because it's a procedural. There's the usual deep, dark arc that we get little bits and pieces of each week, about both characters, Finch and Reese. Benjamin Linus - oh, wait, I meant Finch, has created a master program that lets the government monitor and prevent terrorist activity. The program also detects your run-of-the-mill planned murders, but the government doesn't care about that. Finch does, so he engages an unemployed Green Beret/CIA agent called Reese. Some people don't like Jim Caviezel's performance as the laconic, intense Reese, but I like it. And I have to say that I would probably pay good money just to watch Michael Emerson to read a phone book, and he doesn't disappoint as the genius Finch with secrets of his own to hide. I'll give it an A-.
Ringer - this tale of two twins has been written about before in this blog. It's fall finale didn't make the series that much better. C. It killed off the annoying Jemma and Charlie; otherwise, this would be a C- or worse. And yes, I'll still watch it. Get over it.
The Good Wife - This was one of my highest rated shows from last year. Sadly, I can only give it an D or F now, because I'll never see it again! The powers-that-be decided to put this gem of a show on Sundays, after football. I saw the first episode, but the second episode was half Amazing Race. I deleted it (you know I don't watch anything in real time), as I have each subsequent episode. I can report that my mother is not as big a fan this year as she was last year. Hmph.
So, what have you been watching?
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Fall Finales - Really?
The last episode of Fringe was promoted as a fall finale. Ringer airs its fall finale this Tuesday. Many shows have promoted their fall finales, promising surprises, thrills, and cliffhangers. I'm not a fan.
It seems that expectations for the final episode of a season are pretty high. A couple of years ago, Bones aired a season finale in which Bones either read a book or Booth dreamed that they were a couple who owned a nightclub. It was a fun episode, had all the squints and Zack in silly roles. It was a trifle, but it was entertaining, which is what a show should be. But oh! the lamentations in the blogosphere - this was no kind of finale.
What? A procedural needs a certain kind of an episode to air for the final episode of the season? That doesn't make sense to me.
Some shows require a finale to be an event. The finales of Buffy the Vampire Slayer always resolved a season-long arc in which the season's "big bad" was finally vanquished, killed, or otherwise neutralized. On the other hand, Lost's finales usually elicited more questions than resolution, but they were for sure events to be anticipated and savored. Lost, of course, produced cliffhangers so we'd return the next season to figure out what it all meant.
One of the best finales I've seen was The Best of Both Worlds of Star Trek: The Next Generation. The tension on board the Enterprise mounted as the Borg kidnapped Picard and turned him into a Borg. It was a bold move for a series that up til then hadn't been very bold.
But I don't require most of the shows I watch to have finales. If they do, so be it, but I won't think less of any show in that category that fails to produce one. Personally, I'd rather have a good episode than a mediocre attempt at a finale.
But now we're expecting shows to have "fall finales"? Are you kidding me?
One of the biggest complaints TV viewers have each year is the month and a half or so that TV turns off. It's the holiday season, and usually starts sometime around Thanksgiving and ends sometime after the New Year's Day. Television programmers have to face the fact that people are very busy during the holidays, going to parties, buying gifts, and mailing greeting cards. So television is placed on hiatus while people are distracted. It makes sense.
We viewers are a demanding lot - we're quite irritated by these breaks in our favorite shows. Some seem to take it quite personally. Finally, some shows like Lost and 24 just waited until the new year to air so that viewers could watch with few if any interruptions.
But now we're expecting shows that air on both sides of the New Year's to have "fall finales"? Please. Fringe's finale showed that Nina Sharp is leading scientists in extracting something from Olivia's body? Wow. Knock me over with a feather. Ringer has promised that they'll reveal something that will change everything. Whatever.
I guess my primary objection to this is that it just seems like a trick, an illusion that forgets that good story telling is what every show should rely upon to keep viewers. Focus on that, and everything should fall into place. Viewers will come for the good stories, not for the cliffhangers. At least, unless you make them expect it.
It seems that expectations for the final episode of a season are pretty high. A couple of years ago, Bones aired a season finale in which Bones either read a book or Booth dreamed that they were a couple who owned a nightclub. It was a fun episode, had all the squints and Zack in silly roles. It was a trifle, but it was entertaining, which is what a show should be. But oh! the lamentations in the blogosphere - this was no kind of finale.
What? A procedural needs a certain kind of an episode to air for the final episode of the season? That doesn't make sense to me.
Some shows require a finale to be an event. The finales of Buffy the Vampire Slayer always resolved a season-long arc in which the season's "big bad" was finally vanquished, killed, or otherwise neutralized. On the other hand, Lost's finales usually elicited more questions than resolution, but they were for sure events to be anticipated and savored. Lost, of course, produced cliffhangers so we'd return the next season to figure out what it all meant.
One of the best finales I've seen was The Best of Both Worlds of Star Trek: The Next Generation. The tension on board the Enterprise mounted as the Borg kidnapped Picard and turned him into a Borg. It was a bold move for a series that up til then hadn't been very bold.
But I don't require most of the shows I watch to have finales. If they do, so be it, but I won't think less of any show in that category that fails to produce one. Personally, I'd rather have a good episode than a mediocre attempt at a finale.
But now we're expecting shows to have "fall finales"? Are you kidding me?
One of the biggest complaints TV viewers have each year is the month and a half or so that TV turns off. It's the holiday season, and usually starts sometime around Thanksgiving and ends sometime after the New Year's Day. Television programmers have to face the fact that people are very busy during the holidays, going to parties, buying gifts, and mailing greeting cards. So television is placed on hiatus while people are distracted. It makes sense.
We viewers are a demanding lot - we're quite irritated by these breaks in our favorite shows. Some seem to take it quite personally. Finally, some shows like Lost and 24 just waited until the new year to air so that viewers could watch with few if any interruptions.
But now we're expecting shows that air on both sides of the New Year's to have "fall finales"? Please. Fringe's finale showed that Nina Sharp is leading scientists in extracting something from Olivia's body? Wow. Knock me over with a feather. Ringer has promised that they'll reveal something that will change everything. Whatever.
I guess my primary objection to this is that it just seems like a trick, an illusion that forgets that good story telling is what every show should rely upon to keep viewers. Focus on that, and everything should fall into place. Viewers will come for the good stories, not for the cliffhangers. At least, unless you make them expect it.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Fringe - Peterless
Aw, Fringe, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways.
This has been a difficult season for a number of Fringe fans, following the traumatic finale when the Observers decided to wipe Peter off the face of the Earth. It turns out that Peter was not supposed to survive his dumping in the lake and the Observer was supposed to ... well...observe Peter down. So, what kind of a world is it that was Peterless?
For a number of people, it's a sad one. Fringe is trying to make up for it, however, by having Peter return, in the same lake in which he died, or didn't. Peter remembers everything, but no one else does.
He tried to reconnect with Walter, but Walter would have none of it. He decided that Peter's death was a just punishment for his hubris in taking Peter from his universe. We watched Walter completely ignore Peter in And Those We've Left Behind, and he's made no effort to talk with Peter. He acknowledges that Peter is his son (genetic tests don't lie), but he's stubborn. Peter notices: He didn't even look at me.
Peter is astounded to find that Olivia has had dreams about him, but when he presses her for the emotional content, she claims she can't have an emotional response - she doesn't know him. She figures out that he had a relationship with "the other Olivia", and is kind, but she clearly lacks any regard for him. Instead, Peter observes the burgeoning relationship between Olivia and Lincoln Lee, and gives Lincoln a pair of "readers" that will make his look less bookish.
Peter also has the discomfiting position of being considered a "fringe event". He has an agent "friend" who "escorts" him everywhere, and discovers that his "friend" is under orders to limit Peter's interactions with "civilians". He clearly doesn't belong and doesn't appear to be wanted.
These events have caused Peter to believe that he is misplaced - he is from another universe (the third we know of, if he's correct). He now refers to "the other Olivia", and spent his time in Wallflower looking at the schematics to build the time machine (or whatever) that placed him in this universe.
I'm certain Peter is wrong, and that it is this universe that he belongs in. The question is, how will that resolve? Will the Observer(s) somehow intervene? Will Peter's machine "fix" everything? What?
Ryan McGee, over at Hitfix, has been very vocal about his dissatisfaction with this season. He's not alone, if his comments are any indication. I'm not so negative. The show isn't as good as last season, but I'm enjoying seeing the differences brought upon our characters by the current situation. Ryan does have a good point, however; if this is the last season of Fringe (as appears likely), do we really want to see it without the core threesome in harmony?
This has been a difficult season for a number of Fringe fans, following the traumatic finale when the Observers decided to wipe Peter off the face of the Earth. It turns out that Peter was not supposed to survive his dumping in the lake and the Observer was supposed to ... well...observe Peter down. So, what kind of a world is it that was Peterless?
For a number of people, it's a sad one. Fringe is trying to make up for it, however, by having Peter return, in the same lake in which he died, or didn't. Peter remembers everything, but no one else does.
He tried to reconnect with Walter, but Walter would have none of it. He decided that Peter's death was a just punishment for his hubris in taking Peter from his universe. We watched Walter completely ignore Peter in And Those We've Left Behind, and he's made no effort to talk with Peter. He acknowledges that Peter is his son (genetic tests don't lie), but he's stubborn. Peter notices: He didn't even look at me.
Peter is astounded to find that Olivia has had dreams about him, but when he presses her for the emotional content, she claims she can't have an emotional response - she doesn't know him. She figures out that he had a relationship with "the other Olivia", and is kind, but she clearly lacks any regard for him. Instead, Peter observes the burgeoning relationship between Olivia and Lincoln Lee, and gives Lincoln a pair of "readers" that will make his look less bookish.
Peter also has the discomfiting position of being considered a "fringe event". He has an agent "friend" who "escorts" him everywhere, and discovers that his "friend" is under orders to limit Peter's interactions with "civilians". He clearly doesn't belong and doesn't appear to be wanted.
These events have caused Peter to believe that he is misplaced - he is from another universe (the third we know of, if he's correct). He now refers to "the other Olivia", and spent his time in Wallflower looking at the schematics to build the time machine (or whatever) that placed him in this universe.
I'm certain Peter is wrong, and that it is this universe that he belongs in. The question is, how will that resolve? Will the Observer(s) somehow intervene? Will Peter's machine "fix" everything? What?
Ryan McGee, over at Hitfix, has been very vocal about his dissatisfaction with this season. He's not alone, if his comments are any indication. I'm not so negative. The show isn't as good as last season, but I'm enjoying seeing the differences brought upon our characters by the current situation. Ryan does have a good point, however; if this is the last season of Fringe (as appears likely), do we really want to see it without the core threesome in harmony?
Saturday, October 29, 2011
I Have a Girl Crush - SMG
Yes, I must admit, I have a girl crush. Now, those of you who are thinking inappropriate thoughts, shame on you. You clearly don't know me that well, and get your head out of the gutter.
Those of you who know that the initials "SMG" stand for "Sarah Michelle Gellar" probably think, well duh - Buffy's one of your favorite characters in the whole wide world. And you would be half right in your assumptions. Of course I've had a girl crush on Buffy for over a decade. First, a brief view of my crush on Buffy.
Joss Whedon, in my opinion, is a genius. He took the old horror movie trope of the beautiful blond in the negligee walking down the stairs to investigate that scary noise. Any intelligent watcher is screaming at the television for the idiot blond to stay away, but she never listens, and sure enough, ends up brutally killed. You knew Buffy would be a different type of show from it's opening scene. A high school jock, clearly with nefarious plans in mind, is escorting a tremulous blond through the halls of Sunnydale High School. She's nervous, scared of every noise, but the jock assures her it will all be alright. Sadly for him, the blond isn't a high school girl, but a vampire well over 400 years old. The jock didn't score, but Darla had a nice meal.
Buffy was not the victim but the heroine, the slayer, the chosen one, who has supernatural powers that enable her to kill vampires and other evil creatures. Slayers were normally solitary creatures who were infused with the essence of demons so that they could kill demons, often dying young. Buffy wanted nothing to do with being a slayer after getting kicked out of high school in LA, but, of course, her destiny followed her, and she eventually gave in. But she always played by her own rules. First, she had friends who knew her "secret identity" and frequently took part in the battles against the forces of evil. She was determined to maintain her sense of style, being the mall rat she was. She also had a sense of humor that wouldn't stop, no matter how serious or tragic the circumstances. Look at the following quotes:
In Faith, Hope, and Trick, about her life returning to normal: "All right, yes, date and shop and hang out go to school and save the world from unspeakable demons. You know, I wanna do girlie stuff."
In Real Me, after Giles complains about his new car's automatic transmission:
Buffy: Giles, are you breaking up with your car?
Giles: Well, it did seduce me, all red and sporty.
Buffy: Little two-door tramp.
And in the final episode, Chosen, to Angel, explaining her complicated feelings about Angel and Spike and her desire to wait before deciding between the two: "I'm cookie dough. I'm not done baking. I'm not finished becoming whoever the hell it is I'm gonna turn out to be. I make it through this, and the next thing, and the next thing, and maybe one day, I turn around and realize I'm ready. I'm cookies. And then, you know, if I want someone to eat (eyes go wide as she realizes what she's saying) ... or enjoy warm, delicious cookie me, then...that's fine. That'll be then. When I'm done."
Let's face it, I could talk for hours about Buffy, and what she means to my life and my view of popular culture and television. But I must remind you the title references Gellar, not Summers.
One of the most difficult things I think that we as television viewers have to do is dissociate the actor from the character. We're adults, and we learn early on the distinction between the two. But this can be harder to achieve than it appears, as evidenced by comments that actors who play polarizing characters receive from members of the general public. But I think I've done a pretty good job of making that distinction. Patrick Stewart is no Jean Luc Picard, James Gandolfini is no Tony Soprano, and Valerie Harper is no Rhoda Morgenstern. I get it.
And Sarah Michelle Gellar is no Buffy Summers. Gellar started in Hollywood very young, staring in a series of Burger King commercials that were involved in a lawsuit by McDonald's. But she first really became famous when she starred as Erica Kane's long lost daughter Kendall on All My Children. I've long heard about the professionalism of Erica's portrayer, Susan Lucci, and even before Buffy hit the television air waves, I had heard that Lucci and Gellar did not get along.
I also read some silly magazine articles about Gellar, in which she impresses the author because she and her friends had "girls weekends" in which no one was allowed to wear make up. Wow.
But I truly lost respect for Gellar when she announced via Entertainment Weekly that she was quitting Buffy, before she told her co-stars. Yeah, you just don't do that in my world.
Post-Buffy (and, to be fair, during), Gellar appeared in a number of movies, with only Scream 2, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Cruel Intentions and The Grudge being remotely respected. How many movies with Gellar have I seen? None. I'm just not interested in any of them.
Her personal life is quite boring, certainly, compared with her contemporaries. She married one of her movie co-stars, Freddie Prinze, Jr., who, honestly, is one of the most boring actors ever, and had a daughter in 2009. I never see her in the tabloids and rarely in the magazines. I think better of her for that, certainly.
But really, her biggest problem is that she's not Buffy. No one is.
All that said, I was excited to hear that Gellar was scheduled to star in a new series, Ringer, about identical twins, one of whom takes over the life of the other. The trailer was intriguing, and if Gellar did as good a job on this show as she did on Buffy, well, what's not to like?
My first clue that it might not be such a great show was before it even aired - it went from CBS to the CW. The CW is famous for its teen and young adult soaps. And critics I trust who had seen the pilot episode didn't have much good to say. But I had to see it.
And see it I have - all episodes that have aired. And it's horrible. The story lines don't make sense, the characterization missing, and the tension untense. The basic story is this: former prostitute Bridget is in protective custody because she plans to testify about a murder she witnessed. Newly sober, she somehow escapes from protective custody and reconnects with her wealthy identical twin sister. Apparently the two had a falling out related to Bridget's drug use and the death of Siobhan's child (presumably related). Siobhan appears to commit suicide, and Bridget decides to take her sister's identity to hide from the murderer.
Bridget discovers that Siobhan's life isn't all great - she and her husband have a hostile relationship, her stepdaughter hates her, and she's having an affair with her best friend's husband. Worse yet, it becomes clear that someone was paid to kill a woman named "Siobhan Martin". Bridget is doing her best to take on Siobhan's life and hiding the fact that she isn't the same woman. All the slight differences between the two women don't seem enough to clue anyone that the woman isn't Siobhan. Seriously?
Of course, Siobhan was not dead, but living in Paris. It's clear she has an agenda, against her husband and against Bridget. We don't know why, but it appears we'll learn soon enough.
And the two men in Siobhan's life - Andrew (husband) and Henry (lover) are both dull as dishwater (maybe Freddie Prinze, Jr. was the model?). I guess that Siobhan had an affair with Henry because Andrew ignored her for his work. But it feels like not only is the wife new in this marriage, so is the husband. A man who put work before his family has made lots of changes in his life, apparently. I don't know. The men are pretty to look at but not much else.
The tension, beyond Bridget trying to be Siobhan, comes from Bridget trying to hide the body of the man who killed her, or trying to hide a gun, or staying out of Henry's bed. Gemma, Siobhan's boring best friend, discovered that Siobhan and Henry were having an affair. Bridget finally confessed to Gemma that's she's Bridget, and Gemma then blackmailed Bridget to get Henry to sleep with her so Gemma could ensure Henry gets none of her money. Bridget refused, and shortly thereafter, was Gemma was apparently killed. I guess that's a mystery now.
No matter what I write, I know that I am fighting a useless battle. There's no way I can convince you that this show is good and worth your time. It's not. The show gets a C- or D. If only I could stop watching.
What makes me watch this show week after week? There's only one possibility: SMG. So, it's true, I have a crush.
Veronica Mars fan alert: Jason Dohring, Veronica's bad boy boyfriend Logan Echolls, plays a teacher in the high school of Andrew's daughter attends.
Lost fan alert: Nestor Carbonell, Richard Alpert, is the FBI agent determined to find Bridget.
Buffyverse fan alert: Well, duh.
Those of you who know that the initials "SMG" stand for "Sarah Michelle Gellar" probably think, well duh - Buffy's one of your favorite characters in the whole wide world. And you would be half right in your assumptions. Of course I've had a girl crush on Buffy for over a decade. First, a brief view of my crush on Buffy.
Joss Whedon, in my opinion, is a genius. He took the old horror movie trope of the beautiful blond in the negligee walking down the stairs to investigate that scary noise. Any intelligent watcher is screaming at the television for the idiot blond to stay away, but she never listens, and sure enough, ends up brutally killed. You knew Buffy would be a different type of show from it's opening scene. A high school jock, clearly with nefarious plans in mind, is escorting a tremulous blond through the halls of Sunnydale High School. She's nervous, scared of every noise, but the jock assures her it will all be alright. Sadly for him, the blond isn't a high school girl, but a vampire well over 400 years old. The jock didn't score, but Darla had a nice meal.
Buffy was not the victim but the heroine, the slayer, the chosen one, who has supernatural powers that enable her to kill vampires and other evil creatures. Slayers were normally solitary creatures who were infused with the essence of demons so that they could kill demons, often dying young. Buffy wanted nothing to do with being a slayer after getting kicked out of high school in LA, but, of course, her destiny followed her, and she eventually gave in. But she always played by her own rules. First, she had friends who knew her "secret identity" and frequently took part in the battles against the forces of evil. She was determined to maintain her sense of style, being the mall rat she was. She also had a sense of humor that wouldn't stop, no matter how serious or tragic the circumstances. Look at the following quotes:
In Faith, Hope, and Trick, about her life returning to normal: "All right, yes, date and shop and hang out go to school and save the world from unspeakable demons. You know, I wanna do girlie stuff."
In Real Me, after Giles complains about his new car's automatic transmission:
Buffy: Giles, are you breaking up with your car?
Giles: Well, it did seduce me, all red and sporty.
Buffy: Little two-door tramp.
And in the final episode, Chosen, to Angel, explaining her complicated feelings about Angel and Spike and her desire to wait before deciding between the two: "I'm cookie dough. I'm not done baking. I'm not finished becoming whoever the hell it is I'm gonna turn out to be. I make it through this, and the next thing, and the next thing, and maybe one day, I turn around and realize I'm ready. I'm cookies. And then, you know, if I want someone to eat (eyes go wide as she realizes what she's saying) ... or enjoy warm, delicious cookie me, then...that's fine. That'll be then. When I'm done."
Let's face it, I could talk for hours about Buffy, and what she means to my life and my view of popular culture and television. But I must remind you the title references Gellar, not Summers.
One of the most difficult things I think that we as television viewers have to do is dissociate the actor from the character. We're adults, and we learn early on the distinction between the two. But this can be harder to achieve than it appears, as evidenced by comments that actors who play polarizing characters receive from members of the general public. But I think I've done a pretty good job of making that distinction. Patrick Stewart is no Jean Luc Picard, James Gandolfini is no Tony Soprano, and Valerie Harper is no Rhoda Morgenstern. I get it.
And Sarah Michelle Gellar is no Buffy Summers. Gellar started in Hollywood very young, staring in a series of Burger King commercials that were involved in a lawsuit by McDonald's. But she first really became famous when she starred as Erica Kane's long lost daughter Kendall on All My Children. I've long heard about the professionalism of Erica's portrayer, Susan Lucci, and even before Buffy hit the television air waves, I had heard that Lucci and Gellar did not get along.
I also read some silly magazine articles about Gellar, in which she impresses the author because she and her friends had "girls weekends" in which no one was allowed to wear make up. Wow.
But I truly lost respect for Gellar when she announced via Entertainment Weekly that she was quitting Buffy, before she told her co-stars. Yeah, you just don't do that in my world.
Post-Buffy (and, to be fair, during), Gellar appeared in a number of movies, with only Scream 2, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Cruel Intentions and The Grudge being remotely respected. How many movies with Gellar have I seen? None. I'm just not interested in any of them.
Her personal life is quite boring, certainly, compared with her contemporaries. She married one of her movie co-stars, Freddie Prinze, Jr., who, honestly, is one of the most boring actors ever, and had a daughter in 2009. I never see her in the tabloids and rarely in the magazines. I think better of her for that, certainly.
But really, her biggest problem is that she's not Buffy. No one is.
All that said, I was excited to hear that Gellar was scheduled to star in a new series, Ringer, about identical twins, one of whom takes over the life of the other. The trailer was intriguing, and if Gellar did as good a job on this show as she did on Buffy, well, what's not to like?
My first clue that it might not be such a great show was before it even aired - it went from CBS to the CW. The CW is famous for its teen and young adult soaps. And critics I trust who had seen the pilot episode didn't have much good to say. But I had to see it.
And see it I have - all episodes that have aired. And it's horrible. The story lines don't make sense, the characterization missing, and the tension untense. The basic story is this: former prostitute Bridget is in protective custody because she plans to testify about a murder she witnessed. Newly sober, she somehow escapes from protective custody and reconnects with her wealthy identical twin sister. Apparently the two had a falling out related to Bridget's drug use and the death of Siobhan's child (presumably related). Siobhan appears to commit suicide, and Bridget decides to take her sister's identity to hide from the murderer.
Bridget discovers that Siobhan's life isn't all great - she and her husband have a hostile relationship, her stepdaughter hates her, and she's having an affair with her best friend's husband. Worse yet, it becomes clear that someone was paid to kill a woman named "Siobhan Martin". Bridget is doing her best to take on Siobhan's life and hiding the fact that she isn't the same woman. All the slight differences between the two women don't seem enough to clue anyone that the woman isn't Siobhan. Seriously?
Of course, Siobhan was not dead, but living in Paris. It's clear she has an agenda, against her husband and against Bridget. We don't know why, but it appears we'll learn soon enough.
And the two men in Siobhan's life - Andrew (husband) and Henry (lover) are both dull as dishwater (maybe Freddie Prinze, Jr. was the model?). I guess that Siobhan had an affair with Henry because Andrew ignored her for his work. But it feels like not only is the wife new in this marriage, so is the husband. A man who put work before his family has made lots of changes in his life, apparently. I don't know. The men are pretty to look at but not much else.
The tension, beyond Bridget trying to be Siobhan, comes from Bridget trying to hide the body of the man who killed her, or trying to hide a gun, or staying out of Henry's bed. Gemma, Siobhan's boring best friend, discovered that Siobhan and Henry were having an affair. Bridget finally confessed to Gemma that's she's Bridget, and Gemma then blackmailed Bridget to get Henry to sleep with her so Gemma could ensure Henry gets none of her money. Bridget refused, and shortly thereafter, was Gemma was apparently killed. I guess that's a mystery now.
No matter what I write, I know that I am fighting a useless battle. There's no way I can convince you that this show is good and worth your time. It's not. The show gets a C- or D. If only I could stop watching.
What makes me watch this show week after week? There's only one possibility: SMG. So, it's true, I have a crush.
Veronica Mars fan alert: Jason Dohring, Veronica's bad boy boyfriend Logan Echolls, plays a teacher in the high school of Andrew's daughter attends.
Lost fan alert: Nestor Carbonell, Richard Alpert, is the FBI agent determined to find Bridget.
Buffyverse fan alert: Well, duh.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
What New Shows Am I Watching This Season?
Well, folks, here it is, the new fall season of television, usually one of my favorite times of the television year. Last year was rough, with no new shows making my list of must sees. This year I believe will fair a little better.
On Monday nights, Fox airs Terra Nova. Terra Nova presents a dystopian future, that has somehow figured out how to send people back to a far distant past, before pollution, greed, and overpopulation made our world an environmental disaster. So far in the past, that dinosaurs rule the earth. Terra Nova features the very likable Jason O'Mara as a cop who had been imprisoned for daring to have three children. His wife, a noted physician, is recruited to Terra Nova, but she can only take their two oldest children. A little bribery and chicanery later, the entire family makes it to Terra Nova. I'm going to give this show a try, but I'm not convinced I like it. It features not one but two stereotypical teenagers, and O'Mara's character was rather easily accepted by the leader, played by the exceptional Stephen Lang. Terra Nova is clearly trying to make itself the Lost of the season, with its hints at mysteries under the surface. Indeed, several times, I felt like I was watching scenes from Lost.
On Tuesday nights, the CW is airing The Ringer. This soap opera/thriller focuses on identical twins, both with so many secrets that nothing is what it seems. There's only one reason I'm watching this show: Sarah Michelle Gellar, Buffy herself, plays the twins. So far, there are holes a-plenty, and the male characters are especially one-note. But I can't help myself. I must watch. I'm sure I'll have more to say on this later.
On Thursday nights, Person of Interest airs on Fox. What happens if there is a computer that can monitor humans so much, it can determine when a crime of violence will happen? Michael Emerson's character created such a computer to combat terrorism. The fact that the computer could predict other crimes was an unexpected, and apparently unwanted, side effect. For reasons yet unknown to us, Emerson has hired the man who once played Jesus, Jim Caviezel, to help him prevent murders and other kinds of violent mayhem. Both men are extremely serious and driven, and both have secrets and painful pasts. Like Lost, little bits of the characters' pasts will be revealed week by week. Some critics are not fans of Caviezel's stoicness, but like Anna Torv's Olivia on Fringe, I think it fits.
One show I hope to watch and just haven't yet is New Girl, with Zooey Deschanel. As soon as I have, I'll give my impressions.
Buffyverse Fan Alert - Buffy herself, Sarah Michelle Gellar on The Ringer. Duh.
Lost Fan Alert - Michael Emerson, the mysterious Ben, plays a mysterious do-gooder billionaire on Person of Interest. Nestor Carbonell, the immortal Richard Alpert, plays an FBI agent trying to catch one of the twins on The Ringer.
In the meantime, what are you watching?
On Monday nights, Fox airs Terra Nova. Terra Nova presents a dystopian future, that has somehow figured out how to send people back to a far distant past, before pollution, greed, and overpopulation made our world an environmental disaster. So far in the past, that dinosaurs rule the earth. Terra Nova features the very likable Jason O'Mara as a cop who had been imprisoned for daring to have three children. His wife, a noted physician, is recruited to Terra Nova, but she can only take their two oldest children. A little bribery and chicanery later, the entire family makes it to Terra Nova. I'm going to give this show a try, but I'm not convinced I like it. It features not one but two stereotypical teenagers, and O'Mara's character was rather easily accepted by the leader, played by the exceptional Stephen Lang. Terra Nova is clearly trying to make itself the Lost of the season, with its hints at mysteries under the surface. Indeed, several times, I felt like I was watching scenes from Lost.
On Tuesday nights, the CW is airing The Ringer. This soap opera/thriller focuses on identical twins, both with so many secrets that nothing is what it seems. There's only one reason I'm watching this show: Sarah Michelle Gellar, Buffy herself, plays the twins. So far, there are holes a-plenty, and the male characters are especially one-note. But I can't help myself. I must watch. I'm sure I'll have more to say on this later.
On Thursday nights, Person of Interest airs on Fox. What happens if there is a computer that can monitor humans so much, it can determine when a crime of violence will happen? Michael Emerson's character created such a computer to combat terrorism. The fact that the computer could predict other crimes was an unexpected, and apparently unwanted, side effect. For reasons yet unknown to us, Emerson has hired the man who once played Jesus, Jim Caviezel, to help him prevent murders and other kinds of violent mayhem. Both men are extremely serious and driven, and both have secrets and painful pasts. Like Lost, little bits of the characters' pasts will be revealed week by week. Some critics are not fans of Caviezel's stoicness, but like Anna Torv's Olivia on Fringe, I think it fits.
One show I hope to watch and just haven't yet is New Girl, with Zooey Deschanel. As soon as I have, I'll give my impressions.
Buffyverse Fan Alert - Buffy herself, Sarah Michelle Gellar on The Ringer. Duh.
Lost Fan Alert - Michael Emerson, the mysterious Ben, plays a mysterious do-gooder billionaire on Person of Interest. Nestor Carbonell, the immortal Richard Alpert, plays an FBI agent trying to catch one of the twins on The Ringer.
In the meantime, what are you watching?
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Fringe - Neither Here Nor There
Fringe is back for its fourth season, and now tells us what the universe is like if Peter Bishop had never existed.
That's what I thought, until I watched this episode. It turns out, the Observers just returned the time line to what it would have been had not our sympathetic Observer not saved Peter's life immediately after Walter brought the boy back from the alternate universe. Observers are not supposed to act in our universe, just to observe. By acting, the sympathetic Observer saved Peter, but altered the time line - Peter was never supposed to survive, in either universe.
So, everything is the same - Olivia works for Fringe Division, Walter uses his scientific genius to solve mysteries, and Astrid minds Walter. But, things are different too. Olivia is colder, and is not allowed to say what division she works in. Walter is agoraphobic, and has less control over his emotional responses. Astrid must go on the scene to observe for Walter, because he can't leave the lab.
Of course, the other difference has nothing to do with Peter's disappearance from the time line, although his actions in the finale of Season Three set this in place. There is now a bridge between the universes, so Fauxlivia and Olivia can trade insults as they swap files. However, the bridge may have also allowed some shapeshifters from the alternate universe to come over.
That was the mystery of the week, and we were introduced to it when Lincoln Lee's partner was killed by a shapeshifter. It turns out that if Peter died as a child, Lincoln and Olivia never met. He served as our introduction to all the changes wrought by Peter's absence. Although not allowed, Lincoln inserted himself into the investigation, and proved himself an able agent. Plus, he and Olivia have a lot in common, not least of which is the loss of their partners in fringe events.
Unbeknownst to Olivia et al, the Observers were closely watching them, and they didn't like what they saw. Although they rewrote the time line, Peter's presence wasn't completely erased. He phased in and out while Fauxlivia and Olivia argued. But mostly he haunted Walter, who didn't recognize the man in the mirror and television as the son who died as a child. Previews indicate the haunting will worsen in future episodes. Walter is clearly terrified by these apparitions, and could reasonably presume they are hallucinations.
It was a good episode of Fringe, but with the absence of Peter, it lacked the one thing that makes Fringe delightful - the connection between and among Olivia and the Bishop boys. We didn't get to see much of the relationship between the universes, other than the fact that our universe doesn't trust the alternate universe. So no answers as to who the father of Fauxlivia's baby is, assuming she still has one. But I liked the way Lincoln Lee was introduced (his portrayer, Seth Gabel, is now a full time cast member), and it's hard to argue with any episode which shows us Walter in full form. I'm a little concerned as to what's next, and how Peter will return. I do hope he returns soon. Without him, the show is missing a third of what makes it extraordinary.
That's what I thought, until I watched this episode. It turns out, the Observers just returned the time line to what it would have been had not our sympathetic Observer not saved Peter's life immediately after Walter brought the boy back from the alternate universe. Observers are not supposed to act in our universe, just to observe. By acting, the sympathetic Observer saved Peter, but altered the time line - Peter was never supposed to survive, in either universe.
So, everything is the same - Olivia works for Fringe Division, Walter uses his scientific genius to solve mysteries, and Astrid minds Walter. But, things are different too. Olivia is colder, and is not allowed to say what division she works in. Walter is agoraphobic, and has less control over his emotional responses. Astrid must go on the scene to observe for Walter, because he can't leave the lab.
Of course, the other difference has nothing to do with Peter's disappearance from the time line, although his actions in the finale of Season Three set this in place. There is now a bridge between the universes, so Fauxlivia and Olivia can trade insults as they swap files. However, the bridge may have also allowed some shapeshifters from the alternate universe to come over.
That was the mystery of the week, and we were introduced to it when Lincoln Lee's partner was killed by a shapeshifter. It turns out that if Peter died as a child, Lincoln and Olivia never met. He served as our introduction to all the changes wrought by Peter's absence. Although not allowed, Lincoln inserted himself into the investigation, and proved himself an able agent. Plus, he and Olivia have a lot in common, not least of which is the loss of their partners in fringe events.
Unbeknownst to Olivia et al, the Observers were closely watching them, and they didn't like what they saw. Although they rewrote the time line, Peter's presence wasn't completely erased. He phased in and out while Fauxlivia and Olivia argued. But mostly he haunted Walter, who didn't recognize the man in the mirror and television as the son who died as a child. Previews indicate the haunting will worsen in future episodes. Walter is clearly terrified by these apparitions, and could reasonably presume they are hallucinations.
It was a good episode of Fringe, but with the absence of Peter, it lacked the one thing that makes Fringe delightful - the connection between and among Olivia and the Bishop boys. We didn't get to see much of the relationship between the universes, other than the fact that our universe doesn't trust the alternate universe. So no answers as to who the father of Fauxlivia's baby is, assuming she still has one. But I liked the way Lincoln Lee was introduced (his portrayer, Seth Gabel, is now a full time cast member), and it's hard to argue with any episode which shows us Walter in full form. I'm a little concerned as to what's next, and how Peter will return. I do hope he returns soon. Without him, the show is missing a third of what makes it extraordinary.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Reactions to the Emmy Nominations
Oh, those Emmys. Yes, it is that time of the year again, when the nominations are made, and people all over are shaking their heads, wondering, "What were they thinking?" Let's discuss.
First, I'll confess that I don't watch everything that is considered good and noteworthy on television. I don't think it's possible (especially if you want to have a life outside of TV), and right now, with two pay channels presenting what some think are the gold standard of shows, it's really not affordable either. So, that means that I've missed a lot of what was selected, including Boardwalk Empire (premise didn't really interest me), The Borgias (don't have Showtime), The Killing (never had time), Dexter (still don't have Showtime), Friday Night Lights (never made time for it and I don't have DirecTV), and Justified (I didn't even know it was on until after the first season aired!) are just a few of the shows I've not seen but were nominated for something. And, of course, I don't watch most comedies. The fact that I don't watch these shows does not prevent me from having opinions about them, of course. I do read a lot.
Next, I have to confess that most of the awards bore me to tears. Art direction, editing, makeup and costume. Yawn. I know that there are professionals at work who are as deserving of awards as any, but I don't know any of them, and really, a winner in one of those awards really doesn't help the reputation of the show or the actors.
So, let's discuss the nominations I am interested in.
Once again, two of my favorite shows were completely shut out of the major awards: Fringe and Community. Both had strong years, and both had strong performances by talented actors. I will return to this theme.
Comedy first - critics were ecstatic that two leading men were added this year: Johnny Galecki of The Big Bang Theory and Louis C.K. of Louie. I've watched the latter with B, and I do think he's rather good. Steve Carrell was also nominated for his last season of The Office (figures), and he is the current favorite to win. The lead actress in a comedy group has two surprises as well: Melissa McCarthy of Bridesmaids - oh, wait, I meant Mike & Molly (yes, a lot of critics believe she was nominated not for her show but because of her performance in the movie) and Martha Plimpton of Raising Hope. Again, I've seen the latter, and Plimpton is great, and I'm really happy she's getting work.
Pretty much every actor in Modern Family was nominated for supporting actor. I know a lot of people love that show, but thanks to the inclusion of Glee's Chris Colfer and Jon Cryer of Two and a Half Men (at least they didn't nominate Sheen this year), there was no room for Community's Danny Pudi and Donald Glover. Or even Chevy Chase, for that matter (you would think he's an Emmy magnet). The supporting actress category also has a lot of "really?" for me, including the addition of Jane Lynch, Betty White, and Kristen Wiig (I'll discuss these three along with many more below). But no love for Yvette Nicole Brown, who's Shirley on Community was awesome this year!
And I honestly could not care less who wins Outstanding Comedy Series - I either don't watch them or they just weren't that good (I'm looking at you, The Office and 30 Rock).
Readers of this blog know that I'm really a drama girl at heart, and the drama awards always interest me the most. The best actor award is filled with the usual suspects: Steve Buscemi, Michael C. Hall, Kyle Chandler, Hugh Laurie, Timothy Olyphant, and Jon Hamm. Hamm had a fabulous year on Mad Men, so I hope he bags the gold. Elisabeth Moss was nominated for best actress, and she too deserves the gold over her competitors. But why was Kathy Bates nominated for Harry's Law? Just because she won an Oscar doesn't mean her performance was better than, say, Anna Torv on Fringe. Torv managed to convincingly play three different persons last year. Not that the Emmys noticed.
The supporting actor race is such a strong one that I can barely muster the energy to point out that John Noble of Fringe was left out again. But the two men from The Good Wife (Josh Charles and Alan Cumming), Peter Dinklage from Game of Thrones, John Slattery of Mad Men, and Andre Braugher from Men of a Certain Age are all deserving of the award. Only one actor is nominated from a show I've not seen: Walter Goggins from Justified. Knowing my luck, that means he'll win.
My feelings about the supporting actress race are not as strong, as there are two shows represented I don't watch - Boardwalk Empire and Justified. However, Christine Baranski and Archie Punjabi from The Good Wife were both nominated, as well Michelle Forbes (granted, I've not seen The Killing, but I've followed Forbes for years - she's fabulous) and Christina Hendricks from Mad Men are all deserving.
So, what was nominated for best drama? Boardwalk Empire, Dexter, Friday Night Lights, Game of Thrones, The Good Wife, and Mad Men. Of the shows I watch, the latter two are the most deserving, with The Good Wife getting the edge.
In reading the nominations, I had a feeling of "really?" for a lot of them. Steve Buscemi was nominated for best actor for his portrayal as Nucky Thompson, despite the fact that many critics feel this is not his strongest role and that Boardwalk Empire was a bit of a disappointment. I'm always happy Hugh Laurie is nominated, but House wasn't all that good last year. And Kathy Bates? Really? Jon Cryer? Jane Lynch's Sue Sylvester had a bad year, creatively, and has allegedly just turned mean. I love Betty White, but her nomination for Hot in Cleveland just seems gratuitous. And try as I might, I have found none of Kristen Wiig's characters to be remotely amusing.
My last "what were they thinking" came from Outstanding Miniseries, as The Pillars of the Earth was nominated. The only award that show should win is worst miniseries ever.
First, I'll confess that I don't watch everything that is considered good and noteworthy on television. I don't think it's possible (especially if you want to have a life outside of TV), and right now, with two pay channels presenting what some think are the gold standard of shows, it's really not affordable either. So, that means that I've missed a lot of what was selected, including Boardwalk Empire (premise didn't really interest me), The Borgias (don't have Showtime), The Killing (never had time), Dexter (still don't have Showtime), Friday Night Lights (never made time for it and I don't have DirecTV), and Justified (I didn't even know it was on until after the first season aired!) are just a few of the shows I've not seen but were nominated for something. And, of course, I don't watch most comedies. The fact that I don't watch these shows does not prevent me from having opinions about them, of course. I do read a lot.
Next, I have to confess that most of the awards bore me to tears. Art direction, editing, makeup and costume. Yawn. I know that there are professionals at work who are as deserving of awards as any, but I don't know any of them, and really, a winner in one of those awards really doesn't help the reputation of the show or the actors.
So, let's discuss the nominations I am interested in.
Once again, two of my favorite shows were completely shut out of the major awards: Fringe and Community. Both had strong years, and both had strong performances by talented actors. I will return to this theme.
Comedy first - critics were ecstatic that two leading men were added this year: Johnny Galecki of The Big Bang Theory and Louis C.K. of Louie. I've watched the latter with B, and I do think he's rather good. Steve Carrell was also nominated for his last season of The Office (figures), and he is the current favorite to win. The lead actress in a comedy group has two surprises as well: Melissa McCarthy of Bridesmaids - oh, wait, I meant Mike & Molly (yes, a lot of critics believe she was nominated not for her show but because of her performance in the movie) and Martha Plimpton of Raising Hope. Again, I've seen the latter, and Plimpton is great, and I'm really happy she's getting work.
Pretty much every actor in Modern Family was nominated for supporting actor. I know a lot of people love that show, but thanks to the inclusion of Glee's Chris Colfer and Jon Cryer of Two and a Half Men (at least they didn't nominate Sheen this year), there was no room for Community's Danny Pudi and Donald Glover. Or even Chevy Chase, for that matter (you would think he's an Emmy magnet). The supporting actress category also has a lot of "really?" for me, including the addition of Jane Lynch, Betty White, and Kristen Wiig (I'll discuss these three along with many more below). But no love for Yvette Nicole Brown, who's Shirley on Community was awesome this year!
And I honestly could not care less who wins Outstanding Comedy Series - I either don't watch them or they just weren't that good (I'm looking at you, The Office and 30 Rock).
Readers of this blog know that I'm really a drama girl at heart, and the drama awards always interest me the most. The best actor award is filled with the usual suspects: Steve Buscemi, Michael C. Hall, Kyle Chandler, Hugh Laurie, Timothy Olyphant, and Jon Hamm. Hamm had a fabulous year on Mad Men, so I hope he bags the gold. Elisabeth Moss was nominated for best actress, and she too deserves the gold over her competitors. But why was Kathy Bates nominated for Harry's Law? Just because she won an Oscar doesn't mean her performance was better than, say, Anna Torv on Fringe. Torv managed to convincingly play three different persons last year. Not that the Emmys noticed.
The supporting actor race is such a strong one that I can barely muster the energy to point out that John Noble of Fringe was left out again. But the two men from The Good Wife (Josh Charles and Alan Cumming), Peter Dinklage from Game of Thrones, John Slattery of Mad Men, and Andre Braugher from Men of a Certain Age are all deserving of the award. Only one actor is nominated from a show I've not seen: Walter Goggins from Justified. Knowing my luck, that means he'll win.
My feelings about the supporting actress race are not as strong, as there are two shows represented I don't watch - Boardwalk Empire and Justified. However, Christine Baranski and Archie Punjabi from The Good Wife were both nominated, as well Michelle Forbes (granted, I've not seen The Killing, but I've followed Forbes for years - she's fabulous) and Christina Hendricks from Mad Men are all deserving.
So, what was nominated for best drama? Boardwalk Empire, Dexter, Friday Night Lights, Game of Thrones, The Good Wife, and Mad Men. Of the shows I watch, the latter two are the most deserving, with The Good Wife getting the edge.
In reading the nominations, I had a feeling of "really?" for a lot of them. Steve Buscemi was nominated for best actor for his portrayal as Nucky Thompson, despite the fact that many critics feel this is not his strongest role and that Boardwalk Empire was a bit of a disappointment. I'm always happy Hugh Laurie is nominated, but House wasn't all that good last year. And Kathy Bates? Really? Jon Cryer? Jane Lynch's Sue Sylvester had a bad year, creatively, and has allegedly just turned mean. I love Betty White, but her nomination for Hot in Cleveland just seems gratuitous. And try as I might, I have found none of Kristen Wiig's characters to be remotely amusing.
My last "what were they thinking" came from Outstanding Miniseries, as The Pillars of the Earth was nominated. The only award that show should win is worst miniseries ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)