A Man. And His Blog.

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Apr 26, 1988 (ABC)
Nielsen ratings information: audience numbers unavailable (as of now), 18.0 rating, 29 share

Well well well. I haven’t heard much about CHINA BEACH in recent years. In fact, only thanks to BODY OF PROOF, I actually got the information that this show existed. Critic’s darling, darling with the Emmy awards, and a potential hit with the audience. Yet not really a long living show with only three and a half seasons. I wonder if the show got cancelled thanks to its budget. Because what I saw here looked expensive for a TV show in the 80s. Shooting on Hawaii, and this mostly on location, a big cast, some extras, and all of it spiced up with a great art direction. The thing is just: This episode could have had more spice in its story.

Because it was mostly just an introduction. Almost nothing happened. When I take COMBAT HOSPITAL for comparison, then the newer version of the setting “hospital in a war zone” does not only have more action, but also a lot more character stories (thanks to the 21st Century though). What I got here was basically an introduction to the introduction. Maybe because the pilot is actually a two-parter, but I’m not watching it as such; maybe because I was expecting a bit more from the premiere, figuring that it’s a critics’ darling. Maybe because I actually expected some medical action in the premiere, similar to ER. There wasn’t even a single medical emergency in the first hour, even though it’s also set with the Red Cross of the base. Yes, I know it’s China Beach, and it’s mostly an army base here, but you have your two main female characters set with the Red Cross and the hospital of the base, then better make a Red Cross show out of it in the premiere. I really was missing the medical drama and emotions. Instead I got all kinds of character drama and emotions. Which is interesting, but wasn’t great for the premiere. If you can bore the audience within the first hour, they will never stay with the program for the second hour. I think that’s a typical mistake 2-hour-pilots usually did in the 80s and maybe even earlier.

At least the characters were mostly likable. McMurphy (Dana Delany) seems to be a character with lots of depth, who shines better when in contrast with Cherry (Nan Woods). I loved how both reacted to another in that shower scene, since McMurphy is about to leave Vietnam, while Cherry is trying to get situated. I loved how the two had their own issues with this place, even though they couldn’t be more different. They made a connection here, and I wouldn’t mind when they stay friends along the road, since they made that special connection. (In addition, it wouldn’t be wrong when McMurphy has a girlfriend on her side, and not just the guys she’s buddy-like with). I was just a bit annoyed about the fact that McMurphy was a bit too deep for me in the first hour. The scene where she tried to get the scrubs off was off for me (it could have been a great emotional scene, when I would have known the character beforehand), and when she was drinking with Dick (Robert Picardo) at the end, I wondered if the two share a history. Typical background information, but with a pilot, I expect for the writers to deliver all the important information points the first chance they get. Otherwise the characters are overdrawn, and left are those who think to much of themselves. CHINA BEACH doesn’t need to be so complicated and sophisticated, it just needs to show what is actually going on in Vietnam.

The rest of the cast probably got some nice storylines. I can’t really tell yet, because I wasn’t watching the second part of the pilot yet, but for now I can nod my head and accept what I have been offered. It’s not the perfect show, but I was surprised I was not bored out of my mind with an 80s drama. Who knows, maybe CHINA BEACH really is such a great show. Since it’s set in the 60s, I believe it has survived the millennium, and can work as well today as it was working when it aired on television. Hopefully without all those clichés. Like Beckett (Michael Boatman, back then he did not look like he looks today) and him being black (I so knew it would be mentioned, when I saw him for the first time). Or like the women being typical whores, making their man happy – just look at K.C. (Marg Helgenberger) (not really a shocking scene, when she indirectly “mentioned” the job description). The guys, with the exception of Boonie (Brian Wimmer), came a bit short. Here I hope it’s going to change really soon. I know it’s a show about how the war was seen by women, but they have a men’s cast too. And they shouldn’t be left behind.

Other than that, I love the setting. I can’t really buy it’s set in the 60s (I know when the Vietnam war happened), but for me to completely believe it’s set in the 60s, it should better show something from Vietnam, from that specific time era. Otherwise this show could also be set in the 80s (present), because of the nothingness happening in the base and obviously outside too. The soundtrack is also good, even though there weren’t much songs of the era to listen too. Maybe it’s also one of those things to get better with time.

The second half of the pilot was as quiet and slow as the first one. But it had more focus this time. Even though McMurphy was completely missing from the first half of this hour, giving the real attention to the other women in the camp, McMurphy got her story back in the second half, eventually giving her a reason to stay in Vietnam. Of course she would stay, that was definitely not a question, but I loved how it was executed. A lot of time was given for the characters to make their decisions understandable, a lot of time was given Dana Delany to show what a great actress she was back in the 1980s. I don’t know about today, because I don’t watch DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES and BODY OF PROOF (in fact, I only knew her from FLY AWAY HOME before, and that role wasn’t much of a biggie). When she stood on stage, looking at her boys rooting for her… I also wanted to give away a tear, because it was a touching, dramatic and emotional moment. When a TV show from the 80s manages to make me invest my time in the characters in the pilot already, then the rest of the show also has to be good, right?

I have to say, the second hour was much better, when it came to the focus on the characters. Again, not much of a story, except the question if McMurphy stays or not, as well as some background for Cherry and her looking for her brother, but instead tons of character moments. I loved that. There should be more TV shows build like that, because characters are everything. When I don’t like them or can’t get them and their decisions, then the show can look as pretty and awesome as it wants to be, it won’t help it though. Dana rocked that episode, as well as Laurette (Chloe Webb), who surprisingly got a lot of screentime this time around. Even though she looks like a man at some points of this episode, and even though she’s more of a fool to always say “lots of men, lots of men”, letting her look like she’s just searching for a soldier to fuck in the hours of the night. Basically like K.C., but she never really acknowledges the fact that she’s a hooker in the best brothel of this world. (In addition, she hasn’t gotten much to do, which will hopefully change in the future, because I liked that aspect of women in the war zone).

Some interesting story points in the second half. First, Beckett wanting to be a white guy at the beginning – I don’t know why, but it feels like he’s a crazy man, about to break apart under his experience in Vietnam. Second, Austen (Tim Ryan) with that funny wig on his head. Seemed like he and McMurphy kind of shared a past, which also makes me wonder how many men McMurphy slept with since she has arrived in Vietnam (more or less than K.C.?). Next, the question of what has happened with Boonie. That conversation he had with K.C. was interesting, and gave something of a background for Boonie, despite the fact that no proper information wad given. (Maybe I interpret too much into it, and he was just a miserable guy eight months ago, thin and bleach, and not much of a guy at all).

I’m still missing the “action” of the show though. The ending proved that there will be military and medical terror in the show, but that whole sequence was just for Laurette, and how she copes with the experience of seeing soldiers die. I was actually expecting to see some blood, the doctors and nurses saving people, operations and stuff. And maybe even more chaos than depicted near the end. But I’ll take it. After all, it’s a show from the 80s, and I shouldn’t even start expecting an ER like show in the future (though I still wish it). Other than that, the second part of the pilot saved the rather slow first part. I don’t know if it did, because I watched it five days later, or because the second part is in fact better. All in all, the pilot gets 7.5/10. A bit outdated for sure, when it comes to the visuals, but still an interesting look into a world I don’t know anything about.

When the thoughts were still happy on the beach

But as soon as truth made its way to the thoughts, emotions come out

Fun has to be part of a job

So you can realize what Vietnam is actually all about

As part of getting into one-shot TV shows, which never had a proper chance to win an audience and were therefore canceled after the first season or just a couple of episodes, I will go into one of such TV show. This is also a “blog series” which I have copied right off the German versions I have written since January 2011 on Quotenmeter.de. If somebody is about to say I am a plagiarist, please remember I have written the originals, I’m just translating them for this blog and a wider readership. This version of the column could literally be the “international syndication”. Also, I will not just copy off the articles I have already written, but I will actually watch the shows I’m writing about here. And every episode gets an own review, posted weekdays.

In a time, where the broadcast networks UPN and The WB weren’t the creators and saviors of the teen drama in television (because they didn’t exist back then), the other Big Three had to step up. But it was a difficult endeavor to create a show specifically for teenagers. BEVERLY HILLS, 90210 (pretty high on my to-do list, btw) could be considered a miracle, but only because the first couple of seasons went into the storylines in a generic way, before it turned out to be a young-skewing weekly soap with its fourth season. In 1993, ABC greenlit a pilot to another teen drama, which was probably able to talk to the audience of said 90210, but also wanted to tell a complete different story. MY SO-CALLED LIFE wanted to be honest, wanted to depict an authentic picture of its generation, didn’t just want to be a simple TV show, aired between other shows. The coming of age drama was created by Winnie Holzman, and produced by Edward Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz, who already brought the 80s drama THIRTYSOMETHINGS zu life. And their new show wanted tw I starto give a voice to an audience, which barely had a chance to be heard in television before.

MY SO-CALLED LIFE shows the ups and downs of 15-year-old Angela Chase (Claire Danes), who is shutting herself out from her family and true friends. Instead she tries to find her own identity, and eventually falls in love with Jordan Catalano (Jared Leto), her very own high school crush. The love story between Angela and Jordan isn’t the number-one story of MY SO-CALLED LIFE though. Themes like alcoholism, drug use among teenagers, homelessness, adultery, violence and homophobia are part of the series, thoughtfully chosen by the writers and connected with the character arcs. The result is one of the best TV shows of the 1990s, as well as a critics’ darling of its time (and even today, when people remember this show). Just not a darling with the watching audience. And ABC was obviously thinking about these factors, before they premiered MY SO-CALLED LIFE. Because it took the network one full year to find a place for the show in the schedule.

Operation Life Support: The ad in the USA Today (click to enlarge)

Originally, the show was planned for a premiere in the fall of 1993. Eight episodes were produced, before ABC decided to have MY SO-CALLED LIFE as a midseason replacement in early 1994. But the network didn’t find a suitable slot for the show – the time was the factor here. The 8pm slot was the only one possible for the series, because of its targeted audience. 8pm was the only time for ABC to hope that both the teenager audience and the usually targeted audience (adults between 18 and 49 years of age) will tune into MY SO-CALLED LIFE and make it a success. If the show would have been aired at 9pm, would the teenagers have tuned in? If this show would have aired at 10pm, would the older audience have found pleasure with a show, which doesn’t even tell their stories? Would the teenager audience find a specific show just for themselves at 9pm and 10pm (especially when there was school the next day)? Other than that, the 9pm slot was out of the question from the beginning. Despite the fact that MY SO-CALLED LIFE would have probably been aired against a magazine in the competition, all of ABC’s shows at 9pm were working, and the network didn’t want to ruin their run. Therefore, MY SO-CALLED LIFE pretty much had a midlife crisis, before one episode was even aired. So, while TV critics were asking themselves the question about the time slot, there were also not tired to say that this show is vigorous and touching.

After one year, ABC was able to find a place in the schedule for MY SO-CALLED LIFE. Thursdays, at 8pm was the time and day, also the day where this show would air against the NBC sitcom power house (MAD ABOUT YOU, and the first season of FRIENDS). On August 25, 1994, the pilot episode found its way onto the small screen, and barely found recognition in the ratings. A share of 16 percent put the episode on an unappreciated 48th place in the Nielsen Charts of the week. One week later it was obvious that this result would be the best of the short life of the show. Despite the positive resonance from the critics, it couldn’t bring older audiences to tune in. In the weekly Nielsen Charts, MY SO-CALLED LIFE barely made it into the Top 100 shows, and instead found itself almost always among the ten worst programs of the week. Nevertheless, the show was a hit with its targeted audience: the teenagers. With female audiences between 12 and 17 years of age, MY SO CALLED-LIFE landed on position 17 in December 1994, while it meant the 33th place with male audiences that age. But the other side of the table showed ranked the show 84th with female audiences between 18 and 49 years, as well as 100th place with male audiences in that age. Proof that this show was never a success for ABC. After 19 aired episodes, the show went into a planned hiatus – with an open ending.

Operation Life Support: The Variety ad (click to enlarge)

Because it wasn’t even clear until that point, if ABC cancels MY SO-CALLED LIFE, or gives it a second season. Basically, ABC had a very unusual show in their schedule, which wasn’t seen in television, until The WB tried the genre in 1996 with 7TH HEAVEN (and was successful with it, eventually developing DAWSON’S CREEK and BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER in the process). MY SO-CALLED LIFE gave the young females in America a voice they never believed to have in television, and even the business relationship between ABC and the advertisers was not shaken with the flop. No, the show actually made a bit of a profit. But there was a dispute behind the camera, which gave the show the “final nail in the coffin”, as well as ABC’s unawareness of how to make money with a teen audience.

Claire Danes, 15 years old during production, saw the shooting of the show as stressful, and announced at the end of the season that she won’t return in an eventual second season. With her disinterest, Holzman’s interest in continuing the show also vanished. The news about the true backgrounds of the cancellation of the show made its way through the rising world wide web really fast. The group “Operation Life Support” (OLS) was founded, and buckled up to the task to bring MY SO-CALLED LIFE back to television. Also, they started a flame war against Claire Danes. Under the title “Claire Danes brings death to ‘Life’”, OLS let everybody know how unhappy they were with Danes’ choices to not return to the show, and blamed her for its cancellation (without actually thinking what it would mean for a teenager to be in a year-long contract with a studio, eventually giving up life and school for a television show). The support coming from OLS actually brought MY SO-CALLED LIFE a syndication deal with MTV in April 1995 – before the show was officially canceled, which can be considered an exception in early television. But the repeat airings on MTV were also the last proof that ABC would never renew this show. The official cancellation happened on May 15 that year.

Claire Danes won a Golden Globe as best actress in a TV drama 1995, and was also nominated for an Emmy Award. Danes won her first award with her first television show, and repeated that event in 2012, when she won her second Golden Globe as a TV actress for Showtime’s HOMELAND. But it wasn’t Danes’ second Globe. Already one year earlier, she got the Globe for her portrayal of Temple Grandin in the same-named HBO movie. Meanwhile, MY SO-CALLED LIFE has found its way on numerous “Best of TV” lists, and also works well as a fan favorite today. If the show would have premiered two years later though, it might have had a bigger chance of survival. Because 1997 was the year, when the teen drama genre broke in television: DAWSON’S CREEK and BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER were a success, giving birth to dozens of other shows, depicting lives of teenagers.

.

.

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Aug 25, 1994 (ABC)
Watched for review: Jan 13, 2012
Number of review in February/2012: 52/175

I think it’s going to be easy to review the pilot: It was one of the best ones I have seen in my TV life. Not nearly as perfect, but that’s how a pilot episode should look like. Which is why it’s gonna be difficult to compare this pilot with today’s pilots, and slowly explain why the writers should go back to the slow way of introducing their characters and story, taking time to build their world, and ultimately guaranteeing that the audience will love the characters form the first second onwards.

I mean, this is the biggest problem in today’s times: The writers rush in, want everything done before the pilot is over, and even mix in an episodic plot, to show the audience how the show will look like in the future. The problem is that writers barely know how to connect the building of the new series’ world with the episodic storyline, and sometimes they don’t even know when to stop throwing around with twists. Recent example for the former is THE FIRM, for the latter it’s SWITCHED AT BIRTH. In addition, the characters have to be likable to let the audience care. It doesn’t matter if you write them in an antagonistic way, or as the most loving person on the planet, but the audience has to have a reason to get interested and invested in the characters. HOUSE OF LIES showed why asshole-characters without any kind of edging are boring and why nobody wants to care about them. As long as your characters are below the belt of accepting and liking, you will never get a show on the air, which is going to be taken seriously by the audience. Never let the story determine the way of the characters, like THE EVENT, always find a way to make the characters determine the story – ALIAS is a great example here. And I know that all mentioned pilots here come straight from the 2000s, but there is a reason why there barely are pilots from this era on my Top 20-or-so list of TV pilots (I think I should make a list very soon. Idea saved), and why pilots from the 90s (and probably the 80s) are the best ones. In the 90s, TV shows were slowly, but surely growing up to be sophisticated, intelligent, caring. Compared to the 80s pilot and earlier, which were usually the premiere of a generic, proceduralized show, which is too old to be watched and lived through today. Today, there are barely no perfect pilots out there, and when I surf through the TV of the 90s, I find myself interested in a synopsis, which sounds great because I can see how the writers try to make me care about characters and stories.

I could write on and on about this, and maybe I will deliver an essay about this in a future (don’t hold me to it though, when it’s coming, it’s coming), but MY SO-CALLED LIFE showed me why 2000s pilots and upcoming 2010s pilot will never be as good as TV shows from the 90s and earlier, because of one single factor: There is no time anymore to get invested in a story, everything has to be “go, go, go”. That’s why I loved this pilot, even though it’s not perfect. That’s why I see real greatness in MY SO-CALLED LIFE, even though it’s just one of those positive examples why teenage dramas and coming-of-age stories were working well in the 90s (thanks to WB and maybe UPN). That’s why I can say after watching the pilot that this show will be great. Because even though it was less than an hour short, I got invested in the characters. I have gotten enough time to like them, to find out how they tick and what problems they have, to realize what the inner conflicts between the characters are. When you have all this, you don’t even need a bigger story in the episode, because the characters tell your story. If you manage this to write in the script, you can consider yourself one of the lucky ones, because that’s a real talent!

Yes, it really is one of the best pilots out there. For people who like the genre, MY SO-CALLED LIFE could be considered must-see; for those who believe the genre hasn’t brought anything before DAWSON’S CREEK, you should watch this to see that it was the truly genuine show, before FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS came around the corner. Almost everything was working in here. Sure, some of the very slow, very quiet moments were a bit tiring, considering how those kind of scenes can’t and won’t exist in today’s TV pilots, and how some of those scenes were literally waiting for something to happen, but overall, this pilot couldn’t have been more great. I’m getting invested in Angela’s (Claire Danes) life from the first scene, and I’m getting touched with her life, when she cries herself into her mother Patty’s (Bess Armstrong) shoulder. This is how you should get emotional in your shows, and this is how you get your audience invested. And it doesn’t have to be teenage characters you can write those kind of scenes for. It just works for Angela in this case. Now I know why Claire Danes won the Golden Globe for this role. The insecurity of her character suits her perfectly here, and I love that I can read her character while just looking at her. Gestures can be big sometimes.

There isn’t much to say about the story, because there barely was one to begin with. Like I said, Angela is telling the story here, and Winnie Holzman didn’t even think about creating a story, which sends the character from one plot point to the next. It’s all about Angela and her view of her own life; it’s all about Angela coping with the current situation of her family and friends; it’s all about Angela trying to not get invested in her own life, because she just wants to live the normal life of a normal girl. This is where the stories are created: the tension between Angela and Sharon (Devon Odessa), the generational conflict between Angela and Patty, also the generational (but more friendly) conflict between Angela and her father Graham (Tom Irwin), and finally the genre-standard love story with a bit less heart though, when Jordan (Jared Leto) got introduced. Damn, how I like that the pilot didn’t even go into a love story in the first episode. If this would be 90210, I’d be pretty sure Angela would have had sex already. In a show like THE L.A. COMPLEX, she would have bought the abortion pills already. Instead, the pilot mentions a handful of times that Angela has a crush on Jordan, the two have a non-conversation, and at the end he is recognizing her. That’s it. Just three elements in this story, and that’s it. No exhausting and tuned love story, just to get the romance going. Instead a realistic approach. Loving it. Okay, maybe not all of it. Jordan came a bit over as a drugged idiot – he reminds me of Adam from JOAN OF ARCADIA, and back then I wasn’t very fond of those kind of characters. It makes me hope that I will like Jordan in the future episodes, and he does not become an ugly character with all the usual flaws and stuff.

I have just one thing to say about one of the conflicts: The one between Angela and Sharon was thrown into the episode without really preparing it. During the cold open, they were absolute best friends, seeing themselves as sibling, having the best time of their lives, and a couple of scenes later, Angela is hanging out with Rayanne (A.J. Langer) and Sharon is angry and sad, because her special friendship with Angela is broken. Even though the episode hasn’t done much to show the friendship being broken. In one scene the two are friends, in the next Sharon cries, because she thinks she has done something wrong. It’s like a complete act is missing.

That’s the only problem I have with this episode, and why (besides some of the very slow scenes, which I can excuse though) it isn’t nearly as perfect as it might sound here. But I’m very glad to finally have found this show and be able to watch it. It was on my to-do list for three years now, and thank HOMELAND and the Golden Globes for letting me pick it up now. 9/10

Dreams become reality with a bored face

Dreams also crush unexpectedly

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Feb 6, 2012 (NBC)
Rewatched for review: Feb 5, 2012
Number of review in February/2012: 31/154

Not always is the series premiere of a new TV show that important for a broadcast network. Usually, the success or failure of said series premiere doesn’t depend on a life-or-death situation for the network, but NBC and SMASH have a different relationship with each other. The drama about a Broadway musical and its life, starting with the very idea and continuing with its casting for the major role, metaphorically will either kill NBC or bring it back to life. The executives from the NBC offices see in SMASH the savior of their beaten network and the show where the audience will return (especially for Robert Greenblatt, who took this show with him from Showtime).The critics see in SMASH a potential hit TV show, which can live up to its title (even though it’s unclear if the drama with its difficult topic will ever be something for a mainstream audience). And the potential audience outside of the business has gotten much from SMASH lately. Reportedly $25 million did the marketing and promotional work cost – billboards, paper ads, online ads, taxi stands, the 40-page program guide in Broadway style, which was given to the press beforehand. Is SMASH the smashing success NBC is looking for since 2006, or is it just the last sign of life for a network, which was on top of the Nielsen charts not even ten years ago?

Karen Cartwright (Katharine McPhee, runner-up in season five of AMERICAN IDOL) is standing on a stage, singing “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” – her dream, her element is the theater and the musical. A dream, which is not reality, after she gets interrupted by a ringing cell phone, which brings her back to reality: a casting for a musical, and she doesn’t get the job. On the other side of New York, stage writer Julia Houston (Debra Messing) dreams of a proper musical, which tells the life of Marilyn Monroe, despite there was a huge musical flop in 1983 already. This is her dream, and she wants to live it – so, an outline and a first song is written, and the project goes to Broadway producer Eileen Rand (Anjelica Huston), who is looking for a director. At the same time, Broadway actress Ivy Lynn (Megan Hilty) is dreaming to get the Marilyn role, and takes part in the project from the beginning. But before the production of the Marilyn musical can begin, there are some problems to fight: Arrogant British director Derek Wills (Jack Davenport) and Julia’s co-writer Tom Levitt (Christian Borle) can’t stand each other, and there is a question about who is going to star as Marilyn. In the running: professional and hard-working Ivy, who is looking for her breakthrough, as well as green, but talented Karen, who just wants to live her dream.

2012 just found its best TV pilot so far. After the year had begun with the probably worst pilot already (WORK IT), aspiration can show, if it has it. The fact that SMASH is everything but bad, and also delivers to a niche audience, also means that the show will have troubles to actually find a bigger audience and to be considered mainstream but somebody else than the TV critics. Musicals are not everybody’s darling, especially when they are so different from the mainstream hit GLEE. And to destroy all comparisons between GLEE and SMASH right now, there is to say that those two shows can’t really be compared to another – the surreal fantasy-high-school world in GLEE and the authentic real-life drama in SMASH are two different pair of shoes. GLEE might have given the musical genre a revolution in television, after it didn’t happen with COP ROCK (1990) and VIVA LAUGHLIN (2008), but SMASH shows that the musical genre doesn’t always have to stand beside the real-life world. It can deliver real drama and characters – this is just the problem the show has to face in the long run.

It could be another great written show, the music could be filled with another number-one hits. Marilyn Monroe and musical couldn’t be more fitting for NBC, but is it going to fit between business and the American audiences? Let alone for the international market, if SMASH should ever cross the North American borders as a success. And the pilot actually has all the elements to consider it a really great one, to make audiences invest time in the characters for once, without being disappointed by unnecessary mystery and fake thrill moments. It begins with the rivalry between some of the characters, who can’t be defined with “protagonists” or “antagonists”, and it doesn’t even stop with the depiction of the production of the Marilyn musical, which surely is the seed of some great and original drama in television. And hopefully the reality and authenticity will also come over, to give the audience a mainstream look into a world, which isn’t really known by many people.

SMASH is able to succeed in almost all levels – if you have interest in musicals. “In almost all levels”, because the pilot doesn’t really work well, when it wants to show ALL the sites of Broadway – the light ones and the dark ones. SMASH wants us to be happy and to root for the characters, but it doesn’t even go into the negative aspects of Broadway. It can’t be the happy wonderful dreaming world everybody is hoping to live in. It can’t be just about conflicts between the characters, because they can’t stand each other for private reasons. The pilot only takes time in depicting the idea of the Marilyn project, as well as the casting process. Which is great potential by itself, but while the Broadway-contra is missing, the pilot is not as authentic as it wants to be. But the rest is working. The pilot gives a lot of time to the characters and their first depth scenes, and the original (Broadway) music is just the dot on the “I”, the cherry on the cake. COP ROCK might have completely failed with their original songs back then, but in SMASH (even though in just one single episode so far) it has worked, and it doesn’t need to come around the corner with pop covers (no matter how good McPhee’s performance of Christina Aguilera’s “Beautiful” is). That also gives the nagging TV critics, hating on reality TV killing scripted television, looking for originality and quality. Even though SMASH works with clichés and cheesy moments now and then, the show definitely has quality, and even more, it is original.

Actually, the pilot has no difficulties in delivering to the mainstream audience as well, without not losing its straight-forward approach. Despite the anthology-like first half, with thee different stories only being connected by the Marilyn theme, the second half is able to connect all the storylines, making the pilot a spectacle of a Broadway production and the TV show following its story – which is pretty interesting for network TV standards, if you think about it. Even the audiences, who don’t know about Broadway or Marilyn get a few digressions about both elements of the show, making SMASH something of an entertaining drama, as well as giving insight into the niche and the Hollywood icon Marilyn Monroe in no less than 15 episodes. If only there would be a large percentage of an open-minded TV audience in America.

Ultimately, those digressions aren’t the main aspect of SMASH. The Broadway production will deliver the drama, the idea of a Marilyn musical will divide and bring together the characters, the hectic time before the first performance will keep the characters fraught and connected. And when Steven Spielberg (who deserves his credit this time, because the idea for SMASH came from his mind) actually follows through with his original plan – showing the ups and downs of a musical production within one season – then SMASH can stand as an example in network television storytelling-wise. TV shows become season-long anthologies, like Ryan Murphy’s AMERICAN HORROR STORY wants to be one (and he better make a season-anthology out of it), like HEROES should have been one in 2007. SMASH could be a trend-setter here, and it would be desirable to have a varying TV show, which re-invents itself every year anew. Especially, when SMASH stays realistic, and never even thinks about copying the fantasy world of GLEE and its pop cover performances. And especially, when SMASH delivers proof that reality television can be beaten by original programming. At least this year. 9/10

Marilyn and her baseball career

Proof that American Idol delivers real stars

Season 1, Episode 1 (1)
Date of first airing: Oct 2, 2011 (Showtime)
Rewatched for review: 2011
Number of review in January/2012: 14/14

When I first heard about the show, I wasn’t really expecting much from it. I saw the cast news, thought there were some good choices made, and I was seeing the premium cable version of 24 in the plot. Yet, I was still not anticipating HOMELAND, when the pilot leaked and when I started to watch it. But after one hour, I was almost literally blown away. Maybe it helps to not anticipate a show. That makes it easier to love what you’ll get, when a show like HOMELAND premiers on television. In my always personal opinion, this pilot was the best one, which aired in the fall of 2011. Without a doubt.

It already begins with how the story of a terrorist attack on US soil is tackled: It starts out slow, it continues to be all slow in the pilot, and it focuses on the characters. I wonder how the network version of the show would have looked like. Would the network version stumble upon a conspiracy to ease into the terrorist plot? Would they neglect the character moments between Brody (Damian Lewis) and Jess (Morena Baccarin) in the middle for some fast-paced storytelling and action? The HOMELAND pilot has some similarities with the 24 pilot, and I’m thankful that both shows are still different enough to separate from each other, yet go through the same story.

From the first minutes onward, the characters are likable. The fact that Carrie (Claire Danes) is something of a crazy person makes it interesting to follow her throughout the show. You never had a character like her in a show before, in the status of a main character, supposed to be the protagonist, the hero of the story. In addition, you even start to like Brody, though he’s supposed to be the antagonist, the terrorist. You don’t always manage to write likable characters, which are in fact more than just the protagonist and antagonist. They are the people in front and center of the story. They are the people, whose stories are being told, no matter whose side they are on. It’s like Showtime’s earlier anti-terrorism effort SLEEPER CELL, where the characters of the terrorist cell got enough screentime to shine as reasonable characters and not just evil suicide bombers (except Oded Fehr’s character, but that’s a different story). Which is why HOMELAND can be described more as SLEEPER CELL in a 24-way than an update of the FOX real-time thriller. And the fact that the show delivers a serialized plot, which will most likely end in the actual terrorist plot in the season finale makes the show more thrilling: How does Brody turn out to be the terrorist (if he was in fact turned), and how does Carrie manage to collect evidence, despite her status within the agency? The pilot managed to fire up those interesting questions within the first hour, which makes the show so intriguing.

But then again, even this pilot has some flaws. After a while, it looks like the writers have already begun some minor story arcs, which won’t have anything to do with the main arc. The “secret” relationship between Jess and Mike (Diego Klattenhoff) for example, which could turn out to be a troublemaker for Brody as a husband (and not as a turned terrorist). His kids, which probably won’t be doing much in the show and with its characters, as long as the question about Brody’s involvement in the plot still hangs in the air (and the pilot already suggested that Jess and daughter Dana [Morgan Saylor] had their share of typical teen-drama-problems). Virgil (David Marciano) and his emotional (?) connection to Carrie, as well as how he sees her job and her persona in the middle of all the stress. Especially those three points are not really interesting for now, and promise to fill up some of the episodes with tired storylines, until the writers are able to go on the road with their terrorist arc.

Then again, I love tis pilot for its slow storytelling. HOMELAND is a prime example of why not every premium cable show should be all about sex scenes and brutal violence. Sure, Morena was showing all of her upper body, while some language was included. But when you cut out those scenes and dialog, the pilot would totally make it for primetime air on a network broadcaster. Whether the executives are looking for a character-driven terrorist thriller or not, HOMELAND would be a show able to save the reputation of the networks. Yet it airs on a premium cable channel, letting the audience hope that the characters and the story itself will go deeper with every episode. At least I’m hoping that HOMELAND will be a show, which does not celebrate its pervasive existence with all kinds of sex scenes and all kinds of violence. SLEEPER CELL showed how a toned-down premium cable show looks like, and since then I’m still waiting for a similar show. Did I get that show with HOMELAND? Only episodes will tell.

I don’t have to write much about the cast. I love Damian Lewis and am happy to see him again after LIFE, and Claire Danes makes an extraordinary figure in her role. Somewhat between annoying, wildly crazy, yet the only one who could be considered a hero in the plot. I’d wish for network pilots to deliver similar characters, just to make it simpler to actually get them, understand their decisions early on in the show. I don’t wanna question myself if a character acts OOC, just because the writers aren’t able to hold their line in storytelling. I don’t want a show, which defines and steers its characters by the story (the recent TERRA NOVA and RINGER come to mind), but defines and steers the story with its characters (the ultimate goal in screenwriting). So, HOMELAND creates hope that it will be a show like latter. And the pilot was great enough to let hope live past the first hour. 8/10

Secret conversation between two CIA officials

Mildly psychotic face of a potential terrorist

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Jan 16, 2012 (FOX)
Watched for review: Jan 17, 2012
Number of review in January/2012: 71/71

Mystery television hasn’t died yet. After the series finale of LOST, some have probably thought about the question, if it’s possible to tell another interesting and suspenseful mystery shocker like the work of J.J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse. FLASHFORWARD fell flat, since it never focused on the main story arc, V proved how writers are not caring about plot holes and irregularities, and FRINGE has pacing problems on his own. Now there is a new mystery blockbuster in television, and it’s on FOX again. But ALCATRAZ doesn’t seem to be the savior of said mystery genre. The first impression of the show from Bad Robot seems like, as if it was written for the future fans and nerds of the show, as well as an audience, who is bound to rediscover the genre. ALCATRAZ comes off second best against FRINGE though, and this for mostly one reason: The mystery of the prison island gets never really developed.

The pilot episode begins with a flashback to 1963, accompanied by voiceovers from one Sam Neill, explaining within the first minutes, what’s it all about in ALCATRAZ: The closing of the Alcatraz on March 21, 1963 didn’t happen under normal circumstances, and the prisoners weren’t stuck in other prisons. No, all 302 inmates and guard mysteriously vanished and were never seen of. Until today. Now, almost 40 years later, those inmates return into our world – seemingly all by themselves, all not having aged one single day, all with a specific mission. Meanwhile, SFPD detective Rebecca Madsen (Sarah Jones) is investigating a murder case, which ties to one of the inmates back in Alcatraz. But as she learns, that inmate is dead more more than 30 years. With the help of Alcatraz expert and comic geek Diego Soto (Jorge Garcia), the two are stumbling upon a secret bigger than the frozen donkey wheel.

Whoever awaits something unique with ALCATRAZ, forget it right now. CSI, THE 4400, PRISON BREAK and FRINGE are easily recognizable in the ALCATRAZ pilot – this show is literally the best (and worst) mix of those four shows. Even the characters seem to be clichéd in a form of “seen it already, done the same once”, which you can especially notice with Sam Neill. His character is basically the same he played in the smalltown slash serialkiller slash soap HAPPY TOWN, and the question whether his character in ALCATRAZ is one of the good or one of the bad was even asked back in the short-lived ABC show. But it doesn’t stop there. The two-way team Rebecca and Diego, introduced as a buddy cop team or whatever, don’t have the slightest bit of chemistry, and instead have to rely on what the script is giving them (which isn’t much in this case). Their team-up in the pilot is basically forced and makes it unwatchable at times. Especially when the suspension of disbelief is getting in action. I know it’s part of that particular genre, but how am I supposed to believe the “realism” of the show, when I find the team-up of a professional SFPD detective and an overweight, nerdy expert, who doesn’t have any experience in the job, believable?

But it still doesn’t stop here. Die audiences stumbles upon a few more sticking points over the pilot, when it comes to the introduction of the mystery spot “Alcatraz”. The characters take it for granted that 302 people just disappear into Neverland and obviously reappear one after another 40 years later, without having aged and all. The characters don’t have any hovering question marks above their heads, instead their new job seems to be business as usual. “Hey, a guy who disappeared from Alcatraz 40 years ago came back today, and he still looks the same like 40 years ago. And he killed somebody. Fuck the secrecy, lets hunt him down and arrest him” – that’s basically the motto of ALCATRAZ. Questions and secrets asked and implemented in the pilot are just thrown into the room, so that the watching audience has some mystery meals for the rest of the season – only to be disappointed at the end, because that mystery meal is not exciting enough and definitely boring (and with LOST and FRINGE in the back hand, even nothing new). There isn’t even an explicit mention of the 302 Alcatraz people (who are getting a nickname, like in every other show of its kind: the 63′s) being time travelers or something, executing a grand master plan of somebody or something (aliens?). The characters don’t even ask themselves if there are supernatural plays in the game. when it comes to the disappearance and the return of the 63′s.

Yet it still doesn’t stop there. The main characters, led by tough, but boring Rebecca, and supported by shady and over-the-top cryptic Emerson Hauser, couldn’t be more dull. Sarah Jones tries too hard to be the new action heroine besides Jennifer Garner and Anna Torv (despite Anna Torv not being an action heroine, but a heroine of her own kind), while Jorge Garcia also tries too much to distance himself from Hurley – without much success (if he wouldn’t be a comic geek here…). ALCATRAZ feels in every second like a copy of something already seen, and developed to throw a TV show into the mystery mix after the terrible THE EVENT, just to prove that the genre is still alive and kicking. Only the writers around Elizabeth Sarnoff (who knows how to handle scripts, thanks to her work on LOST [despite being the writer of some rather crappy episodes like "Further Instructions" or "Stranger in a Strange Land"] or DEADWOOD) didn’t really understand how to build a mystery, and how to write the plot and the characters around it. The audience doesn’t need to be scared off or bored, just because the creative start of ALCATRAZ isn’t standard television. You’re gonna have to learn how to connect both the mystery plot and the characters in your story. FRINGE is the perfect example here, the pilot was almost perfect. Also, half an hour longer.

But it’s no mystery anymore, why Sarnoff left the showrunner position mid November 2011 and was replaced by another LOST alumni, also showrunner of seemingly underrated NBC cop show CHASE, Jennifer Johnson. Reasons of the stepback were “creative differences” between Sarnoff and the studio, after the then seven produced episodes obviously couldn’t wow the studio. That’s why most of the first part of the first season is threatening to be as boring and without any new ideas as the pilot, and only after the change of showrunner, there might be a reason to believe that ALCATRAZ will go away from the prisoner-of-the-week theme, and therefore escape from all the copies and duplicates from today’s and yesterday’s television.

The only positive thing about the ALCATRAZ pilot is the optic. Like the FRINGE pilot, the episode looks esthetic, like a movie, and even Michael Giacchino’s score sounds like the adult version of his two MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE scores. But the optic doesn’t save the content, and even the J.J. Abrams haters will again believe that the “bad guy, who ruined LOST”, is again headlining a TV show to its unsatisfying ending (who is still believing that Abrams had something to do with the later LOST seasons, or currently FRINGE?). Optic is not enough to carry a TV show, and it’s a truth FOX recently had to learn with TERRA NOVA. And now FOX is having a deja-vu with ALCATRAZ. 3/10

Angry Jack is angry

Thoughtful Rebecca is thinking

Season 1, Episode 1
Produced as season 1, episode 4
Date of airing: Jan 15, 2012 (FOX)
Watched for review: Jan 16, 2012
Number of review in January/2012: 67/67

Most TV remakes and TV sequels are obvious. The premiere of THE FIRM isn’t far behind us, but is probably not going to have a long life on crapped-up NBC. With some TV shows, you have to think and research hard to actually find out it’s an adaptation, based on another movie or TV show. Mostly because the original work is not well-known to be known by the TV audience. It seems to be a rule that animated TV shows are the “official” sequels to movies – like the animated TV sequels to BACK TO THE FUTURE (1991 – 1992 on CBS), THE MUMMY (2001 – 2003 on Kids’ WB) or DUMB AND DUMBER (1995 – 1996 on ABC), which were airing in the morning hours on those various kids animated hours, but weren’t much successful. With NAPOLEON DYNAMITE, FOX’s new effort to have another animated hit on their schedule, another TV sequel comes around the corner. The original is the same-titled independently produced teenager comedy from 2004, which became a cult hit with its fans (for reasons I don’t know though). $US 400 000 were spent to produce the movie with Jon Heder in the titular role, who plays a 16-year-old high school student, living together with his 32-year-old jobless brother Kip and annoying grandma, just to dream through the day. The TV adaptation metaphorically continues where the movie left off. Meaning, it doesn’t do it literally, being a real TV spin-off. Instead, NAPOLEON DYNAMITE is the animated TV version of the cult movie.

Napoleon is, like in the movie, a bored-out-of-his-mind high school student in a bored-out-of-hell state named Idaho. He is considered to be a loser than a nerd. His brother Kip is on the lookout for his future wife (which will also need the attention of grandma Dynamite), which is why it’s difficult for Napoleon to find a place in life and Idaho. At least he has great hobbies: martial arts, hip hop dancing and tetherball are good enough to fight boredom and giving Napoleon to survive in this dull place. That he hates his brother Kip to the ground proves not to be the only recurring storyline of NAPOLEON DYNAMITE…

FOX already makes a mistake on NAPOLEON DYNAMITE’s first day: not airing the real pilot, instead airing two random episodes in the first season (namely episodes four [standing as this pilot] and three [which was aired after]). This has a kinda good “effect” , because this episode takes a lot of elements over to the series, and makes fans watch it. It is probably the episode, which wanted the fans of the movie to continue watching, maybe because the pilot itself is not that great and something completely different story-wise. That the non-airing of the real pilot also contains a disadvantage shows in the waiver of character introductions and the story for non-fans of the movie (which kind of resembles the movie in some parts). Napoleon’s awkwardness felt way too normal for this episode, even though it should be considered anything but normal – this episode basically shows Napoleon as one of the most normal guys on the planet, despite his characteristics of not being the normal guy he was depicted here. The movie is probably a cult figure, because of Napoleon as a weird character, who justifies the comedy aspect of the story. Yet for the TV show, the writers have written Napoleon pretty much into a corner with his awkwardness, not being existent in this episode. Does that mean the show will eventually lose the tone of its movie? And does it mean that NAPOLEON DYNAMITE is just another show, fitting enough for the animation domination Sunday nights, instead of being something different?

That’s the biggest problem this episode (and therefore the show) has: It feels too normal to be something special. The comedy bits show that the writers were looking for the punchline in their jokes (barely succeeding), as well as the crazy scenes which define THE SIMPSONS and FAMILY GUY. That exactly makes NAPOLEON DYNAMITE fit into the SUnday night block, looking like a brother to all the other shows, but at the end this show is nothing but another effort to put on another crazed-up animated show with crazed-up characters and even more over-the-top storylines. While NAPOLEON DYNAMITE is bringing in all the elements of the movie and therefore tries hard to make the movie fans tune in, the normal TV audience is fobbed off with the fact that this show has nothing new to offer. Like its competitors in the genre.

I have nothing to say against the 2D animation, they are clean-cut and normal. Also pretty much free of any surprises or specialities. But the animation doesn’t contribute much to the style of the show, or the animation domination block, even though it couldn’t be more fitting in there. Only the voice acting is pretty tiring, especially when I think about Jon Heder. He pulls down almost the whole episode with his monotone and sleepy voice. If you need sleeping pills, look no further and watch NAPOLEON DYNAMITE. Also, Aaron Ruell doesn’t seem to be much of a great voice actor here, when he sounds like an old woman in a mustache costume most of the times. Over the top? Oh yes – I’m still waiting for the first animation to not be overexcited.

NAPOLEON DYNAMITE is for the animated world, as FUTURAMA was/is for THE SIMPSONS: an effort for writers and producers to expand their point of view of the comedy into another project. And since the genre of TV animation is hot and buzzed at the moment (despite all the ratings flops FOX was landing in recent years), the producers don’t miss out to bring all the craziness into their very own show, just so it looks like every other animated show on FOX. If this helps the comedy aspect of the show, has to be seen in the future – for the first-aired episode it wasn’t enough though. Maybe only because FOX has chosen to not air the pilot, maybe the seasonal episodes are better while the pilot sucks. Question mark. 5/10

Napoleon just gave a Rambo performance

Now it's time for Kip to show what makes him a hothead

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Jan 12, 2012 (FOX)
Watched for review: Jan 14, 2012
Number of review in January/2012: 63/63

When it comes to TV critics, spin-offs of successful TV shows are never really a good idea. With the exception of the crime franchises CSI, NCIS and LAW & ORDER, there are maybe just two prestigious TV spin-offs, which were not only successful in their own rights, but also build a complete own universe, never to depend on the universe of the mother show, while the rest was barely a magnet for the audience or got cancelled after a season. THE BIONIC WOMAN from the 1970s and Buffy’s blood-hungry lover ANGEL were able to make their show on their own behalf, creating a universe on their own. With THE FINDER, there’s a newcomer in the world of sequels, remakes and adaptations. The backdoor pilot of this new show was an episode in the sixth season of BONES, and introduced us to former soldier Walter Sherman (Geoff Stults), who, based on his own words, can find anything everywhere at any time. He can find missing people, lost trinkets, or maybe the faith people tend to lose nowadays. Even though said backdoor pilot in BONES let some people ask what Dr. Brennan and Special Agent Booth have to do with the story, but the backdoor pilot was simply there to give Walter the best opportunity to build his character, so that he can carry his own show.

While BONES is (loosely?) based on Kathy Reich’s series of books, THE FINDER goes to bed with a complete different book: Loosely adapted is “The Locator” by Richard Greener, and it has nothing to do with either Kathy Reich’s book series or BONES itself. The show tells the stories of Walter and his friend and partner Leo Knox (Michael Clarke Duncan), who are busy to solve the case of a missing father, who allegedly crashed with his plane somewhere over the pampa of Florida, and his missed by his son Cooper (Brett Davern). Walter makes it clear to Cooper that he might not like what Walter finds out about his father. Walter is not just a simple locator of things, he is the best in the world. He literally finds anything everywhere at any time. Just because he bites himself into those cases, never letting go, eventually even risking his own life for the search. Walter gets support by hot US Marshal Isabel Zambada (Mercedes Masöhn), as well as teenage juvenile Willa Monday (Maddie Hasson), who has her very own selfish reason to stay with Walter and his team.

Similar to BONES, THE FINDER doesn’t have much trouble to be easy-going and flaky, as well as not going too much into a complex story to confuse the audience. The setup of the show is fairly simple and could remind of stereotypical USA dramas with eccentric characters, some dramatic background story for the major character, neurotic methods of investigations, episodic storylines. And all of this in the beauty of Florida (despite being shot in the lofts of Los Angeles), which makes THE FINDER looks like MAGNUM, P.I. or HAWAII FIVE-0 – just without the mustache, car chases or shootouts. That’s also the reason why THE FINDER can’t be considered as something new in the world of television, mostly because it delivers clichés already seen a dozen of times in recent years. THE FINDER is more of an update of those 80s detective stories on TV, but the show looks more important than it actually is, thanks to its creator Hart Hanson, who is also responsible for BONES. After all, Hanson managed to put a spin on the crime genre with BONES, focusing more on the characters than the investigation of a murder. If THE FINDER is going to be the same is still in the open – the pilot didn’t show much why it should be considered the “new kind” of crime television in a sea of crime-filled television.

Instead of pulling all strings for the episodic arc and focusing on the investigation, Hanson is busy with taking Walter’s case to the defense and to put the social awkwardness of his main character in the center. This feels especially forced in the first half of the episode, and it doesn’t give Geoff Stults any time to shine with his character. He is basically downgraded to a comedian, who is not capable to tell a joke, much less find the punchline, or realizing how other people must feel around him. Yes, this builds on the charm of Walter Sherman, the crazy awkward finder, but the pilot didn’t show much to make me believe this character is the non-plus ultra of television in the year where the Mayan calendar ends. The pilot doesn’t make clear if THE FINDER becomes a character-centric crime show, like BONES, or just a simple sunny and funny show about a guy who finds stuff. Worse is another thing: The pilot makes the quiet assumption that Walter has some sort of superpowers. Instead of stopping after the explanation of Walter’s brain damage, the episode continues to “explain” why Walter is how he is, and likes to be in life-threatening danger. And it’s kind of dangerous to have such kind of assumption in a show, where there’s no supernatural stuff. The scene on the airfield showed this perfectly, but at least it also showed that the explanation of the brain damage also gives the writers reason to step on the gas in the middle of the episodes, delivering twists and answers, to bring this episode to an early end. The usual way of investigators finding answers to their cases, even though it doesn’t make sense at all…

This is why you shouldn’t take THE FINDER serious as a TV show. The only fun lies between Walter and Leo, as well as in the panties scene for the male audience, when Isabel comes storm out of her bed session with a gun – and her bra and panties. However there’s also Willa, and she can’t succeed to be a good character from the start. With her you get the feeling, she can transform to an annoying teenager, who is not able to be given proper stories than the typical teenage/coming-of-age stuff. Then again: Willa is not the daughter of one of the main characters, which gives her a different dynamic with the rest of the cast. And hopefully Hart Hanson is good enough to create good storylines out of this dynamic.

And when Hanson’s writing team is able to make a good show out of THE FINDER, despite all its easiness and laziness, then there is a good chance that the predictable investigations will be scaled back a notch in the near future. Walter Sherman definitely fits in the line of eccentric characters like Gregory House or Walter Bishop, even though the show itself doesn’t feel like it wants to be a very special show. At least the show fits perfectly enough into the FOX schedule to create hope that the ratings will climb over the course of the first season. Let’s not forget: BONES was like THE FINDER (only better in its first season), and has also risen in the Nielsen ratings. If not, let’s not forget the CRIMINAL MINDS spin-off… 5.5/10

Walter does a plane, because he can do it

Isabel has bra and panties. And a gun

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Jan 10, 2012 (MuchMusic, CTV), Apr 24, 2012 (The CW)
Nielsen ratings information: 0.63 million viewers, 0.3/1 with A18-49 (The CW premiere), Canadian numbers unavailable, because not in Top 30 of the week

I decided to watch the show for one single reason: I’m still having hope for soap operas. Actually, I’m looking for a real soap opera, which throws me into the mix of all kinds of drama and clichés, without being over the top like a daily soap. So, a weekly soap is all I’m looking for, and when I heard about THE L.A. COMPLEX for the first time, when TheCW was acquiring the rights for the summer, I knew I had to watch it. And now I hope TheCW is happy enough with the show to order more episodes. Or Much Music and/or CTV are happy with the show and order more episodes, because this was actually a fun episode. Sure, a bit over the top, ruthless, doesn’t stop saying what it wants. And on top of that the characters are actually charming. Not like in a TheCW soap, because I still wouldn’t like the GOSSIP GIRL characters after six seasons and a movie.

Yes, I liked it. Sure, it wasn’t top-notch entertainment or stereotype-free, but the one thing I really liked was that the writers didn’t even care. They made Abby (Cassie Steele) take the abortion pill, they let her and Connor (Jonathan Patrick Moore) freely (not) discuss about it and just talked as if it were a normal thing. They just made Abby threw up in a very never-I-have-seen-before fashion on her “favorite director”. They were really cruel to show Nick (Joe Dinicol) that the comedy factory is all about losers, if you haven’t gotten any jokes. They were really awesome, when it came to Raquel (Jewel Staite) and her bitchy characteristics in the world of castings and not being cast for a TV show. They really tried to not step on the breaks here. And I hope the writers will continue to not stepping on a break, because it’s very refreshing to have a show like this. Resembling more a chaos reality documentation like THE REAL WORLD or JERSEY SHORE, just way more organized and more nicer, when it comes to the depictions of friendship between the characters, but basically like that: The world isn’t shown from its nice side, instead you have to fuck up yourself to get to a point you envision.

In addition, I like those kind of character introductions. Something similar was shown in the ALPHAS pilot, and I like how every important character gets a minute at the beginning, just so the audience knows what they are doing, knows what they can’t do, how they look like, and what name they have. Some shows need like six episodes or more to name the characters by name (I recently discovered that in the third season of SOUTHLAND, where Detective Ochoa wasn’t called by her name very often), so it’s great to have the first couple of minutes taking time with the characters and making them more appealing to the watching audience. And hey, it worked with me. No wonder, when you have a sexy little girl like Abby, who seems to run away, while Alicia (Chelan Simmons) dances around like a pro in her bra, showing the sexy of Los Angeles (yes, that helped to instantly liking her, lol – my screen was sweating). And then you have Jewel Staite, a pretty much big name in this production, showing her bitch-side – which can also be considered a good thing, because a) I want to see more of her, even though I barely have seen anything with her, and b) the bitch-mode suits her perfectly. Loved her scene in the casting room with all the black women, expecting them to not have any white BFFs. Also a hilarious moment, because that was kinda true. Except when you know shows like ALIAS or SCRUBS, or NCIS: LOS ANGELES. Well, maybe it’s not true at all. But that’s what I mean with not holding any barrels: The writers didn’t even stop mentioning all the clichés going on in Hollywood, and the episode itself showed all those clichés. As if the writers knew they would be parodying everything they’d mention.

The stories itself were good enough for a pilot to introduce me to all the characters. Biggest surprise was Mary Lynn Rajskub. When she stood beside Nick, I was like him: That’s really Mary Lynn Rajskub standing beside her. I didn’t even know she was in this. Nice that she was also in a bitchy mode. That’s something she should play on for a while, because I haven’t seen her like that very often. The only thing about Nick’s comedy plot I didn’t like was the fact that he didn’t fear the stage, and also didn’t realize how bad his gags were. I wouldn’t have gotten on stage with that material, because I knew it would suck balls. Abby and Connor fucking on the roof on her first night in L.A. is of course a big cliché, but it brought the whole abortion pill thing, which was very hilarious. And a soap like this needs a love story – Abby and Connor, and a love story created. That’s all you got for the pilot, and it’s also all you need for the show. At last, Tariq (Benjamin Charles Watson) and Alicia’s stories weren’t really mine, because I couldn’t connect to it. Tariq was almost tortured in the studio, and yet he’s still lucky enough that his beats are liked; while Alicia was only “sitting” around, doing “nothing”, and not having a success. Sure, she needed a story to introduce her, but the writers could have given her a better kickstart for the show. Abby and Raquel were alright, from the girls they got the most attention, and it worked for me; while Connor is way too much of the main male protagonist for me. Blame the love story for it, because it’s all stereotypes and nothing I have seen before.

At the end I’m still surprised that this episode worked well as an introduction. Nicely written (even with the stereotypes), nicely acted, the characters are alright, the setting is okay (though I was a bit laughing about the big party in a motel with a swimming pool and a band, and loads of fucking hot people living in this “motel”), the music is alright. The guest appearance was in fact surprising, and the little strip near the end, watched with great eyes by Abby, led to an interesting ending. What a shame that the episode was “censored” though. Sure, nothing would have been seen anyway, but it looks like the shooting of the show was very free-spirited, when not even the female cast members are shy to take their clothes off for “fun”. 7/10

No protected sex? Time for the abortion pill. And breakfast

This really is Mary Lynn Rajskub. All WTFs in the air!

Season 1, Episode 1
Date of airing: Jan 11, 2012 (NBC)
Watched for review: Jan 13, 2012
Number of review in January/2012: 59/59

You can say anything against old-skewing CBS you want, but you have to accept that they are delivering mostly great and humorous comedy shows, which don’t looks like kidnapped from the 90s and placed in today’s schedule to go for the punchline. ABC, FOX and NBC try to hop on the sitcom train CBS is captaining, but with every new multicam sitcom, they are failing. FOX recently failed with I HATE MY TEENAGE DAUGHTER, while ABC just got rid of WORK IT (which kind of is a shame – as being one of the five people on this planet who liked the second episode). And NBC didn’t even make new friends with WHITNEY (which I still have to test). Now they are coming around the corner with ARE YOU THERE VODKA? IT’S ME, CHELSEA, which is a much better title than the one above this text. Another laughing-track sitcom with hot babes and even hotter guys; another sitcom, which tries to be edgy, but doesn’t have anything else to offer than some sex stories and the usual relationship crap. But ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? doesn’t know what it wants, and it doesn’t find the comedy timing of its cast. And the biggest reason why this pilot is horribly failing (while CBS sitcoms are mostly working): it doesn’t risk anything, it isn’t courageous, it’s isn’t scandalous, it doesn’t give its cast the opportunity to shine with their own comedic timing. Instead the script is looking for the gags and punchlines, not giving the cast anything to do. ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? is the most current example of how a sitcom never works, when it looks and feels like a relic from the 90s.

ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? is loosely based on the essay collection of one Chelsea Handler, who tells funny and witty stories about her life and times in the Twenties in her 2008 published book “Are You There, Vodka? It’s Me, Chelsea”. Laura Prepon takes on the role of the twentysomething Chelsea Newman, who is a funny person without a clear goal in life. Instead she parties, drinks, drives under the influence, gets arrested, and has to be bailed out of the realm of hard-on lesbians by her pregnant sister Sloane (Chelsea Handler, surprisingly not playing herself). Chelsea’s free spirit is a small theme in the show, and it doesn’t stop her from taking nothing for granted and doing what she can do best: praying to Vodka, having sex with one night stands, and loads of fun with her colleagues and friends.

You gotta have to ask what Chelsea Handler is thinking about her “own” show, when she doesn’t even have time to play the lead role, instead has a recurring role as her own character’s sister. Yes, she is busy with CHELSEA LATELY on E! and all the other stuff she is doing, but why not going for the ultimate and taking the lead role? This very much hurts this show, because Laura Prepon is just not suited enough for the role as Chelsea: to tiring her acting, her comedy timing is completely missing, and her voiceovers can be used as sleeping pills. How this unpeppered and non-salted pilot went through the development stages and through the hands of the executives at NBC is a mystery. I have to say that ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? has some good things going on for itself, but compared to all the bad things, the good stuff gets trampled on during the first five minutes already. Or to see some improvements over the next couple of episodes. If a sitcom wants to be funny, it has to find the chemistry between the actors, and this chemistry felt more than forced in the pilot.

In addition, the sitcom wants to be something special, just so it can show a contrast to the other sitcoms on TV land: It not only tries to set up itself to be a multicam sitcom (with all the laugh tracks one can get), but also tries to look like a singlecam sitcom in its two small flashback scenes. Unfortunately, those two sequences didn’t feel like they were belonging in this episode and were kidnapped from a complete different show. To push the success of an edgy sitcom, when the producers aren’t even clear on the style of their sitcom, just hurts the storytelling. And again, the humor of it all. And together with the pretty much bad cast (Handler and the awesome Lauren Lapkus can be considered exceptions), the audience doesn’t have much difficulties to stamp this show with “nice try, but completely shitty” and forget it real fast.

Other than that, ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? hurts, because it only speaks to one minor targeted audience: the young women, who, similar to Chelsea, are open about their life and free from any worries. But the thing is: Is there actually a targeted audience like this out there? That the connection between the audience and Chelsea (the character in the show) can’t be build, is not just the fault of the out-of-sorts cast (especially Laura Prepon), but also the fault of the script, which proves to be missing all kinds of character moments and instead wanders from one edgy joke to another, while totally missing the punchline. This is why the comedy doesn’t work as well as in 2 BROKE GIRLS or TWO AND A HALF MEN – the script is just not bold enough to live in this world of sitcom television. At the end, ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? depraved to a sitcom, whose look is still stuck somewhere in the 90s, and whose language tries to connect to the CBS audiences.

The sitcom still can be good, when the writers and producers find a way to demolish their faults, mistakes and ridiculousness (and maybe fire the cast and hire new actors). As long as ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? doesn’t even try to be a groundbreaking comedy, which lets it shine like the involved people behind the cameras are in it with heart and soul, then the audience will never believe in it, and NBC can cancel it. Cast and crew can be nice people, and they can have fun during the production. It doesn’t help the show though. ARE YOU THERE, CHELSEA? has therefore reserved a place besides HOW TO BE A GENTLEMAN, I HATE MY TEENAGE DAUGHTER and WORK IT as one of the worst comedy pilots in the current TV season. The sitcom output is pretty pathetic this year – on all the four big networks. 2.5/10

Are you there, Vodka? I'm thirsty for some lesbionics

Sex with an Irish redhead seems to be a big goal for sober Chelsea

Season 1, Episode 1 (1)
Date of airing: Jan 8, 2012 (NBC)
Watched for review: Jan 8, 2012
Number of review in January/2012:42/42

I know writing for the big and small screen is a difficult thing to do. If you don;’t get your original ideas to the studio, then maybe adapting old ideas help. Whether an update, a reboot, a remake, or just a simple sequel – if you have a franchise under your belt, it’s easier to get the studios interested. Josh Friedman tried to bring the TERMINATOR franchise to television with THE SARAH CONNOR CHRONICLES back in 2007, but stumbled upon the writer’s strike, which killed his first season, and finally the ever-shrinking audiences, who didn’t get their Terminator they wanted to see in the show. On NBC, another movie gets its television sequel, and here the question has to be asked again, if it’s that a good idea to take the name of the most famous John Grisham adaptation and to make a TV show in the serious legal drama genre out of it. THE FIRM doesn’t have much problems to begin with to be seen as a sequel to the Tom Cruise thriller, but about 80 percent of the two-hour pilot (finally, another two-hour pilot again!) was wasted with a procedural case, which had nothing to do with the main arc of the show. Instead, Mitch McDeere, this time portrayed by charming Josh Lucas, only gets teased from the danger of his past.

THE FIRM is set a decade after the 1991 book and the 1993 movie, and rather continues the movie than the book. Mitch McDeere and his wife Abby (Molly Parker) step out of the witness protection program and move to Washington, D.C. The continuous run from the mob and danger is tiring for the family, especially for young daughter Claire (Natasha Calis). With their new life, Mitch is hoping for a chance to live a normal life, making his life as a defense attorney, building an own law firm. And despite the financial crisis in his own little firm, which he runs with his brother Ray (Callum Keith Rennie) and Ray’s chain-smoking girlfriend Tammy (Juliette Lewis,I still love you girl), Mitch continues to take pro-bono cases, helping the people in need, and takes the case of a high-school student, who seemingly has killed another student in front of witnesses. THE FIRM wouldn’t carry the name of a Grisham thriller, when Mitch’s past wouldn’t get past him, and when he wouldn’t get an offer from a mysterious law firm, who tries to recruit him…

Admitted, it’s not a bad idea to write a legal drama under the mantle of the main character’s paranoia. One THE GOOD WIFE, which doesn’t shine light on the political side of being a lawyer, but on the dangerous past said lawyer had to live through. So, it’ pretty much a positive that even John Grisham took the time to consult and supervise on some of the earlier scripts, making sure that THE FIRM will go into the right direction. It lets fans of the movie hope that the TV sequel will be an ideal case of a great legal drama/thriller, as the movie was 19 years ago. Back in the late 1980s and early 90s, NBC had luck with L.A. LAW (currently on my to-do list, and you better give me reason to watch it now and not in three years or so), bringing the legal genre high on the list for the writers, eventually starting the career of one David E. Kelley. But today, the genre seems old, and even the serious business of being a lawyer, set to stone with THE PRACTICE, DAMAGES and THE GOOD WIFE, seems old now. Is the update/sequel of THE FIRM good enough to let the 90s story live in the 21st Century? Are the writers good enough to see more behind all the other serious legal dramas (like DAMAGES and THE GOOD WIFE) and can make their show not look like a cop of said legal dramas? Have the writers learned from the mistakes of Josh Friedman? And will it be an advantage that a conspiracy plot like in the movie can be stretched out to 22 episodes, while most of the time the episodes will deliver generic episodic stories?

Even for NBC, the success (or, after the inaugural ratings, non-success) of THE FIRM will decide whether the network is serious enough to fully end the comic/serialized TV shows for now, and go back to matured drama, as it was the case back in the 1980s and 90s (and even then, it took a while for NBC to get on the top of the Nielsen charts). But if a legal drama, looking as if it jumped right from the 1990s into the future, and filled with an already clichéd season arc, can help NBC is to be doubted. The movie is not innocent to have helped the legal genre in general, but all the TV shows coming after the movie just make THE FIRM look old-fashioned now, and it’s the question whether the audience finds interest in a legal drama with some mon people, a conspiracy, and a family in endless danger. It can’t surprise anybody anymore, and it’s a disadvantage in the long run, when THE FIRM really looks like a TV show from the 90s, and was only remastered to be aired today.

The pilot has a different problem going for it though: It relies too much on the movie in its first part, and has to have flashbacks to explain the current storyline and what has happened with the McDeeres. A five-minute teaser, drowned in bleached lighting (to differ the various flashbacks in the pilot), feels too much like a real sequel to the movie, instead of slowly going into character work for new audiences. THE FIRM is not successful to premiere in a more universal and creative note, instead it has to be the sequel to a movie. The pilot is not successful in looking new, modern and suspenseful. To make the audience clear from the beginning that THE FIRM is a sequel of some sorts, it had to have all the information coming right from the movie, to make a TV show out of it. At least Grisham and his team of writers knew from the start, which information to take and how to start the TV show, to not slam the unknowing audience with useless information. Basically the mistake THE SARAH CONNOR CHRONICLES did in its pilot, which is why THE FIRM is kind of better because of it. That the pilot had to suffer anyway was because of its generic, episodic main plot, whose investigation and conclusion did not just remind me that those arcs in the show don’t have anything to do with the season arc, but also reminded me that those kind of stories need more spice to be surprising and good. After all, the whole murder/self-defense plot looked like a more crazed-up and mutated spouse of one THE GOOD WIFE or DAMAGES.

But if the audience is able to make the movie forgotten (or haven’t see it at all), then they get a nice little TV drama out of THE FIRM, where the cast can succeed not to suck, Josh Lucas gives a great Mitch McDeere, and I don’t even see Tom Cruise in his role anymore. Lucas is sure to make you believe that this role is his now, which has a great positive effect on believing his character’s actions and decision-making. That’s also a positive, because the TV show continues where the movie ended with Mitch as a character: Instead of being a selfish bastard in the middle of a dangerous situation (like in the book), Mitch continues to be the “all white vest” man, as “holy” and “pathbreaking” for his job and his colleagues. Typically for TV lawyers in the early 90s and even earlier, they have to have a good heart, they have to fight for the innocent, they have to believe in the good of their job and in the law. Mitch is the hero of the hour, the man to go, when you’re in trouble, the man who could step in front of a camera in Washington, D.C. and make fist bumps. (And get killed by the mob at the end of the week, lol). Yes, it feels outdated nowadays, but NBC has the opportunity with THE FIRM to shine a pretty much different light on the legal drama genre – making the lawyers heroes again, not trying to be all-edgy and complex. Not all lawyers have to have dirty vests and need to scheme their way up to the top. And when the writers learn to kill off the logical mistakes (I didn’t even have problems with the pay phone. Rather with the “bad guys” not making their shoes wet), and make the episodic stories more compelling, then THE FIRM is able to entertain on a high level.

The future of the show lies in the hands of the writers, and if they want THE FIRM as a stand-alone drama in the genre with a conspiracy a la 24 as a great story arc, or a real and honest sequel of the movie. Former would be great for the genre. Latter would only work, when the show manages to keep the universal and thrilling episodic stories going. From the beginning, and not in the middle of the season, because it’s closer to the season finale. Sony has agreed to produce 22 episodes, thanks to THE FIRM being produced under an international model, which is still unusual in my eyes. But it has some advantages. The production is scheduled to end in the final days of April – so, when the show is a flop on NBC (which it looks like, but it was a success on Global in Canada with more than three million viewers), then the writers have enough time to write a proper series finale, when Sony doesn’t find a new partner to produce the show with. There’s also enough leeway for the show to be compelling, to prepare the story, to have a bigger outcome at the end. Hopefully the writers don’t fall into a delirium to write a cliffhanger finale. 6/10

Mitch is running again

Mitch has mysterious colleagues again