Category Archive: TV

Reviews and comments on television shows.

If you read this blog, PLEASE sign in to my guest book on frappr. No personally identifying information is needed, so this is risk-free. Just provide a name (even a nickname), your zip code, and any statement you want to make ("hi" is sufficient).

If you want to know more about me, click here.

July 30, 2009

Dollhouse: Epitaph One

OK, if that’s where Joss is headed, I’m in for the ride.

For as much as I was looking forward to Joss Whedon’s return to television with the new show “Dollhouse” this past Fall, I have to admit I was disappointed in the first few episodes (although I understand that was a result of Network’s interference - I've also seen the original pilot and it was much better). The series did pick up significantly in the second 6 (of 12) episodes, with a couple being superb. But in the end, while I could see the show being a venue for examining certain interesting ideas, I didn’t have a sense of where he was headed with it as a series – how would things evolve to keep the show interesting after multiple years?

Now I understand, and really want to see this play out.

The reason I understand is the episode “Epitaph One”, intentionally unaired but also intentionally included in the DVD boxed set. The existence of this episode requires a bit of explanation. The Fox TV network only ordered 12 episodes for season 1 and would only ever air those 12 episodes they paid for. However, in the international market, DVD boxed sets with 13 or more episodes are able to negotiate much more profitable deals, so the people at the division of 20th Century Fox responsible for the DVD sets asked if Joss & co. could somehow create a 13th episode for the DVDs. Thus the “missing 13th episode” came into existence.

What makes this so interesting is at the time this episode was created, it wasn’t at all clear if the series would be renewed for a second season (odds were actually against it). So, for this final episode Joss & company decided to make something of a “series finale” – something that would provide a kind of closure to the show should it be canceled. The effect is that “Epitaph One” gives a pretty clear idea of the overall arc that Joss has planned for the series without giving away so many details as to make any additional seasons produced anticlimactic.

And a pretty amazing arc it is.

“Epitaph One” is set in 2019 in a post-apocalyptic world where civilization has completely collapsed (and in fact has been collapsed for a while, so there are fewer than 10 years before things fall apart). What’s more, it becomes clear that the Dollhouse (or at least Dollhouse technology) is responsible for humanity’s downfall. There are devices that reprogram any person that come to near to them into killing machines and the streets are filled will crowds who kill anyone who is not reprogrammed. Other weaponized applications of Dollhouse tech are also implied. The story follows a small band of survivors trying to find someplace safe who stumble on the ruins of the LA Dollhouse in which the rest of the show is set. They access stored memories in the Dollhouse archives to provide “flashbacks” which give some hints of how this all happened and allowing for some great scenes with some of the series regulars (The last scene with the character Topher is an amazing performance).

Now Joss has hinted that some of the events in the show were written to be deliberately misleading as to how things came about; but even with some variation, it is clear that Joss’s vision for Dollhouse has some real scope. I hope he is able to run it out to the end.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

July 28, 2009

Torchwood: Children of Earth

Now that’s the way to do SciFi on TV.

I’ve not been a big fan of the BBC television series “Torchwood” (broadcast in the US on BBC-America). I checked out the first few episodes of season 1; and since then, when there have been episodes that that got a lot of buzz in the UK, I watched those select episodes when they aired in the ‘States. The series, a more “adult” spin-off of “Doctor Who” isn’t bad, it just didn’t seem to me to have a lot to say beyond entertainment.

For season 3 however, they decided to do something different. Rather than produce a weekly serial, Russell T. Davies decided to do the season as a mini-series. Five episodes over five consecutive nights, telling one large story. The results were comparable to the new of Battlestar Galactica in quality.

At a high level, the plot is fairly generic SciFi - aliens show up and make some demands of humanity with the threat that they will wipe us out if we don’t comply. What the producers of the show did right was that rather than focus on the aliens and technology (as most SciFi does), the series is really about the humans’ reactions to what happens. The show holds up a mirror to human nature, and what it shows isn’t pretty. In many ways, the series asks the same question that Battlestar Galactica did - are there things that we can do to save ourselves that make us no longer worth saving?

The result is a study in the banality of evil, as civil servants try to do “what’s best for the nation” while politicians work to maintain “plausible deniability” and save themselves. Peter Capaldi does a great job playing the civil servant John Frobisher - a tragic villain who is in way over his head and is left dangling by his superiors. The role is one that could have played more clearly dark; but Capaldi’s performance adds a lot of depth to the character to help you see his internal struggle and fear. He is at some level the “good man” his admin’ claims he is; but step by step he is drawn into the path of ruin.

The producers also made some good decisions about the presentation of the aliens - keeping them in a mist-filled room so the audience never gets a clear look at them, allowing the audience to fill in the gaps with their own nightmares; aided by the random shrieks and green ooze that occasionally splashes against the glass wall of the chamber. On top of that you have Capaldi’s performance making Frobisher’s horror at being so close to the creature palpable. What the aliens want from us is also held off until the middle of the series, and why they want it isn’t revealed until the final segment - to great effect. This series could be used as a textbook on the lesson in writing that “less is more”.

I’ll also add that the show made a great use of the regular characters. Early in the series, Torchwood (the people in the best position to fight the aliens) is destroyed because they know things about these specific aliens that would be an embarrassment for the government, and our heros spend the series on the run while trying to help humanity. Denied the use of their usual equipment, we get a much better sense of who these characters are as people.

I’m particularly impressed with how Captain Jack Harkness (leader of Torchwood and a human who is actually from the 51st century) is handled. This is a character originally created for the series Doctor Who and became a part of the spin-off when it was started. While on ‘Who, Harkness was granted, through unusual and unique means, a kind of immortality (he becomes an intrinsic part of the definition of the universe, so no matter what happens to him, the universe restores him). The result is that he literally has a death wish (he fights aliens in hope that one day he’ll meet someone with the technology that can actually kill him). This series was however the first time I really bought from the writing and performance why he wants to die - a man who lives forever collects lot of regrets.

Well done. I have no interest in owning the DVDs of seasons 1 and 2; but I will be buying season 3 when it comes out.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 29, 2009

Virtuality

Just watched the pilot/movie “Virtuality” by Ron Moore who helmed the recent “Battlestar Galactica” remake. It has not yet been picked up as a series, which is a shame since it blows away anything else on TV today. A rich story, a complex mystery, a settling that provides scope to explore a lot of things. Pretty impressive. Plus, Moore has the recent track record that shows he can deliver.

I don’t want to spoil anything so I won’t go into any of the surprises - if you have not seen it I recommend you go watch it on: Hulu. However on face value, the story is: humanity has launched its first mission to another star system (using realistic technology, by the way). The mission is backed by a consortium of companies who are making back at least part of the cost of the mission by presenting it as a reality TV series (with product placement by the crew). She ship’s psychologist serves double duty as the show’s producer (no conflict of interest there!). The only private time the crew have is when they retreat into their virtual reality modules which are custom programmed to allow they to escape the stress of the ship.

In the pilot, various plots are set in motion - news from Earth is bad, one of the crew is ill, strange things start happening in the virtual reality modules, and there are hints that the story is a lot more complex than what I described above. Oh, and did I mention there may be a murderer on board? There are so many things they could explore just using what was in the pilot, I sure hope someone picks it up.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 15, 2009

2009 TV Finales

So I wrote about Movies on Monday and Books on Tuesday so I figured that since there were season (or series) finales of several TV shows this past week I’d complete the media triptych.

WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW!
If you haven’t seen these shows and don’t want o be spoiled, don’t read my comments below.

Dollhouse

As I have written previously, Dollhouse recovered from the slow start and turned into an interesting series, the difference being the focus moved away from the character Echo/Christina and onto the Dollhouse itself. The season finale (actually the last two episodes) continued that upward trajectory with a number of twists. I particularly liked finding out that at least one of the Dollhouse staff is a Doll/Active (a particularly valuable member of the staff died; but they happened to have a recent “backup” of their mind, so with a little editing to make the transition...). The show has now come down strongly on the POV that some aspect of moral character (the person’s “soul”?) cannot be reprogrammed using the Dollhouse’s technology. I do hope it gets renewed.

Fringe

Fringe has been my guilty pleasure this season – a show that objectively doesn’t meet my criteria for “good TV”; but I watch it anyway, largely because the character of Walter is just so fun (the actor John Noble really disserves some recognition for his work). The series has also gotten better as it has gone on and the show’s underlying mythology has become clearer. While I had figured out early on where, in general , they would find Dr. Bell, the final reveal of his exactly location was wonderful. Plus we have enough information to figure out the big secret regarding Peter. Nicely done.

Lost

So in this season the show fully embraced being Science Fiction. With the set up of the season 4 finale, it looks like in the 5th and final season, they will embrace the mythic. We now know the correct response to the pass code “What lies in the shadow of the statue?”: “Ille qui nos omnes servabit” – “He who saves us all” in Latin. I loved the preamble with Jacob and the man in black, and the final fade to white certainly left things open for next season.

Bones

That was bizarre. The show has played with the format before; but never to that extent. It was however quite entertaining seeing everyone playing strange parodies of themselves. Of course, the final reveal at the end was a bit of a cliffhanger for a show whose renewal is not yet locked in.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 24, 2009

“Caprica” and “Dollhouse”

Have a lot else on my mind today, so a bit of lighter fare.

Caprica

Consider a story set in a decadent polytheistic culture whose young people are mostly interested in orgies and watching fights – a society where there is also an upstart monotheistic religion with a geometric recognition sign and a slave class ripe for revolt. Sound like ancient Rome? Try the back-story for the science fiction prequel spin-off series for Battlestar Galactica called “Caprica” which is scheduled for the end of the year (but whose pilot episode is available on DVD now). According to the writers, the parallels are quite intentional, and the series is once again set up to explore human nature in all of its virtues and vices.

The story is set starting 58 years before the events of BSG, and in fact the second to last scene of the pilot is the first demonstration of a new prototype military robot, call a “Cylon” (setting up the later series). The series centers on the lives of two men: Daniel Greystone, a technology entrepreneur (in the mode of Gates or Jobs) who made his name creating a neural interface technology that allows for a full-sensory virtual reality experience (which the younger generation uses for simulated sex and violence), and who is now in the robot business (guess what he invents); and Joseph “Adams”, a lawyer from the despised colony of Tauron who is in the employ of the Tauron mafia. Joseph Adams is actually Josef Adama (who changed his name to fit into Caprican society and hide his roots) the father of Admiral William Adama in BSG (little William also makes an appearance in the series).

The story begins with a shared tragedy for these two men that drives them into their separate weaknesses. In the process, the pilot already explores racism, honor, hubris, and grief. I can’t wait for the series.

Dollhouse

Many people (myself included) were looking forward to the third coming of Joss Whedon to TV (after Buffy/Angel and Firefly). Unfortunately, even before the first episode aired the news was bad – Fox forced Joss to redo the pilot, dumbing it down for a mass audience; and there were other signs that they made him compromise his visions for the series. Still, Joss is the master of creating shows whose individual episodes are mindless on the surface; but when strung together tell a deeper story.

He might have actually succeeded again, despite Fox’s interference.

No doubt, the first 5 episodes were fairly shallow – establishing the idea of the series (a secret organization with the technology to wipe and reprogram minds that use that technology to rent out made-to-order “dolls” to fulfill their client’s dreams). But like the first few bars of a fugue, that only served to establish the basic theme for the series. Starting with episode 6, the show really started to pick up – adding variations on that theme and additional melodies to create something much deeper and more complex. I’m not sure it is a symphony yet; but it certainly shows promise. Now all of the Joss fans are just waiting to hear if the series gets renewed. Insiders say it is a 50-50 shot. I’ll certainly keep watching it if it does get a second season.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

March 27, 2009

The end of BSG 2.0

Last Friday, the final episode of the new "re-imagined" Battlestar Galactica aired; and so what has been one of the greatest series on TV has come to and end (although at least one made-for-DVD movie and a prequel spin-off series is on the way). It has been interesting to see how many professional television critics have been willing to call this a "great TV series" and not just a "great Science Fiction TV series". Certainly I think that BSG 2.0 compares favorably in terms of writing, acting, and significance with series like "The West Wing".

An interesting indication of the significance of this series is that last week, the Deputy Director of the United Nations Human Rights Commission invited the cast and writers of the series to come to the UN and serve as the panel for a discussion of the human rights issues raised by the series. I can't think of another TV show that has been asked to present their views to the United Nations.

This is however quite fitting for BSG 2.0 – a series that dealt with both sides of issues like torture, terrorism, racism and many others. At its most basic level, it is a series that asks: at what point do the actions of the human race render us no longer worth saving; or as Commander Adama says in the pilot-miniseries:

You know, when we fought the Cylons, we did it to save ourselves from extinction. But we never answered the question "Why?" Why are we as a people worth saving? We still commit murder because of greed and spite, jealousy, and we still visit all of our sins upon our children. We refuse to accept the responsibility for anything that we've done, like we did with the Cylons. … Sooner or later, the day comes when you can't hide from the things that you've done anymore.

That's what the series was all about – answering Adama's question "Why are we as a people worth saving?"

Of course what everyone has been talking about this past week is if the final episode was a worthy conclusion to such a great series. On that topic, I can say, for me, it worked; although I do understand why some people were disappointed.

Heading into this last half season, a few things were clear to me. The first was that that there was some third party at work (in addition to the Humans and Cylons). Particularly with the re-appearance of Starbuck and some of the benevolent coincidences which occurred, it was clear that events were being manipulated by some unseen party or parties who's agenda was different from either the Cylons or the Humans. In the original 1978 BSG series there were the episodes "War of the Gods" parts 1 & 2, and "Mission to Terra" in which the existence of the "ship of light" was established (with its crew of highly evolved beings). I kept expecting for some re-imagined version of the "ship of light" to appear and to be shown to be behind some of these events (in the 1978 series, they were even responsible for bringing Apollo back to life, so it would fit for them to be behind the return of Starbuck).

The other thing that was clear to me was that the gods/god that the Humans/Cylons worshiped were real beings. The stories the Humans/Cylons told indicated that they weren't talking about some ancient mythological abstraction; but rather beings who were quite evident to a technological culture. As an example the "god" named Hera committed suicide by jumping off a cliff after the Humans started to leave Kobol in spaceships and was buried in a very real tomb that had technology beyond that available to humans. That's doesn't sound like myth; but rather something that was actually observed (ignoring for a moment whether the term "god" can reasonably be applied to a creature that can commit suicide that way).

So in the end, my sense was right; but the writers chose to keep things vague. The bottom line is that there was a third party at work behind the scenes – "god" (although we are told he doesn't like to be called that). However, details on who and what "god" is (or even if there are more than one) was left unanswered. Now there seem to be many who object to this as "Deus Ex Machina". I think that is an unfair characterization – that term is generally used where something that does not flow from the rest of the story is added at the end to wrap up the loose ends. Yet as I have argued above, I think saying "god did it" is in fact one logical conclusion from what has been presented in the rest of the series. All that is missing is an explanation of what god is, and I can appreciate the writer's decision to leave that question unanswered.

I may not agree with the theology of the series; but as a presentation of what humanity is, it has few equals.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 06, 2008

2008 TV Up-Fronts

Last month the various US television networks announced their schedules for the Fall (or in the case of NBC, the schedule for the whole year as they announced they are abandoning the idea of a "Fall season" in favor of starting new series throughout the year). So this is my annual post on what looks promising on TV for the coming year.

Dollhouse

By far, the TV show which has grabbed my attention (and has gotten good initial feedback from critics) is "Dollhouse". This is largely because it marks the return of Joss Whedon (Buffy', Angel, Firefly) to network television; but also because the series has potential to be something great (which, given Joss, may be a redundant statement). The concept is that an illegal secret lab has perfected the technique of erasing people minds and re-programming them with new knowledge, skills, personalities, memories, etc. They have a small collection of individuals (known in the show as "actives") who the lab claims have volunteered to have their identities/personalities/memories erased so that the lab can re-program them and send them on missions for the lab's clients. So one day an active might be programmed as the ultimate assassin, while on another they may be programmed to provide "entertainment". In between assignments they are programmed with a simple child-like personalities and kept in a comfortable dormitory that the lab refers to as the "dollhouse" (hence the name of the show).

Joss has always liked to explore morale ambiguities; but this certainly pushes that limit even farther. After all, when you strip away the technology, this is essentially a show about human slavery and there is no pretense that the actives are used for noble purposes. Yet the people who have seen the pilot all agree that while they find what the lab does to be reprehensible, Joss managed to make the lab employees themselves sympathetic – you can understand why they do what they do. What's more, it is clear that Joss plans to use the series to explore the nature of identity – what makes a person unique? What makes them valuable? – as well as the various roles we all play as we go thought our lives. So as with all of Joss' shows, there will be a lot of entertaining action with a deep intellectual subtext for those who are willing and able to explore it.

Other than Dollhouse, I've seen no must-see shows; but there are a few that might turn out worthwhile.

Fringe

Lost will be finishing up next year so J. J. Abrams (Felicity, Alias, Lost) needs a new project. What we get seems to be a cross between Alias and X-Files. Strange things are happening in the world, and a (female) FBI agent (who is not liked by the Bureau) is given the weakest lead to follow up on – a mad scientist (and I mean that literally – she has to get him out of an asylum) who may have an explanation. As a result she stumbles onto a world-wide conspiracy involving "fringe" science (telepathy, etc.). The series is about the agent, the mad scientist, and the scientist's son (who is the only person who can reliably make sense of his father's ravings) pursuing the conspiracy. To me it sounds a lot like X-Files; but those who have seen the pilot say it feels more like Alias. Hmmm. Not sure I am up for yet another J. J. Abrams goose chase. I punted on Alias after a couple of years and barely hung on with Lost (although that may be an indication he is getting better).

Crusoe

A TV series based on the 18th century novel "Robinson Crusoe", only with the title shipwrecked character being more like MacGyver and a less racist depiction of Friday. So Lost without all of the weird stuff (and intelligent behavior)?

Kings

While Hollywood is well known to mine every old source for ideas (and rarely comes up with new ones), this I think is a first: a modern retelling of the story of King Saul and David from the Bible. David is the young wiz-kid whose victory against overwhelming odds put him into the spotlight (and wins him the favor of Saul's son and daughter); but Saul fears that David has become too popular and is a threat. OK, a good start for something; but can they keep it going?

My Own Worst Enemy

A rather extreme case of split personality: a man is both a mild mannered efficiency expert and an international super-spy; but he doesn't know it – at least not until the series starts and his lives start to cross over. I suspect this is meant as a response to last year's Chuck. It could be good; but I view it as a long shot.

The Philanthropist

Playboy billionaire has a live-changing experience that makes him want to use his money for good – not by giving it to others but actually going out himself and helping people. The network's notes refer to him as a "vigilante philanthropist". Could be interesting if they can avoid being too preachy.

Life on Mars

An American remake of an excellent BBC production. A modern cop gets into a car accident and wakes up in the 1970s and is somehow accepted as a transfer into the police precinct. Has he really traveled back in time? Or are these hallucinations while he lies in a coma in a hospital? The BBC version managed to maintain that ambiguity for two seasons and in the process explore just how much things have changed in 35 years, with the main character trying to use modern police techniques back before they were invented. The BBC show was great; but the track record of moving UK shows to the US isn't good.

Eleventh Hour

Another BBC import – this time about a government scientist who is assigned to help protect the public from abuses of science. Each episode some corporation is found to be doing something dangerous and our hero stops them.

The Mentalist

A professional (fake) "mentalist" who was successful because of his powers of observation decides to go straight and use his skills as a private investigator. Sounds like Psych done as a drama instead of a comedy.

Merlin

The story of Merlin and Arthur and young men. Been done before; but it is a rich field to play in. Odds are against it; but I am willing to give it a try.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 13, 2008

New Amsterdam

There's a new TV show, "New Amsterdam", that I am giving a tentative "thumbs up" to.

The premise is that in 1642 a Dutch soldier serving at Fort Amsterdam on Manhattan Island saves the life of a Native American girl and is nearly killed in the process. Her tribe rewards him with the blessing/curse that he will not age or die until he finds his soul mate. The man then lives through a series of identities until the present day where he is known as "John Amsterdam" a New York City homicide detective with a reputation of being reckless (he doesn't have to worry about being killed). So far we know he has also been a furniture maker (whose creations are now expensive antiques), a Civil War surgeon, a lawyer in the 1930's, and a soldier in WWII. He's been in the Army three times as well as the Coast Guard, Marines, and Navy (but not Air Force – he has a fear of heights).

The only person who knows his real identity is an old bartender who happens to be John's son. It is also established that in the 1930's and early 40's, the person who knew his full story was his secretary who also was his daughter, so there may be a pattern here.

The episodes so far have basically been standard police procedurals where John's 350+ years of experience and knowledge help him solve the case. Each episode also has a flashback thread that relates emotionally to the case (much the same way Lost integrates flashbacks).

One of the reasons I am enjoying the show so far is that John is presented as an interesting and complex character, who has dealt with real issues in his long life. He's an alcoholic who attends AA meetings. He had an interracial relationship in the 1930's. While the TV show "Highlander" covered some of the same ground, I never found the McCloud characters all that interesting in their own right. John Amsterdam however seems to have some real potential.

The show also does a lot of the "little stuff" well. His current dog is named "Thirty Six" (the one back in the 1930's was "Twenty Nine"). I guess after a while he got tired of coming up with new names.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

March 05, 2008

Desert Island Media (TV)

This is the continuation of my response to a suggestion for posts from Melissa. Essentially if I had to go a long period of time with access to only a small set of movies, books, TV, games, which would I choose? Previous posts in this series can be found here:

Movies

Books

My short list of TV shows to have and re-watch is also pretty easy to generate. What’s more, unlike books, this is pretty close to my list of best or recommended shows as well.

1. Buffy the Vampire Slayer

This should come as absolutely no surprise to regular readers of this blog as I have waxed effusive about the series on several occasions. While most TV series become less interesting after the third or fourth viewing, my appreciation of Buffy continues to grow each time I watch it. I spot new connections, new nuances, new moral or philosophical conundrums. I am in the midst of (slowly) re-watching it and Angel all over again (on my Monday posts, look under DVDs Watched for “BtVS” and “AtS”). In fact I would go so far as to say that if Buffy was the only TV series I was allowed to watch for several years, I would be content.

2. Babylon 5

Again, this should not be a surprise. I re-watched the whole series again last year and still enjoyed it. It is a far less subtle series than Buffy (which likely accounts for the lack of academic interests in the show) – JMS said what he wanted to say so clearly that there is little to discuss afterwards. Still, I could stand to watch it again and again.

3. Battlestar Galactica (the 2005 version)

This is the one of only two current series on my list (and the only one in the top three); but it is also clearly a masterpiece (although I am doubtful it could have been made unless Babylon 5 and Buffy had broken the ground for it). It even has potential to move up to the number two slot on my list when the series is done; but right now it is still an open question as to whether they can bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.

If I could take a few more, I would grab:

4. Angel

Back to Joss Whedon’s work and the other half of the Buffyverse. While the first two seasons of Angel struggled to find its distinct voice, seasons four and five more than make up for the shaky start.

5. Firefly

Finishing out the Joss Whedon trifecta. While less than a season’s worth of TV, I’d still want it.

6. Dead Like Me

A fascinating series about the meaning of life as told from the perspective a slacker girl who dies and becomes one of the grim reapers (harvesting the souls of the dead). While it sounds morbid, it is actually both funny and poignant.

7. Grey’s Anatomy

The other current series in my list, and its down at number 7. I was afraid that this series might go the way of “Desperate Housewives” (great first seasons and downhill from there); but they have managed to keep the writing, acting, and directing at a consistently high level. There are some individual episodes of Grey’s that I might put forward as among the top ten episodes of a TV show ever.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

January 22, 2008

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles

So there's a new TV series out based on the Terminator movie series. It takes place after the second movie and replaces the events of the third (history is changed so that those events do not occur). In the series, the whole battle for the future has moved into the past with many agents from both sides (humans and machines) being transported back in time to either prevent or ensure the rise of SkyNet. One set of human agents secretly build a time machine which is used to transport Sarah, John, and a new "good" terminator from 1998 to 2006 when the current incarnation of SkyNet is supposed to be created so they can join the underground fight to stop it.

The two-hour pilot didn’t actually grab me. It had lots of action and exposition; but the characters were all rather flat – I didn’t develop much of an interest in any of them. Still, I was willing to give it a couple more weeks to see where they were headed, and I am glad I did. The second episode was much better – adding the much lacking human element; and last night's episode was excellent. It spent the time to really explore the classic moral issue doing violence to prevent greater violence in the future (usually posed as "Would you kill Hitler as a child?"). Here they discover an average guy working as a cell phone salesman who in his spare time is developing an AI to play chess that appears to become a key piece of SkyNet. The guy is quite nice and means no one any harm; but his hobby just happens to contribute to the end of the world.

If they can keep doing episodes like that, I'll stick with the series.

Posted by Steven at 09:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

December 28, 2007

In praise of "Pushing Daisies"

Most TV shows are just some variation on a previous idea, occasionally being "creative" by mixing previous shows in new ways ("Day Break" was "Tru Calling" mixed with "The Fugitive"). TV shows that are truly innovative are rare. Those that are also commercially successful are even rarer.

"Pushing Daisies" is one of those very rare shows. From the concept to the execution, there is no show I can recall that is anything like it.

The creators have called it a "forensic fairy tale". I can certainly see the "fairy tale" part of that. The way I would describe the "feel" of the show is: imagine what it would be like if Theodore Geisel (a.k.a. "Dr. Seuss") had developed a live-action (non-animated) TV show. While nominally set in the present-day real world, everything is just a little "off" – a little exaggerated, a little unreal. The omniscient narrator, who often talks in rhyme, completes the Seuss-ian effect. The supporting characters are at least quirky, and sometimes outright bizarre.

The concept sounds morbid and depressing; but the themes are actually quite positive.

The main character, Ned, is a man who as a child discovers he has special "gift":
1. If he touches a dead thing, it comes back to life.
2. If he touches something he has brought back to life, it dies again, permanently.
3. If he doesn't touch something he has brought back to life a second time within a minute (allowing it to die), something else dies in its place.

The process of discovering this gift as a child (including the death of his mother and his childhood sweetheart's father, leaving both of them effectively orphaned), has left Ned with real issues about "touching" anyone (physically or emotionally). The series then is about the Ned (and others) discovering how to reach out and grab life.

Ned as an adult owns and runs a pie shop and helps a private investigator by temporarily bringing back to life murder victims to get information on who killed them so they can solve the case. The series picks up when he discovers that his childhood sweetheart (Charlotte "Chuck" Charles, whose father Ned was indirectly responsible for killing) has died and he brings her back to life (at the expense of the funeral director). The two rekindle their relationship with one major limitation – they can never touch each other (otherwise she will die again, permanently).

Ned, Chuck, Olive (who works at the pie shop), and Chuck's aunts (who raised her) are all people who have failed to embrace life for one reason or another, as are many of the characters in individual episodes. While the show deals with death a lot, it is really about people learning to embrace life. This is perhaps no surprise as the creator of the show, Bryan Fuller, previously created the shows "Dead Like Me" and "Wonderfalls" that deal with the same themes (and in the case of "Dead Like Me", explored them through the vehicle of death in much the same way).

This is a very strange show - too strange for some people; but I think it is one of the best new shows in many years.

Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 19, 2007

2007 Up-fronts

It is Up-front season again – the time when the television networks announce to the affiliates and advertisers what their fall lineup is expected to be. There are usually a few changes between the up-front announcements and what actually airs; and it is often difficult to determine the actually quality of show from what the networks send out; but for TV fans like myself this is a good opportunity to see if there are any shows with interesting concepts coming down the pipe.

Last year there was a very promising set of announcements. There were ten new shows that I thought had promise. Last year was also a good example that promise is no guarantee of success. Of the ten shows I thought had promise, only three turned out to actually be good; and of those, only one, "Heroes", survived to the end of the season.

Which brings us to this year, whose announcements are, in my opinion, nearly devoid of promise. If last year (inspired by the success of shows like "Lost") the networks were open to trying new things, new concepts; this year they are being far more conservative, with a multitude of re-hashes of older shows and ideas.

In terms of trends, the networks seem to be balancing the growth of "reality" shows with an increase in "unreality" – there are eight new Sci-Fi, Horror and Fantasy shows planned. Unfortunately, almost all of those shows appear to be retreads of earlier series. So you have "Reaper", which seems to be a reincarnation of "Brimstone", "Chuck" which borrows from "Jake 2.0", "Journeyman" from "Quantum Leap", "New Amsterdam" from "Highlander", "Moonlight" from "Angel"; and of course "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" and "The Bionic Woman" which are at least honest about their derivation.

The only new SciFi idea seem to be "Pushing Daisies" about a private investigator who has the ability to bring dead people back to life by touching them – but if he ever touches them again, they die permanently (which is a problem since his girlfriend is one of the people he has saved). An interesting idea for a short story, or perhaps a movie; but a series? I just don't see that this can go very far.

The non-sci-fi shows exhibit a similar lack of originality. So is this fall devoid of hope? Well, not quite. There are a few shows that caught my eye:

The IT Crowd
This is an import of a British comedy about computer system administrators in a large corporation. Think live-action Dilbert. I haven't seen the UK version; but everyone I know who has, raves about it. Now UK to US imports have had a mixed track record – Coupling failed horribly; while The Office seems to have translated well. In general it seems to be better to watch the original version than the US remake; but one can always hope.

Kid Nation
A reality show with a new concept. Take forty kids and put them into an empty town without parents and find out what kind of society they create on their own. I assume the producers will step in if it become too "Lord of the Flies"; but I admit I'm interested to see how they do this and how it works out

Bionic Woman
When I heard they were going to do a remake of "The Bionic Woman", I really wanted to hate it. I never liked the original series and saw no reason to do it again. Then I found out that David Eick, who is one of those responsible for the excellent "Battlestar Galactica "remake is involved, so I checked out the trailer and clips NBC provided at the upfront and this is now the show I am most looking forward to this Fall. As with 'Galactica, the new series looks much darker and more complex and appears to be set up to address a lot of tough questions. The proof will come this Fall; but they've already got me for the first 3 episodes.

Posted by Steven at 09:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 16, 2007

Drive

I have commented before that television is fundamentally a writer's medium, and that while there are many indicators one can use to find TV shows that one might like, I believe the technique most likely to succeed is to note who writes for the shows you already enjoy and then find out what they write for next. This explains why I have been looking forward to the new show "Drive" on Fox for quite some time. It is produced by Tim Minear, who has yet to write a show I didn't like.

Having now seen the first 3 hours of the series, broadcast Sunday and Monday this week, I am comfortable that his record will remain intact.

On face value, "Drive" is about an illegal, cross-country road race with a thirty-two million dollar prize. Each episode certainly has enough fast cars and dangerous lane changes to keep any NASCAR fan happy.

Where Drive begins to diverge from the likes of "The Gumball Rally" and "Cannonball Run" is that the unseen organizers of this race are, from all early indications, quite evil. Many of the participants in the race have been coerced into participating – the lead character's wife has been kidnapped and it has been made clear to him that she will only be released if he wins the race. Likewise the driver who arrived last at the first checkpoint was told they had to participate in an "elimination round" to stay in the race – and was handed a gun and a picture of another driver and was told to eliminate them (I won't spoil what happens). Other characters participate willingly; but for reasons unrelated to driving and the prize. One man, whose life has been quite conventional, is dying and wants go out with a bang.

While it is too early to be sure, I can already see signs of the central metaphor. If my favorite show "Buffy" was about taking the statement "High School was Hell" literally, Drive is about taking the statement "Life is a Journey" literally. The race is a means to test the participants and show them who they really are. Some will rise about it, while others will succumb to temptations.

If all that sounds too serious, don't worry. As with all of Tim Minear's shows, there is plenty of humor mixed in with the drama and action. In Monday's episode there was a priceless sequence of a man's teen-age daughter teaching her father how to lie effectively (which she has apparently been doing quite successfully to him for years).

It is still opening week, and there's a long road ahead (sorry, that was a pun I couldn't pass up); but early indications are that "Drive" is going to be a keeper.

Posted by Steven at 10:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 25, 2006

Drama, Comedy, Mystery

The Fall TV season has started which means I am in the midst of my usual ritual of trying news shows hoping that at least a couple of them are worth watching. I'll post some of my early opinions soon.

What I wanted to write about now is a trend I have just come to realize and understand.

I don't like straight Dramas
I don't like straight Comedies

I've been checking out shows and several have left me quite cold, despite having at least reasonable acting and writing. To be clear, these weren't great shows; but my total lack of enthusiasm seemed out of place given that they were not entirely without objective virtue. Anticipating wanting to write reviews here soon I put some serious thought into why they didn't grab me – and then I recalled one of the sessions at WorldCon.

The session talked about how real life was a mixture of laughter, pain and sorrow, of comedy, horror and drama. We have terms like "gallows humor" or "foxhole humor" because it is human nature to find reasons to laugh in the most desperate situations. Therefore, the panel proposed, that TV shows which are "just" drama, or "just" comedy or "just" horror are inherently not realistic. It is the mixture of these genres's that best reflect real life.

With that in mind, I reconsidered the shows which had failed to grab me, and it's true -they were dramas in which no one laughed, or comedies in which there was no underlying sorrow. People just aren't like that.

With that insight I want back over other shows I have liked, and for the most part the pattern fit – I like "dramedy's" (drama-comedies). I like shows where characters laugh and cry and scream.

There were however a few exceptions which led me to my other realization:

I like Mysteries more than I dislike straight Dramas and Comedies.

I'll put up with shows where no one ever laughs (or always laughs) if there's a puzzle to engage my mind. Of course a drama-comedy-mystery is even better; but I'll take when I can get.

Posted by Steven at 07:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

August 19, 2006

Best … Episode … Ever

Watched the 200th episode of Stargate SG-1, and it was a hoot. The kind of episode only they could get away with, and certainly a worthy celebration of this long-lived TV series. While I think the quality of the show has been variable in later years, I still watch it on and off, and it was good to see them having fun.

The series is about how an ancient alien artifact was found buried in Egypt from the time of the Pharaohs. The artifact turns out to be a 'stargate', which allows you to dial up another stargate and transport yourself (via a stable wormhole) to that other location in the universe. The US Government uses it to run a secret project (managed by the Air Force) to explore the universe through the 'gate and to protect Earth from various alien threats.

There were a couple of episodes several years back which dealt with them discovering an alien living on earth who has been brainwashed by others of his kind into thinking he was a human. The alien did however have these vague memories of the existence of Stargate Command, and ended up writing and producing a TV show "Wormhole Extreme" based on his clouded memories - Wormhole Extreme is essentially a bad parody of Stargate SG-1 itself. The team helps him regain his memories; and the Air Force allows the show to continue production because it gives them plausible deniability about the real Stargate program (anyone who leaks anything about the real thing could be dismissed as having been inspired by the show).

So, for the 200th episode, the story is that a "Wormhole Extreme" movie is in production, and the alien writer/producer comes to the team for help on the script. The show essentially becomes the ultimate exercise in self-parody, as they the characters talk about everything that is cliché, overdone, silly, and otherwise humorous about their own show. The inside jokes and writers tricks fly fast and furiously. The stage scenes with the Stargate SG-1 characters that they could never actually do on the real series; but can here in the context of pitching ideas for "Wormhole Extreme". The ending of the episode is interviews with the actors in "Wormhole Extreme" on their 200th episode, allowing them to say the things which everyone assumes the actors on Stargate SG-1 would love to say but never would.

All in all, a perfect self-parody without anyone having to actually break character. The best celebration show I have seen on any TV series.

Posted by Steven at 03:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 27, 2006

One can only hope….

Folks know I am a fan of writer J Michael Straczynski ("Babylon 5", "Jeremiah", etc.). I also appreciate what Bryce Zabel tried to do with "Dark Skies" and the TV series (not the movies) "The Crow". I had also heard rumors (even JMS indirectly mentioned it) that JMS and Zabel had made a pitch to Paramount to run a new Star Trek TV series back in 2004 (as "Enterprise" was dying), although details were sketchy at best … until now.

Last week Zabel posted on his blog the full 14 page pitch he and JMS made to Paramount. The post can be found at:

http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/2006/06/spaced_out_star.html

And the pitch itself can be found at:

http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf

If you are at all a fan of what Start Trek was and might have been, I encourage you to read this.

The essence is that they proposed to do a "Battlestar Galatcica" with the original series. The original "Battlestar Galatcica" was a somewhat corny TV series from the 70's. It has some good ideas; but has not aged well, either in terms of style or content. When Ron Moore and David Eicks proposed to revive the series in 2002, they "re-imagined it" – retelling essentially the same story with the same characters; but done in a more modern style and a more modern tone. Enough of the original series was kept to provide a framework; but within that framework they used their freedom to create something new, something better. The result in my opinion is one of the better shows on TV today.

Now imagine doing the same thing with Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the original "five year mission" – keeping the framework of the original story and characters; but otherwise abandoning continuity with the original series, movies, and subsequent series, opening up the freedom to tell the story in a more modern style and tone, and with (this is JMS after all) a real five-year arc that tells a consistent story across the whole five year mission (and beyond). For details, read the pitch.

I have to admit, as I read the pitch, I found myself getting excited, even shouting "Yes!" at some points. This is Trek as it should have been, as it could still be if the studio was interested. If there was a petition I could sign to support this, I would.

Posted by Steven at 05:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

May 25, 2006

2006 Spring Finales, part 2

I hate doing two TV posts in a row; but I've been fighting a cold this week and spending more time than normal in front of the tube. So here are my observations on the last two finales of the season.

Alias
Well, that definitely ended the show - having eliminated a number of the characters in the course of the finale – but overall I found it less successful at wrapping things up. Yeah, the "good guys" lived happily ever after (although there is room for "Daughter of Alias" in a few years); but I didn't get much of a sense of closure. The flashback were nice as they allowed for all of the major characters of the past to show up for one final bow; but the only thing I really liked about the finale was the fate of Sloane – the perfect way to dispose of such a nasty character.

Lost
Now that's what a season finale should be like. You answer a bunch of old questions that people have been begging to have resolved; but at the same time you open up enough new questions to get people to come back. Unlike the Season One finale, I do feel like we know a lot more about the situation. Not enough to understand it; but enough to feel like I got something for my time watching the show, and enough to at least promise that this is actually heading someplace. Apparently next season we start to get the story of The Others. My early bet is that turning the key has sealed off the island so that even the others can no longer get off, and as a result they need to join forces with the rest of the LOSTies.

For the summer, we have the next season of The 4400 coming, and there's a new show on SciFi: "Eureka" that sound promising.

Posted by Steven at 05:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 23, 2006

Fall 2006 TV preview

The 2006 "upfronts" (early network announcements of their fall schedules to advertisers to allow them to pre-purchase ad slots) are out, and I can see I'm going to be reading a lot of books this fall. There's only one show on my "must try" list, and a few others that have good concepts but I'll wait to hear the "buzz" this fall before deciding if I'll try them.

The sure thing

OK, in TV there is no such thing as a sure thing; but "Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip" comes pretty close. An Aaron Sorkin "behind these scene" drama with an ensemble cast is a fairly safe bet since he has already had hits with "Sports Night" and "The West Wing" using that formula. This time it's behind the scenes of a "Saturday Night Live" style comedy show, and everyone is already saying that this is the 500 pound gorilla of the Fall season. Which make's ABC's decision to reschedule "Grey's Anatomy" up against it puzzling. Granted, Grey's is one of ABC's best shows; but why risk going head-to-head?

The good concepts

After that, there are no shows in my opinion which are clear winners. There are a few shows with interesting concepts, and given the right writers and actors, some of these may win. However, the network's track record of putting together the right writers and actors for good concepts isn't very good, so I'm in "wait and see" mode on these. As we get closer to the fall, there tends to be more info available and I'll decide then which of these I'll take out for a test drive.

Jericho
Events in a small Kansas town after "the bomb" has been dropped. Kind of a Midwest version of the classic book "Alas, Babylon". There are a lot of directions you can go from that premise, and many of them are interesting. If they take the time to deal with all of the questions that come up when a small community get cut off from the larger civilization, it may prove worth it.

Heroes
A bunch of normal people around the world wake up one day with superpowers. One can fly, another read mind, another teleport, etc. The producers promise that there is a larger story with the fate of the world in the balance; but that individual episodes will deal with the more personal dramas of the various characters dealing with their abilities in the real world. Kind of like "The 4400" or Straczynski's "Rising Stars" comic books. The latter clearly showed the deep questions you can get to starting with this premise (does power really corrupt? How do you determine the "greater good"?) We'll see how the network does.

20 Good Years
A comedy about an older "Odd Couple" (two very different men who share a place to live) who realize that they probably have only 20 good years left and decide to make those most of their remaining time on earth; but in very different ways. There is a lot of room for meaningful observations about life in between the jokes if they make the effort.

Day Break
A mash-up between the movie "Groundhog Day" and a murder mystery with a touch of "Tru Calling" mixed in. A man is falsely accused of murder and tries to prove his innocence; but discovers that every morning he wakes up at the start of the same day, giving him another chance to investigate and set things right. This could either end up monotonous or fascinating. If they play out how the information from previous cycles puts familiar events seen in previous episodes into a new light, this could be a great show.

The Nine
Nine diverse people are taken hostage in a failed bank robbery and spend 52 hours together under stressful conditions. As far as I can tell, the show is about how those 52 hours affect the character's lives after they are free. A good dramatic premise and I can see many ways to use this to comment on the human condition.

Six Degrees
Six strangers who don't even know each other at the start of the series begin to make decisions that affect each other's lives. If they really make this show about how people's decisions have consequences, not just for themselves but for others; and about the subtle interconnectedness which exists between people, this could be great. Of all of the shows in this category, "Six Degrees" is the one I most hope lives up to its potential.

Traveller
Three friend rollerblade through a museum shortly before it blows up in a terrorist attack. Two of them become prime suspects in the bombing, Things start to get really weird when they find themselves unable to prove that their third friend (who is missing) ever existed. There are a lot of shows this Fall trying to be "the next Lost"; but this one is just different enough that it might work.

'Til Death
A comedy about newlyweds who move in next door to a couple who have been married for 24 years. The older couple fight a lot; but underneath they truly love each other. The younger couple is just figuring out how this marriage thing works. There's a real opportunity here to say something in between the laughs about how real marriages evolve; but my guess is this will be all laughs and no substance.

On The Lot
This is the Mark Burnett and Steven Spielberg reality show collaboration which has teams of filmmakers creating a new short film each week in a different style/genre. Each week the loosing director is removed from the competition. The winner gets a job with Spielberg. I have long since lost interest in reality shows as a genre; but as a cinemaphile this may prove interesting.

Posted by Steven at 07:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

May 18, 2006

2006 Spring Finales, part 1

The 2005-2006 network TV season has nearly come to a close, so I thought I'd make a few comments on shows I was still watching at the end of the season and their finale episodes.

The West Wing
Farewell. The final episode of the series was what was needed and expected, but no more. Each of the characters had their moment in the spotlight. Each was given a chance to comment on "what's next". One reviewer describes it as "dignified", which sounds about right. Safe might be more apt. Boring even. For a show that started out by challenging so many conventions, it was sad to see it go out with something which said so little. The show was just not the same after Season 3 when Sorkin left and Schlamme found himself in the back seat as "Executive Consultant". There were moments of greatness; but never as good as what can be found in the first three seasons.

Grey's Anatomy
Wow. It's interesting to have seen the season finale of Grey's Anatomy so soon after the final episode of The West Wing. In many respect the writing and direction of GA reminds me of those first three seasons of WW. I loved the fact that the opening voice-over monolog (usually done by the main character Meredith Grey) was done by all of the interns this time. The sequence where Dr Webber questions the interns was a wonderful. Each giving an almost non sequitur monolog response to Webber's question; but in doing so revealing so much about how that character has changed over the season. Great TV. On the flip side, the show once again shows why Meredith may be the lead character; but she is certainly no role model. While the reasons for her lack of discipline with men are by now well established in the series, it is still hard to see her making mistake after mistake in her relationships.

Bones
I was very surprised that they'd start to resolve the big background mystery of the show (what happened to the main character's parents when she was a child) at the end of the first season. That's the kind of thing you drag out as long as possible and start to resolve when ratings go down. However, given that they decided to jump into that now, I have to say their (partial) resolution was well conceived. Here you have a character whose whole life has been built around finding people's true identities so that justice can be done. Having her find out that her own identity is false and that her parents were criminals is a brilliant move. For a character that has been established as being "tightly wound", this kind of thing should have lasting consequences. We'll see if the writing staff is up to that challenge next season; but cracks are already showing. I appreciated the fact that Ms. "let the evidence speak for itself" initially refuses to believe what her staff is telling her about the movie ticket.

Lost & Alias
The Lost finale is next week; but the producers are promising that we finally get some answers (accompanied, I am sure, by more questions). In addition, the final episode of Alias comes next week. This show dropped off my list a couple years ago; but I'm certainly interesting in how they try to wrap it all up (or if they do). My best guess is still that Sloane and Rambaldi are the same person; but don't ask me how.

Posted by Steven at 06:06 PM | Permalink

February 13, 2006

Crunch Time Again

I didn't post over the weekend as I was too busy recovering from a personal crunch at work last week. A lot of things on my plate happen to all line up in the next few weeks, so I am living in interesting times. I'll probably be fairly busy one way or another until March 13th, so posts may be a bit less frequent for the next few weeks. Given that, I thought I'd just make a few random comments while I wait for the caffeine to take effect.

- One reason I am upbeat despite the workload is that some of it relates to my being able to do some teaching. There's a week of training being given by my department, and I am teaching the whole first two days of classes. On top of that I am preaching at church on Sunday, March 12th. Color me very happy (just ask Anne).

- I continue to not be drawn to the Olympics. Anne and I watched our recording of the Opening Ceremonies last night – nothing to write home about; although I did enjoy the ski-jumper and the dove that were animated with people's bodies. I'm pleased they are giving good coverage to curling this year. I'm not big "into" the sport; but find it interesting and the lack of coverage in previous years had always bothered me. I have the same feeling about Rhythmic Gymnastics in the summer games.

- A couple years back I realized I had never read anything by the great SciFi author Alfred Bester, so I picked up a couple of his books, and am now finally getting around to reading his first novel – the Demolished Man (which holds the distinction of being the winner of the first-ever Hugo award). I am quite impressed so far. Some of his techniques are "old hat" now; but one must remember that this is the book in which they were invented (kind of like watching Citizen Kane).

- Grey's Anatomy remains one of the best written shows on television. While this and last week's two-part episode were clearly written as Sweeps Month ratings fodder, they clearly show what you get when you ask an already great show to do something outstanding. Both episodes were a fugue on the subjects "what really matters" and "how people handle stress". What's interesting (that I learned after watching it) was that the first episode (last week's) was deliberately written to show the "masculine" point of view; while this weeks was meant to show the "feminine" point of view. In hindsight I can see it. The point I wanted to make though is that this is a show that actually tries to do things like that. Also, the bookend "shower scene" motifs (at the start of the first part and end of the second) were perfectly done - showing the difference between masculine and feminine POV; but also commenting on what we think matters vs. what does really matter.

That's all for now.

Posted by Steven at 02:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

January 16, 2006

Midseason Blues

We just passed though the start of the midseason replacements on television in the US. This is when the networks, having cancelled half of the series they started the season the season with, launch a few new shows to fill out the depleted schedule.

Historically, midseason replacements have tended to have a bit better track record with me than the shows networks start the season with. I might "keep" one or two new shows of the thirty that start the season (say a 5% success rate), and another one or two of the ten shows added midseason (a 15% success rate). The reason is simple. I have never had any illusions that I represent the target market for American television, so the shows the networks put on in September are meant to appeal to someone else. The shows that networks hold back for midseason tend to be more niche products – shows that they believe are good; but appeal to a more limited audience – often people like me. So, normally I do quite well midseason.

Not this year.

Of all of the midseason replacements I checked out, only one had any real virtue in my book - "In Justice". I don't think I'm going to watch it regularly; but I recognize that the show is well done and is trying to do something interesting. We have had police (and justice) dramas that focus on catching and convicting the criminals, and we have has law dramas that focus on defending innocent individuals. In Justice is about trying to overturn convictions after they occur, and as such the focus of the show is on the kinds of mistakes and errors which can occur when the police and D.A. try to solve a crime. Think of it as the other side of the coin from the "Law and Order" series. The writing is good (not great, but good), some of the characters have multiple dimensions (and there is reason to hope that the rest will be fleshed out). If I didn't have so many other things to do with my time, I'd watch it.

What about the rest of the shows? They all had serious flaws in my opinion. A common thread is "collection of misfits" ensemble where every character seems to be defined by their flaw. Now I'm all for flawed characters. Rich, complex, interesting characters almost always have flaws. The problem is I saw several shows the last two weeks where the only thing memorable about any of the characters was their flaws. Without some redeeming value, some reason to root for a character; I see no reason to watch.

There's one show I feel compelled to comment on specifically because news reports have made it out to be controversial (I have to wonder if that's just a publicity ploy). That's "The book of Daniel". Apparently there are groups who have attacked the show because it is Anti-Christian and sacrilegious. In some people's opinions, portraying a religious leader who is flawed and whose family is having problems is a bad thing. I disagree – real religious leaders are human beings and are therefore flawed, and because their families are human too, they also have problems. I think there is a great opportunity for a TV series that showed that struggle honestly and compassionately – even to the point of showing such people doing the wrong things (perhaps for "good reasons") on occasion. The problem I have with The Book of Daniel is that the characters were one dimensional (see "collection of misfits" above) and their actions unbelievable.

The other interesting observation this season is that the whole idea of midseason replacements may be fading away. Networks are now reserving successful shows ("24" for instance) to not start until January and then run them without re-runs until the end of he season. This, together with cable networks counter-programming (starting their shows just as the networks go into re-runs), and the whole idea of "television seasons" may be changing. I have no idea if this will actually have an effect on the quality of shows produced; but staggering the start of show more might give new programs a chance to find their audience without the competition they face each September.

BTW – I have updated my "shows I watch" list on my about page. Its getting shorter and shorter.

Posted by Steven at 05:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

January 06, 2006

Best (scripted) TV shows ever

So after I did my piece on Buffy, I started to think about what other shows I would put into that category. I haven't been able to find a good source for "every TV show broadcast in America", so there may be some good ones I have just forgotten; but here's my top 10 list so far. Because these shows have very different reasons for being on my list, I find it impossible to establish an order between them, so I'm listing them in chronological order.

The Ernie Kovacs Show (1952-1956)
Ernie Kovacs was a true innovator. At a time when most TV shows were "Radio with Pictures" or "Theatre in your living room", Ernie dared to ask "What could you do with television because it was television and not radio, theatre, or the movies?" Among other things, he invented various camera tricks and techniques that are still used today. His show was a collection of comedy skits; but he constantly played with both the format and technical aspects of the show. The show would almost certainly seem "old hat" to a modern audience; but you have to keep in mind, Ernie was the guy who invented the "hat".

Playhouse 90 (1956-1961)
The show that (amongst other things ) gave us writer Rod Serling, director John Frankenheimer, and episodes like "Requiem for a Heavyweight", "A Town Has Turned To Dust", "Alas, Babylon", "The Days of Wine and Roses", "The Miracle Worker", "Judgment at Nuremberg", "Invitation to a Gunfighter", "Project Immortality" (most of which were eventually made into movies). This is the first television show to really attract top writers to the small screen, and it remains some of the best comedy and drama ever produced for television.

The Twilight Zone (1959-1964)
The Twilight Zone said more about the human condition than any show since, and said it better than most of the shows that followed. Of the shows in my list, this is the first that I would also call a "classic" in the sense that I expect people 100 years form now to still be watching it.

All in the Family (1971-1979)
This show not only had something to say; but what it had to say was something a lot of people didn't want to hear. Bottom line, this show opened the door to dealing with tough issues on television. We'd still be watching shows where the big crisis was that the wife burned the roast if it wasn't for the Bunkers. Of course credit must be given to Johnny Speight who created "Till Death Do Us Part" for the BBC (the show on which All in the Family was based)

M*A*S*H (1972-1983)
While this was one of the first shows I added to my list, I went back and forth on it many times. The reality is that most of the episodes in the early seasons were pure formula, and it took a while for the show to find its "voice". But once it did, it was amazing. It had three characteristics which I come back to time and time again in this list:
- It had something to say, not just about war (which is certainly spoke eloquently on), but about people in general.
- It was not confined by its genre. Was it a Drama? A Comedy? A Medical show? A Military show? The fact that it mixed outrageous comedy with deep pathos (just like real life) was part of what made it special.
- It was willing to experiment with its format. There was the dream episode, the interview episode, etc. The show's writers were willing to try new things to tell their story.

Moonlighting (1985-1989)
After Ernie Kovacs, I think Moonlighting did more than any show to experiment with what a TV show is. Mixing genre's (who ever heard of a comedy detective show back then?), breaking the fourth wall on TV, experimenting with format (Shakespeare, musicals, etc.) Now I'll grant that not every experiment worked; but enough did to make an amazing show.

Babylon 5 (1994-1998)
The show that added the phrase "a five year arc" to the Hollywood lexicon (we would not have shows like Lost if it wasn't for Babylon 5). In addition to telling a single coherent story over 5 seasons (a story that had a lot to say about humanity), the show also had a deep impact on how TV series are made. The idea of any TV show, much less a science fiction show with complicated special effects, returning money to the studio at the end of each season because they came in under budget is unheard of; but B5 did it. This show will be used as a master class for how to produce TV for years to come.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997-2003)
I've already expressed myself on this, so I'll say no more.

The West Wing (1999-????)
The show that made political discourse interesting. While the show has dropped off in the last few seasons, the writing of seasons 1-3 was some of the best that has appeared on TV since Playhouse 90. It also has a lot to say about both people and politics. I was temped to actually put "Sports Night" on my list instead (same writers); but the fact that West Wing did occasionally succeed at explaining complex political problems put it over the top.

In terms of the current crop of shows, given more time I could see either "Over There" or "Battlestar Galactica (2004)" bumping one of these off my list someday. We'll see.

Posted by Steven at 06:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

December 29, 2005

In Praise of Buffy

There have been a number of television shows I have been a fan of over the years – some because they were entertaining, some because they broke new ground for the medium, some because they had something important to say. There are however only a very few which I would categorize as "great" – shows that provide such a combination of virtues that I think they will be to television what Shakespeare and Wilde's work are to plays, what Beethoven and Mozart compositions are to music, what Dickens' and Fitzgerald's writing are to novels. I would, for instance, include "The Twilight Zone" and "M*A*S*H" into that category.

I would also include "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" in my short list of the greatest TV shows of all time.

For those who have never really watched the show, this is probably a surprising claim. As I have mentioned in a previous post, I too originally dismissed the show as "teen fluff", only to discover its depth and many virtues later; so I appreciate my attribution of greatness is a fairly long limb to climb out on. It is however becoming a shorter limb each year. I base that statement on the ever increasing acceptance of Buffy by the academic community. After all, one reason Shakespeare and Dickens works are recognized as great is that academics have wanted to talk about them. Consider two observations:

First, in 2004, a year after the series was cancelled, an academic conference was held where 180 scholarly papers were presented on subjects related to Buffy. To be clear, this was not a fan convention. It was an academic conference attended by college professors from four continents and in fact was the largest such conference ever dedicated to a single TV show. Topics discussed included whether the character Faith exemplified Nietzsche's concept of the "over-man", how consequentialist vs. absolutist ethics are applied by various characters in the series, and the "feminization" of the character Spike. Such conferences continue to be held in the US, Australia, and Europe even though the show has long since ceased production.

Second, there are now twelve (12) academic books out on Buffy in English (more if you count other languages). These are not episode guides or other descriptions of the contents of the show; but rather books by academics talking about what the show means and how it communicates its themes. Most are intended to be used as part of college courses. They include: "Televised Morality: The Case of Buffy the Vampire Slayer", "Bite Me: Narrative Structures + Buffy the Vampire Slayer", "Sounds of the Slayer: Music and Silence in Buffy", and "Blood Relations: Chosen Families In Buffy The Vampire Slayer". I can not find any other TV show that comes even close to that.

I think there are several reasons for this popularity among academics:
- The show is rich with metaphors and symbolism that actually do mean something (unlike Twin Peaks)
- The show provides a context to discuss all sorts of philosophical and ethical issues
- The show demonstrates realistic consequences of character's actions and decisions over the course of the series (which makes it a very "moral" show in my book. Even though characters often do immoral things, those actions almost always are shown to have consequences in the long run).
- The show demonstrates realistic character growth and change over the course of the series
- The show uses a wide variety of story-telling styles and techniques
- The show has a definite arc for all of the major characters
- The show has interesting things to say about people, society, and relationships

Fortunately, the whole series is now available on DVD (for rental or purchase), which is by far the best way to see the show - the character and plot arcs that play out over many episodes are more visible that way. There is even a boxed set of the whole series for those who decide they like the show.

Posted by Steven at 08:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

December 17, 2005

Best New TV Show of the Season

Well, as all of the network programs go into their winter hiatus, and before the counter-programmed shows start up, now is a good time to look back at the fall season's new shows and make some summary judgments. Out of the eleven new shows that I tried at the start of the season, there are actually only two that I am still watching – Surface, because of the interesting story telling techniques, and Bones, because of the characterizations. Between the two, Bones is by far the superior show.

For those unfamiliar with the show, Bones is (on face value at least) a police procedural, in the mold of the original CSI. The main character is Dr. Temperance Brennan, a forensic anthropologist, specializing in identifying human remains and what happened to them, who is occasionally brought in as a consultant by law enforcement authorities. The show is based on a series of books written by Dr. Kathy Reichs, who is … a forensic anthropologist, specializing in identifying human remains and what happened to them, who is regularly works as a consultant by law enforcement authorities (Dr. Reichs is actually only one of a handful of forensic anthropologists authorized by the FBI to handle evidence in criminal cases.) She also writes for the TV series and consults with the other writers. At that level, the show is very much like the first season of CSI.

What sets it apart (and eventually above CSI in my opinion) are the characters, and the dynamics between them. Dr. Brennan is a flawed individual who carries with her a whole lot of baggage from her childhood (her parents disappeared when she was a child and she ended up in foster care). She has retreated to the lab and to pure logic as a defense against the feelings she can't handle. In many respects, she is a more "human" (i.e. realistic) version of the Spock character from Star Trek. She knows her science; but has very little ability to deal with people. She is paired with Special Agent Seeley Booth of the FBI who is an emotional, intuitive character who has his own baggage of having served as a sniper in the military – think Dr. McCoy with guns and a badge. What works is that the conflict between the two is not just played for humor, but is used to express the virtues and vices of each point of view, not just on the job; but in life in general. Neither side is shown as being right, and both are shown to have limitations.

As the series has progressed, they have also started to flesh out some of the other characters in the ensemble, each adding to the debate other points of view on how life should be approached. It is this subtext of dueling philosophies which keeps me coming back each week.

Bones had already reached the top of my list of new shows; but this week's Christmas episode secured the position without contention. Now just about every TV series eventually does a Christmas episode (some try multiple times to get it right, and fail). The problem is that this ground has become too well trod. We all know the standard tropes, we know "the true meaning of Christmas" and the half-dozen ways writers have discovered to bring their characters to realize it, again and again, show after show. It has been a very long time since I have seen any TV show do anything new on the subject.

Bones managed to surprise me.

Instead of telling a story about someone discovering "the true meaning of Christmas", they managed to tell a story about how different people derive different meanings from Christmas, and presented those ideas without judging which one is "true" (beyond, perhaps, a common theme of "giving", loosely defined). They took the inherent differences in the characters and built a story about how each of those characters comes to Christmas with different needs, expectations, and desires. A job well done.

If they can maintain this balance between having an interesting crime drama while building on that drama a meaningful discussion on the different ways people approach life, they will continue to have my support and patronage.

Posted by Steven at 06:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

November 11, 2005

Movies and Television

Those who have known be for a long time (Roland?), will know that when I was younger I was a serious cinemaphile. I would go to two or three movies every weekend (and sometimes more), year around. Sometimes I would see a movie I liked and right away collect my friends who had not seen it yet and drag them back to see it again. I actually saw "Raiders of the Lost Arc" eight times in the first week it was open that way. Conversely, while I did watch television, I didn't watch a lot of it, and often heard about cool new shows from other people at work before I started to watch them.

These days, things are quite different.

There are still movies I rush out to see on opening weekend; but more often than not I wait to see what the reviews and word-of-mouth is like before I go to the local multiplex; and if some movies slip by, well, I'll catch them on HBO or DVD rental. Conversely, as has been noted by some commenters on this blog (again, Roland), I tend to watch more television than I used to.

So the question is – why?

Now the proximate cause is clear – as I have stated several times in this blog, I just have too many things I want to do and too little time, so I am cutting back on activities to focus on those I feel are of greater value. In that calculation I have found television to be of more value than movies, hence the shift. But that merely redirects the question – why is television worth more of my time than movies?

The answer gets back to another point I have made often – television is a writer's medium, while Movies are a director's medium. As someone who aspires to be a writer, I find I am learning more that is of value to me as a writer from television than from Movies.

Anyone who has seen a favorite novel made into a movie has seen how small a subset of a typical novel will fit into a typical movie. The reality is, from a writer's point of view, movies are short stories. You have enough time to establish a few characters, set up a premise, and then make some point (perhaps with a clever twist at the end). There are very very few movies which (in my opinion) come close to the depth you can have in a novella, much less a full novel. Now a good movie, because it is a multi-media experience, can make the same point as a short story in a much more compelling way; but it is still, in essence, a short story.

Television on the other hand has the option to do much more. A typical season of a television drama these days is about 16 hours of programming. That's 60% more than all the Lord of the Rings movies put together. The kind of story you can (if you choose to) tell in that amount of time is fundamentally different than what you can tell in a movie. You can spend the time to really flesh out several characters, establish deep background, carry multiple themes to conclusion. You can employ multiple styles in different episodes; you can do everything a good novel writer does in a good novel.

Now, of course, just because someone can do something, doesn't mean that they do it. Most television today is still written as an anthology of short stories that happen to have recurring characters. The best of these are good short stories, and much can be learned from them about writing short fiction. And then there are a few shows on television where the writers stretch their wings and try and tell an epic story, a novel, over the course of a season (or better yet, a whole series). These are the shows that are even better when watched on DVDs where you see all of the episodes together in rapid succession. The fact that a few such shows exist is one reason I value my time spent watching television over movies.

Posted by Steven at 05:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

October 11, 2005

Fall TV Season 2005, the verdict

Well, particularly given my interest in allocating more time to "output" activities (see previous post), the time has come to make the decision on what TV shows I will continue to watch this Fall season (I am ignoring Summer/Winter shows like Battlestar Galactica who won't be airing new episodes until January when most of these shows are in re-runs).

Of the new shows. My keepers are:

Commander in Chief
This has started out very strong and is well worth watching. Good writing, good acting, interesting situations, a different POV from West Wing. My only concern is that the creator (Rod Lurie) has just been fired for delivering episodes way late and while I like the new show-runner (Steven Bochco) in general, it may well be that the reason the first few episodes were good was because of the time Lurie took on them.

My Name is Earl
This is my "guilty pleasure" this season. I watch it just for the laughs.

Bones
This is on my keeper list because of the characterizations and how they are being used. They have set up two very different characters with different views of the world (very similar to the Spock/McCoy relationship in the original Star Trek); but instead of just using that as background with the occasional one-liner thrown at each other, they seem to be really exploring those two points of view in their own right. As long as they keep exploring the character/POV issues, I'll keep watching.

Surface
So this season we had three invasion/mystery shows: Invasion, Threshold, and Surface. Invasion never grabbed me – they didn't give me enough bait to make me care, and the characters were largely forgettable. There may be a good story there; but at this rate it is going to take too long to tell it. Threshold was my favorite after the pilots – an intelligent "alien invasion" show. The problem is that the episodes have started to all feel alike to me. I am actually going to watch another couple of show; but it is hanging on by a thread. The show I have ended up committed to is Surface, largely because of they way they are telling the story with multiple disconnected threads and because they are giving just enough new information in each episode to keep me wanting more.

Of the old shows, my keepers are:

Lost
Still "the" water-cooler show of the season.

Grey's Anatomy
I keep expecting this to degenerate into a soap opera and it keeps surprising me with episodes that are actually meaningful.

Desperate Housewives
Another I expect to fail soon; but it has managed to continue find new and interesting things to say.

West Wing
This is on my list until the election. If they actually switch and bring in a Republican administration, I'll keep watching just to see if the new POV will change things. If Santos wins, I'll punt.

I'm also keeping Battlestar Galatica and Over There, which I think are each better than any of the network shows; but they are (or will shortly be) off-season.

The losers from last year are:

Medium
I had already decided that they seemed to have said all they had to say about her dealing with her abilities in "the real world", which was in my opinion the only thing that made the show interesting.

House
This was a tough decision. I still say this is a great show with a great character; and I still recommend this show to people. I just don't have the time to watch it. The fact that the medicine is all babble to me doesn’t help.

Alias
This was already falling of the bottom of my list last year, and has now officially been removed. It started very well; but its clear the writers didn't know where they were headed and it was only a metter of time before they ended up in the weeds. I hope Lost does not follow their path.

And in the Summer/Winder Season, I am dropping Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis. Stargate Atlantis never grabbed me; and while I will watch part 2 of the current SG-1 cliffhanger, I think they have played out this franchise.

Posted by Steven at 04:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

September 28, 2005

Fall TV Season 2005, part 2

Surface
Strange (and often enormous) sea monsters start showing up in the world's oceans and eating people, ships, etc. The show follows three independent threads. There's the government team who are investigating the creatures and working to keep it all a secret (putting out cover stories to distract the public). There are two people who encountered the creatures and want to know what's going on; but are being stopped by the government (one of them is a marine biologist who saw them from a mini-sub, the other's brother was killed by one). And then there's a kid who found one of their eggs and hatched it. The show focuses mostly on the two "outsider" stories with the government team thread mostly providing background and menace (its clear the government scientists know a lot more than the audience are being shown).

This is on my "so good so far" list. They are disclosing just enough about the creatures to keep the mystery level high and make me want to know what is happening, and the multiple points of view make for interesting story telling.

Invasion
I'm going to give this a second try because some critics I respect like it; but so far this hasn't grabbed me. Based on the pilot this seems like a basic variation of the old "invasion of the body snatchers" story – strange lights show up in the middle of the hurricane and people who were caught out alone start to behave strangely, including working to isolate the town. Meanwhile someone who wasn't affected finds a body that looks "alien". Been there, done that, seen the movie(s). If there's nothing new in the second episode to make this seem fresh, I'll punt.

E-Ring
This was promoted as "The West Wing" in the Pentagon; and it is. Unfortunately, it is late season West Wing without Aaron Sorkin's snappy dialog or meaningful discussion of real issues. I may give it another try just to be sure it isn't heading someplace interesting; but I doubt this is a keeper.

Kitchen Confidential
After having seen Tony Bourdain (on whose book this is based) over the summer on the travel channel's show "No Reservations", this fictionalized version is downright boring. There are some good jokes; but just as many that rely on shock value as opposed to real humor. Punt.

My Name is Earl
I commented in an earlier post that every show needs someone who is likeable, or at least unlikable in an interesting way. This comedy manages to deliver both in the same person. Earl is clueless, dishonest, redneck who is trying to turn his life around. He and his friends by nature fall into the "unlikable in an interesting way" category; but then Earl really wants to change which gives him moments of likeability. All that provides a wonderful context for humor which isn't the same old situation comedy stuff we have seen many times before. This is definitely a keeper.

Commander in Chief
The vice president (who was added to the ticket as a "stunt" to get votes) becomes president; but no one wants her, including the dying president. The pilot was very nicely done. While not up to season 1 West Wing, the writing was good, with a balanced mix of drama and humor (mostly at the first husband's expense); and Geena Davis certainly has the skill to pull off this role. The supporting characters are rich with possibilities. I definitely want to see where they plan to take this.

Posted by Steven at 08:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

September 17, 2005

Fall TV Season 2005, part 1

Well, it's that time of the year when I watch the first episodes of a lot of shows, the second episodes of a few shows, the third of even fewer shows, and so on until I reach my small set of "keepers" for the season. While the premier season is still young, I currently have two shows which are still on my "I'm still watching" list.

First the losers:

Prison Break
I'm not sure how you make a series out of it; but the concept is great – a structural engineer who redesigned a prison gets himself sentenced to it as an inmate so he can stage a prison break to rescue his brother who is on death row. He goes into the prison with a "perfect plan" which does not survive contact with reality. Good idea, good drama. I watched two episodes before I punted on it.

The reason I gave up is that I found really didn't care if the prison break was a success or not – all of the characters were so flawed (including the hero and his brother) that I never got invested in the story.

Reunion
This was a long shot going in; but I wanted to give it a try just in case. The idea of each episode being flashbacks from a specific year that led to the events in the present was interesting (kind of like "24" with a longer timeframe). Unfortunately, it turned out to be just another primetime soap. Rich kids, poor kids, boo hoo.

I do believe that we are all the products of the some total of our pasts, and I think there is an opportunity out there for a really cool TV series out there to show that – to show some characters in the present and then show the events in their lives that made them that. "Jack and Bobby" tried to do that; but it didn't quite work. "Reunion" promised it; but didn't deliver. I still hope someone figures out how to make that work.

The War At Home
OK, I'm a sucker for the old "Breaking the fourth wall" gimmick; but if you are going to have your characters talk to the audience, please give them something worthwhile to say.

Now the (temporary) winners:

Bones
This is likely to devolve into just another police procedural drama; but I'm willing to give it a couple more tries because I find the characters interesting. I love the gender role reversal (the woman is a distant, detached, intellectual; and the man is involved, emotional, intuitive). I definitely got the sense from the pilot that these characters have depth and if they can use that to make an interesting show about the people, not just the cases, it might end up a keeper. Although one wonders – just how many cases a year are there that need the services of a forensic anthropologist?

Threshold
Yes Virginia, based on the final scene, I'd say we are definitely on page 42 of the manual (If you have seen the show that will make sense, and I suspect you'll agree).

Very interesting. While not the blow-me-away pilot that Lost gave us last year, this was certainly a pretty wild ride, and I think I like where it is taking us. Among the things I like:

- The characters are very real. They are scared. They are uncertain. They make mistakes. While they are good at what they do, they aren't unrealistically hyper-competent. OK, the linguist on the team needs more depth; but the rest of the characters acted a lot like real people with their credentials would under the circumstances.

- While you have several engineers and scientists as characters, no one pulled any "magic" solutions out of thin air to save the day. The one "invention" was shown as a completely unexpected result methodical trial and error investigation; and when they went to use it, it didn't even do quite what they expected. Again, this is much more what one would expect in reality.

- Likewise the bad guys didn't do anything particularly stupid; and to be fair, the ending makes clear they are very much winning.

My only concern is that the pilot tended to cross the line from drama to horror, and horror doesn't have a good track record on TV.

Posted by Steven at 08:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 14, 2005

The Prisoner

One of my Birthday presents this year (thanks Anne) was the boxed set of DVDs for the old British TV series "The Prisoner". I had wanted this for a long time; but the price was just high enough that I never got around to buying it for myself. Perfect present-fodder.

I remember watching the show many times (usually on the local public TV station). The first time (when I was rather young), I watched for the action and adventure and found many parts incomprehensible. As I grew older, I began to appreciate the show more and more as allegory and parts that didn't make sense before now did. I can now appreciate how subversive some of the episodes were in their day ("Free For All" is a rather nasty commentary on the political process).

Unfortunately, while more of it makes sense to me now than it once did, the final episode remains beyond my ken. OK, I do understand why number six is actually number one (and as many people have pointed out – they tell you that in every episode: "Who is number one?" "You are number Six"); but what happens after he discovers that still doesn't make any sense to me. Up until then I would say that the episode is about how every revolution becomes the next orthodoxy which (inevitably) will become the subject of the next revolution. Perhaps the point of the end is that the only way out of that cycle is pure chaos? I don't know – but now at least I can watch it as often as I want to see if I can finally "get it".

Posted by Steven at 09:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

August 06, 2005

Battlestar Galactica, Season 2

Most television is junk – pointless entertainment without wither philosophical or artistic virtue. Occasionally a show slips by the network executives that is actually intelligent and meaningful. Other times a show may slip by that is actually artfully conducted and a joy to watch. It is exceedingly rare that a show manages to get produced with is both meaningful and artistic, and virtually unheard of that such a show manages to last a season much less get renewed.

The new version of Battlestar Galactica on the SciFi channel is a show that has beaten those odds.

This is what good Science Fiction, no… good television is all about.

The show manages to dissect the human psyche and leave all of our virtues and vices splayed on the screen like some horrid vivisection demonstration. It is not pretty; but is truth. The characters are complex, with varying numbers of faults; but none without virtue either (Even Baltar – the closet traitor – has some vestige of humanity the shows on occasion). The questions raised about faith, government, the military, are all questions worth asking.

On top of that, the show is produced with a nearly cinematic quality, using techniques rarely seen on episodic television. The use of camera angles, motifs (such as the blood dripping on the floor that bracketed this past week's episodes), music, silence, all make the program a work of art that would be worth seeing even if the story was of lesser quality.

Finally, the show does not go for the simple answers, the neat endings. There are always multiple plot lines, and most are left hanging from episode to episode. Major characters are killed. Others are taken out of the action for several episodes. None of the "safe" assumptions that normally apply to American TV seem to apply here.

Oh, and they have not entirely forgotten the original series. While the story has diverged, key background elements keep showing up to tie the series together. This week, the man-on-man basketball-like game they used to play (and wager on) in the old series made an appearance. I'll be very interested to see what, if anything, they end up doing with "Count Iblis" in the new show.

Posted by Steven at 08:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Over There

I've watched the first two episodes of Bochco's "Over There" – a war series set in the current conflict in Iraq, and have still not made up my mind.

On the one hand, the characters are largely stereotypes and paper thin. I'm willing to accept that they might flesh out over time; but it would be nice if they had not been defined along such obvious lines to begin with.

On the other hand, it is one of the more realistic depictions of war that has ever been shown on a TV series. Things happen the way they really happen in war (I base that observation on my long interest in military history and on reading blogs by current soldiers in Iraq). It is brutal, it is senseless, it is chaotic; but it is not without honor and purpose.

My thumb is still wavering on this one; but I'll keep watching for now.

Posted by Steven at 08:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

July 17, 2005

TV Comes and TV Goes

The new season on the SciFi channel started Friday. Some quick takes:

Stargate SG-1
Changing of the guard – Richard dean Anderson is leaving the series, causing a shuffle of characters and roles, with Ben Browder and Claudia Black (who previously starred together on SciFi's Farscape) and Beau Bridges being added to the cast. The previous season ended with our heroes finally defeating the Gua'uld (the primary recurring villain of the series), so this is their chance to really start the whole series over while keeping the very rich mythology they have created. I'm going to watched the first 5-6 episode then make a call if they have brought new time to the series or not. I have to say, I love seeing Browder and Black together again, and the fact that they have essentially changed roles (this time he's the straight arrow military type and she's the wild one) is fun to watch.

Stargate Atlantis
Looks like more of the same here. While I love Stargate SG-1, Atlantis always seemed superfluous to me. Spin-off series work if they allow the writers to explore new ground; but I don't really see what new doors this series opened up for drama. I suspect this will get dropped off my list soon.

Battlestar Galactica
Wow. Let me say that again. Wow. This new "re-imagined" series is everything good science fiction is supposed to be. Complex characters, complex plots, mysteries, moral dilemmas. The new season doesn't take the easy path of putting every back together again after last season's finale, and continues to provide the characters with challenges.

On the flip side, word is that "The Inside" will not be continued, and that in fact not all of the filmed episodes will air. This is a dark cop drama that I still haven't made my mind up on. The characters are so complex, I'm still trying to form an opinion on the show. Well, there's always DVDs.

Posted by Steven at 07:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

July 11, 2005

Guns, Germs and Steel

Late notice; but starting tonight on PBS, there is a 3 part series based on Jared Diamond's controversial Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Guns, Germs and Steel". The book is an attempt to answer the question posed to Diamond by a Papua New Guinea villager: why is it that it is the Europeans who have come to New Guinea in their airplanes and culture and not the other way around? Diamond's answers are quite interesting, and probably not what you expect.

Posted by Steven at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

July 02, 2005

30 Days

Last year Morgan Spurlock released his documentary "Supersize Me" in which he ate nothing but MacDonald's food for 30 days while monitoring the effects it had on his health (I'll give you a hint – it wasn't good). The movie was excellent, exploring a multitude of issues related to America's fast food culture without resorting to "ambush journalism" as perfected by a certain other filmmaker.

"Supersize Me" was nominated for an academy award, but lost to a film by that other guy. However Spurlock's success did appear to get him the attention of folks at the FX network, and he's been given a chance to produce five, one hour documentaries as a series entitled "30 days". So far 3 episodes have aired (although FX is repeating them, so it may in fact be possible to see them all of them again by the end of the summer).

The idea of 30 Days is for people to spend 30 days walking in someone else's shoes. The first episode was Spurlock and his longsuffering fiancée Alex to live for 30 days on minimum wage in Columbus Ohio (an average American city). The episode showed (as opposed to talked about) the issues faced by the working poor. It was a wonderful piece of documentary art.

The second episode was about someone who went on an anti-aging regime promoted by certain doctors – taking steroids, human growth hormone, vitamins, etc. all to turn back the clock and make his body "younger". Frankly, I found this to be a weaker episode, although I think the side effects he experienced were enough to scare any guy off the program.

This week's episode was about a devout and active Christian who knew almost nothing about Islam living for 30 days as a Muslim man in Dearborn, MI. It was enlightening both in terms of what it showed about everyday Islam and also about how this guy dealt with his own faith while trying to respect the community he was temporarily a part of. It was all handled with a lot of respect for all parties.

Next week appears to be about another devout Christian who shares an apartment with a gay man for 30 days in San Francisco's Castro District (the heart of the local homosexual community.

If you like good documentaries, and want to have some idea how other people live, I strongly recommend the series.

Posted by Steven at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 16, 2005

The Inside

This is a very dark psychological thriller wrapped inside a police drama. I like the mission statement that Tim Minear (the producer of the show) set out on the show's official web site:

This is a show about damaged people – the only interesting kind there is – and about how their damage sometimes makes them especially suited to the work they do. Our heroes are FBI agents who investigate serial crimes, and each episode contains interesting surprised as the theory of the case evolves; but I've made every attempt to keep the stories clean and simple, so that the focus stays on the characters.

In brief, the show is about the FBI's Los Angeles Violent Crimes Unit, run by Supervisory Special Agent Virgil "Web" Webster. Special Agent Webster has been given him a great deal of leeway from the FBI in how he runs his team because of his track record of success. He has assembled a hand picked team of agents, and then uses them (in the worst possible sense of the word "use") to solve cases. There was something familiar in how Webster manipulated his staff that it took me a while to place – the character of the Director, Eli Cross (played by Peter O'Toole) in the 1980 movie "The Stunt Man". If you have seen that movie, imagine Eli cross running an FBI office and dealing in violent crimes instead of making a movie and you have some idea of what "The Inside" is like.

Webster's latest recruit to the team (replacing a woman who committed suicide as a part of solving a case for Webster) is Special Agent Rebecca Locke, who as a child was abducted and held for 18 months before she escaped on her own. Her childhood experience has left her psychologically scarred, and she was denied entry to the FBI's elite "profiler" program after failing the psych exam; but Webster hired her to become his teams new profiler, counting on her baggage to actually help the team (and, perhaps, to make her easier for him to manipulate).

Have I made it clear that Webster is not a very nice guy? A couple quotes:

Webster: [woman is being held hostage by Simon] "Simon Gunther!" [Simon turns around, and Web shoots him] "Let her go! Damn, I got it backwards!"

and

Webster: "Our pasts are what we are made of."
Paul Ryan: "So what are you made of? What's your past?"
Webster: "Good night, Special Agent Ryan" [walks away]

Posted by Steven at 02:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 08, 2005

Late warning of possible good show!

The pilot episode of "The Inside" airs tonight on Fox. I have (obviously) not seen it yet; but have 2 reasons to believe that it might be worth watching:

1. It is being produced by Tim Minear, and written by Tim, Jane Espenson, David Fury, and Ben Edlund. Which is in my opinion about as good a collection of DNA for a show as you can get.
2. Harry Knowles (of Ain't It Cool News) has seen four episodes and raves about the show; and I have tended to agree with Harry a good 80% of the time.

While at the top level the show is a crime drama, apparently it is really about how working in the FBI's Los Angeles Violent Crimes Unit affects the new (female) investigator. Will exposure to all the darkness change her?

Posted by Steven at 09:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 07, 2005

Season Finales

I know it’s a bit late (this is a posting that was back-burnered for a while); but here's my $0.02 on the various season finales of the TV shows I watch.

Lost
See separate post. It wasn't what I was looking for; but it definitely keeps me interested.

Grey's Anatomy
Solid episode. The surprise at the end didn't do much for me (the various characters' love lives are not the focus of the show for me). I certainly plan to continue watching this next season.

Desperate Housewives
Exactly what they needed. They finished off one main plot, added some new questions, and provided a cliffhanger for next season.

House
Not much of a season finale – more like "yet another episode". I still like the character a lot; but if time gets short this may fall of the end of my list.

Medium
Didn't see that coming. I'll definitely watch the first episode next season to complete the cliff hanger; but this is another show that will likely fall off my list if time runs short in the fall. I have a feeling that this show has already said everything it has to say.

Alias
OK, I'll admit that last 10 seconds made me jump. Unfortunately, I suspect it is just another case of pulling a rabbit out of hat – entertaining but meaningless. Unless there is very good press next season, Alias is off my list.

Posted by Steven at 11:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

June 02, 2005

4400, Season 2

Back in 2004, USA network aired a mini-series over the summer called "The 4400". This coming Sunday (June 5, 2005) a second season of the show will air, and I plan to watch it.

The 4400 was an interesting and entertaining SciFi series that dealt intelligently with the real-world consequences of its premise. The idea was that over the last century 4400 people had quietly disappeared. Then suddenly an object in space is tracked approaching Earth. The huge glowing sphere lands on a lake in Washington State, and promptly disappears, leaving the 4400 people behind. The US government assigns the Department of Homeland Security to handle the situation. Eventually they are released and allowed to at least try and reintegrate themselves into society.

The problem however is it quickly becomes apparent that "the returnees" (as they are officially called, "the 4400" being their news media nickname) have been changed – each seems to have a unique ability they have gained while they are away, and the government (and society) is at a loss for how to deal with them. What we learn by the end of the first series is that they have been sent by people in the future to fix key events so that a horrible fate can be avoided. Each was chosen an empowered to have a very specific effect to bring about a desirable future.

As an example of why I liked the original series – one character is an African-American who served as a soldier in WWII, before the civil rights movement. He has a real problem adjusting to modern society where he seems to be the only person who cares about his skin color. That changes when the public starts to get nervous around the 4400 and they become a persecuted minority. Suddenly the African-American character is back in a situation he understands.

Of course, the second series could not live up to the original; but I'm definitely going to give it a shot. The original series is available on DVDs for purchase or rental.

Posted by Steven at 10:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 26, 2005

"Dude, you've got some Arzt on you"

Watched the season finale of Lost last night. As usual, Hurley gets all of the best lines (see title of this post). In general - entertaining episode.

My original feeling was that they really needed to provide an answer to at least one of the questions pending on the show, while adding a few more for next season (see the season finale for "Desperate Housewives" for what I was expecting). They took a different route - providing additional information on each question, but not really answering any of them, and then leaving big cliffhangers for next season. I'm not sure I'm quite satisfied; but I am certainly planning to watch next season.

Warning - spoilers follow. Don't read further unless you have seen the show.




The Hatch
Well, they have it open, it goes _way_ down, and the ladder is broken. While that plot has certainly moved ahead, I don't think we really know anything more than we did.

Danielle Russo (the French woman)
I don't think she was the one who kidnapped Claire to begin with (that was Ethan and The Others as originally presented). My guess is that she actually helped Claire escape from The Others; but then wanted Claire to stay with her instead of returning to our gang, and that was when Claire scratched Danielle. Danielle's plan all along was to keep Claire away from The Others so that Danielle could offer the baby in trade for her Alex.

The Others
I think The Others believe for some reason ("the island" told them?) that a child will save them. That's why they kidnapped Alex (Danielle's child) long ago, why they kidnapped Claire, and why they have now kidnapped Walt. I think Walt (being "special") is the one they are looking for.

Jin, Sawyer, & Michael
Their fate is definitely left undetermined at the end of the episode. My guess - Jin and Michael end up washing ashore clinging to wreckage of the raft at the start of next season. Sawyer is MIA (perhaps seen in flashbacks, so the actor gets paid); but we later discover that he was not shot (as it appears); but rather he shot the light out and deliberately dove in the water, and ended up clinging to The Others' boat to rescue Walt. I say that in part because of the conversation earlier in the episode about if Sawyer "is a hero or just wants to kill himself". My guess is a little of both and my theory above accomplishes that.

The "Monster"
Well, what we saw was certainly not what I expected. I think we have a whole lot more data now about The Monster (a.k.a. the island's "security system"); but no clearer idea of what exactly it is. Yes, that was a face (actually 2 faces I think) in the black cloud. The trees were not being knocked down; but blown up out of the ground. The Monster lives underground.

Also, there was something someone said after the pilot that I originally discounted; but went back and checked for myself and it turns out to be true. Look at the scene at about 5 minutes into the first episode. The guy gets sucked into the airplane engine, and then we get a shot from another angle of the engine blowing up. In the reverse angle shot, just before it blows up you can see two dark objects fly by the engine on non-ballistic (i.e. controlled) trajectories. One swoops down from above and then flies up, and another approaches the engine from the right and then flies away. The movement is definitely not debris flowing Newton's law of motion - it changes in direction in ways that imply powered flight.

Bottom line
I'm still waiting to see of JJ Abrams knows where this is headed or not. Nothing in the finale made me think he is making all this up as he goes along; but there was also no great revelation that made it clear that this is well planned. I'm still hanging on; but there better be a sign soon that this is all going to pay off.

Posted by Steven at 05:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 19, 2005

Fall TV 2005, Part 2

Here's my $0.02 on some of the new shows:

"E-Ring" – Drama about the inner workings of the Pentagon, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer. This has been getting a lot of advance buzz about the quality of the writing. Plus it stars Benjamin Bratt and Dennis Hopper. This is near the top of my list of shows to try.

"Commander in Chief" – Dramedy about the first female President. Co-produced by the guys behind the series "Century city" (which I liked) and the outstanding move "The Contender". I'd be more optimistic if they were promoting it as a Drama (with humorous moments like West Wing) as opposed to a Drama-Comedy.

"Invasion" – the aliens are already here, being hidden by a conspiracy in a coastal town. While I almost always give new sci-fi at least a one episode try, the only reason I am even slightly optimistic about this one is that Tommy Schlamme (West Wing, Sports Night, Ally McBeal, Boston Public) is involved. If he thinks this is worth his time, perhaps it is.

"Threshold" – alien spaceship is found in the ocean and a team of experts is recruited to make first contact. This is actually getting some good buzz on dealing with real-world issues.

"Fathom" – strange new life forms start showing up in the oceans. What are they and where do they come from? Are they terrestrial or alien? Yet another series to mix aliens and oceans. It'll get my 1 episode; but I'm not optimistic.

"Kitchen Confidential" – a fictional sitcom loosely based on Anthony Bourdain. I liked Bourdain's non-fiction book about being a chef in New York, and it certainly had funny parts. I will give this a try, although sitcoms rarely stay on my watch list.

"Prison Break" – An engineer whose brother is wrongly imprisoned tries to break him out. Has my attention simply because it’s a novel idea for a show, and those are rare. Have no idea how they could keep this going for very long.

"Reunion" – A 20th high school reunion provides the frame for a series composed mostly of flashbacks about how a group of friends evolved as adults. The idea provides some real possibilities (but I thought the same thing about "Jack and Bobby"). The producer (Jon Harmon) has done some good work before (Tru Calling, American Dreams).

Posted by Steven at 04:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Fall TV 2005, Part 1

The new Fall TV schedules from the main networks have come out, and I thought I'd comment

The dearly departed:

"Eyes" - It fell of my list after a few episodes, but I always thought it was good as pure entertainment. Actually surprised this wasn't a keeper as it seemed to have the kind of profile the networks look for.

"Joan of Arcadia" - I liked the start of the first season a lot – the way they presented God in the first few episodes matched my own experience fairly well (minus the little girl in deeley-boppers). By midseason it started to diverge, and in season 2 what they presented as god was unrecognizable to me.

"Jack and Bobby"- It fell off my list a while ago; but I had so hoped it would succeed. It was, at least, a new approach for a show. Too bad they made the characters themselves so boring.

"Tru Calling" – Dead mid-season; but I'll miss it. They managed to keep coming up with variations on the basic story to keep it interesting. Still, I decided not to pick up season DVDs, so it wasn't that good.

"Enterprise" – At its best it did fulfill the promise of giving us the back-story behind the well known franchise (just how did the federation start?). At its worst, it was drivel; but then again, what Star Trek series can you not say that of.

Staying:
ABC maintains control of my remote with Lost, Desperate Housewives, and Grey's Anatomy. West Wing moves to Sunday. My guess with a new president coming in, they want to move it out of the way of the "Lost" juggernaut. Medium and House are back.

I'll post some comments on the new shows later.

Posted by Steven at 02:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 30, 2005

Comments on Other Shows

Alias

This continues to slide in my book. The first, and to a lesser extent the second season held me because there was a set of background mysteries on which to speculate. However after the 20th plot twist that sends things off in yet another new direction, it is getting increasingly clear that there are no real answers, and that any time spent thinking about this show is just wasted. This is now the last thing I tend to watch on my Tivo – often over a week after the episode aired. This also does not bode well for Lost (written by the same folks); but we'll see what kind of payoff they provide on Lost at the end of the season.

Medium

The focus of this show is really how a normal, average person handles discovering that they are not normal or average and how that affects their life. The main character, a housewife named Allison Dubois, starts having visions and dreams which prove to be accurate. The show is about how she deals with that and starts to learn the "rules" of her abilities (there is no instruction book, so she needs to figure out the significance of things on her own), all while trying to not neglect her roles as wife and mother (and not being sent to a psychiatric ward). Her family life is as important a part of her story as are her visions. The portrayal of a "real" family – not often seen on TV – keeps me coming back for now, although I am not sure there are many episodes worth of stuff to say here, so fear it will decline quickly.

Posted by Steven at 08:14 PM | Permalink

One Up and One So-So

Several new shows started very near the end of the TV season, two of which I though were worth looking at. I've now seen enough of them to form an opinion:

Grey's Anatomy

This is definitely a keeper – particularly after last week's fugue on the subject of responsibility (several sub-stories on the subject of taking or being responsible). Well written, well acted, relevant things to say in an entertaining package. Still looking to see some of the minor character fleshed out a bit more; but the overall quality of the writing is going to keep me coming back.

Eyes

A very entertaining show; but that's all. This is a private investigator show from the other end of the spectrum than The Rockford Files – a large detective agency, lots of gadgets, lots of staff, often dealing in "big fish" clients. The characters are interesting and well acted. The head of the agency, Harlan Jud, reminds of a hero from a Zalazny novel – someone so confident in his own ability (and in this case, the ability of his team), that he is relaxed and jokes around regardless of what is happening. Jeff McCann plays an investigator so good a lying that it isn't really clear if he even knows when he's telling the truth (certainly no one else is). The "problem" is that while I find this show very entertaining to watch, is really has nothing to say beyond the pure entertainment. There are no deeper truths. There is no extended mystery to think about. It is just high quality entertainment, which means I have a hard time making time for it in my schedule.

Posted by Steven at 08:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 24, 2005

26 hours of "Lost"

I've noted before that it is rare for shows that I enjoy to also be commercial successes, supported by the networks. "Lost" however is a quite impressive exception. The degree to which the network is supporting the show is astounding.

For the last couple of decades, a standard season of an American network drama has been 22 episodes. The networks have all come to the conclusion that this is the sweet-spot – the point where risk and reward balance to maximize the likelihood of profit over all. Of course most shows don't make it that far; but having more than 22 episodes is unheard of.

There was one exception – the series "24", which by virtue of the structure of the show (a season covered the events in one day, where each episode represented one hour of real time) was allowed to have 24 episodes.

And now there is Lost. The network originally planned on a 22 episode season. Then midway through, they ordered 2 more episodes. Then, as it turned out, the final episode (number 24) was running long, and rather than force them to cut it, the network agreed to allow the final episode to run 2 hours as long as it could be split into 2 1-hour shows in re-runs and syndication (making, effectively, 25 episodes). And finally, the network ordered an addition 1 hour show to summarize the whole season to date before the last 5 episodes aired (so those that started watching the show late could get caught up). So, all total, ABC will air 26 hours of Lost this season. I think you have to go back to the early 70's to find a series that had a 26 episode season. ABC at least is convinced they have a winner here.

By the way, if you haven't been watching and are intrigued, ABC is showing "Lost: The Journey" (the catch-up special) this Wednesday, April 27.

Posted by Steven at 10:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 21, 2005

Playing Diogenes

This is really a reply to Roland's comment on my "Finding Serenity" post. When I finished writing this I realized it was an essay in its own right, and since I didn't have any other post today I decided to post it at the top level (hey, it's my blog!)

I sympathize with your not wanting to "deal with the pervasive fluff of the medium". My problem is that I still believe that there are important things to say which are best said in metaphor and myth, and am willing to spend my time wandering the wasteland looking for them. Books can do this; but I have to say only one author (Orson Scott Card) has ever managed to reach me emotionally to the point that I cried while reading a book (and he has done it a few times!), while performed media has been more successful at engaging me emotionally (for any emotion). So I continue to look.

That being said, there is no doubt in anyone's mind (TV writers, network executives, and least of all me) that I am not the target audience for TV programming. My interests are too far out on the bell curve to bother programming for me. This is further demonstrated by the fact that most of the shows I have loved of late (Firefly, Wonderfalls, etc.) rarely last a whole season, and are certainly not renewed for a second one. Shows that I like and are also a popular success (like Lost) are rare.

On the other hand, I am convinced (in part because I have talked with some of them) that there are TV writers who very much want to write the kinds of shows I want to watch. So what are they to do? A few have discovered one imperfect solution – develop shows whose obvious characteristics pander to the wide audience; but put into those shows subtext which is deep and meaningful. The problem is – the subtext quite often takes longer than one episode to play out; but the net effect is when your typical consumer tunes in and watches a single episode, they get what they want and come back for more. However, if you stick around and watch several shows, you start to realize there is more to the show than the mass market content. Only a few shows do this, and you have to make an investment to find the shows that do.

As a concrete example. I tried "Buffy" a couple of times in the first few seasons and decided it was teen-age fluff and ignored it. A couple years later I was home one day doing some mindless task that was going to take all day and the "only thing on" was a Buffy marathon, so I left it running while I was doing whatever. What I discovered watching several episodes in a row was that there was some real substance behind the fluff if you looked beyond the individual episodes. I rented (and later purchased) the season DVDs and was amazed at what Joss managed to deal with in the show, while at the same time providing enough TV-14 content (V, S, D) to attract the mass market.

So I continue to wander the channels looking for an honest TV show – one that tells the truth of the human condition.

Posted by Steven at 02:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

April 12, 2005

Carnivale

WOW!

I watched season 1 of HBO’s dramatic series “Carnivale” on DVD, and am quite impressed. Conventional wisdom is that the theatre is an actor’s medium, movies are a director’s medium, and TV is a writers medium. HBO however has consistently blurred the line between TV and movies, producing shows that are both well written and well directed. Carnivale is no exception.

The basic fabric of the show is the story of a traveling carnival in 1934 (depression era) America. It is a fascinating (and not entirely flattering) depiction of what went on behind the scenes of such shows in those tough times. Even ignoring the larger story (see below), the characters are complex, interesting, and their interplay would have made for a good drama in its own right.

But Carnivale does not stop there. It then embroiders into that fabric a story of ancient conflict between good an evil, infused with magic, moral quandaries, and uncertainty as to who is on what side. Actually by the end of the 1st season, there is only one character whose affiliation you are absolutely certain of. The performances of the major players give a deep sense of meaning and portent to the events which has only begun to become clear by the end of the season.

A couple of warnings: First, there is some amount of nudity in the series. In particular, the carnival includes (as did most historical carnivals of that era) a “cooch” show (basically under-dressed women dancing). While I never felt it was done in a gratuitous manner, if the depiction of nudity is a problem for you, stay away. Second, while this was a TV series, each episode definitely builds on other previous ones, so I strongly encourage you to not start in the middle or you will cheat yourself out of the sequence of emotions the whole show is designed to lead you through.

Posted by Steven at 03:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 07, 2005

Grey's Anatomy

"Grey's Anatomy" is a new series Sunday Night on ABC (first episode aired March 27). It is too soon for me to declare this one "a keeper" (one I will continue to watch); but I am at this point hopeful. It is the story of a group of first year surgical interns and their teachers. However unlike most medical dramas, the medicine (illnesses and treatments) is almost pure background with very little air time devoted to actually talking about what is wrong with patients and what the doctors are doing to help. The focus of the show is on the people, how they interact with each other, and how they are affected by their work. You could almost transplant the same stories into a high pressure advertising agency and it would work.

The writing so far has been solid, as has the direction, with good use of music and silence. The main character (Meredith Grey – hence the name of the show) is a well rounded character with a lot of nuance, well acted by Ellen Pompeo. She also provides thematic narration for the episodes (episode 2 was about “boundaries” – between co-workers, between doctors and patients, etc.). Unfortunately, most of the other characters are a bit thin – defined by a couple of character traits and (so far at least) little more. If they can develop some of the other characters better without loosing what is already working, "Grey's Anatomy" will make it onto my regular viewing list.

Posted by Steven at 11:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 01, 2005

Battlestar Galactica

For those who are unaware, there is a new "re imagined" version of Battlestar Galactica in production, and its first season ended tonight. The original "Galactica had some original ideas; but suffered significantly from being targeted at young people (the idea that adults might be interested in SciFi, while starting to gain acceptance now was unheard of back then).

The new Battlestar Galactica is a very different matter. It is dark, gritty, and full of adult themes. The basic idea is the same with one major twist – the Cylons (the robotic villains of the old series) have mastered biotechnology, and have in fact created lines of artificial humans which are virtually indistinguishable from the real thing (in addition to the more classic robots). By giving the Cylons a voice and a pretty face (literally in many cases), the show is able to explore issues of what it means to be human and to open the door to actually sympathizing with them (well, as much sympathy as one can muster for creatures responsible for genocide). The moral issues presented are complex for both the humans and Cylons.

The series is arc-structured, with many parallel story lines being played out over multiple episodes. One intriguing arc is that the Cylons are devoutly monotheistic, and it is their belief in one true god that appears to drive their actions. From context, it does not appear that this god is some kind of master computer program; but is in fact a god in the usual meaning of that word. This is in contrast to the human colonists who are presented as being polytheist – believing (to varying degrees) in what appears to be the Greek pantheon of gods.

Posted by Steven at 10:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 31, 2005

Lost, Episode 1.19, "Deus Ex Machina”

(Warning - this posting contains SPOILERS for those who have not yet seen the episode)

Episode 1.19 was a good episode if not entirely satisfying. The island plot was about Locke and Boone’s continued attempts to get the hatch they found buried in the jungle open, with Boone coming to realize that Locke believes “The Island” is telling him what to do. The flashback was part 2 of Locke’s backstory. I had hoped we’d discovery more about Locke’s paralysis; but instead we find out that he was raised by foster parent and then conned by his biological father (with his schizophrenic biological mother’s help).

Unlike many of the episodes, the common theme of the two stories isn’t clear to me. I see two possibilities. It could be that we are supposed to see parallels between Locke’s father manipulating him and the harm it caused Locke, and the way Locke is now manipulating Boone and that harm that comes to him. Or we are supposed to see that despite his apparent resolve, Locke is easily manipulated, first by his father and now by “the island”. Neither is particularly satisfying for me.

On the hidden connections front, we may now have two connections between Locke and Hurley. Not only does Locke work at a box factory that is one of Hurley’s many holdings (I am certain of that); but I also believe Locke’s mother was hospitalized at the same mental institution with which Hurley has some association (patient or employee has not been made clear)

Finally, I don’t know how much to trust closed captioning (I believe it is done by a separate service not associated with the writers of the show); but when Boone says into the radio “We are the survivors of flight 815”, I thought I heard the reply as “You are the survivors of flight 815?” as if to confirm; but the closed captioning read “There were no survivors of flight 815.” (If accurate, that gives support to those who think everyone is actually dead and the island is a kind of purgatory where these people are working out their unresolved issue from life).

Posted by Steven at 01:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Lost

I am a big fan of this show (for now), and expect to post comments on each episode. My concern is if this is really leading someplace or if the writers are just making it all up as they go along. For now I am assuming the JJ Abrams knows what is really happening; but I will probably drop the show quickly if that trust is ever betrayed.

For those who have not seen the show, a commercial jet crashes on a topical island on the way from Australia to America, with 40+ survivors. Very strange things start to happen which lead one to believe that there is more going on than a simple castaway story. Every episode is split between 2 days of action on the island itself (each episode picks up the day after the previous one), and flashbacks of one of the survivor’s stories before they boarded the doomed plane. The backstories are usually relevant to what is happening on this island and tell us a lot about who the characters are. They also often include hidden connections between the survivors if you watch closely.

The show often reminds me of Thornton Wilder’s “The Bridge of San Luis Rey”. In that novel (which won the Pulitzer Prize) a bridge in Peru collapses killing 5 people. A Friar who witnessed the accident spends then next few years of his life investigating the lives of those who died to understand what led them to be on the bridge at that moment and (he hopes) answer the question of why they died. As the book says “Either we live by accident and die by accident, or we live by plan and die by plan” (A point also made by M. Night Shyamalan’s excellent movie, “Signs”). While it remains a mystery what the island actually is (purgatory? a mind control laboratory? a government experiment out of control?), the show is as much about why these specific people are there as it is about what is happening to them because they are.

Posted by Steven at 01:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 28, 2005

Defending “Desperate Housewives”

OK, I’ll admit it. I love this tawdry little show. It’s one of those things I am hesitant to admit; but I think I understand why.

The reason is similar to an observation I made about the movie Titanic (the successful 1997 James Cameron version). I claim that if you took out the “present day” parts of that film, it would have just been yet another overwrought romantic period piece. What in my opinion elevated that movie above the mundane was the small amount of seasoning which the present day scenes provided. I claim that what those brief scenes add is a context which made the main story more meaningful by saying the events had consequences. One of the things which transforms “fiction” into “literature” is that the story changes the characters. To make that happen in a story as brief as the sinking of the Titanic is quite a challenge; but by showing Rose as an old woman they were able to establish character growth and elevate the whole story.

I believe in a similar way, the short periods of narration in “Desperate Housewives” often (but unfortunately not always) serve to give meaning to the show which elevates it above the main content of the story; which often seems to be as salacious as ABC Standards and Practices Department will allow. Having Mary Alice (being dead, and therefore a “neutral” observer) comment on the meaning of events may be a brute force solution (one might think that a better writer could express such meaning without having to come out and say it); but it worked for Aesop and it works now. There have been a few times where I have been nonplussed by a particular episode until the final moments when Mary Alice makes an observation that ties it all together and leaves me thinking about whether I agree. Getting me to think about an episode after it ends is the surest way to get me hooked on a show.

Unfortunately, as we reach the end of the season, there have been an increasing number of episodes which don’t seem to try and say anything significant about humanity, life, whatever – where the narration is used only to move the story along and not to comment on the meaning of the action. I hope this trend doesn’t hold.

Posted by Steven at 07:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)