By request: Fall TV report, Part I

[trinityofone]

Okay, I suppose I should start by saying that I generally think that pilots are not very good. For shows I really love, even: they tend to be stiff, packing too much exposition; they haven’t really found themselves yet. So everything I say in here has to be taken with the general knowledge that pilotitis exists, and further, that I know it exists. But I can only judge based on what I’ve seen, and what I’ve seen is pilots.

So far, these pilots:

Heroes

I am not enthusiastic about this one, to be honest. Almost nothing happened, and while I appreciate and very much like taking the time for character development, I don’t think we needed scene after scene to tell us the same exact things, over and over. Indian Guy has daddy issues! Guy from Gilmore Girls has brother issues! Japanese Guy (who was Franklyn in Scrubs, BTW, and was my favorite part of this so far) is a ginormous dork! Thank you, I got it the first twelve times you told me.

Also—and here’s something I don’t normally say—I was really bothered by the female characters in this. The first one we’re introduced to, Niki, is a woman who strips for a living and is having problems with loan sharks; think Vivica A. Fox in Independence Day, except paler, both in complexion and force of personality. We meet her as she’s slowly pulling off her top for the benefit of a video camera. The other main female character is also introduced as she’s being filmed, and while I get that this is a transitioning device meant to link them together, I immediately flashed back to my freshman film course and all that talk about the “male gaze” and the objectification of women. At the time, I thought it was mostly pretty stupid, but I really felt what Linda Williams et. al. were getting at, watching this show. The two main female characters are a stripper and a cheerleader. The men are academics, nurses, politicians, artists… This pisses me off.

But you know, I’d be willing to let it slide (for NOW) if something interesting actually happened. Maybe eventually it will. But not in hour one. And I’m still waiting for Greg Grunberg to show up.

Also, guys? The everyone-is-connected-in-some-vague-way thing is so VERY Lost. Thanks.

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

You don’t know how much I really, REALLY want to like this show. Matthew Perry was my favorite part of Friends, Bradley Whitford was my favorite part of The West Wing, and I had to spend a large portion of my day yesterday staring at large, high res photos of the two of them gazing at each other lovingly. So I WANT to like it. And I know that Aaron Sorkin is capable of delivering the goods.

But the pilot was limp, man. It showed signs of classic pilotitis: waaaaaaaay too much exposition, and just general slowness and stiffness. And yet, I still don’t feel that I have a very good idea who anyone is. All of the characters felt really flat to me. Bradley Whitford has some sort of drug problem, and Matthew Perry has foot-in-mouth problems; Amanda Peet is too good to be true (and is really rather creepy, IMO), Steven Weber is a dick, and Sarah Paulson (who, if she’s likewise creeping you out by being really, really familiar looking, was briefly in Serenity, as well as The Other Sister with—score!—Joe Flanigan) is like a BIG Christian, omg. But these are just labels; I got no sense—at all—of who these people are. I didn’t even really sense why Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford like each other, aside from, you know, why wouldn’t they like each other? But if they’re supposed to be best buds and work partners who touch each other’s necks in an ALARMINGLY non-heterosexual manner, can we get a little sense of their history, please?

And yeah, I know. It’s just the pilot. But it felt so slow. Where was that Sorkin snap?

Unlike Heroes, however, which I still haven’t made up my mind about, this I am definitely giving another shot come fall. It’s Perry! Whitford! Sorkin! How can I not?

Ugly Betty

ABC can’t seem to decide whether this show is called Betty the Ugly or Ugly Betty, but the latest release says Ugly Betty so I’m switching back to that. I was pleasantly surprised by this one. The publicity materials are just awful: lots of photos of America Ferrera, who is gorgeous if not of the typical anorexic Hollywood body type (her first film was Real Women Have Curves), wearing bad glasses and bad clothes and huge braces, while her hair of course is perfect and more lustrous than mine has ever been, EVER. I feared the She’s All That (which we’re all going to pretend I didn’t actually see) gimmick of a beautiful girl who nobody knows is beautiful because she wears glasses! And overalls! And her hair’s in a ponytail! And then omg gasp, she really IS pretty, after all!

Well, the bad glasses, the bad clothes, and the seriously painful-looking braces are all present in the show, but it’s less bad when Ferrera is moving around and being a real person under them. And, I don’t know, the show is just fun. It’s based on a Columbian telenovela, and it’s kept a lot of the feel of one: everything’s a bit over the top, and there’s possibly a faked death and other wackiness. And. AND. I am a big sucker for the type of character who’s played in Ugly Betty by Eric Mabius (who was also in Eyes, which starred my cousin Tim Daly, who was also in Wings with Steven Weber [see Studio 60, above] and who has his own show coming out this fall, The Nine, and omg, the whole fall schedule is like a spinning vortex of Cousin Timmy!). Mabius plays Daniel Meade, the playboy son of a magazine magnet, and Betty’s new boss. And you just know that even though Daniel’s currently screwing models left and right, he is going to be charmed by Betty, and she’s going to help him be a better person, and they’re going to have a lot of awkward-surprised sexual tension, and when it’s done well, I LOVE that kind of story. I can’t imagine why. *awkwardly pushes own bad glasses up nose*

So anyway, this could be promising. It’s on Fridays at eight, though, so if SG-1 does get pushed back down, Betty may get the axe from my personal schedule. (Oh, man. I can’t believe I haven’t actually made a chart yet! Must get on that.)

Vanished

The only reason I care about this at all is that it has Gale Harold in it. I wants me some network telly Brian Kinney. And network telly apparently makes Brian Kinney an FBI agent named Graham. Graham has angst because he was involved in a hostage negotiation where a little kid got exploded and had his guts splattered all over Brian’s Graham’s shirt. Graham, however, doesn’t handle this by doing an interpretive dance with a scarf; instead he won’t talk to his priest and he’s kind of cranky with several people, including Ming-Na, who’s cute, and Rebecca Gayheart, who annoys me for no logical reason. But then, she’s supposed to be annoying in this show, so points there.

Anyway, the point is, some senator’s wife has gone missing—you could say she’s…VANISHED!—and it’s Graham’s job to track her down, along with Ming-Na and some other people who weren’t very memorable. Whatever. I have to admit that this really isn’t my kind of show. I may watch it again, just for the pretty (and Gale Harold is very, very pretty), but not if Mimi Leder doesn’t back away from the zoom, MY GOD MIMI, WE GET THAT THE CAMERA CAN MAKE ALL KINDS OF CRAZY MOTIONS AND GET REALLY REALLY CLOSE TO PEOPLE’S LIPS BUT STOP IT NOW BEFORE YOU DAMAGE SOMETHING, LIKE MY NECK. Yeesh.

Anyway, feel free to ask me any questions, and I’ll try to answer as best I can. Tonight I’m going to watch The Nine for Cousin Timmy, and probably some other things. Stay tuned!

Comments

[wychwood]

I feared the She’s All That (which we’re all going to pretend I didn’t actually see) gimmick of a beautiful girl who nobody knows is beautiful because she wears glasses! And overalls! And her hair’s in a ponytail! And then omg gasp, she really IS pretty, after all!

The only time I've really felt that that gimmick worked was in My Big Fat Greek Wedding, where the main character actually looks painfully plain until the makeover. *g*