Lost is back tonight and Martha Stewart gets her own Apprentice (not to mention Jerry Bruckheimer inflicts yet another new show on America – NBC’s E-Ring) but the one new show I’ve already seen is Invasion.
ABC’s promotions point out that TV Guide and USA Today call it the season’s best new drama. Fair enough. It’s an intriguing sci-fi mystery from executive producer Shaun Cassidy (who was responsible for the high-quality, short-lived horror/mystery American Gothic on CBS several years ago) but, at least initially, it leans a little too heavily on the mystery. It’s slow going in the show’s first half hour with very little action and very little cast charisma. Things perk up considerably when William Fichtner enters the scene as a creepy sheriff who acts so weird that he simply must be an alien (or is he?).
Many people grew frustrated with the way Lost played coy about its big mysteries throughout the first season but the show had already hooked a substantial fanbase thanks to that remarkable two-hour pilot and the twist-heavy exploration of its large ensemble that followed in subsequent weeks. I’m not quite sure Invasion will invite the same viewer generosity. Personally, I’m giving it a couple more weeks before I make up my mind.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Fall TV: My Name is Earl
One new show premieres tonight and it’s already a critical favorite. My Name is Earl on NBC is one of the oft cited "comedy saviors" of the new fall season. It’s not that great, but it’s not too bad either (a common refrain for this season’s best new offerings).
It’s another single-camera half-hour, not as quirky (or smart) as Arrested Development but unconventional in its characters and premise. Scientologist/Kevin Smith regular Jason Lee stars as a dirty, rotten white-trash good for nothing who has an epiphany that involves winning the lottery and Carson Daly that leads to a decision to right his past wrongs. It should give the show plenty of material for the weeks (maybe even months) to come.
The show’s biggest drawback isn’t even its own fault. NBC has scheduled it for Tuesdays at 9, following shrug-inducing reality series The Biggest Loser and leading into last season’s non-event The Office. It also puts the show in direct contention with Fox’s hot House and two shows that join the schedule next week: CBS’ reality darling The Amazing Race and ABC’s promising newcomer Commander-in-Chief. Sure, there’s no comedy in the hour but when the alternatives are that good who cares?
Supporting Lee are the recognizable but relatively unknown Jaime "if-it-wasn’t-for-white-trash-I’d-have-no-career" Pressly, Ethan Suplee, Eddie Steeples and Nadine Velazquez. The girls fare a little better than the boys but no one comes off too bad.
Really, you could do worse than watching an episode of My Name is Earl, just don’t forget that starting next week you’ll have plenty of other options.
It’s another single-camera half-hour, not as quirky (or smart) as Arrested Development but unconventional in its characters and premise. Scientologist/Kevin Smith regular Jason Lee stars as a dirty, rotten white-trash good for nothing who has an epiphany that involves winning the lottery and Carson Daly that leads to a decision to right his past wrongs. It should give the show plenty of material for the weeks (maybe even months) to come.
The show’s biggest drawback isn’t even its own fault. NBC has scheduled it for Tuesdays at 9, following shrug-inducing reality series The Biggest Loser and leading into last season’s non-event The Office. It also puts the show in direct contention with Fox’s hot House and two shows that join the schedule next week: CBS’ reality darling The Amazing Race and ABC’s promising newcomer Commander-in-Chief. Sure, there’s no comedy in the hour but when the alternatives are that good who cares?
Supporting Lee are the recognizable but relatively unknown Jaime "if-it-wasn’t-for-white-trash-I’d-have-no-career" Pressly, Ethan Suplee, Eddie Steeples and Nadine Velazquez. The girls fare a little better than the boys but no one comes off too bad.
Really, you could do worse than watching an episode of My Name is Earl, just don’t forget that starting next week you’ll have plenty of other options.
Monday, September 19, 2005
Emmy Blahs
Turns out the most prescient Emmy prediction I made this year was this: "[the voters] love to make lazy choices sprinkled with a few unexpected surprises." This year had plenty of lazy choices and even more unexpected surprises than usual. Too bad they were almost all bad.
A few words on the show itself: slow, dull, boring, lifeless. It got off to a perfectly awful start with a ridiculously self indulgent "Emmy memories" segment followed by one of the worst things I've EVER SEEN ON AN AWARDS SHOW - that brain-meltingly bad rendition of September by Earth Wind and Fire joined by the Black Eyed Peas with reworked lyrics that actually included a reference to Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. Ellen Degeneres perked things up with her usual reliable good humor but even her set felt sedate. Then there were the Emmy Idol performances, the mismatched presenters with godawful scripted banter (what did Lauren Graham ever do to deserve presenting with Jennifer Love Hewitt? the Emmys clearly hate her! and what did America ever do to deserve seeing Mischa Barton and Adrian Grenier on stage together?), the unforgivable misuse of Ellen for the rest of the show... that's even before we get to the winners.
Last night's selections are best summed up by Doris Roberts as outstanding supporting actress in a comedy series (her fourth win for Everybody Loves Raymond) and Patricia Arquette as outstanding lead actress in a drama series (Glenn Close will now never win an Emmy for The Shield, while Frances Conroy has one shot left at winning a statuette for five brilliant seasons as Six Feet Under's Ruth Fisher).
There were very few wins worth celebrating. Sure Felicity Huffman is a terrific actress but why single out the cast member with the weakest material on Desperate Housewives' first season? Just because she's more of a respectable "actress" than co-stars Teri Hatcher or Marcia Cross doesn't make her win any more satisfying, considering the material the other women had and made the most of.
And when television comedy deserves a swift kick in the ass why reward the stale format of Everybody Loves Raymond with another series win instead of the riskier, more dynamic Housewives or Arrested Development? Was it overcompensating for the sad fact Emmy voters didn't even acknowledge that Everybody Loves Raymond existed during its first two seasons? (Yes, that was the time for the show to win, not in 2005.)
Why Brad Garrett? Why Doris Roberts? Why Tony Shalhoub? Why James Spader and William Shatner two years running instead of Ian McShane and Terry O'Quinn just once? Why give the admittedly brilliant Daily Show two awards instead of giving the equally brilliant Ali G at least one? Why honor the atrocious script for The Life and Death of Peter Sellers instead of allowing one of TV's all-time greats, The Office, to win a single Emmy? Why? Why? Why?
At least Lost won, voters did their duty there. And Blythe Danner (even if C.C.H. Pounder deserved it more). And S. Epatha Merkerson. Danner and Merkerson even gave the best speeches (though Huffman's was nice too). Other bright spots of the night included Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien's bits as presenters (Stewart's reaction shot during the opening number was also priceless) and David Letterman's heartfelt tribute to Johnny Carson.
But as usual the Emmys have made it even harder on themselves for next year. By passing over so many of this year's greats they've got a lot of make-up awards to give, which will only leave next year's most deserving newcomers with unnecessary competition.
A few words on the show itself: slow, dull, boring, lifeless. It got off to a perfectly awful start with a ridiculously self indulgent "Emmy memories" segment followed by one of the worst things I've EVER SEEN ON AN AWARDS SHOW - that brain-meltingly bad rendition of September by Earth Wind and Fire joined by the Black Eyed Peas with reworked lyrics that actually included a reference to Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. Ellen Degeneres perked things up with her usual reliable good humor but even her set felt sedate. Then there were the Emmy Idol performances, the mismatched presenters with godawful scripted banter (what did Lauren Graham ever do to deserve presenting with Jennifer Love Hewitt? the Emmys clearly hate her! and what did America ever do to deserve seeing Mischa Barton and Adrian Grenier on stage together?), the unforgivable misuse of Ellen for the rest of the show... that's even before we get to the winners.
Last night's selections are best summed up by Doris Roberts as outstanding supporting actress in a comedy series (her fourth win for Everybody Loves Raymond) and Patricia Arquette as outstanding lead actress in a drama series (Glenn Close will now never win an Emmy for The Shield, while Frances Conroy has one shot left at winning a statuette for five brilliant seasons as Six Feet Under's Ruth Fisher).
There were very few wins worth celebrating. Sure Felicity Huffman is a terrific actress but why single out the cast member with the weakest material on Desperate Housewives' first season? Just because she's more of a respectable "actress" than co-stars Teri Hatcher or Marcia Cross doesn't make her win any more satisfying, considering the material the other women had and made the most of.
And when television comedy deserves a swift kick in the ass why reward the stale format of Everybody Loves Raymond with another series win instead of the riskier, more dynamic Housewives or Arrested Development? Was it overcompensating for the sad fact Emmy voters didn't even acknowledge that Everybody Loves Raymond existed during its first two seasons? (Yes, that was the time for the show to win, not in 2005.)
Why Brad Garrett? Why Doris Roberts? Why Tony Shalhoub? Why James Spader and William Shatner two years running instead of Ian McShane and Terry O'Quinn just once? Why give the admittedly brilliant Daily Show two awards instead of giving the equally brilliant Ali G at least one? Why honor the atrocious script for The Life and Death of Peter Sellers instead of allowing one of TV's all-time greats, The Office, to win a single Emmy? Why? Why? Why?
At least Lost won, voters did their duty there. And Blythe Danner (even if C.C.H. Pounder deserved it more). And S. Epatha Merkerson. Danner and Merkerson even gave the best speeches (though Huffman's was nice too). Other bright spots of the night included Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien's bits as presenters (Stewart's reaction shot during the opening number was also priceless) and David Letterman's heartfelt tribute to Johnny Carson.
But as usual the Emmys have made it even harder on themselves for next year. By passing over so many of this year's greats they've got a lot of make-up awards to give, which will only leave next year's most deserving newcomers with unnecessary competition.
Fall TV: Monday nights
I’ll deal with the atrocity of last night’s Emmy Awards later but first a few words on the new series debuting tonight.
Of course if you only watch one thing tonight it should be the third season premiere of Arrested Development. 8 o’clock. Fox. Be there. None of the season’s new shows (on any network, any night) are on this level.
Fortunately, the best of the night’s new shows, Kitchen Confidential, immediately follows on Fox. Alias alum Bradley Cooper stars in the single-camera half-hour comedy loosely based on the adventures of real life "rebel chef" Anthony Bourdain. The opening episode is a little too busy as it introduces a large ensemble cast which includes Buffy the Vampire Slayer’s Nicholas Brendon, Grosse Pointe’s Bonnie Somerville, Freaks and Geeks’ John Francis Daly, Sin City’s Jaime King and Owain Yeoman (apparently he was in Troy, I haven’t seen him before but he’s pretty funny), but as long as the show can make intelligent use of this cast in the weeks to come it should be worth watching (I’m a little disappointed that Harold and Kumar’s John Cho will only appear in the opening episode, his absence not only leaves the show down one talented actor but also with a lily-white cast). Pairing the unconventional and promising comedy with Development makes for a smart hour but one likely to be ratings-challenged. The comedy hour leads into Prison Break and three solid shows make Fox the night’s quality network, but most people will probably be watching CBS…
Raymond is gone (it will never again terrorize the Emmy Awards) but CBS has added two new comedies to its successful Monday line-up. The first is How I Met Your Mother, a sappy and not especially funny show that promises to tell the story of how its lead character fell in love with the woman he would ultimately marry. There’s a twist at the end of the first episode that makes the show even more conventional than it first appears. On the plus side the show does a decent job of sharply defining its characters and the supporting players – Neil Patrick Harris, Buffy’s Allyson Hannigan and Undeclared’s Jason Segal – are all great comic actors (though only Hannigan is at the top of her game in the pilot). The blend of romance and comedy could appeal to the Friends crowd but I’d recommend watching Kitchen Confidential instead.
CBS’ other new comedy, Out of Practice, is more promising. It’s from the Frasier showrunners Joe Keenan and Christopher Lloyd and it shares elements of that series’ sophisticated farcical humor. Stockard Channing and Henry Winkler are the veteran names in the cast, playing the separated parents of three grown children played by Christopher Gorham, Paula Marshall and Ty Burrell. All five of the characters are in the medical profession but at heart this is a dysfunctional family comedy. Jennifer Tilly is also in the cast as Winkler’s new girlfriend (although not in the early pilot that I saw) and as long as Keenan and Lloyd can give these actors material worthy of their talent Out of Practice could emerge as one of those rare laugh-track-comedies that are actually funny.
Also new tonight is alien invasion series Surface on NBC. Each of the three major networks has their own alien invasion series this fall and CBS’ Threshold (which premiered to so-so ratings on Friday but I have yet to check out) is supposedly the classiest while ABC’s Invasion has the cushiest timeslot (following Lost on Wednesdays). Surface stands out in a less desirable way – it’s the cheesiest. In this series the aliens are in the water and are discovered by three different people in three different areas of the U.S. The dialogue is pretty awful, the characters generally uninteresting and the mystery is on the level of the 50s B-movie. There might be some appeal here for younger viewers but hardcore sci-fi fans are probably better off with the other new shows, and everyone else is better off watching Fox.
The other new show of this busy premiere night is Just Legal on the WB. Jay Baruchel (the star of Undeclared and the mentally challenged wannabe boxer in Million Dollar Baby) and Don Johnson star in a legal procedural from exec producer Jerry Bruckheimer. It’s Bruckheimer’s first show to actually get on the air at WB, part of his continued attempt to dominate all of network television. I haven’t seen it but I don’t expect I’m missing very much.
Of course if you only watch one thing tonight it should be the third season premiere of Arrested Development. 8 o’clock. Fox. Be there. None of the season’s new shows (on any network, any night) are on this level.
Fortunately, the best of the night’s new shows, Kitchen Confidential, immediately follows on Fox. Alias alum Bradley Cooper stars in the single-camera half-hour comedy loosely based on the adventures of real life "rebel chef" Anthony Bourdain. The opening episode is a little too busy as it introduces a large ensemble cast which includes Buffy the Vampire Slayer’s Nicholas Brendon, Grosse Pointe’s Bonnie Somerville, Freaks and Geeks’ John Francis Daly, Sin City’s Jaime King and Owain Yeoman (apparently he was in Troy, I haven’t seen him before but he’s pretty funny), but as long as the show can make intelligent use of this cast in the weeks to come it should be worth watching (I’m a little disappointed that Harold and Kumar’s John Cho will only appear in the opening episode, his absence not only leaves the show down one talented actor but also with a lily-white cast). Pairing the unconventional and promising comedy with Development makes for a smart hour but one likely to be ratings-challenged. The comedy hour leads into Prison Break and three solid shows make Fox the night’s quality network, but most people will probably be watching CBS…
Raymond is gone (it will never again terrorize the Emmy Awards) but CBS has added two new comedies to its successful Monday line-up. The first is How I Met Your Mother, a sappy and not especially funny show that promises to tell the story of how its lead character fell in love with the woman he would ultimately marry. There’s a twist at the end of the first episode that makes the show even more conventional than it first appears. On the plus side the show does a decent job of sharply defining its characters and the supporting players – Neil Patrick Harris, Buffy’s Allyson Hannigan and Undeclared’s Jason Segal – are all great comic actors (though only Hannigan is at the top of her game in the pilot). The blend of romance and comedy could appeal to the Friends crowd but I’d recommend watching Kitchen Confidential instead.
CBS’ other new comedy, Out of Practice, is more promising. It’s from the Frasier showrunners Joe Keenan and Christopher Lloyd and it shares elements of that series’ sophisticated farcical humor. Stockard Channing and Henry Winkler are the veteran names in the cast, playing the separated parents of three grown children played by Christopher Gorham, Paula Marshall and Ty Burrell. All five of the characters are in the medical profession but at heart this is a dysfunctional family comedy. Jennifer Tilly is also in the cast as Winkler’s new girlfriend (although not in the early pilot that I saw) and as long as Keenan and Lloyd can give these actors material worthy of their talent Out of Practice could emerge as one of those rare laugh-track-comedies that are actually funny.
Also new tonight is alien invasion series Surface on NBC. Each of the three major networks has their own alien invasion series this fall and CBS’ Threshold (which premiered to so-so ratings on Friday but I have yet to check out) is supposedly the classiest while ABC’s Invasion has the cushiest timeslot (following Lost on Wednesdays). Surface stands out in a less desirable way – it’s the cheesiest. In this series the aliens are in the water and are discovered by three different people in three different areas of the U.S. The dialogue is pretty awful, the characters generally uninteresting and the mystery is on the level of the 50s B-movie. There might be some appeal here for younger viewers but hardcore sci-fi fans are probably better off with the other new shows, and everyone else is better off watching Fox.
The other new show of this busy premiere night is Just Legal on the WB. Jay Baruchel (the star of Undeclared and the mentally challenged wannabe boxer in Million Dollar Baby) and Don Johnson star in a legal procedural from exec producer Jerry Bruckheimer. It’s Bruckheimer’s first show to actually get on the air at WB, part of his continued attempt to dominate all of network television. I haven’t seen it but I don’t expect I’m missing very much.
Friday, September 16, 2005
Emmy Predictions: Movies and Series
Variety, Music or Comedy Series
Nominees: Da Ali G Show, The Daily Show, Late Night with Conan O’Brien, Late Show with David Letterman, Real Time with Bill Maher
Should Win: The Daily Show has all the buzz (and really rocked it during Indecision 2004) but the second season of Da Ali G Show was every bit as brilliant as the first, six tight episodes of incisive social and political critiques.
Will Win: The Daily Show has all the buzz.
Should’ve Been Nominated: As far as I can tell they actually got this one right.
Reality Competition
Nominees: The Amazing Race, American Idol, The Apprentice, Project Runway, Survivor
Should Win: The Amazing Race still sets the standard in this field, and the past season saw three separate editions air. Consider this another win for Chip & Kim and Uchenna & Joyce, not Freddy & Kendra.
Will Win: Race already has two Emmys, but that shouldn't stop it from nabbing number three.
Should’ve Been Nominated: Uh, The Starlet? Don’t think so. America’s Next Top Model has its fans but I don’t watch. So I’ll say Nashville Star, since it does the American Idol format better than any show besides Idol, and it doesn’t involve Donald Trump.
TV Movie
Nominees: Lackawanna Blues, The Life and Death of Peter Sellers, The Office Special, Warm Springs, The Wool Cap
Should Win: If I was a TV movie purist I’d say Warm Springs. But I’m not. So even though The Office Special wasn’t really a TV movie it was presented that way for its American TV debut and it was the perfect ending to the best short-lived series ever.
Will Win: Warm Springs should take it provided the voters aren't distracted by the empty flash of Peter Sellers.
Should’ve Been Nominated: I don’t watch enough TV movies to say for sure but I know that Showtime’s slight but snazzy Reefer Madness: The Musical was at least better than the Peter Sellers movie.
Miniseries
Nominees: Elvis, Empire Falls, The 4400, The Lost Prince
Should Win: I’ve only seen two of these and even though The 4400 was really the first season of a series masquerading as a miniseries, Empire Falls put me to sleep.
Will Win: It’ll be hard for Emmy voters to say no to the cast of Empire Falls, but if they do PBS’ no-doubt classy The Lost Prince could pull an upset.
Should’ve Been Nominated: Yeah right.
Drama Series
Nominees: Deadwood, Lost, Six Feet Under, 24, The West Wing
Should Win: Lost made network TV interesting again, 24 delivered a little over half a great season and Six Feet Under was much better than its reputation but Deadwood was the season's best show. Period.
Will Win: Hmm. This would be the perfect time for 24 to sneak in and nab its first win after three previous nominations, Emmy loves to reward great shows at unexpected times. But I doubt it. The HBO shows seem to be out, I guess they're both too good. Even though some think The West Wing will return for its fifth win in six seasons (good lord) I don't think that genre prejudice will stop the Emmys from rewarding network hit Lost. I hope I'm not wrong (unless, of course, one of the HBO shows win).
Should’ve Been Nominated: For the fourth season in a row The Shield was better than ever before.
Comedy Series
Nominees: Arrested Development, Desperate Housewives, Everybody Loves Raymond, Scrubs, Will & Grace
Should Win: Not because the Housewives weren’t great, they were, but Arrested Development was still TV’s best comedy in its second season.
Will Win: By giving an award to Desperate Housewives Emmy voters can not only reward a great genre-defying show, but also reward something that people actually watch.
Should’ve Been Nominated: Two words: Gilmore Girls.
Nominees: Da Ali G Show, The Daily Show, Late Night with Conan O’Brien, Late Show with David Letterman, Real Time with Bill Maher
Should Win: The Daily Show has all the buzz (and really rocked it during Indecision 2004) but the second season of Da Ali G Show was every bit as brilliant as the first, six tight episodes of incisive social and political critiques.
Will Win: The Daily Show has all the buzz.
Should’ve Been Nominated: As far as I can tell they actually got this one right.
Reality Competition
Nominees: The Amazing Race, American Idol, The Apprentice, Project Runway, Survivor
Should Win: The Amazing Race still sets the standard in this field, and the past season saw three separate editions air. Consider this another win for Chip & Kim and Uchenna & Joyce, not Freddy & Kendra.
Will Win: Race already has two Emmys, but that shouldn't stop it from nabbing number three.
Should’ve Been Nominated: Uh, The Starlet? Don’t think so. America’s Next Top Model has its fans but I don’t watch. So I’ll say Nashville Star, since it does the American Idol format better than any show besides Idol, and it doesn’t involve Donald Trump.
TV Movie
Nominees: Lackawanna Blues, The Life and Death of Peter Sellers, The Office Special, Warm Springs, The Wool Cap
Should Win: If I was a TV movie purist I’d say Warm Springs. But I’m not. So even though The Office Special wasn’t really a TV movie it was presented that way for its American TV debut and it was the perfect ending to the best short-lived series ever.
Will Win: Warm Springs should take it provided the voters aren't distracted by the empty flash of Peter Sellers.
Should’ve Been Nominated: I don’t watch enough TV movies to say for sure but I know that Showtime’s slight but snazzy Reefer Madness: The Musical was at least better than the Peter Sellers movie.
Miniseries
Nominees: Elvis, Empire Falls, The 4400, The Lost Prince
Should Win: I’ve only seen two of these and even though The 4400 was really the first season of a series masquerading as a miniseries, Empire Falls put me to sleep.
Will Win: It’ll be hard for Emmy voters to say no to the cast of Empire Falls, but if they do PBS’ no-doubt classy The Lost Prince could pull an upset.
Should’ve Been Nominated: Yeah right.
Drama Series
Nominees: Deadwood, Lost, Six Feet Under, 24, The West Wing
Should Win: Lost made network TV interesting again, 24 delivered a little over half a great season and Six Feet Under was much better than its reputation but Deadwood was the season's best show. Period.
Will Win: Hmm. This would be the perfect time for 24 to sneak in and nab its first win after three previous nominations, Emmy loves to reward great shows at unexpected times. But I doubt it. The HBO shows seem to be out, I guess they're both too good. Even though some think The West Wing will return for its fifth win in six seasons (good lord) I don't think that genre prejudice will stop the Emmys from rewarding network hit Lost. I hope I'm not wrong (unless, of course, one of the HBO shows win).
Should’ve Been Nominated: For the fourth season in a row The Shield was better than ever before.
Comedy Series
Nominees: Arrested Development, Desperate Housewives, Everybody Loves Raymond, Scrubs, Will & Grace
Should Win: Not because the Housewives weren’t great, they were, but Arrested Development was still TV’s best comedy in its second season.
Will Win: By giving an award to Desperate Housewives Emmy voters can not only reward a great genre-defying show, but also reward something that people actually watch.
Should’ve Been Nominated: Two words: Gilmore Girls.
Season Premieres: Survivor
Uh oh, this show is back.
And the one thing to discuss is the latest Big Twist courtesy of Mark Burnett: two former Survivors are back in the game. At the start of the show they were announced as a surprise and randomly matched to the two new tribes (which were already chosen before the show began). The players are Stephanie and Bobby Jon, the scrappy duo who ultimately made up Survivor's first ever tribe-of-two last season.
Of course the twist leaked out ahead of time, but watching it still felt disconcerting. It was if Survivor decided to take a page out of timeslot-rival The OC's self-referential playbook. There was more onscreen awareness than ever before that everyone is there to play Survivor, a TV game show. The other players were genuinely excited to see Steph and Bobby Jon and treated them like celebrities (conveniently distracting from the former NFL player hidden in plain sight). And the former players are able to give their teams advice on how best to approach challenges, not because they’ve seen the show on TV but because they’ve played it. That sort of openness is odd for a show that is usually so protective of the particular brand of fly-on-the-wall voyeurism it sells (taken to such extremes that during interviews with contestants who have been voted out the booted player will often refer to other players as still being at the location, even though filming has long since wrapped). But it’s not unwelcome.
The impact on the first episode was both good and bad. There was an immediate entry point with contestants, a familiarity, that usually takes time to develop, but Steph and Bobby Jon took up so much of the screen time and story interest that it was even harder than usual to get to know the new players (at least the ones who weren't vomiting their insides out, or the nurse who tended to them). When it came time to kick someone off it was pretty obvious it would be the 100-year-old man but, poor guy, we hardly even met him before it was time for him to go.
My biggest concern is the twist messing with one of the best dynamics of Survivor: the players have no previous knowledge of each other and only form relationships and opinions of each other during the game. The absence of that turned All Stars into a wretched parody of a typical Survivor season, the kind of stereotypical reality-TV trash that Survivor (narrowly) manages to avoid. But I don't think this idea will turn out nearly as bad as All Stars (or even the disastrous "Outcast tribe" idea several seasons back). Steph and Bobby Jon will have to work extra hard to even stay in the game. On a show that loves to mess with its audience this development is one more distraction from the same old, same old.
And the one thing to discuss is the latest Big Twist courtesy of Mark Burnett: two former Survivors are back in the game. At the start of the show they were announced as a surprise and randomly matched to the two new tribes (which were already chosen before the show began). The players are Stephanie and Bobby Jon, the scrappy duo who ultimately made up Survivor's first ever tribe-of-two last season.
Of course the twist leaked out ahead of time, but watching it still felt disconcerting. It was if Survivor decided to take a page out of timeslot-rival The OC's self-referential playbook. There was more onscreen awareness than ever before that everyone is there to play Survivor, a TV game show. The other players were genuinely excited to see Steph and Bobby Jon and treated them like celebrities (conveniently distracting from the former NFL player hidden in plain sight). And the former players are able to give their teams advice on how best to approach challenges, not because they’ve seen the show on TV but because they’ve played it. That sort of openness is odd for a show that is usually so protective of the particular brand of fly-on-the-wall voyeurism it sells (taken to such extremes that during interviews with contestants who have been voted out the booted player will often refer to other players as still being at the location, even though filming has long since wrapped). But it’s not unwelcome.
The impact on the first episode was both good and bad. There was an immediate entry point with contestants, a familiarity, that usually takes time to develop, but Steph and Bobby Jon took up so much of the screen time and story interest that it was even harder than usual to get to know the new players (at least the ones who weren't vomiting their insides out, or the nurse who tended to them). When it came time to kick someone off it was pretty obvious it would be the 100-year-old man but, poor guy, we hardly even met him before it was time for him to go.
My biggest concern is the twist messing with one of the best dynamics of Survivor: the players have no previous knowledge of each other and only form relationships and opinions of each other during the game. The absence of that turned All Stars into a wretched parody of a typical Survivor season, the kind of stereotypical reality-TV trash that Survivor (narrowly) manages to avoid. But I don't think this idea will turn out nearly as bad as All Stars (or even the disastrous "Outcast tribe" idea several seasons back). Steph and Bobby Jon will have to work extra hard to even stay in the game. On a show that loves to mess with its audience this development is one more distraction from the same old, same old.
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Emmy Predictions: Dramatic Performances
Supporting Actor
Nominees: Alan Alda (The West Wing), Naveen Andrews (Lost), Terry O'Quinn (Lost), Oliver Platt (Huff), William Shatner (Boston Legal)
Should Win: It's hard to stand out when your show focuses on a different character seemingly every week but O'Quinn somehow did exactly that.
Will Win: I honestly think any of these guys could win, but Andrews might be too fresh and Shatner already won for the role (not that that means anything). O'Quinn has a shot and Platt's work is undeniable but Alda has already been nominated for a Tony and an Oscar this year, is a respected Emmy vet and was supposedly out-of-this-world great on the show.
Should've Been Nominated: Anthony Anderson was nothing short of revelatory in his season-long arc on The Shield.
Supporting Actress
Nominees: Stockard Channing (The West Wing), Tyne Daly (Judging Amy), Blythe Danner (Huff), Sandra Oh (Grey's Anatomy), C.C.H. Pounder (The Shield)
Should Win: When the nominations were announced nothing made me happier than seeing C.C.H. Pounder's name on the list. Now, if she actually wins...
Will Win: I'm not sure I even want to know. Word is Daly has an edge since her character on the show had a heart attack (and she's been an upset winner in the past). But I do sort of think Blythe Danner has to win for one of her three nominations. She already lost comedy guest actress and probably won't win for her TV movie. Considering the voters will have to watch Huff they'll see a great actress elevating a mediocre role, that should do the trick.
Should've Been Nominated: The absence of Deadwood ladies Robin Weigert and Paula Malcolmson is inexcusable. And I call her lead but Emmy calls her supporting, whatever you call her Lauren Ambrose deserved a nomination.
Actress
Nominees: Patricia Arquette (Medium), Glenn Close (The Shield), Frances Conroy (Six Feet Under), Jennifer Garner (Alias), Mariska Hargitay (Law & Order: SVU)
Should Win: Close. No contest. Not because she's an Oscar nominee but because she effortlessly became a part of a brilliant ensemble and elevated an already great show in the process.
Will Win: Close. See above. (But there is an unhealthy amount of Internet-buzz for Hargitay and there would be worse things than Conroy winning an Emmy.)
Should've Been Nominated: Jennifer Beals. Who knew? Anyone who watched the second season of The L Word.
Actor
Nominees: Hank Azaria (Huff), Hugh Laurie (House), Ian McShane (Deadwood), James Spader (Boston Legal), Kiefer Sutherland (24)
Should Win: McShane continued to captivate on Deadwood, even when his character was silenced by kidney stones.
Will Win: Back in December I really thought McShane would have this all locked up, and watching the show's second season only confirmed that. But buzz for Laurie is so strong that he's jumped to the front of this odd pack.
Should've Been Nominated: Where do I even begin? Well with Michael C. Hall I guess, the fourth season was his best ever on Six Feet Under. The Shield's previous winner Michael Chiklis and Rescue Me's Denis Leary were especially worthy as well.
Nominees: Alan Alda (The West Wing), Naveen Andrews (Lost), Terry O'Quinn (Lost), Oliver Platt (Huff), William Shatner (Boston Legal)
Should Win: It's hard to stand out when your show focuses on a different character seemingly every week but O'Quinn somehow did exactly that.
Will Win: I honestly think any of these guys could win, but Andrews might be too fresh and Shatner already won for the role (not that that means anything). O'Quinn has a shot and Platt's work is undeniable but Alda has already been nominated for a Tony and an Oscar this year, is a respected Emmy vet and was supposedly out-of-this-world great on the show.
Should've Been Nominated: Anthony Anderson was nothing short of revelatory in his season-long arc on The Shield.
Supporting Actress
Nominees: Stockard Channing (The West Wing), Tyne Daly (Judging Amy), Blythe Danner (Huff), Sandra Oh (Grey's Anatomy), C.C.H. Pounder (The Shield)
Should Win: When the nominations were announced nothing made me happier than seeing C.C.H. Pounder's name on the list. Now, if she actually wins...
Will Win: I'm not sure I even want to know. Word is Daly has an edge since her character on the show had a heart attack (and she's been an upset winner in the past). But I do sort of think Blythe Danner has to win for one of her three nominations. She already lost comedy guest actress and probably won't win for her TV movie. Considering the voters will have to watch Huff they'll see a great actress elevating a mediocre role, that should do the trick.
Should've Been Nominated: The absence of Deadwood ladies Robin Weigert and Paula Malcolmson is inexcusable. And I call her lead but Emmy calls her supporting, whatever you call her Lauren Ambrose deserved a nomination.
Actress
Nominees: Patricia Arquette (Medium), Glenn Close (The Shield), Frances Conroy (Six Feet Under), Jennifer Garner (Alias), Mariska Hargitay (Law & Order: SVU)
Should Win: Close. No contest. Not because she's an Oscar nominee but because she effortlessly became a part of a brilliant ensemble and elevated an already great show in the process.
Will Win: Close. See above. (But there is an unhealthy amount of Internet-buzz for Hargitay and there would be worse things than Conroy winning an Emmy.)
Should've Been Nominated: Jennifer Beals. Who knew? Anyone who watched the second season of The L Word.
Actor
Nominees: Hank Azaria (Huff), Hugh Laurie (House), Ian McShane (Deadwood), James Spader (Boston Legal), Kiefer Sutherland (24)
Should Win: McShane continued to captivate on Deadwood, even when his character was silenced by kidney stones.
Will Win: Back in December I really thought McShane would have this all locked up, and watching the show's second season only confirmed that. But buzz for Laurie is so strong that he's jumped to the front of this odd pack.
Should've Been Nominated: Where do I even begin? Well with Michael C. Hall I guess, the fourth season was his best ever on Six Feet Under. The Shield's previous winner Michael Chiklis and Rescue Me's Denis Leary were especially worthy as well.
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Emmy Predictions: Comedic Performances
The post that begins my predictions for this year's major Emmy winners (which will be announced this Sunday to viewer apathy in a low-rated telecast). Huzzah!
(Remember Emmy voters suck and when it comes to picking winners they love to make lazy choices sprinkled with a few unexpected surprises every bit as much as when they're picking nominees, so don't go to Vegas based on what I say.)
Supporting Actor
Nominees: Peter Boyle (Everybody Loves Raymond), Brad Garrett (Everybody Loves Raymond), Sean Hayes (Will & Grace), Jeremy Piven (Entourage), Jeffrey Tambor (Arrested Development)
Should Win: I wouldn't care much if they canceled this category entirely but I'd vote for Tambor.
Will Win: Since Boyle is the only major Raymond cast member to never win many are expecting him to take it, but Piven will probably "upset" for a performance that everyone in Hollywood seems to adore. Then again, Emmys being Emmys, watch Hayes win this for no good reason at all.
Should've Been Nominated: Do you even have to ask? Arrested Development's Will Arnett (and Michael Cera and Tony Hale).
Supporting Actress
Nominees: Conchata Ferrell (Two and a Half Men), Megan Mullally (Will & Grace), Doris Roberts (Everybody Loves Raymond), Holland Taylor (Two and a Half Men), Jessica Walter (Arrested Development)
Should Win: There is no woman funnier than Jessica Walter on television right now (ok, besides Lauren Graham, maybe).
Will Win: This is being billed as a battle between the overbearing mothers but if Holland Taylor somehow wins, and no disrespect to the talented actress stuck in a mediocre show, I'm really hoping the ghost of Nancy Marchand will immediately strike her dead right there on the stage. Smart choice is Walter, safe choice is Roberts (who has already won three times for her role). This is the Emmys. Roberts it is.
Should've Been Nominated: Gilmore Girls' Kelly Bishop deserves to be one of those overbearing moms in contention.
Actress
Nominees: Marcia Cross (Desperate Housewives), Teri Hatcher (Desperate Housewives), Patricia Heaton (Everybody Loves Raymond), Felicity Huffman (Desperate Housewives), Jane Kaczmarek (Malcolm in the Middle)
Should Win: Cross puts up a good fight but Housewives' first season belonged to Hatcher.
Will Win: Hatcher seems to have a lock with her real life comeback story but there could be sentiment to go with scene-stealing Cross or if the Housewives split votes Kaczmarek could pick up her first ever win (and lots and lots of attention).
Should've Been Nominated: Both Lauren Graham and Eva Longoria truly belong here.
Actor
Nominees: Jason Bateman (Arrested Development), Zach Braff (Garde...er, Scrubs), Eric McCormick (Will & Grace), Ray Romano (Everybody Loves Raymond), Tony Shalhoub (Monk)
Should Win: Bateman.
Will Win: Word is that Bateman and Braff submitted subpar episodes for consideration but Shalhoub picked a great one. Who am I to argue with Emmy geeks? (Seriously, if you think my site is geeky check out Awards Heaven or the Gold Derby discussion boards.)
Should've Been Nominated: Emmy is racist. Yeah I said it. How else to explain the absence of Bernie Mac (ok people forgot his show was even on last season...) or Kevin Hill's Taye Diggs (ok, ok, people didn't even know that show existed and it probably was submitted as a drama anyway... I'm just saying).
(Remember Emmy voters suck and when it comes to picking winners they love to make lazy choices sprinkled with a few unexpected surprises every bit as much as when they're picking nominees, so don't go to Vegas based on what I say.)
Supporting Actor
Nominees: Peter Boyle (Everybody Loves Raymond), Brad Garrett (Everybody Loves Raymond), Sean Hayes (Will & Grace), Jeremy Piven (Entourage), Jeffrey Tambor (Arrested Development)
Should Win: I wouldn't care much if they canceled this category entirely but I'd vote for Tambor.
Will Win: Since Boyle is the only major Raymond cast member to never win many are expecting him to take it, but Piven will probably "upset" for a performance that everyone in Hollywood seems to adore. Then again, Emmys being Emmys, watch Hayes win this for no good reason at all.
Should've Been Nominated: Do you even have to ask? Arrested Development's Will Arnett (and Michael Cera and Tony Hale).
Supporting Actress
Nominees: Conchata Ferrell (Two and a Half Men), Megan Mullally (Will & Grace), Doris Roberts (Everybody Loves Raymond), Holland Taylor (Two and a Half Men), Jessica Walter (Arrested Development)
Should Win: There is no woman funnier than Jessica Walter on television right now (ok, besides Lauren Graham, maybe).
Will Win: This is being billed as a battle between the overbearing mothers but if Holland Taylor somehow wins, and no disrespect to the talented actress stuck in a mediocre show, I'm really hoping the ghost of Nancy Marchand will immediately strike her dead right there on the stage. Smart choice is Walter, safe choice is Roberts (who has already won three times for her role). This is the Emmys. Roberts it is.
Should've Been Nominated: Gilmore Girls' Kelly Bishop deserves to be one of those overbearing moms in contention.
Actress
Nominees: Marcia Cross (Desperate Housewives), Teri Hatcher (Desperate Housewives), Patricia Heaton (Everybody Loves Raymond), Felicity Huffman (Desperate Housewives), Jane Kaczmarek (Malcolm in the Middle)
Should Win: Cross puts up a good fight but Housewives' first season belonged to Hatcher.
Will Win: Hatcher seems to have a lock with her real life comeback story but there could be sentiment to go with scene-stealing Cross or if the Housewives split votes Kaczmarek could pick up her first ever win (and lots and lots of attention).
Should've Been Nominated: Both Lauren Graham and Eva Longoria truly belong here.
Actor
Nominees: Jason Bateman (Arrested Development), Zach Braff (Garde...er, Scrubs), Eric McCormick (Will & Grace), Ray Romano (Everybody Loves Raymond), Tony Shalhoub (Monk)
Should Win: Bateman.
Will Win: Word is that Bateman and Braff submitted subpar episodes for consideration but Shalhoub picked a great one. Who am I to argue with Emmy geeks? (Seriously, if you think my site is geeky check out Awards Heaven or the Gold Derby discussion boards.)
Should've Been Nominated: Emmy is racist. Yeah I said it. How else to explain the absence of Bernie Mac (ok people forgot his show was even on last season...) or Kevin Hill's Taye Diggs (ok, ok, people didn't even know that show existed and it probably was submitted as a drama anyway... I'm just saying).
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Season Premieres: Gilmore Girls
Gilmore Girls returns tonight to answer some burning questions left over from last season's exceptional finale.
Luke's answer to Lorelai's proposal is...
well, you'll have to see for yourself, but I will say that his answer sets off an amusing chain of events that highlight the show's sixth season premiere (two of the show's trademark eccentric supporting characters played by Liz Torres and Sally Struthers have rarely been used better).
The bad news is that Rory's boring and obnoxious Yale boyfriend Logan is still around, and looks likely to be around for awhile, and her storyline in general provides some of the weakest moments. But living full time with Richard and Emily gives the grandparents some always welcome screentime, and new colors to play as well.
And then there's Rory's irritating longtime pal Paris (her enjoyable longtime pal Lane is MIA for this episode, as is Lorelai's enjoyable pal Sookie). Paris often makes me want to scratch my eyes out and pull out all of my hair. In this episode she's hilarious. Maybe I'm just finally getting used to the character but I think I like the direction they're taking her... and I'm glad that overall there's every reason to believe that this season will be a worthy follow up to one of the show's best ever.
Following Gilmore the WB premieres one of its new series, Supernatural, which has exactly one thing in common with its lead-in: Jared Padalecki, who played Rory's first love Dean and stars here. He's one of two brothers (the other played by Days of Our Lives and Dark Angel alum Jensen Ackles) whose mother died in a mysterious supernatural incident when they were young. When their father goes missing years later the boys set off to find him and discover numerous unexplained phenomena along the way.
Oh how I loved X-Files. Oh how this show is no X-Files.
Luke's answer to Lorelai's proposal is...
well, you'll have to see for yourself, but I will say that his answer sets off an amusing chain of events that highlight the show's sixth season premiere (two of the show's trademark eccentric supporting characters played by Liz Torres and Sally Struthers have rarely been used better).
The bad news is that Rory's boring and obnoxious Yale boyfriend Logan is still around, and looks likely to be around for awhile, and her storyline in general provides some of the weakest moments. But living full time with Richard and Emily gives the grandparents some always welcome screentime, and new colors to play as well.
And then there's Rory's irritating longtime pal Paris (her enjoyable longtime pal Lane is MIA for this episode, as is Lorelai's enjoyable pal Sookie). Paris often makes me want to scratch my eyes out and pull out all of my hair. In this episode she's hilarious. Maybe I'm just finally getting used to the character but I think I like the direction they're taking her... and I'm glad that overall there's every reason to believe that this season will be a worthy follow up to one of the show's best ever.
Following Gilmore the WB premieres one of its new series, Supernatural, which has exactly one thing in common with its lead-in: Jared Padalecki, who played Rory's first love Dean and stars here. He's one of two brothers (the other played by Days of Our Lives and Dark Angel alum Jensen Ackles) whose mother died in a mysterious supernatural incident when they were young. When their father goes missing years later the boys set off to find him and discover numerous unexplained phenomena along the way.
Oh how I loved X-Files. Oh how this show is no X-Files.
Monday, September 12, 2005
Boys (and a Girl) Behaving Badly
[Disclaimer: My original plan was to post this almost a full month ago, when these three films were still somewhat relevant.]
There's something a little off about a feel good movie about a pimp who longs to become a successful rapper. Sundance audience award winner Hustle & Flow is frequently entertaining, and something of a relief from most of the summer's Hollywood product, but look a little deeper and you'll find an ugliness underneath its shiny exterior. It's hard to be inspirational when your hero is a whiny, abusive jerk and his goals are so shallow.
Slick direction, solid performances (especially by lead Terrence Howard and supporting player Anthony Anderson) and genuinely exciting song-creation sequences go a long way to covering up the film's more unsavory aspects, but they don't go far enough.
The movie's treatment of its female characters is pretty much indefensible and its portrayal of its primarily African American cast of characters is at the very least suspect. Yes the movie is about a pimp and yes it makes sense to show his mistreatment and disrespect for women, but a movie can be about a misogynist without actually being misogynistic. Unfortunately that's not the case here. The movie is so intent on following its hero's journey that the women he uses and abuses are never allowed much consideration. They receive a lot of screentime but very little depth.
The level of offensiveness of the racial elements is more debatable but I think the movie ends up looking bad here as well. Director Craig Brewer (who happens to be white) uses certain stylistic techniques that clearly pay tribute to the blaxploitation films of the 70s. But as championed as blaxploitation has become it's a little too easy to forget the "exploitation" part of that equation. Hustle & Flow wallows in black stereotypes without saying anything new about them. Even the way in which the lead character is finally able to achieve his goals is an insulting cliche. I'm not sure it's what Brewer was truly intending but at its core Hustle & Flow is an exploitation movie and black cinema deserves better.
The creators behind Pretty Persuasion are trying to be offensive, I think, but I found the movie to be something worse... dull. In its tale of a manipulative Beverly Hills high school student who gets her friends to accuse a teacher of sexual harassment, the movie aims for the same high-school-as-a-microcosm-of-society approach used so winningly in Election, filtered through the darkly comic world view of movies like Heathers. But it falls far, far short of those heights.
The movie fancies itself a satire (the term is literally spelled out and defined on a blackboard in one of the classroom sets) but its targets are so scattershot that it never connects. America's sexualized teen culture, racism, sexual harassment, school shootings, hunger for fame, the news media and numerous other issues are skewered in disappointingly obvious ways. I'm all for black comedy and satire but just trying to be provocative isn't enough if you're not saying anything new.
The film's star, Evan Rachel Wood, is one of the best young actresses working today but she has yet to find a film role that allows her the extraordinary range and talent she displayed on three seasons of the ABC drama Once & Again. Her role here (which borrows a little from Reese Witherspoon in Election, a lot from Nicole Kidman in To Die For and even a bit of Alicia Silverstone in Clueless) is undeniably challenging and it's nice to watch Wood try to meet that challenge, but it's a little painful when she comes up short.
To set his film apart from the teen movie pack, director Marcos Siega was determined to have a restrained visual style (even though a little visual spark would've added some much needed energy). That led to a lot of long takes which in turn leaves it up to the actors to define their own comedic rhythms. It's not entirely Wood's fault that a lot of the movie's humor falls flat but unfortunately she has to deliver the bulk of it and it harms her performance overall. Fortunately she's better with other aspects of the film including its frank sexuality.
Other notables in the cast include James Woods (chewing the scenery to an embarrassing degree), Ron Livingston (wasted) and Jane Krakowski (smart and funny in the film's most solid performance).
Wedding Crashers isn't really about bad behavior, although it's been very successful at marketing itself that way.
The concept, two swinging single guys "crash" weddings to score with emotionally vulnerable women (only to end up falling in love when they meet the "right" two women), would seem a perfect fit for appropriately R-rated contemporary screwball execution. Instead it's really an unusually boring Hollywood romantic comedy with dull characters, terrible filmmaking and a script that's the literary equivalent of paint by numbers. In a lot of ways it's the perfect "R-rated comedy" for our times: the material is so cliched, sanitized and watered-down that only the most prudish viewers could possibly be offended (unless of course you're offended by terrible filmmaking...).
There's a good cast here but they're all pretty much lost at sea, receiving no help whatsoever from asleep-at-the-helm director David Dobkin. Owen Wilson makes for an exceptionally dull romantic lead, Vince Vaughn tries a little too hard with material that just isn't there and Isla Fisher seems eager to steal scenes... if only there actually was anything to steal. And why cast Christopher Walken and then give him absolutely nothing interesting to do? I'm not even going to start listing all the horribly miscalculated supporting characters like the psycho preppy boyfriend and the creepy gay son (someone behind the scenes seems to think gay + artist = CRAZY! what the hell is that about??).
The sole exception to this criminal abuse of talent turns out to be Rachel McAdams (following up very nicely on her breakthrough work in last year's Mean Girls and The Notebook). Her character is as empty as all the others but she manages to overcome that with sheer skill, she's a natural born charmer.
Of course Wedding Crashers has turned into the summer's biggest "sleeper" hit, which only proves that this year's "box office slump" actually has nothing at all to do with the quality of the movies. People are still as willing as ever to spend their money on crap.
There's something a little off about a feel good movie about a pimp who longs to become a successful rapper. Sundance audience award winner Hustle & Flow is frequently entertaining, and something of a relief from most of the summer's Hollywood product, but look a little deeper and you'll find an ugliness underneath its shiny exterior. It's hard to be inspirational when your hero is a whiny, abusive jerk and his goals are so shallow.
Slick direction, solid performances (especially by lead Terrence Howard and supporting player Anthony Anderson) and genuinely exciting song-creation sequences go a long way to covering up the film's more unsavory aspects, but they don't go far enough.
The movie's treatment of its female characters is pretty much indefensible and its portrayal of its primarily African American cast of characters is at the very least suspect. Yes the movie is about a pimp and yes it makes sense to show his mistreatment and disrespect for women, but a movie can be about a misogynist without actually being misogynistic. Unfortunately that's not the case here. The movie is so intent on following its hero's journey that the women he uses and abuses are never allowed much consideration. They receive a lot of screentime but very little depth.
The level of offensiveness of the racial elements is more debatable but I think the movie ends up looking bad here as well. Director Craig Brewer (who happens to be white) uses certain stylistic techniques that clearly pay tribute to the blaxploitation films of the 70s. But as championed as blaxploitation has become it's a little too easy to forget the "exploitation" part of that equation. Hustle & Flow wallows in black stereotypes without saying anything new about them. Even the way in which the lead character is finally able to achieve his goals is an insulting cliche. I'm not sure it's what Brewer was truly intending but at its core Hustle & Flow is an exploitation movie and black cinema deserves better.
The creators behind Pretty Persuasion are trying to be offensive, I think, but I found the movie to be something worse... dull. In its tale of a manipulative Beverly Hills high school student who gets her friends to accuse a teacher of sexual harassment, the movie aims for the same high-school-as-a-microcosm-of-society approach used so winningly in Election, filtered through the darkly comic world view of movies like Heathers. But it falls far, far short of those heights.
The movie fancies itself a satire (the term is literally spelled out and defined on a blackboard in one of the classroom sets) but its targets are so scattershot that it never connects. America's sexualized teen culture, racism, sexual harassment, school shootings, hunger for fame, the news media and numerous other issues are skewered in disappointingly obvious ways. I'm all for black comedy and satire but just trying to be provocative isn't enough if you're not saying anything new.
The film's star, Evan Rachel Wood, is one of the best young actresses working today but she has yet to find a film role that allows her the extraordinary range and talent she displayed on three seasons of the ABC drama Once & Again. Her role here (which borrows a little from Reese Witherspoon in Election, a lot from Nicole Kidman in To Die For and even a bit of Alicia Silverstone in Clueless) is undeniably challenging and it's nice to watch Wood try to meet that challenge, but it's a little painful when she comes up short.
To set his film apart from the teen movie pack, director Marcos Siega was determined to have a restrained visual style (even though a little visual spark would've added some much needed energy). That led to a lot of long takes which in turn leaves it up to the actors to define their own comedic rhythms. It's not entirely Wood's fault that a lot of the movie's humor falls flat but unfortunately she has to deliver the bulk of it and it harms her performance overall. Fortunately she's better with other aspects of the film including its frank sexuality.
Other notables in the cast include James Woods (chewing the scenery to an embarrassing degree), Ron Livingston (wasted) and Jane Krakowski (smart and funny in the film's most solid performance).
Wedding Crashers isn't really about bad behavior, although it's been very successful at marketing itself that way.
The concept, two swinging single guys "crash" weddings to score with emotionally vulnerable women (only to end up falling in love when they meet the "right" two women), would seem a perfect fit for appropriately R-rated contemporary screwball execution. Instead it's really an unusually boring Hollywood romantic comedy with dull characters, terrible filmmaking and a script that's the literary equivalent of paint by numbers. In a lot of ways it's the perfect "R-rated comedy" for our times: the material is so cliched, sanitized and watered-down that only the most prudish viewers could possibly be offended (unless of course you're offended by terrible filmmaking...).
There's a good cast here but they're all pretty much lost at sea, receiving no help whatsoever from asleep-at-the-helm director David Dobkin. Owen Wilson makes for an exceptionally dull romantic lead, Vince Vaughn tries a little too hard with material that just isn't there and Isla Fisher seems eager to steal scenes... if only there actually was anything to steal. And why cast Christopher Walken and then give him absolutely nothing interesting to do? I'm not even going to start listing all the horribly miscalculated supporting characters like the psycho preppy boyfriend and the creepy gay son (someone behind the scenes seems to think gay + artist = CRAZY! what the hell is that about??).
The sole exception to this criminal abuse of talent turns out to be Rachel McAdams (following up very nicely on her breakthrough work in last year's Mean Girls and The Notebook). Her character is as empty as all the others but she manages to overcome that with sheer skill, she's a natural born charmer.
Of course Wedding Crashers has turned into the summer's biggest "sleeper" hit, which only proves that this year's "box office slump" actually has nothing at all to do with the quality of the movies. People are still as willing as ever to spend their money on crap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)