television reviews

You are currently browsing the archive for the television reviews category.

ben-lyons

At The Movies, once a “must see” for Adam and me, has finally (after a year) retconned the show back to what will hopefully be something closer to the ‘old show’ and is dumping its terrible new hosts as step one.

I feel bad for Ben Mankiewicz, who there was really nothing wrong with, but jammed into the ridiculous new format, and partnered with moron of the moment Ben Lyons, couldn’t possibly win. The good news is that I think Mankiewicz’s reputation will remain unscathed…we all know, and many articles and blogs have made it publicly clear, that he’s not the reason this went bad.

I was never a huge fan of frequent co-hoster of the old show, Michael Phillips (chalk it up to personal taste) but the guys knows films, which is what is required here.  And A.O. Scott is great – both fun to watch and incredibly well informed when it comes to film.  I’m excited to start TIVOing this show again…beginning September 5th.

As many of you know I railed against the new format, and especially the disgusting casting choice of Ben Lyons, as an actual film critic when he’s really just a sound bite shill for the machine.  And while from go there was no chance I was going to watch this show with Lyons masquerading as an “expert” I felt the need to blog about this and actively oppose it when Lyons had the gall to list the Twilight TRAILER as his “Three To See” pick in an early episode.  Yes, the man suggested that instead of seeing a real film, that people go view a highly publicized TRAILER online.  What a brainless dickbag.  Anyway…

Wouldn’t it be great if this small step signaled a change in the world at large?  The move towards using informed qualified talent rather than “attractive”* connected hacks?  It’s almost enough to make me have some faith in the world…almost.

Thanks to all you other fans, writers, etc., that both called this out for what it was – and most importantly refused to watch it and sent a message via the ratings, so that we could put a stop to this.  One small step for man…one giant leap for mankind I say.

*I use attractive in quotes because I find few things more reprehensible than looking at Ben Lyons face, but by “traditional beauty standards” I suppose he is considered technically more attractive than the rest of these guys.

trueblood(5)

So here’s the first thing I really have to say about True Blood.  Alan Ball is a genius at keeping me around.  Because every episode, at some point, I think I can give up the show (this would generally be a part featuring Tara) and yet every cliff hanger-y ending has me going “AH!” and then “crap. I guess I’ll be tuning in next week.”

*slow clap*  Well played Mr. Ball, well played.

So since I’m watching the show (sometimes against my will) I decided it was high time to do an actual review, especially since True Blood searches (er, I mean Anna Paquin naked boob searches) have sent my blog hits into the stratosphere more than a few times this past spring.  So here it is.  A True Blood Review.

The Good:  This show is surprisingly good at turning me around on some things.  At first I was not a Bill fan, I wasn’t feeling all swoon-y and I didn’t really get the appeal.  But by episode three or four I was in love and couldn’t blame Sookie a bit.  There’s always something about the good guy that gets me, and Stephen Moyer’s Bill, despite his vampiric ways, is defiintely a bonefide good guy.

I like Anna Paquin.  I would watch Anna Paquin watch paint dry and probably be mightily entertained.  I think she’s lovely and a talented actress.  I don’t love the accent, but it’s better than a few others on the show and so I’m just deciding to accpet those accents as they are and be okay with it.  The Sookie character is a bit annoying and preachy, but I don’t think that’s Paquin’s fault.  I hope they’ll ease up on Sookie’s holier than thou attitude as it seems a little bratty and unlike the way she was originally portrayed.

true blood season 2

Jessica.  Oh Jessica, how you turned me around.  At the end of Season 1 there was no plot I was dreading more (except anything involving Tara) than seeing more of the whiny Jessica.  But she’s the absolute best thing Season 2 has going for it.  It’s wonderful to see a new vampire go through the trials and tribulations of being a vampire and also being a teenager.  I don’t know if it’s the writing or Deborah Ann Woll’s acting or a combination, but whatever it is I hope they keep it up.  What an amazing turnaround.

jessica

[SPOILERS]

Lafayette.  Nobody was happier to see Lafayette not be the dead body in the car at the end of Season 1 than me.  Of course he was chained up in a basement and the other characters didn’t seem overly concerned about finding him, which seems odd in a place where people show up in cars with their hearts missing, but whatever.  At least he’s alive.  And now that he’s linked to Eric I suspect all sorts of great stuff is in store for us.  Nelsan Ellis’ Lafayette is routinely the only actor/character that doesn’t let me down at some point or another.  His performances are always dead on.

Sam Merlotte.  Like Sookie I find Sam Tramwell’s Sam a bit whiny and brooding for my taste, but he’s a great character and I hope we’ll get to explore less of the brooding and more of the reality of Sam this year.

Michelle Forbes’ Maryann is a welcome addition this year and her arc is supremely interesting, except where it intersects with Tara, which unfortunately is constantly.  Adam and I were sure she was going to be some Circe type character, but this last episode has her looking more like a Minotaur, which is even better if you ask me.

Read the rest of this entry »

gs_daisy_de_la_hoya_081013_m*

Okay, so it’s confession time.

When I saw that Daisy, the “loser” from Rock Of Love was getting her own (appropriately titled) show Daisy Of Love I subjected Adam to at least a five minute rant about the downfall of society and more importantly women.  That rant surely included some version of the following “since when is it rewarded (with both money and recognition) to have no real redeeming qualities except sluttiness (and for that matter since when is ‘slut’ a redeeming quality) blah blah blah.”  All said while standing on my soapbox and making the world safe for sanity again.

Who knew I could be so wrong (and/or would fall so far from my soap box-y pedestal)?

Because while in a way Daisy’s show is just as bad as all the other dating reality shows that masquerade as being about love, but are really just about trying to outwit or out wait a handful of other morons for a cash prize, but in another way it’s kind of a good show.

And I think I’ve figured out why…let me break it down for you all scientific like.

1.  Despite the fact that Daisy is actually hard to look at (honey – please stop bleaching that broken hair and get a new weave while you’re at it; learn the roles about removing at least one accessory – or 12 – before you leave the house; and stop whatever botox shit you’re doing to your face/lips) she’s actually pretty likable and entertaining.  She’s certainly no rocket scientist, but she’s kinda sweet. It’s like she’s aware she’s not too smart and that in many ways she’s a parody of herself, but she just kinda shrugs her shoulders and goes, “well, this is what I got…so here we go.” There’s something honest and almost endearing about it.  Yes, I can’t believe I wrote that either.

2.  Additionally, unlike Bret Michaels and New York, who are clearly in it for the money (and fame) and are supremely unlikeable to boot, and Flava Flav who is supremely likeable but hard to take seriously, I believe that Daisy IS actually looking for love.  I doubt she’s stupid enough to think she’d find real love on TV, but to her surprise I think (and the viewers) she has a legitimate connection with at least one of the dudes and it’s kind of refreshing to watch.

3.  In shows like this, you spend more time with the contestants than the “star” and I have to admit that I’m finding Daisy’s dudes far more palatable than the usual skank fest that happens on Rock of Love and Flava (sorry to sell you out ladies – I recognize I’m a traitor if it’s any consolation).  But on the feminist side of things (yeah, I know feminism anywhere near this post is a stretch) there’s very little female objectification going on with Daisy’s show because she’s the only woman.  Instead it’s all about male objectification, which I don’t like to encourage as it’s just as wrong on some level, but considering how rare it is in comparision, there’s something almost progressive about it.  Like I said, progressive and feminism are a stretch in this post…but stay with me.

4.  Daisy has ended up a with a strange mixture of freaks and the meatheads that probably beat them up in high school which adds an extra fun element to watching them interact. Despite that strange mix though there are less unwarranted betrayals, conniving, and backstabbing than the shows stacked with female contestants.  Don’t get me wrong there’s still tons of drama (both manufactured and genuine) but it’s generally less gross than watching what the women contestants say and do to one another.  It’s also WAY more fun to watch these self proclaimed rock star badasses and tough guys crumble like little babies in the confessional after getting dumped by Daisy – it’s waterworks and blubbering oh my!

Daisy Of Love Contestants

5.  Lastly, unlike the unlikely pairings that resulted from Flava of Love and Rock of Love (I have no idea who ended up with the horror show that is New York) I could actually see Daisy with a guy or two from this show.  I’m sure it won’t work out that way as we all know real life has nothing to do with reality TV (there’s only one successful TV pairing ever, right?) but you really can see her falling for a guy on here (if you’re watching the show it’s obvious who) and legitimately trying to date him after the show.  And so it’s nice to see something at least CLOSER to real on reality TV for once.

So, now that I, a self-proclaimed hater of the majority of reality TV, has confessed to loving one of the worst kind of reality shows out there, I hope I’ll be able to sleep at night.

* Sadly of note is that this picture is the only non-exploitative, non over the top non naked/ridiculous picture I could find of Daisy in about nine pages of google web search.  This does not bode well for my liking of this show…but I guess I knew that already. On the plus side, she kind of looks like she’s doing an impression of a Chimp…hanging from the bars of her cage…which is sorta cool.

studio 60

the west wing

Let me be clear about two things first:

1.  I thought Studio 60 was brilliant – one of the best shows I’ve seen in years and I was devastated when it was cancelled.

2.  I’m aware this post is about a year (or more?) too late and likely completely unnecessary at this point in time, but I’ve been watching The West Wing reruns on cable in an effort to stave off buying the complete West Wing collection (which I cannot remotely afford right now) and I’ve been moved to write an epic (okay,  not quite epic) post…so here it is.

Studio 60 never had a chance, in a nutshell because though it was beautifully written, exceptionally performed, and extraordinarily executed – as few television programs are these days – it just couldn’t compare in content to The West Wing.

What was it about The West Wing that so moved me (us)?  Well, I cannot speak for the whole of society, but for me, it was that my life is pointless.  I essentially shuffle (or did – more to come on that later) paper.  I am (was) incredibly valuable to my company and employers and fellow co-workers for what I do every day, but in the larger scope of the world it means absolutely nothing.  The world is not a better place for my working existence and I find myself (then and now) yearning for a purpose.  To know that I am doing something with my day that matters.  And that is what they did everyday on The West Wing.  Regardless of how the story worked out, their main objective, whether obtained or not, was to do good…to try to do good…to try to change the world.  My day to day life has nothing to do with these things, and so it remains ultimately completely uninspiring.

And this is why Studio 60 couldn’t work when it came AFTER The West Wing…no matter how brilliantly executed, who can care about some silly hollywood SNL type show and the intricacies involved in producing said show and the relationships revolving in and around it…when the show that came before it was about the people who shape the very world?  Studio 60 never had a chance…unless Sorkin did it first…as a beautiful prelude to The West Wing.  But that was not to be, and so we lost out on Studio 60 – a ‘could have been’ brilliant long running show…because he showed us his perfection first in The West WingThe West Wing was the most perfect show I have ever had the opportunity to watch, a program that managed to both entertain and inspire, a show that I nearly had to turn off (and sometimes did) when George Bush became president, because it was too difficult to watch a brilliant and imaginary Jed Bartlett be the president I yearned for while my country was run by a moron.  Never have I so wished to transport myself into a television world than when I had to watch Jed Bartlett be good and honest and intelligent, and surround himself with the same, while in my world an idiot boy with a crooked smile was run by corrupt puppeteers and crooks.

But there is hope.  Because I’m able to watch The West Wing with renewed faith these days, hoping that Obama will be able to slowly restore my faith in this nation and in my own governement.

And I guess with that, I managed to make this post relevant after all…

SIDENOTE:  I should mention Sports Night. Also brilliant, and worthy of mention and a mark in history on its own.  It’s a crime it too did not last much longer than Studio 60…only 45 episodes…but since it came first I like to think of it as both proving my point, and as Sorkin getting his feet wet.  Of Sorkin learning what he needed to do to make The West Wing so powerful…and he really just nailed it.

SIDENOTE 2:  If any benevolent benefactors out there would like to send me The West Wing collected series on dvd, please don’t hesitate to be in touch and I’ll get you an accurate shipping address :)

bc-cold-case

So I’m watching an episode of Cold Case yesterday (okay, fine, three episodes) and I realize I really hate this show, yet cannot tear myself away. Damn you Cold Case, and damn you TNT for running them back to back so cleverly that I only have approximately six seconds to turn off the television before being drawn into a new crime.

Cold Case has all the train wreak-y elements that Law & Order has that makes it impossible to turn off: A violent crime in the first few minutes?  Check.  An interesting and immediate twist of events?  Check.  A red herring?  Check.  An attractive and “intelligent” cast set to solve the crime?  Check.  But there are some things that Law & Order has, or rather doesn’t have that allow me to hate myself slightly less in the morning after being drawn into an episode (or twelve).

Cold Case has these elements in spades, and I end up hating myself for watching it not only in the morning, but also WHILE I’m watching, which is just not good for anyone.  What are these things you may ask?  Don’t worry, I’ve laid them out for you below:

1. Cheesy Music.  The music is off the charts cheesy and obvious.  I know it’s often put there to mark a point in time – old hippie 60’s music?  Our cold case must take place in the 60’s!  But it’s WAY overused, and also so obvious as to cause multiple eye rolls per scene.  Here’s a hint – unless you’re playing it for comedy, you don’t have a music cue for say, “Brickhouse” when a hot chick enters a room.  Subtlety is not a word these people are familiar with.

2.  Heartstrings & Happy Endings. Law & Order sometimes has happy endings and/or eye-rollingly obvious attempts at cheese, but it’s not the standard.  You cannot find an episode of Cold Case without these things.  What should be a straight intelligent procedural instead becomes a “heartfelt drama” about reuniting people or whatever.  It’s annoying.  Be a procedural, or be a lifetime movie of the week.  Pick one.

3.  Personal Details about the Recurring CastLaw & Order (the flagship version) is really good about keeping the personal stuff for the detectives and lawyers basically non-existent, and it’s the reason it’s the best of all the L&O versions.  SVU is REALLY bad at it, and Criminal Intent is also bad at it, but it seems more forgivable if only because D’Onofrio is such a talent.  Regardless it’s a mistake.  SVU becomes all about Olivia’s personal feelings about rape or about Elliot’s feelings about child abuse.  Guess what – they don’t like them.  Whoo!  Surprise!  Are you surprised that detectives that have kids and a mother that was raped have really really personal feelings about these issues?  No, no you probably weren’t, because it is super obvious and talks down to the viewer.  Also, in the billions of episodes I’ve seen of SVU (yes, it feels like billions) I’ve never seen them effectively delve into the detectives’ actual feelings about these issues beyond the basic “this makes me really really mad!” concept.

Cold Case skates the line on this issue of adding personal details in the most annoying of ways.  They don’t come out and say anything obvious about these characters lives, but in the one of the episodes I watched yesterday (hopefully my last ever) they dropped at least six (SIX!) hints about blondie’s past experience dealing with addicts and her subsequent abandonment issues.  Hello!  We get it – her mother or father or whoever was an addict – she doesn’t trust addicts.  She has DRAMA about addicts.  Move the freak on and solve the god damn case.

So here’s what Cold Case does have going for them:  BOBBY CANNAVALE.  I would watch paint dry if there was even a hint of a suggestion of Bobby Cannavale making a brief apperance.  Especially if he’s going to be all rakishly handsome (as usual) and all funny and full of life but with a slightly shady past…which he is on Cold Case.

So there, now you really know why I watched three freaking old episodes of Cold Case on TNT last night.  Never again though, never again.  Let’s conveniently ignore the fact that Cannavale’s on a new show CUPID soon on ABC – which allows me to be a little more confident in my “never again” declarations in that I can get my Cannavale fix elsewhere.

SIDENOTE:  I’m officially adding Bobby Cannavale to my “list” (top 5)…which I’ll be laminating shortly.  Clive Owen, Bobby Cannavale, and man, I can just never decide between Brad Pitt and George Clooney…

That’s right Anna*, you rock that side ponytail.  Sadly I could not find a picture on the interwebs of said side ponytail so you could see how awesome it is, but if you saw episode #2 of True Blood you KNOW what I’m talking about.

So what about True Blood?  Is anybody watching it other than Adam and I?  It doesn’t seem like it, yet it has already been renewed for a second season.  I’m glad HBO is giving it a chance, but I’d gladly trade True Blood (season one or two) for a third season of Carnivale

What can I say about True Blood?  I guess I can say that I desperately WANT to like it, but that it continues to fail me, but not enough that I can actually write it off just yet.  I will say that without Anna Paquin I would have checked out immediately, the one thing True Blood has done (other than teach me about Paquin’s ability to rock side ponytails) is that I’m even more smitten with Anna Paquin than ever.  She’s just gorgeous.  I don’t love the accent, but it’s passable and I could do with less wide-eyed acting, but otherwise she’s pretty much saving the show for me.  The main vampire character Bill is slowly growing on me, but just when I feel like he’s reigned the character in we get another weird over the top scene that is pretty laughable. 

The biggest problem for me with the show so far is that the characters are fairly stereotypical and the actors they have chosen for these stereotyped roles may lack the ability to add the necessary dimension to take them to the next level – right now they just appear to be overacting in every scene which makes everything laughable. Sookie’s (Paquin) best friend Tara (Rutina Wesley) and Sookie’s brother Jason (Ryan Kwanten) are probably the worst over-acting offenders, other than the actors playing the other over the top vampires (that we’re kind of just getting introduced to now), but everyone is pretty guilt of it at this point, including at times Paquin.  I know the overall style of the show is designed to be somewhat campy and over the top, but in its current form it’s making it difficult to take any of it seriously or connect with any of the characters. 

[Spoiler]

The other problem for me is that so far, the only thing supernatural about the True Blood world is Vampires…oh, and that Sookie can read minds.  Yeah.  I have a problem with this.  It needs to be explained, or more things in the True Blood world need to be revealed as “not what they seem”…you throw a werewolf in there, or a guy who changes into a dog (hint), or some other weird crap and suddenly I can buy that Sookie can read minds, but right now, with the world as is, it doesn’t work.  At all. 

I’ll hang in there for now (let’s call it 2.5 stars for now), but mostly just because there’s not much else on TV that I’m interested in (though I eagerly await the Pushing Daises premiere). 

Here’s a photo of Sookie and Bill from True Blood:

Here’s a shot of Anna Paquin with the new blonde hair:

And here, because I’m totally smitten, is Anna looking absolutely GORGEOUS in some silly magazine:

* And yes, she’s naked in my comic at the top of the page – if only because it’s now officially a nice running gag. 

[Spoilers – Read With Caution]

1.  They learned from their mistakes last year.  While this Season Premiere was full of holes (as I’m beginning to accept the show will be) it was far and away better than the ‘stab my eyes out rather than watch’ premiere of last year. 

2.  Claire should not try to “be a badass dark-haired future chick”.  This is beyond Panettiere’s acting ability, and was laughable at best.  She looked gorgeous actually with the dark hair, but the acting.  Yikes. 

3.  Hiro should be kept doing what he is great at – comedic relief.  He and Ando are a great funny pair, and a welcome bit of levity with all the serious stuff that goes on in the show, but either the writers don’t know how to write him serious or Oka is not capable of the performance.  Like Claire, the “serious” scenes with Hiro are laughable.  And while I adore Hiro in theory, the more they have him harping on being a “hero” and “saving the world” the less likable he is.  Call me naive but to my mind real heroes don’t run around desperately looking for people to save, they just are.  If this is an attempt at future character development it’s a really clunky attempt that is painful to watch. 

4.  Niki is a terrible character no matter what they name her (Jessica, Gina, Tanya, etc.) it doesn’t seem to matter.  She sucks.  Get her off the goddamn show.  I’ve never had a serious problem with Ali Larter outside of Heroes, which is to say that I rarely have thought much one way or the other about Larter, but she just sucks on this show.  And it’s too bad, because the idea of Niki is a good one (and one I actually had when I was a kid and created a comic book character called Angelica – who had three split personalities that all had power over different aspects – one body, one mind, and one soul – combining them would have made Angelica a very powerful hero – or villain – but her mind was so fractured she couldn’t control them and usually operated as only a shell for one of the other personalities) so OBVIOUSLY, I personally think this character has a lot of potential and is an interesting idea – but between Larter and the writers they’re botching it.  Royally. 

5.  Maya is a terrible character and Ramirez is a terrible actress no matter who she’s on screen with.  Every single scene is over acted, and always with those huge eyes attempting to get bigger with every word spoken.  This is not acting. 

6.  Suresh is the stupidest scientist in the history of time.  Duh, of course you were going to mutate you moron. This is why only idiots in comic books try out their own serums on themselves.  See: Dr. Hank McCoy aka The Beast (a personal favorite of mine, despite the idiocy of using his own serum on himself).  Even major villains like Green Goblin and Dr. Ocotopus usually have an “accident” with their experiments before turning into something horrible, rather than purposefully injecteing shit in their arms.   I know they wanted to drive the Suresh character here, but I believed he was smarter (and more “moral”) than this. I didn’t buy it, it seemed forced.  Good work Heroes.  Good work. 

7.  Nathan is still a good character and Adrian Pasdar is still a good actor one that brings some much needed acting chops to the table.  I am a little sick however of watching him weigh good versus evil for an entire season before he remembers that he’s good.  Let’s give him something different to do okay?

8.  Heroes loves some convenient plot points! 

  • Suresh puts Molly on a plane with a stewardess to look after her.  Really?  Really. 
  • Peter’s mom blames future Peter for what happened with Claire, because he told her to stay home after Nathan got shot, and because of that she was home for Sylar to get her.  But if Nathan hadn’t gotten shot wouldn’t she have been home watching the press conference (etc.) anyway?  I guess we are supposed to assume she was getting ready to run out and buy milk or something and that Sylar obviously wouldn’t be able to find her while she was out getting milk.  Yeah, Sylar is that limited, for sure. 
  • Future Peter can do almost anything – turn invisible, stop time, time travel, fly, heal, read minds, apparently vanish people into other place (or other bodies) and yet he had to run into the supply closet to hide the gun?  Wha-?  Yeah, that made no freaking sense. 
  • HRG leaves all his highly confidential files on people with powers in a little brown box marked “Dad’s Office” on the kitchen table.  Really?  I don’t care that he’s in prison and we’re all in mourning or distressed, his family freaking know how serious his work and their lives are – it’s life and death on a daily basis – you think they’d be a LITTLE more careful.  It’s a given that Sylar could probably break into a safe, or find the files eventually, but we can’t just make it a little bit difficult for him?  Jeezus.

9.  The “new” villains don’t seem that scary to me.  Not compared to Sylar.  They do seem like jerks and killers that should be locked up, and I’m not saying they’re not a force to be reckoned with, but they also seem like kids who leave horrible destruction in their wake but are pretty unfocused.  I guess I’m more of an intellectual villain kind of girl (Sylar) than a mob mentality brute force villain (the rest of these guys – thus far).  I suppose it’s possible they’ll turn out interesting, and I know Heroes needs to up the stakes, but they just seemed like The Brotherhood Of Evil Mutants, Magneto’s villain team from the X-Men comic books, and quite frankly, The Brotherhood always seemed as lame as their name.   

It did look like Adam Monroe (aka Kensei) is going to show up though later as part of this gang according to Mama Petrelli’s future vision, so maybe there is hope for this rowdy group to be impressive.  It also looks like maybe Monroe was at some point married to or maybe more likely related to Niki as one of his alias’ is Richard Sanders (at some point in the past).  Maybe he’s her great grandfather?  Who knows – could be interesting.  It also looks like Sylar is going to walk the side of the angels, at least temporarily this season, which I’m unconvinced they can do successfully.  I’m a huge Sylar fan, so they better do it right, which is unlikely.   

10.  When Heroes gets it right, they really do get it right – the scene with Sylar and Claire was AWESOME.  Good writing, good acting, great plot development. 

  • Future Peter was completely badass, just casually using his powers for good (possibly well-intentioned but bad good, but whatever), popping in and out wherever he wanted, changing shape, it was great. 
  • Elle remains an interesting and complex character and Bell continues to up the acting level, which this show is in desperate need of. 
  • The Sylar as Petrelli brother reveal was good, not really unexpected, but still good.  I’ll be interested to see where this takes us. 
  • HRG’s reaction to realizing that Sylar could heal and had taken Claire’s powers was moving and great – although the follow up reunion was mishandled in my opinion – that reunion could have been much more powerful without being over the top.  It was kind of a let down. 
  • Sylar was a stong point throughout the show – back to his true (and awesomely terrifying) form.  His exchange (and the reveal) in his scene with Claire, was the highlight of the entire two hours. 
  • Peter in a villain’s body is a nice plot point.  It’s interesting.  I love when Sci-Fi shows have people in other people’s bodies.  It’s a favorite trick of mine.  Any Buffy fans remember Faith switching bodies with Buffy – that was a great little arc.  Let’s hope Heroes can be as successful with it here. It’s opened up nice questions.  Does Peter still have his powers in there?  Does he have this other guy’s (apparently so terrible we can’t say what his powers are) powers?  A good set up. 

So overall, hit and miss.  But they did a good enough job that I’ll stick around for a while and see if they can hang onto it.  A lot of good, and a lot of bad land us at about 2.5 stars.

So, in finally getting back to my previously promised Tudor rant/review, here we are.

I guess part of my problem with this show is that, at this point, I have a surprising amount of actual knowledge about this time period and these people and all the events that led up to these kind of amazing (and horrible) things that happened to these people.  And so, knowing what I know, I just don’t understand the choices that they make for the show. They will make these seemingly valiant attempts to keep it true to the facts in certain ways and then just go wildly off the mark for no apparent reason. 

Adapting material is difficult, and it’s very difficult to do it well, so I do try to cut them some slack, but some of this stuff they have added in or changed is just ridiculous and unnecessary.  The great thing about Henry VIII and his six wives is that it was rife with drama and intrigue to begin with.  There were murders, conspiracies, marriages, affairs, sexual escapades, religious persecution, beheadings, trials, rumors, it’s all there – you actually have to invent very little to “sex it up” and make it pretty for the masses…so I just don’t understand the choices they make. 

The Good:  It’s interesting to see these characters brought to life and the scenes shot on location are rich and beautiful, unfortunately,  too large a percentage of the show is shot on sets, which despite a good effort for a television show, look pretty sad and small and cheap.  The costumes however, show no expense spared, and are fantastic. 

*spoilers*

The Bad & The Ugly:

Mary of Tudor (Henry VIII’s younger sister) was married to King Louis XII when she was 18.  This character is played by…wait for it…38 year old actress Gabrielle Anwar.  Now I hate Anwar, and have never liked her ever, so I’m a bit aggressively biased here.  However, even for the non-biased, Anwar is not looking too good these days (and certainly not anywhere near 18 )  and she has a really bad habit of making these terrible expressions while she is “acting” that make her look even older than her 38 years.  It is a painful experience watching her play this interesting character.  

I know of course that people play characters much younger than their age all the time on TV, but it’s actually kind of important here when you understand that these women were being married off at very young ages.  It was a huge part of what was going on at that time, and it’s difficult to understand as a viewer when we see Anwar, looking 40-ish and being horrified because she’s marrying an ugly old king.  It’s far less dramatic to see Anwar marry this guy, than if they had cast an innocent looking 18 year-old.   

Additionally, in the show they had her marrying the wrong king (who cares about any kind of accuracy, right?).  They invented (or stole?) some King of Portugal for her to marry.  This seems to be not such a sin until you understand what a complex web of alliances there were at this time, and marrying off princesses to other countries was a chief way of solidifying an alliance.  In reality, she married King Louis XII of France…and Portugal had nothing to do with it. 

But the greatest sin is in how it all plays out.  In reality, Mary didn’t kill her husband as Anwar does (a crime of treason for which she could easily be killed).  In truth the King dies about three months after the marriage (an old guy putting it to an 18 year-old for three months can be exhuasting – and fatal).  After King Louis VII died, Mary very cleverly arranged to marry the man she was actually in love with, Charles Brandon, with the help of King Francis I (the new King of France) and much to the anger of her brother King Henry VIII, since it was without his permission.  In the show, Anwar kills this ‘King of Portugal’ and heads back home within a week, marrying Brandon in the process.  It’s like they want to tell the story, but they just can’t manage it.  And I have to say, again, a far less dramatic take than the actual original story, which is pretty tragic and then redeeming in its own way.  A headstrong young woman being sold off to a foreign country but then cleverly managing to marry the man she loves anyway (unheard of in that time)…fascinating.

Henry Fitzroy.  Son of King Henry VIII by his mistress Elizabeth “Bessie” Blount.  This is true, and handled pretty accurately.  And then they suddenly decide to kill the kid with the “sweating sickness”.  Why?  I have no clue.  It’s not like they milk it for high drama.  There is literally one scene in which the kid’s mother comes to see him (already dead) and there is a maybe five-second scene of King Henry looking at the tiny crown of the kid (who he never saw anyway).  In reality Henry Fitzroy lived to the age of 17 and died suddenly of consumption (tuberculousis).  

Anne Boleyn.  They’ve done Anne the biggest disservice of anyone, which is really a crime for a series focused partially (for the first two years at least) on the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn.  I’m not a huge Anne Boleyn fan, she was a manipulative clever woman and a vindictive tyrant of sorts, but she was also incredibly witty and wise in a way and she rose to a power no women had previously imagined, based solely on her own merit (and maybe beauty). 

She also had a very good reason for being as angry as she was and for becoming the tyrant she became.  Much of what Anne Boleyn did in her rise to becoming the Queen of England can be chalked up to revenge.  In reality, Anne was very much in love with Henry Percy (eventually to become the Earl of Northumberland) and he with her.  They were likely married or “pre-contracted” which was as good as marriage in those days (and the relationship was likely consumated).  This was a great match for Anne, both in that it would rise her up in the societal ranks, and also because, rare in that day, she loved the man and he her. 

This marriage was deemed unworthy by both Cardinal Wolsey and Henry Percy’s father and possibly King Henry (although it was a time before Anne would realize the king had anything to do with it – and there is speculation as to whether he actually did).  Wolsey and Percy’s father undid her marraige quite cruelly and Anne was temporarily banished from court.  It was a very hard lesson to learn.  And for a woman like Anne, it was not taken lightly.  She came back to court with a very clear idea about how to get power, and that she would need to play the game like a master.  There was no way to get that power, or revenge on Wolsey without rising as high as possible, and there was nothing above Queen for a woman.  It’s unlikely she ever really loved Henry VIII, although it’s possible that after years of courting she did fall for him.  It’s also highly unlikely she was guilty of any crimes against him. 

In The Tudors there is none of this backstory.  None.  We never know why she hated Wolsey so much. Religious reasons are given, and they were certainly present as well, but her single minded hatred of the man is far too personal for it to just be religious difference, and Wolsey was actually fairly light in punishiment for the followers of Martin Luther (i.e. heretics) compared with his successor Thomas More, who also opposed Anne’s marriage to Henry, yet she did not set out to destroy More, she had a very specific reason to go after Wolsey, and none of that is addressed.  They do give her a previous “dalliance” with the poet Thomas Wyatt, which is completely out of context and just wrong.  There is a recorded flirtation, but an affair is very unlikely.  So overall it is an incredibly unfair portrait.  All the history that built this amazing woman and character is just dropped.  It makes it impossible to understand her motivations and as such it is the broadest of sketches of a fascinating woman.  And it makes me angry.  Really angry. 

In the end, I don’t mind so much if you want to create a completely fictionalized world of The Tudors, I probably couldn’t ever love it, but I certainly can’t even like it if you can’t make it more interesting than what really happened.  If you’re going to make it fiction…it’s gotta be better than reality.  And this, isn’t. 

2 Stars.   Blech.

That’s right.  You guys couldn’t take the “creative” and “adventurous” stuff, so here we are.  Back to Adam’s and my invigorating “real life”.  Like watching a marathon of Discovery’s ‘Deadliest Catch’.  Which makes a riveting comic to read, right?  :) 

Honestly though, the show, Deadliest Catch is kind of amazing and horrible.  I mean, it is hands down the most intense reality show of all time, a guy actually died on one of the episodes I watched.  Talk about raising the reality stakes.  Forget houswives and their ridiculous rich woman woes, and the sluttiness of rock of love hos, and even my cherished chimpanzee bros…dudes DIE on this show. I did a little rhyming for you there…did you enjoy it?  Good, because it will probably never happen again.  Anyway, the show is pretty crazy.  It is really fascinating to see how these men (and one whiny woman) live with these dangerous jobs and lives, although it suffers from the same problems of all reality shows, too much padding and recapping, too much repetitive stuff overall,  but otherwise a pretty scary show…or maybe I’m just super afraid of the Bering Sea…which could totally be my own issue…

Sadly, even though it is BAD I’m still pretty interested in it.  Despite the fact that they didn’t handle much well in the entire first season I keep finding myself wondering how they will handle the interesting things to come in the second season.  As a matter of fact, I have so much to say about this show that I’m going to do another post today about it…I would do it now, but I don’t want to delay Rabid Lamb any more than I have already…

« Older entries § Newer entries »