Keith: Okay, Noel, it's time to talk TV again. Last week, we discussed new shows. Since then, one of your favorites—Smith—has been cancelled, and things aren't looking so hot for Kidnapped, which is now being asked to wrap it up in 13 episodes and get out of the way. All this before some major shows have even debuted. Wow. At least Heroes is looking pretty safe, but maybe this week we should talk about some old favorites and how they're looking this year.
Since it's always easier to talk about what isn't working than what is, I'm afraid I'm going to have to join the chorus of people worried about Gilmore Girls (CW, Tuesdays, 8 p.m. ET). Long one of my favorite shows, it received the wrong kind of attention at the end of last year when creator Amy Sherman-Palladino and her writer-producer husband left the show after negotiations with the network broke down. That left David Rosenthal, already on the writing staff, as show-runner. Amy was famous (infamous?) for taking an auteurist's hand in the show, and many speculated that things wouldn't be the same without her. And while this year's season première wasn't a "Spock's Brain"-like sign that the show was forever on a downward slide, it still felt pretty forced. The patter was (mostly) not that bad, but it just seemed like everyone was trying too hard to keep the spirit alive. You know that Pulp song "Bad Cover Version," where Jarvis Cocker compares his ex's new lovers to imitations of himself by listing all these examples of post-shark-jumping pop culture? ("Like a later Tom And Jerry when the two of them could talk / Like the Stones since the '80s / Like Planet Of The Apes on TV…") It felt a bit like that.
I haven't watched the second episode yet, so maybe I'm speaking too soon. Of course, it didn't help that the Palladinos left the show in a bad, bad place last year. What did you think?
Noel: I liked the second episode better, but that may be because I'm accepting the show's overall diminished quality, and I'm settling in to see where the story goes. Mainly, I'm hoping that the new staff doesn't completely destroy these characters before they can guide them to a safe landing in the series finale, which I hope will be this spring. It would help if Rosenthal and company would tone down the faux-Gilmore dialogue, which has been kind of painful so far. Maybe just let the cast breathe a little. That's something the Palladinos excelled at, balancing the rapid-fire conversation with a beat or two of reaction. And I don't think Daniel Palladino ever got enough credit as a director. Television is an actor-and-dialogue-driven medium, but on some of the key Gilmore Girls episodes, Daniel Palladino made some striking visual choices, capturing tense dramatic moments in long, moving takes.
Anyway, it'll be nice if Gilmore Girls can keep it together enough to keep providing a boost to Veronica Mars (CW, Tuesdays, 9 p.m. ET), which came roaring out of the gate to start season three. I've heard some grumbling about the plan to do mini-arcs this season, but in the first episode, the writers introduced a handful of mysteries and few compelling new characters, and still found time for the witty social observation and fearless plot twists that give the show its unique tone. It was funny, then suddenly horrifying. A joy to watch.
I also really liked the first episode of season three of Lost (ABC, Wednesdays, 9 p.m. ET), though I've learned to expect complaints from Lost fans no matter what the show does. My only complaint about the season première is a carryover complaint from last season's finale: This cast seems ill-suited to big dramatic confrontations and action sequences. But knowing glances and existential terror? Aces up. And yeah, yeah, we're all sick of the flashback structure, except that it really does give the real-time story a chance to simmer without boiling over, and by this time, I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude toward any flashback and/or island development, since last year's payoffs were more than worth the wait, in my opinion. And while I'm as eager as anyone to see how the rest of the castaways are doing, I'm also drinking in every minute we spend in The Others' camp, after so many episodes of almost no contact.
Plus, that opening sequence. Holy God. Did you see it?
Keith: Yep. And I think I'm back in. This was much more compelling than I remember it being last season, if only for the hilariously contentious book club. Also, I know we aren't supposed to know, but any idea what Stephen King novel they were reading? Is the typeface a tip-off? I didn't recognize it, and I smell a clue!
I also appreciated the time with The Others. Part of what I like about them as villains is that they seem to have no idea they're the bad guys. In fact, they're pretty sure they aren't, however nefarious their means. You've got to appreciate the moral ambiguity created by their moral assuredness. They seem so convinced that they're almost convincing, and I predict the next big twist will pull back to reveal that they're just as much pawns of a mysterious force as our castaways.
What I like about The Others applies times 10 to those self-righteous, human-persecuting Cylons on Battlestar Galactica (SCI FI, Fridays, 9 p.m. ET), whose season première I just watched. Obviously, that tremendous act of genocide that kicked off the series makes them the bad guys, but their conviction is kind of infectious, and the more time we spend in their society—and it looks like we're going to get in even deeper this year—the more sense they make. Not that I'm rooting for the toasters, but part of the genius of this show comes from the way it plays both sides.
I know you were still catching up with this, but is it safe to talk about it with you? Can we discuss the show-altering twist of last year's season finale? Can we talk about how __________ is getting manipulated by __________? Or the political extremism that's consumed __________? Or whether __________ and __________'s marriage will last? Or how chummy __________ and __________ have gotten, even though they may not have gotten out of this episode alive? Can we, please?
If not, can I at least talk about how every time I think Battlestar can't get any more of-the-moment, it finds another way to remind us its Peabody is well-earned. One of the posters on this site says it best: Where the first two seasons dealt with the politics of the state, now we're dealing with the politics of resistance, and all those words that come with it, like "insurgency" and "suicide bombings." It's almost become a cliché to talk about it as the best show on television, but I'm hard-pressed to think of a better one.
Noel: I am still catching up—I'm about halfway through the first half of season two-and-a-half, or something like that—so keep your spoilers under your flight helmet for now, even though there probably isn't much I don't already know, just from reading Entertainment Weekly. Anyway, now that all the new fall shows are being canceled, I should be able to get back to Battlestar Galactica soon. (But wait a minute? Isn't The Wire the best show on television? I don't get HBO, so I have no idea what's what.)
- Comments