2D or not 2D? That's not really the question at all...

I recently saw a special on CNBC called The Story of Pixar that was incredibly interesting not only because of the visual and technical advancements of the new medium, but also because it illuminated the fundamental shift in the animated industry from traditional 2D features to almost exclusively computer modeled features. In the special (which was excellent and well worth the time), the notion that Pixar killed traditional animation was discussed at length. While those mired in the 2D world (and the industry at large) blamed the folks at Pixar for the decline and near annihilation of the ages old medium, I was most struck by Pixar's response because I agree whole-heartedly. As Pixar attests, it's not a matter of medium, it's a matter of story.

Traditional animation was in decline long before Pixar came along, and like a sickle, cut down it's competitors with record-breaking success after success. The stunning visuals played a part in this success, I have no doubt, but after all is said and done, Pixar's domination comes down to good storytelling (tattoo-it-on-your-leg storytelling). If it didn't, then the dazzling visuals wouldn't matter 3, 4, or 5 films down the road because we've already seen it. At present, Pixar is 11 for 11, which is basically unheard of. Therefore, what Disney 2D animation began to lack was solid narrative, not visual appeal or whatever magical bells and whistles they seem to think made Pixar a success. Indeed, the crew at Pixar, much like myself, rather adores traditional animation. It's because of this that the steady decline in quality of Disney 2D films is so irksome and disappointing.

As far as I'm concerned, things started to decline after The Lion King, which premiered in 1994 (which, holy hell, was 16 years ago--I'm suddenly very old). Many would contend that this is because it was the last traditional film to be released prior to 1995's Toy Story. I simply think it was just one of the last ones to have a great narrative and wonderful songs at its core. The rest of the nineties were populated with respectably successful, although not earth-shattering features such as Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, and Tarzan rounding out the decade in 1999. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed each of those to certain degree (in some cases quite a lot), but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who lists them among the aforementioned The Lion King, recent predecessors like Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, or the older classics like Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Pinnochio, etc. For me, the last two truly great 2D films were Lilo & Stitch and The Emperor's New Groove. Here, Disney stepped out of the mold, focused on having solid, if unconventional, storylines, and in my opinion, succeeded greatly (these are truly two of my absolute favorites). Beyond that, and with incredibly weak offerings like Brother Bear and Home on the Range, I figured traditional 2D was basically over. Again, it's not that I don't love the medium, it's that lackluster storytelling doesn't bring in the crowds. It's a real shame that this happened and even more of a shame that Pixar is unfairly blamed for a once-hallowed medium biting the dust.

Which brings us to now now. I had heard that the powers that be were going to bring back traditional animation with a flourish and a big ending. Well, that gusto brought us The Princess and the Frog. In spite of misgivings, I had heard from a number of critics that it was actually quite good. Having heard about the production woes prior to release, I rather surprised to hear that it turned out so well. Then I actually saw it. Apparently my initial misgivings should have been heeded. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't a terrible film or anything, but it was in no way the grand return to form that I had so desperately hoped for.

More than anything, I was just plain disappointed. I don't think it's that the critics' positive reviews raised my expectations unrealistically because I still went into this with a healthy dollop of hesitation and skepticism. Having heard about the production woes and numerous rewrites, even the most glowing of raves couldn't have allayed my concerns. What a lot of the issues boiled down to was that this is the love story of a young, southern, African-American girl as written by a couple of old, white WASP-y men... Why, I can't imagine that would cause any problems at all! Having taken a quick look at the two director/writers, it was suddenly apparent where the cries of racial insensitivity may have come from, even if I didn't think all the criticisms were fair. As I recall, the main character's name was originally supposed to be "Maddie" but was changed to "Tiana" because critics cried fowl, saying that "Maddie" sounded too much like "Mammie". I never would have made that connection, but I'm not exactly at the center of the conflict either, so what do I know. (I do know that when I think "Jazz Age New Orleans" the name that pops into my head isn't "Tiana".) I also recall there was a lot of hullabaloo about the fact that this is Disney's first African-American princess and she spends the better part of the film as a frog. I didn't see that as a problem, given the nature of the story, but apparently others did. Whatever the complaints or accusations of racial insensitivity (or even indifference), they all led to a hell of a lot of rewrites, deletions, and modifications to script after script as the creative team tried to please everyone. The end result seemed to work for most people, but I could feel the rewrites as I was watching it and got the impression that a lot of story and character development may have been lost in the shuffle. I'm not saying they should have ignored racial considerations (far from it), but when the writers didn't know how to handle these concerns properly, the story was left timid and watered-down. Again, this is why you don't have a bunch of old white men writing a story about a young, African-American girl. Not a whole lot of common experience or understanding there, you know?

Anyway, the film's problems don't stop there. I think a big part of the problem was Disney's approach to bringing back the medium. On the one hand, I can absolutely see where they wanted to usher in a new era for traditional animation by harkening back to the kind of classic story that started it all. I think any attempts at reinventing the wheel here probably would have failed, but for me at least, so too did this attempt at your standard princess story. I love the princess stories of yore, but that's just it. Yore. I think the main problem with a princess tale is that this film isn't set in some remote European village during the 12th century when castles and princes and glass slippers were on every street corner. This is supposed to be Jazz Age New Orleans, a time and a place when princes are head-scratchingly anachronistic. Even if they had found a way to make this them work for this particular setting, it still wouldn't have the panache of other princess stories because, after so long and so many, The Princess and the Frog couldn't help but feel blandly derivative. This is the same old story I've seen oh-so-many times before, only not as good. It was an adequate story, and filled the royal slippers as well as it could, but it just didn't strike me as special. In short, it quite simply wasn't magical.

As mentioned, the story was adequate, all required elements were there and all major plot-points were hit, but it felt utterly hackneyed. This is the story of two total opposites who start off disliking each other, only to fall improbably, but completely in love. It's a... tale as old as time, you might say... It's a conceit that has worked time and time again, so I can see where writers keep tapping that well, but the writers here did very little to dress up this tired conceit. This time around, we have a repressed girl who spends all her time working meets a mad cap rogue who teachers her how to live a little, while she teaches him some depth, all while falling in love. Been there, yawned at that. In all honesty, I got pretty bored pretty quickly (what with knowing exactly where things were going and where they'd end up almost immediately) and started puzzling (i.e. putting together a jigsaw puzzle, not pondering the mysteries of the universe)... so there's a chance I probably missed a few things (what can I say, it was a particularly difficult, yet addictive puzzle--seriously, I loves me some Klimt, but those spirals were murder). None of this story seemed special or unique to me, which, given the setting and the narrative approach, is kind of hard to believe. It felt uninspired and none of the characters seemed genuine or real to me.

The film wasn't without merit, and indeed had some truly charming moments, but as a whole, it fell completely flat. At the center of my indifference was Tiana, the central figure of the film, and who should have been the emotional backbone of the story. I think I first stopped really caring about her or her woes when it was revealed that her raison d'etre is to open a restaurant. Really? Opening a restaurant is the central motivation here? That's why so much of what is happening is happening? That's the prince's main concern when things are all going to hell? He wants to make sure she gets the money for her restaurant... Honestly? Wow, don't care. I didn't care about her restaurant from minute one and spent the entire film feeling like that was a pretty flimsy reason for her journey. I get that she mainly wants the restaurant because she associates it with her late, beloved father, but I just didn't feel it. The stakes weren't high enough, the predicament didn't carry enough gravity, and as for the ticking clock? I simply forgot about it and even forgot why it was ticking at all. Oh, that's right. If she doesn't get the money together for the restaurant in time, she'll, uh, lose the dilapidated space she had picked out for it...? Yep, that was the ticking clock. Well, the film would have you believe that the clock is ticking to midnight when they'll be stuck as frogs forever, but I didn't feel any real urgency there and when no one turned back into a human, no one seemed all that upset about it. It felt like Fiona staying an ogre. It wasn't that she would turn back into Cinderella and coach would turn back into a pumpkin at midnight (to devastating effect), or that she'd prick her finger on a spinning wheel on her 16th birthday and die, the real conflict at the center of Tiana's world is a matter of real estate. Indeed, the necessary gravity was only applied when the prince's life was in danger, and even then, I was so hardly invested in that character that I could barely be bothered to care. When the death of a lightning bug and the dreams of a gator are more pressing, more central, and important to the viewer than the love story or impending death there of, you know you're in trouble.

Even the songs didn't grab me, and for a musical-phile such as myself, that's surprising and disappointing. Once again, it's not that the songs were terrible or anything, but they were simply adequate. I didn't feel inspired listening to these characters and honestly can't even remember any of the tunes. I didn't walk away humming and had no desire to load up my iPod. As with the perfunctory elements of the story, it honestly felt like the writers sat around and pondered things like, "Okay guys, we're 14 minutes in and we need a song... What do we do?!" None of them felt particularly organic to the story and none of them struck me as special or memorable. What a let down. I walked away thinking, "Yeah, maybe they shouldn't have tried to make this a musical at all..."

I guess at the end of the day, it's not that this was a terrible film or anything (in fact, it was incredibly beautiful), it just wasn't anything special, and for Disney to reinvigorate traditional animation, they needed something special. Very special. When you're trying to put your medium on a level with Pixar, your story needs to measure up. This one didn't. I didn't hate this film and it really was beautifully made with a few nice moments peppered throughout, but that's not enough for me. And it's not enough to go toe-to-toe with Pixar. Seriously, when a film has me sobbing because a girl's cowboy doll gets donated to Goodwill, you know the storytelling can hardly be matched. God, just thinking about that scheme makes me a little misty. Between "Jessie's Song" and that commercial for sad-looking homeless puppies, I have to assume that Sarah McLachlan simply enjoys making people cry. Geez, that commercial evoked more of an emotional response than The Princess and the Frog did... Not good.

Anyway, I've been blathering on about this for entirely too long, but I needed to do a little venting. Disney had a real opportunity here, and while most seemed to have enjoyed the film well enough (except Annie, she's on my team!), I can't think of anyone who ranks it among the true classics. I don't quote lines from the film, I don't know the songs by heart, and I can't even remember half the characters' names... Did the prince have a first name? Or was he just "Prince of Maldonia"? I haven't the slightest idea. The finale was utterly anticlimactic and ultimately forgettable. It almost seemed like an afterthought. Oh, so they got married and that made her a princess and that made them turn back into humans and stuff... Awesome? Not really. I walked away underwhelmed and fairly bored.

I'm hopeful Disney takes a chance on 2D animation again, only with Pixar's attention to storytelling. I generally don't care what medium is chosen, so long as the characters resonate, the narrative is gripping and memorable, and the film is cohesive and memorable.

It could be a bunch of little stick figures and that would be fine.

(Although that wouldn't necessarily be my first choice...)

Everwood PD! Get your hands up!

Boy, if that doesn't strike terror into the hearts of perps everywhere, I just don't know what will...

ABC's latest attempt at summer programming, Rookie Blue, stars Everwood alum Gregory Smith, so that's good (by which I mean, of course, that's awesome)... But other than that? Well... how do I put this gently?

This new pilot is so obviously and shamelessly "Grey's Anatomy + Cops" that it's downright embarrassing. I can't decide if I should respect the creative team more for not trying to hide it or less for not trying period. Let me count the ways...

Cast of overly-attractive 20 somethings in a job that doesn't generally cater to aspiring models: Check

Hip soundtrack: Check

Local hangout is a bar frequented by people in X profession: Check

Female protagonist who also provides annoying, slightly whiny voiceovers: Check

Voiceover girl is the daughter of a legend in the profession and feels the need to live up to a bunch of stuff: Check

Pilot episode features group of newbies on their first day on the job: Check

Newbies struggle to learn the ropes at the hands of often unforgiving, compassion-less superiors: Check

Romantic pairing between voiceover girl and hot, hiring-ranking colleague: Soon to be checked.

Honestly, I could keep going. Now, a lot of shows in the past few years have been Grey's Anatomy + X profession, but never have I seen one that was basically a shot by shot remake of the original, only with that new profession at the center. Shameless. Truly shameless. And yet, paradoxically, shameful as well. Hmph.

From what I've gleaned from the message boards and from what buzz I came across prior to the premiere (and, speaking of shameless!), the only real reason anyone tuned into this generic mess is for Gregory Smith. I don't know what he's been up to since Everwood, but our darling Ephram Brown has been sorely missed. It was lovely to see you again, but I must say, I spent the better part of the pilot wishing this was a group of overly attractive twenty-somethings who were rookie pianists with Ephram providing the voiceovers... Now that's a derivative rip-off I'd enjoy! Come on, Grey's Anatomy + Pianists?! Gold. A quick note on Everwood: It's one of those shows that you get snickered at for admitting that you liked it, but more and more, I have found that a lot of the TV gurus I admire most were huge fans. I was never obsessive about it or anything, but it was a solid show that deserved better than it got. Gregory Smith was the primary reason for that. So brooding. So adorable. It's really a shame that his return to television here was... rather less than triumphant. I'm thinking maybe I'll skip Rookie Blue and re-watch Everwood on DVD instead...

There's honestly no better way to describe the show than "take just about everything and just about every character type from the Grey's Anatomy pilot and substitute with cops," so I don't think I'll try. Woefully derivative would be an understatement. That said, Grey's certainly benefited from this model, so who knows, maybe Rookie Blue will be a huge hit or something. And honestly, it was a watchable pilot. If I had never seen Grey's, I probably would have just passed it off as a cop show aimed at a younger audience and called it a day. In the definite plus column for me, I watched this before I blogged about Memphis Beat, which was definitely to Memphis Beat's benefit. I think it would have received a much harsher review, but for Rookie Blue.

Anyway, the show centers around Missy Peregrym's character Andy McNally. Oh, how I wish I were joking about that name. I've never been a fan of Missy's, so that was off-putting to say the least, but I figured Ephram would make up for it. Much to my chagrin, Ephram was in about 8 minutes of the pilot and wasn't really given anything to do. It was so strange seeing him be anyone but Ephram from Everwood, and the creators of this show should have realized that would be a problem. He needed to be given a substantive plot line with significant character development right in the pilot for anyone to see him as anything but Ephram. As with Charlie from Party of Five being revinvented on Lost, Ryan Atwood going from teen soap The O.C. to gritty Southland, and Carmela donning scrubs as Nurse Jackie, when an actor is known for playing a certain role, his/her next project needs to make a point of separating the two or you're stuck with second-rate hacks such as myself calling your character "Ephram" for the entire series. The creators should have recognized that he would be the draw for this show and should have showcased him more. He's the only reason I tuned in and is the primary reason I'll be giving this show a second episode.

Which isn't to say the pilot was a total disaster. It's real problem was with it's similarities to Grey's. Try as I might, I simply couldn't separate the two. In all honesty, the characters were likable enough, if light on substance, the concept could certainly be a lot worse, and all in all, it was pretty watachable. I didn't spend the entire pilot wishing it would just hurry and end, although perhaps that's because I was too busy chalking up items stolen from the Grey's script... The show certainly has some issues, and I don't think it has a creative team that could ever really make a serious drama work (so it's good that they're aiming for lighter), but the pilot was enjoyable on a certain level, if admittedly poorly made in a lot of ways.

Watching the rookies be put through the paces of the first day on the job was utterly predictable and when McNally arrests and undercover cop, it comes as absolutely no surprise. I certainly knew he was a cop, and so should she. That said, he could have done a lot more to tell her that was the case, but you know, that would have derailed a lazy plot point, so what can ya do? Wait, what's this? Not only was it a lazy plot point in the pilot, it's one with ramifications for the entire show! Huzah! Yeah, turns out the undercover cop will be filling the role of officer McDreamy. Ooooh, but he's all mad at her for blowing the cover he did absolutely nothing to protect (seriously, it would have taken less effort to maintain his cover ID absolutely than it did to vaguely try to clue McNally in), and he's a superior, so there's all sorts of tension and... whatnot! Yay...

The production budget apparently couldn't afford any sort of technical advisers to school these actors in police procedure or, as is so often the case, CPR. Not only did the writers of this show have no background in criminal justice, but I'm pretty sure they've never even seen a TV show about people who do. Half the things people did I couldn't decide if that was the writers' way of pointing out how stupid these rookies are of if that's how they think thinks actually happen. That's not a good sign. To boot, the heart of that poor girl who received CPR must have already been beating when Rookie McLetsseehowfastIcancrackherribs got to her, because the way she was pumping, the chambers of the heart wouldn't have even had time to fill with blood before the next compression. I don't know how it's possible that no actors ever had to learn CPR in their real lives, but... at least they have their looks? Shameful. Oh, but don't worry, the woman playing the paramedic must have actual magical powers or something because she barely raised the need in the victim's general direction before she spontaneously arose from her serious overdose. Top notch writing and acting. Who could ask for more? Oh, wait, I could!

All the characters are basic cardboard cutouts of standard TV types so far and the show did very little to give them any actual depth or individuality (but that one girl has a son! That's all sorts of depthy!). The stories of the week were a bit thin and felt forced and I didn't actually care about any of the players of the week all that much. So, making a tally so far... neither the characters nor the plotlines are strong enough to sustain a series in the long run. Great. I suppose there's a chance that this could magically turn into some solid programming, but I doubt it. But, maybe that's not what this show is going for. If it's a soap, and knows it's a soap, and isn't aspiring to be anything it could never possibly be, it might make for a nice guilty pleasure, which everyone needs a few of. It strikes me as the kind of show that you could keep up with, but never be really sure why you keep up with it, but it's enjoyable enough that you hang in there. It's fluff, and requires little to no energy or effort to watch, and certainly doesn't have the emotional resonance to ruin your evening, so in the right setting, this might be just what viewers are looking for over the weary summer months. There's certainly room to grow, I'll give it that much... Here's hoping they find their feet and smooth out the seriously rough edges because we all know I need more shows to watch... It premiered to solid numbers (for a summer scripted series), so people seem to have enjoyed this new little cop show.

Or they just wanted to see Ephram again.

I know which camp I fall into and involves a lot more Chopin and a lot less faux police work...

I'm just sayin'...

Pilot Grade: C

(The generosity of grading has a lot more to do with Ephram than anything else (in spite of his regrettably scant airtime)... which I'm sure comes a shock after this review.)

Mothers and Sons

Note to writers and showrunners everywhere: If you can make me smile, surprise me, or pique my interest with something new (or shiny--I have more raccoon tendencies than I'd like to admit) within the first five minutes, I can't help but to want you to succeed overall. TNT's latest summertime venture rose to the occasion. Memphis Beat, starring My Name Is Earl alum Jason Lee, could easily have been your typical cop drama, but I knew from only the first few moments of the show that I was in for something a little different, and to great extent, a little better than your standard fare.

The show had me rooting for it almost instantly. The show opened in such a way that it was unmistakably Memphis (even though I hear it's filmed in New Orleans, the essence of the appeal is that it's the South), but for me, and much more importantly, it made it refreshingly clear that this was not New York or Los Angeles. Saints. Be. Praised. In much the same way that Justified piqued my curiosity right off the bat, a simple change of scenery (and by extension, soundtrack) can imbue a show with an entirely different tone and feel (and sticky humidity). The writers made a point of making Memphis itself a character on the show (even to the point of it being heavy-handed). This may be your typical detective drama in many ways, but just the fact that we weren't in your typical locale made it all seem a little fresher, a little newer, and a little more original than its genre compatriots. To boot, the show didn't open on a grisly murder scene or some blustering bad guy interrogating a bad guy. It opened on an entertainer preparing for a show. A scene which would unexpectedly bookend the pilot.

Along with Memphis as a very welcomed change of backdrop, the characters and the writing have quite a bit going for them. The locale had already put the show in my good graces, but it was the simplest, most unassuming of lines from one of the supporting characters that initially won me over. As Detective Dwight Hendricks (Jason Lee) arrives at a grocery store shooting, he asks a beat cop (who had been getting something to eat across the street) how long it took him to get to the grocery store after hearing shots fired. The beat cop responds, with all attendant urgency and seriousness, "It didn't take me more than 29... 30 seconds, tops!" Heh. So simple, and yet it totally elicited a smile. Because, you know, leave it to some young rookie cop to think that the difference between 29 and 30 seconds would actually matter. I think what really made that work for me was that the show wasn't asking for the laugh and the line simply floated by. If you weren't paying attention, you could very easily have missed it. It was in that moment that the tone for the show was set for me. Very serious situations peppered with a sort of quiet humor that isn't trying too hard, but that totally works. Just the kind I like. From that point on, I wanted to like this show (you know, instead of wanting to dismember it, as per my usual), and I think that's why I was willing to let a lot of things that should have annoyed me off the hook.

In spite of wanting to like the pilot, I have learned to be cautious. For you see, the first 10 minutes of The Good Guys also had me smiling and wanting to like it. I did not. At all. So, when Alfre Woodard, the new police chief and resident hardass, showed up at the precinct to ostensibly enforce rules and just generally be a bitch, I was afraid this show was headed in an equally disappointing direction (and to certain extent, it very well did). Alfre Woodard is a power-player to the nth degree. I adore her. So you can imagine how irksome I found it when she initially seemed to be your standard cliche of the woman in power (read: mega-bitch). For the better part of the pilot, in fact, I was frustrated and annoyed with the angle the writers chose for her character. The new chief, a woman, saunters into this man's world and expects them submit daily reports, file necessary paperwork on time, do exactly as she says (regardless of what actually works), and even banishes the guys' favorite lamp (a naked woman's torso that lights up in the bust area). Don't get me wrong, I agreed with her that "Many of the female officers don't appreciate their desks being illuminated by nipples," but other than that, Woodard was presented as your typical, controlling, unreasonable overlord. To see such a great actress seemingly reduced to such a lazy, insulting cliche was starting to break my heart, but then the show put some factors into motion that helped change my perception of Woodard's character and her dynamic with Detective Hendricks.

In Woodard's initial scene with Hendricks, she explains how she's a mother, and that although her children didn't always want to do as they were told, they did it, and ultimately accepted that she was right. I short-sightedly assumed that this was a writer tapping into the genre's more regrettable views of women and a lazy way of creating conflict with the whose maverick protagonist. To a certain extent, that's absolutely the case, but in the grander scheme, the writers' clearly put a lot more thought into this than I initially expected (not that that made it any less annoying while it was happening, tough). The real heart of the matter isn't fully elucidated till the end, but the seeds of their dynamic are sown throughout the pilot.

The A-plot involves the case of a Memphis radio legend (a tiny little old woman) who is the victim of elder abuse. Through this storyline, it not only sews Memphis into the very fabric of the procedural (which was nice, and helped mask the New Orleansishness), but helps highlight the central theme of the pilot, and what I assume with be a central theme of the series: mothers and sons. Hendricks, whose relationship with his own mother is incredibly strong (and of which he is extremely protective), is thrown off the case at one point by seeming mega-bitch Woodard. He solves the case anyway, of course, and is then at the mercy of his new police chief who spends the better part of the pilot trying to keep him under her thumb. After seeing his dedication to his work, to the victim, and the fact that he managed to do right by everyone without her supervision, Woodard's character reevaluates her relationship with him, and more intrinsically, her relationship with her own children. It is revealed that for all her blustering about being a mother and raising kids right, her children hardly speak to her at all. Her efforts have driven them away. It was at this point that I gave the writers some credit. They didn't write a two-dimensional stock character of the "woman in power," but rather set up an unexpected dynamic that will affect the whole series. In essence, she is the mother of the precinct and Hendricks is her unruly son. A bit cheesy, and a bit heavy-handed, but it worked for me. Seeing how strained and distant her relationships with her own children are, she has to swallow her pride and acknowledge that her way of doing things doesn't work. I'm actually pretty intrigued by this pairing and I'm willing to give this show a few more episodes to really suck me in. This is a new interpersonal relationship for a show to explore, and for a crime procedural, it's a surprising, and welcomed move.

It's a good thing the relationship between "mother" and "son" has me interested because so far, they're basically the only two characters on the show (besides "Memphis"). I assume there are other series regulars, but the pilot showcased Woodard and Lee exclusively. As engaging as that dynamic may be, it's certainly not enough to sustain an entire series. Perhaps if I were more of a fan of crime procedurals I wouldn't be as concerned, but this loyal TV viewer needs more on her plate. They both need people to play off of and right now, the only possible candidates are Hendricks' mother and he his partner, neither of whom were given much of a role in the pilot. It'll be interesting to see where things go from here, but I have a sinking feeling things could stagnate. I'm just now sure how much exploring they can do with just Woodard's and Lee's characters alone, and the "cop show" genre needs quite a bit extra for me to really find it engaging. Although, to the show's credit, the A-plot murder was well-written and surprising. It had a lot of nice twists that I didn't see coming and did a really good job setting up characters that I cared about. I hope they continue to integrate the murder of the week into the overall themes of the show because that's when a procedural really works for me (a la Buffy and Veronica Mars). It's really the only way A-plots make much narrative sense to me.

All in all, this is kind of a strange little nugget of a crime procedural. It had your standard detective show elements, but also had a healthy dollop of surprising elements and interesting character choices. That entertainer getting ready to perform in the opening shots of the pilot? Well, that would be Detective Hendricks, as is revealed in a very effective bookend to the show. I'm not so sure that was Jason Lee actually singing, but it made for a nice character quirk that I honestly didn't see coming.

Lee forms the obvious foundation for the show and I think his character has a lot of potential depth (although Lee doesn't seem entirely at home in the role quite yet). It really all depends on where the series goes from here, but so far, the pilot has me intrigued enough to keep going for a while. Unfortunately, for all the show's potential, at the end of the day it's a cop show, and I'm just not sure all the bells and whistles in the world will be able to win me over in the long run. The pilot was fairly solid, if not perfect, but I always find myself wishing these shows were serialized instead of self-contained. We'll see just what a balance this show strikes and whether or not the ratio of A-plot to everything else is enough to keep me interested.

Pilot Grade: C+

The HOA From Hell. No, seriously.

Adding to ABC's summertime gamble is The Gates, which, I have to admit, I didn't hate. Let's not get ahead of ourselves and say I liked it all that much either, but lack of total hate is a baby step in the right direction (you know, as opposed to The Gates companion show, Scoundrels, which has already been capably flogged on this here blog). (According to the ratings for both shows, I'm not alone here.)

Anyway, based on the title for this blog (for those of you who work in my office) you probably thought this post was going to be about Brett and Tara. In all honestly, that would likely have been more entertaining and a good deal more original.

The Gates is ABC's belated answer to the supernatural craze. It centers around a ritzy, suburban, super-secretive gated community that's home to a pair of vampires, several dozen werewolves, assorted witches, some Stepford Wives, and various Republicans. Oh-the-horror, indeed! The pilot was nothing to write home about (and I actually watched it a couple of days ago, so bear with me here), but it was basically well-constructed, no where near as campy or cheesy as expected, and set up a premise and a universe adequately. Unfortunately, it all felt way too familiar. ABC arrived at this monster mash a few years too late and every inch of this show felt woefully derivative, unsurprising, and thoroughly overdone.

That said, and as stated previously, I didn't hate it. The pilot started off in cheeseland, but ultimately found some edge as it settled into its own concept. The real problem, methinks, is that they settled in a little too entirely and way too quickly. I guess the suits were afraid that people wouldn't be sucked immediately if they didn't go whole hog instantly, but for me, that was a wrong step. The reason shows like True Blood and The Vampire Diaries work so well for me is that they give a little and hold back a lot. Granted, they have the luxury of time in a way that I don't think has been afforded to The Gates, but ultimately, I think that's going to be The Gates downfall. It's a little strange to even describe, given the absolutely break-neck pace at which TB and VD tell stories (heh, tuberculosis and venereal disease, anyone?), but for some reason it just felt like The Gates threw everything, the kitchen sink, and a whole basket of standard supernatural conceits at the viewer without much of a plan to build on them. After only the pilot, I wasn't chomping at the bit for more and didn't get the sense of mystery or suspense that I was hoping for.

The show is built around the new family in town, which was ushered into the gates in order to gain a new police chief. Once again, in the wonderful world of "I swear I've seen this before, oh, wait, I have" the audience is met with an unassuming, unsuspecting suburban family that moves onto Haunted Hill, essentially. You see, they'll act as the audience's window into this new world. Isn't that clever? Fortunately, things got a bit more interesting as we meet the vampires down the street and the werewolves that apparently run the high school (and which all ride dirt bikes--I know I'm shaking in my boots, how 'bout you?). The woman playing Mrs. Vampire is a truly terrible actress, which is a shame, because the vamps were really the highlight of the pilot. The relationship between her and a her husband was far and away the most intriguing aspect of the show (mostly because the bloke playing Mr. Vampire does a hell of a good job--I say "bloke" because they're British, of course). Much to the shows credit, the rules for vampires at least sort of appear to be conventional. Although, sometimes they seem to be fine going out in the sun and sometimes they get burned. I guess she forgot to put on her SPF 17,000 or something... At any rate, the wife is less-than-engaging, but her husband struck me as well-rounded, menacing, and unlike most aspects of this show, truly interesting. Quite frankly, he's the primary reason I'll be giving this show a second week.

The werewolves somehow round out the teen angle for the show as the new police chief's son gets all sorts of mixed up with that particular supernatural element (there are oh-so-many too choose from!) You know, it's your standard boy meets girl, girl is dating a werewolf, werewolf gets jealous and tries to kill boy. I'd like to believe that was actually being facetious there, but to put it mildly, that genuinely isn't that far fetched. At all. Again, ABC, you arrived at this party way too late for any of this to seem fresh or original. That said, the pilot did a pretty decent job of establishing the son and the werewolves in a way that has me mildly interested. As far as formulas go, the supernatural show has a lot more wiggle room than, say, your standard legal show or medical drama, so I'm trying to be generous here.

Oh, and there are witches. They're really more like the Real Housewives of The Gates so far, but don't worry they've joined the party as well (and they brought tea!) (Okay, that tea reference will only even kind of make sense if you actually watched the pilot, and even then, I don't expect and non-professional TV watchers to have made note of it, so feel free to ignore that.)

At the end of the day, this kind of setup always allows for a million different avenues for the writers to walk down, but so far, The Gates has taken the conventional route. The writers should have recognized the atmosphere they were entering and done everything in their power to avoid standard conventions. I realize that with the glut of material out there at the moment, it wouldn't be easy to reinvent this particular wheel, but they really should have tried harder. Even the elements of this pilot that were genuinely engaging were undercut by the sense of familiarity. This is a show I've seen before, so unless the next few episodes blaze a new path, I'm pretty sure my vampire dance card is currently filled. They set up a few characters that I kind of care about, and have created a world with limitless possibilities, but I'm not dying to see what happens next. Indeed, the big "cliffhanger" at the end involved finding the body of... the old police chief? I, uh, guess that's spine-tingling? I wasn't even totally sure that was who they found, but there was some really dramatic music, so I guess that's important... I have a sinking feeling this guy (whom no one even kind of cares about) will form the basis for the season 1 story arc, which does not bolster my confidence in the show...

It wasn't a great pilot by any stretch, but it had just enough theoretical potential that I'm giving it another week. Who knows, The Vampire Diaries started off even slower than this an eventually became one of my favorite shows. I don't think that will happen here, but I'm keeping an open mind. I think the real difference is that VD and True Blood have prolific source materials to draw from (although VD has diverged from them in awesome ways) and super-strong creative teams running them. I don't even know who is the showrunner for The Gates, but it's apparently no one of note. So far, I'm underwhelmed, and in a summer with a ridiculous amount of TV to watch, I'm pretty sure this one will only get another episode to win me over. Maybe two. Here's hoping I'm wrong, but I think this sucker is going to fade pretty quickly as the world at large is probably as vamped out as I am.

Pilot Grade: C

Soon-to-be-Forgotten Scoundrels

USA Network has had a monopoly on summertime viewing for several years now (seriously, I don't know how they do it, but if you watch one thing on that network, odds are you watch just about everything else) and finally the non-cable networks took notice. I don't know how it took the big four this long to realize the financial goldmine USA had tapped into, but it seems they're all desperately playing catch-up, and with pretty pitiful results (cough-The Good Guys-cough).

ABC has finally decided to get into the game, but their first foray into summertime scripted programming left much to be desired. (And by "much" I mean "tons and tons and tons.")

Scoundrels premiered last night and I actually went into this pilot with fairly positive expectations. The show follows the Wests, a family of crooks who, after the patriarch is sentenced to five years in prison, tries to go straight at the matriarch's insistence (played by power-player Virginia Madsen). Not the most enthralling concept I've ever heard, but at least it sounded like something different. Plus, with Madsen at the helm, I had reason to believe she'd form an emotional foundation for the rest of the cast to play off of. I expected she'd be the glue holding the rest of the show in place. Well, as with so many pilots, I was wrong. Painfully, ridiculously wrong.

As I soon found out, Madsen proved to be one of the worst parts of the pilot (and believe me, there was A LOT to choose from). I don't know if she just got attached to a show that she didn't actually want to be on, if she found herself with a role that really didn't suit her, or if she's actually just a terrible actress, but her presence was grating at best. She seemed to be phoning it in even more so than her co-stars, and that's saying something. It would be one thing if the mother of this motley crew were a supporting player, but the fundamentals of the series rest almost entirely upon her shoulders, and believe me, she buckled under the weight. At the end of the day, it just didn't seem like she cared, so neither did I.

To make matters worse, I could hear the networks notes in my head. This might be a case of a solid premise being ruined by network meddling, but I'm guessing it was a combination of factors. The fact that this show is supposed to be about scoundrels (a la the title), but in actuality really isn't, was the main aspect that just screamed interference by the suits at ABC. You see, in order to make these people likable (as far as morons who don't know anything about drama are concerned), they can't actually be all that bad, let alone actual scoundrels. The West family lives by a code of conduct, ya know. They don't invade homes, they don't use violence, they don't use drugs, blah, blah, blah. By the end of the pilot, I wasn't even totally sure what criminal enterprises they were engaged in, but it all sounded pretty small time and pretty lame (theft and whatnot). Honestly, the writers and the network had a real opportunity here, but they missed it. When I first read the description of the show, I expected a family of corruption, torn apart by the father's prison sentence. In a bid to pull the family back together and keep everyone afloat, the mother makes the difficult decision to go straight and the audience gets to see the struggle between right and wrong, good and bad, and loyalty or abandon. That I'd like to see. What I got was a watered-down, soulless hodgepodge of events that didn't matter to anyone on the show or, I have to assume, any of the viewers.

The show really tried to be a character piece centered around Mama West, with her husband and four children forming the core of the narrative. I knew we were in trouble when it was made bad-wig-ishly obvious that one actor was playing both of the identical twin brothers. It was all downhill from there. Honestly, when the highlight of the show is the youngest daughter, played by Luke's daughter from Gilmore Girls, you're in for some serious eye-rolling and constant urges to reach for the remote. I think this may once again be a result of network meddling. Rather than present a hard-hitting drama, the network asked for something that would appeal to all ages, genders, and social groups. Well, when you try to appeal to everyone, you appeal to no one. This attempt left the pilot wildly uneven and inconsistent. I got the feeling the show couldn't decide if it wanted to be a comedy, a drama, a caper, a family show, or whathaveyou. The only aspect of the children that was even remotely interesting was the fact that one of the twins became a lawyer, while the other became the worst of the bunch. That could have led to some real conflict and drama (albeit kind of cliche and a bit heavy-handed), but when you have the same guy playing both roles, the possibility for any real tension evaporates. Add to that the other daughter, you know, the obligatorily slutty one, and you have the making of a real winner.

The actual storyline is barely worth mentioning. The essence of the pilot was setting up this tepid, gutless concept. I think the aspect of the show that hit me the hardest was how very, very, very boring it was. Seriously, I've sat through a lot of bad pilots, but this one was far and away one of the most soporific to date. I barely finished it. I was so agonizingly bored by the end I didn't even consider giving it another week to win me over. One and done, peeps. And I have a pretty high threshold. Aside from the boredom, I honestly couldn't see this show going anywhere I wanted accompany it. Had they taken a different approach, it really could have been an offbeat dark comedy with some edge or a visceral drama, but as is, it just came across as a cheap, talentless mess. Shockingly, after this glowing review, I won't be giving this sucker another shot. Not the worst pilot I've ever seen, but certainly not worth my time.

Pilot Grade: D-

Good Night, John Boy!

A new season of So You Think You Can Dance, another few months of motion sickness spurred by the director's quick-cuts, pans, and zooms. Oy. We all agreed last season that the new stage sucks, right? Well, add to that the fact that the show is trying to be %134 hipper with the directing and this season is already driving me nuts. The new stage is distracting as hell. I hate the lights and crap behind the dancers and I really wish they would just set up a stationary camera. Call me crazy, but I'm much rather watch the dancers the way the audience does. Only on the old stage... I think I miss the staircase most of all. It gave the choreographers something different to work with...

Anyway, along with the gripes and vertigo, this season of SYTYCD has completely overhauled the format (instead of 20 dancers paired together, each of the top 11 dancers will be paired with an all-star from past seasons). So far? I'm torn.

The Good: I think the overall quality of the performances is greater on average. There really weren't any total trainwrecks last night, which I suppose is a good thing... (I do rather enjoy the trainwrecks, thank you very much.) I think the best part about the new format is that a good dancer doesn't get tied to a crappy dancer for weeks on end. In that same vein, dead weight gets cut quicker because you don't have the popular half of the pair carrying the other half (Randi, Ashleigh, etc). The real formatting boon? The lack of Mary Murphy! Saints be praised! She is not missed. I really liked Mia as a regular judge last night (even more so than when she was a guest judge in the past). In all honesty though, if it means I never have to hear Mary scream or hear about the Hot Tamale Train ever again, I'd be thrilled to see an inanimate carbon rod filling the third chair.

The Bad: On the other hand, the new format doesn't really allow for slow growth (either of skill or popularity). The fact that we're starting off with the top 10 (er, 11) means that the learning curve has been essentially eliminated. You have to be awesome right off the bat or you're gone. The absolute worst part about the new format is that we won't get to see the chemistry and trust develop between the dancers as they spend the first several weeks together. I loved seeing that bond and I think it carried a lot more weight and impact when pairs were split up. They were teams and genuinely cared about each other when one was on the chopping block. Now? It's ever dancer for him/herself. Plus, when you only have three days to spend with someone, that doesn't allow for a real connection to develop. That said, the chemistry between the dancers last night was better than expected (for the most part), but I just didn't really care about the pairs in and of themselves. Which, I guess is a good thing because they'll all be paired up differently next week. I don't know, it just kind of feels too easy for the performers to be paired up with a pro. I really liked it when two specialties were paired up for a style that neither of them had ever done before. It adds more variety when the prospect of a contemporary dancer and a hip-hop dancer having to do the paso doble is on the table. Sure the results are sometimes catastrophic, but that's part of the fun.

The new format has its plusses and minuses. I think if I had started watching the show back in season 1, I'd be more welcoming to the change, but I only found this little gem a couple of seasons ago and hadn't gotten sick of the old routine. (Last season was a bit of a disaster for completely different reasons that the basic format.) I guess we'll see how it pans out, but I found myself missing the old format quite a lot.

At any rate, as I am ranked somewhat lower than an executive producer on the show, my opinion doesn't really matter, so I'm going to dive right in and just deal with it.

Here is how I would rank the routines last night:

1) Kent--Cha Cha by Tony and Melanie
2) Cristina--Jazz by Sonya
3) Robert--African Jazz by Sean Cheesman
4) Alex--Contemporary by Sonya
5) Adechike--Jazz by Travis
6) Melinda--Jive by Tony and Melanie
7) Jose--Hip Hop by Nap Tab
8) Lauren--Jazz by Mandy Moore
9) Billy--Broadway by Tyce
10) Alexie--Hip Hop by Nap Tab
11) Ashley--Contemporary by Tyce

Controversial ranking? Probably. The judges may have thought Alex's contemporary routine was the most sensational routine in the history of the show, but I don't even think it was the best of the night, and it certainly can't hold a candle to Sonya's last season routine (Tore My Heart) with Jakob and Ellenore. Maybe it's my distaste for contemporary, but I just wasn't blown away. I quite enjoyed it, don't get me wrong, but for my money, a half-way decent ballroom number beats a spectacular contemporary routine any day of the week.

Here's the routine by routine breakdown, in order of my preference (for the performance, not necessarily the person):

KENT
Okay, I don't usually go for folksy smalltownishness, but I simply can't help myself. I adore this kid! The fact that his first dance was ballroom didn't hurt either. I never saw Anya's season of the show, but she's pretty damn amazing. Oh my god, it was so much fun to see this experienced, sexy femme fatale paired up with sweet, innocent farmboy Kent. I was a little apprehensive about his ability to pull this off, but I am SO VERY GLAD I was wrong! For me, performance is a lot more important than technical precision (not that his technique was bad or anything, but it wasn't perfect). His footwork was determined, it not exactly perfect, his technique impressed me, but far and away, the best part of this routine was his commitment to it. He absolutely went there and gave 100% and loved every minute of it. That wins him about a million points in my book. He played the part even though it's about as far from who he actually is as possible. He had the Latin ballroom blue steel face, the swagger, the maturity, the machismo and it all worked for me. It was a super sexy routine, but finding that country bumpkin sexy was just a tad out of my comfort zone. Anya was sexy as hell, and while Kent kept up with her shockingly well, I just couldn't quite deem him alluring... it's just a tad statutory to say something like that about John Boy incarnate. He's just so wide-eyed and innocent! That said, Kent FTW!

CRISTINA
Second in line in the annuls of "I'm expecting that to be a disaster, but it totally wasn't!" we have Cristina. [This just in: I started this post the day after the competition show and am now picking back up with it after the elimination, so adjust expectations accordingly.] Honestly, Cristina is the only girl this season that I even remotely like. Again, my penchant for ballroom wins her a lot of points, but as with Kent, I think it was her sheer commitment and determination to the piece that won me over. She totally went for it and managed to keep up with her partner beginning to end. Call me crazy, but I liked this piece better than Sonya's other piece. What generally determines for me how much a liked a piece is how inclined I am to watch it again, and this one came in above Alex's routine. Anyway, Cristina isn't my favorite competitor, but she's far and away my favorite girl and did NOT deserve to be in the bottom three. It's such a shame that the solos screw over the ballroom dancers so royally. It's a style that's predicated on having a partner, so when there is no partner, there's not much that can be done. I think now that they have the new format, they should just have Anya or Pasha pair up with the ballroom dancers for the "solo". Oh wait, Cristina is the only ballroom dancer. There are certain aspects to this show that I do not enjoy...

ROBERT
...is decidedly pretty to look at and happens to be a very talented dancer to boot. I don't generally dig the African Jazz pieces all that much, but I really loved this one. It seemed to have more sophisticated choreography than I'm used to seeing and Robert and his partner were almost uncannily in sync. And once again, it was clear that he was having a blast doing it and that goes a long way for me. I think my only issue with Robert is his "surprise" face. It doesn't seem all that genuine, even though I think it actually is. His personality can be a bit over the top, but I kind of like that. I didn't really notice him in the tryouts, but he and Billy were placed front and center for the "Meet the Top 11" exhibition episode, so apparently Wade Robson sees some serious potential in him as well.

ALEX
It was a wonderful routine set to a terrific song, but I wasn't bowled over in the same way the judges were. I have to assume that seeing it in person was much more spectacular... Anyway, there's just something about contemporary dance that bores me. Maybe I just don't know enough about dance to appreciate it fully (and that is absolutely a possibility), but it just seems so lethargic to me. I like the dynamism and energy of the other styles. Also, and again, the fact that the entire style seems to be based on "Look how much emotion I'm pretending to have!" drives me a little batty. When I watch someone truly enjoying a jive or getting caught up in a sultry samba, I feel it and believe it to be genuine. Some contemporary pieces strike me the same way, but by and large, not so much. Anyway, Alex is pretty adorable himself and is truly an amazing dancer. I could definitely see him go all the way. I'll be very interested to see this ballerina (ballerino?) do some other styles, so I'm glad he'll be around for a long time.

ADECHIKE
I hate to put Adechike this high on the list, because really, the judges were totally right about his performance, but Kathryn brought so much to the table that it saved the entire routine. I honestly don't think I looked at Adechike even once. Unlike my favs, he didn't commit to the character at all, and while the steps themselves were well-executed, he didn't bring any charm or personality to the performance at all. Which is a serious shame because Kathryn BROUGHT. IT. She looked absolutely stunning in that red dress and it made it kind of hard to care about Adechike. Also, as much as I love Travis, this routine seemed oddly familiar... oh wait, that's because it's already been done. Travis' take was better than the original, but the basic concept has been done (and really wasn't all that spectacular the first time around). I was a bit surprised that Adechike wasn't in the bottom three. He certainly deserved to be there.

MELINDA
Okay, the judges didn't like this routine (and apparently neither did America), but I actually liked it. Melanie's technique wasn't spectacular or anything, but Pasha is gorgeous, the routine was fun, and she really did give it her all. I've seen much worse jives (ahem, Russell and Mollee (mostly Mollee) get much better reviews in the past and much better jives get much worse reviews (season 5, Evan and Randi (I couldn't find a clip)). Her feet really were kind of pigeon-toed, and I've never been a fan of tappers, but the fact that she isn't a contemporary dancer and this wasn't a contemporary piece helps a lot. I like fast routines with a lot of energy, and jives are both. By no means the best jive I've ever seen, but she committed to the character and I quite enjoyed the back and forth between her and Pasha.

JOSE
He's a sweet kid, and it was a good routine, but I wasn't blown away. The fact that the b-boy just happened to get hip-hop for his first routine reinforces my theory that the show isn't quite as random as they claim, but at least we didn't have to watch him try to keep up with Anya. I think my main quibble was with his b-boying in the routine. If you're going to be a b-boy, you'd better be pretty damn impressive, and this just wasn't. He held his own, which is admirable, but Nap Tab's hip-hop often leaves me underwhelmed. It'll be interesting to see how he does next week when his style isn't hand-picked for him (or so I assume). The devil on my shoulder hopes he gets the dreaded quick step. Muahahaha!

LAUREN
Toward this end of the list, the competitors really suffered (and benefited, actually) by their all-star pairings. They benefitted in that the all-star basically saved the routine, but overall, they were upstaged by their partner. Lauren is a fine dancer and all, but I was watching Ade. Lauren was just too smiley to the audience and it broke down the fourth wall for me. I agree with the judges that she really didn't embrace the character or the concept (which, who all guessed that Mandy Moore would pick yet another song from the 80s? Ooh, ooh, I did!). She just strikes me as a dingy blonde who happens to dance. She's very technically proficient, but I'm not a fan so far. This routine didn't really do her a lot of favors, in her defense. The couch should have been an apparatus for awesomeness, but instead it just seemed like a liability.

BILLY
...is clear down here on the list because of Tyce's crappy routine, not Billy's dancing ability. I love Billy and think he did an admirable job with a pathetic, meandering, lame-ass routine. Tyce is a terrible choreographer and does a major disservice to Broadway with each and every routine. Seriously, when anyone else in the world choreographs a Broadway number, it's spectacular, focused, and has a real story behind it. Tyce just seems to draw dance steps out of a hat and throw them all together. I'm glad Billy will have a chance at a better routine next week because he got the short end of the stick this week.

ALEXIE
...also got a pretty crappy routine to work with, but unlike Billy, she didn't make the most of it. I wasn't watching her at all. The routine was lame to begin with, so I can see where she was disinclined to commit to it, but that's just what you have to do. It's a shame she was sent home before she really got a chance to show her skills, but at the end of the day, this was easily one of the worst of the night. Poor girl. She tried out for the show oh-so-many times and then gets sent home first? That's gotta hurt.

ASHLEY
What's worse than a boring contemporary piece or a Tyce routine? A Tyce routine that's contemporary. Good god, he's a pathetic choreographer! This routine has the novel concept of "love." Wow, Tyce, way to think outside the box. It's really not Ashley's fault that I hated this piece so much. It has more to do with Tyce than with anything else. The only reason she wasn't in the bottom three? Her telling Nigel [with regard to whether or not she's ever been in love], "You know, I think I might just be." I'm going to reserve judgment on Ashley till I've seen her in something even remotely good, but so far, she didn't make much of an impression. She seems like a good dancer, but when your stuck with this kind of crap routine, there's only so much you can do. Oh, and the robot voice wasn't as charming as she thought it would be. (See Ellenore's alien voice from season 6, for reference.)

Well, there you have it. I think this season is going to be all about the boys as the girls are eliminated one by one before any of the fellas are even in danger. Geez, do the girls suck this season or what? Cristina's the only girl I like and apparently America disagrees. I think Kent and Alex will go all the way. I think Robert is going to fly under the radar for a while, then really make a splash. I think Adechike will be the first boy to go home.

I love this show, so in spite of my quibbles, I think this season is going to be great. It's too early on to know exactly who's going to go be in the finals, but I think there are only about 5 truly viable candidates. I'm shocked and a little embarrassed to admit it, but yeah, I'm pulling for Kent. Seriously, just seeing how genuinely happy he was for Lauren and everyone else who made it through last night and how devastated he was for Alexie was enough to win me over completely.

NBC Pilots 2010: Volume 3 (comedies)

Sticking with NBC's "Me too! Me too!" approach to programming, their fall slate follows in ABC's footsteps and makes a major play for new comedy blocks. ABC hit it big with last year's foray into the thought-dead genre, so now NBC is trying to do the same. From what I've seen, NBC is kidding themselves if they think they have the next Modern Family on their hands, but a couple of their new offerings appear to have some potential.

New half-hour comedy Outsourced and hour-long Love Bites are set to premiere after The Office on Thursdays this fall, while Friends With Benefits and Perfect Couples appear to be slated for midseason. There's something called The Paul Reiser Show that's on the list, but I haven't seen it on any official schedule yet, and I kind of have a feeling it won't actually pan out, so I won't be reviewing it here. Plus, you know, I'm lazy. (Also, I just watched the trailer and it looks criminally un-funny, so yeah, count me out.)

OUTSOURCED

Description: Stars Todd Dempsy (Ben Rappaport, off-Broadway’s “The Gingerbread House”), Rizwan Manji (“Privileged”), Sacha Dhawan (BBC’s “Five Days II”), Rebecca Hazlewood (BBC’s “Doctors”), Parvesh Cheena (“Help Me Help You”), and Anisha Nagarajan (Broadway’s “Bombay Dreams”), Diedrich Bader (“The Drew Carey Show”), and Jessica Gower (Network Ten’s “The Secret Life of Us”). Robert Borden (“The Drew Carey Show” and “George Lopez”) is executive producer/writer. Ken Kwapis (“The Office”) developed the project through his company, In Cahoots, and serves as executive producer/director.



My Take: Ummm... wow. It's hard to really know where to start here. I have to give them credit for trying something new, but this isn't really working for me so far. I'm stuck between finding this funny or cringe-worthy. I have a sinking feeling this is just going to be one episode after another of Americans looking like assholes whilst mocking Indian culture. Yeah... not exactly my bag, thanks. I honestly don't know what to make of this one. Handled in just the right way, it's the kind of concept that could be a witty juxtaposition of cultural norms, but so far, I'm not sure they're capable of pulling that off. In case the equivocacy thus far hadn't tipped you off, I'm on the fence with this one. I salute them for being daring. Having a mostly unknown cast and setting your comedy in India is ballsy, if nothing else. There's certainly a lot of room for funny in this concept, but I'm afraid it's going to veer into un-funny, America-is-better-than-you-are territory awfully quickly. Anything that is overtly "We're number 1!" is a major turn off for me, so I'm really hoping this comedy takes jabs on both sides (with the serious jabs coming America's way) and using this show as a platform to expose cultural quirks in a hilarious way. That's a tall order to fill, so I'm apprehensive at the very least. We'll see how it goes, but I have to admit, I'm nervous. It just feels like the kind of show that will make me embarrassed to be American... you know, more so. It has some impressive creative talent behind it, so I'm hoping to hell they pull this one off. I'm not sure it'll find an audience immediately, but to NBC's credit, one of the few things they do right is give their comedies time to grow.


FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS

Description: From Oscar and Emmy winner Brian Grazer (A Beautiful Mind, Arrested Development). Stars Ryan Hansen (Veronica Mars, Party Down), Danneel Harris (One Tree Hill), Fran Kranz (Dollhouse)--a role which is being recast, Ian Reed Kesler--who is also being recast, and Jessica Lucas (Cloverfield). David Nevins (Lie to Me, Arrested Development) joins Grazer as executive producer. Also serving as executive producers are David Dobkin (Wedding Crashers), who directs the pilot, writers Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber ((500) Days of Summer), and Jeff Kleeman.



My Take: Well, it's hard to know exactly what this one is going to look like in the end because half the lead roles are being recast as we speak. Most irksome? That my darling Topher Brink (aka Fran Kranz) is getting the boot. Grrr! Argh! He seemed perfect for the role (which I have to imagine is being tweaked as well) and can absolutely hold his own in the acting department. He has great comedic timing and a hell of a lot of depth. I was really looking forward to seeing him again (you know, in a less Thoughtpocalypse kind of way). Sigh. Considerably less irksome? That guy playing the womanizer (with the plan to sleep with a representative from the major religions) is also being recast. I didn't recognize him (after checking IMDb, it appears he's been in stuff here and there, but nothing noteworthy--you know you're in trouble when the official description doesn't list anything) and didn't find him appealing at all. He certainly didn't strike me as a ladies man (at least not a successful one). Anyway, he won't be missed. Regarding the elements which will be staying the same (presumably), I love Ryan Hansen and think that if anyone could pull this off (and temper the Fran Kranz ouster), it's him. His days as douchey Dick Casablancas on Veronica Mars always make me smile. He wasn't terribly appealing back then (which was the point), so I'm actually pretty surprised at how he came across here (i.e. likable and attractive). The other leads are basically unknown to me, but they seemed to acquit themselves well. The concept is pretty basic and standard and I don't think it'll take more than a season for one (or both) of the primary leads to fall in love with the other, but all in all, it looks like it could be some mindless fun. Ryan Hansen is funny even when the script isn't, so in spite of some "meh" jokes in the trailer and some less-than-stellar line deliveries by his co-star (maybe it's just her voice, but it feels like she's playing a character, not that she is that character--"Well, what would you expect from the acting school of One Tree Hill?" chimes the audience), I think he's abundantly suited to anchoring a comedy. The creative team has some promise, even if 500 Days of Summer didn't really do it for me... My main quibbles with that movie had little to do with the comedy, so here's hoping the writers are better equipped for serialized TV rather than film. This feels like NBC's latest attempt at bringing back the glory days of Friends (hell, let's put "Friends" in the title!), but the odds of it being the cultural hotspot of its predecessor are slim. It looks like it could be a really solid comedy, but again, it's hard to know exactly what this is going to be. I'll give a serious shot to just about anything with Ryan Hansen at the helm. God, I miss Veronica Mars (speaking of which, did everyone see Jason Dohring on Lie to Me? I really miss him as well).


LOVE BITES

Description: From Emmy Award-winning writer-producer Cindy Chupack (Sex and the City). Stars Becki Newton (Ugly Betty) and Jordana Spiro (My Boys), whose character names are Annie and Frannie--no, I'm not kidding, although I wish to hell I were. This is kind of a weird one and doesn't have much in the way of a regular cast. Apparently each episode will include several vignettes or something... Their story will anchor the series, while other romantically-challenged characters will come and go each week. Hence, LOTS of guest stars, not so many regulars. Chupack is creator, executive producer and writer. Marc Buckland (My Name Is Earl) also is executive producer and directs the pilot.



My Take: Okay, wow, this might just not speak to my sensibilities, but this looks positively painful. I actually quite like Jordana Spiro, but she and what's-her-face appear to be aiming for Romy and Michelle and are failing, failing miserably. Spiro's ditzy dingbat voice might be a character affectation, but that makes it no less annoying or disingenuous (maybe that's the point? the character is all a front? here's hoping...). More than that, I've never been a big fan of meaningless A-plots, and this show appears to have based itself around that concept entirely. I watch television because it's serialized. While lazy viewers might like a show that they can tune into once in a while and still know exactly what's going on, those are my least favorite shows. If I wanted a self-contained, one-time thing, I'd watch a movie, thanks. Anyway, the concept is dubious for me at best and the creative team leaves much to be desired. I watched exactly 10 minutes of the Sex and the City movie and they had pretty much the exact same gag with the two hot guys turning out to be gay. It was uber-predictable the first time, so you can imagine how thrilling it was to see it once again. Way to recycle, Chupack. I appreciate it when people go green. Quite frankly, can we excise the actual leads of this show and follow the attractive gay guys instead? Pretty please? This feels more like a string cornball casting stunts than an actual series and that is an immediate turn off. I'll never understand the concept of introducing characters, developing them in a way that makes the audience really care about them, and then never having them on the show again. It's like what happened with Cupid. I ended up caring more about the story-of-the-week than the series regulars, so it was beyond irksome when I'd never seen the actually interesting characters ever again and was stuck with total crap. The writing is weak and rife with cliches, the base concept is way too A-plot based to appeal to me, and the two leads aren't coming across as nearly as well as they could. Best part of the trailer? Getting to see Kyle Howard again. He was always one of the better aspects of My Boys. Which, while My Boys was never a home run or anything, appears to have been a million times better than this. Spiro and Howard could do (and have done) better.


PERFECT COUPLES

Description: Stars Kyle Howard (My Boys), Christine Woods (Flash Forward), David Walton (Heist), Mary Elizabeth Ellis (It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia), Hayes MacArthur (She’s Out of My League), and Olivia Munn (Attack of the Show). Jon Pollack (30 Rock) and Scott Silveri (Friends) are the executive producers while Andy Ackerman (Seinfeld, The New Adventures of Old Christine) is the director.



My Take: Are we sensing a theme here? Dadgummit, NBC is going to find the second coming of Friends if it's the last thing they ever do! Or at least they're going to try. And try. And try. This one even has a Friends producer on board. Holy hell, this slate of new comedies is redundant. Speaking of redundant, hey look! It's another My Boys alum! Oh wait, it's the same alum! Anyway, and once again, this one just isn't really jumping out and grabbing me. It doesn't look awful, but it definitely smacks of the inexplicable cliche that men are clueless morons and women are irrational shrews, a la Knocked Up. Okay, not that bad. Nothing could be that bad, but you know what I mean. If the writers can find a way to make these people truly endearing and charming, this show could really work, but I'm cautious. The base concept doesn't leave as much storyline wiggle room as audiences' generally go for (you know, what with the perils of dating being essentially removed). There's just something about established couples that doesn't have people glued to their screens. Okay, there are actually a whole lot of things. It'll be interesting to see exactly what angle the writers take with this, but so far, none of these characters seem all that engaging. They strike me as annoying more than anything. But, as with any show, they might just need time to really establish themselves. I've seen a couple of clips of the show that make it look a lot more promising. The creative team is solid, so if there's enough here that it can work, they're the ones to pull it off. I have to admit, the gag with the dramatic walk-away soundtrack made me smile. The stuff about how annoying married couples can be? Not so much. Here's hoping the writers avoid that. Maybe you have to be married to find that kind of pettiness hilarious... I, for one, am not, and do not. At least Kyle Howard is getting work?