Fall 2011: Watch, DVR, or Skip?

Now that I've finally, finally, finally posted previews of the new shows coming to network TV this fall, here's the handy-dandy, considerably shorter guide to which new shows are worth watching and which aren't. Bear in mind that these are based on my tastes and preferences, so if you're a hardcore procedural fan, take these recommendations with a grain of salt.

My determinations also had a lot to do with buzz about certain shows. I have yet to see the full pilots, but a number of people in the biz have. Depending on how much I trust their opinions, some shows were moved around a bit. Long story short, my perceptions of the trailer aren't the only factor here. This is a list of what I think is worthy of an audience and what isn't. I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again, fair warning.

I've been told on numerous occasions that my blogposts are entirely too long, so for those of you who don't care much for readin', I'm including a measure for my level of stoked-edness. The Stokeometer, if you will, ranging from "Not Even Kind of Excited" at 0 to "Can Hardly Contain Myself!" at 10.

-----WATCH---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are in no particular order, but I tried to keep the midseason offerings at the bottom. I may have missed on though. Networks seem hell-bent on keeping some of the best options till the dead of winter which is weird, and inexplicable, and hard to keep track of.

• Once Upon a Time
  Of the shows premiering in the fall, this one probably tops my list. From the trailer alone, it looks like it could go either way, but chatter online promises that it may just be the best new show of the fall. Count me in!
  * Stokeometer Level: 9
  
  
• Person of Interest
  If this is even half the show the creative team behind it would suggest it will be, I'm completely stoked. It looks to be a slick thriller with a hell of a cast. Assuming it shies away from being too procedural, this should be pretty amazing.
  * Stokeometer Level: 7.8
  
  
• Ringer
  It's hard to say how excited I'd be if Buffy weren't at the helm, but thankfully, she is, so I can't help but be excited for this one. I may be setting myself up for disappointment here, but when it comes to the Whedonverse, I'm a perrennial optimist (even if not at any other time).
  * Stokeometer Level: 8.5
  
  
• The Secret Circle
  Well, I was skeptical of The Vampire Diaries at first, and look where that ended up (i.e. Awesomeville). I'm more than a little dubious about the cast, and I'm a bit worried that Kevin Williamson will be spreading himself too thin, but I can't help but be excited for any and all projects that are even tangentially associated with Ian Somerhalder.
  * Stokeometer Level: 8
  
  
• Terra Nova
  This is one that, based only on what I've seen (i.e. the trailer and various articles), I probably would have put in the DVR category. What can I say? When I hear that a show will appeal to everyone, ages 9 to 90, I become a bit leery. That said, critics in the biz are singing its praises. It looks to be one of the biggest premieres of the fall and I'll certainly be there to see if it lives up to the hype.
  * Stokeometer Level: 7
  
  
• Pan Am
  On paper, I wasn't all that excited at all. But, based on the trailer and a run down of the creative team, I'm surprisingly intrigued by this one. I'll be starting Mad Men (which is finally on Instant Play) in the coming months, so Pan Am should make for a nice companion piece.
  * Stokeometer Level: 7.3
  
  
• New Girl
  Okay, wow, of all the shows that were influenced by critical reaction online, this one has to be the top of the heap. I'm no fan of Zooey's, but everyone seems to think this show is amazing and that it could be the next big thing. I have my doubts, but I'm actually really hoping to eat my words (which isn't to say that I'm chomping at the bit either).
  * Stokeometer Level: 6.2
  
  
• Suburgatory
  This one isn't so much a "Can't wait!" as a, "This could be something really special". I wouldn't say I'm on pins and needles, but it looks like it has a hell of a lot of potential. I have to admit, I hate the title, but if that's the worst thing I can say at this point, they m
  * Stokeometer Level: 6.9
  
  
• Revenge
  Ooooh, I'm actually very intrigued by this on, even with Emily van Camp at the helm. It looks like the kind of concept that will fall apart after the first season, but that's okay. I'm still looking forward to it, even if not for the long-haul.
  * Stokeometer Level: 7.5
  
  
• Scandal (midseason)
  This was a tough one. The pessimist deep within (and, let's face it, without) is sure that this will be a disaster on par with Shonda's other recent shows, but I can't help but be intrigued. It looks like a step out of the box for her (even if just a toe) and I have to remind myself that, back in the day, I actually really enjoyed Grey's Anatomy. In hopes that she captures that again, I'm excited. Plus, Desmond!!!
  * Stokeometer Level: 6.7
  
  
• Smash (midseason)
  Oh, midseason. Why must you be so far away? This is far and away the show I'm most excited about, but it's hard to maintain that kind of enthusiasm through the next 6 or 7 months. Still, my love of musical theatre combined with my love of TV? Yes, please!
  * Stokeometer Level: 9.5
  
  
• Apartment 23 (midseason)
  This one looks just quirky and snarky enough to be awesome. It combines actors from all sorts of shows that I've adored in the past, so I couldn't really ask for more. Here's hoping they don't blow it, because they really do have a ton of things going for them.
  * Stokeometer Level: 7.4
  
  
• Good Christina Bitches (midseason)
  Or GCB, for short. Or lame. Title notwithstanding, this looks completely awesome and stars our good friend Olive Snook. I hate that it's held till midseason, but hopefully that will give them time to figure out a different title. GCB is not going to work, people.
  * Stokeometer Level: 9
  
  
• Alcatraz (midseason)
  This one is the most perplexing in the "why the hell are they waiting till midseason" category. It's high concept, but it looks to be fairly procedural, stars Hurley, and is produced by JJ Abrams. I'm excited and so is everyone else. Here's hoping that excitement lasts for a very long time because this one is going to be a very long wait.
  * Stokeometer Level: 8.8
  
  
• Awake (midseason)
  With procedurals taking over the airwaves, it's very nice to see a high concept, cerebral show coming down the pike. I'm sure they'll try to throw in a fair bit of weekly one-off storylines as well, but this one is inherently serial, whether viewers like it or not. Me? I like it. A lot.
  * Stokeometer Level: 8

-----DVR---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I put these shows into this category, it mainly points to some conflicted feelings. I think they look good enough to give them a chance, but they could also get kicked to the curb after the pilot. Appointment TV? Perhaps not. But they all seem to be worth giving a shot.

• Prime Suspect
  I want to be excited about this one, but it's a remake of a British show (which are almost invariably superior) and the concept just seems dated. It's also a cop show, and more than likely, 80% procedural. That said, the trailer was intriguing and Maria Bello seems to do a lovely job. With reservations, I'll be watching.
  * Stokeometer Level: 5.5
  
  
• The Playboy Club
  I was on the fence about this one after the trailer, but it looks like it could turn into a fun, sudsy, night-time soap drama, which could make for a nice guilty pleasure. That said, if the religious right and the conservative nutjobs of the world have their way, it could get very difficult to actually see this show on the air. This might be a "watch online" venture whether it's awesome or not. Dear Religious Nutballs, In what universe is Law & Order: SVU totally inoffensive, but a show like The Playboy Club isn't? Apparently, in whatever universe that may be, it's just good family fun to see countless women get brutally raped, tortured to death, and dismembered, but seeing them dressed in 1960's bunny girl outfits is simply going to far. Wouldn't want to see people actually enjoying sex, now would we? Bastards.
  * Stokeometer Level: 6
  
  
• Up All Night
  I'm honestly not all that excited for this one, but it has a stellar cast and the trailer had some charm to it. That said, I hate children, so this could easily be a good show that just isn't my cup of tea. At the very least, it should be a quality production with some decent bones to build upon.
  * Stokeometer Level: 4.8
  
  
• The River (midseason)
  This looks like it could be an excellent show, but it just doesn't really strike me as the kind of show I'd really get hooked into. I think this one will get lost in the midseason shuffle and will have a hard time finding a consistent audience. In short, I don't think it's going to set the world on fire or anything.
  * Stokeometer Level: 4
  
  
• Grimm
  Sigh. In theory, I should be uber-excited for this one. Between the creative team, the Whedonverse connections, and the base concept, this sounds like it should be well within my wheelhouse. But, and it's a big but, the trailer was pretty abominable and I have serious reservations about them pulling this off. In the fairy tale royal rumble, my money's on Once Upon a Time.
  * Stokeometer Level: 5.2
  
  
• Free Agents
  Speaking of my Whedonverse allegiances, it's Giles! In short, if the lead couple can create some real chemistry between them, this could be a fun little time killer. If not, it's dead in the water, with or without Giles on board. In many ways, I'm more afraid of this one than not. I hate seeing actors I love in sub-par shows... here's hoping it's better than it looks.
  * Stokeometer Level: 4
  
  
• Hart of Dixie
  I've heard online that this one is actually quite charming. I don't think I'll ever believe Rachel Bilson is a doctor, but if I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for shows like True Blood, surely I can force myself to stretch it even farther and believe that Bilson is anything but Summer Roberts. The creative team has a number of credits that I've adored in the past, so with any luck, they'll make this one work.
  * Stokeometer Level: 5
  
  
• Man Up
  Well, it looks better than some of the comedies coming this fall, so I'll give it a chance. It might be that I watched the trailer for this one right after watching the trailer for Last Man Standing, but this looks pretty decent. I can't say I'm excited, per se, but it looks less awful than some of the others? Low bar...
  * Stokeometer Level: 3.9
  

-----SKIP---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ugh. These are the shows that I might not even screen the pilot. Knowing me, I will, but that's only for the sake of saying I've given it a chance. I can't imagine any of these will defy my expectations and become a show worth watching.

• I Hate My Teenage Daughter
  This looks like one of the many comedies that I don't find comedic at all. If the base concept weren't enough to turn me off, the execution is.
  * Stokeometer Level: 1.1
  
  
• Finder
  Unlike most of the shows on this list, I actually kinda sorta have seen the pilot for this one (the backdoor pilot in Bones), and I was not impressed. Bones is mediocre enough, but this goes one step further. I've heard they're overhauling it in a number of ways though, so maybe they'll be able to make it watchable.
  * Stokeometer Level: 2.2
  
  
• Last Man Standing
  This looks to be the most painfully unfunny, loathsome new show of the fall. Why oh why is anyone giving Tim Allen his own show? And why are they allowing him to play the same unfunny character he played in Home Improvement? Ugh.
  * Stokeometer Level: 0
  
  
• Work It
  Painful. Just painful. If you're one of those people who thought it was hi-larious for the football players to dress up as cheerleaders, however, sign yourself up.
  * Stokeometer Level: 0.8
  
  
• Unforgettable
  Yet another crime procedural. Stupid bent. No, thanks. If I were more of a procedural fan in general, I could be okay with this, but I can only take procedurals in small doses.
  * Stokeometer Level: 2
  
  
• A Gifted Man
  This is a well-made show with a fine cast, but it looks absolutely awful. Sappy, cheesy, melodramatic, and lame, I don't think I'll be signing up for this one.
  * Stokeometer Level: 1.6
  
  
• Charlie's Angels
  This looks pretty awful. From what I've read, it's pretty sub-par, even for people who love this kind of thing. Hell, even the websites that I frequent that are always nice have some negative things to say. Odds are I'll have way more than that. I think this one will open big, then fall off sharply week-to-week.
  * Stokeometer Level: 2
  
  
• Whitney
  I've heard that Whitney Cummings is actually pretty funny, but when watered down to network levels, any and all bite from her comedy routine gets lost.
  * Stokeometer Level: 1.5

CBS Pilots 2011: Volume 2 (comedies)

Finally, we're in the home stretch, people. Two more pilots to discuss. I think we can all agree that it's about damn time.

Last up, CBS comedies. In general, CBS does very very well with their comedy ventures. Hell, the shows they cancel get better ratings than the shows NBC keeps. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean their comedies are fantabulous by any stretch. How I Met Your Mother had some good times, but their best is far behind them. The Big Bang Theory is okay in very small doses, but beyond that, it gets pretty old pretty fast. All the others are just painful, with Two and a Half Men taking the top spot among the awfulest of the awful. Which of course means that it had the highest ratings in town. Ugh. Hopefully Charlie's meltdown will take the show down as well.

To the heap of mediocrity and pain, CBS add two more ventures for the fall:

2 BROKE GIRLS

Description: Stars Kat Dennings (Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist), newcomer Beth Behrs, Matthew Moy (Scrubs), Garrett Morris (Saturday Night Live) and Jonathan Kite. Co-written by Michael Patrick King (Sex and the City) and comedienne Whitney Cummings.



First Impressions: Meh. The odd couple set-up, especially the social class odd couple is pretty standard and I've seen it all before. That said, it's a set-up that can work, though I'm not so sure that's the case here. This show seems hell-bent on incorporating as many pop culture references as it can rather than creating situations that are truly funny. Topical pop culture references have their place and can elicit a cheap laugh (the only line I thought was funny here was the crack about Paris Hilton), but all it really means is that the show won't age well. I don't know, these two actresses seem charming enough and maybe after some time the show will find its own unique voice, but from what I've seen so far, I'm unimpressed. CBS comedies are usually a miss for me and this one looks to be no exception. From what I've seen of viewer comments so far, most people will be tuning in to see Kat Dennings' rack, not the show. I'm not network exec, but that doesn't sound like a good sign. At least something is drawing viewers?


HOW TO BE A GENTLEMAN

Description: Stars David Hornsby (It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia), Kevin Dillon (Entourage), and Dave Foley. David Hornsby (“It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia”), Adam Chase (“Friends”), Ted Schachter (“The Invention of Lying”), Joe Hipps and Modi Wiczyk are executive producers for CBS Television Studios.



First Impressions: Was that... Murray? From Flight of the Conchords?! Well, this appears to be quite a step down. This is basically the same show as 2 Broke Girls, but with men. It's as though the same basic themes were presented to CBS and they decided to come out with his and hers versions. Um, yay? I'm feeling as lukewarm about this one as I was the other one, if not less optimistic. CBS skews slightly toward a more male audience and this show is pretty clearly geared at the guys' guys out there. I don't think I even cracked a smile while watching that trailer and Kevin Dillon is universally unappealing. It's not the worst concept I've ever heard, but the execution looks pretty poor so far. It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia is quite a pedigree to come from, however, so maybe the trailer simply isn't doing the show justice. I kinda doubt it though. As with so much of CBS's slate, I think I'll pass.

CBS Pilots 2011: Volume 1 (dramas)

Say what you will about the majority of CBS's programming, the network does very well for itself, people. Sure 80% of their shows are crime procedurals and spin-offs of other crime procedurals, but ratings point for ratings point, it's the most consistently stable network of the big four, and outside a few notable exceptions (mostly attention-grabbing reality competition shows on other networks), has the overall highest ratings in town. Seriously, when the main problem your network faces is that it simply doesn't have room for new shows (what with all the current shows being so successful), you must be doing something right.

I scoff at a big proportion of their programming, but then I have to give them a pass for sticking with The Good Wife. It's the best network drama on television and CBS knows it. It's ratings aren't on par with the real heavy-hitters on the network, but CBS knows that The Good Wife gives it something no other big four network has: critical acclaim. While cable programming has infiltrated and nearly taken over awards shows (at least in the drama department), The Good Wife stands as the lone hold out. I like to think of CBS as a big movie studio that makes obscene amounts of money on crappy blockbusters so that it can afford to take a modest hit on the quality films.

Whatever the reasons may be, America really seems to love its gory crime procedurals, so when it comes to fall programming, CBS has a delightfully small slate for me to take care of. Hell, ABC and NBC have basically overhauled their entire networks with more new shows this fall than CBS has had in the past five years combined. Ouch.

At any rate, here's the probable schedule for this fall (new shows in all caps):

MONDAY
8/7c pm How I Met Your Mother
8:30 pm 2 BROKE GIRLS
9 pm Two and a Half Men
9:30 pm Mike & Molly
10 pm Hawaii Five-0

TUESDAY
8 pm NCIS
9 pm NCIS: LA
10 pm UNFORGETTABLE

WEDNESDAY
8 pm Survivor
9 pm Criminal Minds
10 pm CSI [new time slot]

THURSDAY
8 pm The Big Bang Theory
8:30 pm HOW TO BE A GENTLEMAN
9 pm PERSON OF INTEREST
10 pm The Mentalist

FRIDAY
8 pm A GIFTED MAN
9 pm CSI: NY
10 pm Blue Bloods

SUNDAY
7 pm 60 Minutes
8 pm The Amazing Race
9 pm The Good Wife [new time slot]
10 pm CSI: Miami

The only truly notable aspect of the new schedule for me is that The Good Wife is moving to Sundays. Many have wondered if CBS is trying to kill the show, but as far as I'm concerned, they're simply putting it on the night it always should have been on. I'm not sure how this is going to impact the ratings, but in terms of tone, I've always thought it should be on Sunday and certainly that it didn't fit with NCIS as a pairing. The Amazing Race gets amazing ratings, so from where I'm sitting, moving the show to it's new slot is a ploy to improve its ratings and keep the show alive for years to come. Here's hoping that's how it actually plays out. If any show is being set-up to slough off this mortal coil, it's CSI, which totally deserves it.

Anyway... On with the shows! Of note, there are a lot of things CBS does extremely well, but providing show trailers isn't one of them. They have a tendency to provide weird mash-ups of behind-the-scenes stuff and show clips. Bear with me...

Here are the dramas:

PERSON OF INTEREST

Description: Stars Michael Emerson (Lost), James Caviezel (The Prisoner), Taraji P. Henson (Boston Legal) and Kevin Chapman (Mystic River). From exec-producer J.J. Abrams (Lost/Fringe) and penned by Jonathan Nolan (The Dark Knight).



First Impressions: Well, shit. You can't ask for a better pedigree than JJ Abrams and anyone even remotely associated with The Dark Knight, so to say that this show should be good is an understatement. I think this is going to be one of the biggest hits of the fall. Not only does it have one hell of a creative team at the helm, but it fits with CBS's brand nicely, but improves on it. I think the only head-scratcher with this one is its scheduling. Thursday is a very big night for television, so that's right on the money, but it's lead-ins are a pair of comedies... the one just before it, a new comedy. That... doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense. But, when push comes to shove, I think this show will have enough buzz and momentum that it won't need a snazzy lead-in. I'm guessing CBS knows that. In terms of the actual show, I'm excited, but cautious. My only real apprehension is the tendency for CBS shows to be straight-up procedurals. I'm hopeful this show strikes the kind of balance that The Good Wife has with 60% serial, 40% procedural, unlike the rest of the network which errs on the side of 85% procedrual, 15% serial, if we're lucky. I've been winding my way through all six seasons of Lost over the past few months, so all I could think when watching this preview was that it looked an awful lot like Sayid would show up at any moment wondering who to kill next. Seriously, how do you trust Micheal Emerson at this point? Especially when he appears to be playing a slightly more mainland-y Ben Linus? Speaking of which, the ex-Losties certainly have done well for themselves in the coming pilot season. Just about every show has an alum (which might simply be indicative of the fact that over 6 seasons, every actor with or without a SAG card was on the show). Anyway, this is a high-budget thriller with a hell of a cast and crew and I can't help but to be excited. This show is in line with CBS, but appears to pack more punch than its usual serial-killer fare. Preventing crime isn't the most original bent in the world, but for CBS, a network whose bread and butter is found in the aftermath of horrific crime, it's pretty novel. I'm guessing it'll err on the more action-y, shoot 'em up, guy-centric end of the spectrum, but if it's done correctly, it could make for one of hell of a show. Sign me up.


UNFORGETTABLE

Description: Stars Poppy Montgomery (Without a Trace), Dylan Walsh, Michael Gaston, Kevin Rankin (Justified, FNL), and Daya Vaidya. Ed Redlich (Without a Trace) writes and executive produces alongside EP Sarah Timberman, EP Carl Beverly and writer/co-EP John Bellucci.



First Impressions: This was originally going to be called "The Rememberer", but that was kind of begging to get made fun of. I'm not saying I won't title the full review of the pilot with anything but "The Rememberererererer", but axing that title was a definite step in the right direction. That said, this looks wearily familiar and fits the CBS brand in a bad way. Where Person of Interest ups the ante, Unforgettable puts a very slight and fairly cheesy spin on the old routine. To be honest, I was so distracted by Poppy Montgomery's atrociously bad American accent that I probably missed a lot of the promo. I'm still trying to decide if maybe her character is supposed to be Australian or has a mother who is or something. Seriously, that's one of the worst I've ever heard. Which is strange, because the Aussies usually do a hell of a job. Not here. For what it is, it seems fine, I suppose. After you've seen 104 billion shows just like this, it's hard to be objective. It has all the cliches you'd expect and will cover the same ground, albeit with mostly different names. Kevin Rankin always does a nice job, but I have a sinking feeling he'll be playing second fiddle here, on a show which already looks pretty mediocre. Sad, really. At any rate, I'm not excited for this by any stretch, but it appears to be a competent production of the exact same show that people seem to love. Odds are it will do well, even if critics are bored to tears.


A GIFTED MAN

Description: Patrick Wilson (Little Children) stars as an ultra-competitive surgeon whose life is changed forever when his ex-wife (Jennifer Ehle, The King's Speech) dies and begins teaching him what life is all about. Julie Benz (No Ordinary Family) co-stars, produced by Susannah Grant (Erin Brockovich), Sarah Timberman, Carl Beverly and Jonathan Demme (Rachel Getting Married), who directed the pilot.



First Impressions: Well, first off, any show that starts off the title screen with a definition is already on my bad side (The Mentalist, I'm looking in your direction). Secondly, when it's a word that everyone already knows the definition of, you can officially bite me. Thirdly, if I have to see another show about a heartless surgeon learning to care about the little guy, I might just cry. Fourth (ly?), Julie Benz. Ugh. Fifth, I'm all for high-concept, but this just looks lame. Other than that...! Yeah, so this show isn't really grabbing me. At least not in any good ways. When it doesn't look completely cheesy or cliche, it looks painfully overwrought. The fact that CBS has this slated to anchor the night on Friday suggests that I'm not the only one who's underwhelmed by this one. It strikes me more as a bad Lifetime movie rather than a compelling series. My heart broke just a little bit to see Margo Martindale (aka, the indomitable Mags Bennett) attached to such a show. Oh, Justified. Did you have to kill her off? Yes, you did. But look at the fallout! In short, this looks like a disaster masquerading as a heart-wrenching, compelling drama. CBS struggles hardcore to incorporate shows that don't fit their model, and have had particularly poor results with medical dramas. Three Rivers, anyone? They managed to break into the lawyer genre with The Good Wife, but cops and lawyers are fairly well-connected in the end. Doctors? They really should stop trying. In case I'm being too subtle here, I'm not holding my breath on this one. It could be an amazing shows disguised as a cheesefest, but I'm doubting it.

My Latest TV Query: True Blood

I realize it's probably old hat to anyone who reads this blog (surely there are a couple of you out there), but I'm a huge fan of Matt Roush's column and get a giddy thrill when he posts my questions.

Well, my most recent inquiry was insanely lengthy and I was sure he wouldn't publish it. In the back of my mind, I thought there might be a chance that he'd post a truncated version, but I wasn't holding my breath. Much to my utter delight and surprise, not only did he post my endless epistle, but he posted it in its entirety. Awh, shucks. :) I love that man. Not too long ago I wrote to him about Modern Family vs. Community, and while my question came off more pointed that I had intended, he took it in stride. I wrote him a bit of a clarification/apology some days later and he responded via email almost immediately. He's a class act all the way.

Anyway, here's my latest inquiry and his response. I honestly didn't mean for it to be so lengthy (seriously, most of the questions are about 4 lines long), but it just kind of happened. Regardless, he included. Because we're tight. ;)

• Question: I just re-read your column on the return of True Blood a few weeks ago and I think you zeroed in on exactly what is most appealing about the show, most notably, the dynamic between Sookie and Eric and the introduction of witches into Bon Temps' supernatural milieu (which seems to be bubbling over like the cauldron I have to believe will be in an upcoming episode). The season is only three episodes in and I must say I'm already more enthralled by witches than I ever was with werewolves. From what I've heard from devotees of the book series, the amnesiac Eric storyline is one of the very best and from what I've seen so far, I can see why. Alexander Skarsgard's performance is hilarious and heartbreaking at the same time, delivered in a surprisingly subtle and effective way. As with previous seasons, the interactions between the human world and the vampires is the true heart of the show for me and is far and away the most captivating aspect. Even Bill, who has long played the lovesick puppy, finally has a storyline that has drawn me in and injected him into the action in a more interesting way.


  
  Bearing that in mind, over the course of last season, I began to realize that not only do I find the vampire/human interaction the most enthralling part of this delectable guilty pleasure, but more and more, this interest is to the exclusion of other storylines on the show. Whereas the first two seasons had a central storyline to tie all the characters together in a cohesive way (a season-long "big bad"), seasons three and four (so far) seem disjointed and sprawling. With so many characters engaged in so many disparate arcs, I find myself losing interest in the periphery. Characters that I once loved and who seemed pivotal to the show now seem inconsequential, and at times, boring. I keep assuming they'll be re-integrated into the meat of the show at some point, but it never seems to come. As I watched the last couple of episodes, I found myself desperate to watch the brewing battle between the witches and vampires, but was instead pulled away by Andy's addiction to V, Jason's were-panther problems, Sam's new shifter social circle, Tara in general, Tommy's induction into the Fortenberry clan, Arlene's demon baby, the reintroduction of werewolves and Jessica and Hoyt's relationship woes. While some of these storylines are working better than others, at the end of the day they all seem so distant from the rest of the action that I'm having a hard time really investing. 

  
  I think the show could learn a few things from The Vampire Diaries. Rather than allowing the cast to swell and the storylines to spiral out of control in every direction, I think True Blood would be well-served by a willingness to kill off characters. It seems ridiculous to accuse True Blood of being gun-shy about killing people, but in terms of the principal cast, there have been surprisingly few deaths and an alarming number of additions. Paring down the cast would make for a more cohesive narrative and it would raise the stakes, so to speak. For all the insanity that happens on this show, I'm never all that worried that someone I love might get killed. One of the most compelling aspects of The Vampire Diaries is that viewers genuinely don't know who might die at a moment's notice. It keeps the cast at a manageable level and keeps the audience on their toes. Do you find yourself losing interest in various aspects/storylines of the show? Does it still have the same bite it once did? Is the best yet to come and I'm just being impatient? — Lacy
  
  
• Matt Roush: I'm enjoying this season much more than last year, and a lot of that has to do with how marvelously Alexander Skarsgard is playing the vulnerable amnesiac Eric. Sunday night's drunk scene was a new high of feisty hilarity, and his hissing match with Alcide in the water was a riot, but then after his sunburn, watching him submit to Sookie's ministrations was awfully touching. Loving it. The witch storyline is fairly strong as well, and the great Fiona Shaw is killing it as Marnie. I agree that the Sam/Tommy subplot dragged down much of last season and feels tacked on again this year — but that's the only part that feels off to me right now. Andy's V addiction, Jason's gory misadventures with the were-panthers in Hotshot, Alcide and Debbie Pelt, Arlene's demon baby (those scenes crack me up, and they're not overdone yet) and anything involving Hoyt and Jessica all feel germane to me as this sprawling cast of characters continues to deal with the supernatural in their midst. As long as the focus stays primarily on Sookie, which the Eric storyline should ensure, I'm at peace with it. You make a good point about Vampire Diaries' ruthlessness when it comes to sacrificing characters and I marvel at the way that show burns through story, but I have to say that True Blood does a better job for me at conveying a milieu, which is to say I believe in Bon Temps and feel transported there in a way I don't where the phonier Mystic Falls is concerned.

CW Pilots 2011 (Buffy!)

Oh, sweet, adorable CW. I give you a hard time, but when it comes to pilot season, you bring me nothing but joy. Is that because the shows you select are invariably kickass? Goodness no. I think we all remember Hellcats. But in terms of managing the volume of new shows, I can always count on you to have hardly any at all. Most seasons it's only two. This season, I see you've branched out to three. One small step forward to real networkdom.

Here's the fall schedule (newbs in all caps, Eastern Time):

MONDAY
8 pm Gossip Girl [new time slot]
9 pm HART OF DIXIE

TUESDAY
8 pm 90210 [new time slot]
9 pm RINGER

WEDNESDAY
8 pm H8R
9 pm America’s Next Top Model

THURSDAY
8 pm The Vampire Diaries
9 pm THE SECRET CIRCLE

FRIDAY
8 pm Nikita [new time slot]
9 pm Supernatural

Just look at that. No Sunday. No third hour of primetime. Easy breezy. I could ramble on about what the network needs to do to be a real threat in the industry, but it ain't gonna happen, so I'll save my breath... or typing. Long story short, they're getting their asses handed to them by ABC Family. Why, you ask? Is it because the shows are better? Hell no. I think it boils down to the fact that ABC Family can advertise on all of ABC's other networks, whereas the CW has a more limited pool. You'd think Warner Brothers would have more pull and exposure, but honestly, I see ads for ABC Family all over the place and the CW almost nowhere. Anyway, here's the latest in the CW's desperate attempt to keep their heads above water.

RINGER

Description: Stars Sarah Michelle Gellar (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), Kristoffer Polaha (Life Unexpected), Ioan Gruffudd (Fantastic Four), Nestor Carbonell (Lost), and others. Eric Carmelo and Nicole Snyder (Supernatural) will executive-produce the project.



First Impressions: Buffy! That's right, folks. Sarah Michelle Gellar is finally returning to television. Probably not on the network she had in mind ("I've been behhrnt by you before!"), but a return nonetheless. Word is, CBS was considering picking up the show, but opted out. This is far and away the most mature, off-brand show the CW has ever had. Rather than a teeny-bopper fantasy or a supernatural genre piece, this looks to be a surprisingly adult drama. The promo above doesn't really do it justice methinks. I've seen a couple of clips of the show and the trailer doesn't do much to explain the premise. From what I've seen, I'm very excited and intrigued. Buffy plays identical twins, which always leads to certain problems, but it looks like they'll be pulling it off well. Hopefully it'll be as astounding as Nina Dobrev's turn as Elena and Katherine. Honestly, when Katherine first appeared on the scene, I was a bit worried that it would feel like The Parent Trap or something, but Dobrev does a wonderful job. I never have to wonder who I'm looking at, unless of course that's part of the plan. Anyway, this looks to break out of the CW's mold which is wonderful, but also problematic. Are junior high schoolers who drool over 90210 really going to stick around for a serious psychological drama? I have my doubts. The real saving grace will be if the Whedonverse turns out in droves. That legion may be tiny, but it's dedicated. Plus, what meager numbers they put up would be cancel-worthy on another network, but on the CW? They'll probably fit right in. This looks like an interesting concept with a great cast. If they can pull off the ins and outs of twins, it should be a winner. "Numfar do the dance of joy!"


THE SECRET CIRCLE

Description: Stars Britt Robertson (Life Unexpected), Thomas Dekker (Heroes), Gale Harold (Queer as Folk), Phoebe Tonkin as Fay Chamberlain, Jessica Parker Kennedy as Melissa, Shelley Hennig as Diana Meade, Louis Hunter as Nick, Ashley Crow as Jane Blake and Natasha Henstridge as Dawn Chamberlain. From executive producers Kevin Williamson (“The Vampire Diaries,” “Scream,” “Dawson’s Creek”), Andrew Miller (“Imaginary Bitches”), Leslie Morgenstein (“The Vampire Diaries,” “Gossip Girl”) and Gina Girolamo.



First Impressions: Okay, peeps, seriously mixed feelings about this one. One the one hand, it's from Vampire Diaries genius Kevin Williamson. On the other hand, it's from Vampire Diaries genius Kevin Williamson. You see, it's always lovely when you come across a show from someone you love, but when that someone is currently working on something else, it's bittersweet. More often than not, the showrunner in question gets spread a little thin and one or both of the projects suffer as a result. I'm hoping to hell that's not the case here, but I'm cautious. Another bone of contention is that this stars that obnoxious brat from Life Unexpected. Ugh. Not a good sign. The cast in general leads to some concerns, but along with the wild cards are some solid players. Um, Brian Kinney? Yes, please. In terms of concept, the whole, "person discovers he or she (usually she) has powers" is entirely overdone, but if anyone could pull it off, it's Williamson. The book series that this show is based on is from the same author as TVD. From what I've heard from readers, the series is rather divergent than the books. As Secret Circle starts off, I'm guessing it'll be pretty true to the source, but as with TVD, I'm guessing it blazes its own path. This show has a definite The Craft vibe to it that I'm not sure does it any favors, but it also has a rather Harry Potter-ish generational storyline that I'm intrigued by. I like that the parents all have a history together at the same time that their kids are building their own history. I can't say it'll be a home run, but I'll definitely be tuning in. Be forewarned, if it's anything like TVD (and it should be), it may start of slow and vaguely juvenile, but that's probably not where it'll end up.


HART OF DIXIE

Description: Stars Rachel Bilson (The OC), Scott Porter (FNL, The Good Wife), Jaime King, Wilson Bethel, and Cress Williams. From executive producers Leila Gerstein (“Gossip Girl,” “Eli Stone”), Josh Schwartz (“Gossip Girl,” “Chuck,” “The O.C.”), Stephanie Savage (“Gossip Girl,” “The O.C.”), Len Goldstein and Jason Ensler (“Gossip Girl,” “Chuck”).







First Impressions: Well, first off, we have the major problem of believing for even one iddy biddy second that Rachel Bilson is a surgeon. I like Bilson a lot, but no. Then there's the problem of the voice-over. Hopefully that's short-lived. Beyond all that, we have the concept. Sigh. Look, I'm a huge fan of the Schwartz/Savage pairing, but this just feels incredibly old hat. And not even a very good hat. The whole fish out of water, city slicker moves to a small town has been done way too many times to seem fresh. That said, I loved Everwood... I'm doubting Hart of Dixie will rise to that level, but I'm trying to keep an open mind. It'll be nice to see Jason Street back in action (what with his recent stint on The Good Wife making me want to beat him to death with Kalinda's bat), but I can't say he's my favorite actor. Jaime King actually seems to be the most at home with the show so far, but will predictably bring the evil harpy dressed in chiffon to fruition. In case I'm being too subtle, of the CW's offerings, this one has me the least excited. I'm holding onto hope that the creative team is one that I love and that even if this doesn't look great on the surface, it will likely have a quirky humor to it that I can appreciate. I'll certainly give it a shot, but on paper, it's just not my cup of tea. Here's hoping it's better in execution than conception.

Sorta Super

The first thing a friend of mine at work (hi, Brett!) said to me the day after Syfy's new series Alphas premiered was, "Does Tim Kring have anything to do with this?" It's a fair question and speaks to the primary problem with this show: It looks a whole lot like a bunch of other shows, with a fair bit of Tim Kring's Heroes thrown in for bad measure. (For the record, he doesn't actually have anything to do with the show.) It's a shame really, because if this show existed in a vacuum where no other superhero-type shows had ever aired, I think I would have thoroughly enjoyed it.

As is, I liked it well enough, but it just seemed a little too familiar to really grab me and hold on tight. The show centers around of group of superhumans, called Alphas, who come together to solve peculiar, impossible, or near preternatural problems. Again, on paper, in and of itself, I'm very intrigued. In reality, this would-be original concept is extremely common and although Alphas succeeds better than most, it just didn't pack the punch that a truly unique program can have.

The aspect of the show that held the most appeal and which makes it more divergent than similar shows is the nature of the abilities of its main characters. Rather than outlandish, over-the-top, supremely typical superpowers like flying or shooting laser beams out their eyes, the Alphas have powers that aren't so far removed from what may actually be possible. For example, one character has the ability to manipulate people by suggesting things to them, kind of like Professor X. The difference here is that she can only succeed in so much as the mind she's working with has sufficient plasticity. She has to be looking right at them to make the suggestion and it only goes so far. In the real world, some people are incredibly good at manipulating others, she's goes a couple of steps further. Another character has supernatural aim and an amazing sense of space, so much so that he made an impossible shot to kill someone and can throw coins into a vending machine. Again, some people have superior abilities in shooting and throwing, this show takes it a couple of steps further. Just like some people have perfect pitch, others can do complex math in their minds, and some have more muscle mass than nearly anyone else, this show looks at superpowers that could actually exist, if only we take natural abilities a little bit further. I'm not sure it will lead to the most thrilling series in the world, but it does manage to ground the show. The whole "ordinary people with extraordinary abilities" theme is well-worn and I'm not sure dialing it back will necessarily lead to success. That said, going even further over the top certainly hasn't been working well on TV lately, so this has a better chance than most.

The cast is likable and engaging for the most part, but I think the show would have resonated more if they had taken more chances and stepped outside the formula in a bolder, more unexpected way. As is, we have a beautiful, sexy woman with an edge, a mousy woman without any confidence, an arrogant strong-man, a socially inept, near autistic young guy, and the badass, sexy rebel who's new to the team. Sigh. Once again, these are all character designs that I could get behind, but I sure wish I hadn't already gotten behind them 87 times before. When you take this concept out of the superhero genre, the familiarity is even more apparent is certain respects. Half the procedurals out there involve some rag-tag group of different people coming together to solve fantastic crimes. It makes it incredibly difficult to view this show with new eyes, just as it's impossible to see a cop show, legal drama, or medical series and not groan at the conventions. On rare occasion, a show can take a tired genre and reinvent it in unexpected and captivating ways (e.g. The Good Wife, Nurse Jackie, The Wire), but with Alphas, they seem a bit too comfortable holding onto the tropes of their predecessors.

When looking at this show with as unbiased an eye as I can, it's actually quite well done. Many of the plot twists and turns could be seen a mile away even without super-sight, but the pilot was well-composed for the most part and made for a reasonably cohesive and engaging program. The most compelling aspect was the ongoing mythology that they began to establish with the pilot. The fact that the enemy group/organization is called Red Flag didn't exactly help with things, but the concept behind them was intriguing. As with any genre show, the success hinges on bringing something new to the table. Alphas might not have brought something completely new, but they at least rearranged the dinnerware in a way that caught my attention.

The best divergence from the norm was with the visual style and direction. The special effects employed to illustrate the Alphas' powers was extremely effective, particularly when the strong-man turns on his muscle and the mousy girl puts her synesthesia to good use. Above all though, the pilot opens with super-aim guy (I can't remember any of these people's names... I think his last name was Hicks) is triggered to go kill someone, having been made into a sleeper assassin of sorts. The people around him start telling him it's time to kill, but the art direction makes it really hit home. It's hard to know if he's having a psychotic break, is brain-washed, or is dreaming. In a weirdly obvious and yet concurrently subliminal way, the people and things around him say it's time for him to kill and when everything and everything seems to be in agreement, what else is there to do?

As with so many shows for me, deciding whether or not I'm going to love a show largely comes to down to whether or not it's procedural or serial. While in general, the "band of really talented people solving crime" motif falls into procedural territory, I usually wish it wouldn't. With Alphas, it's a tough call regarding the ongoing format of the show. I can see where there will likely be some procedural elements, but the pilot made a point of focusing on the characters themselves as well. By making it clear early on that these are not invincible superheroes and that with each of their gifts comes a downside, it gives the show room to explore the subtler aspects of these characters. It gives the show room to breathe rather than cramming as much plot-exposition-of-the-week down viewers' throats. I'm hopeful they'll stick to that and really make these characters unique and engaging. For me to really care about a show, especially a procedural, I need to truly invest in the people. So far, I'm moderately intrigued...

David Strathairn is always wonderful and turns in a very nice performance as the leader of this band of Alphas, blending an intelligence with an undeniable warmth and caring. His team is a little hit or miss at this point. As mentioned, they fall a little too closely into familiar stock for me to really sit up and take notice, but they all seem to have potential. The only real problem I had was that the vaguely autistic kid is played by Mr. Nigel-Murray from Bones. I adored his sweet, trivia-lovin' Englishman on Bones, so to see him here as a socially inept American was a bit jarring. His accent was spot on, but his speech patterns felt a little forced in a "I'm not quite sure just how autistic I'm supposed to be" kind of way. As with any role, I'm sure he'll settle into it over the next few episodes and craft a character with traits that are more consistent. As of the pilot, he seemed to vacillate between Rain Man and Temperance Brennan.

All in all, if I had never seen a superhero show before or had never experienced the rush of a team of strangers coming together to use their special skills, blah, blah, blah, I think I'd be rather enamored. But, I have experienced both those things, separately and combined. Alphas certainly isn't the freshest idea or residing in the least common genre by any stretch, but they do a respectable job. They have established a foundation that could turn into something amazing, even if not something wholly original. I'll definitely be giving the show a few more weeks to make this concept its own.

Pilot Grade: B-

ABC Pilots 2011: Volume 2 (fall comedies/midseason offerings)

It's dawning on me that the fall season is just around the corner and I'm in very real danger of not getting all the shows previewed in time. As such, I'm going to streamline and truncate the process. First and foremost, it has become abundantly clear that reviewing comedies in this kind of format is a lost cause. There just isn't enough to really indicate if a show is going to be funny or not (usually not). The 2 minute promo seems to do more justice to dramas, so unless there's a comedy that really stands out, I'll be sticking to their more serious, hour-long friends. I was tempted to keep the midseason slate to a minimum (what with them not showing up until January or February, but so many of the most promising options are relegated to winter that I can't.

ABC has several new comedies for fall, but most of them look to be hit or miss. Hopefully they pan out better in full than they do in the trailers, but some of them have no hope. I've linked to trailers for them in case you're really, really interested.

In short, Last Man Standing stars Tim Allen ('nough said) and looks unspeakably bad. As per his nauseating Home Improvement persona of yore, it's a show that has very little to say or do other than made broad, sweeping generalizations about the sexes and pretend they're hilarious. They are not. I have very little tolerance for the notion that women are in charge and men simply have to put up with them. No one forced you to get married and have kids, genius. Shows like this make men look stupid and useless and make women look like shrewish harpies. Um, yay? Not so much. Worst of all, I think I spied Caitlyn Dever (aka Loretta from Justified) playing one of his daughters. Geez, talk about trading down. Ouch.

Man Up follows in the men vs. women trend, but has a hell of a lot more potential. I'm not saying it looks like a surefire hit or anything, but after watching the Last Man Standing promo, this looks like pure gold. Again, with comedies, it's hard to tell, but this looks like it could be fun. It seems to be opting for men are children and women have to take care of them, which also does neither gender and favors, but at least it isn't as nauseating. Done in the right way, this could work.

Suburgatory appears to have the most potential of the bunch. My good friend Michael Ausiello really enjoyed the pilot, and based on the promo, it appears to have more edge and perspective than ABC's other options. A lot of the notes being hit seem to be aiming for Popular, which is a show I loved, but which have become pretty prevalent lately, so they don't seem quite as fresh. That said, asking if team spirit is something that will clear up on its own wins them a hell of a lot of points. I'm intrigued.

Work It features men in unconvincing drag, because, you know, there's nothing funnier than men dressed as women. I had a class in college called "Queer Theory" where we dissected why it's oh-so-hilarious for burly men to dress up as women and yet why when women dress like men, it isn't funny at all. What it boiled down to was that people see it as men reducing and degrading themselves for comedic effect, but see women dressing as men as powerful and confident. What could possibly be more ridiculous than a man wanting to dress like a woman? Hilarious, I say! Yeah, no. This looks absolutely terrible, and for more reasons than gender-coding, but its basic premise alone is completely cringe-worthy. Pass.

Midseason, of course, has the comedy I'm most excited about. Why or why are the networks doing this? See below for the sum-up of shows that won't premiere till January or February. Oy.

With the fall comedies quickly out of the way, here are ABC's midseason dramas:

THE RIVER

Description: Stars Bruce Greenwood (John from Cincinnati), Leslie Hope (24), Eloise Mumford (Lone Star), Joe Anderson (The Crazies) and others. Written by Michael Green (Kings) and Michael R. Perry (Persons Unknown). Executive producers include Oren Peli and Jason Blum (Paranormal Activity) and Steven Spielberg.



First Impressions: This looks like a solid production with an interesting bent, but I'm not sure it'll be my cup of tea. I've never been one for the Blair Witch-y, Cloverfield-y fake documentary format and I generally find thrillers to be less than thrilling. That said, it's not your typical network television fare and I'm always looking to add something new to my rotation. I have a feeling this will struggle in the ratings department, however, and that it will likely get lost in the shuffle. All in all, this feels more like a feature film than a television show, which, speaks to the production quality, but also speaks to the narrative. It's hard to tell from this particular promo, but I'm just not sure how good a series this will make. In short, it's too early to make a snap judgment with this one. It's the kind of show that will either be incredibly well done or will be a disaster. From what I've seen so far, it's likely the latter, but even if its a home run in general terms (good cast, interesting premise, high production values), it just doesn't strike me as the kind of show I'll be invested in week to week.


SCANDAL

Description: Stars Kerry Washington (Ray), Henry Ian Cusick (Lost), Tony Goldwyn (Ghost), Guillermo Diaz (Mercy), Columbus Short (Studio 60), Darby Stanchfield (NCIS) and others. Based on the career of crisis management consultant Judy Smith, who serves alongside producers including Shonda Rhimes (Grey’s Anatomy, Private Practice) and Betsy Beers (Grey’s Anatomy).



First Impressions: First thought? Oooh, she's sassy! [in mock tone] Second thought? Desmond!!! Okay, so here's the deal. This is a Shonda Rhimes production. Citing a long list of precedent, there are certain aspects of the show which we can all assume will be there, whether you like it or not. That said, this looks to be a farther step out of her mold than usual. At the very least, viewers will be spared yet another medical drama and even better, we won't have to endure the trials and tribulations of newbies on the job. Kerry Washington is lovely and appears more than capable of anchoring the show. Her character has a bit too much in the "she's amazing, she gets the job done no matter what" department, but that's to be expected with this kind of concept. More importantly, Desmond. Oh, how I love Henry Ian Cusick and I'm honestly pretty excited to see him back in action, even if sans delectable accent. I'm also a big fan of Joshua Molina, but it doesn't look like he's a regular. What it does look like is that the show appears to value a good guest actor and that can mean the difference between memorable episodes or terrible ones, especially if this is in any way a procedural. I'm hoping, and from the promo it appears to be the case, that this is a serial drama and doesn't pen itself in by procedural conventions. If it can truly break out of Shonda's mold and take its own unique spin, this show could be pretty engaging. I'm not willing to bet the farm or anything, but this looks far and away like Shonda's most promising new project in years.

On the comedy end of the spectrum, ABC has some serious contenders slated for midseason. Why they're holding them to January, I'll never know, but I guess they got the memo that all the major networks seem to have gotten. Oy.

At any rate, here are the midseason comedies:

APARTMENT 23

Description: Stars Dreama Walker (The Good Wife), Krysten Ritter ('Til Death), James Van Der Beek (Dawson's Creek), and others. Nahnatchka Khan (American Dad) and Dave Hemingson (Traffic Light) penned the pilot and will produce along with Jeffrey Morton (Traffic Light).



First Impressions: Okay, I have two sets of first impressions for this one. When the new slate of shows was initially announced, this show didn't have a trailer so much as a hilarious clip of James Van Der Beek basically being himself on the show, and capitalizing on his Dawson days. It was pretty damn funny. The trailer certainly points to some potential, but it's that clip in my head that has me excited about this show. Well, not the only thing, but its front and center (and no, I couldn't find it on youtube--they seem to have scrubbed it from the internet). Anyway, aside from Dawson, we have Dreama Walker who, after devious turns on Gossip Girl and The Good Wife, has really proven herself as a formidable actress. She is an absolute pro at playing vengeful and cunning, so her battles with the equally wonderful Krysten Ritter should be kinda sorta awesome. Krysten is wonderful in just about everything and can play it straight, comedic, or completely insane at the drop of a hat. The website I pulled the cast list from has her main credit listed as 'Til Death, but that really shouldn't be her claim to fame. When I cite a love of Krysten Ritter, I'm talking about her roles on Veronica Mars and Breaking Bad, thanks. In short, I'm more excited about this show than I have been about a comedy in a long time. We'll have to wait a couple more months to see if it actually pans out, but so far so good. The only way I think Dreama could have more going for her is if she and Eli Gold were granted a spin-off. Now that's a show with an automatic spot on my ever-crowded regular rotation.


GOOD CHRISTIAN BITCHES
(which was retitled Good Christian Belles because the brass at ABC has no guts, and then retitled GCB, because Good Christian Belles was terrible... not as terrible as GCB, but once you've started that snowball rolling downhill, it's hard to stop it)

Description: Stars Leslie Bibb (Popular), Kristin Chenoweth (Pushing Daisies), David James Elliott (JAG), and Annie Potts (Designing Women). Robert Harling (Laws of Attraction), who penned the pilot, produces alongside Darren Star (Sex and the City) and Aaron Kaplan.



First Impressions: I'm super-excited for this one if for no other reason than Kristin Chenoweth. Okay, there are other reasons, but she's certainly the biggest one (and, conversely, the tiniest one as well). The original title, Good Christian Bitches, was enough to get me intrigued by this one. Indeed, that title is what would have assured the show some viewers come midseason. Sure, it would have offended some people, but at least you'd know what the hell the show was about. GCB? Seriously? Ooooh, I love it when those three letters are together! Can you imagine when G and B start talking about C behind her back! Dear ABC, I know you're prudes and that network TV is the last bastion of watered-down drudgery, but unless they're in the industry, no one is going to know what that means. Oy. Anyway, aside from the god-awful title, this looks like a soapy, sudsy, "mean girls" of the south and I kind of can't wait. I am a little confused over the concept exactly though... Apparently all those women supposedly went to high school together? Uh, they aren't even close to the same age, people... Oh, well. Suspension of disbelief if my middle name (Agnes was already taken). If this were airing anywhere by network, I'd be even more excited. My main fear is that ABC will be so afraid of offending anyone (which already appears to be the case) that the show will lose any and all edge it once had. Fingers crossed they somehow slip by, but I've been burned by network TV too many times to be confident. Even a bowdlerized version will still have Kristin Chenoweth, so that's what I'm really hanging onto. God, I miss Pushing Daisies.

Catching Up on New Shows

Sorry I've been a little lax with the posting lately, but I just haven't been feeling up to it. Several new series have started in the past few weeks and it was starting to feel overwhelming. Summer used to be the time when I'd get all caught up on everything, post about new pilots for fall, read an effing book even (scandal!), but increasingly over the past few years, Summer is just as jam-packed as the fall and I'm starting to wear thin. Man alive, my Sundays are insane. I kid you not, here's the slate of shows with which I have to play DVR musical chairs: True Blood, The Glee Project, The Glades, In Plain Sight, Falling Skies, The Next Food Network Star, and Leverage. If Game of Thrones and The Killing hadn't ended, it would be safe to say that Sunday alone has more programming than the entire rest of the week combined, times Marlon Brando, plus 4. Sheesh. Seriously, programmers, have mercy! I'm not a religious person, but if feigning piety will get people to move shows to another night, I'm willing to pretend.

Anywho, Sunday may be the dumping ground for 80% of the shows I watch in the summer, but it's not the only night. A lot of new shows have come down the pike lately and I've simply been too busy or lazy to review them here.

As such, here's the short, short version (which, let's face it, is the model you've all been wishing to hell I'd stick to in the first place). These reviews might not be the most timely, but at least it means I've had a few weeks to weed out the winners and losers. I'm going to skimp on details and descriptions because presumably, everyone is at least familiar with these shows by now in basic terms.

SUITS
I'm actually really enjoying this one so far. The pilot was solid and engaging and episode two was even better than the first. It's a legal show about an experienced lawyer who takes on a genius as his ward, basically, to form a super-duo legal team. That makes it sound awful, but it really wasn't. I wouldn't say it's appointment TV for me yet, but it could certainly get there. It's not quite as procedural as I suspected it would be, so that's a coup, and the characters are interesting enough to keep me coming back. In a strange twist for me, I'm really enjoying Gabriel Macht as slick, wealthy, masculine attorney Harvey. Not generally the kind of character I gravitate toward, but he has a very straight-forward, no-nonsense swagger that I find really appealing. He's a smooth operator who knows how to get what he wants, but he's not a dick about it. The claws come out when necessary, but even then, he's very calm and collected about it. His foil and plot generator Mike is extremely likable in spite of his eidetic memory. It has become par for the course for procedurals to employ a super-genius who can process knowledge faster than anyone else and recall facts with near preternatural speed and accuracy, so on the surface, I was leaning toward a groan at this particular MacGuffin, but Suits does it in a creative and non-annoying way. Mike is brilliant, to be sure, but he's also a pot-smoking train wreck who is the first to admit that he doesn't know the first thing about being a lawyer. He screws up, he gets played, he makes a fool of himself. He's not some omniscient, infallible demi-god like Patrick Jane who knows everything, can do no wrong, and never needs any help from anyone. The pair of them have great chemistry together (as is required by the brass at USA, last I checked), and they make for a charming pair. The main problem with the show so far is that they don't quite know what to do with the supporting cast yet. At this point, there's a weasel-y bad guy and three women, all of whom pop up when needed, then slink back into the shadows until one of the leads needs something. The lovely, Whedon-fabulous Gina Torres seems particularly wasted so far. The few minutes she has on screen are excellent, but so far, she just hasn't had a whole lot to do. Hopefully, after the show establishes its universe more fully and fine-tunes the dynamic between the leads, there will be more time and attention paid to the supporting cast. Until then, the two leads have enough charisma to keep me coming back. It's a legal show, but it dips its does outside the mold often enough to keep me engaged.

Show Grade (thus far): B+


NECESSARY ROUGHNESS
On the other side of the USA spectrum, we have Necessary Roughness which equates to Unnecessary Programming. I like Callie Thorne quite a lot, but not here. She plays a psychologist who helps athletes overcome their emotional problems in order to be better players. That makes it sound almost as awful as it was. I barely made it through the pilot, peeps. Aside from the base concept leaving much to be desired, Thorne's character is almost universally unlikable, as are all the other characters on the show. The only bright spot is Scott Cohen (who played Max Medina on Gilmore Girls, for those of you playing the home game) who is always delightful. He has rather unfortunately gotten sucked into a truly terrible show, however, so when I saw him on screen, it was a brief moment of happy followed by a sad grumble for his career. With most USA shows, I'm happy to give them a few episodes to grow on me, but this one? Not a chance. I ended up fast-forwarding through parts of the pilot and even then, it felt like it was about 3 hours long. Painfully boring, annoying, and overall lame, I will not be giving this sucker another shot. I knew I was in for trouble when I learned that Marc Blucas was on board. Even worse? He's not even the most unlikable person on the show. Yikes. Let's just say, when picking Whedonverse alums, Suits did a masterful job and Necessary Roughness must have been pretty drunk at the time. Zoe vs. Riley? We have a winner, and it ain't Buffy's military boytoy who someone managed to suck the life out of every scene he was ever in. Seriously, why were they wasting time killing vampires when there were pernicious Rileys running around boring people death? Priorities, people. (Speaking of the bottom of the barrel, why yes, yes that is Eggs from True Blood.)

Show Grade (thus far): F


FALLING SKIES
Over on TNT, Dr. Carter has made his return to television as Tom, a history professor and father of three who is trying to survive an Independence Day-ish invasion from aliens who have killed 90% of humanity and enslaved a lot of the rest. He and a band of resistance fighters are trying to save the planet, but are struggling hardcore. The pilot was a two-hour event and let me just say, it's a good thing they tacked on the second hour because the first hour was unbearably boring. Good lord I was bored! It was basically spent watching random groups of people walking from place to place. The few moments of action fell pretty flat as well. Indeed, the only character whose fate I worried about was the alien. I'm guessing that's not what TNT had in mind. I took a few days off and then finally dove into the second half of the pilot and was very pleased to find that it was considerably better than the first half. A lot more exciting and a lot less cheesy, the second half managed to set up a situation that got me invested to a certain extent. The following episode was even better, although the show still has a lot of problems. First and foremost, I still don't really care about any of these characters. They've done a very poor job establishing these people in a way that makes the audience really invest and when you don't care about the characters, you don't care if they get incinerated by aliens. Having seen a few episodes, I'm finally starting to care and subsequently, I'm finally getting into the narrative as a whole. There are some pretty silly elements, but overall, the production value is solid and they've done a serviceable job setting up this new reality. I'm not exactly chomping at the bit week to week, but in terms of concept, Falling Skies has done a far better job than its predecessors in making this storyline work. I can see where they're headed and why. They have a lot of work to do before I'm really invested, but I can see some real potential down the road. I'm getting more and more into as the show Goes on and I'm hopeful that at some point, it'll be appointment TV. The addition of Steven Weber has already done wonders for the dynamic of the show, so with any luck, that trend will continue.

Show Grade (thus far): C+


SWITCHED AT BIRTH
Not that I really expected more from ABC Family, but Switched at Birth is unbelievably painful to watch. It's kind of like a car accident that you can't look away from, but a really self-righteous, preachy car accident. To describe the show would take ages because they've thrown every possible plot device into one show, then added the deaf community. Long story short, it's the tale of two girls, switched at birth, one of whom grew up as a rich girl from a snooty family and the other grew up on the wrong side of the tracks and who went deaf at the age of three. I endured a few episodes just out of morbid curiosity, but it's just too awful to bear. When the show isn't going on and on about how stupid and narrow-minded the hearing world is when it comes to deaf people, it's exposing class warfare in the most ridiculous of was (seriously, some of the things they have these characters say and do are utterly laughable--I spend the better part of every episode thinking to myself, "Oh my god, that would never happen!"). At the forefront, we have two teenage girls, neither of whom are particularly endearing. The wealthy hearing girl is played by that actress who played Luke's daughter on Gilmore Girls (for those of you still playing the home game) and suffice it to say, she's just as likable now as she was then, if not less so (assuming that's possible). The deaf girl isn't as bad, but that doesn't mean she's all that good either. In short, this show is just one heavy-handed plot device after another, none of which ever really seem to make much sense. I keep telling myself that this show is aimed at tweens and that I shouldn't hold it to a high standard, but then I realize that it's not the standards that are the problem. It's the show. There are more than a few shows out there aimed at younger audiences that are good. This is not one of them. If you're looking at it strictly through the lens of a teen soap, it gets the job done with heaping dollops of ham-fisted drama and forced love triangles, but I need more from a show.

Show Grade (thus far): D-

THE NINE LIVES OF CHLOE KING
Also coming down the line from ABC Family, this show is pretty bad, but I'm actually kind of enjoying it on a guilty pleasure level. My brother and I affectionately call it "Cat Girl" and it's completely ridiculous, but it rounds the corner into so bad it's good territory. The concept is absurd, what with the main girl being from an ancient line of cat people, and they take themselves way too seriously, but it reminds me just enough of other shows that I'm enjoying it in spite of myself. It has a definite Buffy vibe (although without any of the Buffy execution) and it doesn't hold back. It's like it knows that it's ridiculous, but is willing to go with it. For all the bad writing and fundamental problems, the young actors are actually pretty good and the concept, laughable as it may be, fits into my fantasy wheelhouse pretty well. Maybe it's just when stacked up against Switched at Birth that I find it charming in any way shape or form, but this one has turned into my guilty pleasure of the summer. Yes, it's awful, but yes, I keep watching it (if for nothing else than the hilariously bad, low-budget special effects). On the plus side, the show has one of the very few mother-daughter relationships on TV that doesn't make me cringe and the characters genuinely seem to care about each other. Chloe has her scoobies, and her school life, her watchers, and an ancient race of baddies out to get her and that's just Buffy enough that I'm charmed. If only it had Joss Whedon at the helm, I'm sure I'd be in love. As is, it lacks the wit and edge of a Whedonverse production, but for a low commitment flight of fancy, I'm enjoying it well enough. I wouldn't recommend this show to others and I'm embarrassed to admit I'm keeping up with it myself, but if you're looking for an unintentionally funny farce about cat people, look no further.

Show Grade (thus far): C-