Chicago Style

So much for preconceived notions. I went in to viewing Fox's newest drama The Chicago Code thinking: Cop Show + Flashdancer = Yay?, but I walked away totally impressed. As it turns out, this seems to be a cop show for people who hate cop shows (me! me!).

Okay, so to say I hate cop shows is an over-generalization. I should clarify that I hate cop procedurals. Much to my delight, The Chicago Code looks to be much more of a serial than most of its genre compatriots. When it comes to TV, I'm will to accept just about any conceit, any backdrop, and any genre, so long as what happens in episode 1 actually matters in episodes 2 and 3. Hell, some of my favorite shows fall into genres that don't generally populate my DVR, but a good serial is a good serial, regardless of subject matter. Meth cookers, 1920s gangsters, backwoods Kentuckian drug dealers, US Marshals, Baltimore cops... they're all fair game when the story actually matters.

The story of The Chicago Code matters. It's not just the story of some random cops taking down A-plot bad guys-of-the-week. It's a story about a city, a social and political heritage, and the people born of such a place. The show was originally titled Ride-Along, and having seen the pilot, the change was warranted. This show isn't just looking at the job, it focuses a magnifying glass at the underlying infrastructure of one of the country's most infamous cities and the police who are trying to make a difference. That sounds incredibly saccharine, but when told through Shawn Ryan's lens, it's gripping and effective.

I have yet to watch Ryan's past show The Shield (it's on my list), but having recently loved and lost Ryan's Terriers, I should have known I was in for far more than a typical Fox drama. The show focuses on police lieutenant Teresa Colvin (played surprisingly well by Jennifer Beals) as she uses her new position of power to try to chip away at Chicago's criminal infrastructure from top to bottom. The pilot began with her doing voiceover narration which made me a little leery, but as the episode unfolded, the narrative reins were handed from character to character. It wasn't so much a cheesy device to impart lazy plot exposition as an effective means of introducing characters and giving them some genuine interest and perspective. It felt more like they were narrating the documentary of their lives and their city, complete with artistic flashbacks to their pasts. Passing it from character to character worked incredibly well and got me invested in these people and this show almost instantly, which allowed the show to deliver quite an emotional wallop with only the pilot under its belt.

Along with Beals, Jason Clarke stars as Detective Jarek Wysocki, Colvin's former partner and newest recruit in her war on corruption. There are a lot of ways the show could have taken this dynamic. At various points during the pilot, I expected the standard "she's a hard-ass, he's a loose-cannon" trope, the "they used to be lovers but now they have to work together" storyline, and worst of all, the deplorable "she's a woman in power who's in over her head and needs someone to save her" bullshit. To my delight and surprise, the writers have played against all those predictable and unwatchable conceits and constructed a rather fresh and engaging relationship between them. Wysocki, playing against type, completely respects Colvin, admires her accomplishments, and feels she is eminently capable. Having the lead male actor, the rough-and-tumble bad boy (sort of) of the show show complete trust in Colvin's abilities helped quash a lot of the the potentially problematic gender issues with the show. Other cops, dirty cops Colvin is ousting that is, might point to her sex as a liability and use it as a flimsy excuse for the way things are, but not Wysocki. In this way, the writers are able to address issues of gender without crippling the show under the weight of a tired routine. Colvin won't have to spend every waking minute proving herself because to the people in this show who actually matter, she already has. Along with Wysocki, Colvin's partner (sort of) Antonio, Wysocki's new partner Caleb, and Wysocki's fellow police officers trust and respect her. That goes a long way to improve the narrative and make this a show that doesn't have me rolling my eyes and cringing.

Wysocki and Colvin form the backbone of the show and I'm already rather intrigued with their dynamic. The writers did a nice job constructing a relationship that had an ambiguous past and a limitless future. They were partners, are friends, and you believe it. He's been established in such a way that the audience likes him, values his opinion, and most importantly, can believe that he's comfortable having a woman in power. Something as simple as positing his dream movie star against his partner's went a long way. Where his new partner came up with Phoebe Cates in Fast Times at Ridgemont High as his wet dream, Wysocki counters with, "Audrey Hepburn, in anything she's ever been in." To juxtapose the typical, juvenile fantasy of Phoebe Cates (which I type "Cakes" every single time, go figure) taking off her bikini with the pinnacle of class and elegance, they've established Wysocki in a way that makes his relationship with Colvin all the more believable. Going one step beyond that, Wysocki, who can't seem to keep a partner for more than a day, goes so far as to say he prefers a female partner. He's been established as a bit of a player (he's engaged to a 27-year-old, but is still sleeping with his wife), so that may seem to indicate that he's simply a Lothario who'd rather stare at a pretty female partner all day, but when it comes to this job, a cop needs someone who has his back. Wysocki may be a ladies' man, but when push comes to shove, he's as comfortable with a female partner, if not more so, than a male (although his new partner seems to be sticking around, and for good reason--rather than being your typical newb, he's actually pretty talented). You can immediately believe how Colvin and Wysocki worked so well as partners. Neither of them has anything to prove and neither of them has gender hang-ups keeping them from connecting. She's not some power-hungry mega-bitch trying to exert dominance in a boys' club. She's just a cop, trying to clean up the city--a goal in which Wysocki is also invested.

I feel like I'm beating the gender issue to death, but it really could have been a horrendous element of the show and turned out to be one of its strongest assets. As such, I can't help but to elaborate. Adding to the gender dynamics of the show are Wysocki's niece Vonda, a new cop, and her partner. During Vonda's voiceover, we learn that when her father was killed (also a cop), Wysocki took her in, and when she told him she wanted to be a cop, he not only didn't discourage her, he pulled strings to get her into the academy quicker. For a viewer such as myself, confidence in the abilities of women goes a hell of a long way and it endeared Wysocki instantly. The show doesn't go overboard in this arena though. This review is making him sound like a card-carrying feminist, and that's really not the impression he gives at all. More than anything, he simply strikes me as a person for whom gender doesn't really matter when it comes to most things, including the job. It simply isn't a factor that really matters all that much. He was established in such a way that when his niece is injured chasing down a bad guy, he gives her a hard time, but not because "this job isn't safe for a girl" as you might expect from a typical cop show. He simply addresses an error in procedure and tells her to be careful the way he would anyone else. He also gives a tantalizing possible hint at his past with Colvin when he asks Vonda if she's sleeping with her partner (who, it just hit me, is played by Todd Williams, aka Bobby Dershewitz on In Plain Sight (!)), saying, "Trust me, being partners is enough to handle." Or something like that. Does this point to something more in his past with Colvin? Or has he simply been around long enough to have seen the fallout before? Whatever it is, I'm thoroughly intrigued. Add to that the fact that Vonda swears she isn't sleeping with her partner, but that she later reveals that she's terrified something might happen to him, and the waters are delightfully muddied once again. They set Colvin and Wysocki up in such a way that a romantic pairing at some point isn't out of the question, but it's very clear that this show isn't hinging on the "will they or won't they" shenanigans of other shows. They have a very different vibe than that at this point and I appreciate it.

Now that I've spent 5 pages establishing just how much of a non-issue gender is, I can move on to the rest of the show. Please try to keep the Hallelujah chorus to yourselves. At the center of the narrative is Colvin's fight against corruption from the top down. The pilot creates an overarching storyline that will allow for the show to grow into nearly any direction it wants to. High ranking city alderman Patrick Gibbons (played to perfection by Delroy Lindo) is as corrupt as they come and is more than willing to kill to maintain power. When Colvin and Wysocki start to uncover some of his shadier dealings, things get even messier than they already were (Gibbons having hired a hit of a whistle-blower who could have exposed his operations). As Colvin recruits Wysocki to form a special task force to look into Gibbons' brand of crime, he takes decisive action. In what came as quite a jarring surprise, the narrative reins had been handed over to Colvin's partner Antonio who was in the middle of giving details about his upbringing, how Colvin had saved him from the streets and encouraged him to be a cop, when his story is cut short. His narration and flashbacks stop almost mid-beat as he and Colvin are gunned down in the street. I honestly didn't see it coming, and even though I only just met these characters, I was emotionally invested in the outcome. That simple narrative device helped establish everyone on the show and help catch viewers completely off-guard. It's not often that I truly care about a set of characters by the end of a pilot, but when Antonio died, it was upsetting. He was a character that I already liked and wanted to learn more about. Killing him off in the pilot not only sets a certain tone for the show and gives these characters additional motivation to take down the city's criminal overlords, but it lets viewers know that this show doesn't pull any punches and that nothing can be taken for granted.

I was a little apprehensive about this kind of show airing on network TV, fearing it couldn't be as gritty or dark as the setting might require. To be honest, I'm a little afraid of just about anything airing on network TV anymore. Cable, especially premium cable, affords so many more options to a show. It's getting to the point where watching a program that has to endure the confines of network standards and practices is taxing, so especially for a show with this kind of subject matter, the Fox label was a bit unnerving. To the show's credit, they actually did a really nice job with it. There were certainly times when I felt they were holding back a bit, but it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the show. In a chuckle-worthy turn, the writers added a narrative quirk for the cleaned-up dialogue by giving Wysocki a distaste for profanity. It was an obvious nod to network confines, but I couldn't help but believe that a guy who adores Audrey Hepburn might also deplore cursing. I'm still a bit apprehensive about how far they'll be able to take such a construct on a big four network, but based on the pilot, I'm hopeful they can pull it off.

Overall, this was a slick production. The budget is clearly there, and the writing and directing had enough uniqueness and style that it had a different vibe than most of what's out there. In spite of network confines, they did a very nice job establishing Chicago as the often notorious city that it is. The story will likely have procedural elements, but there's no escaping the underlying storyline that runs through everything. My only major concern with the show is that I had to dub Jason Clarke Detective Mumbly Mumbleson. Good lord, between his native accent sneaking in here and there, his varying Chicago accent, and his soft, mumbly, word-jamminess, I had a hell of time making out what he was saying a lot of the time. I went back and turned on the subtitles for most of it. While it was annoying as hell, the very fact that I cared enough to make sure I caught every word speaks very highly of the show.

Here's hoping his enunciation and the sound editing is better in the future... and for me there certainly will be a future. It's not often that I set my DVR to record a series after only the pilot, but it's safe to say that The Chicago Code looks to be a winner. It's far and away the best new pilot of the midseason and if Fox had any brains at all, they would have given it a post-superbowl debut.

Pilot Grade: A-

Terriers: The Best Show No One is Watching

Whenever I get my questions to TV pundits published on their blogs, I tend to geek out a bit. Even though I totally realize that no one cares about such things but me, poor Annie still has to listen me to giddily account how I wrote an email... an then sent it! It's scintillating stuff, let me tell you. I was going to restrain myself from nerdily posting the fruits of my total lack of labor here, but it actually gives me a chance to talk about a show that I accidentally fell in love with: Terriers. My darling Matt Roush posted my concerns about the show's ratings in his column today. If you don't already follow him, I'd highly recommend it. Here is a link to his latest "Ask Matt" column and he's also available on twitter. We have had differences of opinion on occasion in the past, but by and large, he's one of the names I trust most. He has turned me on to several excellent shows in the past. Anyway...

• Question: In a near-accidental turn of events, I started watching FX's new series Terriers amid the glut of fall premieres, and much to my surprise, the show grabbed me almost instantly. The pilot was sharp and witty and smoothly plays against all the TV clichés I've grown to hate over the years. I watch a lot of TV, so when I come across a show that surprises me, I sit up and take notice. I expected a typical crime procedural, but instead was met with a solid, engaging and hilarious serialized character piece. Not since I just happened to catch Nurse Jackie and stumbled onto Justified have I been so delighted by an accidental find. The suspense and mystery are brilliantly underlined by a dark humor that really appeals to me.
  
  That said, I'm concerned for the future of Terriers. I've recently seen Terriers listed alongside various shows with anemic ratings (mostly of the "Vote to Save a Show" variety) and have become concerned. How has Terriers been doing? Do you think it will survive? I'm also curious as to what you think of "Save a Show" style polls. Do they ever have any real effect? I seriously doubt it, but I find myself voting regardless. In a fall pilot season that left me largely unimpressed, I'd hate to see Terriers go the way of Lone Star (the best broadcast pilot of the year and sadly the first to get the axe). I'm sure that Terriers has a better chance given its network, but even FX must have a ratings threshold to maintain.
  — Lacy
  
  Matt Roush: I don't know the exact numbers, but I do know they're below what FX would like them to be, and it's disappointing to the network and the studio. The show is so offbeat in tone and texture, and is done no favor by its too-quirky title, that it probably would have been a slow build even if it hadn't been scheduled against the fall network onslaught. But the reviews have mostly been rapturous, and the show has just gotten better as it goes. I love the fact that no two episodes are quite alike, and the blend of mystery and comedy and palpable emotion is unlike anything else currently on TV. But as we've seen (and as you noted with the Lone Star debacle), being too different and resistant to pigeonholing can work against a show's commercial prospects. I hope FX sticks with this, but you're probably right to be concerned. As for save-the-show polls, it can't hurt to participate and make your voice heard. But such efforts rarely budge the numbers the programmers are looking at to determine a show's future.

Ahhh! That's me! That's me!!!

Annnnd, I'm back. Sorry about that. As you can see from my query above, I basically stumbled onto this little gem by accident. That's why I never wrote a review of the pilot. I never had any intention of actually watching the show, so I figured it would be one of the calculated omissions from my fall reviews. Yeah, that was stupid. In a fall pilot slate that ultimately had very little to offer, Terriers stands out as one of the best new shows on TV. Aside from the already-canceled Lone Star, HBO's Boardwalk Empire, and awesomely ridiculous Nikita, I dare say it's the only other new show to warrant a spot in my top tier, nay, a spot on any tier at all. (Seriously people, this fall was sad.)

Well, it's high-time I atoned for past televisual sins and gave Terriers its due--even if it is likely to be canceled. I'm more than a little bewildered at FX's programming strategy with this one. To debut a new show on cable alongside the swell of network crap in September seems completely illogical to me. To boot, it isn't really paired with a more established show nor did it receive much fanfare. Sigh.

Terriers is the kind of show that doesn't sound very good on paper, but that comes together beautifully. At first glance, I suspected it would be your typical procedural, but with a dash of quirky thrown in for good measure. This show is so very much more than that. The pilot was everything you'd ever want in a show and somehow things just keep getting better episode to episode.

The show follows two best friends who, after a few errant left turns in life, ended up working as freelance detectives. It sounds completely hokey on paper, but believe me, it works. Donal Logue (ER, Life) stars as ex-cop/reformed alcoholic Hank Dolworth and his best friend Britt Pollack, a former thief, played by Michael Raymond-James (best known for playing psycho serial killer Rene on True Blood). After playing a character so spectacularly creep-tastic as Rene, it's nice to see him in a role that's incredibly likable. Hank and Britt are the center of the show and play off each other in a very natural, believable way. They have great onscreen chemistry and make for a convincing pair of best friends/screw-ups/rough-and-tumble detectives.

Based on the concept alone, I assumed this would be your standard genre show with a slight Psych bent to it, but that's really not how it operates. There are certain elements that smack of a procedural, but rather than this being a show about detectives who happen to be people, it's actually a show about people who happen to be detectives. In this sense, it reminds me of Nurse Jackie. Sure, she works in a hospital, but Nurse Jackie certainly isn't a medical show. It's a dark comedy about actual characters, not just the job they do. The same goes for Terriers, a similarly brilliant show that blends harsh reality with a hell of a lot of charm and humor. Donal Logue's comedic timing is perfect and he makes every scene something more interesting and surprising than you'd expect. The comedy in this show can be subtle at times, so you have to pay attention, but for those in the audience who are, this show has a number of hilarious moments. The show doesn't feel the need to force the laugh, so it all comes off as genuine and funny.

At its core, Terriers is really a character piece. Even when the show has case-of-the-week type elements, they always relate to the characters themselves in a meaningful way. This could be painfully ham-fisted in the wrong hands, but here it works naturally. It's impressive and strange how the writers pull it off every week, but some seriously crazy things happen in a very grounded manner. This show seems more authentic than most out there, but at the same time has A-plots that are outlandish and peculiar. The fact that the A-plots are unique and that they relate to the characters in substantive ways makes me actually invest in them, which for me in quite rare. I find myself genuinely interested in the happenings of their detective work and never casually fast-forward through the A-plot. Indeed, this is the kind of show where the ending sneaks up on you. Seriously, I get so immersed in what's going on that when the end credits start, I'm always like, "Wait, it's over already?"

I think my favorite part of the show is the interpersonal dynamics between characters. Hank and Britt are solid bases for the show, but the supporting cast is what brings it all together. Hank's ex-wife Gretchen and their lawyer Maggie are completely delightful, even if their roles thus far have been fairly limited on the show. The real shining star of the supporting cast is Laura Allen, who plays Britt's girlfriend Katie. The interplay between Britt and Katie is funny and charming and, unlike so many relationships on TV, it doesn't annoy the hell out of me. So often the girlfriend in this kind of relationship is a whiny, bitchy, nagging drain on a show, but here? It's completely the opposite. Not only does this relationship have a firm grasp on reality, but the interplay between the pair is smart and endearing. Upon finding out that Britt asked her out after he had seen a picture of her on her refrigerator (he had broken into her house during his thief days, you see), I fully expected Katie to explode and some major melodrama to unfold. Instead, in a wealth of twists and surprises offered by the show, Katie instead tells Britt to go outside, wait five minutes, and then break into the bedroom through the window. Where lesser shows would use this as a platform for a bunch of screaming, Terriers sees it as a total turn-on. Heh. Awesome. The refreshingly intelligent characterizations of women doesn't stop with Katie. As mentioned, Gretchen and Maggie have slightly smaller roles on the show, but they're equally engaging and multi-dimensional. Hank and Gretchen are ex-spouses, but there's still a lot of love and respect between them. The show takes the road less traveled and avoids the omnipresent "evil ex" cliches and even makes the possibility of the pair reuniting more complicated than expected. Gretchen's new beau is actually quite a good guy who tells a white lie to Gretchen in order to protect Hank. Most recent addition to the cast (as a recurring character rather than regular), is Karina Logue (Donal's real life sister) who plays, conveniently enough, his quirky, dark, slightly mentally ill sister on the show. She's brilliant and broken and in the world of Terriers, the fact that she secretly lives in her brother's attic just makes good sense. She isn't a series regular, but I do hope she'll stick around for a good long while.

All in all, I'm rooting for these characters in a way I simply don't for most other characters on air at the moment. The fact that this show is actually a serial masquerading as a pseudo-procedural is a big part of that. When I truly care about the people in a show, I care about what happens to them, even if it's a one-off A-plot. Even better, the A-plots are meaningful, but not in a heavy-handed after-school special kind of way that Grey's Anatomy does. We just see how these characters would react to the given situation in an authentic way. Nice. With this kind of set up, though, the writers have to try a lot harder to craft characters that really work. Fortunately, Terriers succeeds in spades. This show makes for an odd mix of mystery, drama, comedy, and dollops of just about everything else. You'd think it would be all over the place, but it's surprisingly balanced and never feels sloppy or uneven. I didn't realize just how invested I was in these characters until a truly heartbreaking scene between Katie and Hank where she confesses to screwing up and being afraid to tell Britt. I truly felt for her and found myself hoping Hank would succeed in convincing her to never tell Britt what happened. Hank couldn't bear the thought of devastating Britt, and quite frankly, neither could I. That's when I consciously realized just how much I've been enjoying this show and began to fear for its future.

As mentioned, the ratings are not good. Terrible, in fact. But the show has received nothing but praise from critics (as far as I know) and has been getting more and more buzz online lately. I'm cautiously optimistic that FX will see the potential here and give Terriers some time to build an audience. They really should have premiered this show in the summer or during one of the off-seasons when it would have had less competition and more of a chance to attract some viewers.

I don't know if Terriers will be around for more than a season, but it's definitely worth even a precarious investment.

Show Grade: A

Fairly Ordinary

After a jam-packed week of pilots (a higher volume than I've ever experienced before), I thought I was finally done with the review of Blue Bloods rounding out the week on Friday. Well, silly me, I forgot that No Ordinary Family was bringing in the rear last night. Sigh. I love reviewing new shows, but this year has been a veritable deluge of shows, most of which were pretty mediocre. As such, I might not be giving this show a fair shake due to simple fatigue... Take review with grain of salt.


No Ordinary Family focuses on the Powells, a clan of dysfunctional suburbanites who develop superpowers after their plane crashes in the Amazon. Apparently the water had some iridescent glow of some sort that's tantamount to a radioactive spider. My mum came in a few minutes into the pilot and asked me what it was about, to which I said, "There's this family that crashes in the jungle and the water gives them magical powers or something..." My mom thought I was joking and actually asked me to hit "info" on the satellite so we could read the description. "No really, Mom, that's what it's about." After a quick look of incredulity and a "Seriously?", she settled in to watch. Yeah.

I honestly don't have a problem with the concept for this show. I watch a lot of programs with equally ridiculous conceits. I think the main reason this show wasn't an all-out success for me is how they went about it. The pilot employs the annoying common narrative device of the therapy office. Jim and Stephanie Powell tell the story of how this all went down to a couples counselor. In general, voiceovers and narrators kind of drive me nuts. Sure they work sometimes, and can even add a lot to a show (on Dexter, it's essential, illuminating the dark thoughts beneath his banal daily routine, and on Veronica Mars, it lent itself incredibly well to the pseudo-noir style), but I'm generally of the opinion that if a show is being done right, they don't need someone telling the audience what's going on and how characters are feeling. It just seemed unnecessary, and what's worse, the thought that they'd be telling anyone about their new superpowers seemed utterly absurd.

The writers made a very conscious choice to make the tone of the show very different from a serious drama like Heroes, to varying degrees of success. This show is not Heroes, and I think we can all agree that that's a compliment, but No Ordinary Family seems to have gone out its way to avoid the comparison, thereby eliminating the elements that made the first season of Heroes such a success. The Powells suddenly realize they have these fantastic powers and rather than being perplexed or frightened by them, they're positively giddy, even when their children start exhibiting similarly bizarre abilities. In a way, it was a welcomed relief not to have to watch people be tortured and horrified by what's happening to them, but it also took away a lot of the tension. There just doesn't seem to be anything weighing on them at all and none of them seemed to be concerned for how these powers might affect them in the future. Surely they've seen enough TV and movies to know that with great power comes great responsibility, right? It made watching them tell their friends, random colleagues, and their therapist all about it seem like an incredibly stupid idea. Don't they know the government will try to destroy, contain, or exploit them? Any logical person would have been a lot more cautious with that information, it seems. I realize that the show is aiming for a lighter tone here, but that doesn't mean it has to be nonsensical. Indeed, with a base concept that's off-kilter, I would have hoped that the show would have been a bit more grounded and realistic in other areas.

The show seems to be trying to find its anchor to reality in the trivialities of family life and it just didn't quite work for me. Michael Chiklis stars as Jim Powell alongside Julie Benz as his wife Stephanie, with a teenage son and daughter in tow. Here we have yet another case of shlubby guy/hot girl, only this time, even the hot girl is pretty loathsome. I have never been a fan of Julie Benz and have pretty much hated every role I know her from. I couldn't stand Darla (she wasn't even fun to hate like a respectable villain) and Rita has to be one of the worst characters ever conceived. To her credit, her turn as the super-speedy matriarch of the Powell clan appears to be Benz at the nadir of her annoying-ness. I didn't love her or anything, but she wasn't a nagging bitch either, so that's an improvement. But, then you combine her barely tolerable-ness with Micheal Chicklis and we're back to loathsome again. They didn't have much chemistry together, and Chicklis could not possibly be less appealing or less convincing as a big softy who likes to draw. I hear he's amazing in The Sheild, but here? I'm unimpressed. His newfound superstrength (sort of), near invincibility, and tremendous jumping ability (there's a constellation of powers for ya) should have made him a lot more interesting as a character, but I was pretty underwhelmed. The basis of the show is that this family had lost touch with each other and now they're reconnecting through these extraordinary circumstances. Much like Undercovers tried to rekindle relationships through supposed awesomeness, once again, I was kind of bored.

This show wasn't without merit, and I do think it has some definite room to grow, but it just wasn't as fun or exciting or fascinating as you might assume given the concept. It all just seemed kind of perfunctory. Plane crashes almost killing us all? No problem. Bizarre physical changes that will have untold effects? Excellent. No knowledge of how this happened or why? Okeedokee. Daughter has unsettling Sookie-style mindreading power that she can't seem to control? Why not?! It all just seemed a little too convenient, and, well, a little too ordinary. It's fine for the show to take a fun, light, enthusiastic approach to this concept, but without any real emotional impact, none of it carried a whole lot of weight.

As you have probably surmised, this show has some obvious similarities to The Incredibles, right down to basic family structure, only, you know, not as good. Hell, after finding he has superpowers, Chiklis' character starts listening to police scanners so he can intercept crimes in progress. Familiar much? In the promotional push for the show, the creators were adamant that this show isn't aiming to be the live action version of the Pixar hit. While I give them credit for trying not to steal, I think I'd have liked a live-action Incredibles a whole lot more. The Incredibles managed the theme of suburban blase and the mundaneness of everyday life with mastery and allowed the characters to be excited about their powers without eliminating the suspense or gravity of the situation. In fact, The Incredibles was a pulse-pounding thrill that blended it's serious and light aspects seamlessly. No Ordinary Family simply didn't have me on the edge of my seat or giddy over the superhero awesomeness. They seem to have gone out of their way to make the extraordinary seem kind of humdrum, and not in a good way.

I was feeling pretty "meh" about the show, but the final scenes have me intrigued for more. Apparently the Powells aren't the only supers out there. Predictable yes, but still intriguing. The shadowy powers-that-be have ominous plans for the Powell clan (just like they should have assumed themselves and kept their mouths shut) and I'm interested in seeing how that all plays out. Seriously, I had a hard time caring about anyone in the Powell family, but the bad guys, who were in a few fleeting moments of the pilot, have my interests piqued. It might be due to the fact that one of the baddies, some sort of enforcer I'm guessing, is played by the delectable Josh Stewart, a guest actor on Criminal Minds (he played JJ's New Orleans boyfriend Will), but I'm already a lot more invested in his team than in the Powells... What say we just make him the center of the show, mmkay? (Such thoughts probably aren't a good sign.)

All in all, it wasn't a bad pilot, it just didn't really push my buttons either. Everything seemed like it was 2 or 3 times more sedate and banal than I was hoping for. Maybe this is the beginning of a slow build to more thrilling things, but I'm apprehensive. If they were aiming for this to really be a family drama about people who happen to be superheroes, then the family needed to be a lot more engaging. Perhaps I was the only one who didn't find much to latch onto with the Powells, but as the core of the show, I needed more. If it's supposed to be a show about superheroes how happen to be a family, then the powers really could have been more original and interesting. I've seen this all before and even with the same special effects (although the effects were very well done, even if not all that innovative). The powers were all disappointingly familiar (Nightcrawler? Is that you?) or incredibly lame. Suffice it to say, if I were the teenage son of this clan, I'd be pretty pissed. "You're telling me my father can catch bullets, my mother has super-speed, my sister can read minds and I get... Math!? Seriously? Intermediate Algebra? That's my glowing-water-induced ability?!" For his sake, I'm hoping there's more to it than that...

The pilot wasn't especially strong, but it did set up a foundation that I think could turn into something special. It's a Greg Berlanti production, so the creative team is solid, even if the on-air talent is a turn-off. Heh, when Harold Abbot was finally revealed onscreen as the therapist, even my mother was like, "Oh, so this is a Berlanti production." Ha! I couldn't believe my ears! My mother, the woman who guesses that Chuck is the show that'll be on that night every single night, recognized a Berlanti alum. I didn't think she even knew his name! I was so proud. Anyway, he generally fares better with relationships than flash, so I can see where they're trying to make this more about family than powers, but I think that might be the show's downfall for me. I just couldn't bring myself to care about any of them... I'm hopeful that if I give it a few more episodes, they'll grow on me.

The preview of things to come this season has me hopeful for this show. A lot of my quibbles with the pilot will be addressed and some much needed gravity will be added (or at least so it seems). I can't say the pilot bowled me over, but I'm hopeful this will be the kind of show that starts off kind of weak and gets better episode-to-episode, Chicklis and Benz notwithstanding...

Pilot Grade: C+

Not Your Typical Cop Drama... THANKFULLY

As premiere week finally drew to a close and Friday was upon me, I couldn’t help but smile at the knowledge that I was presumably done blogging about new shows for a while and was giddy to get back to the business of writing about shows I already love (the Castle and Vampire Diaries premieres were off-the-hook fabulous). Sure I skipped a few pilots (I think the only ones I didn’t screen at all were Chase, Mike & Molly, and Outsourced), but by and large, I watched them all, for good or bad (sadly, mostly bad). I DVRed CBS’ Friday night offering, and definitely had plans to watch it, but didn’t have any intention of blogging about it. Well, in a bizarre twist of fate, new show Blue Bloods is actually an interesting family drama/character piece masquerading as a random cop show. Given the relative lack of decent pilots this season, I’m compelled to write about this one just to give a little balance to the good and the bad.


It wasn’t a perfect show or anything, but I found myself interested and intrigued from start to finish. I expected it would by your typical genre show, but it’s actually a serious drama about multiple generations of a New York family, many of whom happen to be cops. The show centers around patriarch Tom Selleck as chief of police Frank Reagan, his father, the former chief, and his children, a homicide detective (Donnie Wahlberg…ugh), an assistant DA (Bridget Moynahan), and a Harvard law student turned rookie cop (Will Estes). It’s not a cop show in the same way that Nurse Jackie isn’t a medical show. The fact that those are their professions is largely incidental. Sure it sets the scene and creates a universe for these people to exist, but it’s more about how the characters interact with this world and with each other rather than the world itself. As I’ve mentioned in previously, when you’ve seen enough genre shows and have sat through more than a few legal dramas, medical shows, and crime procedurals, it simply has to come down to characters. The cases of the week quickly become secondary to interpersonal dynamics and character development because if you’ve seen one murder mystery, car accident, or missing kid, you’ve seen them all.

Indeed, when a young girl was kidnapped, I feared Blue Bloods had started veering down the path of standard cop show. In some ways, this pseudo-victim-of-the-week was the weakest part of the pilot. Just when it wasn’t horrible enough that a girl had been kidnapped, she also happens to be a diabetic so the cops are forced to find her within 24 hours or she’s dead for sure. I assumed this was yet another lame device used by shows to add suspense. The “ticking clock” can be useful and all, but it usually comes across as little more than a ploy. In terms of the A-plot, that’s an apt description, but the ways in which this storyline affects the characters marks a clear divergence from the norm and is the reason this pilot was so successful. Because of the ticking clock, Wahlberg’s character brutalizes a suspect in order to find the girl in time. As such, the evidence gathered might be inadmissible and the pedophile might walk because of his actions. This situation raised a lot of questions about justice, law enforcement, and the use of force. The family comes down on both sides of the debate, some saluting Wahlberg’s actions, others condemning. While hearing Selleck’s character justify the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” was fairly stomach-churning, there are absolutely people out there who believe torture is valid and the A-plot for this pilot helped bring the debate to the table (quite literally in this case as family dinner turns into a bit of blood bath). Both sides of the debate were represented, although I do wish the liberal side of the table had pointed out the obvious: it doesn’t matter where you fall on this issue, Wahlberg’s actions almost let a pedophile walk. Anyway, their heated discussion was uncomfortable to watch (what with my wanting to jump in every two seconds but not being able to), but it brought a very serious and relevant issue into the television dialogue and that was a refreshing change of pace. Most shows would have shied away from the ramifications of police brutality, usually heralding the abuser as a hero, but Blue Bloods put it front and center. If that weren’t enough, the girl who was kidnapped was Hispanic, bringing issues of race and police response to the forefront as well. This show seemed to go out of its way to take a standard cop show cliché and build actual characters around it.

This is a show about people, a family, and the effects that enforcement can have on that family. While I didn’t like some of the characters and often disagreed with their political views, they were all compelling and well-founded. It didn’t seem that half the family landed on one side of the issue and the other have on the other side in a convenient bid for drama. The set-ups for each of these characters made their responses to the issues before them logical, or at the very least, believable. Tom Selleck does a very nice job playing the patriarch, the enforcer, the boss, and the politician. He anchors the family and the show with a decisive, but open hand. The rest of the cast is equally strong, with the possible exception of Donnie Wahlberg… Bridget Moynahan is excellent as strong, smart assistant DA Erin and Will Estes excels at convincing me that he’s smart enough to have been a Harvard lawyer, but that he has always wanted to be a cop. In all honesty, Wahlberg did a respectable job in his role, I just can’t stand him as an actor. I can’t even really put a finger on it, but there’s just something about him that’s completely off-putting. The fact that his character is equally unlikable to me actually makes this perfect casting, I suppose. I assume he’ll grown on me, and his character wasn’t completely without merit, but my initial response is mostly negative. His acting was fine and all (although he had about 80% more accent than any of his family—maybe he was recently adopted...), so maybe it’s just that I don’t find him physically appealing at all. I hate to admit my shallowness here, but I just don’t find him attractive in any respect, either physically or personalitally (ohh, it’s a word). Although I guess the shallowness comes as little surprise given that I’ve officially watched five seasons of Criminal Minds because Matthew Gray Gubler is beautiful (okay, that’s not the only reason, but it's first on the list).

Anyway, the base concept is solid and the pilot went a long way to set up a world for these characters to inhabit. This show is far more than your standard cop show and that’s a lovely surprise. To boot, it’s a serial, which always wins points in my book. I watch a number of shows that are one-off procedurals (the kinds of shows where you can skip a dozen episodes then come back to the show and feel like you haven’t missed a thing), but they’re never my favorites. Even shows that technically have case-of-the-week type elements need something more for me. So, when I get a show that’s truly a serial, I sit up and take notice. Along with the social and political issues and the multi-generational family dynamic, the pilot also sets up an intriguing story arc regarding the death of the fourth Reagan child in the line of duty. Not all is what it seems and police rookie Will Estes gets drawn into a conspiracy that might very well indict his fellow police officers and even his family.

I was surprised by this show. It had some elements that I would change and the occasional genre cliché, but more than anything it’s a solid family drama that isn’t afraid to examine hot-button issues. There’s only so much that can fit into 42 minutes, so certain aspects of the show were a little more convenient than I’d prefer, but the show makes it work. Given that it airs on Fridays, I didn’t think it would perform very well, but it actually won the night, getting a 2.2 rating in the key demo and 12.8 million total. That’s not bad for any night, but on a Friday at 9 pm? Quite impressive. Hell, it fared better than Undercovers by a long shot and killed its atrocious timeslot competitor Outlaw. In all my ratings predictions, I never saw that coming. Fortunately, it’s deserving of the attention and certainly deserving of my eyes than J.J. Abrams’ boring, uninspired dramedy. It’s not often that quality actually wins out in the ratings department, but it happens.

If cop shows aren’t you cup of tea (or even if they are), Blue Bloods has a lot to offer and a solid foundation on which to build. It could go in a lot of different directions and I’m happy to see where it ends up. Plus, the fact that it airs on Fridays is an added bonus in my book, what with total lack of scheduling conflicts.

I’m as shocked as you are, and maybe it’s the pilot fatigue talking, but based on the pilot, Blue Bloods one is worth a shot.

Pilot Grade: B

Generation Y

I suddenly feel so old… It’s only been in recent years that characters on TV were my age and, more terrifyingly, younger, so seeing a show about characters I could have gone to high school with is even more disconcerting… I had mixed feelings about this one going in, but figured I owed it to the class of 2001 to give ABC’s My Generation a shot.

Told as a documentary-style drama, My Generation puts a different spin on an old routine. The show’s conceit is that a documentary film crew has kept up with students from the class of 2000 over the past ten years after graduation. The show unabashedly focuses on cardboard cut-out stereotypes from high school (The Jock, The Nerd, The Rocker, The Rich Kid, The Prom Queen, etc). I’d be more critical of the blatant lack of originality there, but I can believe that a documentarian would likely do that on purpose, looking to high school clichés as a baseline, then seeing how it all panned out. My real problem with the show is how abundantly convenient everything was. It’s ten years later and all these people magically end up back in their home town so they can interact. The fact that it’s told in a documentary style somehow makes this more irksome and yet, less irksome, all at the same time for me. It’s hard to explain, for some reason, the fact that they are presenting this as reality makes me think, “Huh, what a random, crazy happenstance… Okay then.” On the other hand, all the ridiculous connections that happen would never really happen, so that makes the styles kind of a liability. Whatever the effect, I think they could have brought all these people together in less ridiculous ways.

As the pilot progressed, however, I decided to just kind of let it go. I decided to accept the conceit and just go with it. That helped immensely and made me like the pilot quite a bit more than I had. The documentary focuses on 9 classmates and looks at how their lives have changed over the past decade. For as much as I was eager to let the contrivances slide, some of them were just absurd. Of these nine people, the nerd who wants a house full of children ends up an infertile virgin, the punk ends up a pregnant army wife, the most driven kid ends up tending bar in Hawaii, etc, etc. There are mild contrivances and then there are CONTRIVANCES!!! Geez, one here or there would be one thing, but this show went out of its way to make sure that no one ended up where they expected to. Oh, and if that weren’t enough, apparently ever major event to have happened in the past decade affects one or more of these students directly. Enron, 9/11, Indecision 2000, you name it. It was honestly kind of fun to see how these events might affect a person’s path in life, but to see them all sitting next to each other just felt forced and self-indulgent. But, then again, most people are boring, so if this pilot employed any accurate veritas at all, I’d have fallen asleep ten minutes in, so I really shouldn’t criticize. I guess my main quibble is that it could have been done with more grace and creativity than it was.

For all its foibles and anvilicious contrivances, the pilot was enjoyable enough. The characters were likable and interesting for the most part, even if they weren’t original any conceivable regard. At the very least, the different format made them feel somewhat different, so that certainly helped. The main problem with this show (aside from the abysmal ratings) is that I only really cared about a handful of the 9 principal characters. As with most large ensemble casts, there are a few standouts, but there’s also a lot of filler. I have a sneaking suspicion that I’d spend half of every episode wishing they would go back to focusing on someone else. It’s like what happened with Grey’s Anatomy. When it got to the point where Yang was the only character I cared about, it was time to cut ties. I watched a whole of story about a whole lot of people that bored me just for the brief moments of goodness. Not. Worth it. In a perfect world, shows cut the dead weight, but more often than not, you just have to sit through the boring crap for a few glimmers of people you really care about.

The characters were decent enough, but the format is what really held the most appeal to me. The flashbacks to 2000 and current events of the past decade were kind of fun and the soundtrack from my high school days was downright eerie. Seriously, every song that would play would trigger this blinding bolt in my brain of “Oh dear god! Junior year!” It was kind of fun on a nostalgic level, but that feeling is immediately tempered by a remembrance of high school as a whole… [insert cold shudder]

All in all, I didn’t hate this pilot or anything, but I’m not real inspired by it either. On a purely soapy level, I could see this being a show I’d keep up with week-to-week, but I honestly have enough soap in my life. I give them credit for trying something a little new, and quite frankly, the format was the strongest part of the pilot, but this just isn’t a documentary that really has me breathless for more.

This pilot wasn’t without its charms, but I think I’d rather go watch a real documentary, thanks…

Pilot Grade: C

1 Law & 2 Orders

Good lord, if I never see another mediocre cop show or legal drama again, I just might die happy. But, until then, I’ll just have to slog through the ever-present deluge of standard clichés that seem to crop up in every single set of pilots for just about every network on the air. Sigh.

At some point, it gets difficult to even assess this kind of show because you’ve seen so many iterations. How can something be interesting if you’ve already seen it? How can a story suck you in if you already know the outcome? After watching enough of these shows, it ultimately boils down to the characters themselves. If you’ve seen one legal drama or cop show, you’ve seen ‘em all, but if there are truly interesting characters at the show’s core, it can make up for a lot of the drudgery of the stories-of-the-week. That’s how The Good Wife made it into my top tier. Sure, I’ve seen a million and a half legal shows in my day, but I haven’t seen characters quite like these and dynamics quite like theirs. In fact, when there are engaging, distinctive characters at the core, it manages to make the A-plots more interesting. I care about this random court battle because Alicia Florrick cares about it. Unfortunately, most shows aren’t The Good Wife, and don’t have such a solid foundation to build on. As such, I don’t really care about the characters and subsequently, couldn’t care less about the mundane details of their daily lives.

To varying degrees, new shows Detroit 1-8-7, The Whole Truth, and The Defenders all fall into this disappointing category.

We’ll start off with our latest cop show…

DETROIT 1-8-7

This is your typical cop show. For what it is, it’s fine. That’s really the primary impression this pilot made and that’s not a particularly a good sign. All the actors do a respectable job and the writers at least tried to make the characters original, but when it all boils down, these are the same standard characters tackling the same standard cases in about the same way. The show had its charms, and over time, I think I could probably grow to appreciate them all on a deeper level, but I was so bored by the A-plot case-of-the-week that it would take a much more intriguing set of character profiles to get me invest. If you’ve never seen a detective drama before, you would probably enjoy this show quite a lot, because honestly, in terms of genre, this pilot did a better job than a lot of them that have come down the pike lately, but given that I have seen cop shows before, and a whole lot of them, I was pretty bored. This show does very little to reinvent this particular wheel and I don’t think I’ll be sticking around for long. This show seems to be aiming for a grittier than the network would allow and they just didn’t know what to do with it after that. Decent effort, but there was really nothing new or innovative about this take on an overdone genre.

Pilot Grade: C+

And now for more legal dramas… you know, because we haven’t seen enough of those…

THE WHOLE TRUTH

To the show’s credit, they’ve taken a bit of a different spin on the old genre and that’s really the only reason the pilot held my interest. This legal drama shows audiences both sides of the case, the trial, and then the truth is revealed. In essence, the show gives compelling arguments for both scenarios and then allows the audience to decide what really happened. It’s not the most novel approach I’ve ever seen, but at this point, even a slight deviation from the norm makes a show seem fresher and better than its counterparts. It’s lovely to see Maura Tierney in good health again, but Her Royal Dourness did very little to bring life to this pilot as the tough and talented DA. Her sobering tone suits her character well enough, but the fact that her character is unlikable to the other characters spills over into the audience as well. There are a lot of characters out there that you love to hate or that you love because they’re neurotic control freaks (or whatever), but Maura’s character is not one of those. But, in all fairness, her glum exterior was nowhere near as irksome as Rob Morrow’s obnoxious over-acting, so she wins some points. Morrow plays the defense to Tierney’s prosecution and goes completely overboard in playing the foil. His brashness and casualness were unconvincing and just plain annoying. I actually said to the TV at one point, “Cool it, Rob. We get it!” Sheesh. The writers are obviously pointing to a future opposites-attract will-they-or-won’t-they (or have they already?) romance between the pair, but I sensed very little chemistry between the two. It's impossible to know if things would have been better with original DA Joley Richardson, but I have an inkling it would. It wasn’t a terrible pilot and it was honestly kind of fun to decide for myself whether or not the defendant was guilty, but I don’t know that I’d want to do that every week. The case itself was pretty thin and while the jury convicted the guy (rightly, as it turns out), there honestly wasn’t enough evidence to convict him. I was willing to give this pilot a “meh” until the final scene when the truth is revealed. Apparently, the murder victim’s bloody cross necklace was stashed at the defendant’s home, only to be found by the guy’s daughter, thereby proving his guilt to the audience. I’m sorry, the police didn’t search the house? It took the daughter all of five minutes to stumble onto this key piece of evidence, but the police didn’t even bother to look? Ugh. If this points to the kind of thought being put in week-to-week on the A-plots, I think I’ll pass, thanks. Based on the ratings, I’m not the only one.

Pilot Grade: C

THE DEFENDERS

This show about a pair of buddy lawyers working kooky cases in Las Vegas had the unfortunate distinction of being the last one I screened. I was already pretty bored with these standard genres, so I wasn’t really in the mood for more. From what I could discern through the law-show-addled fog was a pretty typical law show that was executed decently, if not all that compellingly. I’m not much of a Jim Belushi fan, so that didn’t help, but Jerry O’Connell did a nice job. He seemed to be enjoying the role and played off Belushi pretty well. Once again, the case of the week was pretty thin and I became annoyed at the ridiculous courtroom antics more than amused. I really have to question whether or not either of these legal shows has any lawyers acting as consultants because the legal wrangling is often unconvincing if not utterly absurd. I’m no lawyer, but I watch them on TV and I know when a show is just being lazy. Anyway, the actors were all likable enough and the Vegas bent does add a bit of a different flavor to the show, but honestly, for procedurals that are heavy on A-plot, there needs to be one hell of an A-plot, and that just wasn’t the case here. The best part of the pilot was Natalie Zea as feisty prosecutor/occasional lover to Jerry O’Connell’s character, but near as I can tell, she’s not a regular cast member. All the better for Justified, all the worse for this show. It was honestly no worse or better than most other cheesy law shows, but that’s just not enough for me these days.

Pilot Grade: C-

Undercoverzzz...

When you hear that JJ Abrams has a new show in the works, giddiness ensues. At least it does for me. With Alias, Fringe, and Lost under his belt, it was no wonder that networks were fighting tooth and nail for his newest show, Undercovers, and ponying up ridiculous sums for the privilege. Well, NBC won the rights to the show, but after seeing the pilot, I'm not too sure that makes them a winner...

Undercovers tells the tale of Steve and Samantha Bloom, a married couple who left the spy trade so that they could focus on their relationship and start a catering business. After settling into married complacency for five years, they're drawn back into the world of espionage, or as the characters on this show obnoxiously refer to it, "sexpionage," when a mutual friend/spook goes missing. Good god, if I never hear the term "sexpionage" again, it'll be too soon. What's worse? This show had very little espionage and even less sex appeal, so the term was a misnomer to boot. The basis for this show is the notion that Sam and Steve have settled into coupledom and that the spark and excitement of their relationship has fizzled. Although the pilot wants you to believe that reentering the spy game has rekindled their romance, by the end of the hour, I was more certain than ever that married people are boring.

I'm sure there are married couples out there who aren't boring, but Undercovers did very little to make that case. You'd think that a show about a pair of spies would be titillating and exhilarating, but Samantha and Steve are just plain dull. The stunningly gorgeous Gugu Mbatha-Raw (say that three times fast, or, you know, at all) stars as Samantha Bloom and actually brings a lot of charm and sex appeal to the role. Boris Kodjoe (really? Boris? didn't see that comin'), who plays her husband Steve, on the other hand, does not. I don't know if he simply hadn't settled into the role or if this kind of character just doesn't suit him, but I was unimpressed. For all the supporting cast's assertions that he was the best spy ever and a total badass, he just seemed like a big yawn to me. What's worse, his lack of charisma and personality seriously hindered Gugu's sparkling turn as his wife. There was very little chemistry between the two and practically no sexual tension whatsoever. They really did just seem like a nagging couple who had no spice in their lives. As much fun as that sounds, the pilot suffered all the more for it. I simply didn't care about their relationship one bit and that made it incredibly hard to invest in the storyline and to stay awake.

Indeed, the only real spark to the pilot was Sam and Steve's spook friend Leo, the guy that they've been charged with tracking down. The story actually began with him and almost tricked me into believing that JJ Abrams had done it again. The opening scene, with Leo running from bad guys and hiding information, was the only real exciting, suspenseful note in the pilot. The character of Leo is supposed to play second fiddle to the dynamic duo that is the Blooms, but in all honesty, he's the only character I believed could be an actual spy. Samantha was pretty good as well, but any badassery she brought to the table was watered down by her dud of a husband. If she and Steve had had any real connection or spark between them, even the lamest of scenes would have sizzled. As is, the only sexual chemistry on the show was between Samantha and Leo, who, in a nice yet obvious twist, is her ex-lover. These two shared only moments together onscreen, but instantly had more heat than Sam and Steve did throughout the whole show. I find myself desperately wanting the Blooms to dissolve so that Sam and Leo can run off and play spy games together. I... don't think that was the show's intention. Leo stole the show for me and made for the best part of the pilot (even though he only had a few minutes onscreen). He seemed to be the only one who brought something special to the role and gave his character a snarky, slightly rakish personality that had some real crackle to it. Boris? Not so much. Which is a real shame, because the actor is very easy on the eyes... you know, for as long as they eyes can remain open.

For a show that is so entirely based on one primary couple, the powers that be should have paid more attention to the rapport (or lack their of) between the two. Don't get me wrong, the pair seem to get along well, but not in the sexy, thrilling way the show needs. They struck me more as... really close pen pals. Not lovers, not confidantes, and not even spies. I didn't buy their supposed backstory for a minute. Gugu played it better than Boris, but there was only so much she could do. Since there's no way to not draw Alias comparisons here, I'm going to stop trying. This show is not Alias... in the worst possible ways. With Alias, I believed Jennifer Garner as a spy instantly. I was wholly invested within in moments and completely enthralled by the pulse-pounding gravitas of her situation. With Undercovers? This pair of supposed spies just seems like a couple of tourists. With their chemistry fizzling before my eyes, I at least hoped that their mission would be a thrill, but it fell flat as well. None of the gunplay or fight sequences were believable and none of them seemed to have anything really at stake. The writers' aim at a straight-up dramedy instead of a drama that happens to have some levity to it shot them in the foot. There was no gravity to what they were doing and the super-secret spy mission carried about as much weight as the lame-ass catering B-plot.

Speaking of the B-plot, wow don't care. Sam and Steve are apparently hell-bent on keeping this ridiculous catering side business going with Sam's sister at the helm. The woman playing Sam's sister actually did so with quite a bit of charm and lightness, but I just didn't care about it. Sydney Bristow's home life was exciting and interesting because it examined how Sydney could keep her spy life a secret from the people she loved, people who risked death if they should uncover the truth. In Undercovers, the B-plot just seemed extraneous and inconsequential. The rest of the supporting cast is fine as well, but none of them really grabbed me. Marshall 2.0 was more annoying than the original, but at least he had some personality. Granted, it was the same personality that always seems to accompany the "tech guy" character (with the refreshing exception of Auggie on Covert Affairs), but at least he brought something to the table. All in all, the only character I really latched onto was Leo, and I'm just not sure he's going to be enough to keep me coming back for more.

That the story fell flat for me is disappointing on a number of levels. I love a good spy show and was extremely pleased to see some faces of color in the lead roles of a show for a change, but things just didn't come together here. The writers seemed to be trying so hard to not be Alias and not be Mr. and Mrs. Smith that they ended up with practically nothing. Covert Affairs and Nikita both took cues from earlier spy genre shows, but then they made them their own. They weren't afraid of comparisons and just did what worked. Undercovers would have done better to have stolen the vibe from Mr. and Mrs. Smith and the gravity of Alias wholesale. There would have been people crying foul at the thievery, to be sure, but those same people would probably be tuning in every single week as well. This show had all the bare bones in the world to work with and ended up with something that was surprising dull. It's a good-looking show with ample budget and network support, but at the end of the day, all those advantages were lost on it.

In short, JJ Abrams, this was not your best work. By a long shot. It wasn't a total disaster or anything, but I was honestly pretty bored throughout. I'm not chomping at the bit for more and find myself wishing it weren't about a married couple at all. When the base conceit is boring, all the other bells and whistles in the world can't make up for it. Abrams' other works all had me on the edge of my seat, desperate for more so to see a creation of his fall so flat is a shock and a shame. I'm going to give this show a few more weeks to build some chemistry or create an ongoing storyline that I care about, but I'm cautious. Who knows though, I wasn't all that impressed by the Covert Affairs pilot, but it has actually turned into quite an entertaining show... although in all honesty, I think it had more to work with than Undercovers does.

I really thought this was going to be a winner, but apparently I wasn't the only one who was underwhelmed. The ratings for the series premiere were surprisingly low. Only 8.6 million tuned in and the show scored only a 2.0 in the key demo rating. That's on par with Chuck's current numbers and we all know NBC isn't happy with Chuck's current numbers. Ouch. For comparison, the premiere of Fox's Lone Star (in a much more competitive timeslot, no less) scored a 1.4 in the key demo and is seen as a ratings disaster. Undercovers fared better, but not by much. What's worse, Undercovers was down 13% from the god-awful mess that was Mercy opening in that same slot last season, and Undercovers placed last at 8 p.m. among the major networks. Double ouch. I honestly thought the show would do far better than that, but I can't say I'm heartbroken that it didn't.

At this point, I have better things to watch and it would take a serious turn around in the show to change my mind. Given the base concept, I'm not sure that's possible. It's a well-made show with potential, but I'll be surprised if it manages to suck me in.

Pilot Grade: C-

Raisin' and Runnin'

Comedies are always a little touch and go for me, what with number of insanely unfunny shows out there, so I generally go in with a healthy dollop of apprehension. Fox's new pair of comedies on Tuesdays turned out to be a mixed bag.

First off, the mostly good news...

RAISING HOPE

I wouldn't say this little show will ever be appointment TV for me, but it had quite a bit of charm and enough laughs to make it a nice alternate. This quirky, off-color, slightly trashy show about a kid who ends up with a baby could have been incredibly hokey, but it actually worked pretty well. I'm none too fond of babies, so the fact that I enjoyed this pilot says a lot. The show isn't always polite or high brow or family friendly, but it's not vulgar either. It forges a nice balance of charm and trash, something Greg Garcia always does well with. It relies a little too heavily on sight gags and crudeness for my tastes, but also has quite a lot of heart (without being schmaltzy). Martha Plimpton and Garret Dillahunt are hilarious and the rest of the cast does a good job keeping up with them. Plimpton's line deliveries are always so spot on that even if a line is weak, she makes it work. Her timing is just flawless and she plays the haggard, slightly white trashy mom to perfection. I'm a little afraid it will become a bit one-note in terms of story, and lord knows anecdotes about children aren't really my thing, so if it starts to veer in that direction, I'll probably ditch this one. But, it made a fair showing in its premiere and I'm willing to DVR it for a rainy day or happily stumble across it when my must-watch shows aren't on. It's a bit coarse, but also lovable. What I really walked away from the show with was a true appreciation for what a weird sounding word "Hope" is. Hope. Hope. Geez, say that a few times. If it didn't have any actually meaning, it would be a seriously strange sound to employ. It would be like naming a baby "Snup" or "Flen" or something.

Pilot Grade: B-

And now for the mostly not good news...

RUNNING WILDE

From the original promos for this show, I was afraid. Very afraid. Then I heard that the concept of the show was being retooled and David Cross was being added to the show. Given the creative team behind this one, I was very hopeful they could turn this ridiculous misfire into some real comedy. Well... the pilot was retooled all right... but not nearly enough, I'm afraid. I loved Arrested Development and I adore the majority of the principal cast, but this uneven, unfunny farce about an entitled rich guy learning to be less shallow from a humanitarian just didn't really work. You could tell that Will Arnett and Keri Russell were making the best of what they were given, but that it just didn't quite come together. The concept alone sounds more like the plot of a bad romantic comedy than a great TV series. Seriously, although there were a couple of glimmers of funny, most of the pilot was fairly cringe-worthy. There were so few genuine laughs that I could count them. Total? Two. One of which was really more of a smirk (I'll admit it, the piano gag at the end got me). The only real laugh came when David Cross' character, about to be pulled apart by unsuspecting loggers, attempts to save his life by yelling for Keri Russell to "Tell them I'm white!" Heh. Other than that, there were a lot of moments that were almost funny, but just didn't quite make it. I honestly don't know if the powers that be can turn this into a winner, but if anyone could do it, it would be Mitch Hurwitz, so who knows. At present, this pilot was more ridiculous than funny, and the base concept just doesn't seem sustainable over the long-run. Such a shame.

Pilot Grade: D+