CW FALL 2012: Schedule and Pilot Trailers

Not sure why, but neither NBC nor the CW offered up full trailers for their new shows when they unveiled their fall schedules.  Clips, sure, but no full trailers.  Ugh.  Well, the CW is finally starting to roll out actual trailers for their new offerings, but not all.  As such, this is a little incomplete.

Anyhow, the slowness with with they can assemble a trailer is the least of the CW's woes.  Aside from having the worst ratings on network TV (their ratings pale in comparison to most cable shows, in fact), their development slate last season was almost entirely a disaster.  Seriously, when a supernatural show penned by one of the writers of the most successful show on the network is terrible, you know you're in trouble.  Indeed, even with The Vampire Diaries as a lead-in, and Kevin Williamson at the helm, The Secret Circle was a truly awful show.  I spent the better part of the first season thinking that it might turn around ( the way TVD did), but it most certainly didn't.  The writing was bad, the concept was mishandled, and more than anything, the two leads had about as much successful chemistry as a pre-Walter White Jesse Pinkman (which, for you non-Breaking Bad people out there, is code for "none").  Seriously, I'm no fan of Britt Robertson OR Thomas Dekker, but even I thought they'd have more chemistry together than they did.  What a disaster.  Furthermore, rather than the writers of the show noticing  this and changing course, they kept on keeping on with the "they're destined for each other" storyline.  Long story short, even TSC couldn't survive and summarily cancelled.  Ringer, the other much-hyped pilot from last fall, was deservedly cancelled as well.

Here's the long and the short of the fall season:

MONDAY
8/7c 90210
9 pm Gossip Girl  (THE CARRIE DIARIES takes over in January)

TUESDAY
8 pm Hart of Dixie
9 pm EMILY OWENS, M.D. (formerly known as First Cut)

WEDNESDAY
8 pm ARROW
9 pm Supernatural

THURSDAY
8 pm The Vampire Diaries
9 pm BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

FRIDAY
8 pm America’s Next Top Model
9 pm Nikita

NOT RETURNING NEXT SEASON:  Ringer, The Secret Circle, One Tree Hill (sweet jesus, finally), H8R, Remodeled, and The LA Complex.

The CW still hasn't put out a trailer for The Carrie Diaries, but I'm already scared.  Gossip Girl is ending it's run midseason when The Carrie Diaries takes over, so odds are a trailer won't be forthcoming for a while.  Can't say I'm too heartbroken... 

Here are the trailers/clips that are available at this point:

ARROW

My Take: Well, this show has more than a few fairly overt Dark Knight elements and overtones, but hey, if you're going to copy something outright, may as well draw from the well of awesomeness.  I'm honestly not too familiar with the mythology of the Green Arrow comics, but it appears to borrow heavily from Batman lore.  Again, a fine choice of influences, but it also means that it'll be compared to it's predecessor.  A lot.  And it probably won't measure up.  Taking Arrow for what it is and trying to divorce it from The Dark Knight, this looks like a solid action adventure show with an interesting central mystery and modified mythology of its own.  Generally speaking, comic book heroes appeal to me greatly, but when translating to live-action, it has to be done right.  From the trailer alone, Arrow appears to have taken the concept from the comics (and other iterations) and transmuted it into episodic television successfully in terms of tone, cinematography, costuming, etc.  How well that will work in the long run is anyone's guess, but at least right now I'm not cringing at the cheesiness of his outfit or the absurdity of  the setting (*cough* The Cape *cough*).  That said, all I could think toward the end of the trailer was, "Awh hell, looks like someone brought a bow and arrow to a gun fight."  As far as weapons go, the bow and arrow have always been on the cool end of  the spectrum, but in a modern, urban setting it comes across as a bit silly.  Not as silly as I would have expected though, so that's a big plus.  I'm sure it's the kind of thing you'd get used to, but as ever with the bow and arrow, there's only so much one can do.  What happens when he runs out of arrows?  It's a pretty useless weapon at close range...   Anyway, it's derivative, to be sure, but if it's done well, it should be enjoyable.  It has a slightly different bent in terms of his origin story with the shipwreck and I think the writers could do a lot with that.  If they can present a compelling reason he's fighting for the little guy and if they play their cards right, this could be a serviceable superhero show.  All in all, it's more up my alley than most of the new pilots for fall and it looks to be well made and well cast.  Thievery aside, I must say, I'm kind of excited for this one.  It's certainly exceeds my expectations so far and even allays a few fears.

Potential-O-Meter:  7.5


EMILY OWENS, M.D.



My Take:  Speaking of borrowing liberally from other shows, good lord, seriously?  Seriously.  And no, that wasn't actually supposed to be a straight-up Grey's Anatomy reference, but hey, when in Rome.  This is pretty patently derivative and I'm not sure there's any way around that fact when reviewing.  Man alive, it's even the same specialty front and center.  What few elements aren't specifically Grey's in nature are cliches from every other medical drama you've ever seen, plus a dash of Mean Girls for good measure.  You've got the spate of new surgical residents who don't know what they're doing, the obvious budding romantic situation between resident and attending, the uber-competiveness, the Baily-esque Nazi, the voice-over, etc.  There are only a few minor differences and tweaks, but they're appreciated and will be the key to this show hopefully becoming it's own show at some point.  I like that our lead was a losery geek back in the day and the theme that we never really leave high school.  It's not much of a departure from other shows out there, but with Mamie Gummer in the role, it's pretty charming.  Mamie is delightful, so even with overly-familiar storylines, this might be an enjoyable little medical drama where you totally know what's going to happen, but you like watching it anyway.  The cast in general seems likeable enough, but I'm not sure anyone will really be able to stand out among the crowd of pretty people.  I think the show will be banking on the central love triangle with some random medical stuff thrown in here and there, which to be honest, doesn't have me chomping at the bit.  That said, I really enjoyed the first few seasons of Grey's, so many this show can capture some of that appeal.  In pretty much every respect, this is the same old thing, but it's an old thing that usually does pretty well on mainstream TV.  I review medical research proposals for a living, so seeing different specialties described in terms of different high school cliques made me smile, so with any luck, the show will find a way to integrate the "life is high school and high school sucked" theme in a new and fresh way.  Can't say I'm holding out too much hope for that, but that's the element that most appealed to me in the trailer.

Potential-O-Meter:  5    


BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

 My Take:  Oh dear god, SO cheesy.  Like, eye-rollingly, wince-inducingly cheesy.  Apparently this is very loosely based on the '80s series starring Linda Hamilton and Ron Perlman in lion make-up.  The beast for the modern era is basically a Calvin Klein model with a bit of a scar and a lot more brooding.  Ugh.  Yikes.  Wow.  This show is clearly hoping to tap into the tween girl fantasy zeitgeist of the past several years, taking a healthy dollop of Twilight and adding a sexy detective.  For a specific audience, this show could work, but as far as broader appeal is concerned, I'm already groaning and I've only seen 5 minutes of the show.  First and foremost, they seem to be pushing the romance between the two leads WAY too soon.  Again, tapping into the conventions of YA teen girl fiction, there's no build-up, only immediate pay-off.  Which, when the pay-off is immediate, there is no pay-off.  I think I'll have a hard time caring about these characters even in the long run, let alone the pilot.  This show has been paired with The Vampire Diaries on Thursday nights, and while I think there's a sizable segment of TVD's audience that falls into the very specific demo that Beauty and the Beast is aiming for, there's just as sizable a segment that won't care about this show one iddy bit.  Perhaps this show is hoping to do just what TVD did, taking a seemingly contrived tween love story and turning it into a kickass supernatural show, but as with The Secret Circle before it, I seriously doubt Beauty and the Beast will succeed.  I don't know.  I guess it's possible, and I'll certainly give it a few episodes to try, but TVD set the bar pretty high here.  On the plus side, the production looks good and it at least has some semblance of an over-arching mythology to cling to.  How well it will use said mythology is up for grabs, but I'm going to err on the "mostly disappointing" end of the spectrum.  The only aspect that really caught my eye was the fight scene when blood spatter hit the camera.  That was a nice touch and certainly against the grain for a show like this.  The damsely crap that followed was less impressive.  I'm sorry, why didn't she get her own ass off the railroad tracks?  Because the big strong man needed to feel useful, I guess.  Put her in actual, logical peril and it's fine to have some help.  Make her look like a dumbass who thinks she can outrun a train and we have a problem.

Potential-O-Meter:  4      


And that's it so far for the CW.  A mixed bag of mostly very familiar concepts and unnecessary voiceovers.  Yay.  Of these, Arrow is far and away the most promising, but as an anchor with no lead-in, on a struggling network, it's got its work cut out for it.

Bunheads: The Second Coming of Gilmore Girls

No, seriously.  It really, really is.  Many have tried to copy the charm of Gilmore Girls over the years, even Amy Sherman-Palladino (GG creator and executive producer), but few have even come close to succeeding.  Indeed, even Palladino has struggled to recapture the magic with misfires like The Return of Jezebel James, trying to take an established look, and feel, and tone and cramming it into some other form.  Turns out, the secret to recapturing the magic of  Gilmore Girls is to make pretty much the exact same show, in the same setting, with the same characters, music, and actors.

That may sound like a dig, but in all honestly, I say stick to your strengths.  Clearly Palladino excels at a certain kind of show, so I say, if you can, make that show again.  Palladino's newest project Bunheads is Gilmore Girls is almost every possible way--and that's a good thing.

I have often said that I have little patience for the "same old thing", but in this case, I'm making an exception.  I have sorely missed Gilmore Girls since its demise some years back and could hardly believe my eyes when Bunheads gave me that charming, funny, authentic Gilmore Girlsy vibe that I hadn't felt in ages. 

Premiering on ABC Family on June 11th (I watched the pilot online already), Bunheads stars Broadway vet Sutton Foster as Lorelai (er, Michelle), a classically trained dancer whose life kind of flew off the rails, landing her in a Vegas showgirl act.  With nothing going her way and her life sitting next to "dead end" at the singles table, Michelle gives in to lovelorn Hubbel's offer to whisk her away from this life, take care of her, and give her a new life on the beach.  I don't want to give away all the pertinent details here, but the main point is that Michelle ends up in Stars Hollow (er, Paradise), a quirky small town full of peculiar, familiar characters.

Foster is an absolute delight as Michelle and even though it's completely apparent that Michelle is a thinly-veiled reincarnation of Lorelai, I am more than fine with that.  I could easily imagine every word coming out of Michelle's mouth being said by Lorelai and rather than annoying me or feeling like some ersatz, inferior clone, it made me smile ear to ear.  Oh Lorelai, how I've missed you!  Foster tackles the quick dialogue like a pro and her line deliveries had me laughing out loud.  Not a small feat.

Michelle finds herself in Paradise, which is basically Stars Hollow, only warmer.  The real difference with Bunheads is that she's not yet a part of the quirky town and is seen as an interloper and intruder, especially by her new mother-in-law, played by Kelly Bishop, aka Emily Gilmore.  Again, I don't want to give too much away here, so I'm going to save some of the salient points, but basically, Michelle is tossed into this new situation and has to sink or swim.  Helping her succeed is the fact that Emily (er, Fanny) is a dance teacher.  One of the most endearing aspects of the pilot was watching Michelle interact with the young dancers (a group which includes a Paris, Madeleine, and Louise type trio).  She's so warm and easy-going that it all just seems effortless.  And completely charming.  Based on where things end up at the end of the pilot, I suspect Michelle will join Fanny in teaching the girls, adding some much needed fun and youth to a fairly staid routine.

Perhaps it's because I already know many of these characters from their pseudo-stints on Gilmore Girls, but I found myself connecting with them almost instantly.  These are characters and character types that I adored for many years and it's so nice to have them back.  It kind of felt like a reunion with some old friends.  Gypsy and Emily are the only two actors to have come straight across so far (albeit in slightly different roles this time), but I imagine they won't be the last.  The rest of the town has some definite potential as well.  The only character that didn't work for me is Truly, a dressmaker in town who despises Michelle for stealing Hubbel, the only man she's ever loved.  It's not so much that the character is a problem so much as  the actress.  I don't know the actress' name, but she was really terrible.  Like,  this is a bad audition for community theatre terrible.  I'm hoping she settles into the role and can pull it off better in the future, but at this point, it all rang false to me. 

That said, overall, I was completely charmed by this show, it's warm blanket of familiarity, and the chance to see my darling characters back in action.  I grew so attached to all of them, in fact, that I'm already invested and dismayed at the things that happen to them.  Not to give too much away, but there's an event that happens in the episode that actually really got to me.  Generally speaking, just about anything can happen in a pilot and I simply don't care, but this one mattered.  This event facilitates the ongoing series in a number of ways, but it still struck me pretty hard.  You'll know what I mean when you see the episode. 

In summation, if you've been missing Gilmore Girls as much as I have, good news!  Seriously, I went in with trepidation and a pretty low bar and was delighted to get that same old feeling.  The second Michelle walked down the street and I heard the same (well, near same) strummy, la-la music start up, I couldn't help but smile.  And I kinda can't wait to see if  they can keep it going.  There are some logistical hurdles with this that Gilmore Girls didn't have, but I'm confident they can make it work.  The show has a lot of GG qualities, but it also blazes its own trail in certain ways as well.  Thematically, the show examines the consequences of squandered talent, wasted opportunities, and the necessity of adjusting your dreams based on what you've got.  A lot of shows take the "pursue your dream at any cost" approach, but Bunheads is more realistic and sobering.  Sometimes you have to rewrite your dreams.  There's a really lovely scene at the end of the episode where Michelle and Fanny, who have been oppositional and even confrontational thus far, come together over shared experiences and lost opportunities.  It really hit home and made me believe that these two characters, so different in so many ways, have a core of experience that few can truly understand.  If the series can pull of this kind of material with that kind of depth and heart going forward, it should be a long-time joy.  I sure as hell hope so at any rate. 

Gilmore Girls plus ballet?  Uh, sign me up!

Pilot Grade:  B+

CBS FALL 2012: Schedule and Pilot Trailers

While other networks are struggling so much they have to cancel as much as they pick-up, CBS has the opposite problem.  When nearly every show in your arsenal is doing extremely well, it doesn't leave much room for new shows.  Admittedly, it's a problem ABC and NBC would kill for, but it actually does have its own downsides.  It reinforces CBS' reputation for being kind of old and stodgy and doesn't allow for much wiggle room.  As such, when CBS makes cuts, they end up cutting shows that have higher ratings than NBC's best performers.  On the up side, this level of success allows CBS to cut shows that are terrible, even if their ratings are good (a la Rob and Unforgettable).  It also gives shelter to excellent shows with lower ratings like The Good Wife.  CBS may get a bad rap for skewing older in the demographic, but on the reality show of networks, they're just haters who are jealous of CBS' success.  In this case, it's actually kinda true. 
At any rate, CBS is in extremely good shape at the moment, but they have a lot of aging shows that will need to be replaced eventually (sooner than later, if they know what's good for them).
Here's the schedule for fall:

MONDAY
8/7c How I Met Your Mother
8:30 pm PARTNERS
9 pm 2 Broke Girls
9:30 pm Mike & Molly
10 pm Hawaii Five-0

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

WEDNESDAY
8 pm Survivor
9 pm Criminal Minds
10 pm CSI

THURSDAY
8 pm The Big Bang Theory
8:30 pm Two and a Half Men
9 pm Person of Interest
10 pm ELEMENTARY

FRIDAY
8 pm CSI: NY
9 pm MADE IN JERSEY
10 pm Blue Bloods

SUNDAY
8 pm The Amazing Race
9 pm The Good Wife
10 pm The Mentalist

DEAD AS A DEAD DEAD:  CSI: Miami, A Gifted Man, How to Be a Gentleman, NYC 22, Rob, and Unforgettable.
All the dead weight they cut needed to be but and deserved to be cut.  They shant be missed.  With only a few new slots in the schedule though, CBS only has room for a handful of new shows for fall and I have yet to see much of anything for their midseason.  Here are the newbs:

PARTNERS

My Take:  As mentioned, it’s harder to evaluate shows that have a feature video rather than a traditional trailer, so bear with me.  Comedies are tough to parse in bite-sized pieces, but I think this show has some definite potential.  After the characters have actually settled into their roles and the story finds its feet, Partners could be a lot of fun.  The cast is exceptional (LOVE Michael Urie and David Krumholtz has the Whedonverse backing him) and the writing talent is responsible for Will and Grace, a show I quite enjoyed back in the day.  The set-up takes your standard “attractive people dating other attractive people” comedy and puts a bit of a tweak on it.  Not exactly reinventing the wheel, but hopefully the actors and writing will bring something fresh to it.  At the very least, everyone knows the trepidation of friends and lovers interacting, so in terms of ratings and reliability, it has a lot going for it.  The laugh track is going to be a real turn off if the comedy is anything less than gold, so they’ll have to really work for it, as HIMYM does.  Partners looks to be an ideal pairing for HIMYM, so even though ABC’s scheduling department appears to have dropped acid before throwing darts at the calendar, CBS actually seems to know what they’re doing.  All in all, this looks like a charming, if fairly conventional sitcom that should be good for a low commitment, easy show.  PS—500 points for naming the dog Elphaba.

Potential-O-Meter:  6.8


VEGAS

My Take:  Dear Vegas.  Justified, you ain’t.  I tried appreciating the nuances of the show and its concept, but by and large, seeing a rule-breaking cowboy in a hat just makes me pine for Raylan.  More so.  If I had to assess this show, I’d say I’m already kinda bored.  The mob, in general, doesn’t excite me.  As far as bad guys are concerned, they’re some of the least interesting (with more modern mobsters even less captivating that older ones).  I’ll make exceptions for shows like Boardwalk Empire, but even then, I’m not as intrigued as I am by other concepts.  The cast and production look solid, however, so if they can create a story that can bypass my biases, this could be a quality show.  Indeed, from what I’ve seen, this definitely looks like it could be a good show, just maybe not my show.  Michael Chiklis is awful, but I enjoy Dennis Quaid well enough (although the bad fake accent decreases my appreciation of him by at least 24%).  Overall, this behind-the-scenes vignette felt a little flat to me.  Maybe it’s my sensibilities, maybe it’s the show itself, but I’m far from taken with this show, its concept, and its cast.  I’ll give it a shot, of course, but I’m not hopeful.  I think it might be a hard sell for CBS, but who knows.  I don’t watch NCIS, so it’s hard to match up demographics, but maybe all those people who love NCIS will love Vegas.  Doubtful, but CBS has a good enough track record that I wouldn’t count it out.

Potential-O-Meter:  4.1


ELEMENTARY

My Take  Oy.  Dear America, please stop.  If I weren’t such a huge fan and devotee to the brilliant British version of a modern Holmes and Watson, I’m not sure how I’d react to this show, but seeing as I am, I’m annoyed.  Again.  American adaptations are almost universally inferior and unnecessary, so my knee jerk reaction is to simply write this off wholesale and go watch Sherlock instead.  In fact, that would probably be the best recommendation I could make.  Rumor has it there was a fair bit of scrutiny of this show for copying Sherlock hook, line, and inferior sinker, but the writers here very cleverly made Watson female.  On the surface, I have no problem with gender switches when adapting material.  It has worked a number of times in the past to great success.  But seriously, Joan Watson?  Man alive, you couldn’t have just given her an entirely different first name?  Cheesy.  Extremely cheesy.  Anyhow, strictly on its merits, it looks like CBS has taken a classic and turned it into a very typical, very uninspired crime procedural that probably has nothing to do with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle whatsoever.  That said, one of the executive producers has been involved with some excellent shows for HBO and Showtime, so hopefully he’ll bring a little something extra to the picture.  He’s more accustomed to working with pay cable though, so I’m guessing he’ll find the constraints of network TV to be stifling, not inspirational.  Were this on HBO, I’d have a much better feeling about it.  As it, not only does it have to try to live up to the superb British series, but it has to do so in a way that middle America will tune in on a network that won’t allow for any creative expression.  Yeah, good luck with that.  I don’t have high hopes.  Even if the show turns out to be pretty good, it will never surpass its predecessor.  Indeed, it shouldn’t be trying.  I like Johnny Lee Miller and Lucy Lui a hell of a lot, but I think it’s going to be nearly impossible for the show to hold its own, even with a great cast.  We’ll see.  But I’m going to cite precedent on this one and assumethe worst.

Potential-O-Meter:  5.3

MADE IN JERSEY

My Take:  Yeah, no.  Good god, seriously, there have got to be more ideas out there for shows.  Here we have yet another lawyer show, about an young upstart who’s seen Legally Blonde a few too many times, making her way in the big city, blah, blah, blah, I’m bored.  Not only am I bored, I’m rolling my eyes.  A genre show can be a great show, but only if it brings something new to the table.  The Good Wife is a lawyer show on the surface, but it’s so, so much more than that.  With Made In Jersey, I see no such depth.  God, it’s like the network execs thought to themselves, “How could we make a show like The Good Wife, but that appeals to the masses more…  I know!  Throw in Jersey Shore!”  No, Phil (I assume his name was Phil).  That is a terrible idea.  Man alive, if I have to watch one more show where the experienced team members are blown away by the brilliant newcomer cracking the case, I might cry.  The fact that CBS has sentenced this show to Friday, after the fading CSI: NY implies that I’m not the only one with fairly little confidence in this show.  I’m fine with “the same old thing, only better,” but I have zero patience for “the same old thing, only worse.”  There was pretty much nothing in that vignette to recommend the show, so I think I’ll be sticking to my other networks for Friday night offerings.  CBS just doesn’t seem to want to try very hard on a difficult night (in their defense, they don’t really need to, but still).

Potential-O-Meter:  3

There you have it.  They only had a small handful of slots open to them and they decided to fill them with all that.  CBS, it's hard to argue with your business model given your sucess and your willingness to keep The Good Wife for me to enjoy, but this is a pretty disappointing slate for this fall.  Here's hoping that these shows are better than they look.

TV Reviews: Scandal

(Bear with me, I actually watched this pilot over a week ago... The finer points might not have stayed in my brain. You know, like people's names and whatnot. Little stuff.)

This is going to be the short short version of my usual reviews. I'm trying to get back to blogging in a more active way, but life keeps preventing me from doing so.

Scandal stars Kerry Washington as a professional "fixer" who takes PR nightmares and makes them go away. She and her team are kind of the crew from Burn Notice, only instead of disarming bombs and getting rid of neighborhood drug dealers, she keeps compromising information out of the press and shuts up whistleblowers. This is a Shonda Rhimes production and aside from a lack of medical acumen, is exactly what you'd expect from Shonda.

Washington plays Olivia Pope, the best of the best, blah blah blah, who doesn't take guff from anyone and dishes it out with zeal. Again, not exactly blazing a new trail here. She's a former aide to the president and apparently used to be involved with him romantically as well. This is one of the many predictable elements of the pilot, but it also bears the most potential for the ongoing series. Having been spurned by her former lover, the most powerful man in the country, she has an axe to grind. This is where the ongoing story arc comes together. Aside from this, I suspect most of the show will be case-of-the-week type stuff which has never been of much interest to me in general.

The basic concept has some real potential even though the pilot itself was pretty bad. From minute one, the show is so hell bent on telling the viewer what complete badasses these people are that it forgets to give them much substance. Furthermore, if a character is actually cool, I don't need to be told. Raylan Givens is as cool as they come. The show didn't need to tell me that, they showed me that. Scandal simply tells the viewer what he or she is supposed to think about these people then hits them over the heads with it for 42 minutes. Yeah, yeah, I get it already! Telling me someone is cool pretty much automatically means I think they aren't which means that Scandal has a lot of work to do. The dialogue was so oppressive and clunky in this regard that is was actually laughable. Even after such a barrage and an A-plot to further convince me, I'm still not buying it. The cast is fine and all, and Desmond from Lost is particularly nice to have around (best part of the show, brother), but I'm still not convinced. I don't believe that Washington really is Olivia Pope. She didn't do a completely horrendous job and in general, she's a fine actress, I just don't think this was the right part for her.  At least not from what I've seen so far.  I don't know. I can see where she could convince me more over time, much like Mary from In Plain Sight did, but after just the pilot, not only do I not like her character, I don't believe in her character.

The supporting cast didn't get much chance to shine in the pilot and were mostly cookie cutter stereotypes that all such TV teams are required to have. We have the socially awkward computer genius, the attractive investigator, the no-holds-barred prickish alpha male, the charming, disarming womanizer, and the mousy new girl who's learning the ropes. Ugh. Speaking of mousy new girl, I realize it's not just Shonda who does this, but when a show so blatantly has a "I'm the new person who will act as the viewer's window into this world" it drives me absolutely crazy. For a writer, it's just a cheap, easy way to dump plot exposition with as little effort as possible. "I know, we'll just have a new person show up who needs everything explained to them a million times! Genius, I say!" Lazy, I say. I am more than happy to pick things up as I go along. I don't need it all explained from minute one, especially with a concept that is as seemingly obvious and straight-forward as this one. The supporting cast all did a decent enough job, I suppose, but honestly there wasn't much to judge. Desmond had the most prominent role and was by far the most likable character on the show, even if he is embodying yet another cliche. The characters are as basic as their inter-dynamics are and although there's certainly room to grow and adapt, the pilot alone didn't leave me desperate for more.

Oddly, the most promising aspect of the show and the most off-putting was Olivia Pope's relationship with the president, played by Tony Goldwyn. On the plus-side, establishing a universe for the show where the characters have such high-level connections opens some interesting doors and ups the stakes considerably. That said, if the writers don't tread lightly, they could easily write themselves into a hell of a corner. Hopefully though, they'll interlace high-level drama with the more story-of-the-week type elements and find a nice balance. While Tony Goldwyn does a very nice job as the president (and Jeff Perry does an even better job as the president's aide), some of his interactions with Olivia elicited an eye roll and a sigh. When they are talking in the oval office (or the like) and he backs her up into the corner, all her former bravado (that I was already having a hard time buying) melts away and she becomes this weak, simpering shell of a woman. Ugh. It was disappointing to say the least and only served to undercut her character in the most hackneyed way possible. It always seems to be the case with female characters. Oh, they can be effective and ballsy in one aspect of their lives, but they have to balance that with a vulnerable, pathetic side as well. I can appreciate that they were trying to give her some depth and layers, but for me and my brother, it just pissed us off. To go from a fiesty bulldog in your professional life to a scared, weak, almost submissive, doe-eyed idiot in your love life isn't depth. It's insult. Seriously, my brother was like, "Please tell me they're kidding." They were not. To the show's/character's credit, she managed to get away from the big strong man before completely compromising her position, but it was already teetering before she started breathily asking (not telling) him, "Please don't..." She seemed to get some backbone back toward the end, but the damage had already been done. When it comes to men, she's impressionable and weak-willed. The scenes from the coming episodes helped bolster my perceptions of her strength and character going forward, but here and now, I'm unimpressed. My brother and I spent pretty much the entire episode wishing that Gina Torres (Zoe from Firefly) were playing the lead role. Gina Torres is a badass. Gina Torres could put Ukranian mobsters in their place in a way I could believe. When it got to the scene with the president, I was like, "Oh man alive, now I really wish Zoe were playing this role. I'd love to see how she'd handle this (i.e. verbal evisceration or a knee to the groin)." To which my brother responded, "Zoe never would have been in this situation." Hear, hear. Kerry Washington is a lovely woman, and a fine actress, but this is just doesn't seem like the role for her (so far).

In terms of the story-of-the-week A-plot, it was predictable to say the least. In fact, at times it was so so obvious that we didn't think they would actually do it, but they did. There were no twists or turns or surprises that hadn't been telegraphed loud and clear at least a dozen times prior. The dialogue was fairly painful and clunky, but I'm hoping that's a product of the newness of the show. Maybe they'll settle in as the series continues? Here's hoping. Based on the potential of the concept, I'll give it another episode or two. There are a lot of shows out there that had terrible pilots and turned into excellent shows. The Vampire Diaries and In Plain Sight, in particular, come to mind. Can Scandal follow their lead? I'm skeptical, but willing to try.

I didn't hate this pilot, but I certainly didn't love it. My brother actively hated it. It has gotten to the point now that whenever a mediocre show comes on, he can't stop himself from saying, "You know, compared to Scandal, this is looking pretty good." I didn't hate it that much, but admittedly, I played Bejeweled during the really painful parts. Which... might mean I actually did hate it as much as he did...

On a final note, my brother and I happened to be discussing the lack of minority representation on TV prior to watching this pilot and while we very much appreciated that they cast an African-American woman as the lead, the cast as a whole is surprisingly white. We got to talking about it because we were noting the number of great characters on TV who are of Indian descent and it underscored to us how woefully underrepresented African-Americans are. What strikes me as odd is that Scandal, which is produced by Shonda Rhimes, an African-American woman who has frequently spoken out on this issue, has nearly as few minority characters as shows produced by a bunch of white guys (i.e. the vast majority of shows out there). Seriously, Scandal has two African-American characters. And that's it. The entire rest of the cast is white, which means the race ratio is nearly 3 to 1 whites to non-whites. Actually, make that whites to African-Americans. From what I recall, there were no other races included either. Now, I'm not saying that just because Shonda is African-American the whole cast should be as well, but I guess I would just expect a non-white writer to be more attuned to the problem and more devoted to representing faces of color on television, like she has with her other shows. Maybe it was a decision based on the politics of DC? Maybe it just kind of happened that way during casting? Whatever the reasons, I applaud Shonda for including casting an African-American as the basis for the show, but I would have liked to have seen (and expected) a bit more diversity throughout the cast.

Anyhow, it was disappointing pilot, but a promising idea. Here's hoping it settles in as the series continues. It has decent bones, and a promising concept, now it just needs to learn how to use them. If they can keep it more on the serialized side of format, I'm willing to forgive quite a lot. If they turn it into more of a procedural, I doubt I'll stick around for long.

So much for the short short version...

Pilot Grade: C-

TV Review: Smash

In short, I'm in love.

I watched the pilot for Smash (free on iTunes), NBC's latest attempt at dragging the network out of the gutter, and I have to admit, it's also their greatest attempt. While past Hail Mary passes have died ignominious deaths at the hands of the network that was, Smash is far and away their best effort and has the best chance of subverting my expectations for the network.

I should start off with a full disclosure of biases. The premise for this show is pretty much tailor-made for me and my artistic sensibilities. I'm a sucker for serialized dramas, musicals, dance, Broadway, and Jack Davenport. Honestly, it could have been half as good and I'd still be giddy with anticipation for more and clutching my pearls that NBC will blow it. Again. Unhealthy love of musicals aside, I've never been a fan of Marilyn Monroe or her brainless cupie doll routine, at all, so in my own particular brand of flamboyant mathematics, I think my biases may have cancelled each other out. As such, prepare yourselves for a completely unprejudiced and unconflicted review. Huzahh!

A lot of television viewers and critics have been quick with the snap judgments about Smash, assuming it was NBC's attempt at a Glee-style hit, but rest assured, rather than a derivative knock-off of a show that has spun into a full disaster, Smash is everything Glee wishes it could be, but isn't. Rather than setting up a faulty framework whereby actors can sing a million song covers that are vaguely adjacent to whatever contrived moment it happening on air, Smash embraces the ages-old theatrical conceit of a show within a show and makes it sparkle. Yeah, yeah, they're both shows with songs and... no, actually, that's about where the comparisons stop. Watching Smash didn't at all feel like watching some iteration of Glee, and if you've watched Glee over the past two seasons, you know there's no possible way that isn't a compliment.

Smash tells the story of the making of a musical about the life of Marilyn Monroe, using the songs within the musical that is being writing as the primary songs for the show. It forges a compelling blend between the real world and the stage adaptation in much the way the film adaptation of Chicago did (I kinda want to say that Rob Marshall is involved with this show somehow, but don't quote me on that), shifting from reality to fantasy from breath to breath. Other songs elucidate character moments and plot developments as well, but it all blends together nicely and doesn't feel like, "Awh hell, it's been 7 minutes, we have to put another song in no matter how much it doesn't fit." The musical numbers were all completely organic to the story and felt like, well... like I was watching a good musical. For those of you out there who've seen good ones and bad ones, you know what I mean. In the best musicals, the songs simply flow through the narrative like all other storytelling elements. In a bad musical, well, you can feel the number coming from a mile away and can't believe you have to sit through an entire song about postage stamps. It helps that Smash has a hell of a pedigree going into it, not only with an amazing cast of onscreen talent, but actual Broadway writers and choreographers working behind the scenes. These people know how to put on a show and I know how to sit on the edge of my seat clapping my hands together and grinning.

Katharine McPhee stars as Karen Cartwright, budding ingenue and corn-fed Iowan who dreams of making it on Broadway. With her primary credit being "former American Idol contestant," I was understandably concerned about her ability to carry a series. Her acting resume is pretty slim, but at the end of the day, she did a really lovely job, allowing her inexperience to make her performance better, not worse. McPhee is green and unpolished, but so is the character she plays. The very quality that makes her an appealing and refreshing choice as Marilyn makes her an appealing actress overall. Every slightly awkward moment comes off as genuine and disarming. I wouldn't say that every second was a home run, but I found that I connected with her character instantly and found myself rooting for her from the get-go.

By intentional contrast, Karen's rival in the race for the lead is a Broadway veteran named Ivy, and is played by Megan Hilty. Maybe it's humanity's knee-jerk sympathy for the underdog, but neither I, nor the producers of the show within the show were as drawn to her as they are to Karen. She actually did a very nice job embodying Marilyn and she's a force to be reckoned with onstage, but there was something forced and almost disingenuous about her portrayal. Whether this is chalked up to the actress, the character design, or both, is anyone's guess, but it made for a noteworthy juxtaposition. I assume she'll grow on my over time, but as is, one of my very few quibbles with the show was that McPhee's character is so obviously the star of the show (although after talking to Annie, it seems some people were more divided than I). Maybe it's just me, but I can't imagine any universe in which she doesn't get the lead role. It appears that the bulk of the first season will focus on the contest for the role of Marilyn, so unless they flesh out Ivy in more substantial ways, I think the winner is a bit of a foregone conclusion. I think the reason I struggled with Ivy is that she went whole-hog with the Betty Boop Marilyn persona that I've long despised. McPhee's character gave Marilyn an actual personality, a heart, a brain, (da noive?) and my attention. She made her more than the dingbat, and that instantly wins her a lot of points.

The two leads do a very nice job, but it's the rest of the cast that really brings it together and creates the world of the show. The cast is replete with heavy-hitters like Angelica Huston, Debra Messing, and of course, my darling Jack Davenport who steals the show. Okay, I may be a bit biased, as mentioned above, but I think most viewers will find his prickly, sexy, brilliant director Derek Wills as delightful as I do. There are truly no serious weak links in the cast at all and I found myself believing the characters instantly and investing in them. To see the contrast between the two young women, pursuing their dreams in the face of parental opposition or apathy and the profession veterans who've seen a million girls just like them feels authentic and meaningful. We theatre buffs have seen this conceit before, to be sure, but there's a reason writers keep tapping that well. It's utterly compelling and unbearably brutal to watch. I've seen it a dozen times and yet I get sucked in every single time.

Indeed, the few weaker points to the pilot were some of the more staid story elements. While the performances made some of the more predictable plot points work, they were predictable nonetheless. As the season progresses, I'm hopeful the writers will play with expectations and take more narrative chances, but even if they don't, it all still works. More surprises would simply be icing on the cake. In terms of the smaller story elements, there were a few moments where the writers were clearly aiming for heart and depth, but slid into schmaltz instead. I'm not overly concerned here. Once the show really finds its feet, I'm confident these more heavy-handed beats will dissipate as the characters become fully formed. I realize that Ellis' monologue about his love of the theatre and Ivy's would-be heartbreaking phonecall to her apathetic mother were important character points, but this early on, they fell a bit flat. Those were the two primary instances in the pilot that didn't ring true for me and felt forced. The fact that these two moments came from the two characters I connected to the least is no coincidence, methinks.

Minor quibbles aside, the show really worked. The chemistry between all the actors made even the weaker beats worth ignoring. In particular, McPhee and Davenport sizzle onscreen. This is, of course, intentional, and it's a good thing it worked because the show would be far less without it. The story of an aspiring starlet facing the prospect of having to sleep with the director to get the gig is well-worn and familiar, but again, the actors make it feel fresh. Jack Davenport can do no wrong, really. His real strong-suit is the subtlety he brings to the story in the smaller moments. The look on his face and glint in his eye when McPhee performs for the first time had me sold on him as a character and on her as the lead. How that will all shake out in the long run, especially in light of the entirely too revelatory "this season on Smash" highlight reel, will be interesting to watch, even if not completely surprising. That said, the fact that Tom, one of the writers of the musical, and Derek, the director, hate each other (or at least feel a certain rivalry) will make the whole process twistier and murkier in all the best ways. Does Tom want Ivy for the lead because he thinks she's best for the part or because it's clear that Derek favors Karen? Will his loyalties to Ivy win out? Will Derek's bravado overpower him? When push comes to shove, who carries more weight in the decision? I kinda can't wait to find out.

All in all, this was an easy show for me to enjoy. My threshold for musicals is pretty low in general, but even if I weren't such a fan of the genre, I think there would be a lot to love about Smash. Was it perfect? No. Did I care that it wasn't perfect? No. The glitzy production numbers (I've watched the baseball number about half a dozen times now), Broadway caliber singing and dancing (was that Alex Wong I spied in the rehearsal for said baseball number? why yes, I think it was), fine acting, and wonderful cast were enough for me to casually ignore the flaws. Most musicals have issues, let's be honest, but if I can walk away with a smile on my face and a song stuck in my head, I really can't complain. In the end, I find that I'm more excited about this show than I have been about any other pilot this year. Whether or not it'll sink or swim is anyone's guess, but in terms of network TV in general, NBC might just sink or swim right along with it.

No pressure or anything.

The fact that it's on NBC is actually quite the double-edged sword in terms of it's prospects. On the one hand, NBC has hardly a feather in its cap these days and hasn't launched a huge hit since The Office. When there aren't any solid lead-ins to help with new start-ups, it's much more difficult to find traction with viewers. On the other hand, NBC's standards for "good ratings" have gotten so low that shows have to be complete, total, and utter flops to get cancelled. What this means for Smash is yet to be seen, but the good news is that I think it will do at least well enough that NBC will keep it around for a while. They can't really afford for it to flop... In my heart of hearts though, I think it will do well, NBC notwithstanding.

Pilot Grade: A-

TV Review: Alcatraz

When the fall slate of shows was announced, I was pretty underwhelmed, finding a lot more to salivate over for midseason than for September. That's still mostly true, what with Revenge being the only real new love of my life, but in fall's defense, midseason is losing a bit of its luster as well.

When I first heard that JJ Abrams had a new show about prisoners disappearing from Alcatraz prison in 1963 then resurfacing 50 years later to cause mayhem and whatnot, I was pretty excited. JJ has a pretty good track record (Undercovers notwithstanding) and although Lost eventually devolved into a total mess, that was long after JJ's involvement had ended. It was with this pedigree that I happily looked forward to Alcatraz as, I hoped, my new obsession, bringing a glisten and cache to midseason that we'd never seen before.


Yeah, not so much.

Awh, best laid plans. Yeah, I think with Alcatraz we have a tragic case of a great, high concept idea that's been weighted down by network TV. What could have been a gripping serial drama full of mystery and intrigue has been revised and diluted into a standard network crime procedural. Ugh. It wasn't a total disaster or anything, and I really do think it has potential, but at the end of the day, it appears to be way more baddie-of-the-week than I expected. In my book, I'll take a decent serial over a good procedural any day of the week, so such a realization was quite a letdown.

The basic gist of the show is interesting and different. When Alcatraz prison closed in 1963, the prisoners were supposedly transferred to other prisons. In the show's mythology, however, they were taken by unknown forces for unknown reasons. In present day San Francisco, these long-forgotten prisoners are resurfacing, having hardly aged a day, with vengeance on their minds and mysterious puppet master pulling the strings. Interesting, right?! Wow, that sounds like a hell of a concept for show! That's something I've never really seen before! I can hardly wait for the awesome web of awesomeness to unfold before me!!

In actuality, the base mythos for the show's conceit acted merely as a framework for a quirky buddy cop crime procedural. Yeah, that's the exact opposite of what I was hoping for. That said, even that could have really come together in fabulous ways. It didn't. Problemo numero uno? Sarah Jones. Good lord, you've got to be kidding me. When I first heard she'd been cast as the female lead, my expectations for the show diminished by half. Quite rightly, I was disappointed to find. Sometimes I really hate being right. Jones plays Rebecca Madsen, a tough, no-nonsense detective who rose through the ranks at a young age, having learned everything she knows about detectiving from her father. Okay, seriously? How many times do I have to see this character? Your show is about ghosts from Alcatraz wreaking havoc and yet you couldn't come up with something more original than that for your primary character? Such laziness does not bode well for the show as a whole. But, again, even such a hackneyed character model can work when placed in the right hands. Sarah Jones' hands ain't them.

In truth, I've only ever seen her on a few episodes of Sons of Anarchy and an episode of Justified. I wasn't particularly impressed by either, but all in all, she did a serviceable job with the roles she was given (that of the daughter of a white supremacist and very pregnant Kentucky prisoner, respectively). While she managed okay with those, at no time did I think to myself, "You know, she's make a hell of a supernatural detective." I was hoping I'd be wrong, but no. She was terrible. Not for one second did I believe she was a police officer of any stripe, let alone a badass detective who chases down bad guys. First of all, she's not old enough to be a detective. But, then again, no one on these shows ever is. The real problem is that she looks about 14. The flippy blond bob and matronly shape did not help. To boot, her manner, her demeanor, the way she carried herself, everything, struck me more as any random woman at a grocery store than as a ballbusting maverick. With a capable actress, her appearance wouldn't have mattered, but Jones couldn't sell the part even if she looked it, so to not look the either was the death knell. She commanded no authority and at no time did I feel she was actually capable of much of anything. She truly brought nothing to the table and left the audience with a bland, forgettable performance. Seriously, if I had to think of 5 words to describe who she is a as a person, I doubt I could get to 3 before giving up and saying things like, "Uh... punctual? And, um... loves Eggos?" for personality traits 4 and 5. A great actor can make even the weakest of material sing. Alcatraz has problems, but it's by no means the "weakest of material," and yet she still failed. The first outing for the show consisted of the pilot and second episode, of which she was front and center and yet I'm still left with nothing but cliches to hold onto. Maybe that's why they stuck to the cliches... they realized she couldn't bring anything special, so they just put a cookie-cutter out there and hoped the audience would fill in all the blanks. Man, I think back to the Veronica Mars pilot. With Kristen Bell as the lead, I left the pilot knowing who she was, how she operated, and most importantly, that I liked her and wanted to know more. Sarah Jones is not half so capable, and Alcatraz suffered as a result. Honestly, with another actress at the helm, I'd probably being singing the show's praises. As is, I'm left wondering what idiot thought she could anchor a show.

Jones was the real problem here, but honestly, the rest of the cast wasn't given much to work with. Hurley is playing Hurley. Straight up. Even his quips and turns of phrase are the same. His manner, tone, reactions, everything. Don't get me wrong, I love Hurley, but I already know Hurley. He's as warm and convivial as ever, having a lovable chemistry with just about everyone. Having never seen him in anything besides Lost, I can't vouch for his range, but I would have loved to have seen him given something a little different. In this, I'm met with a female cop stereotype and a character I already know. On the one hand, it grounded the show in familiarity, but on the other hand, it grounded the show in familiarity. I'm always looking for something new, and when I run across a ballsy high-concept, I expect it to follow through in all aspects, not just the background conceit.

Sam Neill and Parminder Nagra round out the supporting cast and are both fine, but I kept feeling like they were being wasted in favor of watching Jones awkwardly run after criminals. I'm hopeful the writers will realize what they've got on their hands and shift the focus, but as is, they provided the mysterious people behind the curtain, the bosses, the ones in the know, but didn't get to show much of it. Here's hoping for more. The end of the second episode opened a lot of possibilities for Nagra and I'm hoping they make the most of them. That she, apparently, hasn't aged either, existing in flashbacks and modern day, is genuinely intriguing and automatically makes her character far more interesting than the actual leads of the show. It also helps explain how she could have been shot straight through the heart with a huge rifle and managed to survive. I just hope they actually have a plan for the long term and figured out their own mythology before jumping int with both feet. As with Lost before it, I'd hate to see "the island is magical" become a common refrain for this show... (I just barely finished Lost and can I tell ya? Majorly disappointing. That whole last season was a snooze. I had three eps to go and I simply didn't care. Finally watched said eps, and still didn't care. Ugh.)

While the show definitely has some procedural elements to it, what with a ghost from the past seemingly being tracked down week-to-week and pairing between a cop and an unconventional partner, but its ongoing story seems to hold together better than most. I expected the prisoner in the first episode to be a one-off, but it appears that they'll be making appearances for the long run. This gives me hope for the series. With the leads being as lackluster as they are, I found myself instantly more interested in the prisoners, wanting to learn more about their stories, their histories, and their personalities than in Jones or Hurley. For the one-off characters to outshine the stars is a very bad sign, but the underpinnings of the show allow for a more serial arc than expected. I really hope the writers make the most of that and eschew standard procedural elements for something much deeper than they've given us so far. The mysteries they've laid out are genuinely compelling, but having been burnt so many times before, and by several of the same people, I'm reluctant to trust the writers to payoff their setups. Seriously, is it worth feverishly discussing the many possibilities if you can't be sure the writers themselves have figured anything out? Ultimately, probably not. Lost raised so many questions and opted to answer them poorly or not at all that viewers felt cheated. If you're ever looking for a good time, play the "Wait, how did that happen? Uh, the island..." drinking game. You'll be soused in no time. I'm more than a little concerned that this will be the same situation, slightly different island.

The show isn't without hope, but I'm proceeding with extreme caution and prejudice. I doubt I'll ever learn to love the bad acting and personality-lessness of the lead actress, but I'd like to think there's enough here that they could make it work. There are a lot of logistical elements of the story that I think will prove problematic for the writers down the road, but I'm crossing my fingers that they have a plan this time (having seen what a disaster not having a plan proved to be with Lost). At the end of the day, I didn't hate it, but I certainly didn't love it either. My brother and I spent the whole time wishing it were written by Joss Whedon and starring... almost any other actress out there. Gina Torres was our top pick, but there's a bag of potatoes in my kitchen that's on the short list for the job (what with Jones being their competition). Even if the project ultimately falls to pieces, JJ can usually put together a hell of a pilot. With Alcatraz? Not even close. There are a number of amazing shows out there that had bad or mediocre pilots, but JJ's trajectory is almost always in the other direction. That does not bode well for Alcatraz.

I like to think that in its original iteration, Alcatraz was as badass as it should be and that it was the network that tied their hands and foisted mass appeal on them in the form of a crime procedural. Whatever the cause, that's far and away the show's weakest story element. It's weakest overall element, of course is the cast. Wow. I'm hoping the show starts to gel into more of a serial as they go along and that the overarching storylines take over as the season progresses. The concept of Madsen's grandfather being one of the prisoners who has come back, although hokey and predicable, opens some interesting doors as well. In a perfect world, the show would use the first few episodes to build a bit of an army of prisoners from Alcatraz and then stop having the baddie of the week elements for the most part. I realize that's probably not going to happen, but a girl can dream. Hey, they have middle America to appeal to, dontcha know, and they can't be confusing them with actual storytelling. Ugh.

Again, it wasn't a total disaster and it does have some things going for it. I just wish I'd gotten to see more of those things in the pilot. I also wish so many of those things weren't the same things Lost had (hell, even the music sounds exactly the same). As is, most of the show's assets are theoretical. In my mind, they have a lot of a good stuff to work with. On the screen, much less so. The production values are high and show is well-made, even if the talent onscreen and offscreen leaves a bit to be desired. Hopefully they'll settle into their roles and be more at home with who they're supposed to be... or, you know, Sarah Jones could get hit by a bus. One or the other, really. I'll give it a few more episodes to find its feet and establish itself, but after two episodes, I'm left with a "meh." And... more than a few unintentional laughs... My brother and I really had a field day with this one. They just made it too easy.

Pilot Grade: C+

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.

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.