I don't like working out. In fact, I'm lucky if I get to the gym once a week (ok, fine! - once a month.) But the unbearable pain of attaining your beach body is made a little bit easier if there's something good on TV, or a good song in your earbuds. Why not enjoy both? Here are five television songs from my workout playlist that just might keep you on that treadmill. "Let Me Be Your Star" - Smash
"The past is on the cutting room floor; the future is here with me."
Perfect if... your workout is a performance for the mirror on the wall at the gym. Play it... during your warmup.
Purchase it:
"I Could If I Wanted To" - Crazy Ex-Girlfriend
"Throwing a ball like it’s sooo important to know how to throw a ball. Whoopty-fricking-do."
Perfect if... you hate working out. Play it... during that third set of angry, angsty crunches.
Purchase it: "Don't Put Dirt On My Grave Just Yet" - Nashville
"I got a whole lot more than a little bit left"
Perfect if...you wanna quit, but know you'll feel better if you don't. Play it... during those last few miles before the cool down.
Purchase it:
"Aces High" - Empire
"No cameras please, I'm in my zone."
Perfect if... the gym is your zone.
Play it... during whatever part of your workout makes you feel amazing.
Purchase it:
"Who Are You" - CSI
"I remember throwing punches around and preaching from my chair"
Ok, so this isn't really a TV song. It's just been co-opted as a TV theme song. But every workout playlist needs some Who, so put this song on yours.
Sometimes, one hit television show will set off a series of copycats (the way that the 1960s vibe of Mad Men was co-opted rather unsuccessfully by shows like Pan Am and The Playboy Club.) Other times, for whatever reason, multiple creators/showrunners seem to simultaneously have the same idea. It happened in 2005, when all three broadcast networks debuted shows centered around unidentified water-based monsters, all with forgettable one-word titles (Surface, Invasion, and Threshold). Right now, The Crown is on everyone's Netflix binge list. Meanwhile, for those who want to hearken a little further back in British history, PBS premiered Victoria this past weekend on Masterpiece.
The phenomenon is also currently happening with time travel - across the networks and on cable. Two such shows premiered this past fall - Frequency on the CW and Timeless on NBC. I watched the pilot episode of each, but neither made it to my weekly watch list. Here's why not:
Timeless - NBC
Timeless was up first on NBC. The episode was a composite of potential good ideas, but felt more like a first draft than a polished pilot. A band of heroes that we're supposed to believe are "unlikely" (though they seem pretty textbook to me) are tasked with traveling through time to save the past as we know it from a nefarious villain with unclear intentions.
The first seven minutes offered the audience the start of three plot lines and no discernible foundation. Failing to establish their credibility, the show gave us no reason to trust the characters. The editing was odd, and the show leaned the action sequences to hold together a flimsy and incoherent plot.
And speaking of incoherent, Timeless does little to address the philosophy of time travel to which it holds. Everyone seems to gloss over the massive shock that the existence of time travel ought to be. Usually at the prospect of time travel, people are incredulous. We're offered flimsy lines of protest: "Why would you be stupid enough to invent something so dangerous?" Damn good question. On the one hand, the show seems to hold to the "No Do-overs" rule. Yet, the whole plot is based on the proposition that the past can be altered and that it's the job of this band of heroes to protect the historic timeline as we know it.
On the whole, the writing was simplistic, with lines like, "Oh, the humanity!" "Make your own future" Lucy's sister tells her. Ugh. To which I reply - "Oh, the cliches!"
The highlight of this episode for me was Malcolm Barrett - glad to see him again after his run in the short-lived Better Off Ted. His lines like, "The future is not on your side - boy!" were brilliantly delivered.
I was not at all a fan of the show's use of "Wish You Were Here" at the conclusion of the episode. It was a weird cover, and if you're going to use a song by Pink Floyd, why not... "Time?"
Timeless is about the big picture - significant historic events. Frequency deals with a much smaller world with more personal consequences. And chose better music for its soundtrack.
Frequency - The CW
Frequency won major points as soon as they selected Wonderwall as the song that would indicate we were "back in time." (Side note: "Wonderwall" came out in 1995?!) The show is a remake (I gather) of the movie of the same name. I haven't seen the film, so it was all new to me. Here's the gist: New York cop discovers that she can communicate across time with her long-dead father through his ham radio.
I was pleasantly surprised by Peyton List, whom I'd only seen before as Jane in Mad Men, and Raimy is quite a change of pace from the one-time Mrs. Sterling. (Tough and Sincere instead of Fragile and Manipulative.)
Raimy really plays it fast and loose with the standard rules of time travel - i.e., Don't Tell Someone the Day They Will Die. The show sometimes seems to subscribe to the "The universe corrects itself" theory. In other ways, changing the future seems to be possible.
I'm not confident Frequency will maintain a consistent mythology or rules of the time travel, or that the show has an endgame in mind. But I sure like its premise. If Frequency manages to get a second season (which it may - this is The CW after all), I might just make time to catch up before that fall premiere.
Time After Time - ABC
ABC will be the third of the broadcast networks to the time travel TV show game this season, with Freddie Stroma as a time traveling H.G. Wells.
So there you have it. Three new shows each with a new angle on an well-worn concept. The first was set up to be a Time-Traveling Action/Adventure, the second to be a Time-Traveling Police Procedural. Yet to air Time After Time is poised to be a Time-Traveling Action/Adventure Police Procedural...Historical Romance? Still, I doubt that magic combination will save it. (Although its premiere slot next to Once Upon A Time might.) It's my prediction that these three shows will go the way of Surface, Invasion, and Threshold - one season, and less than wonderful.
Lately, I'm deciding which returning shows I'll have time for this fall, and which new ones I want to give a chance. Let's see what there is to see on ABC:
Oh, Heck. I love this show so much it made me use a pun. And I hate puns! Last season we saw a lot of growth and change for our favorite family from Orson. Axl got a girlfriend and got to have a beer with his dad. Brick started a podcast and went to the Planet Nowhere convention. Sue didn't get engaged, didn't go to Prom, didn't win the attendance award, and, in the sweetest graduation-themed episode ever, didn't lose her yearbook after all. Meanwhile, Mike and Frankie kept on being the most well-meaning, not to mention the most realistic, parents on TV. How does anyone not love this show?
In Season 7, Sue will head off to college, and Brick might be headed to high school. We're apparently also in for a Halloween episode that can't be missed. Overall, I'm looking forward to more madcap adventures with household appliances, classic sitcom misunderstandings, and heartfelt endings that give us the warm fuzzies to the tune of the show's jaunty theme song that makes the viewer feel like Orson is home.
The Middle premieres Wednesday, September 23, at 8 PM.
New Show: Quantico (And mid-season expectations)
Unless you love The Muppets, you might not be that excited by the new shows in ABC's fall lineup. Two of the leading men from Gossip Girl got their own gig on the network this season, with Chase Crawford starring in the somewhat promising drama Blood and Oil, set in the North Dakota oil fields, and Ed Westwick exercising that American accent in the horrifically creepy looking Wicked City. (Seriously, the trailer will give you nightmares and possibly prevent you from ever going on a first date again.) As a fan of Community, I'm interested to see what comes of Dr. Ken, starring Ken Jeong. Of all the shows debuting this fall on ABC, the trailer that captured me the most is Quantico. It starts out looking a bit like NCIS but ends up with a twist that I found to be not exactly believable, but nonetheless intriguing. See for yourself:
If this show has anything going against it, it might be the use of a single actress as the star vehicle in a TV world that's currently embracing the ensemble cast. Priyanka Chopra is relatively unknown here in the states; but she's a Bollywood actress and singer, and a former pageant winner (Miss World 2000). Taking on this big role could make or break her, no? Her co-star Johanna Braddy is a talent I'm familiar with. This summer, I binged on UnREAL, a scripted drama that aired on Lifetime (but please don't judge it by that!) and is well worth your time if you are interested in a piercing satire (commentary?) of The Bachelor. (Unfortunately, you can't watch it on Lifetime's website anymore without a subscription, so if you have an antenna like me, you missed your chance.) Johanna was absolutely brilliant on UnREAL, and I have little doubt she'll make a similar splash on Quantico if she's given the screen time.
Quantico premieres Sunday, September 27 at 10 PM.
For whatever it's worth, the shows slated for mid-season premiere look far more interesting. There's Of Kings and Prophets, an epic that appears to be only very loosely based on the Biblical account of Saul and David, The Family, a thriller that seems to combine the political intrigue of The Good Wife and the sinister content of a classic episode of Dateline, and the quirky comedy The Real O'Neals, a show that has the advantage of being headlined by Emmy winner Martha Plimpton and Mad Men alum Jay Ferguson. But since we'll have to wait at least until January for those, in the meantime, I'll be excited to see what's new with the Hecks in Orson, and I'm at least curious to see what happens to Alex on Quantico.
Recent attempts at televised musicals have ended in, well, disaster. In 2013, NBC produced the miserable Underwood-fronted Sound of Music Live!and then this past December, in what can only be assumed was a misguided attempt to increase the floundering channel's viewership, they reprised the lunacy with a live Peter Pan.
So when I saw ads for ABC's attempt at the televised musical, I was intrigued. Galavant, we were promised would not be sentimental or classy, but comic, quirky, and (juvenile-ly) irreverent. I tuned in* to see if these promises would be kept.
*Ok, this is the part where I have to admit something I'd hoped I'd never have to. As much as I love network television, and pride myself on my rabbit ear antenna, last night my antenna failed me. The sky was cloudy, and it was raining, and ABC mysteriously disappeared from my TV. A little blue box blinked "NO PROGRAM," and I resigned myself to hoping I would be able to catch Galavant on Hulu Plus the next morning. Which is what I did. Ugh. I feel like I am betraying all my fellow TV "cord-cutters," but I had to be honest. Ok - back to the review:
Galavant doesn't disown the musical genre it springs from. Rather, it pays homage to its inspirations. Be it through the closing line of the opening song, "attend the tale of Galavant," a turn of phrase now forever associated with Sweeney Todd, or the occasional nod to Shakespeare, the writing confirmed that this production is fully aware of theatre as a genre, musicals as comedy, and television as a medium. It understood that it would be seen on a small screen, so it made the big moments count. The acting can be over the top, but without being inconsistent or annoying.
This was what I appreciated most about the opening episodes to Galavant - They are utterly self aware. They know exactly what they claim to be. There were a few moments when I thought the plot was about to slip into classic fairy tale tropes, but just when I began to worry, the storyline turned, and got us back, well, off track. Sure, in the end it will probably deliver a love story in the classic sense, but it won't take the usual route to get us there.
The characters - all of them - are likable. Even the villains are likable. Moreover, the villains aren't even obvious. Sure, there's King Richard who stole the hero's lady away in the opening number, and Madalena is a bit of a gold-digging flake, but they're funny. And the heroes are far from perfect. Galavant himself is a bit washed up (not to mention hung over) by the second half-hour episode, and Princess Isabella has got her own schemes that she's keeping to herself at the moment.
Too risky to be a full season show, and yet too promising to be a single night event, Galavant is slated to air Sundays this month. I was a bit surprised that it was ABC that took a chance on this little miniseries. More than a chance, it's been talking up this "extravaganza" for weeks. The home of Once Upon a Time and all things Disney offering up a comedic take on a fairy tale? But then, Disney music patriarch Alan Menken seemed to be the show's biggest name - and rightfully so. His music is clever, catchy, and will probably be in my head all week. Speaking of big names, Galavant doesn't boast many. I kind of love that. I love that it can support exciting guest stars because the main characters are relative unknowns. I love that ABC was able to risk smaller headliners because they're only stuck with this show for a month if it flops. It shouldn't flop, though, because it's better than most of what's on TV right now. Plus, it's got enough social media traction to trend on Twitter.
Galavant wasn't spectacular in a way that knocked my socks off, but it was good. It made me laugh. It never missed, in part because it never tried to do something outrageous. It was well-acted, well-produced, and well-written. I was entertained. It delivered on what it promised. I can't wait to see what happens next.
*Here's hoping the weather and my antenna hold up.
On this Father's Day, I'd like to take a moment to talk about some great TV fathers. Before you read on, I'll acknowledge that this post leans toward father-daughter relationships. It's partly because I'm a daughter, but it's also because it was hard to think of very many father-son TV relationships that were particularly commendable. Anyway, here they are: five of my favorite dads of the small screen!
Along with Jay Pritchett and Phil Dunphy, a modern ABC sitcom father who should enter the annals of Great TV Dad history is Mike Heck. Sure, this middle-aged middle-class Dad may not be a warm, cuddly father. And yeah, he makes his share of mistakes. Once he even admitted he had a favorite kid - in front of the other two kids. But he also goes out of his way to support his children when they need it - agreeing to coach a soccer team of cliquey teen girls so Sue would have a chance to play. Standing up for awkward little Brick when he believes he's being picked on. Laying down the law for lazy Axl. But perhaps more importantly, Mike loves his kids' mother, Frankie, even when she's stressed or sad. He's your average family man. That's what makes him great.
I am super disappointed that this Robin Williams headlined show has been cancelled. Poor Sarah Michelle Gellar can't seem to catch a break. In any case, Simon's greatest strength as a father was, not surprisingly, Robin Williams's greatest strength as an actor - that perfect combination of silly and sweet. Simon, father to Gellar's Sydney, consistently brought the humor to their charming relationship, which, yes, left Sydney to bring the common sense. The two of them played on the whole "bringing up father" role reversal in a workplace environment, incorporating the familial aspects of a sitcom in hilarious ways. Despite their dysfunction, these two characters effectively balance out one another's strengths and weaknesses, a quality indicative of a healthy father-daughter relationship. It only lasted a season, but The Crazy Ones is worth your time.
Next on my list of great TV dads is another father of a Sydney - the humorless Jack Bristow. Half the time we didn't trust him, and when we did, we weren't sure that we should. But even when his actions seemed altogether villainous, Jack really did have Sydney's best interest at heart. He may be the dad on this list with the most faults, but his status as super spy makes up for that. The times he saved Sydney's life are too many to mention, let alone count. And if there's a father out there who needs a tutorial in scaring off daughters' boyfriends, he need look no further than Jack's phone conversation with Sydney's fiancé Danny in the pilot episode. He may have an icy exterior, but Jack Bristow has a warm heart once you realize he's one of the good guys.
If there's a TV Dad who deserves credit for trying, it's Michael. First, he had to fix the relationship with an estranged son he never wanted to part from in the first place. Then, compounding the whole deserted island problem, poor Walt gets kidnapped. But Michael never gives up the search for his little boy. Yes, he is determined to a fault. (Actually, he might have more faults than Jack, because yeah, did commit a double homicide there in the hatch.) In the end, getting Walt off the island might not have been Michael's best decision, but he did what he thought he had to do in the near impossible situation the story handed him.
Television is chock-full of awkward father-daughter relationships. Suburgatory's George and Tessa have a chemistry can hit the viewer strangely given the actors' small age difference (Jane Levy is just 15 years younger than Sisto.) The fact that Tessa calls her father by his first name doesn't help. Nashville's Deacon and Maddie are awkwardly navigating the new father-daughter relationship they've discovered in a manner all-to-akin to dating. But then there's Keith Mars, father to Veronica, girl detective. Keith was always the right combination of strict and empowering. In TV terms, he managed to maintain his own storylines all the while supporting hers. The scene when the two of them confirm their biological relationship was the most moving moment this emotion-laden show saw. Well, either that or when he saved her life at the end of Season 1. In times of trouble, Keith was strong for his daughter, and the best single dad TV has ever seen.
Have a favorite TV dad who's not on this list? Tell us about him in the comments!
Nashville's Season 2 finale cemented what was perhaps already certain - Chris Carmack is the MVP of this show. And his character, Will Lexington, has got nothing but trouble coming toward him now. Yes, Season 1's finale left Rayna in a coma and Juliette an orphan, but Will's fate at the end of the second season hit the audience (well, me, at least) harder than those cliffhangers did. In part, it was the inevitability of his fate. This far into the plot, Will had made too many missteps to keep his secret hidden for much longer. Even more painful, though, is the fact that it will be Will himself who reveals it all. And he has outed himself to the world in a moment he thought was private. Chris Carmack delivered that moment with such heartbreak and humanity, not unlike his moment on the tracks a year ago. Only now we know his heartbreak won't be hidden anymore. It was devastating. And acted so devastatingly well.
Of course the real MVP of Nashville is the music, which consistently articulates what the show's dialogue can't seem to, and allows the actors to deliver emotion in a way that makes the show utterly unique among its soapy ABC brethren. The music of the finale was no exception. Scarlett and Gunnar's beautiful Bluebird duet of "It Ain't Yours to Throw Away" was a haunting backdrop to the destruction in Will's life and Juliette's, too.
This duet opened with a cinematic moment that deserves mentioning. It was only for a moment, but before they begin singing, the two characters faced each other in one room, but illuminated by opposite lights. The melancholy, pensive poet, Scarlett, was spotlighted in blue, while Gunnar stood in a glowing red. They were separated almost exactly down the center of the shot by a single strand of white Christmas lights. It was marvelous. Symbolic of their differences, and the distance between them, yet as full of warmth as the song that would follow. (Unfortunately, it happens right before video above starts, 36 minutes and 33 seconds into the episode, if you're curious.)
Now, as much as I enjoyed "On the Other Hand," I have a few problems with the episode. First: for much of the 42 minutes, the show business aspect of the plot centered around sales of the characters' digital singles in order to top the charts. Not only were the mechanics of this not clearly explained for an audience unfamiliar with the concept, but in the end, chart-topping wasn't even particularly important to the movement of the story. It just took up minutes I would have rather spent hearing a longer conversation between Scarlett and Avery.
Second: I don't usually comment on the wardrobe aspects of TV shows, because I am vastly under qualified to do so. (I wish frequenting wornontv.net qualified one to speak about such things, but alas…) However, I just gotta say, what the heck was going on with the hats in this episode?! First, Gunnar has that Charlie Chaplin number somehow magically affixed to the back of his head. Can you say, distracting? Then, Luke Wheeler shows up with a hat so sparkly, he could have proposed to Rayna with that! We haven't seen such a fashion misstep on this show since Rayna's fedora disaster during her Liam days.
Though not exactly in as much suspense as at the conclusion of Season 1, "On the Other Hand" did leave me with a few lingering questions. Chief among them, why does it seem Rayna was totally fine with the unexpected, over-the-top, public proposal by Luke? A proposal she had to accept, and was not discussed ahead of time? Is this poor character development? Or just one more example of how Rayna is great at solving others' problems, but disastrous at even identifying her own? Another query: was there more to Avery and Scarlett's conversation than was shown on screen? I mean, was there more in the script? Because that scene seemed cut short, and did not thoroughly explain Avery's attitude in his later conversation with Juliette. Perhaps it was meant to be ambiguous. That way the audience is left in as much limbo as Juliette herself? I can only hope these questions will be answered when Nashville returns next fall.
Nashville took a page from the Gossip Girl playbook last week: get all your characters together at a fancy event. Things are bound to fall apart. The interesting thing about the fancy-schmancy polo match was that the characters didn't behave exactly as you'd expect. Deacon, who you might guess would fit in the least at an event like this, eased into conversation all smiles with his beautiful lawyer girlfriend by his side. On the other hand, Juliette, the princess of glitter, was royally out-of-place.
An awkward Juliette strikes an awkward pose.
Source: seat42f.com
Which brings me to this - I am loving Juliette this season. At the end of season one, we saw glimpses of her troubled backstory. But this season, we've seen her humanity in humorous ways. This has endeared the character to me. One of my favorite lines from the episode has to be: "According to wikipedia, that sound means the game's about to start!"
I suppose this is the point where I brag about my predictions from my last Nashville review. They've all come true! Gunnar and Zoey did indeed hook up, Will's already had trouble with Edgehill and Layla's already made her move, and Juliette's affair with Charles (who, in this episode, the characters are all of the sudden chummy enough with to call "Charlie") is about to cause her a world of trouble. Previews indicate we'll see that in next week's episode. What I did not expect about Juliette and Charles Wentworth was the possibility that the two of them might have a real connection.
I try not to comment judgmentally on the decisions the characters make (being as they are fictional) but rather how those decisions affect the overall complexity and richness of the story. Therefore, I'm not going to fault Zoey for her attraction to Gunnar. It makes for a good story. Plus, I have a theory that Sam Palladio can have chemistry with anyone.
From what we've seen so far, the new characters introduced in season two are adding to the drama in interesting ways. In particular, Luke Wheeler offers another - and very different - love interest for Rayna. "I was not expecting that," she says when he kisses her. Neither was I, Rayna. Well, not until the obviously foreshadowing conversation he had with Deacon at the polo match. This moment illuminates another fascinating thing about the nature of this show. The soapy details - like Luke's attraction to Rayna - move the larger "business of music" plots along. Because Luke wants to see more of Rayna, he's agreed to take Scarlett on tour. So Scarlett's big break might be the result of another entirely separate potential relationship. Which only proves that nothing's entirely separate. (And that makes a good story.)
And now for the reason anyone and everyone should watch this show: the music. The acoustic version of "Hypnotizing" was by far the best number in the episode. It turned a song I sometimes skipped past on the album into a true heartfelt ballad. Acoustic is how the song was meant to be sung. Oh, and listen for the harmonica.
If the writers of Nashville do one thing really well, it's set things up for catastrophe. And not just the inevitable part of the catastrophe, but all the lingering repercussions. It's what they did at the end of the first season with Rayna and Deacon's accident. The immediate outcome of that cliffhanger was Rayna's coma and Deacon's incarceration. But the lingering result was Rayna's inability to sing and how that led her to further business conflict with Edgehill's new management, and Deacon's inability to play his guitar.
In last week's episode, "I Don't Wanna Talk About It Now," I noticed three things that just might be hinting at calamities we'll see this season.
1. Gunnar and Zoey leave the Edgehill Showcase... together. Did you notice Gunnar leave the Edgehill party with Scarlett's friend Zoey? I can't imagine that won't lead to something. Even if nothing ever happens between those two, their interactions will eventually bother either Scarlett or Will. Or somebody else entirely, who knows? And leaving together wasn't the start of this. It started the episode before that, when she inspired him to write again. (The song he wrote, by the way, was my favorite performed on the season so far. I cannot wait for the next "Music of Nashville" album to drop.)
2. Will's choice to leave Highway 65 for Edgehill. In deciding he was a performer and not a songwriter, not only did Will put himself in a position to feel justified in ripping off Gunnar's songs, but he effectively sold himself short and bought himself a world of trouble down the road. Gunnar and Will have a fragile friendship as it is. And if you think working so near to his old flame won't come back to haunt him, you haven't been paying close enough attention. And that little look Layla gave Will while he was performing? That wasn't nothing, either.
3. And of course, Juliette's adulterous dalliance with Charles Wentworth. There are so many layers to that mistake. For one thing, there was about a 15 second scene in the episode where Juliette looked longingly at Charles and his wife. It seemed to me she wasn't longing for him, but for the love they (supposedly) shared. Poor Juliette. Charles has now further confirmed her disillusionment with love. And talk about foreshadowing - like Avery told her, "Defiance is a drug. It can make you do stupid things." How is this any stupider than any of the other ones? The short answer is that he's married. But the long answer is that he's a media mogul who's influence is of extreme importance to Edgehill Records. This was not just a relationship mistake. This was a business mistake.
It's just brilliant! Nashville proves that good drama has a long fuse. It doesn't happen all at once. By the time we reach the end of season 2, Nashville will have surprised us again. I'm sure of it. Whether it was based on something I noticed, or something else I've totally missed, season 2 is about to get catastrophically good.
The Middle
The 5th season premiere of The Middle was everything that's great about this show. The characters are both sweet and touching, and hilariously flawed. That makes for great comedy, as does the relatability of the show. Anyone who's ever left for college or dropped their kid off at college knew just what the Heck's were going through. Heck, anyone who ever shopped at Bed Bath and...er... Between knows what they were going through. With Season 5, The Middle's still going strong.
Back in the Game
This new series didn't quite hit a home run, but Psych alum Maggie Lawson delivered a fantastic performance as the spunky tomboy single mom Terry. I was less enthused by James Caan's "The Cannon," but that may just be because his character isn't very likable. Although I'm guessing he'll grow on the audience as he grows on Terry and her son. I'm intrigued by the ragtag group of athletes who make up the "Angles." If this is a show about lovable losers, I'll keep on watching. With comedies, the true laughs come when we see ourselves in the characters.
Modern Family
I'm a viewer, but no superfan of this award-winning ABC comedy. I was disappointed to see this show win the Emmy over The Big Bang Theory and 30 Rockon Sunday night. I have two big problems with Modern Family.
For one thing, while the show claims to confront "modern" issues, they tend, as comedies often do, to land squarely on the stereotype. In the first episode that aired this week, that's exactly what happened with Mitch and Cam's proposal storyline. Not to mention the fact that the plot just seemed a little stale. You can only do the "See, they're a normal couple!" thing so many times. I don't think anyone except the writers doubt the validity of the two's relationship.
For another, the characters on the show are utterly un-relateable to most of the show's American audience. Their SoCal mini-mansions are evidence of just how 1% these families are.
The one really fantastic joke was of course, delivered by Ty Burrell's Phil Dunphy, who played his daughters off of one another's perceived worst/best qualities. But one great joke isn't enough for me. I watch ModernFamily because my TV stays on between the aforementioned comedies and Nashville.
Two of the shows that met their untimely ends in 2013 I'm actually sorry to see go. I also feel a little guilty that I didn't get to know them better before they bit the dust. In my last post and this one, I'll tell you why I'm going to miss two short-lived shows of this past television season.
The pilot episode of How to Live with Your Parents (for the Rest of Your Life) wasn't anything special. As is so often the case, the best (read: only) jokes were used in the promo ads, which took all the funny out of watching the episode itself. I couldn't pinpoint it at the time, but I later realized what I disliked about the episode. Here's the setup: Polly, played by Sarah Chalke, falls on hard times and is forced to move into her mother and stepfather's home with her young daughter. Life is hard for the misfortunate Polly, and her hippie parents are utterly unhelpful. When Polly goes on a date, reluctantly leaving her parents to babysit, hilarity ensues. (Polly's parents gave their granddaughter coffee. That's basically it.) But rather than being funny, this episode was depressing. I just felt bad for Polly and wished that life was better for her. Suffice it to say, I didn't plan to watch another episode after the pilot.
But then I did. I forget if was sandwiched between The Middle and Modern Family, or if it came on after one of those two, but my TV was still on, and I watched the episode (confusingly) entitled "How to Live with Your Parents for the Rest of Your Life." It was as though the characters' roles had reversed. Hard times? No. Polly was to blame for making a mess of her own life, and her parents (although very much still flower children) were the only ones who could help her fix it. In this episode, Polly tries to move out of their house, but is not successful at turning on an oven (or any other aspect of living alone.) Brad Garrett delivered a phenomenal performance as Polly's stepfather. His back-and-forth with Sarah Chalke made for some incredibly comedic moments. In addition to being funny, this episode was uplifting. How to Live... was all of the sudden a feel-good comedy, and one I felt I would watch again!
Alas, I will not get the chance. I guess the best news in all of this is that there are still ten episodes of the show I haven't seen. Small comfort for the cancelled.
There were stellar performances all around on this week's drama-filled season finale of ABC's Nashville. As Hayden Panettiere's Juliette brought the house down with "Nothing in this World (Will Ever Break My Heart Again)," the hearts of the viewers were breaking.
It was Panettiere and Charles Esten who shone brightest in the season finale. Aside from the spectacular music (and edge-of-your-seat drama), what Nashville does best is create incredibly complex characters. Panettiere delivered an authentically angry, hopeless, and helpless reaction to Jolene's death, which fully revealed the internal sorrow that's been working its way through her rhinestone exterior all season. Esten's remarkable portrayal of Deacon's spiral back into alcoholism added depth to that character, but also served to explain his history with Rayna. It made Rayna and Teddy's decision to keep the truth from him understandable. (Shout out to newcomer Lennon Stella. Maddie's realization of her true paternity was real and heart-wrenching. This young actress is going places.)
Key to these performances was the way they were set up - all season long, but particularly in this season's penultimate episode. Juliette's mother's death, Scarlet's ultimatum for Gunnar, and Maddie's discovery set the stage perfectly for the season finale "I'll Never Get Out of This World Alive." For the characters, everything is falling apart, but for the story, everything is coming together. That's what made the final five minutes of the episode outstanding. Despair, but not a single plot hole.
Though it brought me to tears more than once, I thoroughly enjoyed this episode of Nashville. It followed a kind of finale formula - break everything apart in the final moments, leaving your audience on the edge of their seats until the fall. But the formula works, even when we can see things coming. (Put anyone in a car in the last scene of a season finale, and we know it won't end well.) In the last five minutes, we were slammed with one cliffhanger after another, not the least of which was Deacon and Rayna's deadly looking car accident. Suffice it to say, I'm thrilled that ABC has renewed Nashville for a second season. I can't wait to see what happens next. It just might break our hearts.
There are a few dramas on ABC which I did not watch from the beginning but suspect might be worth my time. In this series, "Better Late Than Never?" I watch a few episodes of a show and let you know what I think as a latecomer. Was I better late than never? Part #3: Revenge From the promos, I gathered that this show was about a woman avenging her father's death. (As it turns out, she's actually avenging the fact that he was framed for a crime he didn't commit and sentenced to life in prison.) I didn't know that the show is loosely based on Dumas's The Count of Monte Cristo. Revenge centers around the main character's duplicity. I joined the show in Season 2, Episode 16, "Illumination" and also watched this past week's, "Victory." In the course of her vengeance, Emily returns to her childhood summer home, takes on a false identity, and things get complicated. At least in the two episodes I watched, her true self seems always to be on the verge of being found out. So I was kept near, if not directly on, the edge of my seat.
The very cheesy intro graphics could have turned me away, but Revenge actually held my interest. The acting is solid - especially Emily VanCamp's performance. Her "Emily Thorne" brings to mind Jennifer Garner's "Sydney Bristow." Perhaps because "Emily" is an alias, but also because VanCamp, like Garner, excels at making the smooth transition between her honest serious face and her deceptive happy one. What I missed as a latecomer: A whole lot of plot. Who is trustworthy? I'm supposed to be on Emily's side, right? To whom is she telling the truth? To whom is she lying? I'm not sure, and as a latecomer, I'm definitely not sure what I'm already supposed to know. In addition to the vengeance plot line, there's a political plot line, a mob plot line, a business fraud plot line, and none of them seem particularly connected. If that sounds complicated, it's because this show is rife with complications. I have a feeling, though, that that's what makes it good. The Verdict: Better Late Than Never? Maybe. Particularly if you are a fan of soaps, complex mystery plots, or shows about the lives of the 1%. But you'll have to be really committed, because you'll need to catch up. And it might not be worth it, as the critics aren't giving the second season very rave reviews.
There are a few dramas on ABC which I did not watch from the beginning but suspect might be worth my time. In this series, "Better Late Than Never?" I watch a few episodes of a show and let you know what I think as a latecomer. Was I better late than never? Part #2: Once Upon A Time I joined this show in season 2, episode 15, "The Queen is Dead." I had high hopes, as I am a fan of all things fantasy. A world where multiple fairy tales collide sounded right up my alley. Alas, my first impressions weren't very positive ones. I found that the acting was overdone, the effects were cheesy, and the plot moved incredibly slow. Soap opera slow. Here's a recap: The wicked stepmother and her mother sought out and eventually found Rumpelstiltskin's dagger, while the rest of the characters, who I gather are the good guys, tried to stop this from happening. I say "gather are the good guys" because I was inclined, as I watched this episode, to side with Regina, the wicked stepmother. This was primarily because Lana Parrilla delivers better than anyone else in the cast. Which is in itself confusing, because all of these stars are fine actors. This leads me to believe that the problem is with the writing. Take Sunday night's episode, "The Miller's Daughter," for example. How on earth was Jennifer Morrison supposed to deliver the joke about the invisible chalk without sounding corny? "I drew the invisible line - I think." Really? Episode 16 was supposed to be a big one, judging by how ABC marketed it. They got all #OneWillDie hashtag happy.
Frankly, I wasn't very concerned about the impending death. I was too distracted by the spinning wheel scene - à la Ghost. Was it supposed to be evil and frightening? Sexy? Whatever. The plot device that characters can live with their hearts outside their bodies was equally distracting. Because I'm not sure why that worked, I'm also not exactly sure why or how Cora died. What I missed as a latecomer: Everything, it seems! But most importantly, the timeline. It was difficult to follow what was happening in the present and what was a flashback. (Or are they flashing sideways? This is, after all, another show from the writers/producers of Lost - but not the ones you'd remember - this guy and this guy.) While the exposition delivered in Lost's flashes back or sideways serves to further the plot, these fairy tale flashes in Once Upon A Time only serve to slow it down. The timeline was made even more confusing by the fact that four women who looked to be not fifteen years apart on age are, in fact, four generations of the same family. (Am I wrong, OUAT fans?) The Verdict: Better Late Than Never? No. It seems you had to watch this show from the beginning in order to appreciate it. If I had, I might love it. But I don't think I'll watch Once Upon A Time again. Especially since it's up against The Amazing Race, which makes for a more relaxing Monday morning eve.
There are a few dramas on ABC which I did not watch from the beginning but suspect might be worth my time. In this series, "Better Late Than Never?" I watch a few episodes of a show and let you know what I think as a latecomer. Was I better late than never? Part #1: Nashville Overall impressions: I have watched the past three episodes of Nashville, and I'm hooked. In "I've Been Down That Road Before," it was the song Consider Me that glued my eyes to the screen. What's great about this show is the fact that it's willing to take a hard look at the entertainment industry, but in a new way. Not as reality trash, or as a CW soap, but as a well-scripted, masterfully-acted drama. By the time the plot really got moving in "There'll Be No Teardrops Tonight," I was invested in the characters' lives. And that's thanks in no small part to the stellar acting from every member of the cast. Hayden Panettiere and Connie Britton deserved those Golden Globe nominations. And in my opinion, Nashville is worthy of an Emmy nod as well. You may be thinking that a show about a rivalry between a seasoned professional and a young star isn't for you. What if I told you it wasn't about that at all? Biggest asset: The music, which is no surprise, since the show's musical director is T-Bone Burnett. Buddy Miller is one of the music producers as well. To be honest, had I known those talents were behind this show, I would have started watching from the first episode. Nashville's soundtrack is already in my Amazon cart. Panettiere and Britton's musical chops make their whole characters entirely believable. But it's Clare Bowen that really wows me. Listen to this:
What I missed as a latecomer: Some relationship set-up. Because I didn't see what held it together in the first place, I lack a little bit of context as Rayna and Teddy's marriage falls apart. Similarly, I'm a little lost as to why I, as the viewer, am supposed to care about Avery's storyline. It seems to be peripheral to the plot that matters. The Verdict: Better Late Than Never? Definitely. This show has become a staple of my weekly TV schedule. Not only that, but I hope to catch up on what I missed over the summer. I'm thrilled that I found this show during its first season. I'll admit I am nervous to get too excited. ABC is quick to drop shows that are this expensive to produce. I learned that lesson the hard way when I fell for Pan Am. I can only hope that more viewers find, as I have, that this show is worth watching, even if they haven't been watching it up 'til now.
The Middle has never been short on great guest stars. There was Brooke Shields as the troublesome neighbor, Ray Romano as Frankie's old boyfriend, and Whoopi Goldberg as Sue's guidance counselor. Tonight, Roger Rees played "Mr. Glover," Sue's less than encouraging science teacher. I remember Rees as the illustrious Lord John Marbury on The West Wing. And on The Middle, he shined and in my opinion, stole the show. His delivery was flawless. His comedic timing perfect. That was a casting win for sure. But it was Sue (Eden Sher) who stole my heart. Not in her hilarious failed attempts to prove that smiles are contagious, but in her ever-present, persistent optimism. Optimism which eventually won her a smile from Mr. Glover.
Who wouldn't smile back at that grin?
Source: abc.com
What did you think of tonight's episode, "The Smile?" What did you think of the overt product placement for Red Lobster? It would have bothered me if I didn't love their biscuits so much. It probably didn't hurt that I also happened to be hungry while I watched. The Middle keeps getting better and better. If you aren't watching yet, start now.
