Friday, November 25, 2011

Castle Season 4 Check-In

If you haven’t started watching ABC’s Castle, what have you been doing with your life? Arguably the best show in ABC’s arsenal, Castle is still rocking after four seasons. If you are not familiar with the show, it follows Richard Castle (Nathan Fillion), a James Patterson-esque author who is writing a new series of crime thriller novels based off of the life of NYPD detective Kate Beckett (Stana Katic). Castle pulls strings in the Mayor’s office and gets himself added to Beckett’s team as a “writer-consultant.” I’ll leave my plot summary there because if you haven’t experienced the first three seasons of Castle you should really drop whatever you are doing and get to that right now.

Season 4 starts with a bang. Episode 1 “Rise” picks up right about where Season 3’s “Knockout” ended. Beckett is in surgery, fighting for her life. When she finally stabilizes Castle is horrified to discover that she remembers nothing of his confession of love to her. It seems that we’ve once more dodged the bullet of them actually having a relationship. Beckett dealing with the fact that she was shot starts to establish itself as a season-wide story arc. She struggles to find her would-be killer and more importantly she struggles with the reality that it is not likely he will be found; at least not this season.

We’ve also got a new Captain. Victoria Gates (Penny Johnson) is almost everything that Captain Montgomery was not. She doesn’t like Castle and she’s playing the role of the hard-ass. After Montgomery’s “Get it done however you like, as long as you get it done, and don’t make me look bad” attitude the team really butt heads with her. Initially I didn’t like her character at all. I felt like the hard-assed captain character was a little over done and she was rather flat. As the season has progressed though it has become apparent that her no-nonsense tactics are actually successfully bringing out the best in the team. She even lets her hair down a few times and shows some real character. While she’s no Roy Montgomery I can see how she was probably the best replacement we could have gotten.

So far season highlights have include Episode 2 “Heroes & Villains” which is too great an episode to miss. Castle’s already wild theories only get crazier when a real life vigilante super heroes gets thrown into the mix. Episode 3 “Head Case” is a nice twist on the police procedural model because the episode starts with a murder, but no actual body. Because it has got so much character, I find that it is easy to forget Castle basically boils down to a police procedural. Twisting that model, even when they don’t have to in order to stay interesting, is a reminder that the show runners really do know what they are doing. Episode 3 also adds in the side story arc of Castle’s daughter Alexis dealing with the fact that she didn’t get into Stanford and that her boyfriend is very far away. Other great must see episodes include Episode 6 “Demons” which features a group of ghost hunters who have their leader killed by a ghost and Episode 8 “Heartbreak Hotel” which kicks off with Castle in full Elvis impersonator costume being dragged down a hallway by two bouncers. Honestly picking out any episodes as the best is difficult. The whole season has been gold so far.

In the last episode that has aired, as of the writing of this article (Episode 9 “Kill Shot”) we return to the plot of Beckett dealing with her sniper trauma. I really liked the way they dealt with this in terms of film style. Chaotic shots of the funeral and sniper shooting really had me feeling like I had PTSD along with her. Most importantly I hope this means that we will finally see Beckett dealing with her shooting fully. By that of course I mean that hopefully we will stop ignoring the fact that she did not forget everything around her shooting and is fully aware that Castle professed his love to her. I know that the chemistry of the series is entirely built in the fact that they can never break the tension and actually get together but that doesn’t mean I’m not rooting for it to happen anyway.

Bottom line is that after three and a half seasons the show is still going strong. The episodes still feel fresh and original. I actually enjoyed the Esposito/Parish love interest story line because it got Esposito and Ryan into the spotlight. I think that I would really like to see an episode where Beckett was completely out of the picture and they had to solve a crime on their own - with the help of Castle of course. Also I enjoyed getting to see Lanie out of her medical lab and brought forward with some better character development. I think as long as they keep doing what they’ve been doing we’ll see Castle sticking around for a few more seasons; no easy feat in this one-season-flop television environment.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Top 5 New Shows This Fall

This fall has not been kind to premiers, with The Playboy Club and Charlie’s Angels cancelled before they got even halfway through their seasons.   Few new shows have really stood out, but that does not mean there are no new offerings that deserve your attention.  Here are my picks for the top five you should be watching this fall.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Harry's Law: It's... Back?

In a season that has seen lots of excellent new television get the axe (okay, I'm referring pretty much exclusively to Fox's Chicago Code which was murdered in its infancy like so many other promising Fox programs), an NBC show that no one really took seriously has returned this fall for a second season of twelve announced episodes (season one ended after a dozen airings, usually a symptom of an early demise). It's not that I didn't enjoy Harry's Law last season-- I did. And it's not that I'm not watching it this season-- I am. But how did it survive its lukewarm IMDB score (7.2) and anemic Metacritic (48) rating, not to mention all the real critics and its own viewing numbers? It's a secret probably only known to the NBC brass and whatever they're smoking. But I have a few theories.

My first theory, and perhaps the only valid one, is simple: Kathy Bates. If you don't know her but think she sounds or looks familiar, you can spend the half an hour it takes to scroll through her portfolio on IMDB. She is perfect for the role of Harriet “Harry” Korn, a copyright lawyer who has her mid-life crisis a little past middle age and quits her cushy job to open a criminal defense practice in the ghetto of Cincinnati. Bates handles the role with masterful subtly, blending curmudgeonly mannerisms with empathetic grandmothering to bring out the character's own struggles, despite her character's rare service as the central point of any given episode. Harry is a deceptively complex character, searching for purpose, for justice, and possibly even for love, but Bates and the show's writers prevent the show from being about that exclusively, which might be why it's still afloat.

Harry's Law takes place in the relatively unexplored-by-primetime setting of Cincinnati, Ohio. The city is less important for being Cincinnati and more important for not being New York or Los Angeles. The setting does not have a life or significance of its own, which could be considered a weakness of the series, but really adds to the feeling that Harry is “lost” in her own life, searching for her own importance.

One of the primary facets of the show is the art of the closing argument. Law & Order has been here before, as well as countless other television shows and movies before it. But much like the epiphanies in House, the viewer can safely expect that right around 48:00, Harry's Law will deliver a lengthy block of closing arguments. These speeches are finely crafted rhetoric, highly stylized to fit the lawyer delivering them, and clearly heavily rehearsed. Generally, the prosecution presents his or her argument first, and it is often so solid that the viewer finds her or himself agreeing, and wondering what Harry could possibly say to overturn it. And then she does, to everyone's delight. Is this feeling enough to keep people coming back? Maybe.

What could have been a very gritty show about the pressures of late/post-middle age and practicing criminal law in urban centers instead takes a turn for the silly, which is probably another key to its survival. In the first episode of the first season, Harry sets up her practice in an abandoned shoe store, and one of her assistants takes up shoe sales on the side, calling the office “Harriet's Law & Fine Shoes.” This mechanism is blessedly removed in the second season, but still stands as evidence that the show does not take itself too seriously. This is not Law & Order; it isn't even CSI. This is a show about an old lady who happens to have a law degree, and makes forays into criminal law surrounded by characters whose sometimes silly exterior belies a complex inner nature. It has its own vice, separate and distinct from other procedural legal shows without any attempt at emulation.

Clearly, I don't have the answers. Harry's Law is not a bad show, but it's not on the same level as much of its competition, and in the cutthroat world of primetime television, its renewal was surprising. It feels like a show that would be more at home on the USA network, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it picked up there in syndication. Without turning this into a second season review, I will add that the new season has taken some steps to establishing the show a little more seriously, adding some new characters and upgrading Harry's digs. I don't know how much hope there is for the show going forward, but there is one thing I learned from the esteemed Chekhov; if Harry doesn't use the enormous revolver she is seen wielding in most of the promotional material, the show is as good as dead.

Wednesday, November 02, 2011

Land of the Lost . . . and Jurassic Park . . . and a little bit of Avatar thrown in

Fox has pretty much been keeping their primetime schedule afloat with reality programming. and I have always had a dubious relationship with them ever since they cancelled Firefly. Fox has put out some great shows, but they are very quick to drop the axe on shows that are not performing in the ratings game. Specifically I have not felt that Fox has done a good job putting out genre shows. and I felt that the short-lived Terminator and Dollhouse both could have been handled better. However, they seem to be trying to fix that with Terra Nova, the new sci-fi show with Spielberg’s name attached. The show has been referred to as a mix of Lost, Jurassic Park, and Avatar and I feel that this is an accurate albeit overblown description.

In the not too distant future, the earth is plagued with environmental devastation and overpopulation. The inconvenient truth is that the planet we know and love is beyond saving and even stopgaps such as gas masks for outdoor use and population limits (a family is four) are just delaying the inevitable. Just when all hope is lost, scientists discover a portal to a long-forgotten past. The government immediately begins to send people through the portal to establish a new colony in the past where mankind can get a second chance: Terra Nova.

The exact rules behind this sci-fi phenomenon are handled beautifully. The rules are covered in a just a couple of lines of dialogue and left largely unexplained. The writers clearly understand that the exact workings of the time travel are not the focus of the show. The portal opens one way regularly and intermittently; communication with the past is still possible; and when people came into the past they altered the time stream creating a new universe (Back to the Future style). That’s it. That is all that is necessary because the point of the show is not getting to Terra Nova, it’s living in Terra Nova.

My major complaint about the show is the characters. We follow a family made up of stereotypes and easily forgettable characters. We have cop father, doctor mother, rebellious eldest son, super smart middle daughter, and toddler youngest daughter. The only important factor about the youngest daughter is simply her existence.

The week to week troubles have come from three different sources:

The first are the various dinosaurs native to this new time/place. The camp has great fortifications and everyone inside the settlement is safe, but when situations bring the characters out of the safety of camp, dinosaurs are a constant danger. My favorite part about these dinosaurs is that the writers have opted not to use the popular dinosaurs that everyone knows and loves. There are no stegosaurs, triceratops, or even T-rexes. Of the two different species that have we have seen a lot of one is some version of a pterodactyl that is the size of a bat, which may or may not be real, and a weird twist on a velociraptor, that the internet has assured me could not exist.

The second threat comes from a group of other humans referred to as the Sixers, named because most of them came in on the sixth pilgrimage (For an unstated reason the portal does not work constantly and so people must come in groups referred to as pilgrimages). The Sixers decided they wanted to break away from Terra Nova and form their own colony and are more then a little hostile towards the citizens of Terra Nova. The Sixers are what makes me compare the show to Lost. The Sixers feel like the early “others” back when the passengers of flight 815 knew there were other people on the island, but had no idea who they were or what they wanted, which is to say back when the show was fun. The writers have kept the Sixers shrouded in mystery and for now I like it that way. The show is not bogging itself down with mythology yet, but they are putting out some interesting teasers and questions that will keep fans coming back.

The last source of conflict is by far my favorite. I assumed that when our family traveled back to the past that they would have to leave all the comforts of technology behind for some stupid but logical reason. However, the writers chose to make Terra Nova a sci-fi haven with computers and all the advanced technology the future had to offer. The writers have also taken a note from the Eureka playbook and have shown that this future technology and past environment don’t always coexist nicely. In one of the early episodes a genetically modified virus gets free and infects several characters causing them to slowly lose their memories. The cop father must find a way to reverse the problem while also dodging the slashers trying to turn him into lunch so that he can get his wife (and the other characters, but mostly just the wife) back to where she remembers who he is. It’s a plotline that I am pretty certain is literally taken from Eureka, but it works and I like the fact that elements of the future are all their new land of the lost home.

Overall Terra Nova suffers from two-dimensional characters that have not yet developed very far, but there is substantial room for growth. The children still blame dad for getting put in jail and leaving them. Rebellious son has a girlfriend he left and desperately wants to get brought to Terra Nova. You’ll notice I don’t use any of the family members names. That’s because I don’t know them and while I could look them up I think it serves to show my point that at this time the characters have yet to leave the realm of stereotypes. The other facets of the show are great. The writing is fairly solid and the conflicts have been intriguing and kept me coming back for more. The special effects have been very impressive for a TV show, especially the dinosaurs. It is clear that Fox is putting a good deal of capital into making this show a success. If they use the rest of the season to really make me care about the characters and do not overuse the mysteries like Lost did then I think that Terra Nova could be a hit and bring Fox back into the fight for scripted drama supremacy.