Tuesday, September 13, 2005

The New T.V. Season Is Among Us

While technically this is not the first night of new television for the Fall Season; it's been the first night I've found something interesting enough to write about. "Prison Break" and "Reunion" were the first two new shows of the season to premiere last week on Fox. I saw "Prison Break," and it's mildly entertaining if you don't give a shit about reality or interesting characters. Didn't see "Reunion," but haven't heard anything about it to set the world on fire. I watched five minutes of Fox's new sitcom on Sunday night, "The War at Home." It's amazing that with four animated shows surrounding "The War at Home," it comes off as the least realistic of the bunch. As for returning shows, "The O.C.'s" third season started, but I'm still only about halfway through the second season DVD, so I haven't watched it yet. And then of course "The Simpsons," "King of the Hill," and "Family Guy" premeiered. "American Dad" did too, but I have yet to make it through an episode of that, so I can't really write up anything on it.The other three were just as funny as they have been lately. "Family Guy" has turned out to be the best of the bunch with "King of the Hill," in probably it's last season, falling not too far behind. As for "The Simpsons;" they're still having their moments, but that four or five season high they had in the middle of the show's run has just never been matched, and probably never will be.

Tonight two new eagerly anticipated shows made their debuts, and one surprise hit from last year made it's return. So, let's get into it.

BONES (FOX, 7:00 CST)

"Bones" stars Emily Deschanel ("Spiderman 2;" sister of Zooey) as Temperance Brennan; a forensic anthropologist who's expertise is, you guessed it, BONES. The show is based on a series of mystery novels by real life forensic anthropologist, Kathy Reichs, who in her dreams wishes she was as hot as Deschnael. I've read the first three books in the series, and they're very entertaining reads. Reichs gets overshadowed by the insane popularity of Patricia Cromwell and her very similar Kay Scarpetta mystery series. But Reichs is most definately the better writer here. Just compare the reader reviews on Amazon.com; you'll see I'm not alone with this opinion. And last I checked Reichs' novels have been adapted into a t.v. series; Cromwell is still stuck in Hollywood development hell with her own books.

If anyone reading this is a fan of the books, I will say that Deschanel is perfectly cast as Brennan. She's a feisty, cuthroat, and yet professional woman trying to make it in the man's world. While usually being stuck in the lab on high profile murder cases, she is able to use her feminine instinct and ability to blackmail to get her out into the field on occassion. I don't remember Brennan kicking so many people's asses in the books I've read, but maybe that comes later in the series.

In the pilot episode, and I'm sure throughout the rest of the series, Brennan gets partnered up with her FBI admirer, Steely Booth (David Boreanz of "Buffy" and "Angel" fame). He uses his connections to get her on the high profile murder cases because he thinks she's a hell of criminalist, and I think he kind of likes her. She also has a ragtag group of fellow scientists played by Eric Millegan, T.J. Thyne, Michaela Conlin, and Jonathan Adams. There all relatively unknowns, but so far they seem to be able to act.

As for the show itself, it's off to a promising start. Deschanel and Boreanz have really good chemistry. It's a lot better than say Jill Hennesy and Jerry O'Connel in the very similar "Crossing Jordan." Although the similarites in set-up is the only thing I'm referring to. While "Jordan" has always come off as cold and boring to me, "Bones," despite the awful title looks to be fun and fast paced. What impressed me the most about this show was how much I liked Boreanz. As much as I loved "Buffy" and "Angel," Boreanz was in both shows the least interesting aspect to them. They alwasy tried to make him so dark and brooding, and when he was allowed to show a more relaxed, comic side he typically shined. His best performance on "Angel" was as a puppet of all things. In "Bones," he gets to be the sidekick and doesn't have to take himself so seriously, and it works pretty well for him. There are a couple of scenes where he's having to mope and brood; let Deschanel do that from now on.

The fun part is probably in the end what could distinguish this show from the other countless crime shows out there. Instead of trying to go darker than their counterparts they actually keep the scenarios pretty lighthearted, or as lighthearted as you can keep murder shows. But no worries; this is not "Murder She Wrote;" it's more along the lines of "Moonlighting" or "Remington Steele" with quite a bit more gore.

In one weird detour from the books they change the setting from Montreal to D.C. (which could eventually happen in the books). I guess they figured a bunch of Americans don't want to watch a show set in Canada. I thought that would have actually been a nice change of pace and scenery. And also, I'm glad they tried to keep the mystery simple and let us get to know the characters a little bit in the pilot, but I hope we get away from the sex starved politicians and jealous boyfriend plots.

But there really isn't much to complain about here. It's a very entertaining show, and Deschanel should become a household name if anyone can pronounce it after a few more episodes. She's got a lot of spark in her, and she's a hell of a lot better and cuter than her sister. Although, I do love me some Zooey. I'm rambling, so overall I'd reccomend sticking with it for awhile and see how it pans out.

SUPERNATURAL (WB, 8:00 CST)

With "Lost" becoming such a huge hit last year, there are a ton of sci-fi, and no pun intended, supernatural shows coming out of the woodwork this year, and "Supernatural" is the first out of the starting gate.

Jard Palecki ("Gilmore Girls," "House of Wax," and this week's opener, "Cry Wolf") and Jensen Ackles ("Smallville," and "Dark Angel") play brothers who lost their mom when they were kids to something otherwordly. Their father and the oldest brother (Ackles) have been chasing supernatural beasties for the last twenty years trying to find out what the hell killed their mother/wife. The younger brother (Padlecki) has tried to create a normal life by going to college and about to start law school, but when Dad dissapears on a case involving a ghostly hitchiker, the brothers team back up to try and find him. Of course by the end of the pilot, they haven't found him yet, and the series for awhile will consist of them solving otheroworldly mysteries and hopefully finding their dad.

I will probably watch a few more episodes of this to see where it goes, but I left the pilot with mixed feelings. The show is definately creepy. And with an "X-Files" vet like director David Nutter behind the camera it's not hard to see why. However, while the premise is interesting enough, and like I said it's creepy, I just found myself not caring so much about our main characters.

Jensen Ackles handles silly one-liners with the best of them, but in the end that's all they are. Padalecki is such a whiny bitch in the first half of the show, and then he has this miraculous transistion and saves the day. I didn't buy it for a second.

But it's still nice to have at least one straight horror themed show on the air, and I'm really curious to see what the show holds for us in the future. But they definately need to work some kinks out, and I can't really figure out why they paired this up with "The Gilmore Girls." Nothing against that very popular show, but do these two shows really fit together.

HOUSE M.D. (FOX, 8:00 CST)

Last season, Kennelworthy and Chris both gave this show some really strong write-ups, and I have to admit, due to my addiction to "Veronica Mars" (I'm getting help, I swear), I didn't see an episode. However, thanks to the invention of friends with DVR, I got to see the first season last month. I was holed up for an entire weekend watching this somewhat cult phenomenon that sprang up once "American Idol" became it's lead-in. The second season premiered tonight.

While I haven't really found the love for this series that KW and Chris have, I can see why America loves this show so much. Two words: Hugh Laurie. This man deserves many, many Emmy's, and I have a feeling he'll get a few. Might even pull an Oscar or two out of his hat once his run with television is over. He's a hell of an actor, and he carries this show on his shoulders.

My problems with "House"'s first season, and even the episode I saw tonight, is that Laurie shines so high above everyone else in this series, that everyone else comes off kind of cardboard and lacking life. Omar Epps and Robert Sean Leonard have never been two of my favorite actors, but even the lovely Sela Ward and Lisa Edelstein (sex goddess) are never really given much to do.

The first half of Season One really didn't suffer from this problem. The show started off as more of an ensemble piece, but the writers, and rightfully so, fell in love with Laurie, and have forgotten about everyone else. And by enlarging Laurie's hold over the kingdom they've also made the medical mysteries a little more ridiculous and unrealistic. Or in the case of tonight's episode, try to make a simple mystery a lot bigger than it really is. Next week's episode, which I've already seen (Can't say how), is flat out preposterous. A kid with cancer has a blood clot that they can't locate, so they induce a coma and perform a kind of semi-concious autopsy to find it. I will say this for the second episode though, you will never guess how it ends. Whether that is a good thing or bad thing, I'll let you decide when you see it next Tuesday.

But I still find myself somewhat addicted to the show. Laurie is so good, and is so well written, that I'm always entertained. And it's the first medical show in I don't know how long that I've actually enjoyed watching. Never have been a huge fan of the medical shows. I just wish the show would grow along with House's ego, and then we might have a great show instead of just a good one. And can we drop the M.D. from the title; how fucking stupid is that?

2 Comments:

At 9/14/2005 03:10:00 PM, Blogger Chris said...

Actually, Jonathan, they don't really call it "House, M.D." It's there on the title credits, sure, but you never hear Fox call it that.

Also, all of the medical cases are based on some sort of fact. House's methods, however, have been called into question many times by medical experts and some of the techniques have been recognized as total fabrication.

Agree with the other characters not being well-developed next to House, but then again, it is a show called "House."

I'm still sort of catching up into the new season--I missed the "O.C." opener, and I've got the new "Prison Break" and "Bones" to watch. I've seen the "House" premiere. And yeah...how DID you see the next show...you've got someone on the inside at a local Fox affiliate don't you?

Anyway, I'm looking forward to next week with "Lost" coming back. I'm going to need some serious help in getting to see everything, this year. I want to see "My Name Is Earl" also.

 
At 9/14/2005 03:50:00 PM, Blogger Jonathan said...

Yeah, it seems like everything I want to see is on the same two nights. So, it's going to be quite a bit tougher getting to see everything. And I'm worried about "Alias" even making it through the season; that will be a brutal timeslot. I am glad "Arrested Development" is going to be on Mondays.

As far as my comments about "House" go. If a lot of these are medical facts and based on real cases then I guess I stand corrected. How I saw next week's episode really isn't that interesting. A friend of a friend kind of thing had an advanced copy. It was just one of those freak of nature kind of things.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home