Grid Effect

My apologies for a second consecutive late post. This one relates more to my boss being in Vegas so I showed up to work an hour late as a result, rather than a post Superbowl hangover. In my lethargic stupor last night, I actually managed to watch Rules of Engagement, a new CBS sitcom that I learned about while watching the game on Sunday (It appears the network self-promotion still works on me).

The premise of the show is there is one worn down, semi bitter, middle-aged couple, who befriends a young, optimistic recently engaged couple that have a still single friend with no intentions of tying the knot. So yeah, it’s pretty much like every other couples oriented sitcom. The older couple of Jeff and Audrey (played by Patrick Warburton and Megyn Price) essentially hold nothing but contempt for each other as they offer advice to their nubile counterparts. Jeff never portrays a positive image of marriage to Adam (Oliver Hudson), and the concept, much like all of these shows, is the marriage is drains the life out of the husband and the wife is a preening harpy with little regard for how miserable she is making his life, mainly because she thinks he’s an idiot.

Needless to say, it’s a tired concept and offers up little in creativity, but Warburton gives a stellar performance playing Jeff. Most will remember him as Putty from Seinfeld as the king of the deadpan. He is almost as strong in this series, but unfortunately his performance isn’t enough to save it, it’s too redundant and I do not see much changing in ways of content. Despite Jeff’s obvious dismissive tone, Adam is constantly probing him with hopeful questions when clearly Jeff is never going to reply with anything encouraging. The entire dynamic is Hudson setting up Warburton for jokes, its like a poor mans Abbot And Costello.

The women on the show (particularly Audrey) counters her husbands protests or disobedience with threats of withholding sex or emasculating jabs about his manhood. Again: nothing new. Her protege, Jennifer, played by Bianca Kajlich delivers little else. She does pull off one decent line when at an art gallery with every main cast member, her husband sidles her while she is looking at a painting, he offers up some pretentious explanation about the deeper meaning of the painting she has been observing, and she replies, “I think a monkey got into the paint”. Why do I remember this one line so vividly? Because it was the only delivery that made me even grin from either female lead.

Which brings us to Russell, played by the David “I am in this for a paycheck” Spade. Russell is supposde to be the wild card in this show, he is what separates Rules of Engagement from being a carbon copy of Til Death on FOX. The leave little to the imagination of Russell’s attitude in the pilot. It opens with him berating Adam for getting engaged. And ends with him lying in bed with a dingy waitress (who moved from New York to Ohio to be an actress) that he met at the art gallery while on a date with Jennifer’s friend. While the waitress rambles incoherently post-coitus, David looks at the business card the blind date gave him and has a contemplating look in his eye, until the waitress arrives back in bed from getting a glass of water and they agree to one more round of sex.

I am not sure how much longer this series will be on the air, but they either need to put some heightners in Spades shoes or rethink the female casting decisions. He had face time with four different women last night (Jennifer, Audrey, the waitress and the date) and was eye to mouth with all of them. Jennifer and Audrey do not matter as there is no romantic overtones between him and the two, but is it feasible all these women are approving of him as a sexual partner if they could post him up in basketball? It’s nitpicking, but it was so noticeable I feel like it warrants mentioning.

All in all, it wasn’t as bad as I thought. Which admittedly, isn’t saying much; but between Warburton’s delivery, and Spade always has decent potential (despite his diminutive stature) I would classify Rules as an above average sitcom. Does that mean I will continue to watch it? Of course not. But there is a certain type of American who enjoys this brand of television, for better or worse, I am not that type. So if the humorous studies of the disparities between men and women is your thing, I would recommend it. If you regularly read this website, I wouldn’t go within a mile of CBS on Monday night, because odds are the only time you tune into CBS are for Survivor (new season begins on Thursday) and/or sports.

More on Sunday night’s Extras later today.

In Case of Emergency, last night’s other ABC debut, has the same exact texture and style too it as Knights. A collection of guys and one token aesthetically pleasing woman (To this shows credit, their female lead is much more attractive than Knights of Prosperity’s female lead). Let me just say that I tend too think Jimmy Kimmel is quite hillarious, and the fact he did a cameo on this trainwreck leads me too believe his ratings are worse than previously thought and that ABC must really have him by the balls.

The premise is four friends/acquaintances cross paths through extenuating circumstances on one night when they are all questioning their own validity and place in life (though the three male leads all seem pretty familiar with each other, Kelly Hu’s character seems too be the only new addition to “the group”). The humor if not identical, is probably a little less “edgy” than that of Knights, and I use the term loosely.

Never the less, this series also negated the laugh track, which I am traditionally in favor of, but the jokes are so bad that they need too be supported by some sort of background appreciation. One of the running gags throughout the pilot is the girl cannot remember the guy’s name who had an unbeknownst crush on her in high school, but can remember the other two guys, and seemingly every other detail about her youth, quite vividly. If this recycled, rehashed and redistributed humor is indicative of the series, then a laugh track is probably necessary just too remind the audience it’s supposed too be a comedy.

Other notes:

Johnathan Silverman plays a more tense version of the guy from Weekend At Bernies. For the half hour he is essentially doing an incredibly poor caricature of Woody Allen. The most cringe inducing moment comes from him when he gives a painful explanation about the hardest part of being divorced, that is, filling out the emergency contact info when visiting the hospital (get it? “In Case of Emergency”? Yeah, it’s really bad when a shows actual title comes from such a insipid moment).

At least it’s a paycheck

David Arquette, between this and producing Dirt, decided too remind us why he has been out of entertainment for the past couple years. Silverman says he can’t drive because he doesn’t have his license on him.

I almost forgot too mention, Lori Laughlin, the girl from RAD (also John Stamos’ wife on Full House, but I prefer too remember her from the 80’s BMX teen movie) plays a doctor. She is the strong, confident one; But didn’t go too high school with the four former classmates.

Oh well, I tried and was unimpressed. It’s back too pretending that ABC only exists for professional and collegiate athletics.

As many of you know, ABC premiered two new sitcoms last night with Knights of Prosperity followed by In Case of Emergency. I wasn’t terribly impressed with either one, so anything I have too say is fairly limited.

Knights pretty much had the same style of humor as any typical sitcom, just without a laugh track. It doesn’t revolve around a family or four twenty somethings hanging around a regular locale, it was just five Jim Belushi’s, a college kid and an attractive woman who banned together to rob Mick Jagger. Of what? I have no idea. Why did any of them agree too such a hackneyed plan in the first place? Again, no idea. But one can point out insignificant plot holes in this show all day long. So I’ll just move on.

What makes it akin to the typical sitcom is not setting, but all the same techniques: double entendres, misunderstandings, bumbling and incoherent humor. It’s really difficult too take seriously or laugh with and I doubt I will ever watch it again, but it did have some high points:

-The montage that illustrated how they got a hold of Jagger’s apartment key, followed by all of the additional security he had beyond his front door (Several security guards, a metal detector, finger pad and alarm system). It wasn’t funny, but interesting none the less.

-The guy who played Murmur on the most recent season of The Sopranos and the CO from Rescue Me who did Lenny Clarke all the favors is in this series as the lead characters most trusted ally. At this point he is essentially a “That Guy”, and after two impressive and convincing turns in such critically acclaimed series, I am surprised he isn’t getting more notoriety with better work.

-The funniest character on the show, the Arab cab driver, had a thinly veiled jab at the Jimmy Fallon movie Taxi. There is more of a personal than a critical appeal. Whenever I am discussing the worst films I have ever seen, Taxi is on a very, very short list.

All in all, I like the effort from ABC, but the pilot did nothing for me. I am not sure who its target audience is, so it probably won’t be on the air much longer. I just can’t imagine it is this hard too find decent comedy writers somewhere in Hollywood, or the country, for that matter.

More on Emergency and Friday Night Lights later today.

I stumbled across this today and thought it warranted posting since it involves two things I have an undying obsession with: The NBA and Arrested Development. The writer compares and contrasts AD characters with some of the more atypical NBA personalities. Not positive I concur with the Kobe-Lucille Bluth comparison, but it will do. It will be interesting to see who is paralleled with Buster, and who will play the Lucille to his Buster, maybe Doug Christie with his wife? If you have never seen Arrested Development before, being compared to Buster Bluth is not exactly the highest of praise, particularly for a professional athlete in a league that measures posturing as much as it measures skill.

Who is Tobias? Mark Madsen? Because we all know he is gay but is struggling in coming to terms with it.

Lyndsay Bluth could be anyone, someone into vanity and physical appearance applies to 90% of the league.

George Michael is going to be the hardest to match. A self-conscious teenager shy around women who desperately wants to sleep with his cousin. AC Green is as close as it gets, but he is retired and I am sure Green has lost his virginity by now, and I can all but guarantee he has no intentions of bedding a relative. This guy might have to go to the incestual fail safe and pick someone from West Virginia.

The possibilities are endless.

I’ll let you know by the end of the recap if I am going to continue watching Studio 60. For the most part, you will be able discern whether or not I will by my tone in the article.

Everyone one is still in a tizzy over the happenings in Pahrump, Nevada. And Matt is scurrying to put together a replacement show, in case Tom and Simon cannot make it back. So he chooses a heavy-set, slightly shy writer to fill the shoes of Simon for the “Weekend Update”-esque sketch. When he expresses insecurity over his physical appearance, Matt has the attractive female writer say she is looking forward to seeing him in a suit, he immediately goes all schoolgirl blushy before she sternly says, “Don’t flirt with me.” Somehow, this manages to instill confidence in him. Like I said in last weeks entry, the drama is fairly inconsequential. Simon makes it back in time regardless, making the entire bit negligible.

Out in Pahrump, we are still supposed to be curious as to why Tom was speeding through their small town. I’ll save you the suspense and just say he was light-speeding through Pahrump to see his brother before he left for his third tour in Afghanistan. The judge, has a soft spot for the troops, even if they are siblings to sketch comedy shows he despises, let’s Tom off of the speeding ticket, Simon off the possession charge and Jack, who coincidentally went ballistic right before everything surfaced about Tom’s brother, off of his contempt of court charge. Hooray!

Harriet spends the entire episode proving to everyone she is not homophobic, including Jordan, Matt and the staff, which leaves viewers of Studio 60 forced to endure multiple cliche rittled blue state-red state arguments about the tenants of Marriage in America, that probably eats up at least ten minutes of their 45-minute air time.

And on the business end of things, Jordan is still in hot water with the network heads over the exerpt of her ex-husbands memoirs that ran in The New York Post. As revealed last week, Jack, who initially was suspected as an advocate for her dismissal, is actually fighting for her. She is confronted by one of the network owners and warned to not screw up the deal with TMG, the company headed by the Chinese man who is in Nevada with his daughter because she wanted to meet Tom Jeter.

The girl also doubles as her Father’s translator, and at the very last moment, the Chinese man caught wind of Jordan in the tabloids. Unfortunately his daughter translated incorrectly, mistakenly saying to Jack that, “Your president has brought great shame to your network”. Jack goes ape-shit about how honorable Jordan and everyone on the cast of Studio 60 is, it ends up this tangent, that lasted at least three hours, was unnecessary, because the Chinese man actually said that “Jordan’s ex-husband had brought great dishonor to himself.”

In the closing scene we learn that Matt was being so difficult on Harriet because he felt it should have been him defending her instead of Tom. So he is actually feeling guilty about his absence.

That, my friends, is the straw that broke the recappers back. It was just one speech too many for a series overrun with speeches. Damn, its a shame that girl didn’t translate properly and Matt isn’t emotionally stable, I might have been on the hook for one more episode.

Just to illustrate I am not a total scrooge, here are a couple decent lines from “Nevada Day: Part II”-

Danny: Judge, in this position, are you pretty much capable of doing whatever you want?
Judge: Why do you think I’m smiling?
-Danny, inquiring about the unique circumstances to Tom’s position.

Harriet: Who’s homophobic?
Matt: Please, I’m homophobic in a way that makes sense.
-Harriet and Matt after he accused her of being homophobic.

Let me just close by saying the series wasn’t a colossal bore. It had its high marks, great acting from the entire cast, most notably Steven Webber and Mathew Perry. Some intriguing story lines that never materialized, probably because I am bailing on them halfway through it first season. Oh well. Nothing ever reached the status of “gripping” for me to have any regrets here.

Ultimately the series is to conceited for my taste. Sorkin, in his attempt to prove that not everyone in hollywood is liberal like mainstream America might believe them to be, refutes his own intentions by portraying everyone from a red-state as some cracked-out gun wielding yokel ignorant to everything. And again, I am not offended in the least nor am I pandering to a base. My sensibilities haven’t been corrupted or anything… but jesus, couldn’t they have brought in a consultant from Iowa or something. Possibly for their second season?

From here on out, if you enjoy this series and want to read up/discuss the latest happenings in Studio 60 land, go here.

It seems like months since the last installment of Studio 60. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. This weeks episode entitled “Nevada Day, Part 1″ sort of encompasses everything that is wrong with this series. Whether it be the preachy blue state politics, self-importance or predictable plot, “Nevada Day” has it all.

To demonstrate that I am not all gloom and doom when it comes to this series (or network TV in general), I will concede that Sorkin & Co. do have some moments of clarity. Matt’s aethiest summary of the “culture wars” was definitely agreeable. When evangelical Harriet claims she doesn’t even know what the sides to the “culture wars” are, he responds, “Your side hates my side because you think that we think your stupid, and my side hates your side because we think your stupid.” Good piece of writing and perfectly delivered by Perry.

Obviously, its not that I find fault in the politics of this series. Even if I did, I wouldn’t broach the topic because that’s not what this blog is about. Its just, it seems like every conversation delves into the misconceptions of mainstream America about Hollywood. And for the premise of the show, that is a material worth tackling (even if by doing so, you solidify those conceptions. But whatever). But every scene evolves into some ideological rant.
For instance, on the plane to visit Tom in the incredibly remote city of Pahrump, Nevada (For a Vegas junkie such as myself, I was unaware there were any other cities in Nevada), Danny and Jack discuss the likelihood that Jordan will stay on as Network President. Out of nowhere, Jack utters, “People think hollywood is run by liberals. Its not. Its run by corporations. And you will have a hard time finding and liberals at those board meetings.” Given the context of the discussion, this had little to do with anything they were talking about.
Every time this subject matter is approached, it’s unabashed palpability could easily be confused as Aaron Sorkin labeling himself as persecuted. Simon (DL Hughley) at one point randomly screams, “I can’t believe everyone hates hollywood”. I am sure this isn’t Sorkin’s intention, but no one wants to hear how victimized a collection of millionaires are, even if there is validity to it. Sorry.

And the drama this show tries to manufacture never seems compelling. I am never concerned with the outcome of a character or story. Take “Nevada Day”, for example. In one of the more contrived plots I have watched on television, Harriet is accosted by three gay men coming out of a diner after being misquoted by Page Six about gay marriage. Tom, attempting to defend her, steps in between her and the trinity of agitation, as Harriet and Simon start to pile into a car, Tom pushes one of the men back, he falls, and really melodramatic music kicks in. To be honest, after watching the new Wire episode that was just posted on “HBO On Demand”, this scene was pretty hysterical. That is probably why I categorize this as a comedy, watching some guy lightly fall on his side doesn’t really concern me.

Later, while shooting rehearsing a scene in which Tom plays Jesus, the head of NBS’s, the cops come to pick up Tom for the incident. Coincidentally, not only is he wearing a jacket he borrowed from Simon because he is cold and dressed only in native Jerusalem garb for a sketch, it also has a partially smoked joint in it, which Simon confesses to at least seven or eight times. In addition, Tom is wanted in this small Nevada town for an outstanding speeding ticket, and the joint isn’t discovered until they are in the police station, in Nevada, where marijuana posession/use is a felony. Fantastic! This isn’t even remotely contrived.

John Goodman is not-so-surprisingly hilarious as the quick-witted Nevada judge who resents everything “Studio 60″ represents. He is hyper sensitive to their “edgy” and “secular” material that he takes personal offense to. He is clearly somewhat of a caricature, but before he goes off on a series of self-righteous tirades, he actually manages to make them feel ridiculous.

On the business side of things, Jordan’s ex-husband has an exerpt from the “tell all” book about his former marriage placed in The New York Post. The exerpt details how she hates everyone set aside single professionals without kids. This comes in the wake of Harriet’s page six scandal and Matt planning on running a controversial sketch with Jesus depicted as the head of NBS’s Standard’s and Practices division, which I assume is in place to comply all programming with the FCC.

They end the episode leading us too wonder why Tom was speeding through Nevada, for whatever reason he wants to be discrete about it. I am sure he was wronged in some way, thus justifying his speeding. With what I have come to expect from this show, My guess is he was being threatened by those lunatics who protest soldiers funerals because the federal government does not outlaw homosexuality.

I will ride it out through the second half of this two part episode, but come next Monday I am dropping either this or Nip Tuck as a series I recap. Any preference as to which?

This week’s episode entitled “The Wrap Party” was probably the best Studio 60 episode to date. But it left me all the more convinced that this series has no real foundation or direction. In fact, the atypical texture and content of “Wrap Party” relative to the rest of the series is probably why I enjoyed it so much. But I digress.

Nate Corddry’s character (Tom) received an ample amount of screentime last night. This was surprsing, but pleasantly so. His parent’s were visiting from Columbus, OH and after the broadcast, Tom agrees to give them a tour of the studio. During the tour, the depiction of the parents as simplistic red state stereotypes was not so subtle, they say things like, “I thought Joan Rivers was going to jump out at me in the audience”, they are unfamiliar with the Abbott and Costello routine “Who’s on First?”, and when Simon introduces himself, Tom’s mother attempts to prove their not racist by saying her husband had developed an infatuation with Halle Berry since the latest James Bond movie. The parents are seemingly good-natured, but there is a difference between being good-natured and being an idiot. I can assure you, us Columbus folk are every bit as embittered and hostile as those in New York and LA. In fact, my cousin and I discuss this phenomena on a pretty frequent basis.

Anyhow, we come to find out that Tom has a younger Brother serving in Afghanistan. My initial impression was: why do they need to take this in this direction? Clearly an example of a series trying to do too much. But upon second thought, it was almost necessary to explain the awkward tension between Tom and his parents with this. Considering Tom scolded them for not appreciating the historical significance of what he does is how the story behind his Brother was revealed, Tom’s parents thought he had lost perspective. Which on some level is probably true. Tom explained (before we knew what he was referring to), “I’m just trying to take your mind off it, Dad”. But his parents didn’t seem to want the distraction. I don’t want to read too much into it, but it kind of spoke to the frequently discussed disconnect between Hollywood and mainstream America.

Another example of condescension that could be construed as misogynistic by your garden variety feminist was the three groupies not understanding the responsibilities of a writer for a sketch comedy show. I thought this was a little much, but then I recalled a survey I once saw (do not have it off hand) and the results showed that 30% of Americans thought actors wrote their own lines. So, I guess it is plausible.

I had a feeling this next plot point would come to fruition. Simon encourages Matt to welcome the idea of hiring some black writers for the show. Matt, looking for any excuse to get out of the wrap party and take his mind off Harriet, agrees to go. The guy they sought out to potentially offer a job to, turned out to be a hack that pridicated his routine on the “white people do this, black people do that” shtick. Simon opts to leave out of frustration, Matt convinces him to stay. During which we learn about Simon’s background in South Central and his motivation for wanting to seek out black writers. It is noble.

While bonding, the two overhear a black comedian receiving a poor audience reaction (the aforementioned comedian received a positive one) His material, though poorly delivered, comes across as original and introspective. The two recognize that he bombed but decide to go backstage and talk with him regardless, as they saw potential in his act. His response to the two of them is reticent, which is refreshing for this show. They inform him that he bombed and ask if he knows who they are. His answer: “Yeah, listen, I’m a pretty smart cat and I know that I am not any good at this. I especially don’t need to multi-millionaires telling me so.” They immediately offer him a position as a staff writer, which he accepts, though non-verbally.

In other notes, Jordan attempts to make friends with the members of the cast. During the process she gets a little anebriated and meets Harriet’s baseball playing boyfriend. He hits on her, she tells Harriet, Harriet dumps him and wonders off to gaze at Matt.

And Timothy Busfield also received ample screentime. When an old man stumbled into the studio, he dismissed him as a couk and tried to get him a cab to take him home. Before discovering that he was a former writer named Elie Wallach who served in WWII before writing for a series. Despite his service, him and many of his cohorts were blacklisted in the 50’s. The episode ends with him sharing stories with Matt and Danny.

Again, I thoroughly enjoyed “The Wrap Party”. But it was inconsistent with the rest of the series in entertainment and content. I mean, the two best aspects to this episode were the old writer and Tom’s relationship with his parents, neither of which will have any continuity to them. The story with the new writer from the comedy club has promise. Until then, I remain skeptic.

The above title might sound like an oxy-moron, but it sufficiently explains my lack of appreciation for Studio 60. Last night’s episode studied how the personal can conflict with the professional, a topic that’s been explored ad nauseum already in this series. Apparently several years ago Matt jepordized his career while attempting to impress Harriet with an edgy sketch. This was revealed after last week’s episode when Matt seemingly couldn’t focus because of Harriet being a distraction. And its beaten like a war drum that they still have feelings for each other. It’s obvious this is going to be a ongoing plot point, but I just find it uninteresting.

The professional aspect of Studio 60 does nothing for me either. If I felt like there was even an inkling of a possibility that something would go wrong and prove detrimental to the characters then it would catch my attention. But everything is rectified by the end of every episode. There is an issue with the Vanity Fair writer doing the “behind the scenes” piece that could result in some negative press. Other than that, Danni somehow coerced the show producer to do his series with NBS (the network Studio 60 airs on and Amanda Peet’s character heads) instead of HBO, with no plausible explanation.

Again, the series has potential. The acting is commendable between Perry, Whitford, Hughley, Paulsen, Busfield and Nate Corddry (of The Daily Show fame), I am just not sure they are given much too work with as the story has yet to be funny or interesting. Better luck next week, I suppose. 

    Studio 60 on The Sunset Strip is something I can’t see myself in the long haul for. The characters are extremely self-involved and all the abrasive, quick witted dialogue falls short more often than not. The show presents itself as a drama moreso than a comedy, but it is difficult to actually register concern for millionaires working on a sketch comedy show, their professional and personal dilemmas seem more or less inconsequential.

For example, the most recent episode featured the main character Danny (played well by Mathew Perry) struggling to accept that his ex-girlfriend and subordinate, Harriet (played by Sarah Paulson), had possibly started dating a professional baseball player (She gave Danny an autographed bat from the ball player that included his phone number, she claims it was an accident). So to act out revenge he goes to a house of psuedo pussycat dolls (he is seemingly familiar with all of them) so he can get a stiletto boot from one of them and present it to Harriet as a gift with the measurements of said pussycat doll scribbled on it. This struck me as a personal crisis that resolved itself. Is it just me or does it seem like once you are up close with a dozen gorgeous women in lingerie that any lamenting over an ex would sort of evaporate. No? Not even mildly? Whatever. Point being is that when your average guy sustains an emotionally devastating break up, he doesn’t have a burlesque house he can run backstage to.

So in a moment of ineffective yet rare defiance I am placing this show in the comedy section. Even though I think the humor falls short. So yeah, that’s not a rcommendation. And on a semi-related note…
what I find really ironic is the sketches they throw together on Studio 60 are actually funnier than anything on SNL nowadays. And it’s all without really trying. As an example the faux news anchors of Harriet and Simon played by DL Hughley and Sarah Paulson have better lines and chemistry than any “Weekend Update” crew from the past seven years. And again, it isn’t even that funny. I guess this is representative of the sad state of affairs at was once a great live comedy show.