TV Meme, Day 4: My Favourite Show

A few months back I was a pleased when everyone weighed in a TV show I flashed back to. I don’t think the dust has quite settled on the actual post, but the meme calls for it and so I shall revisit it. My favourite TV show is unequivocally a little NBC comedy called Friends. It’s a confession that’s almost a reflex. It’s actually the only question of the 30 I answered immediately. Friends is the type of show that’s a bit like lightning in the bottle. If it went into production today, I don’t know if it’d be as successful. Yet, it doesn’t depend on a wholly original concept. A group of friends and their lives…hasn’t that be done before? Certainly. And yet, Friends exudes an irresistible charm that I can confess to having seen every episode (of this ten season megahit) at least twice.

In assessing the lives of six friends in New York, Friends, like so many situational comedies depends on showing us types. We have Rachel – the spoilt, but goodhearted daddy’s girl, Phoebe – the slightly loopy working artist, Monica – the neurotic cook, Joey – the dumb, but good-looking ladies’ man and actor, Chandler – the slightly repressed office guy (where does he work exactly?) who has issues with romance and Ross – the good-natured, but often longwinded palaeontologist. Yes, the types are broad but there’s a consistency that runs throughout the show that makes it just a little more special. Every actor is comfortable in their “niche” and the tug-o-war that so often occurs in ensemble comedies never comes. Everyone is equal, and that’s a big part of Friends’s appeal. And those idiosyncrasies and catchphrases – Phoebe’s smelly cat; Joey’s “How you doing doing?” Monica’s angry, “I know!” It’s all part of the continuous hilarity that is Friends.

It’s a comedy, so it has to be funny. I said it before, and I’ll say it again – I don’t hold much stake in the sense of humour of persons who don’t find Friends funny. It just doesn’t make any sense to me. There are times when they go just a little over the top, but Friends always knows what’s funny and what’s not. It’s not the writers or the actors alone, but it’s everything together. Kudrow’s Ursula has a deadpan hilarity and the writers give her some delicious lines. I actually laugh when the in studio laughs, sometimes I laugh even when they don’t. Few things can put you in a good mood like spending time with Friends. I don’t think anyone who has seen Friends cannot find the escapades of our protagonist as realistic. Sure we may not be living on New York, or working as an actor but the realism with which the six interact with each other accounts for a large part of its appeal. Each episode works as a standalone, but even more impressive is hwo gags introduced in the first season can continue throughout to the final one. We know that Ross and Rachel were “on a break” and we know that Phoebe is a vegetarian (except for a particular bout of pregnancy). The continuity adds to the reality and makes it that much more enjoyable.
       
This entry is part of my ongoing meme on TV Moments

I’ll return to Friends again, not only for this meme but sometime again…because I love it and it only fills me with joy.

Follow the Yellow, Brick Road – A Few Short Notes, No Digressions

I didn’t cover The Wizard of Oz on Sunday – because it’s not my absolutely favourite musical – it’s the ever dreaded #2. Jose and Ruben both looked deeper into the classic spotting things that had never occurred. Of course, that’s one of the main indicators that a film is excellent – when you can keep returning to it and finding new things. The thing is, I often forget that the The Wizard of Oz is a musical. It’s not that the songs are poor, headlined by the class “Over the Rainbow” and backed up with sweet tunes like “If I Were the King of the Forest” and “If I Only Had A Brain” it is just as fulfilling in its moments of adventure as it is in its moments of music. What I remember The Wizard of Oz for most is the one thing that has been borrowed by countless story tellers (on film and otherwise) – our hero’s departure to a strange, new world that turns out to be a dream. Incidentally this running gag is the weakest part of The Wizard of Oz’s strong story, but all things considered it’s only weak by comparison and it’s only lost its brilliance today because of our overexposure to it.

The Wizard of Oz is one of the films I remember earliest from my childhood. I can’t recall the exact age, but I know I saw it when it had all switched to Technicolor. Upon my “discovery” of the earlier sepia toned portion I found myself more charmed by Dorothy’s adventures (or lack thereof) in Kansas. She’s obviously out of place, and it made me realise how important this portion is to her “development”, and I couldn't help but smile every time Judy said "Oh, Aunty Em" in that earnest way of hers. The Wizard of Oz is doing so much even though it seems like a standard home, away and back home story. I always marvel at Judy’s ability to be meek while still having a sort of bravura that’s most attractive. She has a thing for line readings, even at that age, and sure she spends a significant portion of the film admonishing the things she meets it’s never too much. Of course Dorothy’s growing dissatisfaction with Oz is key to the message the story has to tell us. It’s part of the weirdness of the entire film though. Sure, the Wicked Witch of the East is evil and all, but the celebration is almost perverse as we watch those crazy Munchkins rejoicing.

It’s nice that The Wizard of Oz has endured for so long. As much as I love Shirley Temple I balk at the idea of her as Dorothy. It’s a little gem, that works as much for the adult as for the child – and that’s a bit of a rarity. It’s #19 on my list of favourite films.

TV Meme, Day 3: Best New Show Last Season

I have not been dedicating as much time to the small screen over the past year, I’ve been keeping up sporadically only with some of my favourites and I haven’t seen as much of many. It wasn’t quite the banner year for new shows like years past but there were a number of auspicious new additions. It’s a bit clichéd to single this particular one out, but I’d feel a little overly stoic if I conduct a 30 day TV meme without focusing on the little show that could – Glee. Anyone could tell you that Glee has its issues – that I’ll admit too. Others might tell you that Glee is unrealistic – that I think is missing the point. in the same way that Grease is an unrelenting parody (albeit, a little ineffective at times) of teenage stereotypes Glee – complete with its missteps on occasion – aims at the stereotypes of high school. I don't particularly care for the word best, I'll go with favourite.

A show like Glee is a bit of an anomaly on the small screen and I’m quite surprised at the cultural phenomenon it’s turned into. I’m a bit worried it’s heading to the ultimate letdown, for with all the hype and all the success it’s attained there seems no way to go but down. But it is what it is. Matthew Morisson’s attempts to revive the Glee Club at his high school while facing opposition from the dastardly Sue Sylvester present the crux (seemingly at least) of the show. But like so many school dramas, the importance of Glee rests on the shoulders of the student. I’ve had an affection for Lea Michele since hearing her on the cast recording for Spring Awakening and her bit part on Ragtime in the late nineties. Thus, perhaps I’m a little bit overly fond of her – even her role is more of a double edged sword than is obvious. It’s particularly difficult for anyone to make the ludicrousness of Rachel’s craziness works, and though Lea has her moments of doubt – she still stands out as my favourite of the cast. Not that she works alone though, the aforementioned Lynch and Morisson are important to the show, even if Morisson’s bland charm is hard to appreciate at times. But each cast member has their role and each fulfils it Amber Riley brings the sass with just the right amount of heart, Chris Colfer does a good job as the pocket gay, Mark Salling, Naya Rivera and Kevin McHale are just a fraction of Glee regulars contributing to the diversity of the show.

And then of course, there are the guests. No primetime show can match Will & Grace when it comes to excellent use of guests but Glee does a good job of using stars that are often forgotten – particularly those from the stage. It’s a part of its charm, and though it has its issues it’s nice to see the actors we probably wouldn’t be seeing on the big screen any time soon. Glee doesn’t exactly give us a fresh perspective on life or high school but week after week it (attempts to least) gives a little bit of joy. It’s not perfect, and I’m unsure on what will happen at the Emmy’s…but if I remember anything from the last television season it will be Glee.

This entry is part of my ongoing meme on TV Moments

Robin Hood

After the jury began splitting over the goodness (or terribleness) of Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood I began wondering just what I was expecting when I listed it as my #4 most anticipated film of the year. sure, I’m enamoured with Miss Blanchett (who isn’t) and though I’d say that Crowe has been snubbed by awards too often in recent years I don’t particularly love him. True, I did read the original script for the then titled Nottingham but with all the changes made that was an entirely different beast. Naturally I was disappointed with the tepid response, thus my expectations were somewhat lowered. I expected less and watching Robin Hood I got less.

Half an hour into Robin Hood two things truck me. The first was more obvious, I was feeling bored. However, more than this, I found myself remembering a book on screenwriting I’d read a few years ago. Sid Field had said that it’s always good to have a back-story to your screenplay so you’d know what happened to the characters just before the credits roll. She went on to say that sometimes writers like their back-stories so much they end up using it as part of the screenplay. Herein lies one of Robin Hood’s earliest issues. Screenwriter Brian Helgeland seems to be altogether too fond of his work and he chooses to open the movie forty minutes before it actually begins. It’s not that the running time is outrageous, but it feels like a chore. Note, I watched this the same day as the 190 minute Doctor Zhivago (my review), and I didn’t look at my watch once during that one. Even more he has a tendency to write some blandly expository dialogue that even Cate Blanchett (she thrives on those exposition passages usually) falters at times. It’s actually what does in Oscar Isaac who I was impressed with in Agora. Ridley Scott, or Helgeland or maybe Isaac himself seem so enamoured with making John a lascivious villain that he spends half the film shouting inane lines in a VERY LOUD VOICE. Pass.

And yet, don’t think I’m trashing Robin Hood because as it picks up I find myself charmed by its machinations. I’ve heard more than a few persons recognise Scott’s skill with battles, but I’d have preferred if he’d tried to make Robin Hood an introspective character study than an amalgamation of what we’ve seen before. The entire point of rebooting the series depends on it offering something different. Hence, it’s the new portrayal of Maid Marian that stands out in this incarnation. Yes, I am unfairly biased to Cate. It is what it is, but it’s a register that I like her in. She’s not as irrepressible as Kate or formidable as Elizabeth, but the toned down but nonetheless strong woman is something she plays excellently. It’s not her best, by any means, but her decision to show bits of emotion at the strangest parts turns her Marian into the most realistic portrayal of the film. Sure, it ends with a somewhat misguided monologue from her but the almost chaste attraction between Hood and Marian work. Marian is past her prime, and more than a heated romance she wants a man she can finally depend on and stand by. Thus Ridley’s decision, to make it less about the physical and more about the intellectual, works for me.

            

More than any film Robin Hood thrives with the promise of what could have been…but I’ll put the possibilities out of my mind. Robin Hood is imperfect, but in its own way it was divertingly charming. Certainly not the comeback Scott and Crowe were looking for, and after a year and a half without Cate I’m unsatisfied. Still, they could do worse. I came in expecting less, but I didn't get nothing.

              

B- [almost a C+, but not quite]

TV Meme, Day 2: A Show More People Should Watch

Crime drama procedurals are really a dime a dozen. Yet, when I think of show that more people should pay attention to I can't help but gravitate to a particular show about a police from Georgia who arrives in Los Angeles to deal with crime head on. The Closer is a show that grew from one I liked to one I can't help but love and considering that it's "merely" a crime drama, you may wonder...what makes it worth seeing? Good question. Two words - Kyra Sedgwick.

At this moment Ms. Sedgwick has earned four consecutive nominations for Best Actress in A Drama at the Emmy's. She had the misfortune to  lose to Mariska Hargitay of that dreaded crime show in her first year - a year where she was head and shoulders above the competition. Sedgwick has continued turning out excellent performances, but I'm unsure who's watching. Still the vieweriship of 5ML per season is not horrible, but it deserves better because The Closer is more than just a run of the mill show focusing on crimes week after week. It fails to fall  into the trap that so many procedurals do. The Closer has a cast of "people" and not "types".

Week after week the show's main cast are more interesting than the guests and that's what makes The Closer special. It's supposed to be like that. We're invested in the machinations of Brenda and Fritz. We like to see her fighting with J.K. Simmons' perfectly played Assistant Chief Pope. Sometimes it seems The Closer even forgets that its a crime procedural and not a straight drama - and it's all for the better. I don't know if Kyra will ever get that Emmy it deserves, I don't know if this upcoming sixth season will be its last. But I do know that I love The Closer, and chances are you might too.

       
This entry is part of my ongoing meme on TV Moments

“Sister, Sister”

I love seeing sibling machinations on the screen. There’s something decidedly charming in seeing sturdy bouts of filial love and especially when that bond is between sister and sister. It’s something that pits actress against actress and often results in good performances all around. So today we're catering to the ladies - But what makes a good sisterly pairing? Well, obviously, they have to love each other – that’s a bit of prerequisite, so of course no inclusions of those Dubois women…few sisterly pairing are as true, and loving as these five that follow – well, I can’t think of any…

            

The Dashwoods 

There are really three Dashwood sisters in Sense & Sensibility, but only two of them get descriptive adjectives to their name. Sure, Emma Thompson’s age acts against the very reason for Austen’s title, but she’s a good enough actress to overcome whatever her age cannot. Sure, sometimes Marianne comes off as undeserving of her sister’s patience, but they do look out for each other. Like a clever diversion on a piano to prevent the embarrassment of Elinor and the dedication Elinor in turn pays to a sick Marianne. Dedication to sisterhood. 

           

The Magraths

Crimes of the Heart is such a forgotten one, but with Diane Keaton, Jessica Lange and Sissy Spaceck I remember it. A sister of Best Actress Oscar winners, what can be better? Sure one of them is washed up, one's suicidal and one's "never been kissed" but the chemistry these three women have make me wonder this film isn't more remembered.

                

Ms. Jane Bennet, Ms. Elizabeth Bennett, Ms. Mary Bennett, Ms. Lydia Bennett and Ms. Kitty Bennett

It’s one thing ensuring two sisters match the truth of an Austen novel, but it’s so much more difficult when it’s five. How does Joe Wright accomplish it? Well Mary is the odd one out, and is often alone. Eliza and Jane gravitate to each other as do Lydia and Kitty so we have the older pair and the younger pair. But, even more, moments when they must combine are just as honest. The film’s beginning with the five of them, and their fishwife mother, haranguing their father about Miss Bingley is handled nicely. Yes, the strongest moments of the film come when Rosamund and Keira interact – they are so very lovely together. But Wright tries to make each one have their moment, and for the most part, he succeeds.

   

The March Girls

Of course this list cannot be made without some incarnation of the March sisters. Meg, Jo, Beth and Amy are memorable characters of literature and cinema and the 1932 incarnation is the most memorable. Kate stars as a role that seems tailor made for her - that of the irrepressible Jo. Joan Bennett, Jean Parker and Frances Dee round out the foursome as Amy, Beth and Meg. It's a pity none of the actresses went on to fame other than Kate, and it's a pity that the fair but uninspired 1994 version is remembered more. Still, the March Girls are the epitome of sisterly affection.

   

The Schlegel Girls

Howards End is a delight, and more than anything else the reason for its beauty lies in the chemistry between Helena Bonham Carter and Emma Thompson. Sure, they have a brother, but Tibby is incidental. It’s weird, considering the future controversy between these two women and a certain Shakespeare fanatic, but the bond these two seem to share is striking. Sure, halfway through the film they part ways, temporarily, but it doesn’t make the bond tenuous, they’re reunited at the end because the Schlegel girls know something about familial ties. It’s a unity that Ivory handles wonderfully. They are as different as night and day and of course this is why they’re so necessary to each other.

                      

Which actress pairing convince you most of their sisterly bond?

TV Meme, Day 1: A Show That Should Never Have Been Cancelled

Television is a dastardly mistress. The existence of a show is ever more ephemeral than that of a film, especially in a time when few shows are in demand on DVD and only a select few are lucky enough to be aired after their time has expired. If a show doesn’t go completely all out or suffice to a bland, generic niche in its first few episodes the dreaded c word emanates – cancelled. In the wake of the 2007-2008’s writer’s strike a marvellous new show was put on hold. It reappeared half a year later, even more innovative than before. I suppose, though, in a way it was ahead of its time and it was cancelled with only 24 episodes in two seasons. Such was the story of last decade’s comedic masterpiece Pushing Daisies.

Pushing Daisies was – not by coincidence, I’m sure, just like the euphemism from which its title derives. What is the phrase pushing up daisies if not a whimsical and perhaps irreverent title given to the dead. And it’s this same whimsicalness which is inherent in the atypical hilarity, blindingly bubbly colour palette and ferociously original concept of the show. The story…? A young boy realises he has the inexplicable gift of reviving dead things, but like all gifts it comes with stipulations. If he allows the undead thing, or person, to live for more than one minute something of similar “life value” dies (a man for a man, a flower for a flower, an animal for animal). He revives his dead dog while a bird falls dead; he revives his mother after a heart attack precipitating the death of his childhood sweetheart’s father. What Ned does not know is that if he touches the revived again they die again – permanently. Thus, a good night kiss from his mother renders her dead eternally. Ned becomes a pie maker and happens upon his childhood sweetheart – dead. He revives after some emotional conflict, and therein lays the crux of one of the show’s main conflicts. Chuck and Ned are in love, but alas, cannot touch.

Yet, Pushing Daisies is not a romantic comedy full of emotional angst – though it is romantic and comedic; neither is it a detective procedural, like the machinations of Ned and company suggest. When I say that Pushing Daisies is unlike anything on television before or since I do not jest. Brian Fuller’s story exudes originality and brilliance and it’s something that is rarely seen. The cast of the show play a significant part in the brilliance. Lee Pace has an average-guy likeability that renders him oddly charming and together with Anna Friel they are just adorable together. Chi McBride offers a strange humour that is effective and Ellen Green and Swoosie Kurtz make one wonder why they’re so often forgotten, for they are talented.

But, it is a certain petite 4”11 blonde who steals the show. Really, it is an occupational hazard of being Kristin Chenoweth. Kristin really is a third wheel to the romance of Ned and Chuck and yet we consistently root for her in her ridiculous machinations for Ned’s attention, it’s a comedic marvel of a performance – hence her much deserved Emmy win.

Pushing Daisies does something special. Each episode surrounds the dead and their story, yet each episode leaves you with convinced of the joy in life. It balances the dark (and perhaps more realistic) overtures of disaster in the world with a blind faith and glee that is completely charming. I don’t know why Pushing Daisies met such a woeful end. Can a show be too good for the public? I never know why more weren’t watching, I don’t know why ABC performed one of its most cruelly inane acts. But cancelled it is. Nonetheless, Pushing Daisies is a marvel and I’ll soon be buying it on DVD. Chances are you haven’t seen it.

You should rectify that.
           

This entry is part of my ongoing meme on TV Moments

 

 R.I.P: 2007-2009, Pushing Daisies