Scott Fairley

I’m not really a fan of Jay Leno.  No sir.  While I recognize that he effectively needs fresh material 300 or so days per year, and I certainly respect his work ethic, he’s still my least favourite of the late-night hosts.  So when word spread that Conan O’Brien (my favourite of the late-night hosts) would be taking over The Tonight Show, I was most pleased.  But Leno didn’t go quietly into that good night.

Jay Leno has signed a deal with NBC that adds a fourth (yes, fourth) late-night talk show to their lineup, in the 10-11pm slot.  This was, as many have pointed out, the longtime home of the prodecural drama.  ER has spent 15 years in that timeslot on NBC, but that’s largely been all.  And with ER slowly circling the drain for one last season, and NBC struggling commercially, it makes sense on a number of levels.

For one thing, the budget of a talk show is exponentially lower than a prime-time drama.  Build one set.  Hire a band.  Done.  No expensive effects shots (like CSI), no expensive locations (like Lost) and no actors demanding seven figures per episode (like… well, nearly every show with a well-known cast).  While a talk show in that hour might not significantly increase ratings, it definitely offers more ratings for NBC’s money.

But does it really mark the end of the prime-time drama like many are saying?  Perhaps.  The elimination of the 10pm slot is relatively inconsequential.  Fox, who produce almost exclusively 1-hour dramas these days, have never had a 10pm slot, and they have some of the most expensive (and best rated) shows on TV.  House pretty much rules the ratings, and Bones has a good sized following in it’s own right.  24 is returning after a strike-induced hiatus.  When Fox shows fail, it’s generally spectacular, but when they get it right, their big shows are generally driven well past the point of shark-jumping as long as they draw ratings.

CBS have most of their biggest shows in the 10pm slot though, and they’ll probably see a big jump because of NBC’s move.  Two CSI spin-offs are in that time slot, and only one of them has serious competition, and it was never from NBC.  ABC is in an interesting position, however; Lost is really their only big drama, and due to it’s direction and structure, it’s incredibly unlikely to gain new viewers, but it’s proven very likely to lose them.  Not to mention that after 2010, Lost is finished.  ABC might heavily consider either moving Jimmy Kimmel to 10pm or adding a 10pm talk show, or they’ll take a chance on a new drama, but losing Lost really expands their options, and they may very well follow NBC’s lead.

But what NBC’s doing is much more interesting than “killing the prime-time drama”.  They’re merging it with the prime-time comedy, if anything.  Take a look at The Office.  Since Paul Feig started writing and directing the show more frequently, it’s taken a noticably darker turn.  Episodes like The Dinner Party and Moroccan Christmas are generally lighter on laughs and have some legitimately heavy drama.  And Chuck often resembles an hour-long single camera sitcom with bursts of action and (from time to time) legitimate drama.  Having seen the majority of their high-concept dramas fail, NBC aren’t simply cutting their losses.  They’re actually trying something new.  The great irony is that NBC gave the prototypical TV dramedy Freaks and Geeks the shaft in 2000, and Scrubs was straddling the line between comedy and drama a great deal in it’s earlier seasons (with a large dose of surrealism), but as it became more of a straight comedy, NBC became less interested in it.

So kudos to NBC.  Frankly, I’d rather they do more shows that go for quality storytelling with no regard to maintaining genre forms and be consistent within the rules of the show.  The hour-long drama and the half-hour sitcoms couldn’t maintain separate lives forever, and I for one welcome our new hybrid overlords.

I said I’d be writing weekly episode reviews.  So far, that’s yet to happen.  Which is my fault, but bear in mind that this site isn’t my full-time job.  So rather than hastily write reviews of every episode of every show I’ve been watching, I’ll just do a show-by-show rundown:

House – House, as I’ve said before, is a good-to-average medical show with some of the most interesting characters on TV.  The show is fairly predictable in terms of the medical content and the “patient of the week” storylines, but they’ve always been smart enough to prevent medicine from getting in the way.  This season, I can barely recall any of the pantents (save the lovely Felicia Day), but I’ve been impressed with the way they’ve handled the growing tensions among House’s team.  House hiring a Private Investigator to check up on Dr. Wilson and other members of his staff has made for some of the best scenes the show’s had in quite a while.  And the subplot of Thirteen seeking anonymous lady-love was well-executed, despite Fox only highlighting the titillating aspects of it in ads for the episodes.  All in all, I’d say it’s the strongest season the show’s had yet.  B+

How I Met Your Mother – Understanding the behind-the-scenes goings-on of the show kind of made the “surprise” that Stella wasn’t the mother of Ted’s children less of a surprise.  Obviously, Sarah Chalke can’t have a starring role in two series at once (even if Scrubs is only back for one more season), and other clues along the way did indicate that she was unlikely to be the mother.  But with all that in mind, it’s been a good season so far.  Not perfect, by any means, however.  In addition to Stella being effectively written out, there was a very brief subplot of Robyn moving to Japan to be an international news anchor.  It was over within two episodes.  While I can respect the writers for not milking it, it still seemed like it would have been best left out altogether and just had Robyn quit her job at Metro News 1.  But last night’s episode was about as good an episode as they’ve ever done, and there’s yet to be a real stinker of an episode, or a celebrity guest spot as questionable as Britney Spears’ two episodes as Abby from last season.  But I’m still waiting for one as brilliant as “Okay Awesome”.  B

The Office – I think it goes without saying that a show that focuses too much on a “will they or won’t they?” storyline is that when they eventually do (or don’t), it can take a lot of the best elements of the show out.  While the first two seasons were very heavy on the Jim/Pam love story, and the storyline effectively climaxing in season 3, they were very smart about how they handled it in season 4 by emphasizing other storylines and characters.  Season five takes it a step further by effectively denying Jim and Pam a “happily ever after” with Pam at art school in New York and Jim still in Scranton.  But beyond that, they’ve also been a B or even C plot in most episodes.  This season’s had some really great moments, like Michael and Darryl singing the blues, and Andy and Dwight’s continuing rivalry.  There have been some missteps, like Pam and Jim’s brothers “pranking” him.  It wasn’t funny, and it didn’t really add much, and lacked the edge of the other awkward moments on the show.  But again, it’s been a strong season, despite it’s previous strongest element (Pam and Jim tension) being removed.  A-

Dexter – Likewise with The Office, Dexter is trying to follow-up it’s best season without a key element present.  Sgt. Doakes, Dexter’s foil, was killed towards the end of season 2.  So where are the writers to go?  A more internalized, slow-burn of a season.  And it’s been fairly solid so far.  Dexter and Rita are expecting, and Dexter has a new friend in Assistant DA Miguel Prado (Jimmy Smits).  Michael C. Hall has his hands full with both the prospect of impending fatherhood and friendship, and he handles it incredibly well.  The tension has been slowly rising, and how the season ends is anyone’s guess.  While they likely won’t match the thrilling finale episodes of season 2, it’s looking promising all the same.  A

Scrubs – Still not back yet

Lost – Nothing until January.  Sigh.

If I remember anything from Ray Louter – one of my theatre professors and my primary acting and playwrighting instructor – has ever told me, it’s this:  Raise the stakes.  Storytelling is most interesting when there’s something that hangs in the balance.  Something including and in between embarrassment and death.  Anything.  It’s made me a better actor, a better writer, and a better director.  Believe me when I say that while I may forget the bulk of my education, I could never forget this.

Unfortunately for Jenji Kohan, she appears to have done so with her show Weeds.  You know the pitch:  suburban mom turns to pot dealing after the untimely death of her husband.  Hilarity ensues.  And for three seasons, it was one of my favourite shows.  Mary-Louise Parker is terrific as Nancy Botwin, who balances less-than-legal entrepreneurship with single parenthood.  It was the kind of show that could switch from high drama to low comedy in the same scene without missing a beat.  The supporting cast, including Justin Kirk as her brother in-law Andy and Kevin Nealon as disgraced accountant Doug Wilson, meshed in such a way that it was rarely, if ever, a dull show.  The third season stands out particularly, as it began with a mexican stand-off and somehow managed to never lose steam until it’s finale saw Nancy and her family literally rising from the ashes to fight another day.

Season 4 saw many changes.  Major characters like Conrad Shepard were gone.  Most of the background players didn’t follow the Botwins to the border town of Ren-Mar.  Neither did a good chunk of what made the show great.  The stakes, raised close to the highest they could be given the circumstances, are now worse than low.  They’re unclear.

That’s been my major beef with Weeds this season.  It’s still a well-written, well-acted show.  But great dialogue and actors to make that dialogue great will only get you so far.  Despite the sheer volume of illegal activities taking place (up to and including human smuggling, as well as the usual drug rackets), I have yet to care what happens to Nancy and company next.  Because while I know what’s theoretically at stake (jail, Silas and Shane homeless, etc), I’m not convinced the characters do.  I don’t live in their world.  Their world is defined by many things, but only the things expressed onscreen.  The threat of Nancy getting caught is long gone, as is so much as a reference or two per episode of her vocation.  And with few circumstances remaining constant from episode to episode, it’s simply too unclear what’s at stake.  I rarely have a sense of what their worst-case-scenario is.  And when I do (and when it comes to pass), it resolves itself with little to no consequence.  So as such, my level of empathy is dropping.  Andy and Doug have been smuggling immigrants across the US-Mexico border for much of the season, but it seems as though Doug not getting laid is their worst case scenario.

For a show that’s fundamentally about criminals, it’s alarming how little risk seems to be present.

I don’t want to discount Weeds entirely though.   It’s made me laugh out loud, gasp, and have difficulty waiting a week to see the next episode over.  It’s a show I’ve spent whole days marathoning DVD box sets with.  It’s made an Olsen twin not just watchable, but interesting.  Weeds is an A+ show having a C- season though.  Eleven of Thirteen episodes down, and I’m still waiting for so much as a return to form, let alone something that raises the bar.  While I can understand that the show needed to establish a new order (new location, new characters etc), it’s been handled in such a way that it’ll take an incredibly strong season finale to keep me around for a fifth season.  But for now, I’ll be waiting for a season finale that’ll make this post redundant.  If there’s anything Weeds does absolutely right, it’s those.

I grade movies with letters.  The criteria is based largely on the intent of a movie, not just an objective grading system.  For example, I would consider Casablanca an A+.  I would also consider Raiders of the Lost Ark an A+.  Both are effective, well-crafted, and leave me wanting nothing more, despite one being an iconic romantic drama, and the other being a b-movie on steroids.  Context is important.  So with that established, here’s a rundown:

A – Excellent.  Multiple elements stand out
B – Good.  Usually has a few standout elements
C – Average.  Nothing exceptional, but not a total waste
D – Cannot be recommended.  Unintentional comedy likely rampant.
F – Unwatchable.  Not even a drinking game can save it.

Pluses and minuses, of course, would indicate that they’re either on the low or high end of that criteria.
TV, on the other hand, is much more subjective.  The episodes can really only be judged by the other episodes and seasons of a show.  My philosophy is to assess each show as a whole with a grade (ie Scrubs: B), and grade each episode as either above expectations, meets expectations, or below expectations.

The shows I plan on reviewing regularly include:
The Office (A)
House (B-)
Scrubs (B)
Dexter (A+)
and How I Met Your Mother (A-)

I’ll likely pick up some new shows on the way, but 5 shows to keep tabs on seems like a modest start.