TV On the Blog: Fall TV Preview, Hollywoodland Review, The Simpsons, Prison Break, and MORE

Okay, I am back, so strap on your boots and settle in.

First, don't mean to harp on this stuff too much, but before I move on to other stuff I just want to point your collective attention to two excellent articles from this week's issue of Newsweek. The first is written by probably the best political columnist in the biz, Fareed Zakaria, who is as always so astute in his observations that you wonder why his points are not more obvious.

Check out this article on why Bush is seriously playing into Osama's hands with his simplistic view of Iraqi foreign policy:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14758456/site/newsweek/

Also, check out this superb column by Jonathan Alter. I thought the premise was gimmicky when I saw the title - an alternate history where Bush acted in a much different manner post-9/11, but the execution is so good that alter really hammers home his point. Please, if you don't see an alternative to Bush's presidential style, read this and see the light:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14753927/site/newsweek/

Anyways ... do your civic duty as an American and read those columns, then come back so I can get to the good stuff:

TV:

PRISON BREAK:

Just some quick thoughts -- this show is getting exponentially more absurd each week. I still love it, but I feel like some time soon it may reach the breaking point where it just gets too nutty for its own good. I mean, this ep saw the upteenth scene where Michael and Lincoln bid farewell to their femme fatale accomplice, after she seemingly betrayed and then seemingly helped them in a maddening back-and-forth that went on and on throughout the hour. We had a crazy ending with William Fichtner brooding over The One Man Who He Could Never Catch~! with more melodrama than an Italian opera. And we had T-Bag kill some poor bastard, with one good hand and a pocket knife, with no explanation for how our favorite gimpy serial killer so easily offed a huge guy brandishing a hot iron. Again, I'm not simply complaining - just observing that this show is taking its pulpiness to a new level of late. I love Bellick's sheer sleaziness, the quiet determination of Scofield, and hey, the final fate of Abruzzi was pretty darn awesome. "I bow only to God ... and I don't see him here." = kickass. I even enjoy the subplot about the one thuggish guy hitchhiking with the naive college girl - it's the new Kim-in-the-cougar-trap of 2006! But I hope the show isn't in danger of losing some its intensity and, dare I say gravitas, by devolving into pure cheese.

My Grade: B

- FOX SUNDAY NIGHT Returns!

There was a time when FOX Sunday Night could do no wrong. A time before American Dad and (shudder) The War at Home. A time of shows like MARRIED WITH CHILDREN, THE X-FILES, FUTURAMA, and ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT. When THES SIMPSONS was in its prime and FAMILY GUY was a cult-classic in the making.

Dammit, what happened? But still, with The Simpsons, Family Guy, and soon, King of the Hill, the great tradition of kicking back on Sunday and being entertained for a few hours by FOX before the start of the school / work week lives on.

THE SIMPSONS:

Wow, 18 years, and no end in sight! Gotta respect it, especially when The Simpsons can still make me laugh like it did on Sunday. Not great, by no means classic, but still plenty entertaining, this tale of mafia mayhem in Springfield did a number of things right:
a.) told a coherant story from start to finish
b.) introduced a funny new character
c.) expanded the world of the show effectively
d.) had plenty of good gags and quotable lines

But yeah, it still made a few of the cardinal mistakes of nu-era Simpsons:

a.) was way too random at times without necessarily being funnier for it
b.) didn't give enough time for a natural conclusion to the plot
c.) lacked the genuine heart of the earlier episodes
d.) retread too many familiar gags / plot devices / themes

But still, this ep was much more about Column A than Column B, and made me laugh numerous times while telling a good yarn. If this is what we can expect from this season of The Simpsons, then BRING IT ON, keep it going, and pleased be to getting me properly hyped for theu pcoming movie.

My Grade: B+

FAMILY GUY:

Ugh. What was THAT? Maybe one of the least funny episodes I've ever seen of this show, this was NOT a good way to start the season. As usual, this show can be so random and hit or miss that for all I know next week we'll have a classic half hour of comedy, but ... this one just plain sucked. And, what's weird is this ep actually seemed, structurally, much more in tune with Season 1 and 2, and really cut down on the random cutaways and "this is just like that time ..." type scenes. Which don't get me wrong, is a GOOD thing. The problem here was that the ep just was not funny at all. The premise of Peter freaking out about a prostrate exam was a terrible A-plot and just lame and boring, and Stewie's sudden attachment to Lois never really produced any good laughs. With the exception of the use of George Takai gags, which are pretty much inherently funny, this was not very good.

My Grade: C -

So yeah ... it's time for:

Danny's "I Watch Too Much TV Already and Hope All New Shows are Bad!" FALL PREVIEW:

- Can you feel the excitement for the new Fall Season? In the next few weeks a ton of stuff is returning - THE OFFICE, MY NAME IS EARL, VERONICA MARS, LOST, SMALLVILLE, GILMORE GIRLS, and more. Then there's buzz-worthy new shows like HEROES, 30 ROCK, STUDIO 60, JERICHO, and THE NINE.

I'm probably most excited about the third season of Veronica Mars. Other than 24 (not returning until January, but I'm already psyched) it was my favorite show last season, and I am really anxious to see if it does well on the CW with a strong lead-in and some extra hype. You still have time - do as my brother is doing and watch the Season 1 and 2 DVD's now to get ready for what will hopefully be a full season of one of TV's smartest, most entertaining dramas.

I'm also excited about The Office. I feel that now that the big Pam and Jim "moment" is out of the way, they can focus more on some of the comedy dynamics until the next big moment when the status quo is inevitably restored., allowing the cast to really gel as a comedic ensemble. Also, we have an upcoming Ricky Gervais-penned ep to look forward to, so ... I mean, awesome! I'm still not really sold on My Name Is Earl - I love the cast - Jason Lee can do no wrong in my eyes and Ethan Suplee and Jamie Pressly are money in their roles - but I wish the writing could have the same heartfelt satirical bite of, say, King of the Hill (the best animated show in primetime, back in January, in one of the few decent programming moves FOX has made in years).

Lost, I am pretty much just very, very curious about. My expectations have been lowered a bit though by some recent interviews where it seems like the focus will once again be on milking the flashbacks for all they're worth rther than focusing on the here and now and advancing the actual plot and mythology. Still, this is the show that even now posseses the best single premise on TV - but after two years of crawling along, it's time to stop coasting on leftover goodwill from the phenomenal Season 1 - it's now make or break for me and I'm sure plenty of others.

As far as Smallville goes, I just feel like the show my be treading water at this point. At one juncture it seemed like the show was poised to really evolve and gain some new momentum, by focusing more on Metropolis, fully turning Lex to the darkside, and bringing Clark ever closer to being Superman. Now it seems stuck in an eternal rut of lame Clark-Lex-Lana love triangles, Chloe as a walking plot device, Lois with nothing to do but look pretty, and the best supporting character in Jonathan Kent killed off to be in line with the movies. I just really hope that the season premier blows me away, as previous years' have done. Because as usual, this show seems to surprise me by kicking in to overdrive at just the right times.

While Josh Schwartz returning to The OC can only bode somewhat well for this flailing show, last season was so bad in general that even the ever-enjoyable antics of Sandy and Seth Cohen could barely keep it afloat. Just end it on a high note.

And while I'm too much of a newcomer to Gilmore Girls to continually long for the show's good ol' days, I am remaining cautiously optimistic about the coming season. While a creator with a unique voice leaving their pet show can spell doom (see The OC), said creator staying on long past the honeymoon period can also mean trouble (see Chris Carter on The X-Files). So who knows ... in any case though, I think this will probably be the show's last season, and I think enough of an outline is in place that things will progress naturally, and hopefully will end the way the Palladinos intended.

And as I alluded to in my review above, I'm hoping that the greatest comedy of all-time, The Simpsons, can really build some momentum and make a creative comeback of sorts, to get me excited for the upcoming movie. I'm already a little down on the new season of Family Guy, though Prison Break has started Season 2 on a somewhat cheesy but still highly enjoyable and action-packed opening arc.

As far as NEW FALL SHOWS - what am I looking forward to?

To be completely honest, there's not a whole lot that excites me. It seems like every time a particular genre succeeds, the nets just proceed to milk that genre for all its worth and subsequently drain all viewer enthusiasm. This year the gritty serial drama genre is being pushed like no other, and really, how many of these things can one watch at one time? Until something comes along that beats 24 at its own game (not likely), 24 and its cheesier little brother, Prison Break, satisfy most of my serial drama needs. And the weird thing is that, honestly, from what I've seen most of the new serial dramas are missing the one thing that makes 24 so great - the purse sense of fun that the show always has. Many of these new shows are just so grim and joyless that despite sharp writing and good acting, they just feel like too much of a chore to watch. I enjoy dark, moody shows when that sort of tone is appropriate, ie one of my favorites ever, Millenium - but that show dealt with such deep and complex themes that it warranted its foreboding tone. Something with a simple and inherently over the top premise (say, someone being ... kidnapped?) works so much better in my mind if it has the right mix of intensity and fun, or else it's just too difficult to get caught up in the ongoing saga.

The funny thing is that last year, the genre of choice was sci-fi mystery a la Lost, and since, in theory, I love that genre of television, I found myself watching endless new shows like Surface, Threshhold, Nightstalker, and Invasion, worried about how I could possibly watch that many new shows. As it turns out, I enjoyed approximately ZERO of those new shows, and most seemed to agree as ALL were cancelled! And now here we go with another go-round of "let's copy the genre show that's hot at the moment." Have we learned NOTHING, people?

And again, not to follow the company line, but I really do think NBC is coming out of the gate with a strong lineup.

30 Rock is probably my most personally anticipated new fall show. Yes, you heard that right. Tina Fey is very hit and miss with me (like Mean Girls, hated 80% of SNL over the last few years), but she has an awesome ensemble with her, Alec Baldwin~!, Tracy Morgan~! and the very talented Rachel Dratch. I don't know for sure, but this one could be a sleeper, especially with the comedy competiton so poor at the moment.

And yes, Studio 60 really is that good. There's no denying that the writing and acting on this one is at a level rarely seen on network TV. The question is whether its compelling enough material to keep you watching every week. I'm betting yes, but the jusry is still out. Ask me again when I've seen a few eps. But if you haven't seen it already, make sure to watch the pilot - on its own it really is an amazing piece of television.

Heroes is one that I have been looking forward to for a long, long time. Honestly I need to see more episodes to see what I really think. For us comic geeks, it is easy to look at this premise and see it for what it is - a simplified version of numerous stories, from X-Men to Watchmen to Planetary to Supreme Power to Rising Stars, which all have similar themes. Is this just Squadron Supreme-lite? 4400 with less panache? Maybe, but like Lost, this is a very open-ended show that could go in many directions, so it also, therefore, has pretty much unlimited potential if it is carefully steered in fun and exciting directions. I'm not sure yet if it will live up to the epic scope of the premise, but I'm willing to give it a few weeks to see.

Jericho on CBS has a tres-cool post-apocalyptic premise, but my big concern is if that premise will ever actually be the focus and explored fully, or if it will just be the token backdrop for one big soap-opera. Definitely one to give a bit of a chance before deciding.

ABC's Knights of Prosperity was a lot cooler-seeming when it was called Who Wants to Rob Jeff Goldblum. Still, Donal Logue is a very funny guy and I'm curious to check this out - Grounded For Life was underrated in my book and I am always up for a sample of this style of irreverent comedy.

The Nine still pisses me off because it stole my name for a series, but I am a bit of sucker for they-are-all-interconnected type stuff, which makes this as well as Six Degrees two new shows that intrigue me. Of the new fall serial dramas, these are the two that probably most impress me from what I've heard so far, with talent like JJ Abrams behind the scenes. But I am still kind of skeptical, as I've heard mixed reviews thus far.

And finally, back to NBC. 20 Good Years is a very traditional sitcom that has two very funny veteran comedians in John Lithgow and Jeffrey Tambor. If anyone can put a crazy spin on traditional, it's them, and after the premature death of Arrested D I am eager for more Tambor (though it will be hard to match his role as George Bluth Sr.). This is one more potential sleeper in my eyes, though does it have anything going for it beyond the talent of the two leads? Still, I think that comedy fans both young and old may find something to like.

Those are the shows I'm most looking forward to as of now - could change, as always, but who knows -- let me know what ya' think.

- Some other quick TV items: Man, I am plowing through Season 1 of Curb Your Enthusiasm on DVD and have Season 2 on tap.I know, 5 years ago says hello, but my HBO-less self has only seen a handful of eps up until now, before Best Buy's amazing $19.99 TV on DVD sale went into effect last week. Hilarious stuff and a must see for any fans of Seinfeld, aka pretty much anyone with a sense of humor.

- So The Rock is now too good to be called The Rock?!?! Okay, "Dwayne," be that way. But the millions AND MILLIONS of The Rock's fans don't want the former badass-turned-Hollywood wannabe, once known worlwide as The People's Champ, to be some metro-ish dude named Dwayne, dammit all. That just ain't right.

Okay, as promised time for a MOVIE REVIEW.

HOLLYWOODLAND Review:

Most film noirs don't have the burden of also being biographies. The noir is known for its stylized dialogue, outlandish characters, tragic and sudden plot twists, and clockwork-like plot-structure. So how can a movie be both a period, fact-based piece AND a classically-styled film noir? Well, Hollywoodland - the biographical story of how TV's Superman, George Reeves, fell from TV stardom to an unsolved, tragic death - somehow pulls it off.

Like all the best noirs, Hollywoodland is replete with sharp camera angles, pointed dialogue, and shadowy, morally-ambiguous characters seemingly trapped in a world of crime and corruption. But unlike most noirs, or even most mystery flicks, this one is based on a riddle that was never fully solved. This in turn makes the movie more of a message film and less a traditional mystery or noir movie. There are no tidy endings, no big twists, no real resolution. In some sense, this makes the film slightly less than wholely satisfying. But when looked at as more a meditation on the life of a tragic figure, an examination of how fame, power, and money - how Hollywood itself - is like a black hole that leads one to spiral into corruption, vice, and despair, and tragedy - Hollywoodland emerges as a movie with something to say - a tightly written, amazingly acted movie that makes up for its ambling plot with the overall quality of its production.

The cast is just loaded with talent. Adrian Brody channels the broken-down private-eye spirit of the greats as Simo, the down-on-his luck detective who finds redemption in the tragedy of his greatest case. Diane Lane delivers a powerful, Oscar-Worthy performance as George Reeves' adoring yet condescending object of affection. She does the whole Stella Dubois, fading-starlet thing to perfection. Robyn Tunney really surprised me as the sultry golddigger who seduces Reeves. From her somewhat bland supporting role on Prison Break, I had no idea she had this kind of acting ability and charisma. She did a fantastic job in this movie. Bob Hoskins is just classic here - doing what he does best as the aging, corrupt chief of MGM Studios and husband of Diane Lane's character. And like I said, Adrien Brody does a great job as the lead - I'd go so far to say it's by far my favorite role of his to date.

Now, the elephant in the room - Ben Affleck as George Reeves. Affleck has to be commended - he does a very good job here. But, I have to say that some of the praise I've heard for his work goes a little far. As good as he is, I never totally bought Affleck as Reeves, the way I did, say, Joquien Phoenix as Johnny Cash. Affleck is most natural, I think, when he's playing someone close to his own personality - a happy-go-lucky, slightly smug, maybe even preppy modern guy. Here he is asked to play someone of a different time, and he never fully transforms into a person of the 1950's the way Diane Lane or even Robyn Tunney does. Affleck is asked to embody George Reeves and he mostly succeeds, but i never felt like he goes all the way. As good as his perfomance is, I can't say it is on quite the same level as some of the truly A-list cast that surrounds him.

That being said, Affleck does reasonably well and does succeed at making George Reeves an extremely empathetic character - a once promising actor shrouded in meloncholy as his career prospects dwindle, despite being a hero to kids worldwide. Some of the excellently-scripted scenes - of Affleck as Reeves, watching himself laughed at on-screen as he tries a serious movie role, and as he tries to hide embarrassment while trying out for a pro-wrestling act, really resonate.

And some of the best moments for me the duality-infused scenes of Reeves as Superman - outwardly bringing joy to millions of kids but inwardly hating himself. I loved the scene of kids across the country running home to watch Superman, a perfect encapsulation of pop culture in the 1950's as the TV age dawned.

In the end, I guess this movie just covers so many bases that it never focuse enough to be quite as great or insightful as a straight biopic like Walk The Line. Since the plot splits its time between Simo's search for answers to Reeves' death (was it suicide? a mob hit? a jealous fiance?) and flashbacks to Reeves' life, neither aspect quite feels complete or fully fleshed-out.

But in its own way, this movie achieves a level of greatness as simply an amazing collection of performances, and as a thought-provoking look at the veil of corruption that lay behind the glitz of golden age of Hollywood.

My Grade: B+

Alright, that's all I have time for now. Still to come - my Summer Movie Wrap-Up. PEACE.