Sunday, 7 March 2021

Big Sky - Season 1, Part 1 Review

Whenever there is a new drama that hits this sort of niche, and by ‘niche’, I mean one that’s not a procedural drama set in a hospital, police or fire station. Therefore, you can imagine how interested I was when I heard about Big Sky, and how that interest peaked when I realised that David E. Kelley, behind recent delights such as Big Little Lies, was involved in producing. Big Sky does not hold up to the standard set by Big Little Lies, but hey, it’s a network drama, often tasked with longer seasons (in the case of Big Sky’s first, 19 episodes vs. Big Little Lies with only 6). However, Kelley knows how to create vivid, unique and interesting characters with crisp clear points of view, and he is no stranger to the demands of network television, so I knew he should be up to the task.

It’s a mixed bag, and interestingly, not in the ways I was expecting it to be. Often with dramas with a mystery/thriller element at its core, common criticisms relate to the dragging out of the plot, the sprinkling of clues being too few and far between, or even the mystery itself growing stale. After watching the first 9 episodes (the first part of Season 1), this is clearly not the case here. The pacing of the central storyline, the kidnapping of three young girls by Rick, a crooked mountain cop and Ryan, a sheltered perverted truck-driver is brisk and sharp, with plenty of twists and turns to boot.


However, to up the pace of the story other sacrifices have been made. In this case of Big Sky, the core protagonists characters are the victims. It’s exactly the sacrifice in a network drama, produced by the same person whose strength is enduring characters, that the show cannot make if it wants to secure longevity. Yet, nine episodes in, the two protagonists Jenny and Cassie, an ex-cop and a private detective respectively, are still nothing but empty vessels that exist purely to push the plot forward.


It’s outstanding how little attention is paid to showing us who these characters are, what drives them, what trips them up, and how they relate to the world they live in. What’s worse, it seems like no attempt has been made to differentiate them. The only attempt to show us who they both are relates to the fact that Cassie has been hooking up with Jenny’s husband, or separated husband (the show doesn’t really bother to classify or explore the relationship), but they both react to the conflict in exactly the same ways. In a particularly misguided scene in the show’s first episode, the two come to blows in a bar over this guy (who, by the way, is immediately killed at the closer of episode 1, effectively killing the story dead in its tracks). But they don’t just come to blows, they physically fight, throwing punches and brawling in the middle of a public bar. The fight is so choreographed, and the punches thrown so intense, that any sort of subtlety that they are anything other than headstrong women is thrown out of the window.


One of the beautiful things about procedural television, or television where something extraordinary happens in an ordinary environment, is that the crime, or mystery, or central conceit, is intrinsically linked to a protagonist's own character, own goals, own fears or desires. The plot should unfold as the characters do, with the audience seeing the onion peeled away to reveal who they really are. I cannot state strongly enough how this absolutely, categorically did not happen. There was clearly no interest in exploring who these people are. It’s a rookie mistake, and one that ultimately hurts the heart of the show.


And let’s talk about the heart of the show, or more accurately, the lack of it. There are numerous reasons to feel slightly uncomfortable at some of the choices the show makes, but I’ll start with the portrayal of the show’s villains, and oh boy, there are a lot of them. If you’re wondering how on earth the producers, David E. Kelley in particular, fails to characterize their protagonists in any meaningful way, it’s because every single morsel of effort is thrown into showing us who the villains are. This is ultimately successful. Rick and Ryan are drawn superbly, and time is taken to show us their desires, fears, strengths and weaknesses, and in classic David E. Kelley fashion, their underlying human quirks that show us who they are. What makes the piece a bit uncomfortable however, is that these characters are beyond saving. They are vile, worthless human beings who kidnap teenagers and sell them into sex-trafficking. There is no redeeming them, yet great pains are taken to show their personal relationships in isolation with the broader landscape of the show. Rick’s strained relationship with his wife, and Ryan’s sheltered and twisted relationship with his mother are portrayed brilliantly in siloes, despite the look-how-quriky-and-unique-these-people-are vibes. At some points, you could almost think you hear the show telling you to feel sympathy for them, to relate and to understand them. Now, I’m all for three-dimensional characters, and shades of grey, but the crimes depicted here are so categorically evil, that the care taken with the portrayal here seems mildly inappropriate.


The crimes both Rick and Ryan commit in the first nine episodes are in no way sugar-coated. In fact, the show takes great delight in showing us just how gruesome these two can be. Only three or four episodes in, when one of the teenagers (the classic younger-but-brighter teenager) escapes, Rick doesn’t just catch up to her and restrain her, he shoots her, twice, in the leg, with a bow and arrow, while she is running away from him. We watch her squirm and topple over, as the close-ups show that both arrows have penetrated all the way through the leg. Meanwhile, Ryan could have been portrayed in a way in which his sheltered existence, and abuse from his mother, causes him to be passive in the crimes committed, and ultimately gives him pause or at least, reservation, to the part he plays. But no, there is no moment of hesitation, no real attempt to dissuade Rick from their attempts to sell them off to the highest bidder, and no remorse felt.


As for the kidnapping plot itself, it’s clear that great care has been made to ensure a brisk pace complete with twists and turns, and by all means it is at least initially successful, but it’s also extremely necessary. If the plot was any slower, or any less shocking, the show would be without a pulse. The wonderful thing about shows with similar concepts, let’s take Desperate Housewives as an example, is that the housewives always came first. Yes the mystery of each season took 22 episodes to play out, but they could pretty much get away with it because the four women were so unique, so well-defined and we simply loved spending time in their company. In the case of Big Sky, if they had slowed the plot down, they would have had more time to explore the world they created, the characters fighting for justice, and let us fall in love with them. As it stands, there is absolutely no time for us to do that (not that they even tried). Only one episode even marginally stepped closer towards showing us these characters, and, not coincidentally, it was the episode where the central story took a breather, and we spent time at a wake.


Unfortunately, even the kidnapping plot, the hook of the show, starts to unreveal pretty much the moment the girls are rescued. To sustain the plot, the tone takes a sharp veer into soap-opera territory. Rick is shot in the head, survives and then either has or pretends to have memory loss. The show doesn’t really even bother to clarify what it eventually was, because by that point the gruesome death by his mistreated wife becomes more appealing, a move that comes on the heels of about 3 other deaths within the space of 20 minutes, and therefore loses all shock-value, as you realise that they are just jettisoning the plot and the characters to reset the show. Don’t think Ryan gets off any easier either, as he kidnaps yet another child for almost literally no reason and murders his mother, a priest, before evading capture and escaping town. When, in the final episode, the big set piece revolves around a car chase between the protagonists and a self-driving Tesla, being driven by a dead priest with a bound child in the passenger seat, you sigh at just how far the plot has completely unrevealed.


Upon reflection, it becomes even mind-boggling that time was sacrificed on the development of the characters integral to this plot when you realise in the last few episodes that half of these characters aren’t even here to stay. Rick is murdered by his wife in the ninth episode, basically terminating both characters, and Ryan murders his mother, It’s again, quite an astonishing oversight. Why create characters so undeniably evil, yet spend so much time on providing them with a stage to shine on?


It would be amiss to talk about the kidnapping plot without exploring the three characters at the center of it, privileged white teenagers Danielle (pretty but dumb) and Grace (younger and smarter), and Jerrie, a transfeminine sex-worker. Again, the perspectives between all three, their lives, and how they ended up kidnapped is rife for exploration, and to the show’s credit, they attempt to characterise all three and explore broad themes that set them apart. However, they could have gone deeper. There were opportunities for them to do so, in particular the earlier episodes, but the moments are sacrificed for more twists that go nowhere (Grace, escapes, is shot with the bow and arrow, and returned within one episode, having learned nothing and essentially rendering it meaningless). The parents are not even featured, so you cannot even tie the kidnapping to an emotional core, or relate to the pain it must be for the people that love you. Part of the issue with our protagonists can be tied to the very fact that they have no emotional connection to this case, other than of course, that kidnapping is a horrible thing no matter who it happens to. The husband’s death appears to be the show's weak last-minute attempt to connect the case to something personal, but because it doesn’t relate to the bones of the story, it fails on all counts.


Instead, precious time is spent watching girls bond in their own silo, often in the form of signing. The show has a few obligatory conversations referencing Jerrie and their identity, but it feels like it’s ticking the box, as nothing really comes out of those conversations that drive the plot or the characters forward. The singing is symptomatic of another issue that goes to the core of the show, and it’s one of tone. The pilot paints a picture of quirky town living, which, although characters and plots are clumsily introduced, it’s something you see growth and potential in. Once the horrors of the central story take ahold, the tone shifts into something far more grim. In episode two and onwards, the shifts in tone are wild and inconsistent, flirting with comedy-drama, pure thriller/horror, some gore, small-town quirks, and oh, of course, some singing (to give us some Nashville vibes) to boot. It’s one thing to have a fluid show capable of taking on multiple genres, but that’s not what’s happening here. Genre and style are key to the telling of a story to capture it in its best light, but here, tone-shifts can happen mid-episode, mid-act, mid-scene and back again, with no rhyme or reason to it. As a new show, I can give some leeway to it, as tone does often take time to be optimised to best bring out the show, but until then, at least try to stick to one, please.


As the plot winds down, and characters are written out or driven away, what are we left with? Well, we’re left with Jenny and Cassie, and because they’ve been so marginalised, who cares? They’ve pretty much taken nothing away from their ordeal, but are in prime position, working side-by-side as private detectives, to be front and center of whatever the next flashy, plot-driven central story is thrown their way. Until then, we’re left with a hollow show, where the audience really has no desire to follow Jenny and Cassie into their next battle. When the new plot is introduced, the show will have to do all of the heavy lifting from scratch, creating a new story, mystery and populating it with quirky characters for our protagonists to likely bounce between, just like soulless pinballs in a bright and flashy arcade machine.

Friday, 10 April 2020

Knots Landing Season 11 (1989 - 1990)

Knots Landing Season 11 is a fascinating year of the show. It's a crucial time in the grand scheme of things, with DALLAS, FALCON, DYNASTY in serious declines and / or exiting the airwaves. KNOTS at this point just lost it's arguably most prominent, or at least, splashiest character in that of Abby Fairgate, so there must have been a huge pressure, and I have to imagine significant intervention by David Jacobs, around how to kick the season off in the best way to retain eyeballs.

It's therefore quite surprising, or perhaps not if Jacobs was a key creative force, how low key the starter episodes are. Yes, the the resolution to the Paige / Greg / Ted story-line is classic Latham & Lechowick, with Paige, Greg and Ted lightly jumping from plot point to plot point complete with fake-outs, suspense and wacky tertiary characters, but is nicely and speedily plotted towards a resolution. What's more interesting, and what becomes easy to miss, are the other stories start to simmer; stories that are about, well, scenes from a marriage. By that, I am talking about Val / Danny / Gary / Amanda, and Michael / Eric / Linda.

What's interesting about the new stories, certainly in the first 8 episodes, is how cleverly written they are, and how they connect squarely to the roots of the show. KNOTS is a show about marriage, growth and the resulting conflicts this creates. For starters, it is easy to forget how complex Danny and Amanda's marriage was initially presented to us. Danny isn't written as a serial rapist at this point, and looking at these early episodes that is no hint that he was ever conceived in this way. Danny and Amanda have grown apart, there's hurt and anger on both sides, and we watch two flawed adults try to grapple with there new reality, while trying to move on with their lives with Gary and Val. I'm not excusing Danny in these episodes, he's not the best guy by any means, but he's written with a hell of a lot more nuance at the beginning, sort of like modern Richard Avery, and you thank the show for giving us this complexity. You can see and feel Amanda and Danny's marriage, you can understand it, you can sense why it didn't work despite these characters simply not really existing before this season. That's a great thing to pull off.

The linking of the Danny and Amanda to the viewer, and then the revelation that Amanda is Sally's friend, is of course a seismic shift in the narrative. But from a story stand-point it helps rein in the less interesting separate relationships into a bigger, more interesting story. The fact that Gary and Val, a divorced couple, happen to be dating two individuals that are actually a divorcing couple is of course ridiculous, but you forgive this and are relived at the reveal because it feels like these stories now actually have a point, a weight, and a direction. Without connecting them, the intrigue of Danny and Amanda's marriage would not be connected appropriately to the root of the show, and would quickly grow pointless. I do wonder what the aim of Sally's friend was in Season 10, no matter what the point was, I do believe it certainly was not planned to grow into this particular story. More likely, was Teri Austin supposed to be revealed as alive and negotiations failed in bringing her back? Is that perhaps why Gary and Val's screen time in the closing two-parter is minimal at best? In any case, it didn't happen, and evolving the story and linking it to the Danny / Val story is a particularly clever way to to give it some much needed life.

The Linda / Michael / Eric story is also quite interesting at the top of the season. Don't believe me? Go back and watch. It's presented well as another marriage that is showing it's cracks. Yes, it's a re-tread for Michael's character after his crush on Paige in Season 8, but this story digs deeper and improves on it significantly. This time you really feel for him as he tries to navigate what is ultimately a lose / lose situation. In addition, you understand Linda's inner confusion as well, they were both young, they are confused, they don't know when to pull the plug or how to navigate their emotions. There is no clear path forward, and you can understand each perspective of the story. Sure, it's not the best story KNOTS does, but it at least is an attempt to connect to the core of the show.

Those are the first eight episodes. Then, once episode 9 hits, BAM. Many of the wheels immediately fall off the show. Presenting Danny as an outright rapist destroys the complex and nuanced story initially presented to us and re-pivots it to one where there is a clear villain. Almost immediately after, and for more than ten episodes, Val stubbornly refuses to believe that Danny raped Amanda and Val's character is swiftly destroyed. Val would not rebound again until the second half of Season 13, of which it is far too late to gain momentum as Joan Van Ark exits the show. The writers dig deep in these first episodes to help us understand Val's perspective, her inner turmoil in trying to decide how to take this new relationship. The writers help us understand Val's point of view; for example the fight with Danny when she finds out he is married, she leaves him, and does a good job of showing the character's backbone despite the plot then dictating they reunite as they move into the the middle block of episodes.

Oakman was a daring story in the first block and on paper had no right whatsoever to be as interesting as it was, considering it was about corporate pension fraud. However, Lantham & Lechowick's style gives it strength. Like the Ted / Paige / Greg plot in the first three episodes, it moves at breakneck pace, using the plot to sustain our interest. Even using Ginny to shoehorn in the story surprisingly works. The introduction of the story in episode 5 is jarring, perhaps the most jarring story introduction up until this point (we go from Ginny visiting her friend with the twins to a significant number of the principal cast in Mack's office talking about pension fraud). But it works. 

However, as we move into the middle portion of the season the Oakman storyline, which continued to sustain our interest by introducing, and have us follow, the romance between Paige and Tom, then becomes too much about Oakman, rather than the Maguffin Oakman looks like it was  supposed to be. The episode where Tom and Mack go to Canada to hunt someone down with evidence is a prime example of an epic misstep in the telling of the story that has become weighed down with plot, and there are no character beats in sight to sustain it.

The middle episodes also reintroduce Greg's daughter, Mary-Francis, returning to the show in an episode which is actually extremely well-written, where Greg and Mary-Francis conflict over their world views, and we see a side of Greg that we haven't seen in a while, a deeply flawed man. It's refreshing to watch as you release how much you've missed Greg get truly challenged like that since Laura's death. Unfortunately, the episode ends with her murder, and the story moves into poisoning, a British villain, ghosts and then a clumsy link to the Oakman story to finally resolve.

The third portion of the season in my opinion is shaken up in an invigorating way, it creates great suspense and conflict. Unfortunately, unlike the first part of the season, it is at the expense of the show's core. For sure, it's splashier: Anne is introduced, Olivia and Paula, characters with history and subtlety are jettisoned; their characters had become too understated, to 'real'. Sure, there are some great story beats here, the reveal of 'evil' Danny to Val, who then knocks down Pat, is amazing, suspenseful TV, but unfortunately we're left with a generic villain in which the show has absolutely no idea what to do with, so they tread water until the season's close so they can breathe and figure something out for next season. 

The resolution to Eric's arc is handled well in the middle block, but almost immediately Linda becomes manipulative, and we're left with a generic 'bitchy' character in which all her likable, naive qualities from earlier in the year have vanished. Karen's stalker story is cleverly plotted, and again is an example of what Latham & Lechowick excel at, but unfortunately without any other more grounded stories being told at this point, the number of recurring characters and plot comes on too strong and there is no character beats to give it roots. It's simply a clever little story about a stalker that starts to outstay its welcome.

In my opinion, I love how the season started out, it's depth and complexity makes it feel like it's gone back to basics, but unfortunately, maybe through falling ratings or maybe it was planned all along, the show succumbs to splashier storytelling to create buzz and excitement, ultimately eroding the complexity in a lot of its characters as it comes to an end. Unfortunately, season 12, the worst in the series, continues that trend in even more ridiculous ways, and the series almost fails to recover.
x

Saturday, 12 October 2019

TV Review: Riverdale (Season 4, Episode 1)

RIVERDALE: "Chapter Fifty-Eight: In Memoriam"

Well done, Riverdale.

Since the tragic passing of Luke Perry, there was the question of how his character, Fred Andrews, would be written out. Timing wise, Luke's passing occurred as the show was busy filming the tail end of the third season, where the already fast pacing was becoming even more frantic as the show continued to crescendo it's story arcs for The Farm and Griffons and Gargoyles. Thankfully it was decided not to fully 'deal' with the character of Fred until a more appropriate time, that time being in-between seasons where a well rested crew could think clearly about how to best address the situation.

As it transpires, this decision was very wise. Luke's passing is addressed in this episode, the first of season four, by having Fred die in a self-contained episode that acted as a In Memoriam to both the character and to Luke Perry itself. The show's continuing arcs are seldom, if at all, addressed and the show, in an extremely rare move, slows down its pace and digs a little deeper in the portrayal of how our Riverdale characters, in particular Archie, deals with Fred's passing.

I had forgotten how beautifully this show is presented. The vivid colors and ridiculousness that Riverdale fans know and love are present in the first 5 or so minutes of the episode, and of course, Archie is shirtless at the first available opportunity, decorating a float for the 4th of July parade. Cheryl is as ludicrous as always, lamenting our four protagonists for not fully respecting the first parade since her brother's death, and, oh yeah, updating her dead brother's body (propped up in a chair; is it the actual body stuffed? A fake? I've forgotten the details) on the goings on of the town.

Then, Archie gets the call that Fred has died, and those elements of Riverdale, not that we don't love them, fall away. Those first few scenes are important somewhat to reestablish the world of the show, and to reassure fans that, don't worry, it's not changing anytime soon, but the moment Archie hears the news, and falls to the floor, the show takes a breath, strips itself back, and slows itself down.

The way Fred Andrews dies is in itself a tribute to Luke Perry and the character. He is hit by a car after having stopped on the side of a road to help a woman with car troubles. The show then sets up a small mystery, the driver that killed Fred is unknown, as it was a hit-and-run. In that moment, early on, it is difficult to judge if this will become part of a larger mystery or not, and how many episodes it will dominate. However, we quickly learn that the driver has turned themselves in and is out on bail. Of course, the inevitable Revenge Archie kicks in, but the moment is brief and more measured than expected. As Archie demands an explanation from the man, it transpires that he was just protecting his son who, in a moment of stupidity, took the car for a ride without a license. This, as Archie explains later, reminds him of something he would have done when he was younger, and Fred would have protected him in the same way.

There are other, smaller, more powerful moments. Early on, the characters sit in Archie's humble backyard trading stories about Fred, as so often happens in moments of mourning and reflection. The scene is elevated by the emotion from the characters (and one imagines, the actors). The scene does not serve to further any number of plot points, as is so often the case and the issue with fast paced shows such as Riverdale. Instead, it's just there, pulling you in, reminding you of Fred's kindness and the impact he has had in mentoring our protagonists. Jughead's story of how Fred would look out for him, and feed him when he was hungry, was particularly moving.

The road trip, and funeral home visit serves up more understated moments. Where, after Archie decides to be the one to transport Fred's body home, he asks to see the body to ensure that it is in fact his father. We cut then to the room that Fred's body is in. However, instead Veronica and Betty walk through the door. Archie, we are told, changed his mind. We don't see that moment, but we don't need to. We have already felt his pain. The body reveal, and confirmation that it is Fred to the audience and later, to Archie, is handled wonderfully.

Another beautiful scene that must be mentioned is the one with Shannon Doherty, shot at the roadside where he was ran down. Shannon, as it turns out, was the woman who Fred had stopped to help. Of course, Shannon Doherty and Luke Perry are linked together through Beverly Hills 90210, as Brenda and Dylan, at the peak of its popularity. There is a legacy there, a weight that has lasted almost 30 years and is a defining part of 'High School TV' culture. Knowing that Shannon is there as as tribute to Luke, plus the emotion in her delivery, as she explains what happened, followed by the prayer, only last a few minutes. But it's wonderful. There are no meta references, no winks to the audience. In fact, it's amazing just how 'straight' this whole episode is played.

The transportation of Fred's body home, to a rally in his honor, and the resulting funeral all pull emotional punches. At the funeral, Archie recalls a story of how, disappointed one 4th July when a fireworks display was called off due to the rain, Fred comes home with a ton of fireworks, and makes a display for Archie in their own backyard. Later, at episode close, the characters gather to do the same thing. As the fireworks are let off, Archie retreats to the garage, we see brief glimpses of Fred in the episode's only flashbacks as he remembers the old car, and the camera slowly withdraws as we leave Archie to cry alone.

Small glimpses of other story points of the show are thrown in. Hiram and Hermione are shown in jail, Alice with a picture of The Farm in the background, and in a touching moment, Betty spends some time alone at her father's graffiti-ed grave. However, all in all, this was an episode solely about paying tribute to Luke Perry, through Fred's passing, and you are grateful that this was so. Although I love the energy, furious pacing and ludicrousness of Riverdale, it's part of the fabric of the show and will always will be, I can't help but wonder that if the show trusted itself to slow down more, in the moments that really matter, it could really hone itself and make the right stories, ideally the ones that pack that emotional wallop, all that more powerful.

A series high point; A.

TV Reviews: 2019 Season (30 SEP - 4 OCT)

THIS IS US: "The Pool: Part Two" (Season 4, Episode 2)

When I realized that this episode would be revisiting the famous Pool episode back in Season 1, I wasn't too excited. However, the story ends up serving as a strong thematic baseline to carry the rest of the episode. Also, I believe this is the first episode that starts to flash back to actual scenes filmed in the past for the show (so a more traditional flashback), rather than flashing back to new scenes filmed in the past, if that makes sense. It's great to see a show, that respects it's characters' past so strongly, now begin to respect it's own actual past just as well. As the show grows older, I want to see more of that.


The themes of this episode deal with how we recognize growth and change, and how we re-assess ourselves to make the best decisions to adapt to those changes. For the main, these are classic stories relating to parents and the growth of their children (The Pool, Randall / Beth, Kate), for Kevin, it's a more personal story looking inwards.

The pool storyline doesn't give us a huge amount of story that we haven't seen before, just simply that the kids are growing up and Jack and Rebecca have to recognize that. We revisit some of the same troubling behaviors as we have seen in the past; Kevin deliberately embarrasses Randall in front of his friends, and Rebecca fears the worst when some popular girls suddenly take an interest in Kate. What makes this episode different however, is the self-awareness that the children bring to these more grown-up situations. In a particularly powerful moment, Kevin (like his future-self) looks inwards, and asks his father if he is a good person. While Kate, when realizes she has been set-up by her popular classmates, makes the best of the situation rather than self-destructing. It ends up being a great story because, even though the kids are growing up, and we see Jack and Rebecca reacting to this, we also see the kids start to develop their own senses of self that we recognize in them as adults.

The Beth / Randall story is split into two, with Beth's worry over Tess' new haircut threatens to hurt Tess' self-confidence, and Randall is overprotective when he accompanies Deja on a trail school-run and a strange person sits next to her on the bus. The Beth / Tess story is OK, although I would question the similarities Beth has here with Rebecca as a parent. I would think Beth is more empowering than the show is giving her credit for here? No? Randall's story is more of what we've seen before. I continue to like the portrayal of the growth of the children characters; the new hair, and Deja texting Malik as the bus route so happens to drive past where he works.

The Kate / Toby story is a trickier one. Oh sure, it works from a plot perspective, a care worker comes over to assess the situation now that their baby, who is blind, is home. Kevin, Rebecca and Miguel are also there as support. We learn that Kevin has been fundamental in this period of adjustment, and that Kate, while seemingly fine on the service, has been overeating to cope with the stresses the situation brings. The story also has some strong moments; Kate's speech near the end about how her home will be a house of hope is amazing, although it is clear that she is masking some self-doubt and guilt around this situation. We also see that Toby has been losing weight, and are treated to a reveal that Toby has been secretly going to the gym without telling Kate. This story will need some greater exploring, as at the moment it doesn't track. Why the secrecy? Why now, after all this time, has Toby committed to losing weight? I hope, and trust, that Toby's motivations will be explored so we can understand the eventual conflict from both sides.

Finally, the Kevin story is surprisingly strong.We learn in a sweet scene with Kevin and the baby that he has reached over 180 days of sobriety, and we see that in a lot of ways, it is helping him life a better life. He is a rawer, stronger actor, he's taking care of a houseplant, and he has been their to support Kate and Toby. However, Kevin is soon faced with a decision of whether to take a job out in Chicago, and rightly worries that some of the support mechanisms he has in place, namely his family, the people that he can look after, will threaten his sobriety. In a moment that This Is Us tends to do very well, the past helps inform the present, where Young Jack and Young Kevin's conversation by the pool (the 'Am I a good person' one) in which Jack tells Kevin to surround himself with people he loves and can look after, sees Kevin decide to go to see his Uncle Nicky, who from the premiere, we know needs some support. I'm not sure why I like the Kevin story so much, I think it's just so nuanced, and really digs deep. Also, I would imagine we are going to be treated to a Kevin / Cassidy (from last week's Premiere) pairing in the future - which feels exciting.

So there we have it. It's a strong, classic This is Us episode; B+.


MODERN FAMILY: "Snapped" (Season 11, Episode 2)


Two out of the three stories were of a higher quality than expected on this week's MODERN FAMILY, which continues to limp out of the gate towards its Series Finale. Unfortunately, I'm not seeing any long game at play for the final season, with the story-lines, like last week's Premiere, mostly self-contained and as disparate as ever.


Don't get me wrong, the Mitch / Cam refrigerator story is ridiculous, not to mention implausible, as we are not quite there with the technology. However, the actors rise to the occasion and the result is a few laugh out loud moments, such as Mitch signing the 'Shallow' duet with Bridget (the refrigerator), and Bridget equally showing that she has retained information from both Mitch and Cam, igniting a conflict between them. It's stupid, sure, but for whatever reason this one tickled me. Of course, once the conflict is out in the open, it doesn't really go anywhere, and doesn't hit home on any more dramatic realizations such as, hey, I don't know, why they both felt the need to bond with a refrigerator in the first place.

The Phil / Gloria story, where Phil becomes convinced that Gloria injured her rival classmate is a classic Modern Family farce, with some funny moments that got a laugh or two out of me. The clever repetition of the 'Snapped' TV show (that seeped into other stories, which is about the only link we got between the three stories this week), and the bit with Gloria filing her nails in the classroom were particular winners.

The Claire story, unfortunately, becomes old within about 4 seconds, as she tries to keep everyone out of the house by pretending to be sick, so that a business magazine can film her for a photo-shoot. The story, like many on this show nowadays, comes across too harshly, and doesn't go anywhere. At about the 5th time of Claire mentioning some ridiculous reason as to why one of her children need to leave the house, it's almost cringe-worthy.

Also, Alex comes home from Antarctica, and no one cares. She turns up at the door and Claire hurries her out to get some soup, without even so much as a hello. The worst bit about Alex's return is that she shivers in all of her scenes, like Antarctica is so cold that even though she has spent what must be a 8 hour+ flight plus travel in the warm sunshine of LA, she hasn't defrosted yet. What? Is that supposed to be funny?

Marginal improvement from last week; C.


SUPERSTORE "Testimonials" (Season 5, Episode 2)


The main story, where the workers all struggle to give Mateo strong testimonials for his deportation lawyer is some solid character stuff, with the montage in Amy's office particularly effective. What elevates the story however is the final realization by the lawyer that ICE may have been called in by Corporate, which would be illegal during the labor dispute that was going on at the time. The scene where Amy tries and fails to trick Corporate into admitting this is particularly hilarious. The conclusion is clever with a bit of an emotional punch, as Jeff agrees to go on record to say he was present when Corporate decided to call in ICE, thanks to a photo placed in Mateo's possession by Cheyenne. Mateo would have been proud.


Mateo's sudden release from detainment in the closing tag does unfortunately feel a big tacked on, and I wish the show had spent slightly more time on his release. However the show makes clear that this is just the beginning, as he will need to fight the ongoing attempts to deport him.

The rest of the episode is fine. Sandra is convinced that Dina is throwing her a surprise engagement party, and the more Dina denies it, the more convinced Sandra is. Of course, Jonah cannot resist throwing her a party anyway, and there was a neat character moment where Jonah basically admits now that he has the idea in his head, he wants to do it regardless.

A solid episode; B.


MOM "Pop Pop and a Puma" (Season 7, Episode 2)


I'm not particularly fond that this is the second episode in a row that deals with Christy working at Adam's bar. I don't think these stories are particularly effective, and they aren't exactly unique to the world that this show has created. This isn't a workplace comedy, and the stories set here tend to fall flat. There is, granted, some comedic potential to an alcoholic working at a bar, but although the show has explored this in the past, it feels like that is not a well that the show wants to mine, so therefore, what's the point?


Of course, one could argue that the story isn't about Christy working at the bar, but about a Christy / Adam conflict putting Bonnie in the position where she has to choose sides. Now this is the story that should have been explored further. I would have been perfectly happy if everything that happened at the bar occurred off-screen, it could have even been funnier if we had heard the conflict as Bonnie did, through their explanation and interpretation of it.

The exploration and conclusion of this story is redeemed somewhat by the show digging a bit deeper, by leaning into Christy acting as a teenager, Marjorie suspects that Christy is reacting this way because it brings up memories of the abandonment she has already gone through with Bonnie as a Mother. It also yields some laughs, such as Bonnie admitting and then continuing to simply agree with whoever has the last word.

The subplot is standard sitcom fair, with Jill outshining her new boyfriend, Andy, at the gym, causing him to feel insecure. The Andy / Jill pairing was very effective last season, but I would like to see the specificity of their relationship, in particular their two vastly different backgrounds colliding, continued to be explored.

Finally, the running bit with Wendy's hair, and the mimicking of 'Orlando' by the other characters, was very funny.

Not as a strong as last week, but still a good half-hour; B-.


THE GOOD PLACE "A Girl From Arizona (Part 2)" (Season 4, Episode 2)

After watching the concluding part to THE GOOD PLACE's two-parter it's pretty safe to say that these episodes never should have been separated. While the show is still struggling to ground some of the stories in anything remotely relatable, the long scene in the middle of the show between Eleanor and Michael, where Michael gives Eleanor a pep-talk saying that a girl from Arizona is exactly the type of person that can save humanity, pretty much saves the day. It does exactly what the show needs, grounds the zaniness in a relatable, human way. Who hasn't had a crisis of confidence like that? They need to continue to do this, to explore all the craziness from the very human perspectives of the four leads. It's also acted exceptionally by Kristen Bell and Ted Danson.


Michael's pep-talk works, and spurs Eleanor into action. She immediately links Chidi and Simone to try and get Chidi to convince Simone to take her situation seriously, and that this is not all happening inside of her head. The resulting scene is incredibly sweet and complex. You buy the attraction between Chidi and Simone, they are intellects, and their banter and dialogue is smart and witty. However, you also feel for Eleanor, who is breaking apart on the inside.

The rest of the show is also enjoyable. Brent's utter pigheadedness is played so well, and I love that even when he is on a faux-talk show where the other guests talk about their humanitarian achievements, that he can talk about stocks and shares and general bullshit and still not blink an eyelid. Brent is reflective of pretty much everything that's wrong with society today in the real-world, not to mention similarities between Trump, and other figures in power. It will be good if the show could lean into that aspect heavier, paralleling the misgivings and ultimate corruption that is occurring in the real-world.

The Jason / Janet stuff, I'm going to be honest, I didn't really pay much attention to. It does nothing for me.

Overall, a welcome improvement from last week; B.


FRESH OFF THE BOAT "College" (Season 5, Episode 2)



This was a bit of a flat episode of FOTB, with some wasted potential. Louis and Jessica take Eddie to a tour of UCLA to visit Eddie's cousin, where Jessica realizes that this 'safety school' actually has some really high standards, and of course, worries that Eddie is not up to the challenge. In addition, she tries to keep Louis from telling Eddie that back in her college days, she was a bit of a wild child.

It's an OK story, but there's potential that in my opinion doesn't get explored. Firstly, let's stop and take a look at the character of Eddie. Do we really buy that Jessica actually believes for one second that Eddie can get into Harvard? How is Eddie doing academically? How realistic is this scenario? None of this really gets explored, so it's hard to tell exactly what we are supposed to feel here. Secondly, I was hoping that the references to Jessica's time in college would result in a strong flashback style episode as FOTB has done in the past. However, while we get some scenes of Jessica in college, they are mainly there for comedic relief (and not even really that comedic) rather than to add anything to the story.

The second story in this episode is Evan, Emery and Grandma exploring Los Angeles. This is a classic, 'my show doesn't take place in LA but is filmed in LA so let's get the characters out for some cheap location shots when the story dictates they go to LA', type fare. The references to Y2K, while funny, doesn't really equal a story.

A lot of wasted potential; C.



In summary:

This is Us: B+
Superstore: B
The Good Place: B
Mom: B-
Modern Family: C
Fresh Off the Boat: C

Sunday, 29 September 2019

Carol's Second Act - Pilot Review

Hi all,


In addition to our returning shows, this week we watched 2 new pilots, both comedies, to see if any made the cut to our regularly scheduled programming.

CAROL'S SECOND ACT "Pilot" (Season 1, Episode 1)

I was a huge fan of THE MIDDLE (and still am, boy do I miss that show), and would often catch re-runs of EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND, so it was perhaps no surprise that we tuned in to watch Patricia Heaton's latest sitcom vehicle, a CBS Multi-Cam called "Carol's Second Act".

CBS multi-cams (loosely defined as a more typical sitcom with a laugh track) aren't really at the top of my list when I think about what Pilots I want to watch, but what the hell, it's only 22 minutes, right? Although, last time I said that, I ended up watching 2 Broke Girls for all 6 seasons.

Multi-cam Pilots are extremely tricky to get right. Not only do you have significant time constraints in establishing character and plot, you have to hit a high laughs-per-minute ratio to really sell the format. Unfortunately, Carol's Second Act struggled in both. Sometimes it felt that it was through the pure will of Patricia Heaton's energy that the show held itself together at all.

The characters are unfortunately predictable and anemic. Each of them kitted out with one defining trait to see them through the first episode before they can (presumably) be fleshed out in episodes to come. The writing leaves a lot to be desired, the jokes simply aren't clever or funny as a consequence of trying to establish too much. As is a common hazard for sitcom pilots, there is too much going on to let the show breathe a bit, and for characters and actors to find their flow in a scene and bounce off each other. Instead a scene is hurried through: PLOT, JOKE, PLOT, JOKE, LAUGH, EXIT, NEXT SCENE. HURRY, HURRY, HURRY.

There are two nuggets of potential, the pairing of Carol and Kyle MacLachlan's characters and the introduction of Carol's daughter near the end of the episode, who is a pharma-rep and could add some actual interesting conflict into the show that could be mined for some comedy. However, a lot of the success of the show will depend on the writers honing in and focusing their stories on what they want this show to ultimately be about. If it's actually about Carol's Second Act, then lay off the Grey's Anatomy style cohort of interns and their associated dynamics and really dig deep into Carol's journey, there's a lot of potential there. If the show is more of an ensemble grounded by the cohort of interns, then quickly round out those other three characters in a way that feels specific, fresh and exciting. Hell, if it's about the current state of the medical profession and the clash between Doctors and Big Pharma, then let's explore that. Don't try to do all three at once, you won't get anywhere. Pick a lane. Commit. Like MOM, you can always re-tool and refine if it doesn't work out.

The grading curve is more forgiving on a Pilot, particularly multi-cams, so I award this one a D.

TV Reviews: 2019 Season Premiere Week (23 - 27 SEP)

Welcome, to the 2019-20 TV Season for the American Networks! While the excitement of Premiere Week and a new season has somewhat diminished over the last ten or so years, there is something still quite exciting about approaching the colder and darker weather knowing you're about to return to watching the familiar comforts of the shows and characters you have grown to enjoy, and hopefully finding some new ones!

In this post I will write about my thoughts to the following returning shows that we watch in my household. They are: This Is Us, Modern Family, Superstore, The Good Place, Mom & Fresh Off The Boat.

Most of these shows we have watched from the beginning (I think we came into Modern Family around Season 3), and currently they range from us full on hate-watching to watching with a genuine love for the show.

I hope you enjoy.

THIS IS US: "Strangers" (Season 4, Episode 1)

There has been some hype over the summer, alongside the premiere trailer, about the new faces on the block. Who are they? Why are they here? Why should we care? This, alongside interviews by the creator indicating a 'risk' being taken with the premiere, piqued my interest. However, not to worry, it's really nothing more than a more heavy-handed, over-hyped approach of introducing some new characters to interact with the old.


Not that there's anything wrong with that of course, and the deep exploration we get of Cassidy (the troubled Marine), Malik (the teenager who wants more for the daughter he is raising) and Jack (the charming, blind singer), shows that the writers are investing heavily in fleshing these characters out before letting them loose on the rest of the established cast. I'm ultimately not opposed to this; longer running series often make the mistake of rushing in half-thought out, newer 'splashy' characters into established shows to keep them from going stale, so it is good to watch This Is Us trying not to fall into that trap.

This does mean that many of the existing characters, namely the triplets, are sacrificed and do not receive much screen-time. When you want to hook your audience back in to your show in a crowded premiere week, should you really sacrifice the characters they know and love right off the bat? Personally, I think it works, but from a commercial standpoint I can understand the 'risk' that was being taken here.

And it works because the three stories that introduce Cassidy, Malik and Jack to the show are strong and engaging, so it makes for an interesting episode. In addition, a powerful thread about Jack meeting Rebecca's parents anchor the show and help with that sense of familiarity. Although the show struggles sometimes to wade out of the melodrama of its own long speeches, the one Jack gives to Rebecca's parents at the country club dinner is powerful, in particular in his rebuttal to Vietnam 'not being a real war'. The writers were clever to utilize the built in emotion that audiences have of seeing Jack in Vietnam last season, and the resulting speech Jack provides as to why Vietnam felt very real to him hits the mark. It's a great example of a show, now four years on, utilizing their in-show backstory to provide an emotionally authentic and specific moment for Jack, that we can relate to. All in all, it was an episode highlight.

In addition, the ending montage which links the new characters to the established ones, is also satisfying. In a neat twist and call-back to the Pilot, one of the character's stories is revealed to be from the future, as we discover that Jack is actually Kate and Toby's son. The most interesting new character, Cassidy, gets the most tenuous link (for now), but it's mystery in how she will be further linked into the show leaves me wanting more. Also, her husband is played by former Revenge actor Nick Wechsler (hi!). One slightly off-note is that we didn't need to hear Jack sing, especially a song that isn't particularly engaging and heavily auto-tuned.

Overall, I would rate the premiere a solid B.

MODERN FAMILY: "New Kids on the Block" (Season 11, Episode 1)

Let's get this over with, shall we?


Now limping into its final season, the premiere offered more of the same issues that have plagued the series for several years now. There are two in particular; the huge number of principal cast members to service results in weak, badly fleshed out stories that miss their mark, and the over-reliance on lazy and predictable character beats to propel the stories forward. Both issues are out in full force in this episode, with a particularly disastrous story offered to Mitch and Cam. If anyone couldn't map out every story beat that this storyline offered us, then you obviously haven't seen the show before.

The Haley / Claire / Phil story had some neat potential as it was a classic story of differing parental approaches in caring for babies. This is the story where there was the most opportunity to pack a bit of an emotional punch, whether it's Haley realizing that she could learn a lot from her Claire and Phil or vice versa. Unfortunately, this was all squandered by cheap sight gags and cold and calculated behavior from Claire and Phil. It was just painful to watch, although the sight gag of Haley hurling her way up to the roof and through the window did elicit a smirk.

The Manny radio advertisement story also lost it's way very quickly. I can't even remember Manny's ex-girlfriend (I assume she was in the previous season?) and the gag of her responding positively to Manny's critics got old within about 30 seconds.

Finally, the thread of Alex interrupting the different stories with her tales from Antarctica added approximately nothing to the show, and the revelation that she was only staying there to make Jay proud of her feels forced and makes no sense. Since when has Alex been portrayed as someone that needs approval from her Grandfather?

I am really hoping that, as they chart their way through the final season of the show, that the writers can create some strong, pointed character/story arcs that see the show off the airwaves. However, I imagine they will try to do too much to service every character, and ultimately service none.

Sorry Modern Family, but I give you a D.

SUPERSTORE "Cloud 9.0" (Season 5, Episode 1)

Superstore did not disappoint in its premiere. Coming off the back of a truly gut-punching finale last season, there is always a little worry that Superstore would undermine itself by returning to the status-quo too quickly. However, it appears that we are in safe hands as Mateo appears only briefly in the premiere in a haunting little scene where he relays to Cheyenne how much he is struggling in the detention center. A little goes a long way in portraying such serious (and not to mention topically and politically relevant) issues, and the writers and producers appear to have recognized this. The treatment of Cheyenne's reaction to everything was also on-point, and authentic to her character. It was both funny and painfully sad, with the balance executed well.


And boy, was the show funny. From the opening tag where Dina belts out the end of the commercial to the antics of the robot floor cleaner, everything in this show just clicks.

The unionization thread is one that is particularly interesting to me about Superstore at the moment. It's a story thread that was once explored before (I want to say, end of Season 1?) but was crescendo'd too quickly and then dropped. However, Superstore has grown a lot in the resulting years, in both its confidence in the way it tells its stories to understanding what works and what doesn't with its characters. The union thread is a tricky story to tell, because you want your characters to win, yet winning in this context (whether that's through unionization and / or the recognition of it by Corporate) would be unrealistic because it is a story bigger than the one store, and ultimately bigger than the show itself. It's those exact types of risky stories that I love, and precious few shows are clever enough to do them justice. Superstore has always subtly used its comedy and platform to make social commentary on Corporations vs. the Little Guy, and the positioning of Amy between the two worlds I think will make for some fascinating developments, particularly if they anchor it in the Amy / Jonah relationship.

The robot cleaner, the fact that he is called Glen (with one N) and the sight gags of it pushing Glenn on the ladder, and recovering from being pushed off the roof, are hilarious. The character of Glenn had a bit of a rocky transition in Season 4 when the power-dynamics shifted between him and Amy, and sometimes Glenn was a bit too annoying or over-the-top in his interactions as they tried to re-work the character to fit into this new world. In my opinion, a little of Glenn goes a long way, and I think they found the right balance in this episode in his feud with the robot cleaner!

The plot to break Mateo out yielded some laughs, and the conclusion, where they have Dina justify her guilt at not finding an escape route for Mateo to the fact that she was upset that her birds were let out by Garrett, and thereby pinning it on him to make herself feel better, was very satisfying. I love that they haven't dropped the bird plot, it's the gift that keeps on giving.

And of course, who could forget about Sandra! The thread about her never being quite able to announce her engagement, and that stellar scene with her nemesis provided a little bit of intrigue as to what will happen next.

In conclusion, a great start to the season: A.

THE GOOD PLACE "A Girl from Arizona (Part 1)" (Season 4, Episode 1)

I must admit, I was a little disappointed in The Good Place premiere. It felt a little too busy to really hone in on any story effectively and the result felt a bit flat. In addition, I'm not really sure why this was made a two-parter, if not only to almost apologize that this does not work as a stand-alone episode. I'm interested to see how the second episode fairs, but I suspect this may have worked better as an hour-long premiere (and perhaps, based on how this was written, this was how it was intended).


The emotional sucker-punch of the Elena / Chidi relationship being destroyed in the finale is not really picked back up and explored here, although one must imagine the devastation Elena is feeling must be hugely significant. However, we move swiftly onto Elena introducing three new humans into the Good Place.

The introduction of these humans provide some light comedy; the beats with the un-enthused Linda were hilarious and the introduction of the bigot Brent and Simone convincing herself she is making up the world in her mind were satisfactory.

The Good Place often makes the misstep of stagnating on certain jokes, characters or concepts in its storytelling, and in this episode the character of Derek outstays his welcome. Derek is one-note, and the plot point exploring the triangle between Derek, Jason and Janet is too inconsequential to be interesting.

The revelation of Linda as a demon in disguise and the resulting replacement of Linda by Chidi makes sense, although I sort of though Chidi was already one of the four in the experiment? But that's just my lapse in memory more than anything.

It's difficult to try and establish what the arcs will be on The Good Place, because in particularly Seasons 2 and 3, the plotting moves to quickly and jerky for anything to really become too established in its narrative. However, the idea that the team have to work to really understand the four humans in the experiment and then use that knowledge to make them better people has potential.

All in all, I would rate this episode as a C.

MOM "Audrey Hepburn and a Jalapeno Pepper" (Season 7, Episode 1)

How are we already on Season 7 of this show!? It feels like a much younger show, and that is nothing but a compliment. When you think about it, because of the significant re-tooling of the show in its first 3 years, this version of MOM has really only been around for 3 seasons.


New this season is Kristen Johntson's promotion to the principal cast. I'm not sure how I feel about this. Oh sure, Tammy is a funny character, yet her arc was her rehabilitation from prison. Now that she is sticking around, what is her role in the group? I wonder what the value is in having yet another character to service. I would prefer more screen-time with Wendy, as her more quiet nature brings something a bit different to the group.

This episode provides two chunky stories for each of the main leads. Bonnie's story works best. It is very funny to hear her inner monologues as she struggles to enjoy herself on her honeymoon in the mountains, and the beats with Adam's glasses really worked for me. As they often do on MOM, this story feels very authentic and specific to these characters. The transition of Bonnie into a mentor for new character Patty also felt fresh and exciting for the Bonnie character, particularly when Bonnie advises Patty with the same piece of advise that Marjorie imparted on her near the beginning of the episode. It's an implicit acknowledgement of how much Bonnie values that relationship, without hitting us over the head with it.

Christy's plot worked less well. Contrary to Bonnie's story, this one could be placed quite neatly into episodes of many shows airing today. The confusion around the new clockwise system of numbering the tables, and the counting to 4 when pouring measures were written and delivered well. However all in all, it really just served as a way to keep all the other characters busy while Bonnie's story delivered the classic 'MOM' brand of storytelling.

Overall, a solid B.

FRESH OFF THE BOAT "Help Unwanted" (Season 6, Episode 1)

A somewhat unexpected Season 6 (especially for Constance Wu) for this little gem of a show starts off on a relatively typical note. There are some funny moments, including pretty much anything that comes out of Jessica's mouth (again, not too surprising) and the adorable Evan beats, complete with blinky eyes of his beanie babies.


The Evan story is a strong one, acknowledging Evan's advancing age but in it's own FOTB way. The pairing of Louis and Eddie works as they both try to talk with Evan about the hormonal changes in his body as he starts to develop 'the tingles' for the opposite sex. As I mentioned, the blinking eyes of both Evan and his beanie babies is extremely funny, and continues to hold up even though when Eddie walks in to the room to try and accomplish what Louis couldn't, you know what's coming. The conclusion, where Evan educates himself on what's going on with him from books and the involvement of Grandma Jenny elevates the story further. A personal highlight was the use of the familiar "Yeahhhh" sound when Evan explains Eddie is approaching his sexual peak, which then changes into a "Noooo" when Evan explains to Eddie that it's all downhill after that.

The other main story is more typical and less effective. It's a Honey / Jessica pairing and deals with the two at odds when a conflict (Honey advising Emery to pick drama as his elective) results in them giving each other permission to meddle in each other's lives if it is for their own good. As typical with this sort of story, the meddling by both escalates into ridiculousness that is somewhat predictable. Although, Honey buying the Grandma a megaphone, and the continued use of that megaphone provides a couple of laugh out loud moments.

Overall, not bad: B-.

So there we have it, welcome back to the season all!

Episode Rankings:
Superstore: B
Mom: B
This Is Us: B
Fresh Off The Boat: B-
The Good Place: C
Modern Family: D

Thursday, 29 December 2016

A Story of Survival: KNOTS LANDING

A Story of Survival: KNOTS LANDING


“KNOTS LANDING somehow, in keeping their finger on the pulse of the time, changed with the time” – Michele Lee (May, 1993)

KNOTS LANDING lacks an identity. A harsh critique perhaps but one that has some merit, particularly when you look at the show as a brand. Rebooting Dallas? That was an easy sell. Dynasty? For better or worse, I can picture it now. Rebooting Knots? Let’s digest that. What Knots? The middle-class ‘scenes of a marriage’ version? The sweeping operatic version, ordinary characters experiencing extraordinary things? Or the Original Desperate Housewives version, a corporate domestic hybrid, bubbly with a sense of humour, with mixed-up briefcases and troubled teens galore. Simply put, you cannot go down the road of rebooting KNOTS, without first deciding which version you wish to reboot. My best pick, you ask? A new scenes of a marriage, four new families, almost Black Mirror like in its storytelling. A couple losing the intimacy of their relationship due to the interference of technology; a career orientated wife struggling with the guilt of putting her family second; a bisexual husband desperate to burst out of the heterosexual box society has placed him in. Likely, I’m in the minority, with many picturing a Season 14 / BTTCS version as the perfect hybrid of intimate cul-de-sac dynamics and the power of the outside world.

Anyway, I digress. While the above critique has merit when looking at KNOTS as a brand, I would argue this ability to change is its cleverest attribute, and one must give David Jacobs and Michael Filerman credit for never getting too precious about their version of the show. I had always dismissed Michele Lee’s quote above as a fluffy soundbite relating to the types of storylines the show was telling. However, it goes a lot deeper than that, economics and strategic positioning come into play. This, combined with the obvious talent required to pull it off while retaining quality, is what ultimately allowed the show to last for 14 years through 3 key transition periods.

KNOTS nailed the first two transitions, but stumbled, crashed and burned on the third, bringing an end to the show after 14 years. I call this post A Story of Survival not because KNOTS struggled to stay on the air, far from it, but to reflect that TV production is a business. Every show on the air is fighting for survival, with even the most popular show no less than one misstep away from cancellation. KNOTS was and continues to be TV’s success story in how to adapt your TV show to fit into a changing landscape.

KNOTS started out solidly, although not spectacularly for a Dallas spin-off, in late 1979. It’s first two seasons ranked #29 and #28 respectively, just placing it into the top 30 in the Nielsen Ratings. KNOTS’ first season is easily dismissed as bland. At the time however, it was anything but. Storylines included Laura being raped and believing she had deserved it, Gary’s relapse into alcoholism and Karen being tempting into an affair with a younger man. Looking at the success of shows such as Little House on the Prairie, it’s easy to see why a take on the contemporary but everyday problems of middle-class America was tempting. Little House was doing extremely well in the ratings, ranking at #16 during Knots’ first season, and a healthy #10 during Knots’ second.

However, something was bubbling underneath all this. Dallas was creeping up in the ratings, and when J.R. was shot at the end of Knots’ first season it changed everything. Dallas shot to #1 during Knots’ second season and continued to whittle away in the background, changing the television landscape and audiences’ expectations. KNOTS responded in kind during Season 2, introducing storylines with fragmented arcs and splashier buzz; Troublemaking little sister rocks the cul-de-sac to its core! Gary gets involved with stolen auto-parts, will he make it out alive?! Gunmen raid Ginger’s baby shower! It was less a transition and more of an attempted evolution, and the splashier episodes where strongly underpinned by the heartbeat of the characters established in Season 1.

By the time Knots Landing Season 3 rolled around, KNOTS had lost Don Murray in a ground-breaking trio of episodes that broke the solid foundation that held up the show. Jacobs had chosen to bring in Ann Marcus to try and fully realise his version of KNOTS, but taking into account the decidedly soapier landscape. Commercially, the end result was a failure. KNOTS dipped 15 places and ranked #43 in the ratings, not helped by a rapidly emerging Hill Street Blues as its timeslot competition which ranked #27. Dallas held onto its ranking of #1 and a more character driven Dynasty ranked #19. Creatively, Season 3 divides the fans, however what it does do is provide the show with a solid foundation to build upon. Two characters in particular, Gary and Abby, are as eager to break out of the show’s confines and grow. The show, looking at their dwindling ratings and their growing competition, gives into Gary and Abby midway through the season, and positions them successfully to launch into the next era.

One could argue two key factors saved the show in 1982. (1) Knots had not carved out a strong identity (at least commercially), and (2) KNOTS was a spin-off from Dallas. If KNOTS had carved out a stronger identity ala Little House, CBS, or David himself, may not have seen the potential to change the show and likely it would not have survived, particularly as it was in an increasingly tougher timeslot competition with Hill Street Blues, one of the most buzzed about shows on TV. Instead, Jacobs used the Dallas connection to score a 4th season, with a healthy budget. The cost? KNOTS must follow in Dallas’ footsteps.

Transition Period #1 – The Corridors of Power

(Seasons 4 – 5)

“We took them out of the cul-de-sac and put them in the corridors of power” – David Jacobs in ‘The Saga of Seaview Circle’

Out of the three major transitions the show went through, its first was its most commercially successful. Executive Producer Peter Dunne was brought in to fulfil the promise Jacobs had made. Dunne set to work, and plotted the season by ‘enlarging the situations’. Nowhere is this more obvious then the premiere of Season 4, where he picked up a thread that Ann Marcus had chosen to ignore; bringing down Sid’s murderers. Karen, the everyday everywoman leveraged Mack to bring down Sid’s murderers. Gary passively leveraged his inheritance. Both gave the characters’ access to power and money, allowing them to make decisions that were unthinkable just one year prior. Meanwhile Val leveraged her own power, that of self-confidence and independence. By throwing Gary out of the cul-de-sac and essentially the show itself, the show could finally expand with its characters.

KNOTS also brought in a new setting, Richard’s restaurant ‘Daniel’. What’s interesting about the restaurant was that it represented the show’s transition period. On the show, Richard fights for Daniel’s to have unparalleled quality, and is more than willing to accept that this would yield lower profits. Abby fights for allure and glamour, and is happy to sacrifice slightly on quality in order to make more money and survive. Sound familiar? As Richard fights for Knots’ as the vision David Jacobs had for it, Abby fights for Knots’ future alongside the rapidly emerging juggernauts of Dallas and Dynasty. Abby, of course, wins out. John Pleshette left after season 4, stating afterwards that his character had no place in the new direction of the show. Donna Mills had always been a vocal advocate of glamorising the show, pushing them to lose the overalls and become more commercially appealing. Coincidence?

From a ratings perspective the transition of Knots was successful. Locked in a ratings battle with Hill Street Blues, it emerged victorious, and KNOTS climbed an astounding 23 places to rank #20, one place more than Hill Street. Little House, now no longer comparable, dropped another 4 places to #28 and exited that year. Critically, by building on the momentum from Season 3 rather than simply retooling the show it was successful in its transition both critically and commercially.

Season 5 continued to build on that success, but ramped up the characters’ zeal and passion for power. Dunne jettisoned the restaurant, as it fulfilled its purpose to transition the show. Richard, Kenny and Ginger were also jettisoned by Jacobs. Greg Sumner, a politician on the rise (again, a perfect representation of the show itself) was introduced, and soon characters that only last year were talking about adding an extra sitting in the restaurant were talking of national business dealings and aspiring to reach the White House.

“If I ever have to make a choice between love or money, money’s gonna win every time” – Abby, to Greg (November, 1983)

In order to fully integrate the show into this new era, Dunne and Jacobs needed to grow some of the characters to better adapt to their new environments. Val had grown last year, the wealth and fame her book gave her plus her new self-assurance over her divorce with Gary meant that she was properly positioned for the new era. However, the other two leading characters, Laura and Karen, spent Season 5 on a journey of growth to assure they would not get left behind.

Laura’s transition was simpler. Once she finally accepted Richard had left her, she revaluated her life, and by Dunne cleverly positioning her as a middle-man between Gary and Abby, Laura in turn used them as positions of power to secure her new place on the show. The motivations for her transition are nicely (and helpfully) summarised a conversation with Abby early in the season:

“Gary’s got his millions, you’ll get yours if you haven’t already, Karen’s husband died and she’s happily remarried. Val’s husband left her, she’s got a bestseller, a new boyfriend and more money than she’s ever had before. Well my husband left me too, and the little I’ve got is five percent of Lotus Point. I think I’m entitled to that small piece of the pie, don’t you?” Laura, to Abby (December, 1983)

Meanwhile, David Jacobs knew that Karen needed a major overhaul, but how do you transition a character that had spent the past four years positioned as the core of the cul-de-sac where family values and charity come first? Simple. You destroy everything she holds dear to her. So Karen’s daughter runs away from home and marries a murderer, moves in with Abby and refuses to speak to her. Karen, a stubborn character unable to accept this transition, becomes addicted to painkillers in order to block this new reality from her. Dunne drags her through the mud, stripping her of her dignity even further by following her into rehab. We see her beg for pills in front of her son and experience withdrawals in such a primal fashion in front of millions of viewers. And Dunne isn’t finished there, he spits her out of rehab and throws her into a crumbling marriage caused by her husband’s preoccupation in bringing down a crime syndicate at the expense of his family. This journey, as extreme as it is, is so successful that by the end of the year when our loving whale-saving Karen leers at Abby, steely eyed, demanding her share of Lotus Point from Abby just so she can be wealthy, viewers hardly blink an eye. Hell, she’s earned it.

“Because you’re going to make me a very rich lady, partner” Karen, to Abby (March, 1984)

These two examples perfectly illustrate the care and attention taken in transitioning the show, by concentrating on the characters themselves and accepting the growing pains associated with such a transition, we naturally buy in to what the show is selling us. KNOTS succeeds both creatively and commercially, as it climbs 9 places to rank at #11 – its highest so far, joining Dallas and Dynasty in the elite. Hill Street meanwhile, was nowhere to be found, having fallen out of the Top 30.

Ratings


1979 – 1980
Dallas #6 (+9)
Little House on the Prairie #16
Knots Landing #29

1980 – 1981
Dallas #1 (+5)
Little House on the Prairie #10 (+6)
Knots Landing #28 (+1)

1981 – 1982
Dallas #1
Little House on the Prairie #24 (-14)
Dynasty #19 (+9)
Hill Street Blues #27 (+60)
Knots Landing #43 (-15)

1982 – 1983
Dallas #2 (-1)
Dynasty #5 (+14)
Knots Landing #20 (+23)
Hill Street Blues #21 (+6)
Little House on the Prairie #28 (-4)

1983 – 1984
Dallas #1 (+1)
Dynasty #3 (+2)
Knots Landing #11 (+9)