The Industry is Not Static

And yet sometimes you wish it were.

As we get to the point of no-return for most television studios, the haves and have-nots are being sorted at a prodigious rate. Granted, I simply don’t have time to watch every new show that comes out, but there are also usually pretty strong indicators as to how a show is going to do or not.

For example, any show with a caveman that isn’t a “Captain,” a “Honeymooners” rip-off, or a solitary, once-and-done joke probably isn’t going to last that long. Couple that with the fact that this is essentially free advertising for Geico (a company, by the way, that is owned by Berkshire-Hathaway – Warren Buffett’s company), and what you get is the merger of corporations and the arts that is at once bourgeois and craptacular. If I was the proletariat, I’d just let this show run its course and let the Revolution handle itself.

But it’s not just about blatantly bad ideas being shown for what they are: One might think that the combination of Kelsey Grammer, Patricia Heaton, and Fred Willard would have enough star-power and genuinely funny people to make “Back to You” work. And yet . . . not. Instead of being funny, it’s either mean or stupid. There’s nothing necessarily funny about awful people being awful to each other – you need a connection of some sort to make you sympathize on some level with the characters. Hence, while “Everybody Loves Raymond” made me cringe (because Raymond was a coward and yet Debra put up with it – both his cowardice and his truly reprehensible mother), at least there were moments when you understood that, deep down, these people truly do love each other. “Back to You” fails in this regard.

So, while these shows are still on the air, it’s only a matter of time before the ratings point out that businessmen don’t understand comedy.

Someone, however, does understand good television over at NBC. Two new shows, “Chuck” and “Life,” are quite good (with “Life” struggling to find its way into Excellent). They both have interesting premises, charming lead actors, decent supporting casts, and good writing.

(Note – good writing may be in very short supply soon)

For “Chuck,” Zachary Levi is a perfect balance between shyly-charming, intelligent, and nerd-core to the extreme. It’s one of those things where you have to believe that the hot girl wouldn’t be out of her mind for going out with him – and you don’t. While I’m not sure exactly how long they can maintain the double-life story (or how many terrorists or international criminals can realistically frequent the Los Angeles area) and I wish there was actually more “geek,” the show is highly amusing.

“Life,” while also incredibly amusing, is more of a straight drama. About a cop who was falsely accused of murder, and, upon his release, reaches a settlement in which he is given an undisclosed (but clearly huge) sum of money and a job back on the force. The interplay between the re-acclimation to the world, between Charlie (the lead, played fantastically by Damian Lewis, who you might remember from “Band of Brothers”) and his partner Dani, and the tension of being a cop surrounded by people you think have betrayed you, is gripping. Everyone has demons on this show, and yet Charlie’s quirky nature – his annoying philosophical ideas and his idiosyncratic tendencies – are a joy to watch. The one flaw I have noticed early is that the cut-scenes – in which an unseen documentary film-maker/journalist is interviewing people in regards to Charlie’s murder case – have already become repetitious. Sure, I understand the desire to drill certain facts home, and during a particular episode it can be an effective and powerful device, but to repeat things from show to show is a bit of a cop-out as far as writing goes.

---

Couple of other notes:

I read a review of “Shot of Love with Tila Tequila” that read: “Pour this shot down the drain and get yourself a real drink – you’re gonna need it.”

Okay, I wrote that.

The show sucks. Whereas at least other dating/reality shows have some sort of theme, this show is all over the place – her tokens should be shot glasses, but they’re keys. Winners go to “heaven” and losers to “hell.” It just is poorly executed. Couple that with the fact that she’s a celebrity because she hyped herself up on MySpace and is (maybe) a bi-sexual makes me question if this is the sort of person who we need to encounter on a weekly basis.

On the good side, the new season of “South Park” has started, and, as usual, they are hilarious. They just wrapped up a three-part episode in which terrorists attack our imagination (they suicide bomb Imagination Land), Cartman is trying to enforce a court-ruling saying Kyle has to suck his balls, and Butters turns out to be the Neo of the Imagination Land-Matrix, and it was so incredibly money.

A fun game would be to try to name all the imaginary characters – it’s like a who’s who of pop-culture from the past 25 years.

---

Some quick hits:

“My Name is Earl” is still very good.

I have no desire to watch “Lost” when it finally decides to come back – I can’t watch a show that doesn’t do anything.

I don’t understand the appeal of “Grey’s Anatomy.” I think I might need a vagina for that.

I’ve heard “Pushing Daisies” is very good, I just have too much on my plate at the moment.

Please let the rumors about new “Futurama” episodes be true. “South Park” aside, “Futurama” was the most consistently excellent adult cartoon after “The Simpsons” (and shouldn’t they have bowed out after the movie? Wasn’t that the point?) started sucking – at least 9 years ago.

I think that’s about it for now. I actually don’t get to watch a lot of TV anymore, but I am a firm believer of bowing at the altar of TiVo (although I now just have a cable-box DVR) – so I tend to catch up slowly but surely.

Remember: Television is not a passive activity. If you don’t like something, turn it off!