Sunday night TV musings
Jan. 12th, 2004 02:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatSpent most of Sunday with cjl at the local Two Boots eatery - I had eggs benedict with a creole hollandais sauce and for dinner? We split a pizza with spinach, tomato, mushroom, blackened chicken, and garlic. Extraordinarialy thin crust. For cocktails? Mimosas and sangria. Very nice day. Also-
he loaned me several DVDs, very sweet of him. So now besides the Firefly DVDs to watch, I have Buffy S4 DVDs, and Red Dwarf DVDs. Meanwhile a lady from my book club took pity on me and gave me the book we're meeting on this week - its a book of horror/supernatural/suspense short stories by a local writer. (Actually by the guy who started our book club to begin with.) Called "Walk in Shadows" by Nicholas Kaufmann. Not available at most bookstores, have to order it. Hmmm networking for books and DVDs is working for me, now if I can only find someone who will give me a job. Finding a job shouldn't be this hard? Right? Right? Ugh. Moving on before I bore you with my weekly unemployment frustration whine.
Sunday Night TV - I taped Alias, b/c out with cjl during it. So watched that this morning. Did get home in time for The Practice.
Horrible episode. Really really horrible. Almost unwatchable. After an interlude of oh about five comic episodes, Kelley jumped back up on his soap-box and lectured to his audience for an hour. Shame. The writer of this episode could have gotten across his point in a far more interesting way. Also?
Hardly any James Spader moments. I think the guy had three stupid scenes which added very little to the plot and made 0 sense. At the end of the episode?
I was rolling my eyes and disliked everyone intensely. Dang it. This is why I had stopped watching The Practice and couldn't stand Chicago Hope, preachy. I'm pretty liberal by the way, so it's not that I disagree with Kelly, it's that I don't have the time or patience to be lectured to by a tv show that's selling shampoo during its commercial breaks. Plus -it's lazy writing.
The plot was fairly simplistic and somewhat cliche, if you've ever watched a lawyer drama or police drama in your life. It concerned a cop getting shot. Two kids are found on the scene. The cop's partner swears one of them shot the cop. The cop's torture the one that got shot in the fight - getting him to claim his friend did it under torture. Then the DA approaches the friend and cuts a deal with him to accuse the kid who was tortured of killing a cop. All the attorney's of the defense firm or The Practice - are brought in to defend the kid - they first attempt to get him out of police custody and see him in the hospital while he's being tortured. But the police don't let them and even handcuff one of their attorney's to a chair. They convince Alan (played by James Spader) to find a judge, so Alan barges in on two judges in bed. Asking them to sign a habeaus corpses petition at 2 in the morning. They refuse, understandably. Eleanor, another attorney with the firm, tries to convince the FBI to interfer and stop the torture, but the FBI says they can't interfer with local investigation. Then, when the kid is finally arrested and the attorneys can see him and bonded for trial, Eugene, the head guy of the Practice, goes in front of the judge and asks to have the case against the kid dismissed on grounds of the fact that he was tortured. While the judge is disgusted by the police's behavior, he can't do anything about it and admonishes the DA who supported the torture instead, but lets the case go forward. Somewhat ashamed, the DA gives Eugene a deal - where the kid is charged with "accidental shooting" and only serves 6 months for his crime.
The final scene is Eleanor telling Eugene the thing that frightens her the most about all this is Eugene's look of futility - no matter what happens, he mustn't give up because people like Eugene make the world a better place.
Okay...that is lazy hackneyed writing. Instead of taking a minute to show us the cop's point of view or even give us an idea of why the emotional issues on the cops side of it - the writer only lets us see the action from the pov of the "self-righteous" lawyers and the kids. We are meant to hate the cops and the DA by the end of the episode and oh, I do. But I dislike the lawyers as well - for preaching to me throughout it. Some interesting issues were presented, but instead of exploring these issues, asking questions about them - the writer decides to give us his pov and his answer and hammer us over the head with why he/she is right! Yes, I agree with the writers view on the topic...but I did not appreciate being hammered over the head with it to the point that I find myself flipping channels to see what else is on. What I love about ATS and BTVS is they never really did that. Not all their episodes were necessarily fantastic, but never once did I feel as if the writer was hammering me over the head with a message. Can't say the same for David E. Kelly's shows.
Alias...well I wasn't surprised. Disappointed? Yep.
I think I preferred La Femme Nikita even if it was confusing at times and had incredibly pricky characters, it wasn't quite as predictable and formulaic as Alias is. But then perhaps I've just watched one too many epsinoage shows?
Part of my problem with Alias is I don't like the male love interest. Never have. The actor playing Vaughn annoys me. I find him weak and a bit of a milequetoast. Sydney on the other hand, I sort of like, unlike some of my friends who honestly can't stand her. Kid Bro watches the show just to see the actress playing Sydney get beaten up. He really despises her. I like her. She's an interesting lead to me. I'm not in love with the character, but I do care about her - and I'm of the opinion that it is impossible to watch this show without liking or at least caring about Sydney. People who don't? Can't watch it. But it is possible to watch and enjoy Alias without liking Vaughn, well most of the time.
And this episode was an example of that - since Vaughn was barely in it. His role was as minor as Jack's.
Perhaps this is why I sort of like Lauren. I find Vaughn's new wife really interesting. And I was hoping they wouldn't take the formulaic approach of turning her into a bad guy - so that Vaughn can eventually have Sydney without feeling guilt. Of course they did, to the relief of lots of their V/S fans. Damn. A far more interesting approach would be to have Lauren be the one who had been Syd's contact while she was in the Covenant or something twisted like that. Build a connection between the two women?
Like they did on La Femme Nikita when Michael was married. But La Femme Nikita was a far more innovative show...sigh. No, instead she's a villain and I yawned. Bored now. Oh well, maybe they'll spice things up and make her a much more complex character than Alison Dorn was - maybe she's in love with Vaughn and is struggling with her job, or maybe, and far more interesting, she's been brainwashed or triggered? My hunch is it's going to be that she's been the villian all along, planted by the Covenant after they took Syd, in order to keep an eye on the CIA - a la Alison Dorn's Francie - and that was foreshadowed in Syd's dream, which is why it didn't surprise me. Disappointed me? Yep. I kept hoping they'd come up with a more interesting innovative twist.
What was good about the episode? Not bloody much.
Kendall - he was interesting - I enjoy the actor and I'd missed him. Also I like how he explained his absence. If he'd been around when Sid showed up, he would have had to work at keeping her secret. I also liked the fact that Dixon had been in on it - had a nice wrap-around effect to S2. But I partly watch the show for Carl Lumbly as Dixon. The fact Sid erased her own memory to protect the dna she'd discovered was a nice twist. Especially when the covenant via Sloan trick her into finding it again and delivering it into their hands, just like she feared.
What I didn't like - well I've never been crazy about the Rambaldi story. But I find sci-fi conspiracy stories boring and predictable - it's why I couldn't get into the X-Files. It's not my cup of tea. After a while the characters just become pawns of the writer to propell the consipiracy plotline forward. Sometimes, if it's done well, they can keep my suspension of disbelief, but usually? I end up rolling my eyes. Angel the Series in a way did the same thing that Alias is doing, but much better.
We have the coming of the miracle child from the chosen one, the miracle child brings forth a being of questionable nature. In ATS they did a wonderful job of letting the characters' propell it. With lovely unpredictable twists and turns along the way.
Alias...is far more formulaic. On Angel - we aren't sure if he and Cordy will ever be together or can be.
On Alias...yes, it's a foregone conclusion that Vaughn and Syde will be back together before long.
On Angel - the birth of the miracle child happens as an effect of something Angel did, it is an effect of his own bad actions. On Alias the baby will happen despite whatever she does to prevent it, even if she's pretty much done everything inhumanly possible to do so. (Yeah, I know she supposedly destroyed it last night, but trust me - Sark took off with the kid. OR someone did. They pretty much tell us as much with Lazaerous who asks about "the passenger".)
At any rate...last night's episode was not a favorite. Much preferred the episode reintroducing Will that aired prior to it. Much better episode.
Next week's? It's Vaughn/Sydney in deadly peril - again. Hmmm, will they kill them? Yeah right. Although I keep hoping they'll kill Vaughn, I know they never will - too many fans love him. Now killing Vaughn would be interesting. But they've done that before - S1's cliff-hanger, they aren't doing it again. Which is why an episode placing Syde and Vaughn in deadly perile really doesn't interest me very much. Where's the suspense? You know they'll live. You also know the experience won't change them any, except reassert their deep abiding love for each other and how guilty they feel about it because of the contrived obstacle that stands between them which, you have to know won't be there much longer since we know that the obstacle is a villain. Sigh.
I'm watching Arrested Development next week, I think, and maybe flipping during commericals to catch Isabella Rosselini...on it. I like Isabella Rosselini, although she doesn't hold a candel to Lena Olin, whom they were unable to get back for some reason. Not sure she's worth suffering through another episode of "oh I love you madly but can't be with you and I'll die - you live" - "no, we'll die together!" Okay enough whining about Alias.
he loaned me several DVDs, very sweet of him. So now besides the Firefly DVDs to watch, I have Buffy S4 DVDs, and Red Dwarf DVDs. Meanwhile a lady from my book club took pity on me and gave me the book we're meeting on this week - its a book of horror/supernatural/suspense short stories by a local writer. (Actually by the guy who started our book club to begin with.) Called "Walk in Shadows" by Nicholas Kaufmann. Not available at most bookstores, have to order it. Hmmm networking for books and DVDs is working for me, now if I can only find someone who will give me a job. Finding a job shouldn't be this hard? Right? Right? Ugh. Moving on before I bore you with my weekly unemployment frustration whine.
Sunday Night TV - I taped Alias, b/c out with cjl during it. So watched that this morning. Did get home in time for The Practice.
Horrible episode. Really really horrible. Almost unwatchable. After an interlude of oh about five comic episodes, Kelley jumped back up on his soap-box and lectured to his audience for an hour. Shame. The writer of this episode could have gotten across his point in a far more interesting way. Also?
Hardly any James Spader moments. I think the guy had three stupid scenes which added very little to the plot and made 0 sense. At the end of the episode?
I was rolling my eyes and disliked everyone intensely. Dang it. This is why I had stopped watching The Practice and couldn't stand Chicago Hope, preachy. I'm pretty liberal by the way, so it's not that I disagree with Kelly, it's that I don't have the time or patience to be lectured to by a tv show that's selling shampoo during its commercial breaks. Plus -it's lazy writing.
The plot was fairly simplistic and somewhat cliche, if you've ever watched a lawyer drama or police drama in your life. It concerned a cop getting shot. Two kids are found on the scene. The cop's partner swears one of them shot the cop. The cop's torture the one that got shot in the fight - getting him to claim his friend did it under torture. Then the DA approaches the friend and cuts a deal with him to accuse the kid who was tortured of killing a cop. All the attorney's of the defense firm or The Practice - are brought in to defend the kid - they first attempt to get him out of police custody and see him in the hospital while he's being tortured. But the police don't let them and even handcuff one of their attorney's to a chair. They convince Alan (played by James Spader) to find a judge, so Alan barges in on two judges in bed. Asking them to sign a habeaus corpses petition at 2 in the morning. They refuse, understandably. Eleanor, another attorney with the firm, tries to convince the FBI to interfer and stop the torture, but the FBI says they can't interfer with local investigation. Then, when the kid is finally arrested and the attorneys can see him and bonded for trial, Eugene, the head guy of the Practice, goes in front of the judge and asks to have the case against the kid dismissed on grounds of the fact that he was tortured. While the judge is disgusted by the police's behavior, he can't do anything about it and admonishes the DA who supported the torture instead, but lets the case go forward. Somewhat ashamed, the DA gives Eugene a deal - where the kid is charged with "accidental shooting" and only serves 6 months for his crime.
The final scene is Eleanor telling Eugene the thing that frightens her the most about all this is Eugene's look of futility - no matter what happens, he mustn't give up because people like Eugene make the world a better place.
Okay...that is lazy hackneyed writing. Instead of taking a minute to show us the cop's point of view or even give us an idea of why the emotional issues on the cops side of it - the writer only lets us see the action from the pov of the "self-righteous" lawyers and the kids. We are meant to hate the cops and the DA by the end of the episode and oh, I do. But I dislike the lawyers as well - for preaching to me throughout it. Some interesting issues were presented, but instead of exploring these issues, asking questions about them - the writer decides to give us his pov and his answer and hammer us over the head with why he/she is right! Yes, I agree with the writers view on the topic...but I did not appreciate being hammered over the head with it to the point that I find myself flipping channels to see what else is on. What I love about ATS and BTVS is they never really did that. Not all their episodes were necessarily fantastic, but never once did I feel as if the writer was hammering me over the head with a message. Can't say the same for David E. Kelly's shows.
Alias...well I wasn't surprised. Disappointed? Yep.
I think I preferred La Femme Nikita even if it was confusing at times and had incredibly pricky characters, it wasn't quite as predictable and formulaic as Alias is. But then perhaps I've just watched one too many epsinoage shows?
Part of my problem with Alias is I don't like the male love interest. Never have. The actor playing Vaughn annoys me. I find him weak and a bit of a milequetoast. Sydney on the other hand, I sort of like, unlike some of my friends who honestly can't stand her. Kid Bro watches the show just to see the actress playing Sydney get beaten up. He really despises her. I like her. She's an interesting lead to me. I'm not in love with the character, but I do care about her - and I'm of the opinion that it is impossible to watch this show without liking or at least caring about Sydney. People who don't? Can't watch it. But it is possible to watch and enjoy Alias without liking Vaughn, well most of the time.
And this episode was an example of that - since Vaughn was barely in it. His role was as minor as Jack's.
Perhaps this is why I sort of like Lauren. I find Vaughn's new wife really interesting. And I was hoping they wouldn't take the formulaic approach of turning her into a bad guy - so that Vaughn can eventually have Sydney without feeling guilt. Of course they did, to the relief of lots of their V/S fans. Damn. A far more interesting approach would be to have Lauren be the one who had been Syd's contact while she was in the Covenant or something twisted like that. Build a connection between the two women?
Like they did on La Femme Nikita when Michael was married. But La Femme Nikita was a far more innovative show...sigh. No, instead she's a villain and I yawned. Bored now. Oh well, maybe they'll spice things up and make her a much more complex character than Alison Dorn was - maybe she's in love with Vaughn and is struggling with her job, or maybe, and far more interesting, she's been brainwashed or triggered? My hunch is it's going to be that she's been the villian all along, planted by the Covenant after they took Syd, in order to keep an eye on the CIA - a la Alison Dorn's Francie - and that was foreshadowed in Syd's dream, which is why it didn't surprise me. Disappointed me? Yep. I kept hoping they'd come up with a more interesting innovative twist.
What was good about the episode? Not bloody much.
Kendall - he was interesting - I enjoy the actor and I'd missed him. Also I like how he explained his absence. If he'd been around when Sid showed up, he would have had to work at keeping her secret. I also liked the fact that Dixon had been in on it - had a nice wrap-around effect to S2. But I partly watch the show for Carl Lumbly as Dixon. The fact Sid erased her own memory to protect the dna she'd discovered was a nice twist. Especially when the covenant via Sloan trick her into finding it again and delivering it into their hands, just like she feared.
What I didn't like - well I've never been crazy about the Rambaldi story. But I find sci-fi conspiracy stories boring and predictable - it's why I couldn't get into the X-Files. It's not my cup of tea. After a while the characters just become pawns of the writer to propell the consipiracy plotline forward. Sometimes, if it's done well, they can keep my suspension of disbelief, but usually? I end up rolling my eyes. Angel the Series in a way did the same thing that Alias is doing, but much better.
We have the coming of the miracle child from the chosen one, the miracle child brings forth a being of questionable nature. In ATS they did a wonderful job of letting the characters' propell it. With lovely unpredictable twists and turns along the way.
Alias...is far more formulaic. On Angel - we aren't sure if he and Cordy will ever be together or can be.
On Alias...yes, it's a foregone conclusion that Vaughn and Syde will be back together before long.
On Angel - the birth of the miracle child happens as an effect of something Angel did, it is an effect of his own bad actions. On Alias the baby will happen despite whatever she does to prevent it, even if she's pretty much done everything inhumanly possible to do so. (Yeah, I know she supposedly destroyed it last night, but trust me - Sark took off with the kid. OR someone did. They pretty much tell us as much with Lazaerous who asks about "the passenger".)
At any rate...last night's episode was not a favorite. Much preferred the episode reintroducing Will that aired prior to it. Much better episode.
Next week's? It's Vaughn/Sydney in deadly peril - again. Hmmm, will they kill them? Yeah right. Although I keep hoping they'll kill Vaughn, I know they never will - too many fans love him. Now killing Vaughn would be interesting. But they've done that before - S1's cliff-hanger, they aren't doing it again. Which is why an episode placing Syde and Vaughn in deadly perile really doesn't interest me very much. Where's the suspense? You know they'll live. You also know the experience won't change them any, except reassert their deep abiding love for each other and how guilty they feel about it because of the contrived obstacle that stands between them which, you have to know won't be there much longer since we know that the obstacle is a villain. Sigh.
I'm watching Arrested Development next week, I think, and maybe flipping during commericals to catch Isabella Rosselini...on it. I like Isabella Rosselini, although she doesn't hold a candel to Lena Olin, whom they were unable to get back for some reason. Not sure she's worth suffering through another episode of "oh I love you madly but can't be with you and I'll die - you live" - "no, we'll die together!" Okay enough whining about Alias.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 07:56 am (UTC)When is cjl going to get a journal anyway?
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 08:12 am (UTC)Completely agree - I hope we don't spend the next portion of the year with sightings of her eggs or the kid.
Can't really speak for cjl...except that he didn't really understand why I decided to do live journal...so something tells me, it's doubtful he'll do one.