Making Room

Having already aired its first season on FX late last year, Dexter (Wednesdays, ITV) will be old news to a lot of satellite and cable viewers, but the show's debut on ITV last night is still something to be celebrated. With this and the upcoming Pushing Daisies, ITV are showing a new willingness to put high profile American shows on in a decent time-slot – something that can only be good news for British TV audiences.

Regardless of what a few (deluded) patriots might say, the difference in quality between British and American drama series is huge, and has been for a long time. In holding with misguided ideals and regulations, however, the BBC and ITV have long refused to treat American series with the reverence they deserve, instead banishing them to worthless time-slots, diminishing their potential audiences while mediocre or plain bad British series occupied prime-time instead.

The problem actually mirrors an argument going on in football at the moment. England’s failure to qualify for Euro 2008 stirred up debate about whether having so many foreign players in our domestic league has badly affected the standard of our homegrown players, and opinion on the matter is divided. Some people believe that by having so many foreigners in the league our homegrown players are not given the opportunity they require to excel. Others believe that having some of the world’s greatest players to play with and against helps to improve the standard of our players, and that a limit – a way to protect British players’ places regardless of talent or form – would only encourage mediocrity and complacency. Personally I believe in the latter, and that our two leading television channels exemplify this perfectly. By refusing to play host to a higher standard of television, BBC1 and ITV have mired themselves in a pool of mediocrity it will be hard to get out of without inviting in a better influence.

Despite the differences in budget and culture that some use to defend British shows against the superiority of American ones, it is ridiculous to ignore as we do – as creators, distributors and as an audience – all the things we could learn from the best television the world has to offer. It is no coincidence after all that The Office – our country’s finest televisual achievement of recent times – came from a man so heavily influenced by American shows. Television is a constantly evolving medium and culturally segregating yourself from its pinnacle achievements can only do more harm than good. And yes, most worthy American shows do find their way over here on one channel or another, but it’s obviously a shame they are not displayed more prominently to a mainstream audience. Can you imagine great foreign novels only being offered in specialist libraries and bookshops? The idea is ludicrous. Their absence would only deny our audience a great source of pleasure and our artists a great source of inspiration. There would be no benefit. Surely that logic should be applied to television, and our greatest institutions should feel obliged to include worthy foreign works as essential parts of the curriculum.

Obviously I’m not saying ITV should be airing American Idol instead of The X Factor (even though it is better) or that the BBC should be airing So You Think You Can Dance? instead of Strictly Come Dancing, but the thought that the BBC can’t find ten hours of prime-time a year in which to show The Wire is shocking when you consider that all they do seem to air are musical-based elimination game shows, hospital dramas and Eastenders. How is there not room (in the budget and in the schedule) for obviously better television? It's not good enough that everything truly good be labelled "cult" and shifted to a lesser channel on which many people won't see it. If we want to make better television, we need to let people understand what it is first.

It’s my hope now that ITV’s newfound boldness with their schedule means they have realised this error and decided to correct it. It’s a risk ratings-wise, certainly, but both ITV and the BBC are in need of a good shake-up and the change would pay off in the long run. Hopefully ITV will have the patience and the foresight to see that possibility. In the short-term, one can only hope that an audience so long deprived of colour aren’t blinded by the lights.

Chinese Water Torture, but German

Admittedly I spend more time flicking back and forth through the music channels than any person should, but why, oh why, is this woman's face so completely unavoidable??? Seriously, I see her more than I see Britney Spears, Kylie Minogue or Justin Timberlake and it's just inexplicable to me. These people are mega-stars and yet Cascada somehow seem to dominate Sky from 340 to 378 with their awful cover versions. How did this happen? To think-- I actually used to believe that too many non-music programmes were the problem with music television nowadays. I think I was wrong.

"And the winner is..."

(Click image to enlarge)

Unless you are a huge fan of random montages, the Oscars® (Monday, Sky Movies) this year were pretty boring. No great speeches, no great shocks, no great "moments" - it was all very chilled, relaxed and chillaxed. Beforehand, though, was a bit more interesting. Having been unable to endure the awful Kate Thornton on Sky's Red Carpet coverage I turned to ol' reliable E! to watch Ryan Seacrest do his thing (Live from the Red Carpet, if you didn't know already) and see Jennifer Garner provide the night's two highlights. Winner of the year's fashion prizes by a mile (see above), she looked so good that she made Gary Busey come over all Dracula and decide he must have her neck. Seeing she and Ryan Seacrest genuinely shell-shocked by his bizarre behaviour was easily the best entertainment the entire night offered. Strike or no, you just can't write that kind of stuff.


Busey attack!

TV Miscellany

° I'm not going to bother talking about American Idol (Thursdays/Fridays, ITV2) in any depth until it gets to the final twelve, but this week's shows sucked, didn't they? I am happy with the people who went, though, except for Garrett Haley. He sucked and it was justified that he should go, fair enough, but he reminded me of someone and now he's gone before I could figure out who it was. It was a bald, bug-eyed character actor who played creepy people in movies and now I just can't think of his name or what I specifically know him from. That's annoying. I thought that if you shaved Garrett's head and aged him a few years he'd look just like him. Now I'll never know because Garrett is never going to get so famous that he loses his mind and shaves his head. Sad how people's dreams are crushed so easily.

° That Mitchell and Webb Look (Thursdays, BBC2) returned for its second series this week and I'm not sure what to think. Much like last season half of the sketches are sharp, intelligent and funny while others seem flat, clumsy and ill-considered. It's hard to imagine anything changing. Any fans of the sublime Peep Show looking for more of Mitchell and Webb are going to have to take the rough with the smooth.

° Props to Sky Sports and the BBC in their handling of the Eduardo injury footage. I was initially kind of disappointed that Sky refused to show a decent replay but in hindsight I can respect that it was the middle of the day, the footage is kind of gross and there are sensitivity issues to be considered. I am glad, however, that the BBC - in a later time slot and with all due permission - showed it all clearly on Match of the Day (BBC1). People are going to be talking about this a lot and it's only fair that they're allowed to form their own opinions based on the proper footage. Horrible tackle, but it's the kind of thing that needs exposure if challenges like this are to be stamped out. Good job by all, and best wishes to Eduardo.

Aussie Soap Round-Up (w/e 22nd Feb 08)

Last week I revelled in the fact that we avoided a long, boring pregnancy storyline. This week was all about the looming of a different, and altogether worse, kind of storyline: the prison sentence. With Susan Kinski (Neighbours) and the Human Carrot (Cassie, Home and Away) both facing charges of negligent driving occasioning grievous bodily harm, I have reason to worry a little. In the case of Cassie I'm just worried I'll have to watch her in prison, but in the case of Susan I'm genuinely horrified by the prospect for her sake (because I am such a sucker). Thankfully, by the end of the week it looked like Susan might escape jail time. Regretfully, it looked like she might have some terrible disease. I'll wait to see how that pans out before commenting further but I will say this much: if Susan ever dies I am going to drop to my knees, rip my shirt open and scream to the heavens in the rain, such will be my dismay. "Damn you, God! Whyyy?!! Whhyyyyyyyyyy!?!!?!?!?!?!?" - the whole bit. Either that or I'll firebomb the Neighbours offices.

Continuing the Ric-Matilda-Viv saga, however, Viv is apparently pregnant and, no, I am not fazed by it because she's not a regular character and therefore the chances of this "pregnancy" amounting to anything are nil. So, what will happen to Viv and Ric's baby? Miscarriage? Abortion? The whole thing being a work to begin with? I'm going to go with the latter for now. Loved Ric's reaction, though; that was a truly convincing "holy shit!" face. Props to Matilda, too, for defending her reactionary sluttiness by throwing Tony's man-whore phase right back in his face. That's two instances of good arguing in two weeks. Home and Away is on a roll.

Elsewhere, a lot of this week's other action seemed to be based around mental health issues; Ringo struggling with his eating disorder, Toadie having severe panic attacks and Jack still choosing to marry Sam. Honestly I only feel sorry for Toadie. Ringo's "manorexia" came on so suddenly and bizarrely that it only makes me realise why girls seem to hate other girls with eating disorders so much (because they are jealous), while Jack's complete lack of spine almost makes me wish a life of Sam upon him, were I capable of such cruelty.

Finally, Dr. Rachel is now the #1 target of Summer Bay's latest stalker, the misogynist maniac medic. He left a note for her that said, "what did you did with your baby?". Taken at a glance that's pretty disturbing; taken very literally it's completely disgusting. Thank you, Home and Away, for that carefully-crafted scarring mental image. What a very nice way to end the week.

Hotter Than a Bucket of Boiling Tears

"When my mother was pregnant with me they did an ultrasound and found she was having twins. When they did another ultrasound, a few weeks later, they discovered that I had resorbed the other foetus. Do I regret this? No. I believe his tissue has made me stronger. I now have the strength of a grown man and a little baby."

- Dwight, The Office, 'Grief Counseling' (s03e04)

Unquestionably the funniest thing I've seen on TV in ages. Brilliant. I actually had to pause the show so I didn't miss anything, I was laughing so much. It seems that, in keeping with all the best sitcoms, The Office (Thursdays, ITV2) is really hitting its stride now that it has a few seasons under its belt. Out of the four episodes from Season 3 that have aired here so far, I'd say two are among the best the show has ever done. If it can hold this kind of form - and I'm thinking it can - there should be a lot to look forward to.

A werewolf, a vampire and a ghost walk into a bar...

It's not too often I'm supportive of British TV drama, but based on the quality of its pilot it will be a great shame if we don't see more of Being Human (BBC Three). Smart, funny and engaging from the off, it was one of best productions I've seen from the BBC in ages.

It's still a little rough - a few supporting performances were pretty bad and one of the sub-plots seems really weak - but the show obviously has bags of potential and already exhibits more in common with shows like Buffy and Kyle XY than with previous British genre failures like Sky One's Hex.

Following the exploits of a werewolf, his vampire best friend and the agoraphobic ghost they find inhabiting their brand new flat, the show's primary focus is on the threesome's longing for normality as they struggle with the weight of their conditions. And it's well done. Where British attempts at a show like this would usually spend all their energy on highlighting the outlandishness of the plot or creating its characters with all the finesse of a heavy-handed lumberjack doing a wood-carving with his axe, Being Human underplays it, using the characters' unique problems to subtly highlight more universal themes and create a believably human drama you can care about. George freaking out because he's locked in the isolation chamber with his ex as he's about to change or Annie freaking out at the prospect of leaving the house after so long - these were really good moments. And broken up by the levity of watching "monsters" talking about Harry Potter or getting giddy about having their own little garden, it strikes a nice balance between the dark and light, the thoughtful and playful. And that's a terrible description, I know, and all this is stuff that every drama should be based on, but that's not always the case and it's certainly not too often we see something as well crafted and interesting as Being Human emerge from our shores.

Having already commissioned last week's Phoo Action, however, it's unknown how much of a chance these other pilots have. Hopefully the BBC will be smart enough and brave enough to give this one a go too.

You can watch it by clicking HERE or on the image above. The link will expire in 5 days.

Losing Belief in Rehabilitation

I have the feeling that my pervading image of Prison Break's third season (Mondays, Sky One) is going to be the above, from 'Boxed In' (s03e09). Refusing to give Sona's new General answers about the botched escape attempt in the episode before, Michael is locked in the Hot Box until he decides to talk or dies, whichever comes first. Slowly baking in the Panamanian sun and with no possible chance of escape, Schofield looked desperate, exhausted and out of ideas. And in that moment my thoughts immediately turned to the show's writers; Schofield's plight so perfectly mirroring theirs. I think that was the precise moment I first lost hope for the show. After last night's episode, 'Hell or High Water' (s03e12), I'm starting to believe it might be all over.

Season 3 has been a mess so far. Borrowing its engine from the show's successful first season and revving away in the vain hope it may once again kick into gear, the story has stalled with a frustrating persistence. To be fair, last night it finally did kick into gear. Unfortunately, before it could get going, the wheels immediately fell off.

Having built up Sona as an inescapable fortress all season and having set various complex machinations into motion around the escape, what turned out to be the hub of the plan? Unconvincingly sneaking past a whole army of guards. Obviously covered in Harry Potter's invisibility cloak or something, it felt like a really cheap way out of a corner the writers had painted themselves into. And from there things didn’t get too much better either. Where a clean break was surely needed from the show’s dismal first half, all signs point back towards Sona; Sucre and T-Bag both looking like key players. This whole thing is dragging horribly, and the sooner we see the back of Sona, Whistler and Jodi Lyn O’Keefe’s hammy hardcase Gretchen the better. Right now the show is looking like a shadow of its former self.

In both of the first two seasons Prison Break was a thrill-ride of a TV show, always pushing forward and never looking back. This season’s lackadaisical attitude progression suggests the show finally has run out of places to go, and if that is the case then one can only hope the show doesn’t run for too much longer. If it continues to struggle like this, cancellation wouldn’t be capital punishment so much as euthanasia.

"But first..."

It has been nearly five years since E4 last broadcast Big Brother USA (Tuesdays/Thursdays, E4), and I remember that for a long while I thought that was a shame. At the peak of our country's BB obsession and immediately on the back of the creation of the monster Jade Goody, we got a glimpse at how things were done in the USA. Less of a sociological experiment and more of an out-and-out game show, we saw people openly (and viciously) scheming for success in a manner far more brazen than our tightly-buttoned English sensibilities would allow. Encouraging open alliances, hidden agendas, constant manipulation and personal betrayals, it was cut-throat in a way we'd never seen, and actually sought to reward the person who could behave most abominably. It was a massive culture shock. It was fun, certainly, but with the start of this new series I'm starting to think it was mainly the novelty of it that made it so.

"It's only a game show..."

With a Gump-esque combination of idiocy and perspective, this oft-repeated refrain from BB1 highlights the major difference between our BB and the US version. Our BB contestants needed a song to remind themselves that not only were they on a game show, but that it was only a game show, and therefore not as important as retaining some sense of integrity to walk back into the world with. Say what you will about the decline in house-mate quality over the years or creative editing or anything like that, our BB is designed to start debate; it's a viewing experience that encourages reflection in even the most shallow viewer, and so its appeal is enduring. In the US version, from its robotic presenter to its house-mates' singular focus, that is not a concern, and so BB1's most annoying catchphrase sums that up too: in the US, at least, Big Brother is nothing more than a game show, and therefore not half as engaging as the version our nation so slavishly gathers around each summer.

I think I'm going to pass on the ChenBot & Co. this time around. I just don't know what I'd gain from watching it.

Aussie Soap Round-Up (w/e 15th Feb 08)

It's not often you see people behaving rationally in soaps, so this week made for a nice change. Credit to Bridget on Neighbours for realising that being hit by a car and left for dead is no big deal, credit to Miranda for finally taking a step off her high horse; and credit, most of all, to Home and Away's Ric Dalby, who performed like a champ all week...

Having spurned the advances of Mrs. Robinson Anderson for weeks now (an eternity in soap time), he used the opportunity offered by one of Matilda's typically insane breakdowns in the only way he should - to finally sleep with Viv. Good for him. And then when Cassie tried to berate him for cheating the next morning, he completely shut her down by reminding her that he hadn't cheated since Matilda had broken up with him and that she was a hypocrite for getting involved anyway because she had cheated on him when they were together a while back. Brilliant. It's all too common in soaps for characters to develop Relevant Information Amnesia (RIA) when they're in an argument, so it was nice to see a remarkably lucid Ric slapping some sense into the Human Carrot. A rare victory for logic and good sense.

That being said, in all this praise for rationality let us not forget how much joy can be derived from soap characters' complete insanity. This week's prize moment was undoubtedly seeing Martha caught trying Sam's wedding dress on. You could see it coming from a mile off, it made absolutely no sense and yet it was completely perfect and hilarious. I mean, I hate Sam with a vengeance and it's hard for me to justify any of her persistent whining, but in this case Martha done fucked up, boy-eeeeeeeee. It was awesome.



And finally - also from Home and Away (it was quiet week on Ramsay Street, I guess) - Rachel got pregnant, I thought to myself, "oh God, I hope she loses it", and then she did. Woooo!! I mean, miscarriages don't exactly make for the best television, but they're a hell of a lot better than long, boring pregnancy storylines and women in soaps just don't have enough abortions for my liking. A big shout-out to Mother Nature for this one. I'm certain it was for the best anyway. No-one wants a baby Lewis.

"Things Are Looking Up For Old Liz Lemon!"

The ship has definitely sailed as far as 30 Rock/Studio 60... comparison pieces go, but now that 30 Rock (Thursdays, five) has finally finished airing its first season here in the UK, I can say with full confidence that, for once, the networks got something completely right. Despite its ephemeral brilliance, Studio 60... became self-indulgent, preachy and boring television; it shot for the moon and it crash-landed hard. 30 Rock, however, played it simple, concentrated on being funny and got it right. It's the better of the two by a country mile and fully deserves all the success it's enjoying. Roll on, Season 2 (whenever the hell that's due to make it over here)...

Needs More Grim

Missy Peregrym as Andi on Reaper

I'll be truthful; when I first saw the ads for Reaper (E4, Wednesdays) I knew it wouldn't like it too much. I wanted to, I was excited when I first heard about it, but I could see that they'd got it wrong from the first moment. There was something about it that reminded me of Desperate Housewives, and for a show that had the potential to be fresh, dark and funny, that wasn't a good comparison to evoke. Four episodes in and sadly I haven't changed my mind. So far, Reaper isn't delivering, and ironically the reason is its lack of soul.

It's a decent premise. Slacker Sam finds out his parents sold his soul to the Devil before he was born and is forced to become a "bounty hunter for the Devil", capturing and imprisoning evil souls that have escaped from Hell, all the while trying to negotiate his unusual new duties with his personal life. It's like a ViewAskewniverse Buffy with the concentration on laughs. Fair enough. And there are nice moments: Sam and Sock have an authentic-feeling friendship, Missy Peregrym is thoroughly charming as Andi and Ray Wise does a decent job as the Devil. It's just not enough to fill the show though.

Comedy or not - and it's not even that funny, really - Reaper's massive failure is that it's completely lacking in any real drama. Despite the gravity of Sam's dilemma and the dangerous situations he always finds himself in, the show offers absolutely no tension. Its concentration on comedy means that the narrative tends to be pushed forward very lazily, everything comes far too easily and ultimately there's no real reason to care. For example, the new vessel - the object in which Sam is meant to imprison the escaped soul - is revealed each week as if it presents a great mystery, yet the show never bothers to explore it at all, safe in the knowledge that in the final scene Sam will suddenly realise how it's supposed to work and emerge victorious. Again, it's just all too easy, and when the status quo feels as unshakeable on a TV show as it does here, it tends to get very boring very quickly. And unfortunately I think it's because of flaws inherent in the show's set-up, so unless something happens in the near future to drastically realign the construct of the show it's hard to see much changing in terms of quality. It could get funnier, sure, but that wouldn't be enough.

I'll keep watching for now just in case it improves, but honestly, as it stands now, I'd be fine with seeing it cancelled. If the after-effects of the Writer's Strike or decent ratings offer it a reprieve, I hope the creative staff knows enough to make a change. If they don't, I imagine the Devil might have his hands on this show before too long anyway.

We Fear Change

When news broke that Neighbours (weekdays, five) would be leaving its home of 20 plus years, my reaction was mixed. Neighbours on BBC1 was a national institution and my memory is infested with it. I remember visiting various friends' houses when I was younger and at each one the family would stop what they were doing, sit down and watch Neighbours together. And it was the same for students too. Neighbours is huuuuuge at university, still supporting tours for its otherwise washed-up or obscure stars from the past and present. It's a big deal. So when change came-a-knockin', it was easy to be disappointed and worried. On five we'd have to endure ads, they might not put it on at the same time or maybe they wouldn't be quite as loyal to the show as the BBC had always been; anything could happen. The one thing I didn't expect was to like it more.

Beside the inconvenience of having to fast-forward through the ads, Neighbours on five has been pretty good. It's on several times a day via five's vast network of channels, it's back-to-back with Home and Away and all of a sudden the picture quality has improved tremendously. Everything seems to be okay. Whether that means its place as an institution is safe, I am not so sure, but at least its present seems to be in safe hands, and I guess that's enough for now.

I Don't Want To Be Rescued

As the fourth season of Lost (Sky One, Sundays )begins, our favourite gang of misfit toys stand divided - there are those who want to be rescued and those who don't. The former, lead by the slightly-less-dull-than-usual Jack, long for the conventional comforts of their "real" lives and all the standards they had been accustomed to; the latter, lead by ultra-cool John Locke, wish to stay amidst the mysterious confines of the islands and embrace all of the wild and wacky wonderfulness life there offers. It's a simple dilemma, right? Well, interestingly I think it's one that encapsulates the dilemma that the show's audiences and creators are facing too. The question is: do we want to be rescued?

Within the diegesis the disruptive element has been the arrival of a boat promising the rescue of the Oceanic survivors; outside of it, however, we have been confronted by a very different and altogether much scarier new inhabitant: the flash-forwards.

Between seasons there were noises from the show’s creators that the introduction of the flash-forwards was an indication that an ending was in sight; that the writers so often accused of winging it were now working with a plan and that the show had finally gained a new focus. They were to be the salvation of the confused and impatient, and Lost would once again be a show that could be relied upon to deliver what the audience wants (whatever that is). Pre-empting all this, however, were "serious" talks with network executives concerned about declining ratings. So if we assume that this new focus was, in fact, borne of those talks, and that a new need for clarity and drive in the narrative have come from a higher order, should we not be as suspicious of the flash-forwards and what they bring to the show as John Locke is of the rescuers? Are our rescuers what they say they are, or are they simply a well-disguised compromise, a placation to restless and unimaginative?

On the bright side, the potential of the flash-forwards is clear. Hints about the Oceanic Six and the apparent code of silence observed by the survivors were exciting, and I am sure there is a lot more to come. But they have their dangers too, and when Hurley told Jack that he was wrong to go with Locke, I immediately felt a change. The immediate echo of consequence from action we’d only just seen felt wrong, far too obvious; like a baited hook, a line dropped to placate those who have criticised (or stopped watching) the show for lacking drive or direction. "This divide will lead to disaster! Keep watching to find out how!” it seemed to shout. Is this something we’ll have to get used to? One can only hope not.

And there’s no way to know right now, but it will therefore be very interesting to see how the flash-forwards are used in future. They represent a narrative device that has the power to completely change Lost, and it’s an instrument that will require very delicate handling. Bad flashbacks could be boring, certainly, but a bad flash-forward could be damaging to the show’s whole identity. Lost is a show that has thrived on and is defined by its ambiguity, and the flash-forwards offer the opportunity and perhaps even the inclination to dismantle that model. I can only see that being a terrible mistake.

So yes, for now I am taking John Locke’s side and remaining wary of the show’s newest inhabitants. I am in love with the magic and the mystery of the Island, and the flash-forwards represent a very real threat to all of that (the season premiere’s title was, after all, ‘The Beginning of the End’). And anyway, has wandering around the island aimlessly really been so terrible? Do we really need rescue from that? I think not. So while I’ll continue to watch with all the enthusiasm of a kid at Christmas, I can’t help but be jarred by what I see as a premature and unnecessary jolt to the entire make-up of a show that has thus far been one of TV’s greatest achievements, as if James Joyce were being forced to write the latter half of Finnegan’s Wake in a more conventional and commercial manner. We can only hope that the show’s creative staff stays true to the show’s original ideals for as long as possible and that they don’t allow the temptation of writing back-to-front to overwhelm them. After all, if the show is set down a certain path heading towards a certain destination, is it still really Lost?