HULK SMASH BROADWAY

After months and months (and months) of hype, NBC's new drama, Smash, debuted this week. I have to admit I've been looking forward to it; after all, it's about the creation of a new stage musical and you know how I feel about musicals.

Well, if you've ever been around me for longer than 10 minutes you probably know how I feel about musicals since I am prone to bursting into song at every opportunity.

Think of Smash as an adult alternative to Glee. You've got your fantasy singing sequences, and of course the songs featured in the show are immediately available for download on iTunes. But no matter the reason why the show is here, the real question is, is it any good?

 

 Well, it made me do this. For reals, I have not seen so many "throw my head back singing and raise my arms over my head" shots in my life. And I gotta admit, by the end, I was right there with them.  It's easy to get swept up in the drama and the music and the excitement.

But when the afterglow wore off I would say that I'm cautiously optimistic. I really liked the pilot; the characters are all great, and the behind-the-scenes stuff on the creation of a new musical is hella interesting.

There's essentially two stories being told here: Debra Messing and Christian Borle (from Spamalot!) are a song-writing duo (think Oscar and Hammerstein) who are struck with the idea to write a new musical about Marilyn Monroe. Meanwhile, you've got Broadway veteran Ivy, who has been stuck in the ensemble for 10 years, and newbie Karen who is also competing for the lead role.

My only complaint at this point is the heavy reliance on cliche. Katherine McPhee as Karen, is the ingenue who has moved from the midwest (of course) with stars in her eyes (of course) but this could be her big shot at stardom (OF COURSE)! And then there's Ivy, the busty blonde (of course) who is tired of wallowing in the background (of course) and might be willing to do anything to get ahead (OF COURSE).

What I found a lot more interesting were the stories of the writers, producers, and directors who are actually creating the show within a show. As someone who did high school and college theater, I've got some small insight into how a show gets made, but seeing how things get done when you've got millions of dollars and reputations at stake is really fascinating. And so far the songs are catchy and the original songs are really great. Which honestly, if the musical that formed the backbone of the show sucked, the show wouldn't have a prayer. But it looks like it's going to be good, and as one of the characters pointed out people are crazy about Marilyn right now.

And for another perspective, I decided to check in on what my cousin, Susannah, a Broadway expert, had to say. In short: she loved it. She's been eagerly looking forward to it and sounds like it didn't disappoint her (I believe the words "love" and "fabulous" were used multiple times).

The only thing that she wasn't absolutely crazy about was the casting of Katherine McPhee, which fair enough. I'm not an American Idol fan and don't really know anything about her, and while I wasn't blown away, I could see the beginnings of a spark in her. Let's hope the show can bring that out. And Susannah and I are in agreement that the rest of the cast is amazing, and we hope they get a chance to sing since most of them are Broadway veterans (on that note this article teases some promising things on the horizon...).

In short, I think people are going to fall into two camps on this. If Broadway and musicals are your thing then I think Smash is going to be must-see viewing for you. If you are meh on either than you probably won't be interested in the show. As for me, I'm definitely tuning in. What can I say, I'm a sucker for a musical. 

Smash airs Monday nights at 10pm on NBC.

Are you ready for some PUPPY BOWL!

Apparently there was some kind of football game on Sunday night? Something about the Super Bowl? If you want to read about that, then I suggest that you scroll down to Clovis' coverage of what sounds like a less than spectacular game.

But we all REALLY know what the highlight of Superbowl Sunday is, right? PUPPY BOWL, BITCHES!

You've got puppies running around and being adorable, the kitty half-time show, the hamsters in their blimp providing camera coverage of the entire field, and this year the piggy pep squad along with Meep the bird who provided entertaining tweets throughout the game. In fact, I think Monkey Sri enjoyed the twitter feed more than the actual game.

While the Superbowl may have been a lame game, this year's Puppy Bowl might have had the most action of any bowl so far. There was a record number of touchdowns (when a toy is dragged or carried into the end zone) and it was a real contest to see who would take MVP. In the end there could only be one, and though he was outscored by the adorable Aberdeen, this year's MVP went to...

Fumble! A 9 week old Chihuahua/Terrier Mix who started things off with a bang by madly frolicking with the other puppies...although sometimes he got flagged for unnecessary ruffness. I think at one point he fell asleep and another dog stepped on his face. Payback's a bitch, Fumble...literally.

But the viewer's choice MVP (which also happened to my pick) was the Aberdeen, the high-scorer of the night!

 He's a 10 week old Australian Shepherd Mix and I thought he was the cutest puppy out there!

IMO the great thing about the Puppy Bowl is that it doesn't really require anything of you in terms of active viewing. It's puppies running around being adorable. The end. Sure they dress it up with hamsters and pigs and kittens and birds, but at the end of the day....puppies. Playing. That's it. If you want to write an email, chat with your friends, do some knitting during the game, no problem. You'll find yourself "awwwwing" in the middle of whatever you're doing though, so watch out.

My only complaint? It's gotten so commercial. It used to be about the game, you know? Not vacuum cleaners. Oh, and one more thing:

WHERE ARE THE BEAGLES, ANIMAL PLANET? Beagle fans demand satisfaction.

"Super" Bowl?

In terms of epic-ness, it should have hit its mark. Two storied teams fighting for the top position both managed to outlast other upstarts throughout the season in order to make it to the final game. If that wasn’t enough, the same two teams met four years previously, the added value of a rematch potentially permeated the air. Plus you had the New York Giants squaring off against the New England Patriots, two teams with fan bases so devoted they could form de facto religious sects. So with all that promise, why was this year’s Super Bowl so, well, boring?

It could...go...all...the... oh, who are we kidding - no, it couldn't.

From the ridiculously lopsided first quarter (the Giants kept possession of the ball for almost the entire time, giving it to the Patriots for only one play before a technical error ended up costing New England a two-point safety in the end zone), this game looked hard fought, but frankly no more astonishing than a typical Sunday game. The fans in the stadium didn’t even really seem all that into it. New York gave a solid, and ultimately winning, performance but it wasn’t one that seemed especially inspired. And the Patriots, with the exception of a record-breaking 98-yard long drive from their own two-yard line into the opposing end zone, pretty much only got by with short, 10-yard passes and the occasional run up the middle.

Unfortunately for Boston, much of the fault for the low-excitement game likely lies with the Patriots. That failed Hail Mary drive in the final moments of the game aside, none of the team’s playing was exactly dramatic. That’s not to say that the Patriot’s short play style wasn’t strong. As my father used to say, if every play you run gets you three yards, that’s always going to be enough for a first down and that’s how you move down the field. Given that the only thing that counts at the end of the game is the final score, that style is the basis for solid, winning football. It’s just that when compared with the Giants’ muscular, relatively angrier playing style, the Pats just came out looking a little worn.

I’m typically the last person to fault a team for a solid playing style that doesn’t look that flashy. I come from the world of Big Ten college football, where the knock on the entire conference for years has been that the low-scoring games and lack of relative flash makes for bad ball. Of course, that’s because the Big Ten’s stock in trade is defensive playing, which by definition exists to shut down football plays. Compared with other conferences, such as perennial chart-toppers in the SEC, the Big Ten often looks slower, putting a larger emphasis on the size of players and their ability to break apart offensive lines. Meanwhile, those whiz-bang Heisman trophy winners in the SEC can put the football wherever they like it, rack up a combined total of over 100 points per game from both teams and have heard about defensive players and secretly have made plans for what they might say to a D-line if they ever meet one.

Right. Now, which one of us runs and which one of us blocks again?

The difference between my crabby defense of reliable, if not glittering, football and my boredom at this year’s game is actually the game itself. This was the Super Bowl. For all that I’d prefer to watch an actual game where the low score means higher stakes per touchdown, the reason we watch the Super Bowl is for the big plays, the explosions and the twirls and twists. The Super Bowl is all about spectacle and special effects and as such it is far more akin to entertainment than sports; it’s the Glee to the rest of the regular season’s CBS Nightly News. This year the league ended up with a game that lacked the pizzazz that it needed for such a night of event television. It didn’t feel fake or overcooked like some other Super Bowls in recent memory, but it didn’t exactly live up as the sheer entertainment machine that it’s designed to be either.

But as they say in the game, there’s always next year. Detroit Lions for XLVII, baby!

Glee Squee-cap: Michael Jackson

I adored last night's episode of Glee for several reasons - the main reason being that it is one of the few episodes that utilized almost the entire ensemble cast, and did it well. We didn't have to sit through Rachel's insane internal monologues and/or endless self-indulgent solos. The main plot was a feud between the New Directions and the Warblers (Blaine's old show choir at Dalton Academy). Blaine is caught in the crossfire of their turf war, and Kurt has to make the tough choice: petty vengeance or moral victory? We also find out that Kurt is selected as a finalist for NYADA, and the scene where he opens the letter with Burt was SO. FREAKING. CUTE.

Don't cry, because then I'll start- Oh, too late!

The assignment of the week was Michael Jackson, one of the most iconic - and controversial - pop idols of all time. Glee didn't feel the need to address MJ's lifestyle, or his death, and I agree with their decision. It's not this show's place to ruminate on the scandals, but to celebrate an amazing body of work. Artie fantasized about getting out of his wheelchair for an awesome dance to "Scream" with Mike, Sam and Mercedes got to duet-it-up with "Human Nature," and Quinn's rendition of "Never Can Say Goodbye" charmed me and her ex-boyfriends alike. I would've liked Santana to take more of a lead in her "Smooth Criminal" duet with bad boy Sebastian (leader of the Warblers). Admittedly, for me it's less about the music itself and more about letting the various characters shine.

 Also, I wouldn't mind seeing more of this hat.

Oh, and before I forget, Rachel and Finn are going to get married, or something. *yawn*

Revisionist History with Maggie Q

Ever somewhat late to the game, I’ve been taking advantage of my Netflix subscription to watch season one of Nikita, the CW spy show that is now in it’s second season. My fellow TV Sluts have talked about Nikita before, but since it’s been a while and, as far as I know, I’m the only one who’s watched more than an episode or two, I wanted to reflect on a couple of things about it.

The first is, like all the other reviews here have mentioned, that despite seeming like a pretty tired conceit, the show manages to kick some serious ass. The acting, for the most part, is solid and believable and the plotting and pacing of the show make it fun to watch. There isn’t a lot that’s truly innovative in terms of bringing much new to the scene (hot chick who kicks butt getting revenge on a secretive and high-tech pseudo-government hit squad is pretty much standard femme fatale fair for the spy genre), but it gets points for delivering the required notes well. Also, I re-read what I just wrote and realized that it says something about my entertainment choices that I’m even comfortable using all those nouns in the same sentence.

The big thought that I had watching this show, however, was something along the lines of, “Damn. This is what Dollhouse should have been.”

Also? Less Eliza Dushku. Kthanx.

Dollhouse suffered from two things – the lack of interest in a main character that was constantly becoming someone else and Joss Whedon being a notorious slow-starter. Anyone watching Dollhouse knows that by the time we got to the part about why we should care, namely the brilliant post-apocalyptic future that the Dollhouse technology would create, it was hard to go back to the mission-of-the-week episodes. What viewers needed to see right at the start was Echo already trying to take down the Dollhouse and already struggling with what it meant to be a new personality stuffed into some other girl’s body. Instead, we got a season and a half of just wondering how it was that Echo was going to start to lose her shit with each mission. Nikita, by contrast, gets to jump right in to the interesting stuff on her show. And, really, how she broke out isn’t nearly as interesting as what she’s doing to do now as a damaged nobody with no real skills except for infiltration and murder. Following her through season 1 as she struggles with wanting to exact her revenge but also rebuild herself back into an actual human being and not just a programmed killer is honestly compelling. Had that kind of ex post facto development been applied to Dollhouse, I’m convinced the show would have done better.

So, for people like me, the fans of Dollhouse who don’t have a lot of promotional options aside from being crabby little cheerleaders for a show that could have been awesome but ultimately never really got on its feet, Nikita offers a nice, cozy alternate reality version of the show, one that has the same intrigue and overarching sense of dread, but without all the sloppy plotting. And, thankfully, no Fox Entertainment executives.

Is The Finder a keeper?

There's a midseason replacement on Fox, called The Finder. It's a spin-off of the popular (at least with this reviewer) Bones. It's pilot was actually an episode of Bones late last season, and it survived in mostly its original form until it was picked up in January.

The show isn't bad. I've seen the first three episodes, and there's good stuff there. The main character is "quirky" but actually manages to pull it off without being annoying or trite. Who knows how long it will take until it gets old, but it hasn't yet (and the quirkiness of Temperance Brennan from its parent show has yet to stop amusing me). The mystery and the twists aren't bad. Here, however, are the weaknesses that the show is going to have to overcome.

It's incredibly formulaic. Not quite as bad as House, but bad. Thus far, it's been a little "fairy tale" with its happy endings. And then there's Willa.

Teen angst. Apparently "in" this year.

What I don't get about Willa is that she doesn't seem to be a part of the actual show. Every other character plays some role in the eponymous "finding." Willa tends to wander off and do her own little storyline and occasionally get some advice from the main characters. She's not, in my opinion, particularly likable. Objectively, her life isn't as bad as they treat it like it is, and I simply lack sympathy. She strikes me as the boring genre of tragic heroine whose flaw is that she simply goes with the flow and does what's expected of her and what's easiest so she doesn't have to think or make any decisions. I know far too many people like that in real life, and talking with them makes me want to smack them one. Why would I watch that in a TV show?

A big draw is the love interest, Isabel, a Deputy US Marshal. Refreshingly unpretentious, she and The Finder are already in a relationship of casual sex when the series starts. I could be alone, but I am bored with the traditional "will they/won't they" and I'm grateful for the change-up. She also pulls off that difficult trick of being very powerful without giving up one iota of femininity. Her squeal of glee at getting a beautiful pair of designer shoes increases to a cackle of delight when she discovers that they are knock-offs, and she'll be able to bring in the counterfeiter. There's also something else I like about her, but I'm having trouble putting it into words...

...personality?

In short, I'm gonna keep watching it for a while. It's good, and I definitely recommend watching the Bones pilot and the three episodes that are currently available on hulu.com (just search for The Finder, and the Bones episode will pop up, too). I'm just not holding out a ton of hope that it'll really draw me in.

Sherlock, Series 2 - now with even more hoyay!

Let's not dwell on the fact that I've seen the first episode of Sherlock already, though it's not due to air on BBC America for some months yet. You don't ask, I won't tell. What I will tell is this - it's bloody brilliant. Spoilers ahead!

Moriarty: "Oh no!" 

Me: "Oh, yes."

The first episode, A Scandal in Belgravia, focuses on the one of the very few significant female characters in all of the Holmes canon: "The" Woman, aka Irene Adler. While the original Ms. Adler only appeared in one short story, she exhibits a keen intellect and nerves of steel - in short, the very qualities Holmes so admires in himself. In the end, she is able to get the better of Holmes and he ever after regards her as the finest example of the fairer sex.

Modern audiences, however, would never be satisfied with this somewhat bloodless admiration. They want romance, they want passion. In short, they want sex. So Sherlock gives the people what they want with a lusty lesbian Ms. Adler, a dominatrix who's sideline is selling national secrets. To be honest, I was a bit miffed that the (all male, mind you) writing team felt that they needed to make sexuality Ms. Adler's defining characteristic. But then this happened...

Ms. Adler: Are you jealous?
John: We're not a couple.
Ms. Adler: Yes you are.
John: Who the hell knows about Sherlock Holmes, but for the record, if anyone out there still cares - I'm not actually gay.
Ms. Adler: Well, I am. Look at us both.

And we both know who's taking him home. 

The implication being that neither Ms. Adler nor John swing Sherlock's way - yet, they both seem to love him. We later find out that Ms. Adler is attracted to Sherlock - her admiration for his intellect rises above her sexual preference. Will John follow suit someday? No, probably not. But this definitely gives the fan-fic writers plenty to work with. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - hoyay keeps the fan base strong.