TV reviews

A complete archive of The Medium is Not Enough’s reviews of TV programmes since 2005

The BarrometerA Barrometer rating of 3

Third-episode verdict: The Magicians (US: Syfy)

3 February 2016 Rob Buckley 7 Comments

In the US: Mondays, 10/9c, Syfy
In the UK: Not yet acquired

No matter how many different dust jackets you put round them to confuse fellow commuters, the Harry Potter books were undoubtedly for kids. Although everyone quailed at the thought of He Who Must Not Be Named (Lord Voldemort), you never got a feeling of any real risk, any real power or anything genuinely nasty going on. Death spells? Sure, but you just fall over and die, and that’s it. It’s not even 24 in the scheme of things, let alone the almighty forces of the universe at work.

The Magicians, which is basically Harry Potter for adults, does much to improve this situation. Set in an exclusive school (university) for wizards, it gives us a magic that can at times be genuinely terrifying. We’ve seen a man made from moths stepping through mirrors from other worlds to freeze time and paralyse people while he rips out their eyes. We’ve seen fiction and reality blurring, with characters from books becoming real and the real becoming fictional. We’ve had ghosts that can actually frighten, people disfigured horribly by magic and raw power consume magic users alive.

And if the rest of The Magicians had been as great as that depiction of magic, I would be its biggest fan. The trouble is that such moments are few and far between. The rest of the time, it’s still Harry Potter but in what is effectively an American High School, rather than a university – one filled with mean girls and bullies, and acted by people who seem to have wandered in off the street rather than acting schools. It’s also filled with hammy attempts at comedy that are as obvious as they are unfunny, something that isn’t helped by everyone smirking whenever they have to deliver a funny line.

There is a vague attempt to give us a rich vs poor subtext, with our stupidly named hero Quentin Coldwater going to the elite, Yale-esque ‘Brakebills’, while his best friend Julia fails the entrance exam and ends up at the equivalent of the local poly, which is half portakabin, half Fight Club. But that’s about it as far as depth and characterisation are concerned, because while you cared about ordinary Harry, bright spark Hermione and loyal old Ron, frankly, pretty much everyone in The Magicians could die a fiery and painful death and you’d be more worried about the marks they’d left on the hardwood flooring than their horrific demise.

It’s a shame because when it starts to properly deal with magic, The Magicians has some truly memorable scenes and some real imagination going on. It just understands that fictional world far better than it does people.

Barrometer rating: 3
Would it be better with a female lead? Marginally
TMINE’s prediction: Likely to get cancelled after a season, but Syfy might just persevere with it

The BarrometerA Barrometer rating of 2

Third-episode verdict: The X-Files (season 10) (US: Fox; UK: Channel 5)

3 February 2016 Rob Buckley 8 Comments

In the US: Mondays, 8/7c, Fox
In the UK: Mondays, 9pm, Channel 5. Starts February 8

When old TV shows get revived, whether it’s Burke’s Law, Knight Rider, Charlie’s Angels or Full House, all everyone cares about is whether the Olsen Twins, John Forsythe, David Hasselhoff, Gene Barry or Bob Saget are going to be back on our screens as the characters they played in the original. Then it’ll be proper.  Then everything will be okay.

What almost no one seems to care about but probably should far more is whether the people behind the scenes are back, too. The reason you loved that TV show in the first place? Almost certainly not just the cast, but the characters, the dialogue, the plots and the mise en scène of the original, none of which were down to the cast. True, new blood may be able to recreate or even better the original – such as with Battlestar Galactica – but chances are, what you need is those creative talents back in the production hot seat.

That’s certainly what we should have been paying more attention to with The X-Files. David Duchovny’s back! Yay! Gillian Anderson’s back! Yay! Mitch Pileggi’s back!… (Check’s IMDB)… Yay! 

Sure, that’s great. But is what we’re going to get more like Ronald D Moore’s remake of Battlestar Galactica or James Dott’s remake of The Invaders? The devil’s in the authorial details.

A while ago, I posted a rant arguing that the UK needed more TV shows with longer season lengths because that was the only way we could train up writers, give them experience and give them a career pathway. Who cares if they turned in work that might not be great at first – in a season of 13 or 24 episodes, who’d remember the occasional duff one or who wrote it, I argued.

Now that’s true for the novice writer just starting out in a sea of other writers, turfing out the meat and potato filler episodes. But when it’s the showrunner? Oh, you remember when he turns in duff ones, because they’re the special episodes, the ones reserved for advancing season arcs, expanding characters, redefining shows and so on.

And so it is with Chris Carter, creator of The X-Files. He chose to write the first episode of this tenth season to bring Mulder and Scully to our screens, and if it wasn’t clear from the original series and all the series he’s tried and failed to run since, it was clear from My Struggle I that he got a bit lucky with The X-Files. Because it was dreadful. Just distilled essence of ridiculousness. I was half-inclined never to watch another episode ever again.

But as I pointed out in my rant, longer season lengths give writers a chance to learn the ropes and give them a career pathway, so they can go on to create things themselves. It’s worth perusing the IMDB list of writers given their break and training on the original The X-Files, since many of them have gone on to become the great and the good of TV and film writing and show running. Vince Gilligan? He created Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul. Alex Gansa? Homeland and 24. James Wong? The Final Destination series. Howard Gordon? Legends, 24, Homeland and Tyrant. Frank Spotnitz? The Man in the High Castle and Strike Back. The list genuinely does go on. And proves me right.

So the question we should have all been asking ourselves is whether these guys were coming back to write for the show. Thankfully, the answer is yes, because once we got past Chris Carter’s mythology-laden, brain-warping, conspiracy-mad first episode, we got straight down to old school X-Files again with Founder’s Mutation, thanks to James Wong.

Yes, everyone’s a bit older now and you get away with showing ickier things on screen, but this was proper X-Files, with a ‘weird thing’ of the week to investigate, Mulder and Scully doing their usual routine, and all manner of scary events happening, in proper Wong style. True, if there was an explanation as to how Mulder and Scully got their old jobs at the FBI back, I missed it (is there an FBI reserves list or something?), but despite the best part of two decades having passed, everything was the way it should have been.

Episode three gave us Darin Morgan’s effort. While Morgan hasn’t really set the world on fire with the shows he’s produced since The X-Files (Intruders, Those Who Kill, Fringe, Bionic Woman, Night Stalker), his are probably the best remembered episodes of the show’s original run, since they were the funniest: Clyde Bruckman’s Final Repose, War of the Coprophages, and Jose Chung’s ‘From Outer Space’. And he didn’t let us down with this year’s thoroughly amusing Mulder & Scully Meet The Were-Monster, a script 10 years in the making apparently, with Mulder looking back with middle-aged eyes at previous cases, only to realise most of them were scientifically explainable, so reluctantly trudging off after Scully to investigate a lizard-man and bumping into Kumail Nanjiani (Silicon Valley) and Rhys Darby (Flight of the Conchords, How To Be A Gentleman) in a Kolchak: The Night Stalker straw hat along the way.

Often hilariously funny thanks to both the writing and Anderson and Duchovny’s performances – has Anderson actually laughed on-screen since The X-Files? I don’t recall her doing so, but it’s a very welcome sight – with dozens of nods to fans along the way, it reminds you how good The X-Files could be, and how many imitators have come, failed and gone since the show aired through being unable to recapture the show’s essence.

So writers – good. Get good writers and your show will be good. QED.

Unfortunately, we’ve three episodes to go in this ‘limited series’ revival of the show and while one’s written by Morgan, the other two are written by Carter. Oh oh. I get the feeling the final two episodes are going to be rubbish. 

That means that it’s a hearty thumbs up from me for at least half the series and a worried look to the horizon. Make sure you watch the episodes Carter hasn’t scripted, since they’re the good ones; the others, I leave to your discretion.

PS My, don’t Mulder and Scully both look young in the title sequence?

Barrometer rating: 2
Would the show be better with female leads? No
TMINE’s prediction: Ratings are holding up, talks are under way and with the cast willing and able, the limited series format might just prove a sufficient draw for viewers to keep coming back

The BarrometerA Barrometer rating of 2

Third-episode verdict: Billions (US: Showtime; UK: Sky Atlantic)

2 February 2016 Rob Buckley 11 Comments

In the US: Sundays, 10pm ET/PT, Showtime. Starts January 17
In the UK: Acquired by Sky Atlantic

With shows above a certain level of quality, you offer a bit more leniency. Lesser shows stick everything into their pilot episode, trying to get you to watch subsequent episodes by putting all their cards on the table straight away: “This is what we are. This is what you’re going to get if you keep watching.” As such, you can tell almost immediately if those shows have got what it takes to make you watch.

And then they tend to neither improve nor worsen, simply offering you more of the same until you’re bored. Or maybe they just offer less and less each week as they run out of ideas.

But with shows that are obviously well written from the outset, you’re prepared to bed down. When you read the first chapter of a good book, you don’t immediately drop it just because you don’t get how all the characters inter-relate or even what the overall plot is – you take it on trust that that will be developed, and developed well, in subsequent chapters. There may even be flaws, but if the good significantly exceeds the flaws, you’ll keep reading.

And so it is with Billions. Now the first episode was really very good. Very good. A real-life chess match between the US’s most powerful lawyer (Paul Giamatti) against Wall Street’s most powerful hedge fund manager (Damian Lewis), it was clever, had crackling dialogue and insight. Okay, so it had that weird thing with the dominatrix and Giamatti, and to be honest, both Lewis and Giamatti are miscast. There was also no blindingly obvious reason why Giamatti was going after Lewis, other than Lewis had a lot of money, since the show didn’t bother to depict Lewis doing anything bad. But it was fascinating to watch.

So I gave it latitude. All good things come to those who wait, etc, etc. Give the show time to dot the i’s and cross the t’s, I thought.

Now, this wasn’t necessarily a mistake. I gave Rubicon about nine episodes of latitude and was much rewarded for my patience. But three episodes into Billions and we’ve still not had any real indication of wrong-doing by Lewis. He’s a dick. Indeed, if Billions has a theme, it’s that powerful people – particularly but not exclusively men – are dicks and do dickish things. The more money and/or power they have, the more dickish they are, often openly, too.

But that appears to be the extent of his crimes, beyond perhaps a bit of minor insider trading. He’s not foreclosing mortgages on the penniless, he’s not destroying companies and jobs for shits and giggles, he’s not even doing terrible things with prostitutes on super-yachts.

He’s just rich. And for some reason Giamatti wants to take him down. It’s not exactly Galahad’s quest for the Holy Grail, is it? 

And that would be a minor issue if the show had other assets. But it’s started to divest itself of them. The second episode had a lovely piece of real-world Wall Street (spoiler alert: the simulated SEC investigation), but all that chess-playing has diminished by about 50%. It’s still there and Lewis’ wife, Malin Åkerman, has started to do the female equivalent, deploying some clever social gambits against someone she’d quite like to burn in Hell, but the move/counter-move structure of the first episode has largely dissipated.

In its place, we’ve had some comedy, which at least has been amusing, but not especially clever and is usually accompanied by everyone smirking. We’ve also had some more ridiculous sex. Didn’t think that urinating dominatrix fun of the pilot was quite enough? Well that’s back in episode three, with a cattle prod for luck, as well as discussions of the emotional implications of liking ATM. No, it’s probably not what you think it is, so go Google it.

Meanwhile, episode two gave us cunnilingual naked lesbians snorting cocaine off each other. And a man being disciplined by a muscular dwarf in a wet room. 

Realistic depiction of Wall Street culture? I have no idea, but it really doesn’t advance the plot or characterisation, beyond referring us back to the theme of “People with power are dicks and do dick things.”

Based purely on the first episode and the fact Showtime has already given the show a second season, I’m going to stick with this, as there’s clearly some clever writers working on it. But I’ve read reviews that suggest that at least some of the trends I’ve mentioned above are still true by episode five. That’s a lot of leniency I’m going to have to offer.

When it’s at its best Billions is a very clever piece of writing. That best is starting to recede into the distance, along with my patience. Fingers crossed, both will return at some point. In the meantime, if you enjoy lots of powerful men (and women) trying to be alphas and trying to see who can pee highest up a wall, Billions is going to be the highlight of your week.

Barrometer rating: 2
Would the show be better with female leads? Yes
TMINE prediction: Already renewed for a second season

What have you been watching? Including The Magicians, The X-Files, Stan Lee’s Lucky Man and Okkupert

1 February 2016 Rob Buckley 12 Comments

It’s “What have you been watching?”, my chance to tell you what movies and TV I’ve been watching recently that I haven’t already reviewed and your chance to recommend things to everyone else (and me) in case I’ve missed them.

The usual “TMINE recommends” page features links to reviews of all the shows I’ve ever recommended, and there’s also the Reviews A-Z, for when you want to check more or less anything I’ve reviewed ever. And if you want to know when any of these shows are on in your area, there’s Locate TV – they’ll even email you a weekly schedule.

It’s Monday and WHYBW is here. Something’s gone wrong, surely. Indeed, work as usual. Damn money. But I also needed a little extra time to get through the big pile of TV that’s been building up over the week. That can only mean one thing: it’s time for a cull.

Some things will be coming off my viewing thanks to natural erosion: Endeavour has just finished its third season after only four episodes. Others will be disappearing anyway, thanks to unfavourable third-episode verdicts, although you’ll have to wait until after the jump (and tomorrow, in the case of Billions and Angie Tribeca) to know which are for the chop.

But it’s time for both Rebellion (Ireland: RTÉ One) and Byw Celwydd (UK: S4C) to leave this mortal coil. Rebellion‘s a fine historical, but with very little by way of characterisation to draw you in, just dry historical facts and a bit of shooting, so I’ve decided I’ve revised my GCSE history syllabus enough now. Byw Celwydd has a peculiar draw, simply because I know Cardiff well enough to enjoy the locations and the whole thing has a slight Caerdydd vibe, but it’s pure soap with dodgy production values, and I don’t do soaps, let alone ones with dodgy production values.

I also can’t be bothered with the latest episode of Baskets (US: FX), as I hear it’s exactly the same as the first episode.

So that means after the jump, you can find reviews of the latest episodes of 100 Code, American Crime, Angie Tribeca, Arrow, Colony, DC’s Legends of Tomorrow, Endeavour, The Family Law, The Flash, The Magicians, Grandfathered, Man Seeking Woman (Woman Seeking Man), Marvel’s Agent Cater, Okkupert (Occupied), Second Chance, Les hommes de l’ombre (Spin), The Shannara Chronicles, Stan Lee’s Lucky Man, Supergirl and The X-Files. Can you guess which ones will be getting the chop?

In case you missed them, this week I reviewed the first episodes of: The X-Files (US: Fox; UK: Channel 5), Stan Lee’s Lucky Man (UK: Sky 1), Baskets (US: FX) and The Outsiders (US: WGN America); and ages and ages ago, I previewed Lucifer (US: Fox; UK: Amazon Instant Video) and The Magicians (US: Syfy), which started last week, too.

Continue reading “What have you been watching? Including The Magicians, The X-Files, Stan Lee’s Lucky Man and Okkupert”

US TV

Review: The Outsiders 1×1 (US: WGN America)

29 January 2016 Rob Buckley 12 Comments

In the US: Tuesdays, 9pm ET, WGN America
In the UK: Not yet acquired

When it comes to America, I’m an outsider. I’m not from America, I’ve not lived in America and I have no American relatives. Sure, I’ve been to many parts of America, watched stupid amounts of American TV and movies, worked for an American company, got married in America, done American studies at (secondary) school and even had an I-visa that allowed me to stay and work in the US for up to five years if I’d wanted.

But none of that makes me American and it certainly doesn’t qualify me to understand why The Outsiders exists. 

In a way, I imagine liking The Outsiders is the US equivalent of someone English train-spotting or Morris dancing. These are quintessentially English things that even a lot of English people have trouble understanding, but which the rest of the world looks at as though the devotee in question should have an entire chapter of the DSM dedicated to them, and maybe the entire country itself should be sown with salt. Why on Earth would anyone do these things?

The Outsiders isn’t without antecedents, either. An everyday tale of an inbred family of Southeners, sticking by their own kind, obeying a stern family figure, living by their own rules, drinking moonshine, racing all over the place, breaking whatever laws they want while the cops try and fail to catch them? The Dukes of Hazzard was there first, obviously.

Even if you didn’t get any of the subtext about Southerners or know anything much about the US, the The Dukes of Hazzard‘s popularity wasn’t a real mystery, since you could still enjoy the car chases or whichever one of the Duke family you fancied the most.

But the existence of The Outsiders is as mystifying to me as the thematically similar Sons of Anarchy. I don’t get why you’d want to watch a show about a bunch of dirty, unattractive mountain men who go round stealing, poisoning, shooting people, lopping each others’ fingers off and suffocating their mothers in the name of family law. If this was The Dukes of Hazzard, I’d be on Boss Hogg’s side, and here I’m on the side of the sheriff (Thomas M Wright) and the FBI guys who want to evict the Family Chromosomeless from their mountain home in favour of the evil mining company who’ve just bought the land.

I can theorise it’s all about some nostalgia for the Wild West, for small government, for constitutional rights governing property, the need for a strong family, et al. Maybe it’s because the Duck Dynasty guys are better fictionalised than in reality. But if to get a strong family you need to stick one of your members in a cage for a few weeks for the crime of having ‘gone travelling’, maybe a strong family isn’t worth it, and things like medicine, proper plumbing and shaving are much better ideas?

To be fair to the show, The Outsiders is about as smart a drama as you can make about a family of 200 or so cousins, only one of whose members can read. Compared to the bigots you might have been imagining, the ‘Ferrells’ are actually something rather different, accepting of black and trans women alike. Their strange family society, which has evolved over 200 years to shun money and has its own royal family, complete with codes of etiquette, is intriguing, too.

But The Outsiders is still about a bunch of people who’ll ride quad bikes into a supermarket and steal what they want with impunity, because they know no one’s coming after them. Are they the equivalent of The Krays? Are they Kentucky ‘legends’? Or are they the equivalent of ‘travellers‘ in the UK? Is, as one of the cast describes it, ‘Mad Max meets Little House On The Prairie‘ a good thing in US terms or a bad thing?

I just don’t know. And maybe you have to be American to truly know if The Outsiders is a good or a bad programme. But given how many Australians there are in the cast, maybe not. So I’ll go with bad.