Best TV Show First Seasons

8:18 AM Posted In , , , , , , , , , Edit This 0 Comments »
Last night I started watching the fifth and final season of Friday Night Lights. Can I first of all point out it's really nifty that they have it out on DVD simultaneously with the TV series premiering on NBC next week? As someone who owns (and lends out) the DVD series to everyone, I jumped on buying it instead of waiting week-to-week. Of course, this means I will get through the show faster, which is depressing after last night's heart-tugging opener.

I reflected that FNL had one of the best series premieres ever...and it got me thinking to the best series premieres of all time, and I realized that generally speaking, the shows with the best series premieres end up having the best first seasons. A show with a fantastic premiere (at least in its first season) rarely fails to live up to said standard. After the first season, it's a crapshoot. So instead of creating two separate lists of best premieres and best first seasons, I present my list of the best first seasons (and generally speaking, premieres) ever.


The OC - Remember when Mischa Barton was a fashion icon? And Rachel Bilson had curves? And Seth Cohen was charmingly self-conscious? And Luke had a gay dad? And Julie was a 'Real Housewife'-in-training? And Ryan's brooding desire to save people was sweet? And Oliver was a total psychopath? And the show was actually funny and shocking in equal parts? Sigh. Few shows, in particular teen shows, will top the glory that is the first season of The OC.


Lost - I was a latecomer to Lost, catching up on the first four seasons in quick succession literally days before the fifth one began. I'm kind of glad I did watch it on DVD so I could (somewhat) solve the confounded mysteries instead of being stumped for weeks. Few shows had as strong a premiere or first season as Lost - where characters were in constant peril, mysteries were piling on top of one another (but not to the hysterical levels they were in future seasons), and insight into each character's life was something to be savoured...and tied in very nicely with what was happening with their on-island selves. In retrospect, the first season is a little tedious compared to future ones (after all, they only thing they discover is the hatch and a whole lot of WTFuckery?) but I constantly hear complaints about s2's "Tailies" and s3's venture into the "Others" territory, so S1 really is a holy bastion of wonderfulness.


Friday Night Lights - I put up a serious fuss about watching FNL. I thought the actors looked smug on the cover. I didn't like the movie very much. I'd seen a clip on TV of Tyra's mom in the middle of a drinking binge and thought it looked lame. Alas, one day we popped season 1 in the DVD player and I was INSTANTLY hooked. The premiere is one of the most captivating ever, and the glorious full length of the first season allowed you to see many different facets of these humanly flawed characters. True, the series felt a little long compared to the length of an actual high school football season, but have 20+ episodes to play around with allowed for so much more than the protracted seasons we now have.


Desperate Housewives - I no longer watch DH because of this first season, and all that it stood for. A hilarious satire of soap operas, the show was whip smart, hilariously funny, and ooey gooey twisty turny. The women were a lot more entrenched in their archetypes - a good and bad thing - and we had some characters that added a lot of flavour to the show...Martha Huber, Edie, Paul, Rex (!), John to name a few. Plus it made sense for Mary-Alice to actually make guest appearances. Part of me thinks they blew their load (sorry, graphic) too early by giving up Mary-Alice's secret, and then following that same format year-after-year. The show was just so fresh, and the supposed cattiness of the stars (particularly come awards season) was entertaining fodder as well. Shame they've now become exactly what they were mocking in the first place - a big, stinky, soap.


Survivor - Talk about The Real World however much you want, this is when reality TV became part of the popular zeitgeist. I started watching about a third of the way through, I think on the episode when Gretchen was eliminated. My family and I quickly became hooked (and played reverse catch-up before the finale) and were surfing the wave of popular culture along with the rest of North America when Richard and Kelly went head-to-head in the much-watched finale. Watching the first season of Survivor now seems a little laughable. The naivete of the castaways is nearly infuriating, the props and challenges look amateurish, and even little details like the cheesy graphics or the fact Jeff doesn't have this catchphrases quite nailed down make for a charmingly docile entry for one of the genre's most resilient franchises.

Solid Contenders:

Pretty Little Liars - the first season just wrapped up and golly was it good...the show lacks (male) character development and one of their best actresses is, unfortunately, dead but the constant guessing game has made it into the teeny bopper version of Lost. Only with blind flute players instead of rampant polar bears.

The Walking Dead - in six little episodes this show blew me away. Again, it could use some work on character development, but you can only expect so much from a half-dozen episodes. Incidentally, if I were to make a 'best premieres evahhh' list, this show would easily end up on it. The fact it was like watching a little movie every week made for a completely enthralling tv-watching experience.

Mad Men - There was lots to like in Season 1. The near-weekly ad pitches (that were sadly absent for much of S2 & S3). Don's lothario ways weren't tired, and Rachel Menken was his most lovely dalliance to date. Betty's desperate housewife act earned equal parts raised eyebrows and empathy. Admittedly however, the pacing was a little slow (although it crawled in S2) compared to the punchier, zippier feeling of S3 & S4, where the show took that initial foundation and skyrocketed our characters to new levels before slamming them back down to earth.

Modern Family - Everyone keeps telling me that this current season isn't as funny as last season (I just caught up on them both over the last three months). I agree getting to know the characters and their funny little quirks - Cameron's a jock! - was funnier the first time around, as opposed to somewhat rehashing elements of their personality this season, but I'm not totally convinced that Season 1 is the best this show has to offer...Season 2 has still shocked and delighted me, and the first few episodes of S1 has some weirdness they've since dropped, so I won't peg their first season as the best ever...but I will say it's definitely one of THE best first seasons for a 30-minute sitcom.

- Britt's On

The Best Damn Thing

11:17 AM Posted In , , , , Edit This 0 Comments »
It's funny that two of the best shows on television right now air in the summer, at least on network television for one of them (some might argue True Blood also stands strong as another summer entry, although Emmy voters may disagree). I'm talking about two programs that are inherently, dramatically different, yet find ties in their collective strengths.

The first just ended over the weekend, DirecTV's / NBC's brilliant Friday Night Lights. To be fair, the show is the more flawed of the two, often sacrificing realism for my most hated plot technique, 'slate wiping', but it's still one of the best things on the small screen these days. I honestly don't get why it doesn't have more of a following, particularly in the US of A - it's a show about football with plenty of hot dudes and dudettes to drool over! Regardless, FNL remains one of my most-looked-forward to programs on a weekly basis, and this last season still delivered with another tally in the 'W' column.

The other show is the much more publicly lauded Mad Men, which airs on AMC in the summertime and fall. Set in the 1960s world of advertising, the show plays out like a film, sometimes at an oppressively tedious and dense pace, although it still manages to provide plenty of watercooler chat every Monday. I've found the people that are the most fervent supporters of the show are the ones that watched early on - I caught up with Season 1 in a very short period of time so I could start watching Season 2 immediately. I've noticed many of the people who joined up for Season 3 (or afterwards, due to the hysteria around it) are less enthusiastic about Matthew Weiner's attention to minutiae, and how the show is really about more than just some pretty faces acting out dramatic scenes.

There are flaws to both shows to be sure, but they are ultimately two of the best written, best paced shows on television (I only wish they had a few more episodes each per season). But what does a show about present-day small town Americana have to do with a show that is diligently obsessed with 1960s culture set in the Big Apple? Plenty:

Ensemble Casting - this is a 21st century trend, to be sure. Over the last decade we've seen a plethora of shows flourish with the stream of thought that there is safety in numbers, a big turnaround from the earlier decades where stars named shows after themselves (translation: if a show aired called The Mel Gibon Hour, you probably wouldn't watch it). A few of the more famous examples include Degrassi: The Next Generation (a format they piloted in the 80s), Gilmore Girls, and Lost, and the failed drama FlashForward that was cited as 'too broad' of an ensemble. Both FNL & MM have thoroughly embraced the ensemble cast, or in the case of Gilmore Girls, the 'community' cast wonderfully.

On FNL, we have a core couple - Coach Taylor and his wife Tami Taylor - played with brilliance by Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton, both finally earning Emmy nods this year. From there the tendrils spiral outwards: football players on Coach Taylor's multiple teams and their families and their girlfriends and their friends, members of the cheerleading squad, pushy booster club members, school administrators, and even the city's mayor are all part of the narrative here, even if they don't all have major storylines. The show does an excellent job at providing you with a familiar cast of faces that populate the town of Dillon beyond a core cast, and make it seem more wholly realized (something Gilmore Girls 'Stars Hollow' did perfectly).

On Mad Men, we have the natural office setting for a range of core, mid-level, and fringe characters. Although Bert Cooper (one of the founders of the show's agency) has never had a standalone storyline, the show wouldn't make sense without him. Beyond the office we also get glimpses into the personal lives of the office workers (and even further beyond that through the eyes of leading female Betty Draper's relationships with friends, family, and various men). Matthew Weiner is smart though, as the majority of his storylines outside of the office still tie into what's going on in the office: Don Draper's constructed lifestyle is enabled by the very fact he is in advertising. Weiner demands you remember characters that may have only appeared once in the last few seasons when they randomly pop up again years later (as Anna, Don's pseudo-wife / sister did in this last episode).

Either way, both shows are fantastic at creating a pyramid of characters that don't hog the spotlight - they each get their times to shine while quietly developing their major moments with small moments episode to episode. FNL this past season struggled a little with letting their increasingly diverse cast have equal playing time, but overall I still felt a connection with the new characters while satisfied with the resolution of the old ones.

Moving Forward, Moving On - Another major hallmark of both of these series is their ability to let characters move on with their lives (and leave the narrow nexus of the show's focus).

Friday Night Lights stumbled with this a bit by having some of their early regulars stick around a year or two past when they should have presumably graduated high school, but for the most part, when you leave Dillon, they give you a nice swan song and goodbye. It's very much like real life - there are reasons why someone might come back to their small hometown, just as there are reasons we might not have seen the last of Smash, Jason, Lyla, Julie, Tyra, Matt, Tim, and Landry (the original cast of teens that have since moved on). Although the show strained against letting go of its stars early on, I give it kudos for working hard this transitional year to introduce new faces while saying a long goodbye to old favourites.

Mad Men is perhaps a more jarring version of this rarely seen phenomenon. When Sterling Cooper dissolved itself into Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce, a slew of beloved second-tier characters were caught in the crossfires. Smug accounts man Kenny Cosgrove, second-rate creative guy Paul Kinsey, and closeted graphic designer Sal (among a few even more minor characters) were on the chopping block. In some ways, it's been a creative coup for Weiner - instead of chipping away and stringing out Sal's homosexuality, he was able to write him off the show with ease and relative legitimacy, while still providing a bookend to his primary storyline. Rather than ride out the tensions between an increasingly bitter Pete and chockful of goodness Kenny, the writers sagely let Pete prevail...for a day or two anyway.

Going back to my earlier point about Mad Men's community cast, some might argue it has a smaller cast of leads than FNL, and I would agree to a certain point - at the end of the day Don Draper takes way more prevalence over anyone else (unlike Coach Taylor, who is always present, but doesn't always have a lot to do). Weiner will let his regulars lapse (see: Joan in Season 3, who, as expected of her, quit her job when she got married only to find she really actually needed the money and disappeared for about half the season) for episodes at a time, because the real true focus is Don, and to a degree Betty, but even she can disappear, as she has so far in this season. The amount we see a character largely has to do with their orbit around Don Draper.

I could go on and on about the strengths and similarities between these two seemingly different shows - great casting, fantastic writing, authenticity - but at the end of the day, the two reasons above are what makes each show really special. They are willing to break the television rules - and while I doubt we'll ever see Don Draper leave and the show continue on (ahem, The Office), or that Tim Riggins will be a non-entity on next year's FNL, I don't doubt the creators will continue to entertain us by making surprising, sometimes hard choices and deftly deleting people from the lives of our stars...just like in real life.

Orbiting around,

- Britt's On

The Non-Darkness of Degrassi

2:39 PM Posted In , Edit This 0 Comments »
I know I’ve talked about it a few times on here already, but I am an admitted Degrassi fan. I watched the original series after school in the 90s (during its first set of reruns) on CBC, and was eager for the reboot at the turn of the Millennium. I lost touch with the show around season 6, but after a chance viewing of ‘Degrassi Goes Hollywood’ last summer I scooped up all of the original and new series, and caught up with TNG just in time for Season 9.

Some people have complained the show isn’t as fresh as it used to be, but I’ve enjoyed the majority of the new characters and felt like they have broached some new topics, while taking different approaches on others they may have tackled in the past. This summer’s daily dose of Degrassi has been a welcome treat as I sit down for a bite-sized portion of Canadian teenage drama, and I like the gradual introduction of the new characters, who so far have only played second fiddle to our (also relatively new) main stars.


In the last week in particular we’ve been introduced to a new villain in town, Drew Torres, a transfer student that came to Degrassi with hopes of snagging the QB1 spot on their supposedly awesome team (the fact they are the Degrassi Panthers cast an ironic light on the lack of football or its importance on the show in comparison to the Dillon Panthers on Friday Night Lights).

In his first week, Drew blackmailed his fellow teammate with a secret about his sexuality in order to (more or less) take over as QB1. He also established himself as the school’s new resident eye candy as various extras fawned over him, and supremely shallow sophomore Alli threw herself at him with a game of strip ‘Would You Rather?’, and was rewarded with a post-school booty call.

I kind of hope Degrassi will keep Drew a villain. Because here’s the thing. Every character EVER on the show that has been introduced as a villain, or even a slightly offbeat dark house, eventually evolves to become a downright likable, interesting, ‘lite’ version of their badass former selves. In fact the show is more successful when it lets its straight edge kiddies dip into the dark side (Sean, Ashley, Spinner, Craig) versus having someone come onto the scene, guns-a-blazin (not literally) and stay that way.


My one quasi-exception to this phenomenon is Ellie Nash, introduced early on as the punky alternative playmate for outcast former prepster Ashley Kerwin. Although Ashley’s edginess lost its teeth, Ellie always remained slightly offbeat (albeit with better hair and less Hot Topic accessories) and dark in the social schema that was Degrassi. Although...much like Jane of the second next generation, she got a bit of a glamover / personality upgrade by the end of her time on the show. As for everyone else? Let’s review.


Jay Hogart was sort of the proto-Degrassi villain. He led a band of misfits that appropriately looked too old to be in high school (they always do!), got into fights, bullied people, stole things, and coerced our cleaner, greener students to behave badly. He also spread an STD throughout the school, in a truly inspired villainous move. The show let Jay have his moments of redemption – the odd one-liner, his acceptance of Alex’s sexuality – while also continually using him as the fallback bad boy totem whenever they wanted a character to do something ‘wrong’ with an enabler by their side.


Then came Manny in Season 7. By this point Manny was one of the alpha females, which automatically meant her relationship would get a lot of airtime. To my surprise and delight, they paired Jay and Manny together in an unlikely sham of a relationship that blossomed into something genuinely sweet. In fact by the time I got to ‘Degrassi Goes Hollywood’ when Jay and Manny finally got their sh*t together, I was desperate to find out what had made Jay become the ultimate ragamuffin with a heart of gold, and their storyline over seasons 7 and 8 was one of my favourites. After that, Jay’s appearances were mainly to facilitate the Jay and Manny show, and to give Spinner someone to talk to.

And thus, Jay Hogart the villain was more or less destroyed. To the show’s credit, they’ve never let Jay do a complete turnaround (as per Spinner’s brief stint as a Christian born again virgin), as per one of the main reasons for his split with his major split with Manny had to do with theft, but his persona certainly softened from ‘ravine guy that gives out STDs’ to ‘Manny’s true love’.


While we’re talking about Jay, one of his top cronies, the female Jay and his early-on h-core girlfriend, Alex, also got the soft and sweet treatment. This was developed through her seemingly random but partially honest lady friend relationship with alpha girl Paige, but also in the episode where former bully Alex was bullied by younger kids when she came back to Degrassi to upgrade her marks for college. Suddenly we had the bully getting pelted with carrot sticks, and we were meant to felt bad for her. Again, to the show’s credit, Alex always maintained her tough girl streak, but she was also a big melodramatic softie when it came to Paige.


So those are the original ‘bad kids’, and how they evolved. Their second ‘next’ generation counterparts were kids from the merger between Degrassi and some other randomly named high school that possibly involved the words east, side, woods, or river. When Johnny DiMarco and his buddy Bruce were introduced, they were sort of Jay and co 2.0, in fact there is a great, misleading promo of Johnny doing a voiceover about taking over Degrassi. Well, that didn’t happen. Johnny wasn’t ever quite the enabler that Jay was (perhaps too easy for the show), and his conflicts with others were mostly reserved to menacing glares and snide comments. His most compelling, realistic storyline was his relationship with Alli and what it meant for his hard-edged persona. Unlike Jay, he never quite opened up and showed his inner muffin to the world (or did, and broke up with his girlfriend when it happened), but the fact his biggest storylines were about dating should tell you how much of a non-badass he was. Bruce in comparison was there for comic muscle relief.


Technically speaking, Jane was originally introduced to fill the gaping void Ellie and h-core Alex had left (although she was never mean). If you watch Season 7 when she is first introduced, it’s stunning how transformed she became as the seasons went on. Gone are the ugly dreads, boy-ish clothing (now reserved for transgender characters like Adam), and off-putting makeup. In its place we gifted with the alternative to the popular alpha girl, a bright, strong female character – although one whose controversy often stemmed from her facing her weaknesses over having some sort of badass reputation. Jane was one of my fave newer characters though, so I won’t complain too much.


Now, in comparison to the above, the prototype for Drew is pretty different. We’re talking preppy jock a-hole. The closest comparison we’ve got can be found in the charmingly awkward Peter, who appeared around season 6 in a memorable episode where he convinced Manny to strip for a video that was then broadcast on the internet. During that season Peter was persona non grata, causing him and Emma to have a clandestine relationship. Peter to me is one of the most interesting characters on the show because he has filled so many random roles. It’s like the writers never really knew what to do with him, and thus Peter had many an identity (and girlfriend) crisis. He was more of an example of a socially awkward menace that burned a few bridges over an actual villain. Drew in comparison to Peter has given us someone who is much more confident in following through with his arrogance, although he hasn’t exactly made any friends yet that will help him overcome the awkward social situations to come once his initial antagonism phase is over.


There are other people I could mention here. For the girls, think about Ashley Kerwin, the original mean girl, was taken down many a peg by the end of Season 1 and was given a slightly whiny but mostly sympathetic character during the rest of her tenure. Ditto to Paige, whose early rape storyline made it hard to ever see her as much as a villain as the show sometimes liked to paint her as. Even Holly J, who started out as a brownnosing snot but has become one of the show’s most dynamic characters has revealed a heart of gold under that ambitious shell.


For the guys, obviously there is Rick, he of the school shooting. Rick wasn’t introduced as a villain however, and it was mostly (aside from his accidental abuse of Terri) through his final act that he has been remembered as one, but even then, moreso as a troubled, bullied student. Declan was somewhat of a cocky villain (in the same vein as Drew) when he was first introduced last season, however these days he sits around pining for Holly J and avoiding twincest. Derek, the curly-headed pal of Danny’s in the middle years of the series, was sort of a jerk through and through, but not exactly a villain.

I get that Degrassi is trying to show multiple sides to each character, and I appreciate that they don’t let the kids who have a badass introduction completely transform to become one of the ‘good’ kids (although Jane is a notable exception here, based on how she was portrayed at first). Holly J and Paige still have their mean streaks, Jay was still an enabler to his last days as a regular on the series, and Peter was still ruining friendships last year…but ultimately every person that is introduced on the show as a villain softens once their initial antagonistic plot point is resolved. I wouldn’t mind seeing Drew go on a testosterone-fuelled rampage of antics on the football team and with the ladies, although I suspect his relationship with ‘Adam Torres’ (the transgender character I can only presume is Drew’s sibling) will give him his entry into the softer, sweeter side of Degrassi.

Finally for the record, Degrassi is by far not the only show where this phenomenon occurs. As one of TV's longest running youth-oriented programs, it just happens to be the most obvious one. Think of Luke, the hyper-aggressive Drew-esque villain of Season 1 on the OC, and how he became almost comically sad by the end of that season when his dad turned out to be gay and he sat around trying to strum a guitar backstage at a Rooney concert. Or for that matter, one of TV's most realistic shows, Friday Night Lights, where Tim Riggins has been continually toed the line between saintly and sad, a far cry from his Season 1 womanizing and extreme boozing antics. It's natural for a show to want to make their characters sympathetic, and taking them out of their villainous comfort zones seems to be the only way they can think to do it. I guess there are two sides to every archetype.

Ah well,

Britt’s On

It Was The Best Of Times...

9:27 PM Posted In , , , , , , , , Edit This 0 Comments »
So two of the shows I regularly watch - One Tree Hill, and Friday Night Lights, are in seemingly paradoxical states.

Okay, different, but somehow similar. One Tree Hill, currently in its sixth season, is facing the imminent departure of the shows two stars - Hilarie Burton (Peyton) and Chad Michael Murry (Lucas, er, kind of THE star of the show). Worst of all, it looks like they'll pull a cheesy wedding day death based on a totally random, spontaneous incident where Peyton having a baby is vaguely fatal. While Lucas and Peyton have never ever ever been my fave characters, their story is kind of the heart of the show - much like Karen and Keith's was a few seasons ago (again not my faves). Without them, I'm not sure where they're planning to take the series...but we'll get back to that.

On the flipside, Friday Night Lights (FNL) has gone through 3 seasons - the latter two of which they've stretched the age of some of the main characters - Tyra, Lyla, and Tim in particular all seemed to be seniors or at least juniors in Season 1, yet are just graduating now with established sophomores come seniors Landry and Matt. The funny thing is, FNL was taped about a year ago, aired on Direct TV about eight months ago, and got renewed for two more seasons two weeks ago. So you do the math - it's been a few very swan song, poignant episodes packed with tears and drama and heart. Now the big question on all the fans lips is where do we go from here? I stated my theory already, Coach T is going to get fired and head for team underdog at East Dillon High - which gives them more flexibility if they stayed at their current school with a new cast. My friend Sarah thinks they might move to San Antonio to keep dreamtastic Timmy Riggins on the show. We'll see...

So here is the paradox. Both shows are losing some of their core cast members. What now?

One Tree Hill has suffered a bit last season, but moreso this one, because the show lacks the momentum of the four high school years (in fairness! they stretched each year - 11 and 12 - over two seasons and acknowledged it). Back then, it was about the State Championship and getting out of high school alive. The producers made a relatively wise choice of fast forwarding past college - more tideous basketball and watching them grow apart - and brought things together in a emotionally fraught and interesting season last year.

This year however, there's been zero momentum. The interesting career positions each character was in at the beginning of S5 have all been erased - Lucas' career options recently abruptly shutdown, Peyton is semi-managing a record label under a mega label, Brooke is doing nothing but working in an empty storefront and designing endless wedding dresses, Hayley has quit her teaching job but also isn't interested in singing again, and Nathan is in a minor league for basketball but with little to show for it on the home or work front. Where are we going? Where's the ambition? I want things to *finally* happen for Brooke, and I want the writers to decide whether they want to give Hayley or Nathan a fairy tale career ending as they snatched them away over the last two years. S6 did start off with a bang (literally) but it's quickly degressed from there without a final build-up.

My question with OTH in relation to FNL is would OTH have benefitted from college years? I'm not sure. I think the lateral drift of the characters would have been depressing, as it is on most shows that go to college, but at the same time the forced closeness (and desire to stay in Tree Hill) today is equally irritating. So is the prospect of killing off a major character for contractual / dramatic reasons. Just have her leave people. Have you learned nothing from S3 of The OC?

FNL...I'm guessing the grads will not be seen in college. The writers have two choices as I've mentioned - to send them off gracefully with a story arc like Smash & Street, or to feature them as minor recurring characters in their other lives. Another theory my friend Sarah had was Coach Taylor might end up at San Antonio state, thus giving him a chance to at least continue coaching Riggins, but we'll see.

Before I depart, let's rank the success of college seasons on other shows I've watched:

Dawson's Creek - 3.5/5: The show actually did a decent job of portraying college in its 90s pretentious way, Joey got better hair, and they finally did away with Dawson by making him exist in a world separate from the rest of the Creekers.
Pros: Less Dawson, continued enjoyable drama, the awesome episode with Joey and Pacey in the K-Mart.
Cons: Noticeable (although acknowledged) drift of the characters, Extreme emo Dawson and the death of his father, Busy Phillips as Audrey = worst cast addition ever.

Gilmore Girls - 4/5: A friend of mine is watching GG for the first time on DVD right now (thanks to moi) and it's making me reflect that the high school years really were fun - with the wider cast of characters from Rory's school definitely outweighing her college castmates. That being said, the show was about Rory's academics / future more than her friends, and ultimately, about family ties which the show never lost - other than that patch at the beginning of S6.
Pros: Smart move on the writers to make Rory choose Yale - it invoked serious family drama, but ultimately kept the family bonds in tact with Rory/Lorilei, Also Logan was a welcome change of pace from Dean, and seeing Rory evolve into someone more confident was nice. Plus Paris (realistically) stuck around. Also the show just let Rory grow more because it wasn't just about "getting into college" it was about boyfriends and futures and careers.
Cons: Some people complain Rory became too stylized in college which I somewhat agree with. Also, the loss of Madeline, Louise, the Puffs, and the various other high school castmates was sad, but realistic.

Buffy - 4.5/5: Let me clarify. Buffy herself went to college for approximately 1.5 seasons - but really, Season 4 of the show was "the college year" that made lots of puns and metaphors, and also heartbreaking drama, of typical college experiences (one night stands, missing home, and getting stupidly hammered to name a few). By the middle of season 5 we had nary a class scene with Buffy, who dropped out as explanation, and returned for one ill-fated class at the beginning of S6. That being said - I give Buffy a 4.5/5 for the college years because to me, Seasons 4-7 are the best of the series (4-6 really), and Willow was attending college for most of them. Season 4 was a transition / turning point, and thus, I gave it a solid mark.
Pros: The show always used typical high school drama as metaphors for the monsters it created (ex: Angel in S2). In college (s4), it did the same thing, but with a few seasons of doing this under their belt, it was much better executed (imo), and generally the funniest season of the show. S5-S7 were just way better in overriding story arcs than the earlier seasons. The fact Buffy never seemed to be in class (nor did Willow or Xander) was finally more logical, and honestly, freeing. Also, glad they acknowledged that Xander was the Pacey of the bunch - not in school, and struggling a bit, but ultimately both work it out.
Cons: S4 in particular had a relatively weak story arc, and mostly rested on its funny / smart college metaphors. Also, Buffy & friends never complete schooling which somewhat makes this a moot show.

The OC - 1/5: Marissa (Mischa Barton) died at the end of Season 3. It was stupid. The one thing I was looking forward to was seeing Ryan go to college, move on, and possibly add a new interesting female to the cast (and playing a guessing game as to who it would be?!?!). Well. The writers decided to predictably - for casting reasons, not for actual story / character relevance - pair him up with goody two shoes/show ruiner Taylor (Autumn Reeser), which, if you watch the beginning of S3 again, is ludicrous. Aside from that, Seth - the token brainiac - wasted away his unwanted gap year and decided to randomly become a movie critic by season's end, and Summer's experience at Brown was laughably bad - thus she dropped out early.
Pros: None. I hated all the characters added / focused on at this point (especially Taylor, Katelin, and Summer's stupid hippie friend) and the 3 main young leads felt disconnected without bonding together to save the day for Marissa.
Cons: Everything. See above.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head...till next time.

Britt's On

A Friday Theory

9:12 AM Posted In , , , Edit This 0 Comments »
One of my fave games is to try and guess the outcome of a show. Friday Night Lights is actually pretty unpredictable because it rarely sticks to the conventions of dramatic television, but this last episode - where it was announced a second high school would open in Dillon, Texas, thus dividing up the football 'talent' by district lines - gave me one to ponder at least for what may happen in S4.

If you haven't followed the show, we've been with the general same pack of kids since S1, despite some very sketchy time placement of some of the main characters (Tim, Tyra, Lyla should all have graduated one or two years ago now) - this year it's inevitable that everyone, with the exception of Julie and newcomer JD, will be graduating. Which begs the question...where do we go from here? The two previous graduated characters were given four-episode story arcs each at the beginning of this season and have made peace with Panther football once and for all - but you can't do that with every character on the show and expect it to feel the same.

At this point the writers have a few options (assuming the show *please please please* continues on):

#1) Give each of the graduating characters a sweet farewell storyline much like Jason and Smash got at the beginning of this season. Start with a fresh cast of characters other than Julie and JD.

#2) Start with a fresh cast, but keep the other characters on as recurring characters for a transition (or possibly final) season - see, the first season or two after the original core cast of Degrassi kids graduated from 'The Next Generation'. You still had storylines with Ellie and Paige at college, but it didn't feel *too* weird, and show still largely focused on Degrassi.

#3) Follow the kids at college with equal weight to what's happening back in Dillon.

#4) Coach Taylor loses the State Championship and gets fired - only to get hired at the new rival high school in town and therefore a fresh new cast isn't so weird after all. Dramatic tension!

#4 was my theory as of this last episode, but I really don't know where things'll go. The writers have kept some of these twenty-somethings in high school for long enough, but it'll be sad to see them go. This is why high school shows are tragic my friends. Like...what will happen with Gossip Girl? That may be a bit easier as the show has never been rooted much in the realities of high school - but it has always focused on the main cast being in the sort of same circles at the same time at the same events and in the same places. GG is a whole nother kettle of fish which deserves a seperate blog post though.

In the meantime, if you haven't already picked it up watching FNL, do it. This is easily one of the best shows on television, and aside from a bit of screwy character editing and the odd blank slate scenario, I have zero complaints about it. And this is coming from a girl who was super against watching the show in the first place - but loved it from the first episode.

Did I mention the hotness & awesomeness that is Tim Riggins (Canadian Taylor Kitsch)?

frid-taykit


Love!

Britt's On

Design & Google Analytics

Powered By Blogger