![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
healingmirthIn very old Sports Night alumni news: Why did the internet not tell me that Peter Krause is on Parenthood? I couldn't care less about watching Lorelai Gilmore be a parent some more, but Casey! Also, why did the internet not tell me that Josh Charles is on The Good Wife? I saw a clip, and he seems smart! I don't actually know what that show is about. They're lawyers?
I didn't know that there was a Law & Order: Los Angeles until I stumbled upon it on Hulu just now. I feel like I should have known this with all the talk about the original shutting down. It's good to see Skeet Ulrich still working? The problem is, I'm not even vaguely interested in a crime show set in LA, and making the first episode Hollywood isn't a good move to sell me on it. Not even with Alfred Molina. (of course, minutes after I finished watching the first episode, this review showed up on my reading page.)
I don't make an effort to watch any of the L&Os, though I've seen my share of episodes by accident or in syndication, so I sort of know what to expect from the various flavors.
Almost the first thing that the episode does is tells us that Ulrich's character has a...wife? and a baby. He has a Casey (so clearly, he's married to either Casey Schraeger or Casey McCall) and a wedding ring, at any rate. The rest of the episode is strictly business, so I'll be curious to see how long it takes someone's personal life to make an appearance.
I think that means I've just decided to watch another episode. The promo at the end of the episode prominently featured Terrence Howard, and I don't know if that means he's part of another pair of cops or if he's replacing someone from the pilot, or if its just the cast sprawling out like they tend to do on these shows.
Despite my cynicism from the first five minutes, I did enjoy the episode. It was as well-made as the hundreds of hours of Law & Order that have preceded it. I liked the guest stars, who are often the most watchable part of an episode for me. Somehow the combination of Corey Stoll, his awesome mustache, and John Patrick Amedori even managed to make me feel sympathy for a somewhat vapid rich-boy wannabe.
And then the second episode of Undercovers (And thanks to the closed captioning on Hulu, I have now caught the dialogue I missed in the pilot!)
This week, Gerald McRaney's character grumbles some more, and for me it totally sounded like hanging a lamp on the show's plausibility problems: "Coming here asking you to fly to an exotic locale, hoping that your rusty espionage skills will be sufficient enough to do the job pains me. Deeply. In the groin. I don't know how you're going to be able to [do the thing that the random plot we've chosen requires] when you can't even operate a coffee machine."
Also, yet again this week there's a reference to some (new) Mysterious Thing, and I am totally not swallowing that hook until there's some indication of what the Real Reason Sam and Steven (I learned their names!) have been reactivated is.
I find it sort of interesting that Leo is utterly self-absorbed. I find the fact that Sam's punchline of a sister is a (comically?) recovering alcoholic sort of not. I think I saw someone say that it's not funny enough to be a comedy, not gripping enough to be a drama, and not well-written enough to be both.
The show has settled in to be slick, and pretty, and clever in a pleased-with-itself-but-not-too-smart sort of way. It doesn't offend me that it exists, but I don't know that it's something that I'm going to stick with.
Finally: Why does Hulu think Detroit 1-8-7 is a comedy? That is not at all the impression I got from the commercials. Is it?
I didn't know that there was a Law & Order: Los Angeles until I stumbled upon it on Hulu just now. I feel like I should have known this with all the talk about the original shutting down. It's good to see Skeet Ulrich still working? The problem is, I'm not even vaguely interested in a crime show set in LA, and making the first episode Hollywood isn't a good move to sell me on it. Not even with Alfred Molina. (of course, minutes after I finished watching the first episode, this review showed up on my reading page.)
I don't make an effort to watch any of the L&Os, though I've seen my share of episodes by accident or in syndication, so I sort of know what to expect from the various flavors.
Almost the first thing that the episode does is tells us that Ulrich's character has a...wife? and a baby. He has a Casey (so clearly, he's married to either Casey Schraeger or Casey McCall) and a wedding ring, at any rate. The rest of the episode is strictly business, so I'll be curious to see how long it takes someone's personal life to make an appearance.
I think that means I've just decided to watch another episode. The promo at the end of the episode prominently featured Terrence Howard, and I don't know if that means he's part of another pair of cops or if he's replacing someone from the pilot, or if its just the cast sprawling out like they tend to do on these shows.
Despite my cynicism from the first five minutes, I did enjoy the episode. It was as well-made as the hundreds of hours of Law & Order that have preceded it. I liked the guest stars, who are often the most watchable part of an episode for me. Somehow the combination of Corey Stoll, his awesome mustache, and John Patrick Amedori even managed to make me feel sympathy for a somewhat vapid rich-boy wannabe.
And then the second episode of Undercovers (And thanks to the closed captioning on Hulu, I have now caught the dialogue I missed in the pilot!)
This week, Gerald McRaney's character grumbles some more, and for me it totally sounded like hanging a lamp on the show's plausibility problems: "Coming here asking you to fly to an exotic locale, hoping that your rusty espionage skills will be sufficient enough to do the job pains me. Deeply. In the groin. I don't know how you're going to be able to [do the thing that the random plot we've chosen requires] when you can't even operate a coffee machine."
Also, yet again this week there's a reference to some (new) Mysterious Thing, and I am totally not swallowing that hook until there's some indication of what the Real Reason Sam and Steven (I learned their names!) have been reactivated is.
I find it sort of interesting that Leo is utterly self-absorbed. I find the fact that Sam's punchline of a sister is a (comically?) recovering alcoholic sort of not. I think I saw someone say that it's not funny enough to be a comedy, not gripping enough to be a drama, and not well-written enough to be both.
The show has settled in to be slick, and pretty, and clever in a pleased-with-itself-but-not-too-smart sort of way. It doesn't offend me that it exists, but I don't know that it's something that I'm going to stick with.
Finally: Why does Hulu think Detroit 1-8-7 is a comedy? That is not at all the impression I got from the commercials. Is it?
