Monday, February 17, 2014

A Feast for the Mind: Hannibal on the Small Screen

As some of you loyal long-time readers may recall, some time back I was on a quest to watch all the shows developed by Bryan Fuller, making my way through the charmingly surreal Pushing Daisies, the puzzlingly bizarre Dead Like Me, and the quirkily comic Wonderfalls. Having thought I had exhausted all that Fuller's creative mind had come up with so far, imagine my delight when I discovered that a new show I had heard some buzz about was another of Fuller's creations. Fuller's latest venture is in many ways starkly different from the others, although there are certainly some similarities as well.

But just what is that venture, you ask? It's none other than a television show based on everyone's favorite villain, Hannibal Lecter. The latest Hannibal delves into the mind of the psychiatrist turned cannibalistic serial killer in the years before he is caught. Hannibal begins with Jack Crawford, the head of the FBI's Behavioral Sciences unit, seeking help from Will Graham, cop-turned-instructor in profiling at the FBI academy, in catching a serial killer known as the Minnesota Shrike. Graham is highly effective because he doesn't just think through what a killer would do; he reconstructs the events of the murder casting himself in the role of the killer. He so completely identifies with the killer that the lines between him and the killer are beyond blurred - they no longer exist as Graham wholly takes on the identity of the murderer. Concerned for Graham's mental wellbeing, Crawford consults with Graham's friend and FBI psychiatrist Dr. Alana Bloom, who recommends that Will be paired up with her colleague Dr. Hannibal Lecter to keep an eye on Graham's mental health. Thus, Dr. Lecter becomes privy to the inner workings of Will Graham's mind while also learning a great deal of detail about FBI cases involving grizzly murders, usually at the hands of serial killers.

Hannibal is such a multi-layered show that it's hard to know where to begin when discussing it. One of the things I very much enjoy about the show is that it is, as the credits put it, "based on the characters" from author Thomas Harris's novel Red Dragon, rather than based on his novels themselves, which have already been treated in Hollywood movies. Because of that, Hannibal plays with the characters and plotlines of the story already well known by fans of the novels and/or movies. It does not stray from the characterizations (for instance, Hannibal Lecter is not suddenly a great guy who would never dream of killing and eating other people), but it can play around with the timing of certain events as well as add or take away interactions between Graham and Lecter as needed/desired to make new emotional impacts and plot twists. Creator Bryan Fuller speaks to this in an interview, in which he said: "I felt that there was an opportunity to tell a chapter of [Lecter's] story that hadn't been told before. We've see him incarcerated, we've seen him post-incarceration having escaped, and we saw him as a young man, but we haven't seen him as a practicing psychiatrist and a practicing cannibal. That's the most interesting part of his life and for some reason, it hadn't been the subject of any of the stories. The backstory was the only indication that we got of what he was like when he was out in the world. It just seemed like it was rich, unexplored territory - so it seemed like that was valid. ... As a fan of the books, I wanted to be true to the novels and yet be able to go to new and different places with the characters. But you have to honor the source material, you have to respect it, because… it's great!" Being such an avid fan of the original novels and movies, Fuller is clearly happy to embrace them but to also do so while adding his own dramatic flair. And while the show is in some ways trying to find a place in the canon (several interviews with cast and crew have indicated that the events in the show are occurring four or five years before Red Dragon), it is not a period piece. Fuller made the bold choice not to have this set in the late 1970s, which would be the correct time period for these events if they are occurring just before the events of Red Dragon, but has it set instead in the present day. Thus, all the conveniences of modern-day life - including and perhaps most importantly, all the fancy equipment in today's crime labs - are seen throughout the show.

This means that Hannibal's fresh new insights allow for uninitiated audiences to the Lecter cannon to be able to watch the show without feeling lost. If you've never read or seen The Silence of the Lambs, you can still watch this show from the beginning without missing any major plot points. What's especially fun (if anything about this incredibly dark show can be called fun) about that is there was almost an air of mystery to the first few episodes of the show. Viewers in the know are aware that Lecter is a cannibal, that he is the Chesapeake Ripper, and other such facts, but these points are only very vaguely hinted at in the show's introduction. It's only later that Hannibal's crimes begin to be revealed without a doubt. But before then, all bets are on. For instance, when the Minnesota Shrike was introduced in the pilot episode and Graham is the first one to deduce that he is eating his victims, my gut reaction was that this serial killer would turn out to be Dr. Lecter. I was of course wrong, although the show did allude to a connection between the actual killer and Lecter - a connection that continues to remain a bit of mystery as the show approaches its second season.

Another thing the show does very well is open a Pandora's box of mystery and mayhem with plotlines that hold significance beyond a single episode, unlike the typical cop procedural show in which each murder(s) grips the viewer for one episode only and then disappears. There is some of the latter in Hannibal, and I found it unfortunate that the larger (and certainly more important) stories sometimes crowded out the full fleshing out of other storylines. But let me step back and try to explain my meaning here a little better. As I mentioned, the first episode introduced a serial killer known as the Minnesota Shrike, who had purportedly kidnapped and murdered eight college girls in his state, although their bodies were never found. Graham's insights caught the murderer, but not before he killed his own wife and attempted to kill his daughter Abigail (who just happens to bear a remarkable resemblance to the missing girls) and not before his crimes inspire a copycat killer. In a typical procedural show, that would be the end of the story. But here, this story continues on. Both Graham and Lecter take on the role of guardian to the newly orphaned Abigail, although they each have their own motives for doing so, and she shows up several more times throughout season one. Throughout the rest of the thirteen episodes of season one, Graham is haunted by visions of a giant elk, which symbolizes the Minnesota Shrike and the disturbing antler room where he mounted his victims. The copycat killer, who we deduce almost immediately is Dr. Lecter, remains at large and thus is someone whose existence is constantly lurking in the back of Graham's and Crawford's minds. The other major ongoing plotline is the search for the Chesapeake Ripper, a serial killer who has eluded Crawford in the past and left a heavy emotional impact on him as a result of his actions. Now that Graham is on the case, there's perhaps hope of finding him at last ... but, of course, we know the Chesapeake Ripper is Dr. Lecter, and even Graham cannot imagine (at least not at this point in his life) that his confidante is the evil person for whom he is seeking. Thus, the Chesapeake Ripper is a recurrent concern for all the major characters.

Still, like I said, there are some serial killers introduced that I feel get the short treatment. For instance, the second episode introduces a pharmacist who is putting diabetic people into comas so that he can bury them alive and use them as a plant food for his mushroom garden. When he learns that Graham can get inside his mindset, he decides to do Graham a "favor" by kidnapping the then-comatose Abigail to add to his mushroom garden. When Graham stops him before he gets out of the hospital with Abigail, the pharmacist tells him that Graham is missing out on the opportunity to communicate freely with Abigail via the mushrooms. This serial killer and his very bizarre theories were never fully explained to my satisfaction. What exactly is his obsession with mushrooms? Why does he think they can help people communicate? And most importantly, if he thought Graham needed to communicate with Abigail, who was he himself trying to communicate with via his garden? It certainly didn't seem like the random patients he saw in his practice were the goal audience. This particular storyline dropped away as quickly as it appeared and seemed all along only to be a vehicle to further show off Will's prowess of getting into the serial killer's mind as well as a reminder of his deep connection with Abigail. This is only one example; there were other serial killers, such as the Angel Maker, who came along and committed horrific crimes that were never mentioned again outside of their set episode.

Speaking of such horrible things, an important disclaimer is that this show is not for the faint of heart. The crimes concocted by the serial killers here and displayed in all their gory detail make shows like Criminal Minds seem like tales for kids. As one of the actors from the show explained in an interview: "Quite frankly, I don't think that there's anything on network TV that can compare with Hannibal and I think that's really exciting. It’s very smart of NBC to be picking up a show that has so much of a cable feel to it. ... If the networks really want to keep audiences, [dark shows are] what they're going to have to cater to in a good way because it's good TV. We need more Breaking Bads, Mad Men, Walking Deads and Homelands on NBC, ABC, CBS and FOX." While I agree with her in general, there were actually times I had to put a hand out to cover up what was shown on the screen because it was just too unsettling. Over time, Graham begins to have nightmares and hallucinations regarding the things he's seen in the field, and I can certainly sympathize. Having watched a bunch of episodes in one day, I found myself that night having a hard time falling asleep with all those creepy images in my head. In Fuller's other shows Dead Like Me and Pushing Daisies where, yes, death was a thing - and with murder being the subject in the latter - the victim's bodies weren't gruesome per se. Indeed, on Pushing Daisies, the strange deaths that met these victims often gave a comic look to their corpses, allowing for the dark humor that show excelled at achieving. Here there really is little humor beyond the occasional witty line to lighten the very bleak mood of the show, although I think perhaps that's for the best as it's fitting with the show's mood.

Speaking of mood, the show's plot is enhanced by an appropriate atmosphere that covers every aspect of the show. Each episode of the show is given the French name of a course in a five-star meal, quietly reminding the viewer each week of the cannibalistic nature of one of the show's main characters while also gently evoking the elegant lifestyle he fronts. The music is subtle but always fits any given moment perfectly whether it's a light-hearted piece of classical music for a dinner party or an eerie tone for one of Will's darker moments.  Largely set in the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. as well as Minnesota but filmed on location in Ontario, Canada, the backdrop reminds me of the early seasons of The X-Files, which were filmed in Vancouver, Canada. The landscapes are largely rural areas where it's cold, it's rainy, it's snowy, and/or it's grey. These landscapes serve to perfectly capture the bleak outlook of a show about a finely tuned but heartless serial killer matching wits with a mentally unstable but righteous FBI profiler. To quote again from one of the show's actors, she notes that "Hannibal is filmic -- there are a lot of surreal elements in it. It’s very psychologically-based. Hannibal’s tone is so different than anything I’m seeing on network television right now. ... Hannibal is very film-like with high production values and great actors." Indeed, there were a lot of times - especially with Will's crime re-constructions, nightmares, and hallucinations - when I would think to myself that the special effects were visually stunning and most of have cost a boatload to create, both in money and time. But the finished product is worth it, with a result that does indeed feel more cinematic than the usual fare on TV. The fine directing also pushes toward this finished masterpiece; several of the episodes were directed by the excellent David Slade, who also directed the pilot for NBC's one-season cop drama Awake (ah, but what a season!). And the icing on the cake with Hannibal is that the viewer is in a special place of almost omniscience throughout the show. While we don't know every single thing going on here (we are certainly kept in the dark about the characters' past lives and many of Hannibal's actions as well as his motivations), we get to see a lot more than any other single character knows at any given time (with the exception maybe of Hannibal himself, who can probably surmise a lot of what he doesn't physically see himself).

This post is a bit rambling, but I think I've covered a decent amount of the basic plotlines for newbies without giving away too much in terms of spoilers as well as discussed some of the thematic mood. As it's already a lengthy post, I've decided to break this down into a two-part post to spare you a very long read. In the next entry, I'll dig deeper into the character development and acting as those components are a huge part of what makes this show so successful.

Sunday, February 16, 2014

All Good Stories Start with "Once Upon a Time ... "

After finishing up my blog series on comedic podcasts, I'd be remiss if I didn't also write up something about the fourth and final podcast to which I've been listening. (This one is not a comedy-based podcast so I did not include it in the four-part series I wrote.) That podcast is titled Storybrooke Ending and is the result of a collaboration between a friend of mine and her cousin. The duo began this podcast to discuss their thoughts and feelings about the ABC television show Once Upon a Time.

Full confession: I don't actually watch Once Upon a Time nor do I intend to start doing so at any point. (I do have to admit to being slightly intrigued by its spin-off Once Upon a Time in Wonderland, but that's mostly only because I'm obsessed with all things Alice in Wonderland-inspired.) While I find the idea of playing around with various traditional fairy tales and mixing them up an interesting concept, I've never really been a huge fan of fairy tales and hence am neither a fan of fractured fairy tales. So I give kudos to the creators of the show for having a clever premise, but I'm not giving them my viewing time.

That being said, I wanted to give the Storybrooke Ending podcast a listen to be a supportive friend, and I found myself oddly compelled to keep listening on for thoughts and comments about a show I don't watch. Nicole and Sam dedicate one podcast episode to each television episode, and they start each podcast episode with a recap of what happened on the latest TV episode. For that reason, I don't really feel lost about the particulars of what they discuss, although the podcast did begin with season three so any references to what occurred in the previous two seasons are over my head. The duo provide commentary on the show's convoluted plot and rich characters while also making predictions of what else might occur in future storylines on Once Upon a Time. The two often make references to Buffy and Lost as they discuss various elements of the show, which are probably logical comparisons but I've never watch either of those shows to know any better. All of this is done in an easy conversational tone, making it sound both like you are sitting down with a friend to discuss your new favorite show and like a fun podcast to work on.

On the podcast, Nicole and Sam also rate each Once Upon a Time episode on a scale of one to five, using a five-part metric. The key elements they choose to focus on rating for each episode are important ones: plot, storyline continuity, emotional impact, character development, and their own personal enjoyment (to capture that je ne sais quoi that encapsulates each episode). Their website for the podcast includes a page for each episode, which provides the highlights of the TV episode and some of the questions that remain for them about the future of the storylines and character backstories/interactions introduced in that episode. If you're a fan of Once Upon a Time and can't get enough of the show, this is a good podcast for you to listen to and recap some of your favorite moments of each episode, perhaps gaining new perspective and insight as you do so.

Friday, February 14, 2014

The Podcast's the Thing Wherein I'll Catch a Laugh ... (Part 4)

My last few blog posts have been about my year or so long adventure in the world of comedic podcasts. I started by discussing The Thrilling Adventure Hour in the first part and ended the most recent post with the discovery of and delight in The Dead Authors Podcast. As I mentioned in the first post in this blog series, The Thrilling Adventure Hour podcast has been including a number of behind-the-scenes interviews in which they discuss things like the writing process and the history of the show. With the latter, the cast and creative team frequently mentioned Paul F. Tompkins's show/podcast as a means of introducing them to various other actors or even their current location for the live show. At first, I thought they were referencing Paul F. Tompkins's work with The Dead Authors Podcast but over time I realized they were not. I searched for other podcasts that Tompkins worked on and thus stumbled upon The Pod F. Tompkast.

The Pod F. Tompkast is one of the stranger things I've heard "on the air," so to speak, with the show being introduced as full of "comedy-type ramblings and bitlets." The podcast features comedian Paul F. Tompkins narrating in a stream-of-consciousness way and composer/musician Eban Schletter providing musical accompaniment to these ramblings. In addition to this odd introduction (which, trust me, could get really odd sometimes as Tompkins would go down the proverbial rabbit hole with his thoughts ending up in unlikely places), the show offers a handful of other segments. These consist of:
  • "A Phone Call with Jen Kirkman." During this part of the show, Tompkins literally calls his friend and fellow comedian Jen Kirkman and the two talk about random things, often Kirkman's phobias or other humorous real-life ancedotes she might have to share. Despite the concept sounding rather blasé, Kirkman's funny-because-they're-true/sad-because-they're-true stories make this segment very engaging.
  • 'Trapped in the Internet' interviews. [This segment doesn't have an actual name as far as I know of, and this is the best descriptive name I could think up.] Presumably due to scheduling conflicts, the phone calls with Jen Kirkman stopped at some point; the comedic conceit is that Kirkman got "trapped in the Internet" and neither she nor Tompkins know how to get her out. As a result, Kirkman (or sometimes the "sleepy voice of the Internet," one of the side characters on the show) sends another person to help with the situation. Of course, this person also never knows how to get Kirkman out but instead ends up sitting down for another strange conversation with Tompkins. Guests on this segment have included Paget Brewster, Justin Kirk, and Dave (Gruber) Allen, amongst others. This segment seems to be more interesting if you know of the guest/have an interest in said guest; however, most of the guests are pretty funny and/or Tompkins will come up with some silly/strange scenario to make this part as compelling as the rest.
  • "The Great Undiscovered Project." This was an ongoing story that Tompkins wrote and for which he did all the impressions. The absurd story involved a plan for a movie written/produced by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Ice-T to be directed by Garry Marshall. The movie would star Ice-T as well as John Lithgow, John C. Reilly, and the artist Mr. Brainwash. Cake Boss also played an essential role in this bit as he brought together several of the creative types and had the gift of seeing the future. Other notable Hollywood types made an occasional appearance over the course of this story. The vast majority of "The Great Undiscovered Project" was revealed through recordings of phone conversations held between various pairings of the main characters. This segment was a tad too ridiculous at times, but I always enjoyed being stunned by how well Tompkins did the many different impersonations as well as the silly factoids he invented for these real-life people (i.e., John C. Reilly's addiction to the cake decorations known as dragees or John Lithgow's favorite actor being the presidential assassin John Wilkes Booth).
  • "The Paul F. Tompkins Show." At this point, Tompkins features a clip from his live comedy show. These are often short sketches including a guest star such as Matt Gourley or Jon Hamm; some of these sketches are far more out there than others, but most will have you at least chuckling a little. One of my favorite parts from here is when Tompkins does "Advice to the Probably Dead," a bit in which he goes through letters written in to "Dear Abby" columnists (and the like) from the 1940s, 50s, and 60s. Because some of the questions (submitted most often by women in eras different from our own in many respects) are so flat-out ridiculous, Tompkins can reply with helpful advice while still being hysterically funny. Another great bit is Tompkins's "Google Voice Transcripts." Tompkins would send well-known speeches from political history or classic cinema to his Google voicemail and then read aloud what the auto-detect translator would spit out as a transcript. The resulting gibberish is absolutely ridiculous and therefore very amusing.
  • "Paul F. Tompkins Comes to Your Town." Basically at this point, there's just a listing given of Tompkins' travel schedule for comedy shows, but this is usually done in some big theatrical way with a different theme for that particular podcast. Any other plugs for Tompkins' and/or Schletter's work appear here.
The podcast wraps up with some final rambling thoughts from Tompkins, sometimes related to the stream-of-consciousness remarks at the beginning of the podcast.

One thing that I very much appreciate about Tompkins's humor is that he shows how it's possible to be incredibly funny without being crass in terms of foul language or wise-cracks that make people - either specific persons (i.e., the ever popular "my wife" jokes) or a whole class of people (i.e., an ethnic group, a misunderstood subculture, etc.) - the butt of the joke. But what do you expect from the man known as "Comedy's One True Gentleman?" Tompkins's brand of comedy can also lend itself toward the "nerd humor" of comedians like Demetri Martin. (Actually, I'm surprised that more people don't make a connection between Martin and Tompkins given that they both show a proclivity toward stream-of-consciousness comedy). This kind of humor might not be for everyone but if you're tired of comedians who get too many of their kicks from potty humor (literally and metaphorically) and want something slightly more highbrow, Paul F. Tompkins in general and this podcast in particular are a good route to go. Tompkins is also obsessed with grammar and will often stop to correct his own speech if he thinks it is not polished enough the first time around. Hearing comedians laugh at themselves is one of the things I often find the funniest in any comedy show, and so Tompkins laughing at his own inability to get a random thought out in the correct grammatical order will make me laugh as well.

The stream-of-consciousness humor with no apparent purpose/endgame in sight takes a little bit of getting used to (if I recall correctly, Tompkins himself refers to the humor on this podcast as an acquired taste); at first, I wasn't sure if I would stick with this podcast past a trial episode or two. By the time I got through all the available episodes, I was absolutely hooked and found myself missing the podcast in the months I've had without any new episodes. Sadly, despite reassurances in the last episode that Tompkins was hard at work preparing future episodes, there hasn't been an update since nearly a year ago. I'm not sure that we'll see more of The Pod F. Tompkast in the future, which is a sad end for a podcast once rated as the top comedy podcast out there by Rolling Stone.

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

The Podcast's the Thing Wherein I'll Catch a Laugh ... (Part 3)

At the end of my last post, I mentioned that The Thrilling Adventure Hour podcast had a number of cross-overs in its line-up, which I'm going to discuss here in part three of this blog entry.

War of Two Worlds

This was an ongoing collaboration between The Thrilling Adventure Hour and the podcast SuperEgo. Honestly, this was absolutely without exception, the least interesting thing put out by The Thrilling Adventure Hour. The different styles of the two podcasts means that these episodes were both written and improvised, making for a rather interesting show - in theory. In practice, they were sort of weird and incoherent, with thin plot lines and poorly drawn one-dimensional characters. I was glad when this series ended, and a bit disappointed to hear in a recent Q&A episode that members of The Thrilling Adventure Hour ensemble hope to do more collaborations with SuperEgo in the future. I for one am not looking forward to that.

This American Wife

This American Wife is a podcast that spoofs on the public radio show This American Life (although, at least regarding the cross-overs done with The Thrilling Adventure Hour, the NPR show it most seemed to parody was Fresh Air). The cross-overs done here consisted of interviews with various actors - speaking in character - from The Thrilling Adventure Hour segments. These were pretty funny, and I enjoyed hearing some more about the characters' back stories as well as their interactions with each other. If these two podcasts chose to collaborate again, I certainly wouldn't mind that. However, there was nothing so very compelling about the concept of This American Wife that made me want to go check out that series on its own.

The Dead Authors Podcast

This was less of a cross-over than it was a plug for another project from one the show's actors, that project being the ongoing improv comedy podcast known as The Dead Authors Podcast. The episode of The Dead Authors Podcast featured in The Thrilling Adventure Hour line-up was the December 2012 feature with the authors of the Gospels, which happened to be one replete with actors and guest stars from The Thrilling Adventure Hour: Paul F. Topkins, Craig Cackowski, Mark Gagliardi, Matt Gourley, and Hal Lublin. This episode was so hilarious that I ended up going back and listening to all the past issues of The Dead Authors Podcast -- and subscribing to the podcast for all future episodes.

But let me step back a moment here and explain the basic premise of the show. Like The Thrilling Adventure Hour, the podcast is a recording of a live show but unlike The Thrilling Adventure Hour, The Dead Authors Podcast is not a staged reading but a work of improvisational comedy. Paul F. Tompkins is the host of the show, and he plays it in the role of H.G. Wells, the British author known as one of the fathers of science fiction. The show's conceit is that Wells owns and operates a functional time machine, which Wells uses to go back in time and transport now-dead authors into the present where he interviews them regarding their lives and works. The author changes from month to month and is always played by a different comedian who comes up with answers to Tompkins's/Wells's interview questions on the spot. The result is always something hilarious, although there are some episodes that are even better than others. For instance, John Hodgman as Ayn Rand was one of the most hysterically funny things I've ever heard, Kristen Schaal as Tennessee Williams was also laugh-out-loud funny, and Brian Stack as Brendan Behan had me in stitches. James Adomian as Walt Whitman responding to every question in a Leaves of Grass-style rambling poem (remember, these were all invented on the spot) was another recent highlight.

So to recap, The Dead Authors Podcast is an absolutely hilarious romp through literature in a improvisational sketch matter, although of course with some historical background done in advance by the participants and Paul F. Tompkins as the interviewer. Of course, both the "author"/comedian du jour and Tompkins roll with the punches and come up with new answers/questions as that night's show progresses and goes in different directions than one might expect. I definitely recommend this podcast for fans of literary humor as it does not fail. But even if you haven't read all the authors featured on this podcast, it will still be funny and you won't be lost. In fact, with Tompkins providing some details of the author's life via his interview questions, you might even learn something in between your peals of laughter!


Speaking of Paul F. Tompkins, The Dead Authors Podcast was not the only trip down the rabbit hole I took as I delved into the world of comedic podcasts over the past year or so. But that's a story saved for the fourth and final part of this blog post ...

Monday, February 10, 2014

The Podcast's the Thing Wherein I'll Catch a Laugh ... (Part 2)

In my last post, I wrote about a podcast that I have been enjoying over the past year, which is recorded from a live monthly show called The Thrilling Adventure. Short recap: The Thrilling Adventure Hour is a humorous staged reading done in the style of old-time radio programs, complete with music and campy sound effects. The show always begins with the segment "Sparks Nevada, Marshal on Mars" and ends with the segment "Beyond Belief." The middle show varies from month to month, although it is usually one of the segments listed below.

The Adventures of Captain Laserbeam

After "Beyond Belief," this is my favorite segment from The Thrilling Adventure Hour. "Captain Laserbeam" is a goofy superhero story featuring a campy Superman/Ironman-type protagonist who is helped out by a bunch of teenagers known as the Adventurekateers. As with "Beyond Belief," the stories of "Captain Laserbeam" as not serialized in the way that "Sparks Nevada" is; nonetheless, there is some development over the years in terms of character arcs, and I think it would be wiser to start listening to this segment from the beginning rather than trying to catch on now. Captain Laserbeam gets himself in all kinds of jams involving the various villains that plague his hometown of Apex City. He ranks this villains in order and like any good superhero, his villains are all ridiculously named and themed characters of their own. My particular favorite has been the Die-brarian (along with his henchman, Papercut), as his presence is a golden opportunity for a ton of bookish-based jokes. (I should have mentioned this in my earlier post: The Thrilling Adventure Hour isn't funny just because of situational comedies or witty repartee; it's also rife with tons of intellectual/nerdy jokes.)

Like with most of the other segments on The Thrilling Adventure Hour, part of the comedy comes from establishing regular catchphrases, but then "Captain Laserbeam" takes it a step further by eventually messing with the now-familiar phrases. Unlike most of the other segments, there isn't really a duo central to "Captain Laserbeam." Captain Laserbeam is more or less on his own, with an occasional bit of information supplied by the ever-rotating cast of Adventurekateers. That means there isn't the same tension of two opposites like Sparks and Croach in "Sparks Nevada" or a symbiotic working relationship like that of Frank and Sadie in "Beyond Belief." Still, Captain Laserbeam's short adventures usually do just fine with him more or less on his own.

Over time, however, the writers ingeniously introduced a new character as a great foil to Captain Laserbeam. The ever upbeat and optimistic Captain Laserbeam found an unlikely alliance with the darker, more pessimistic vigilante known as Phillip Fathom, the deep-sea detective. In one of the behind-the-scenes interviews released on the podcast, Hal Lublin (the voice behind Phillip Fathom, as well as a variety of other characters on The Thrilling Adventure Hour) discussed his process in coming up with an appropriate sound for the deep-sea detective: Lublin noted that the writers were clearly riffing on The Batman character with Phillip Fathom, causing Lublin to contemplate which Batman portrayer he should seek to imitate. Would it be Adam West? Michael Keaton? George Clooney? No, Lublin decided Phillip Fathom should be voiced like Christian Bale as Batman. Nothing is more hilarious than hearing Phillip Fathom on stage shouting something like "My parents were murdered at sea!" in that deep, gravelly voice. In fact, one of my absolute favorite episodes of "Captain Laserbeam" is the one in which Fathom is introduced; hearing him shout "I'M NOT A GOSSIP!" cracks me up every time I hear it. I would love to hear more from Phillip Fathom in the further (and I suspect we will), and I think a spin-off of "Captain Laserbeam" with Phillip Fathom's solo adventures would be a great addition to the current rotation of segments.

One of the compelling things about Captain Laserbeam is that his mythology is not completely fixed yet, and the audience is slowly learning things about his alter ego and history, including his relationship with fellow superhero Dream Girl. Between this and the possibly of exploring Phillip Fathom's background further, there is plenty of fodder for new "Captain Laserbeam" episodes in the future.

Tales from the Black Lagoon

"Tales from the Black Lagoon" is the one anomaly in The Thrilling Adventure Hour cannon. Unlike all the other segments, it is not read live in front of an audience and it's got a much darker vibe. It's certainly still funny, but in a far less obvious way than the other segments. "Tales from the Black Lagoon" plays like a 1940s film noir with the characters all pulled from the Golden Age studio lot, although of course all with some new twist for comedic effect. We've got a cannibalistic Cary Grant, a dope-dealing Shirley Temple, an opium-using Jimmy Stewart, and so forth. This segment challenges the vocal actors in a different way than all the others - it's not just a matter of creating a new tone or accent, it's taking on a well-known personality and voice. The smooth jazzy music, the narrative structure, and the storylines all fit the noir mystery tropes; in sum, this is a great comedy version of old detective stories and very fitting with the idea of an old-time radio program. Unfortunately, this segment hasn't been on the podcast in recent years; the muted comedy may have been less popular than some of the other segments, although the likelier explanation is that the technical aspects of this one made it more difficult to execute.

Jefferson Reid, Ace American / Amelia Earhart, Fearless Flyer

These two segments are similar enough for me to feel okay with wrapping them up together. Like "Tales from the Black Lagoon," the "Jefferson Reid" segment hasn't been on in several years. In this case, it's likely because the usual actor behind Jefferson Reid was Nathan Fillion who has since been tapped to play Cactoid Jim when he's available for a show. "Jefferson Reid" and "Amelia Earhart" are both set in an alternate reality World War II, with Jefferson Reid acting as a sort of super solider and Amelia Earhart a time-traveling pilot (who did not actually disappear without trace over the Bermuda Triangle, rather hiding herself so that she could take part in clandestine operations to stop Nazi victories before they happen). These two segments are my least favorite on the show; the stories seem to be the same thing over and over again, and there's only so many times I can hear Jefferson Reid, Amelia Earhart, or one of their compatriots talk about "dirty Krauts" before I get tired of it. Basically, unlike the other segments in The Thrilling Adventure Hour, these two programs seem unoriginal. Also, despite having two female leads, "Amelia Earhart" tends to annoy me by suggesting that the two women are lesbians. Because of course two women trying to be patriotic during a world war have to be homosexual. Otherwise, they'd be home tending to their Victory gardens and adjusting their cake recipes to account for sugar rations.

The Cross-Time Adventures of Colonel Tick-Tock / The Algonquin Four

"Colonel Tick-Tock" is one of the weaker segments on the show, although it's definitely grown on me over numerous episodes. Colonel Tick-Tock is a member of the Queen's Royal Chrono Patrol, meaning that his job is to police the timeline and time travel at a moment's notice if something goes wrong (i.e., a dinosaur shows up in the modern day). "Colonel Tick-Tock" is notable for its clever use of language/wordplay around time and time travel, and sometimes for coming up with some rather ridiculous historical mash-ups. For some reason, Colonel Tick-Tock is rather effeminate and hinted at being gay, even though he is married to a woman. Another odd thing is that the Queen of England is voiced by a male actor, although that ends up being rather funny (think Jon Stewart's impression of Queen Elizabeth II).

"Colonel Tick-Tock" has earned its own spin-off in "The Algonquin Four," although as I far as I can recall, they have had only one or perhaps two solo episodes. The Algonquin Four consists of a quadruple of historical figures who have been given superhero qualities via a cosmic event: Harry Houdini has an elastic body, Woodrow Wilson can make things invisible, Robert Benchley "has dominion over flames," and Dorothy Parker is more or less the female version of The Incredible Hulk (She literally shouts "Dorothy Parker smash!!" at a moment's notice. In the behind-the-scenes interviews, Annie Savage who voices Dorothy Parker notes that the writers' helpful description of how to play this character was simply "dumber.") The four characters find themselves having to battle various enemies at times. "The Algonquin Four" is not one of my favorite segments either, but it's entertaining enough as an occasional episode.

Down in Moonshine Holler

"Moonshine Holler" is the "fairy tale" of The Thrilling Adventure Hour, but also is the most realistic (if you can actually call it that) out of the selection of segments. "Moonshine Holler" is about a rich man who met a woman at a party and found out she was the "Hobo Princess" when she left behind a fingerless glove. He immediately gave us his riches, changed his name to "Banjo Bindlestuff," and began traipsing the Depression Era-landscape in search of the "hobo paradise" named Moonshine Holler, where he hopes to be reunited with the woman he loves. On the road, Banjo finds a mentor in fellow homeless wanderer Gummy, and they navigate the world of hard luck together.

As with "Sparks Nevada" and "Beyond Belief," we have a comedy that works well because of the two leads and how they play off of each other. One of my favorite running jokes is when Gummy tells Banjo to do something like say hello or thank you, noting "It's the hobo way!!" and Banjo sighs, pointing out that it's actually "the regular people way also." Gummy (who is unbelievably voiced by Hal Lublin, the force behind Phillip Fathom) is a fan of shivving people and eating pie, although not necessarily in that order. In fact, Gummy's favorite exclamation is "Apple pie!," which somehow never fails to make me laugh.

"Moonshine Holler" also works by having a number of situational comedies arise. Most episodes follow a standard format in which Banjo and Gummy come across someone(s) who Banjo hopes either is the Hobo Princess or has information about her. Instead, this person(s) has a problem of their own, which Banjo could solve but only if he reveals his true identity as a millionaire. In the nick of time and with Gummy's encouragement, Banjo thinks up a solution that will solve the current crisis without blowing his cover. Despite being rather formulaic like this, I always find the story in "Moonshine Holler" to be hilarious. The combination of the new and interesting characters, the absurdity of yet another situation, and the funny jokes always leave each episode feeling fresh. This segment feels the most like it could have an end date though, as there is clearly a conclusion coming at some point when Banjo at last finds the Hobo Princess. Still, it's been some time since there was a "Moonshine Holler" episode released on the podcast, so I feel like there's potential for plenty more adventures in store for Banjo and Gummy.

I do have to note on "Moonshine Holler" that this is the segment that most walks the dangerous border between comedy and insult. Personally, I find it very funny because it's all meant in good, ridiculous humor and obviously no one out there currently (or during the Depression) is giving up millions to chase after a Cinderella-like character to a place that may or may not exist. Still, homelessness is a real problem and using these old stereotypes of jumping trains, making stone soup, and warming oneself by trashcan fires is not a flattering (or accurate) portrayal. I try to take it in stride and just go with the humorous aspects, but I could definitely see how some might find this offensive. It's not going to be everyone's cup of tea.

Jumbo the Elephant Saves ... [insert appropriate holiday here]

"Jumbo" is a rather sporadic segment that only appears around certain holidays. In fact, the writers have noted that it's unlikely we'll hear from Jumbo again, although there are still other holidays that could use a little elephantine cheer. Jumbo is a jazz band-playing elephant of Cuban descent living in Miami. Yes, he's an elephant from Cuba, because that makes geographical sense. However, it does mean that he pronounces his name as "Yumbo," which absolutely kills me for no good reason. It's just hilarious every time I hear it. Jumbo's main function is to tell holiday stories and talk about how he manages, against all odds, to make holidays run smoothly. There isn't too much to say about Jumbo, being as he's only been featured on two episodes, but they were very funny episodes, and I hope that he might appear for another holiday special in the future.

That covers all of the recurring segments featured on The Thrilling Adventure Hour, minus a couple of cross-over podcast episodes, which I will cover in part 3 of this (never-ending?) blog post. Stay tuned, solid citizens*!


* Don't get that reference? I suggest you crack in to those "Captain Laserbeam" episodes right away! :)

Sunday, February 9, 2014

The Podcast's the Thing Wherein I'll Catch a Laugh ... (Part 1)

As I've mentioned before, I absolutely love Paget Brewster as an actor. So much so in fact that I follow her account on Twitter because she posts funny and random things and just generally sounds so down to earth. Frequently, she would mention on Twitter a podcast that she participates in, and I wouldn't even bother to click on the link because I had given up on podcasts years earlier. (When I first got an Ipod, I was obsessed with the idea of podcasts and downloaded so many different ones, including a great too many news ones that released an episode every day, that I soon became overwhelmed with the number of unheard episodes I'd have queuing up at any given moment. So then rather than being a reasonable person who weeded out only some of the podcasts I was subscribed to, I simply deleted them all.) Eventually though, repeatedly seeing Brewster make reference to her role in the podcast compelled me to finally check out the premise of this particular podcast. When I found out that the podcast in question was The Thrilling Adventure Hour, a self-declared "new-time podcast in the style of old-time radio," I knew I'd have to check it out. Having spent a great deal of time with my grandparents when I was growing up, I had developed a love for classic movies, old-time crooners, and even Golden Age radio programs. The Thrilling Adventure Hour started as a staged reading out in Los Angeles and was eventually recorded to be shared with a listening audience throughout the country (perhaps even world?).

From that point on, I downloaded all the old episodes of The Thrilling Adventure Hour and would listen to them while doing all kinds of mundane tasks - usually housework like laundry or dishes. It's amazing how much faster and cheerfully these tedious tasks go when you're listening to something that grips your imagination and makes you laugh. The episodes are generally fairly short (about 20-30 minutes on average, with some exceptions) and come out with just the right frequency so that you are neither up to your elbows in backlog nor sitting around waiting impatiently for the next one to arrive. The monthly staged show is roughly one hour (hence the name) with three segments and some interstitial materials including advertisements for made-up products (WorkJuice Brand Coffee and Patriot Cigarettes, with the former eventually becoming an actual product). The podcast breaks each of the three segments down into its own episode, releasing them one at a time. (In the past, it occasionally had separate very brief episodes for the interstitials as well but those have not surfaced in quite some time.) The staged show always opens with the segment "Sparks Nevada, Marshal on Mars" and ends with the program "Beyond Belief." The middle show changes from month to month, although there is a limited universe of available choices at the moment (of course, the writers could keep on inventing new programs, or spin-offs of the other segments, to fill this time slot). Lately, podcast episodes have also included behind-the-scenes interviews with the show's writers, creative team, and actors as well as an ongoing Q&A session with two of the actors.

The show is written monthly by television writers Ben Acker and Ben Blacker (writers of the show Supernatural, amongst other things) with other members of the creative team including a director, composer, and live orchestra. The staged show is performed by a standard cast known as the WorkJuice Players (who all play a set role in one or two segments as well as guest spots on other segments) in addition to a variety of guest stars (some recurring). The Thrilling Adventure Hour attracts incredible talent, many of whom are well-known television actors. As the show has gotten increasingly popular, the guests have become bigger "names" in the business. The Thrilling Adventure Hour has become so popular that it's branched out to other media, including a graphic novel that tells the further stories of the characters introduced in the staged show/podcast. In this blog entry, I'd like to talk a little bit further about the main two segments of the show, "Sparks Nevada, Marshal on Mars" and "Beyond Belief." In a follow-up post, I will explore the other programs as well.

Sparks Nevada, Marshal on Mars

"Sparks Nevada" is a segment that is basically a Western-themed space opera. As the name implies, it takes place on Mars, where for some reason Earthling Sparks Nevada has been put in charge of all law enforcement. His deputy-of-sorts is a Martian named Croach the Tracker who feels he must re-pay his debt of onus to Nevada (with the onus constantly being added to or subtracted from in a balance that only Croach maintains). Each episode sees Sparks and Croach battling some new enemy of sorts, whether a literal attack by robots or something more metaphysical such as Nevada's depression when the woman he loves chooses someone else over him. "Sparks Nevada" is the most serialized of all the segments on The Thrilling Adventure Hour; therefore, this is the one that is best to start with from the beginning rather than trying to jump in now and hope to catch on to all the character arcs and in-jokes.

One of the funniest things about "Sparks Nevada" is the interaction between Sparks and Croach. Sparks is more of a "go with your guts" kind of guy while Croach tries to rationalize and reason through everything. Both have hilarious speech patterns with Sparks spluttering along and Croach coming across rather stilted. As I mentioned, there are numerous in-jokes, including oft-repeated lines and variations of them - for example, Nevada's famous catchphrase "I'm from ... Earth" and Croach constantly explaining Martian things to Sparks with "which you designate [insert English word here]." But as Marc Evan Jackson, the voice talent behind Sparks Nevada, noted in a recent Q&A session about the show, the characters in this show are more than they seem - and they are certainly growing. Jackson pointed this out particularly in the context of Croach, who can seem rather robotic, especially when the show first began, but who has come to developing a wider range of emotions.

However, the "Sparks Nevada" universe is more than just these two characters. There is a host of interesting recurring characters, including the Barkeep (who doesn't want trouble in his place), the artificial intelligence that operates Barkeep's space saloon (and does a lot of thinking on her own), Felton (an everyday citizen who is like the hypochondriac of trouble: he thinks it's there no matter what), the Red Plains Rider (potential love interest of both Sparks and Croach as well as a gunslinger in her own right), Cactoid Jim (a helpful and handsome vigilante; Sparks is often as jealous of Jim as he is grateful to him), Pemilly Stalwark (winner of the Earth's Moon's punishment soccer tournament, a riff on the very popular series The Hunger Games), Rebecca Rose Rushmore (an author of universal acclaim), not to mention all the outlaws that Nevada comes across as a matter of routine in his professional life. These outlaws and the hijinks that they cause add to the hilarity of the show; for instance, the mere entrance of Los Banditos Mutantes causes a ripple of laughter to ensue. The show is a good mix of hilarious situations caused via Nevada's work and those created by the issues in his social life. One of the funniest - and most touching - episodes of all combines both perfectly, in a musical format to boot.

Another thing that I appreciate about this program is that while Westerns as a genre (and to a lesser extent, science fiction as well) tend to be light on female characters, let alone ones that are more than just "damsels in distress" stereotypes, that is not the case here. "Sparks Nevada" may have more men than women on the show, but the female characters that are present are strong and independent. Red is a feisty character with her wits about her who seems to be faster at taking out the bad guys than Nevada is. Of course, the downside is every once in a while due to the fast pace of the show and the need to always create new tensions, Red can sometimes seem a little wishy-washy with her affections - she loves Nevada, she loves Croach, she loves Nevada, she loves Jim, she loves Nevada, she loves Jim. Sometimes it gets hard to remember from episode to episode where her affections lie. Pemilly Stalwak, as the character inspired by The Hunger Games's tough-as-nails protagonist Katniss Everdeen, is a complicated character who is physically tough and learning to become emotionally strong. Rebecca Rose Rushmore is the most stereotypical relationship-hungry woman, but she also has a steady backbone as well as a successful career of her own.

"Sparks Nevada, Marshal on Mars" is the story that started the whole production and is one of the most popular segments on the show. For that reason, the segment has spawned various spin-offs, including "Cactoid Jim, King of the Martian Frontier" about the further adventures of Cactoid Jim sans Nevada and crew, "Tales of the United Solar System Alliance" about a spaceship crew navigating the same universe and occasionally crossing into a "Sparks Nevada" episode, and most recently a segment featuring the Red Plains Rider in a solo adventure. As the show and the podcast both continue, no doubt we will see (read: hear) more growth in the characters populating the "Sparks Nevada" universe, other ridiculous antics, and perhaps additional spin-offs from the first thrilling adventure of the hour.

Beyond Belief

The Thrilling Adventure Hour always concludes with an episode of "Beyond Belief," which the creators refer to as a supernatural Nick and Nora. This segment's protagonists are the married couple Frank and Sadie Doyle, who'd gladly do nothing more than spend all their time locked up together in their Fifth Avenue penthouse apartment tossing back drink after drink. Sadly for the Doyles (but luckily for us), all manner of supernatural creatures have a knack for finding their way into Frank and Sadie's life. It probably doesn't help that Sadie's best friend is a vampire married to a werewolf and than Frank spent at least some of his orphaned childhood growing up in a church full of exorcists. Still, the Doyles have managed to encountered all types of unpleasant monsters and weird situations even when they don't bother to leave their apartment at all. Evil seeks them out. As the show continues, the "Beyond Belief" monsters have segued from ones we've all heard of such as vampires, genies, and so on to more obscure ones like a possessed gingerbread man, a Pinocchio-inspired boy trying to convince Frank and Sadie that they are his parents, etc. The show is never frightening though (nor is it meant to be) and despite usually being drunk at the time, the Doyles always manage to know exactly what to do in any given situation to eliminate the threat. They do this all while swigging back yet another drink ("clink!" being their catchphrase) and swapping turns on supplying the snappy sarcastic one-liners. The Doyles, especially Frank, also have a habit of lamenting about their desire to be alone with one another rather than actually being worried about the impending threat of whatever latest monster(s) they are facing.

Like with "Sparks Nevada," one of the most compelling things about "Beyond Belief" is the relationship between the two leads. The Doyles' love for each other and complete antipathy for just about everyone else they encounter would be horrible if you met them in real life, but here it's comedy gold. Paul F. Tompkins and Paget Brewster shine in the roles of Frank and Sadie Doyle, and their accents for these two characters are some of the most fun ones on The Thrilling Adventure. Unlike in "Sparks Nevada," these two characters are basically static and you could jump in on any random episode and probably not be missing much. (There are, however, a few episodes that make reference to an earlier one in an important way, such as the recent "Basil's Day" one.) Nevertheless, the characters and their witty repartee (not to mention whatever antics will occur with their latest nemesis) make the show interesting and compelling enough that I actually prefer this one to "Sparks Nevada" (indeed, it's my favorite segment of The Thrilling Adventure Hour, hands down). And while Frank and Sadie don't really change over the life of the show/podcast, that doesn't mean they are always the same from episode to episode. Over time, we learn more about their past lives, their friends, and their few hobbies outside of imbibing alcohol nonstop. Each episode brings a fresh new adventure full of laughs so even without a serialized nature for this segment, I still can't wait for the next one to show up in my queue. "Beyond Belief" is certainly the perfect nightcap to conclude The Thrilling Adventure Hour.

That's all for this post, readers. Stay tuned for part 2, in which I'll discuss the other segments found in The Thrilling Adventure Hour.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Don't Trust a, Never Trust a

This may not be something I've addressed before on this blog, but this post needs this preface: I am not a fan of sitcoms. Sure, I've turned to the random episode of Will & Grace for background noise when nothing else half-way decent is on, I watched re-runs of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air in college because it was always on in the cafeteria during lunch time, I've seen a ton of Friends episodes simply because the show was unavoidable in the late 90s/early 2000s no matter how clichéd it became, I even tried to like How I Met Your Mother because so many people I know absolutely love it, but I never really enjoy sitcoms as a whole. In general, they rely too much on the slapstick, characters that are more caricature than anything else, and running gags that become so predictable that gag really is the word to describe them. ("We were on a break!" isn't that funny to begin with; as a recurring refrain it's irritating more than anything else.) When I see a joke coming a mile off, I'm no longer interested. And if you need a laugh track to tell your audience that something's funny, I'm out of there. The one notable exception over the years was Scrubs (side note: I have a long blog post in the wings on that show) because it always took things to weird and unexpected places and could make me laugh like no other sitcom.

So without sitcoms as a comedic fall-back, I try to lighten my load of largely dramatic entertainment (whether it be TV, movies, or books) with dramedies like my beloved Gilmore Girls or the weird hybrid cop procedural-comedy that USA offered/offers with Monk and Psych. But with two of those shows off the air and one winding down, it's getting harder to find something to watch that I haven't seen a hundred times before. My other laughs come from Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report and while the writers for those shows can certainly make comedic gold out of straw, when the straw is the real-life news of broken and corrupt government systems and officials, gross income inequality, corporate greed, and racial injustice, sometimes the end result is that I feel more depressed about the world we live in.

Cue me needing a break from all the bleakness and scrolling through what Netflix is offering up as popular these days. Lo and behold, I come across Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23. I shrug my shoulders and say, 'what the hey, why don't I give an episode or two a try? It'll probably be stupid but might as well find out for myself.' Then find me finding the show surprisingly interesting and watching all the episodes in a handful of days. (Yes, I am a binge TV watcher. But the show also had only two seasons with a total of 26 episodes before being canceled. Because if a show is a little bit different than the standard fare and a tad quirky and enjoyed by me, then of course it's not going to make it for long when competing with inane comedies, increasingly absurd "reality" TV shows, and whatever other formulaic shows are being offered up by mainstream networks.)


So what's this show about, you ask? Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23 opens with perky blonde Midwesterner June landing a dream job on Wall Street complete with relocation costs covered and a gorgeous company-owned apartment for living quarters. It seems too good to be true - and it is, for the company is immediately in shambles when accusations of corporate malfeasance arise. June is out of the street with no place to live or work in a hostile city where she knows no one except Mark, her would-be mentor on Wall Street whom she's met only briefly. But Mark pulls through, landing them both jobs at a local coffee shop (it's not glamorous, but it's a paycheck). Meanwhile, June looks for a roommate and thinks she finds the perfect one in Chloe, despite the cryptic warning from a neighbor: "Don't trust the bitch in apartment 23!" It turns out Chloe is running a scam in which she overcharges the renter, demands three months' worth of rent, and then drives her roommate so crazy that they leave almost instantly. But June finds out about the scam, hangs on through the craziness, and thus begins a beautiful - albeit sometimes dysfunctional - friendship between two very opposite women. Naïve and friendly June is always trying to do the right thing while morally ambiguous Chloe is constantly engaging in some new deception, although sometimes with motives that seem at least partially honorable.

In addition to the Odd Couple pairing of the two roommates, the show rounds out the cast with a number of regulars. There's Mark who becomes June's close friend as well as manager; Robin the neighbor who's obsessed with Chloe and a former victim of her roommate scam (don't think about the second part too much because yeah, the writers weren't thinking that factoid through when they threw it into the show); Eli the creepy pervert neighbor who surprisingly has good advice at times; Chloe's BFF, the sensitive actor James Van Der Beek; and James's flamboyant personal assistant Luther. Other semi-regulars on the show including the parents of both Chloe and June as well as co-workers, various love interests, and June's spiritual adviser Pastor Jin.

Some of the pros of the show (in no particular order) include:
- Non-chronological storytelling done well. The episodes frequently begin with the ending - some weird situation that seems completely random and often out of sync with the narration from June, but we eventually see how events lead up to this situation and why June might be saying something to the likes of "I have the best roommate ever" while Chloe is swinging at her. This kind of out of sorts storytelling isn't uncommon for dramas but it's rarer to see it in a sitcom - and even less likely to be done effectively. There are also fun quick flash backs/flash forwards/brief imagined scenarios scattered throughout, which keep the pace lively and remind me of some of the best parts of Scrubs as well.
- Unpredictable plot lines and twists. Unlike the standard fare for a sitcom, I don't see the jokes coming and I can't tell where the storyline is going. I am 100% sucked in to each episode because I really have no idea what to expect next. The writers are not afraid to go down the rabbit hole or introduce situations that are stranger than the average viewer would imagine.
- The absurdity of the situations presented. Some sitcoms choose to find comedy in the everyday routines of life - workplace woes, dating disasters, children's mishaps, etc. - but others choose to go to the other extreme and show us lives vastly different than our own. I like both kinds of comedies, but only provided that they are well done (which, as I believe I've made clear, most sitcoms do not do). Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23 goes for the latter option, with characters who party all the time, hang with celebrities, and get mixed up in scams for either money or pranks. This is certainly entertainment that provides relief from the everyday problems we all face from time to time. When watching Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23, it's unlikely that a situation will occur that makes you start thinking about office politics, sitting in traffic, housework piling up, etc. For those 20-odd minutes while you're watching an episode, you are completely sucked into this world and not worrying about yours.
- Lots of random references to all kinds of things, with a huge helping of pop culture ones (some I had to look up) in the mix. I love when shows do this.
- Diversity in the cast. The show is set in New York City, one of the epicenters of the racial and ethnic melting pot that is this country, so it's only fitting that the characters be of various backgrounds and not just a bunch of middle-class Caucasians like in some shows (::cough:: Friends ::cough::).
- Quirky and interesting characters that are both unusual for TV and slightly more developed than the typical comedy caricature. Again, the writers were fearless - in this case, having no compunction with creating characters that wouldn't be likeable.
  • Chloe borders on sociopathic with her party life of instant gratification and various cons to get what she wants, regardless of whether it's lying to strangers at bars to get free drinks or tricking June into causing a scene at a family Thanksgiving dinner so it's not Chloe ruining the holiday for a change. Yet at the end of each episode, you feel compelled to view on and see what antics Chloe will come up with next. On a couple of occasions, I even found myself rooting for Chloe to get what she wanted in that episode. And her character is so unpredictable that she really makes the show interesting and varied. I found myself sitting and thinking, 'oh, Chloe is becoming a deeper person and she's revealing something personal about herself,' only to be fooled by another of her games. Yet there are certainly times when Chloe does grow as a person so her character is never by any means static. But even when her intentions are good, Chloe goes about things in her own twisted way ...
  • June may the moral center of the show (as well as its narrator) but that doesn't mean she's always the most likeable one. Sometimes her naivety and worldview can be as annoying as they are endearing. In the early episodes, her obsession with following her life plan to be settled down rankled me. (You think you eventually want to get married and have children? Fine. You set a time table for when each of these important life events must occur? Don't even get me started. I've met people like this in real life. They're not fun to be around.) But June also grows and changes as a character, working to shed parts of herself that are too rigid and learning to allow some spontaneity to spice up her life while still following her dreams.
  • Eli is the perfect example of not being afraid to go there. His character is introduced as the crudest of perverts, always looking out his window and into the girls' apartment (and I won't go further into describing his behavior). But despite it all, his character morphs from one I absolutely detested to someone who becomes a half-way decent person. Sure, he's still constantly at his window by season two but now he's giving helpful advice rather than leering.
  • Having James Van Der Beek play James Van Der Beek = brilliant. I was never a Dawson's Creek fan and I can't recall seeing Van Der Beek in anything other than his special guest appearance as a killer with dissociative identity disorder on a two-part episode of Criminal Minds, so I had no idea if he would do well in a comedy. Well, I absolutely love him here. The fictionalized version of himself is full of comic gold as he obsesses over being a celebrity dancer on Dancing with the Stars, wonders why he's never been nominated for People's Sexiest Man Alive, or even just holds an anti-scary Halloween party. Having Chloe hobnob with a celebrity BFF also allows for a variety of guest stars to pop up without it feeling forced. Of course, Busy Philipps might just show up in an episode because she is a former co-star after all. (Incidentally, the diner where James and Busy meet looks oddly similar to the Royal Diner in Bones, a completely different kind of show on another network all together. Did anyone else notice a similarity?) These kinds of random appearances work much better in this fictionalized world than in other TV shows where a guest star has to be crammed into a script in some weird way requiring contortionist feats in order to make any kind of sense.
  • Mark is the character that is the most difficult for me to wrap my head around. He certainly serves many functions - June's boss as well as her confidante, potential suitor for both girls, and occasional adversarial friend to James as well - but his role seems the least well defined. Mark is the closest to the "nice guy"/normal character you'll see in this show, although he is certainly not the straight man of the typical comedy routine. He has his own quirks and quips throughout the show; however, sometimes his lines/jokes are the most out of the blue and therefore occasionally less funny. At times his character can be very serious, pushing the other characters to a realization about themselves or their current situation, while other times he just comes across as incredibly goofy. Mark is definitely the most difficult character to peg. Of course, this also means that he can come across as the most "real" character, for people in real life tend to be a mixed bag of all sorts of different things.
  • Robin is introduced as "in love with" Chloe, but it's never really clear what exactly that entails. She is not necessarily a lesbian (or not exclusively one at least, for she is depicted on one occasion as enthralled in a non-platonic way by James as Dawson). Despite the claim of love for Chloe, at times Robin actually seems irritated by or angry with Chloe. Mostly it seems like she's enamored of Chloe's lifestyle and just wants to be let into that inner circle, thinking that being Chloe's friend will make her instantaneously cool. To that end, she is more than willing to do things like pick up Chloe's mail, stock her fridge with food, or borrow a limo from a cousin in order to haul Chloe and her friends up to the Hamptons for a weekend. Therefore, Robin pops up at random times under unusual circumstances. Again, though, she is like a real person in that her motivations are murky (perhaps even to herself) and hard to pin down. Liza Lapira really rocks this role, as she does in any other bit part I've seen her in before whether it's the fledging agent Michelle on NCIS or the eye-rolling, thinks-she's-better-than-anyone-else-present swim class student in The Big Bad Swim. The only real downside with Robin was that by the second season, we were seeing her show up in apartment 23 less often.
  • Luther is the most unfortunately caricatured character on the show. He is the quintessential effeminate fashionista homosexual sidekick who looks at Chloe as though she is the enemy he'd most like to "bitch slap" rather than allow her to have more influence over James than he has. (Sadly for him, he usually loses when it comes to gaining James's affinity.) Luther is certainly a funny addition to the cast and has some real zingers, but he is the character that seems most like, well, a character.
  • The parents are always fun when they pop up. June skypes with her parents regularly with mom usually taking the forefront; she ends up becoming an adviser to James on his career in general but in particular with regard to Dancing with the Stars. Chloe's parents have a strained relationship that helps to explain her own dysfunction; as characters, they add hilarity and absurdity to any situation. Whenever Chloe's parents are going to be on an episode, you know you're going to end up with some sort of ridiculousness going down.
  • Pastor Jin is the leader of the Korean church that June feels is a fitting community for her Midwestern values. Pastor Jin, however, is far more liberal than the stereotypical reverend, which ends up feeling fitting with the June that evolves on the show.
Of course, no show is perfect and there are some cons to Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23:
- Chloe's questionable morals and scams can sometimes cross a line. Yes, I understand that part of her character is that she pushes the limits, but there are some things that seem over the top. Chloe sleeping around with married men is something many of us would not condone, but it's not an unheard of thing by any stretch of the imagination. But it's completely unnecessary for Chloe to offhandedly remark that "Tranq sex is consensual." in an episode uses a tranquilizer gun as part of the plot. Joking about the heinous crime of rape just isn't funny. (Ask Daniel Tosh about the blowback on that mistake.)
- Likewise, there are other lines/situations that perhaps stretch/blur common taste. In one episode, James comes to the realization that an old acting coach behaved inappropriately with him. Later in the episode, Mark and June dish the gossip together with Mark starting the conversation with a comment to the effect of "I think James was molested by a former acting coach." Cut to a scene of Van Der Beek sitting alone on a stoop in his underwear looking deep in thought and upset. After a few moments, he get up, states that he is okay, and walks away. Again, making jokes about something like the sexual molestation of a teenaged boy = not funny. It's a real crime and its victims don't just shake it off after a few minutes sitting thoughtfully. Comedy walks a fine line between being funny and just being insulting/offensive. It's not just the writers of Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23 who seem to have a bit of difficulty navigating that line; all comics seem to falter from time to time. Luckily these kinds of moments are rare in this show and most of the funny bits are actually funny.
- There were two episodes in season 1 ("The Leak" and "Parent Trap") that fell a little flat. They were not bad episodes but they were a little disappointing compared to the high caliber of the rest of the show. It's unfortunate to have two relative duds early on in a show, especially given how easily the networks seem to be giving up on shows lately.
- The title of the show is off-putting. There are some people who were probably turned off by the use of profanity in the title; however, if they are that squeamish, this show isn't for them anyway. The reason I found the title inappropriate was that it told me little to nothing about the content of the show. It also puts the emphasis on Chloe when the show is really about the two women and their relationship with/influence over each other as well as relying heavily on the supporting cast for situations, comedic effect, and character development. And, the title gave the impression that it wouldn't be a show with (arguably) positive portrayals of women as multi-layered people with many different motivations but rather one that resorted to name-calling in the worse way. Sandy Cohen of The Associated Press delves more deeply into the implications of putting the word "bitch" in the title of a TV show with this article.
- And, of course, the biggest con of all is that the show ended far too soon. With only two seasons under its belt, Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23 definitely still had a lot of territory to explore. Chloe's crazy antics could only be hampered by the writers' imagination; June and Mark might continue to work through their feelings for each other; Luther's novel could have been picked up by a publisher; and James might continue his quest to find his real father. The final episode of season two (which ended up being the series finale) also introduced the possibility of Chloe and June taking their friendship to a new level beyond the shallow end of the pool as Chloe finally began to open up about her real feelings and thoughts. And since I could so rarely predict where the show was going to go at any given moment, there's no way I could predict where it would have gone if the writers were given more seasons to develop these characters and find new situations for them.

While I don't think I'll ever find another comedy I'll like as much Scrubs, which I still find incredibly and ridiculously funny even after having seen almost every episode multiple times now, I was pleasantly surprised with Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23. If you don't mind watching something with unlikeable - albeit quirky and fun in their own way - characters, you might just find yourself laughing along if you give the show a try also.

Sunday, January 5, 2014

Happy New Year! The Best Books of the Past Year (2013)

So perhaps it's a bit ironic that my last entry was titled in part "We Had the Greatest Expectations" as I had the greatest expectations of staying more on top of updating this blog. Alas, several months past with radio silence from me. While I've been at least occasionally doing some arts and entertainment type things I'd like to share with you all (or you all who are still kicking around here from time to time), I've been short on time to ever write about any of it. Now that it's a new year, I won't make the same mistake as before of promising to make updates more timely as, let's face it, that's not my forte. But I did want to pop in for a quick post with the obligatory year-end list (although it's now already the new year!). As I have done for the past few years, I'm providing here a quick list of the books I found the most compelling reads during 2013. Note, as always, these are not necessarily books released during 2013, simply books that I read during the last year and that have stuck with me. Hopefully this selection might prompt you to pick up some new books for your TBR pile!

Without any further ado, here's the list itself. It's broken down into two major categories: adult books and children's/YA books. Graphic novels and nonfiction books are indicated by these symbols respectively: ^ and **. Any books that I was re-visiting for a second read are marked with a (2) after the title. Each title is hyperlinked to my review of it on LibraryThing for anyone looking for more information on that particular book.

The Best Books of 2013
 
Adult

Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut
Collected Stories by Graham Greene
The Dinner by Herman Koch
Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic**^ by Alison Bechdel
The Girls' Guide to Love and Supper Clubs by Dana Bate
Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn
The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
I'd Know You Anywhere by Laura Lippman
Maus: A Survivor's Tale**^ by Art Spiegelman
Murder at the Frankfurt Bookfair by Hubert Monteilhet
We Need to Talk about Kevin by Lionel Shriver


Children's/Young Adult

123 versus ABC by Mike Boldt
Bear and Bee by Sergio Ruzzier
Fancy Nancy and the Boy from Paris (2) by Jane O'Connor
The Fantastic Jungles of Henri Rosseau** by Michelle Markel
How Are You Peeling? by Joost Elffers
Interrupting Chicken by David Ezra Stein
Knuffle Bunny Free: An Unexpected Diversion by Mo Willems
What's So Terrible about Swallowing an Appleseed? by Harriet Lerner


** = nonfiction
(2) = re-read
^ = graphic novel

Happy reading to all and to all a good night!

Saturday, September 21, 2013

"Great Expectations, We Had the Greatest Expectations"

For a week now, I've not been feeling particularly well so I've been spending my spare time resting as much as possible. Mostly, this has meant laying down and watching something or other that I've already seen so that I'll fall asleep sooner rather than later. But last night I was getting a little bored of just re-watching TV episodes I'd had seen once or twice already. So I scrolled through my Netflix queue looking for something to lift my spirits a little and ended up choosing the most recent TV adaptation of Charles Dickens's classic novel Great Expectations from the BBC and PBS's Masterpiece Theatre - I know, super cheery, right?

Going into viewing the 2011 version of Great Expectations, I didn't have much by way of expectations actually. Somehow, despite my love of costume dramas based on great literature (and in this case, based on a beloved book by one of my favorite authors), I hadn't really heard any buzz about this adaptation. Basically, the only reason it was on my radar at all was because I had heard that Gillian Anderson played the character of the eccentric Miss Havisham. Based on the strength of Ms. Anderson's previous acting chops alone (okay, and my love of Dickens), I decided to check this version out. Almost immediately, I was blown away on how well done this adaptation was and enjoyed this fresh look at the work. Stunning cinematography, haunting music that enhanced the ambiance, authentic settings, and excellent costuming and make-up were just the beginning of great elements brought together for this adaptation.

I'd be the first to admit that Dickens can be melodramatic at times (hey, it was the Victorian era he was writing in), and it seems that previous adaptations of Great Expectations liked to yuk this up. Instantly, the viewer sees that's not going to be the case in this version. Instead, we have a realistic view of Victorian England, the gritty underside to all those beautiful costume dramas to which we've become accustomed. The miniseries opens - as the book does - with Magwitch escaping a prison ship and coming across the young Pip on the marshes on his way back home after visiting his parents' graves in the little churchyard nearby. Dickens describes Magwitch as "A fearful man, all in coarse gray, with a great iron on his leg. A man with no hat, and with broken shoes, and with an old rag tied round his head. A man who had been soaked in water, and smothered in mud, and lamed by stones, and cut by flints, and stung by nettles, and torn by briars; who limped, and shivered, and glared, and growled; and whose teeth chattered in his head as he seized me by the chin." In past versions, Magwitch seems only frightful to a young boy like Pip and perhaps has a smudge of dirt on his face and some unkempt hair. But this Magwitch is terrifying on first sight and shocks the viewer as much as he does Pip. He is covered in mud and blood and is more than menacing (nearly savage) when he happens upon Pip along the dreary and isolated marshes, and that's when the viewer immediately knows this is going to be a different kind of adaptation. Everywhere you look, there is something realistic about the characters and settings, down to the minutest details like the peeling paint on the Gargerys' house and the constant mud holes in the lane leading up to their home. It doesn't matter if some of those attempts for realism involve grit and grime: this is the England that Dickens knew and wrote about and not all of it is pretty.

And it's not just in appearances alone that we have a different take on the classic novel - it's also in the characters. Two of the most iconic characters from Great Expectations are that of Miss Havisham and her adopted daughter Estella. Miss Havisham is perhaps best described as the melodramatic extreme of the scorned spinster. After having been jilted on her wedding day, time just stops for Miss Havisham and she never picks up her life again. When introducing this character for the first time, Dickens describes her as thus:

In an arm-chair, with an elbow resting on the table and her head leaning on that hand, sat the strangest lady I have ever seen, or shall ever see. She was dressed in rich materials,—satins, and lace, and silks,—all of white. Her shoes were white. And she had a long white veil dependent from her hair, and she had bridal flowers in her hair, but her hair was white. Some bright jewels sparkled on her neck and on her hands, and some other jewels lay sparkling on the table. Dresses, less splendid than the dress she wore, and half-packed trunks, were scattered about. She had not quite finished dressing, for she had but one shoe on,—the other was on the table near her hand,—her veil was but half arranged, her watch and chain were not put on, and some lace for her bosom lay with those trinkets, and with her handkerchief, and gloves, and some flowers, and a Prayer-Book all confusedly heaped about the looking-glass. It was not in the first few moments that I saw all these things, though I saw more of them in the first moments than might be supposed. But I saw that everything within my view which ought to be white, had been white long ago, and had lost its lustre and was faded and yellow. I saw that the bride within the bridal dress had withered like the dress, and like the flowers, and had no brightness left but the brightness of her sunken eyes. I saw that the dress had been put upon the rounded figure of a young woman, and that the figure upon which it now hung loose had shrunk to skin and bone. Once, I had been taken to see some ghastly waxwork at the Fair, representing I know not what impossible personage lying in state. Once, I had been taken to one of our old marsh churches to see a skeleton in the ashes of a rich dress that had been dug out of a vault under the church pavement. Now, waxwork and skeleton seemed to have dark eyes that moved and looked at me. I should have cried out, if I could.
...
It was then I began to understand that everything in the room had stopped, like the watch and the clock, a long time ago. I noticed that Miss Havisham put down the jewel exactly on the spot from which she had taken it up. As Estella dealt the cards, I glanced at the dressing-table again, and saw that the shoe upon it, once white, now yellow, had never been worn. I glanced down at the foot from which the shoe was absent, and saw that the silk stocking on it, once white, now yellow, had been trodden ragged. Without this arrest of everything, this standing still of all the pale decayed objects, not even the withered bridal dress on the collapsed form could have looked so like grave-clothes, or the long veil so like a shroud.
So she sat, corpse-like, as we played at cards; the frillings and trimmings on her bridal dress, looking like earthy paper. I knew nothing then of the discoveries that are occasionally made of bodies buried in ancient times, which fall to powder in the moment of being distinctly seen; but, I have often thought since, that she must have looked as if the admission of the natural light of day would have struck her to dust. 
In previous adaptations, Miss Havisham is presented almost as a quaintly eccentric woman who doesn't leave her house much and occasionally dons her would-be wedding dress but otherwise seems to hold it together. In this adaptation, Gillian Anderson plumbs much deeper psychological depths to bring to the screen a truly pathetic - and in turn, frightening - Miss Havisham. This Miss Havisham is fragile both psychologically and physically. She has a deep fear of abandonment - a self-fulfilling complex of abandonment, actually - and hungers desperately for the little companionship she has in Estella. She stands with her head tilted toward her listeners and eagerly awaits to see how her words will impact the listener: 'Am I getting the desired result or not?' she seems to worry.
Anderson as Miss Havisham
Her hair is not brushed and coming more undone and wild over time, her feet are bare and dirty, her lips are severely chapped, and her skin is unearthly in its paleness. Miss Havisham still carries herself as a lady in her posture and gait, but her mental illness manifests itself clearly - and outside of her control when she is nervous - in a self-mutilating tic of picking at her hand in the same spot until it festers. To play Miss Havisham, Anderson adjusted her voice to a breathy falsetto, which serves to reinforce the idea of her being fragile while also giving her an otherworldly eeriness. She is truly an object of pity mixed with a frightful glimpse at what mental illness can do to a person. This Miss Havisham makes you wonder what she was like before being jilted and how stable she would have been even if she had married Compeyson as she wished.

Again, the setting for Miss Havisham doesn't shy away from the grime and it's through this disturbing lens that we gain further insight into Miss Havisham's clouded state of mind. Other adaptations have shown a house that looks more or less pristine with some items related to Miss Havisham's planned wedding remaining untouched like a monument of woe. Not so here. Satis House is crumbling beneath Miss Havisham's feet, and she is doing nothing to fix it. If anything, she is actively working against its upkeep. Everything is covered in a layer of dust, nay, layers of dust. A banquet hall with a set table - complete with a three-tiered wedding cake - falls further into decay as time passes. The house, not terribly far from the damp marshes, suffers other decomposition as well, including moldy, rotten walls and moth-eaten curtains. As the years pass and Miss Havisham increasingly unravels, her mansion follows suit. In this respect, Satis House becomes a character of its own and like its mistress, it is a fascinating train wreck: you can't tear your eyes away from it, but it is terrible to behold.

With her addled mind, Miss Havisham has extrapolated from her experience with Compeyson that all men are evil and must be punished for their eventual betrayal of the women who love them. She plans to enact her revenge through Estella, the little girl she adopted for the purpose of raising up to be a heartbreaker, although her exact means of achieving this are unclear (i.e., she intends for Estella to marry well, which seems an odd means of breaking hearts and manipulating men. This is the Victorian era after all and married women have basically no rights over their husbands; far better for Estella to enter and break engagements if Miss Havisham's goal is to punish men). As such, Miss Havisham sends for Pip to become Estella's occasional playmate when they are both children for Estella to practice on and perfect her skill of making men love her. Poor Pip, an innocent young boy unused to such mind games, is completely unaware of this and his money-grubbing sister and uncle see nothing but dollar signs in the arrangement so they do not stop to consider the motives behind such a request.

With this unhealthy arrangement and upbringing by a such a sad character as Miss Havisham, Estella is generally portrayed as a cold and cruel; in fact, she says as much in the source material: "do you reproach me for being cold? ...  You should know," said Estella. "I am what you have made me." But here both actresses who play Estella (Izzy Meikle-Small as a child and Vanessa Kirby as an adult) add another dimension. This Estella is clearly damaged by her life experiences, emotionally as well as psychologically. When she says the line above, it is not merely a statement of fact as some actors deliver the line, it is also a haughty payback meant to wound Miss Havisham as well as an expression of regret. This is an Estella you can empathize with and one that allows you to see why Pip has loved her for so many years. She is someone who has no concept of how to interact naturally with other human beings, whose manipulations are perhaps just as much a product of not understanding the workings of a sane person as they are an enactment of Miss Havisham's wishes for vengeance.

This new interpretation of Estella made me start really thinking about the female characters of Great Expectations. Perhaps because this was the first full Dickens novel I ever read (after first being exposed to his arguably most famous work, the novella A Christmas Carol), it hadn't occurred to me before how unlike a typical Dickensian heroine Estella is. As much as I love Dickens, he was a product of his era and as such, his female characters - when they aren't throwaway characters of little consequence or evil villains like Madame DeFarge of A Tale of Two Cities - are mostly the Victorian stereotype of "the light of the home." Think of sweet little angel characters with no personality of their own who make a welcoming home that shelters the men in their lives from the cruel outside world, and you've got the main idea. You've got your Lucie Manettes (A Tale of Two Cities), your Agnes Wickfields (David Copperfield), even your Mrs. Micawbers (also David Copperfield), etc. Estella, however, does not fit this mold - she's a far more complex heroine and perhaps that's why she's one of the few female characters in Dickens's novels to have such appeal that even contemporary songwriters are sitting "by my bedside with papers and poetry about Estella" ("Great Expectations" by The Gaslight Anthem; the title for this blog post also comes from this song's lyrics). And, even though she clearly inflicts emotional and psychological damage on both Estella and Pip, Miss Havisham is by no means an unredeemable villain like Madame DeFarge or even Miss Murdstone from David Copperfield. As I explained above, she is at times a pitiable character and when it starts to dawn on her what monsters she has created out of her own unquenchable grief, there is nothing left to do but forgive her for her role in creating turmoil in the young people's lives.

And then there's Mrs. Joe - another complicated character. Mostly she's a character you like to hate, or at least dislike, and that's the quality most picked up in this TV adaptation. Despite being Pip's first guardian and his sister, she's always referred to in reference to her husband, as it is the lovable Joe who cares the most for Pip emotionally. But despite Mrs. Joe's "rampages" against both her husband and Pip and her frequent desire to see herself "raised up" above her station by any means possible (even if it means selling out her younger brother), she is the one who raises young Pips and cares for his physical needs. In this way, she is still a variation of the light of the home stereotype. When she is later bludgeoned and turned into a vegetable, there is nothing left but pity for her unenviable life. Meanwhile, because there apparently needs to be the obligatory light of the home stereotype from Mr. Dickens, we also have here some perfect examples of that character. We occasional hear of and see the perfectly amiable, lovely, and complete forgettable character of Clara, the fiancé of Pip's friend Herbert Pocket. Not seen in this TV adaptation (because even with a three-hour miniseries, Dickens needs to be condensed) is the character of Miss Skiffins who also exemplifies this stereotype.
 
Having thoroughly examined the female characters, now it's time to explore the men of Great Expectations. Of course, we have to start with the hero - and narrator, in the book - of our story, young Philip Pirrip, known to all simply as Pip. I absolutely loved Oscar Kennedy, the actor who played Pip as a child. He so perfectly captured Pip's many emotions from fear of the escaped convicts to enraptures with Estella. His tour de force is most likely in the scene in which he and Joe travel on special request to Miss Havisham's estate to discuss his future. Pip is all smiles as he listens to Miss Havisham's praise of his exceptionalism, expecting to be given something to make him a gentleman worthy of Estella. Instead she offers to pay for his apprenticeship to become a blacksmith like Joe. Instantly, the light goes out of Pip's eyes and the smile fades as he realizes that Miss Havisham means for him to be shamed with this proposal, that she is reminding him of his place as a tradesman. Still, Pip realizes that this is gift should be recognized as generous and one that will please Joe especially. So he holds his tongue and tries to show appreciation for Miss Havisham's deed. But it is indeed a struggle to do so, and we see this in a look he gives Miss Havisham that seems to convey that he could murder her in that moment. It is a magnificent, albeit heartbreaking, scene.

Booth as Pip
Compare this to the rather emotionless expression we see on the older Pip's face when he reacts to the news that he has a benefactor and will receive a fortune. As you might gather then, I was less endeared to Douglas Booth as the older Pip, who seemed miscast to me. Something about him - perhaps his "pretty boy" looks - did not seem fitting with the "boy from the forge," even if most of adult years on screen are part of his life after he receives a gift from an anonymous donor (who he presumes to be Miss Havisham come around on the idea that he and Estella are meant for one another) to make a gentleman of him and send him off to London. Nonetheless, there is nothing I can say that was technically wrong with Booth's performance in the final two episodes of the series in which he stars. He did a fine job of conveying all of Pip's emotions during his roller-coaster London years, which include such scenes as: embarrassment at Joe's arrival to Pip's fancy club in London; jealousy of Mr. Drummle's attention to Estella; betrayal and anger on so many occasions; and many others bundled up together over the course of a dramatic denouement.

Rounding out the male cast is Shaun Dooley as Joe, who does an excellent job portraying the long-suffering blacksmith married to a woman who is first argumentative and then severely disabled while being guardian to her rather ungrateful brother. Dooley's portrayal makes your heart say "aww, poor Joe" or "yeah, good old Joe" every time he is on screen, depending on the situation. Joe is the linchpin in Pip's life and he is undoubtedly one of the most endearing characters in Great Expectations. Another very likable character is Herbert Pocket, who becomes Pip's mentor in gentlemanly ways and closest friend in London. Herbert is ever cheerful and optimistic, with a smile on his face whether he's talking about how his family cut him off financially or an escaped convict is literally holding a knife to his throat. Herbert is played expertly by Harry Lloyd, who is apparently a direct descendent of Dickens (an interesting turn of events given that the character was most likely originally based at least in part on Dickens's son Charley).

Pip's other notable London acquaintances include his solicitor Mr. Jaggers (a slippery character of questionable morals who holds nearly all the secrets of Great Expectations close to his vest); Jaggers's chief clerk Wemmick (outwardly rough but with a kind heart); and Mr. Drummle (a cretinous son of a baronet who is attracted to Estella). And, of course, we have the two escaped convicts - Magwitch and Compeyson. Magwitch is well played by Ray Winstone, who does excellent work convincingly changing Magwitch from savagely aggressive to fatherly compassionate at a moment's notice. Compeyson's bit role is played by Paul Rhys, who perfectly embodies the stereotypical Victorian gentleman villain. I leave it up to the viewer to decide whether that it is a good thing or something irksome. Back home, we have Uncle Pumblechook who is always looking for an angle to increase his stature or wallet and Orlick, Joe's assistant at the forge who stops at nothing to bring down those who he feels threaten him - namely, Mrs. Joe and Pip. For the most part, these characters are all well cast in this adaptation, although I felt that Orlick was perhaps over the top in looking the role of a villainous character. (That being said though, I think that if he were cleaned up a little bit, he would make a really great Uriah Heep if someone were to adapt that classic Dickens novel.) Wemmick also seemed perhaps a bit older than I expected for that role and sadly, his part was so condensed in this version that we saw little of the great friendship that ended up existing between him and Pip.

Indeed, as I've mentioned already, this adaptation did take some liberties with the original text. Because in the book we are told the story through Pip's narration, we never see anything outside of his perspective. The TV adaptation is not tied to this literary device, however, and occasionally makes use of seeing things outside of Pip's limited view. More than once, we see shared moments between Miss Havisham and Estella, which further reinforces how twisted Estella's upbringing is. (However, these seemed to come at the expense of seeing more scenes between young Pip and young Estella, which was regrettable. I felt their childhood spent together was rushed over and thus the roots of Pip's unshakable obsession with Estella were not given a great foundation, to mix metaphors a bit.) A later scene shows Miss Havisham writing yet another letter to a now distant Estella asking why she is so silent only to receive at that moment a stack of returned, unopened letters. In her grief Miss Havisham screams Estella's name and in the process ruins that scene for me. As the camera panned to the outside of Satis House with us hearing Miss Havisham belting "Estella!" from inside, my mind immediately went to A Streetcar Named Desire and I was pulled out of the moment into an entirely different literary work.

Although having to condense the lengthy novel into a three-hour miniseries probably plays a part, other changes are not merely a question of eliminating some "extraneous" scenes or reducing some characters' time on screen. The fire at Satis House becomes a far more dramatic - one might even say, melodramatic - moment in this version, although it seems to be fitting with the entirety of Miss Havisham's self-absorbed and ever-grieving persona. Likewise, Magwitch and Compeyson's fights are far more extreme and gritty on screen than in the book. I think changes like these ones work well actually, but the purists will not be pleased with them. There are other times when this modern production seems to think that sexing things up a little bit will make this series more of a hit with today's audience. (I will never understand why producers and/or writers think that fans of Austen, Dickens, Gaskell, etc. will want their classic literature to become more like the sex-filled stories that already everywhere else on TV and in movies.) So here we end up with a very awkward scene in which Drummle takes Pip to a brothel and offers him a pick amongst several women of various ethnic backgrounds. (Sidebar: Drummle is far more antagonistic toward Pip in this version than I recall him being in the book. One can only presume this was to make him an even more an unlikeable character - and I do believe Dickens did not want us to like him - but perhaps this was a bit over the top at times in this production.) There's also a more touching but still out of place scene in which Estella and Pip engage in a Victorian version of skinny-dipping. The ending is rushed along much faster than the decades that drag on in the novel, but I find it difficult to think of any screen adaptation that would not try to speed along that conclusion.

Besides characters and/or events being rushed over or bypassed altogether, there is one other key thing missing from this adaptation: humor. Dickens was a master wordsmith who could write a witty remark into just about any scene (except, of course, for apparently the entirety of the novel A Tale of Two Cities) and he himself noted of Great Expectations, "You will not have to complain of the want of humour as in the Tale of Two Cities." But as most of that comedy comes from narration (although sometimes it's present in dialogue), there's little room left for it on the screen. And this adaptation seemed to like to highlight the more macabre and dark moments of the novel, creating suspense and drama to pull viewers in to the story. But this is not a problem with this adaptation only; indeed, I find it sad that anyone who only watches adaptations of Dickens's work will never know how funny he was, for it seems that none of that ever translates to the screen. Hopefully this adaptation will be intriguing enough to draw in new readers to the original novel and perhaps other works by Dickens; I know that I for one am now eager to re-read Great Expectations yet again after watching this production.