Movie Box Review

Despite ABC's attempts to claim otherwise, REVENGE is more "hittish" than true hit.  Although it premiered with strong ratings in the low 3s, it's since come down to numbers in the mid-2s, usually beaten by CSI in their shared Wednesday 10PM timeslot.  But these days, a 2.4-2.5 rating at 10PM is nothing to take lightly, especially compared to other ABC drama entries like The River, Pan Am and (based on its premiere) GCB, none of which could crawl much above a 2.  So while series creator/showrunner Mike Kelley said all the right things at today's PaleyFest session devoted to the show about how he hopes the series comes back for a 2d season, and that there are no guarantees in this business, Revenge has an excellent chance--barring an April/May collapse--to be back.  

The Revenge gathering was notably less boisterous than last night's Vampire Diaries craziness (amusingly, a new caution had been added to the pre-panel introductions today asking fans not to rush the stage when the session was over), as befits its more affluent, and dare I say somewhat older, audience.  Nevertheless, there was enormous enthusiasm for the show's antagonists, vengeful Emily Thorne (Emily Vancamp) and her nemesis Victoria Grayson (Madeleine Stowe), as well as the show's resident hunks Daniel Grayson (Josh Bowman) and Jack Porter (Nick Wechsler) and Emily's oddball partner in vengeance Nolan Ross (Gabriel Mann).  Apart from them and Kelley, participants in the panel included producer Marty Bowen, and performers Henry Czerny (Conrad Grayson), Ashley Madekwe (Ashley Davenport) and the series ingenues, Christa B. Allen (Charlotte Grayson) and Connor Paolo (Declan Porter).  

Only the first 15 minutes or so of the next unaired episode (which won't be seen till April) were screened, and there weren't a lot of full-scale spoilers, although Kelley allowed a cast member to confirm that a terrible thing happening to one character in that 15 minutes was the doing of another character (which had been set up in some dialogue in the portion that was screened). What Kelley did provide was a surprisingly detailed blueprint of how the rest of the season is going to play out structurally. So, STRUCTURAL SPOILER ALERT: 

The episode that was partly screened, Episode 17, will continue where the previous episode left off, with Daniel in jail for Tyler's murder (if you don't know who Tyler is, catch up) and the preparations for his trial.  Then the show will jump forward several months from September to December, and Episodes 18-19 will cover Daniel's trial, up to and including the verdict.  (The prosecution case will take up "2 minutes" of Episode 18, and from there on the focus will be on Daniel's defense.)  Episode 20 will be something different for the series:  an hour set entirely in the past, dealing with the period in 2002 when Emily was still trying to decide if her father's version of his arrest and conviction was true and when she was meeting her future targets for the first time.  Episode 20 will also include sequences flashing even farther back, to the beginning of the romance between Victoria and David Clarke (Emily's father--pay attention).  Then Episodes 21-22 will lead up to a season-ending cliffhanger, and also set things up for what would be the main storyline of Season 2.  Kelley provided little information about what this would be about, except to note that Daniel Grayson will no longer be the passive character he's mostly been so far, and that the enigmatic Takeda will figure into these episodes.  Kelley added that the plan for next season would be to follow the same structure as Season 1:  a central storyline occupying the first 13-15 episodes, aftermath episodes for the following 4-6 weeks, then an hour or 2 resolving some issues and setting things up for the future.

The panel was mostly breezy and light-hearted, although Stowe made it clear that while she's having a good time playing Victoria, she takes her character very seriously.  (She and Kelley have collaborated on an as-yet unseen backstory for Victoria.)  Most questions were about the storylines, for which Kelley's go-to answer was "If it's not impossible, it could happen."  (This included a query about whether Emily's father might actually be alive.)  The only complaint any of the actors seemed to have was that their respective stories didn't allow them to interact with some of the other characters as much as they'd like (Nolan with the Graysons, Ashley with Emily, etc).  The panel did clear up, though, that there's no way Nolan will turn out to be Emily's brother, however sibling-like their relationship may be.

Coming up at PaleyFest--deep breath, please--on Tuesday night:  the return of MAD MEN.

 

Soap operas are a staple of primetime TV, and in recent years especially on ABC.  More often than not, though, they tend to come either encrusted with silliness and self-mockery (Desperate Housewives, Dirty Sexy Money, Big Shots) or mixed with other genres (the Shonda Rhimes medical shows, The Gates, Rookie Blue).  There haven't been all that many all-out, unapologetic examples of the genre lately; but the network's new series REVENGE wears its suds proudly and with some potential.  

ABC probably won't be mentioning "The Count of Monte Cristo" much in its Revenge promos, but that's the acknowledged inspiration.  Emily (Emily VanCamp) is a mysterious, wealthy, beautiful young woman who's arrived in the Hamptons to win the heart of the local prince (Daniel, played by Josh Bowman), son of the town's matriarch Victoria (Madeline Stowe).  Through the course of the pilot, we learn that Emily was once Amanda, daughter of a trusted employee of Victoria and her husband Conrad (Henry Czerny) who was framed by them, his life ruined to keep Victoria and Conrad out of jail.  Emily/Amanda's real mission is to destroy them all.  Naturally, there are other complications, like the one person in town who knows who Emily really is (Gabriel Mann), and the boy young Amanda loved, now a man Emily should avoid (Nick Wechsler). 

A show like this is trickier than it looks, treading a fine line between twisty drama and arch self-parody (when Victoria herself wants revenge on someone, she has them buy a Van Gogh rather than a Monet).  Writer Mike Kelley has an uneven record, with the underrated (and virtually unseen) Swingtown to his credit, but also the almost unwatchable The Beautiful Life.  He keeps his narrative balls in the air smoothly enough in the Revenge pilot, establishing a lot of basic relationships and conflicts, although a flash-forward prologue is awkward--it provides a big bang for the pre-title sequence, but probably won't be picked up again for many episodes, if not the entire season. 

The polished look and style are in part attributable to pilot director Philip Noyce, whose films include Salt and Clear and Present Danger, as well as the excellent Showtime series Brotherhood.  Noyce and Kelley have also cast the leads well.  VanCamp was one of the most engaging presences on ABC's Brothers & Sisters, and she handily conveys Emily/Amanda's mix of steel and vulnerability, while Stowe, who hasn't been seen often enough in recent years, makes a formidable adversary.  (The men in the show seem more interchangeable, although Czerny is a strong actor who'll no doubt get the best out of what the material gives him.)  At least in the pilot--beware of series episodes with lower budgets--the production values are suitably top-notch for the swank millieu.

Revenge has an interesting spot on ABC's fall schedule.  Mitch Metcalf's Wednesday projection has it in 3rd place in its timeslot, but if it catches on, there's potential for more.  It follows the network's Modern Family/Happy Endings hour, and its competition consists of the original CSI and the last remaining Law & Order, two geriatric shows that have both just lost their leading men; Revenge should at least nab a chunk of the women.  (It's not what you'd call a "guy's show," although Emily VanCamp isn't exactly hard on the eyes.)  If the series can manage to tell compelling stories without lurching into cliche--well, the TV version of that old adage is that winning your timeslot is the best... you know.  

This year's WONDER WOMAN pilot did not fly under the radar. 

Produced by Warner Bros Television for NBC, it was the subject of speculation before it was even placed with a network, scrutiny while it was being produced, and analysis after it had been rejected.  With the exception of Terra Nova and Smash, it was the single highest-profile pilot of the season.  Now, it seems unlikely to go forward.  But was it... any good?

Well, interesting more than good.  When Warners decided to hand one of their signature DC Comics properties to David E. Kelley, it seemed a curious fit.  Kelley, super-successful in the 1990s and 2000's, has always been known for his dialogue-heavy, mostly legal shows like The Practice, Ally McBeal, and the current Harry's Law.  He'd never tackled an action series, much less one based on comic book mythology.  The surprise of this Wonder Woman is that its heroine, as he's drawn her, is exactly in line with other Kelley protagonists through the years:  cheerfully rule-breaking, quietly lonely, and truly in her element when she's kicking some ass.  She could be Denny Crane's granddaughter.  (Never in the history of superheros has a script contained so much earnest discussion of the potential legal consequences incurred in crusading for truth and justice.)

And in Adrianne Palicki (once and forever Tyra Collette in the minds of Friday Night Lights fans), Kelley has an actress capable of filling the role, both physically and in acting chops.  But Kelley's version of the character is so odd as to be schizophrenic.  She actually has 3 identities:  the crimefighting vigilante herself; Diana Themyscira, a tycoon who is openly Wonder Woman, and whose marketing of dolls and other products in her own image pays for pricey jets and her other crime detection gadgets (it's as if Bruce Wayne, instead of inheriting his wealth, sold Batman dolls for a living); and Diana Prince, a mousy (as mousy as Adrianne Palicki is capable of being) singleton who keeps a small apartment with a cat in order to lead a "normal" life.  The Prince persona makes no sense on any level, and luckily it takes up only a few minutes of the pilot. 

More problematic is that the show never finds a tone or a target audience.  It's clearly not aimed at kids (Diana the corporate mogul delivers a speech about the "tits" on her latest Wonder Woman action figure), but it's still a campy action show where the villains are Elizabeth Hurley as an evil pharmaceutical zillionaire and her steroid-enhanced minions.  While Diana has some depth, the other regular characters (Tracie Thoms and Cary Elwes as her loyal colleagues) are cardboard.   Also, the glaring difference between a movie budget (like the current Warners/DC epic Green Lantern) and TV are made clear by the relatively few special effects and the uninteresting production design.  Pilot director Jeffrey Reiner, who directed many episodes of Friday Night Lights but also the more action-oriented The Event, handles the fight scenes without much oomph.

In gauging Wonder Woman as a show that could have gotten on the air, a comparison with the new Charlie's Angels is worthwhile, since it's another reboot of a female-oriented action franchise (and featuring another Friday Night Lights alumna to boot) which did get chosen.  Wonder Woman gets points for having an original point of view, and a star more charismatic than the 3 new Angels combined.   It fails to deliver, though, on the basic requirements of excitement and a consistent tone; Charlie's Angels may not be much (and in fact it isn't, but it knows what it is.