The Fall pilot season is not over – it lingers on well into Winter – but our sustained coverage at Antenna ends here with 47 shows reviewed. Partly as a coda, partly to change things up and have one person weigh in on several shows, and partly because my own blog is currently hacked and/or dead, I thought I’d give a round up of what I consider to be the best and worst. These aren’t group picks, just the choices of my own addled brain.

(and a quick disclaimer: I’ve not yet seen Casual [don’t have Hulu] or Blood and Oil [didn’t record], so they’re not included in consideration)

Best New Sitcom

The Grinder – Rob Lowe is excellent in this, bringing the best of his Parks and Rec performance, with both a great knack for comedy and a deft ability to hit touching moments within and through that comedy. It’s outlandish and over-the-top, but quite gloriously so. And, to compare to the other alliteratively paired FOX new sitcom starring an ageless 80s icon, The Grinder is smart enough not to rely upon Lowe as much as Grandfathered relies upon John Stamos, as Fred Savage holds the show together in many ways. It’s lightweight and has little of note to say about anything, but it’s very funny.

Honorable mentions:

The Muppets – This is fun. It’s not brilliant, but it’s done well, the script is at times very crisp, I’m not wailing “think of the children!” just because there’s some adult humor, and the sub-genre at least pulls something different out of a set of characters that I love. Perhaps I’ll turn off in a week or four, but for now I’m happy to continue with the ride. Besides, Gonzo always deserved more comic action, and here he gets it.

The Carmichael Show – Loretta Devine bugs me, as she does on Doc McStuffins, but otherwise it’s a passable sitcom. I’d never seen Carmichael prior to the show, yet he is all types of comfortable in the genre. I fully plan to check back in on this one, but with such a tiny first season, it hardly encouraged me to do so till later.

Worst New Sitcom

Benders – I was happy to see my old neighborhood of Sunnyside, Queens feature on television as something other than the location of a key witness on Law and Order, but that’s almost all I liked. It’s trying to be It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, and yet doesn’t pull it off. Weak performances make it feel like a bad script reading not even the final product, weak and telegraphed humor tries to be edgy but is too unoriginal to manage it, a weak concept holds over it all, and there’s not even any ice hockey in a show about an ice hockey team.

Honorable mentions:

Dr. Ken – The stinkiness of the writing here is quite stunning at times. Sitcom pilots regularly stink but this one has so far to go to get anywhere half-decent. The jokes are the worst sort of dad jokes, making Two and a Half Men and According to Jim look proficient and positively witty by comparison. A real pity, especially since Albert Tsai ruled Trophy Wife and can do so, so much more than half-baked mime jokes.

Moonbeam City – Take Archer, modify it slightly for the 80s (but only slightly: visual and comic styles should remain), add comically gifted actors, and it should be alright, yeah? Nope. Very unfunny.

Best New Procedural

The Player – This show is really stupid, and makes no or negative sense half the time. But it’s a lot of fun and it’s never trying to be more than it is. I’ll need to be in the right mood to watch it, but if that mood calls for mindless, silly, yet high-paced action, it fits the bill. NBC out CBS’d CBS. Plus, all those silly elements (people running the world who like to bet on whether some random dude in Vegas will stop a predicted kidnapping or robbery? Whuh?) are silly enough to allow for a touch of camp, like a higher budget A-Team.

Honorable mention:

Blindspot – A rather gripping pilot that did a good job announcing itself as The Blacklist 2. The Blacklist doesn’t do it for me, and nor will this one, but it’s well-acted, tightly scripted, and once the woman is out of the bag (not a metaphor), it sets a good pace and isn’t as icky as I thought it would be. Not for me on a regular basis, but a step above the “No Thanks” category.

Worst New Procedural

Limitless – Matt Sienkiewicz’s review is really smart and deserves reading, much more than the show deserves watching alas. For me, it just couldn’t get its tone right, jolting between camp, serious, goofy, cool, grave, and frequently with music that jolted a different way. Not horrible, just not worth more time.

Honorable mentions:

Rosewood – Morris Chestnut is good in this, but it’s paint-by-numbers. Granted, some other things I like are paint-by-numbers, too, but I don’t especially care for these numbers. You know those B- papers you read that are okay but don’t really try to do or say anything about anything? This is that. It doesn’t fail, it’s not bad – it just put so little effort into being anything other than adequate.

Public Morals – Just so boring. I guess it’s okay, but I couldn’t get far enough into it. Ed Burns may be one of the more boring people alive, so this show fits him, but after rewinding twice to watch a scene that I’d zoned out of, I realized it wasn’t my fault. (note: maybe it’s not a procedural and belongs in the serial category, which is why I gave the nod to Limitless here, but I’d need to watch more to work that out, and I just can’t).

Best New Serialized Drama

Fargo – A brief history of me and this show: I thought it immensely stupid to try and make the film into a television show, and I avoided it. Then Myles McNutt told me I really should watch Season One, for my class, so I did, and I was blown away. When my fellow Peabody Board members and I awarded it a Peabody, I was excited and proud. It’s a truly amazing season. So where could one go from there? Season Two is off to a superb start, again visually and aurally experimental for television, yet in different ways from Season One, again getting amazing performances from its cast (I saw better acting from Kirsten Dunst in a scene than in her career to date. Even Kieran Culkin rocks his scenes), again delighting with an unpredictable plot, and again an artful mix of gravity and levity. If you choose to watch only one of the new shows, make it this one.

Honorable mentions (though a big gap exists between the above and the below):

The Last Kingdom – Compelling television, this has been billed as BBC and BBC America’s attempt to do Game of Thrones with some historical stakes and referents. So it’s not the fantastical universe of GoT, but nor is it entirely trying to be the same thing. If anything, in fact, it’s BBC and BBC America trying to do The Vikings. And they’re doing it well for now. A decent mix of drama, action, and a tiny bit of history to make it feel like one is eating one’s cauliflower while watching men with unkempt beards bash swords and heads against each other.

Quantico – After the second episode, I already feel this one sliding down in my estimation, but it delivered a very impressive pilot, that packed about ten times as much in as its peers, and that balanced anti-terrorist intrigue and suspense with hot young people mating and dating. Grey’s Anatomy meets Homeland, we were told, but since both shows fell apart, I see the writing on the wall for this hybrid.

Worst New Serialized Drama

Bastard Executioner – I was bowled over by how bad the acting and writing were, such that twenty minutes in, I turned it off. It’s hard for me to comprehend that the same guy who wrote Sons of Anarchy penned this pile of medieval turd.

Honorable mentions:

American Horror Story: Hotel – I don’t subscribe to the AHS Just Gets Worse script that so many others uphold, but this season just strikes me as a different type of horror altogether. I grew up reading and watching huge amounts of horror, but I simply can’t stomach torture porn, and this season is too gleefully going the way of AHS: Hostel. Its filming, editing, and cinematography are still beautiful and refreshingly inventive, but I just can’t watch. At least something like Texas Chainsaw Massacre built up to and earned its scenes of gore, whereas the pilot stumbles from death and bloodbath to death and bloodbath with only thirty seconds or so of setup each time.

Crazy Ex-Girlfriend – Stalking is neither funny nor endearing, Hollywood. So I was overboard and swimming for dry land at the premise alone. Jenny Clark’s review made me consider turning around to swim back a little, but we only have so much time in our lives. Extra points docked for putting a “West Covina” earworm in my skull.

Best New Reality Show

I’ll Have What Phil’s Having – I really don’t like Exporting Raymond, seeing it as the Uncommon Grounds (see below) of documentaries about the media, and it led to me finding Phil Rosenthal as intensely annoying. But if we hit the mute button on Rosenthal, this is amazing food porn, filmed beautifully, and striking, for me, the right balance between travel show and food show. And Rosenthal’s not that bad – I appreciate how nothing grosses him out, and he’s not out to depict anywhere as a space of either mysterious exoticism or odd barbarism (so far?). I’ve watched two to date and enjoyed both quite a lot.

Honorable mention:

Suddenly Royal – my review is here. I expected nothing from it but was intrigued. Still, as much as I’ve meant to check back, I haven’t, and that probably says something. Passable, interesting, a cut above many others, and just such an interesting premise that makes it somewhat unique in a very paint-by-numbers genre, but ultimately nothing to write home about.

Worst New Reality Show

Uncommon Grounds – Todd Carmichael proves himself to be a jerk, but I thank him for providing me with a few clips to use next time I teach Othering, since his belittling commentary on Japan dominates a glorified informercial pilot. Many of the other shows that I disliked at least tried to do something and do it well for an audience that isn’t me, whereas this is lazy in every way, and the only people I could conceive of who’d want to watch this are in the “people who enjoy seeing other countries made fun of” demo, which may be large, but fuck them.

Honorable mentions:

Bazillion Dollar Club – my review is here. When you find yourself rooting for everyone on a reality show, contestants and judges alike, to fail and fail abysmally, it’s kind of over, yeah?

Monica the Medium – my review is here. There’s just so much wrong with the person at the center of the show that I can’t stomach the idea of spending more time with her.

Best New Variety or Talk Show

The Daily Show with Trevor Noah – my review is here. Noah’s still not done enough to suggest he’s up to the challenge of interviewing real political guests, which worries me, but with John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, Larry Wilmore, South Park, and occasionally Bill Maher (when he’s not being a monumentally sexist, racist douchebag) doing some heavy-lifting on the satire front, The Daily Show doesn’t need to lead the pack any more, and there’s enough in it to amuse and impress me, so I can wait it out a bit longer.

Honorable mention:

The Late Show with Stephen Colbert – Sacrilege not to rate this higher? Look, it’s me – I just don’t like hour-long latenight talk shows that much: too much loud cheering, sketches that go on too long, a lot of guests that say the same thing. They all do it, and it’s great for some people (I don’t mean that to sound patronizing either: I’m just not one of them). Colbert’s better than many, and he’s using the new platform in some interesting and exciting ways, but I liked The Colbert Report better, so I’m still ambivalent about this one.

Worst New Variety or Talk Show

Best Time Ever with Neil Patrick Harris – Blame me, since I’m not a fan of variety shows in general – or blame the show, as did Antenna’s reviewers. Either way, it’s clawing, contrived, and as much as I love NPH, that only made me want to conduct a rescue mission.

Honorable mention:

Fashionably Late with Rachel Zoe – I could be all kinds of snarky about this, and obviously I’m too old and fat to be part of its intended audience (which is why I take some mercy on it, and don’t let it win this category), but I haven’t seen another television host who is so clearly just reading cue cards. Heck, I’d settle for someone underlining the words Zoe could emphasize on those cue cards; Siri and xtranormal put more inflection into their speech than Zoe. It’s wooden, dry, slow, and lifeless.

‘Tis the season for new television, lots of it, and much of it of doomed to cancellation. Accordingly, Antenna is set to present its sixth annual Fall pilots reviews, so that you can work out what’s worth watching, why, and when. Over the next month (till Oct 16, to be precise), we’ll be furiously updating our central review pages, as our thirty or so reviewers report back on their viewing.

As in previous years, we’ll group the reviews by network. Last year we introduced a “Non-Network” page, but as a sign of the times (and as a sign of us trying better to keep up with those times), this year we have pages for “Streaming,” “Cable: Reality and Variety,” and “Cable: Scripted.” It should be noted that no smart observation or argument about fundamental differences in either delivery platform (streaming, cable, network), or genre (reality and variety, scripted) should be glossed from our choice to use these titles: they exist largely for organizational purposes. There are a lot of cable shows, for instance, making a single page for them unwieldy. Towards this end of organizational expedience, we apologize to PBS for grouping it with cable (instead of giving it its own page, since it only has three new shows), and note that The CW buddies with co-corporate sibling CBS, since it only has one new show beginning during our “season.”

If a show premieres after Oct 16, we won’t be covering it here, but we invite later, full post reviews. Meanwhile, we direct you to the full post reviews of Fear the Walking Dead and Narcos that are already up. The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and The Daily Show with Trevor Noah will each received roundtable review-discussions a week after they began/begin.

Should you be using this page as a portal, click below to reach your chosen page (each page goes live only when the reviews are up, though, of course):

ABC: Blood and Oil, Dr. Ken, The Muppets, Quantico

Cable, Reality & Variety: Adam Ruins Everything (truTV), The Bazillion Dollar Club (Syfy), The Brain with David Eagleman (PBS), The Daily Show with Trevor Noah (Comedy Central), Fashionably Late with Rachel Zoe (Lifetime), I’ll Have What Phil’s Having (PBS), Monica the Medium (ABC Family), Road Spill (truTV), Suddenly Royal (TLC), Todrick (MTV), Uncommon Grounds (Travel Channel)

Cable, Scripted: American Horror Story: Hotel (FX), Bastard Executioner (FX), Benders (IFC), Fargo (FX), Fear the Walking Dead (AMC), Indian Summers (PBS), The Last Kingdom (BBC America), Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy (Disney XD), Moonbeam City (Comedy Central), Pickle and Peanut (Disney XD), Public Morals (TNT)

CBS: Code Black, The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, Life in Pieces, Limitless

The CW: Crazy Ex-Girlfriend

FOX: Grandfathered, The Grinder, Minority Report, Rosewood, Scream Queens

NBC: Best Time Ever with Neil Patrick Harris, Blindspot, The Carmichael Show, Heroes Reborn, The Player, Truth Be Told

Streaming: Casual (Hulu), Hand of God (Amazon), Narcos (Netflix), Red Oaks (Amazon), Super Mansion (Crackle)

Meanwhile, should you be interested in scanning what to watch before the reviews come in (and/or should you want to volunteer to review any. If so, let us know here, as we still have some openings), here’s an alphabetical list of all the shows we hope to cover, with premiere date and “location” and links to trailers.

Happy Viewing!

~~

Adam Ruins Everything (truTV, September 29 @ 10/9)

Adam Conover moves his show from a College Humor web series to the big time (if truTV counts as the big time). You can see an example of his College Humor show here, and quickly get the idea: brief explorations of a wide variety of issues, trying to uncover things and go against the current of popular belief, with comedy and irreverence.

American Horror Story: Hotel (FX, October 7 @ 10/9) teaser here

Lady Gaga joins the cast for this season’s outing, which takes its inspiration from numerous haunted hotel horror films, and from the Hotel Cecil and Elaine Lam’s death that went viral. Everyone involved has promised it will be darker, which is good, because psycho clowns who rip off their masks to reveal festering wounds was just way too breezy.

Bastard Executioner (FX, September 15 @ 10/9) trailer here

Sons of Anarchy showrunner-actor-director Kurt Sutter and partner in life / partner in SoA crime Katey Sagal’s next outing should feed Sutter’s ample taste for blood, set in Medieval England, and focusing on a warrior who can’t seem to lay down his sword as much as he’d like to do so. True Blood’s Stephen Moyer joins Sagal, Sutter, and star Lee Jones.

Bazillion Dollar Club, The (Syfy, September 22 @ 10/9) trailer here

A six episode docu-series that follows two startup incubator founders in Silicon Valley as they try to advise companies towards, well, a “bazillion” dollars by offering such gems like “if you’re not willing to risk everything, you’re going to fail.” Rinse and repeat with HBO’s Silicon Valley afterwards.

Benders (IFC, October 1 @ 10/9) trailer here

A comedy examining God’s chosen sport, hockey, and a bunch of guys in an amateur league.

Best Time Ever with Neil Patrick Harris (NBC, September 15 @ 10/9) trailer here

An American adaptation of England’s Ant and Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway, Best Time Ever will see its titular host offer a variety of acts, games, pranks, stars, and such.

Blindspot (NBC, September 21 @ 10/9) trailer here

A naked woman (Jaime Alexander) is found in a bag in Times Square, with no recall of who she is or how she got there, with an elaborate, mysterious full body tattoo that offers clues to an FBI agent (Sullivan Stapleton) that unravel a large conspiracy.

Blood & Oil (ABC, September 27 @ 9/8) trailer here

Following the largest oil discovery in American history, a young couple move to North Dakotan to get rich. Think Dallas, though it’s probably best they didn’t call it Williston. Don Johnson plays the big oil tycoon, with a large cast of others including Gossip Girl’s Chace Crawford, Revenge’s Amber Valetta, and Delroy Lindo. This primetime soap has been in the trades a lot due to a rocky production history including dumped showrunners, a move from USA Network, and more.

Brain with David Eagleman, The (PBS, October 14 @ 10/9) trailer here

A six-part study of the brain, how we think, how we feel, and how it all works, hosted by neuroscientist and best-selling author Eagleman.

Carmichael Show, The (NBC, August 26 @ 10/9) trailer here

Jerrod Carmichael is joined by Greek’s Amber Stevens West, Doc McStuffins’ Loretta Devine, LilRel Howery, and David Alan Grier in this family sitcom.

Casual (Hulu, October 7)

Jason Reitman’s single-cam comedy written by Airheads’ Zander Lehmann focuses on a bachelor brother and recently divorced sister living together again while trying to help each other in their respective dating worlds, and while raising the sister’s teenage daughter. Trophy Wife’s Michaela Watkins, The Mindy Project’s Alex Cole, and Aquarius’ Tara Lynne Barr star.

Code Black (CBS, September 30 @ 10/9) trailer here

Starring Marcia Gay Harden and Luiz Guzman lead the cast of this medical drama focusing on an overcrowded and understaffed ER in LA, and based on the 2013 documentary of the same name.

Crazy Ex-Girlfriend (The CW, October 12 @ 8/7) trailer here

Because stalking is always an endearing premise for romance (?!), and because crazy women are the bread and butter of many a comedy (?!), this musical rom-com focuses on a woman who ten years after being dumped decides to move across the country to pursue her ex.

Daily Show with Trevor Noah, The (CC, September 28 @ 11/10) promo here

Noah faces the daunting task of winning over would-be audiences likely divided into those who regard Jon Stewart as amazing and likely irreplaceable, and those whose lack of interest in Stewart or active disdain for him likely overflows to the show and the format in general. But with Trump and Walker still in the GOP race, at least the jokes and criticism will come easy.

Dr. Ken (ABC, October 2 @ 8.30/7.30) trailer here

Ken Jeong gets his own sitcom. Starring alongside Trophy Wife’s breakout awesome Albert Tsai, and Dave Foley and Suzy Nakamura, Jeong is a doctor (in case the title didn’t cue you in) and a dad. ABC’s second sitcom focusing on an Asian-American family in as many seasons sounds good, till you see it placed ominously in the graveyard that is a Friday night slot.

Fargo (FX, October 12 @ 10/9) trailer here

How will Fargo follow up on an amazing first season of dark comedy, murder, and deceit in the snow? The new cast for a new story includes Patrick Wilson, Kirsten Dunst, Jean Smart, Jesse Plemens, Brad Garret, Bokeem Woodbine, Ted Danson, Nick Offerman, Cristin Milioti, Adam Arkin, and for the oddity factor, Kieran Culkin

Fashionably Late with Rachel Zoe (Lifetime, September 24 @ 10.30/9.30) trailer here

Stylist and designer Rachel Zoe hosts this talk show focused on fashion, “beauty,” and pop culture.

Fear the Walking Dead (AMC, August 23 @ 8/7) trailer here

A spinoff of The Walking Dead follows a family in LA at the beginning of the outbreak, Fear begins with a six episode season, but already has an order for a second season of fifteen episodes, guaranteeing many more deltoids will be eaten, and many more “don’t go out there” commands will be ignored.

Grandfathered (FOX, September 29 @ 8/7) trailer here

Ageless “Can Work With Kids” John Stamos plays a recently divorced bachelor, restauranteur, player who discovers he has a son … and a granddaughter. Josh Peck, Paget Brewster, and Christina Millian co-star in this single-cam family sitcom.

Grinder, The (FOX, September 29 @ 8.30/7.30) trailer here

Fred Savage and Rob Lowe are brothers and both lawyers, kind of. Savage is an actual lawyer, brilliant but a horrible speaker, while Lowe is coming off years as a beloved TV lawyer. Lowe comes to work with his brother, to provide the pizzazz. Lowe is in three new shows this year, but trailers suggest he’s having all sorts of fun in this one.

Hand of God (Amazon, September 4) trailer here

Hand of God’s pilot won over viewers (sufficiently for Amazon to order an entire show) when streamed in August 2014. Now we can see the rest. It follows Ron Perlman as a debased judge who suffers a breakdown and emerges believing, Judy Sheindlin, that he is the titular hand of God, charged with seeking out vigilante justice. Also starring are Dana Delany, Andre Royo (aka The Wire’s Bubbles), and Garrett Dillahunt.

Heroes Reborn (NBC, September 24 @ 8/7) trailer here

Was anyone even still watching when Heroes ended? Still, Zachary (Chuck) Levi joins the cast, and HRG himself returns (Jack Coleman), albeit joined by the others who couldn’t get post-Heroes jobs (in other words, to save the world, one apparently no longer needs the cheerleader).

I’ll Have What Phil’s Having (PBS, September 28 @ 10/9) trailer here

Media scholars may best know Phil Rosenthal as the protagonist telling Russians why they suck in Exporting Raymond, the documentary about his attempts to translate Everybody Loves Raymond to Russia. Apparently, he’ll now be telling other people of the world why they suck (even if their food doesn’t always) in this food and travel show.

Indian Summers (PBS, September 27 @ 9/8) trailer here

“New” only inasmuch as it’s new to American TV, this show follows a group of socialites at the foot of the Himalayas in the age of the British Raj. Julie Walters stars.

Last Kingdom, The (BBC America, October 10 @ 10/9) trailer here

BBC America (and BBC 2) gets in on the Game of Thrones action with this tale of the founding of England in the ninth century, complete with swordplay, bodice ripping, and warring tribes, adapted from Bernard Cromwell’s best-selling Saxon Stories novels.

Late Show with Stephen Colbert, The (CBS, September 8 @ 11.35/10.35) advance clips here

Dave Letterman retired, Stephen Colbert left The Colbert Report, and though no longer playing the role of Stephen Colbert, Stephen Colbert will now host (albeit without the Colbeard).

Life in Pieces (CBS, September 21 @ 8.30/7.30) trailer here

At this point in the American family sitcom’s history, what new spin could one give it? CBS is banking on telling four independent stories from the same extended family each episode, with cast Dianne Wiest, James Brolin, Colin Hanks, Thomas Sadowski, and more.

Limitless (CBS, September 22 @ 10/9) trailer here

Jake McDorman gets a pill from Bradley Cooper, reprising his role from the film of the same name, that gives him super intelligence (cause that’s Bradley Cooper’s gift to give, apparently) and perfect memory. Jennifer Carpenter plays the cop who tries to reel him in to help her and boss Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio.

Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy (Disney XD, September 26 @ 9.30/8.30) trailer here

Hoping to capitalize on the success of the film, this animated offering also aims to pick up where the film left off. No Chris Pratt, but probably lots of Disney’s good will and hopes for success.

Minority Report (FOX, September 21 @ 9/8) trailer here

Since Almost Human did so well for them, why not try the dystopian future sci-fi procedural again, right? Trade out Michael Ealy, Karl Urban, and Minka Kelly for Meagan Good, Stark Sands, Nick Zano, Wilmer “Fez” Valderrama, and Laura Regan. It’s 2065 (ie: 15 years after the film’s action) and several decommissioned “precogs” (clairvoyants) are still helping a detective on the side. No Tom Cruise, but lots of air holograms will be pinched and swiped to remind you of the film.

Monica the Medium (ABC Family, August 25 @ 8/7) trailer here

ABC Family is aggressively pursuing the lucrative demographic of Penn State student-mediums who have never played Flip Cup by featuring their very own Monica Ten-Kate with this reality show.

Moonbeam City (CC, September 16 @ 10.30/9.30) trailer here

Parodying Miami Vice and its ilk, though looking a lot like the stills for Grand Theft Auto: Vice City and also looking and sounding very Archerian, Moonbeam City unites Elizabeth Banks, Will Forte, Rob Lowe, and Kate Mara in an animated show about Moonbeam City PD.

Muppets, The (ABC, September 22 @ 8/7) trailer here

Surely the most anticipated new show of the season, The Muppets returns Kermit, Fozzie, Piggie, Gonzo, and company to prime time 17 years after Muppets Tonight was cancelled, and 34 years after The Muppet Show ended. Filmed in Office confessional reality style, it follows our multiple leads as they produce Up Late with Miss Piggy. Start polishing Gonzo’s Emmy.

Narcos (Netflix, August 28) trailer here

The Red Viper, Oberyn Martell, lives, and fights drugs in Colombia! Based on the true story of cocaine drug cartels spread around the globe, and ensuing battle with law enforcement, and centered on the notorious Pablo Escobar (Wagner Moura) and the Mexican DEA agent Javier Peña (Pedro Pascal / The Red Viper) sent to capture and kill him, Narcos was shot on location in Colombia.

Pickle and Peanut (Disney XD, September 7 @ 9/8) sneak peek here

Jon Heder is a pickle, Johnny Pemberton is a peanut, and they are friends. Of course they are. This new animated offering comes from Fish Hook and Almost Naked Animals’ Noah Z. Jones.

Player, The (NBC, September 24 @ 10/9) trailer here

Rich bastards bet on whether Philip Winchester can stop big, nasty crimes from happening, and Wesley Snipes makes the whole thing happen. Taxes are paid in full. And NBC uses the most over-used line for anything set in Vegas in their website’s blurb: “the house always wins.”

Public Morals (TNT, August 25 @ 10/9) trailer here

Another police drama set in New York City, this one focuses on the Public Morals Division and hence lots of vice. Star-executive producer-writer-director Edward Burns is joined by Justified bad guys Michael Rapaport and Neal McDonough, 30 Rock’s Cecie, Katrina Bowden, and Elizabeth Masucci.

Quantico (ABC, September 27 @ 10/9) trailer here

Priyanka Chopra is at the center of this thriller focusing on the lives of several FBI Training Academy recruits, told in flashbacks, leading up to a massive terrorist attack that incriminates one or more of them.

Red Oaks (Amazon, October 9) trailer here

Another survivor of Amazon’s pilot project, Red Oaks is a coming-of-age comedy following a young tennis player working at upmarket New Jersey country club Red Oaks in the 1980s. Craig Roberts stars alongside Paul Reiser and Nobody Puts Baby in a Corner Jennifer Grey.

Road Spill (truTV, September 23 @ 10.30/9.30) trailer here

Focusing on what people really talk about in the privacy (or, nationally televised, reality television “privacy”) of their own cars. Also promised by truTV are hilarity, road rage, and moral dilemmas.

Rosewood (FOX, September 23 @ 8/7) trailer here

Morris Chestnut is the best pathologist in a city that television has told us needs a lot of them, Miami. Jaina Lee Ortiz is the Miami PD officer who must work with him to solve murders aplenty.

Scream Queens (FOX, September 22 @ 8/7) trailer here

Ryan Murphy turns to the horror-comedy realm in what hopes to be an anthology series. The sisters and pledges at Kappa Kappa Tau will be picked off one a week, introducing something of a whodunit (Murphy has said it’s like Ten Little Indians). Emma Roberts, Lea Michele, and Abigail Breslin star with the dean of scream queens herself, Jamie Lee Curtis, as dean of the university.

Suddenly Royal (TLC, September 9 @ 10/9) trailer here

An American auto repair advisor researches his ancestry online, only to find out that he’s actually royalty, heir to the British Isle of Man. So he and his family pack up and move to their kingdom. A Princess Diaries whose star will likely never up playing Catwoman, this seems so much like it’s faux, yet it seems it’s for real (well, as real as reality shows are), and that dude honestly thinks he’s a royal, and has done so since 2007, though he only recently moved there.

Super Mansion (Crackle, October 8) trailer here

A stop-motion animated comedy from the Robot Chicken team, Super Mansion follows a group of older superheroes fighting to stay relevant. The show boasts an impressive list of voice talent, led by Bryan Cranston as the show’s lead, Titanium Rex. Old people jokes abound.

Todrick (MTV, August 31 @ 10/9) trailer here

We’re just gonna quote MTV on this one: “quadruple-threat Todrick Hall lets fans into his creative factory and introduces them to the passionate troupe of creative collaborators who pour heart and soul into his weekly videos. Unwilling to wait for Hollywood to make them stars, Todrick and his faithful crew write, choreograph, style, and direct full-scale productions weekly – all while balancing side jobs to pay the bills – to try to make their dreams come true on their own terms.”

Truth Be Told (NBC, October 16 @ 8.30/7.30) trailer here

This sitcom follows two couples who are friends, with facile commentary on sex, race, and relationships. Marc-Paul Gosselaar, Vanessa Lachey, Tone Bell, and Bresha Webb star, after Meaghan Rath was pulled away since another show starring her was greenlit, and was in her first position. Titled People Are Talking in development, till they realized that pretty much nobody is talking about this one.

Uncommon Grounds (Travel, September 14 @ 11/10) no trailer available at this time

After having searched the world for rare coffee in Dangerous Grounds, host Todd Carmichael obviously still has more high-flying international coffee man of intrigue business to conduct in this new show that will explore various countries’ culture through their coffee.

~~

Reign [Premiered 10/17/2013]

In this CW-ification of the story of Mary, Queen of Scots, a teenaged Mary (Adelaide Kane) arrives at the French court and upends the dynamics between Prince Francis (Toby Regbo), his parents, his bastard brother Sebastian (Torrance Combs), and a surprisingly youthful—some would say hunky—Nostradamus (Rossif Sutherland) who predicts Mary will bring the family to its ruin.

Maria Suzanne Boyd [Georgia State University]

Close your eyes and imagine you are watching Mumford and Sons or The Lumineers perform at a renaissance festival. Got it? If so, then you have a good feel for the overall tone of the CW’s new historical drama Reign. The pilot offers a nicely blended mix of fun, intrigue, danger and sex, and in keeping with the CW’s stable of regular programming there is also a hint of the paranormal. Adelaide Kane helms the overtly beautiful cast in her role as the young Mary, Queen of Scots, and it is nice to see her exercise her acting chops beyond her stoic portrayal of Cora on MTV’s Teen Wolf.

If gross historical inaccuracies do not bother you, Reign has the potential to be a delightful, guilty pleasure. The pilot exceeded my expectations both in relation to the production value of the program and the narrative setup.  The sets and costumes were dazzling, the large cast of characters was efficiently introduced, and the season’s main conflict was clearly established.

Put simply, Reign can best be described as Scandal meets Game of Thrones. This show has easily earned a spot on my DVR.

Alyx Vesey [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

This melodrama about Mary, Queen of Scots, as the teenage bride-to-be of Dauphin Francis wants to be many things, but “period appropriate” isn’t one of them. Following Marie Antoinette, the soundtrack utilizes marketable contemporary indie folk and validates such pop anachronism by securing artists like The Lumineers and music supervisor Liza Richardson.

Foremost, Reign wants to put the “rip” in “bodice ripper,” serving its demographics’ hormonal impulses with scenes of voyeurism, masturbation, infidelity, and post-adolescent erotic intrigue. It also wants to capitalize on ABC Family’s success with Pretty Little Liars by foregrounding Mary’s fragile bond with her handmaidens as they encounter regal treachery (prediction: the whole French court is “A”). Finally, it wants to legitimate itself by shading the margins with political machinations and grisly violence.

But for all its demands, Reign is timid. The young cast lacks distinction. They all have excellent cheekbones and offer tepid line readings. Kane is no match for Catherine de Medici (Megan Follows, forever Anne Shirley), who will call upon the supernatural (Nostradamus is her confidant) to prevent her son’s impending marriage. If Mary wants the crown, she’ll have to take on her mother-in-law first.

The Tomorrow People [Premiered 10/09/2013]

Robbie Amell stars as Stephen, a high schooler hearing voices who discovers he’s not crazy; he’s simply one of the Tomorrow People, a superhuman species with powers— Telekinesis, Teleporting, and Telepathy—threatened by a government containment program, Ultra, and its leader Jedekiah (Mark Pellegrino).

Myles McNutt [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Having been responsible for writing the summaries for each and every new fall series, I’ll say this for The Tomorrow People: there’s enough going on that there isn’t enough room for it in the above. We didn’t get to the sentient supercomputer, or Cara (Peyton List) and John (Luke Mitchell) as Stephen’s guardians in this new world, or the daddy issues underpinning the whole shebang.

However, we also didn’t get to the ideas of The Tomorrow People, which are pleasingly evident in this pilot. While far from new, the questions of humanity percolating through the pilot are effective, and the duel for Stephen’s allegiance offers a setup—Stephen working undercover with Ultra—that feels both sustainable and dynamic. Nothing in the show’s mythology is new—the daddy issues are particularly unoriginal—but the math in the pilot feels well calibrated.

Yes, Robbie Amell clearly looks his twenty-five years and has no business playing a high schooler. Yes, the sentient supercomputer is a bit on the nose. Yes, Sarah Clarke is woefully underused as a generic, overworked mother. However, there’s a bit of a wink to The Tomorrow People that keeps it from drowning in self-seriousness; while far from brilliant, there’s enough here to suggest a show capable of evolving into a solid piece of genre television with the right guidance.

Melanie Kohnen [New York University]

I probably wouldn’t have watched The Tomorrow People’s pilot if I hadn’t seen it by chance at San Diego Comic-Con. While I watch a number of CW programs, nothing about the premise stood out to me, and the pilot confirms this at first glance. The Tomorrow People is a cookie cutter CW show featuring a mostly white ensemble cast of attractive young actors who portray outcast characters bound together by a shared supernatural fate stemming from genetic difference (think X-Men). If it hadn’t been for the last scene, I would have had no interest in watching the show again.

But Stephen’s decision to work for Ultra surprised me and makes me curious about what is ahead on the show. Perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised by this twist because Stephen’s decision embodies the ambiguity of so much millennial-oriented television, in which questions of belonging are not easily settled. Ultimately, the pilot suggests that biological family and a family of friends, good and evil, social outcasts and corporations are not extreme opposites, but co-exist. If The Tomorrow People builds on this ambiguity, it has a chance to exceed its too-familiar premise.

Bärbel Göbel Stolz [Indiana University]

This US remake of a 1970s UK teen sci-fi show did deliver. It is a teen drama that provides love triangles, high school bullies, a societal system that has to be rebelled against and displays at its center teen angst, all wrapped up in a coming of age story. In millennial fashion, the coming of age as Stephen comes to terms with his outsider status and powers develops at lightning speed, crystallizing within just 42 minutes.

The Tomorrow People also throws in Abel and Cain, a little bit of The Matrix’s Neo, X-Men mythology, and gender norms we have grown accustomed to in much of teen male melodrama (physically strong, non sexually-threatening males who’ve been partially orphaned; smart females, emotionally torn; bad-boy side-kicks). Given these elements, you may think “seen it, been there, I don’t care.” Yet, this show does provide a few interesting alterations from the norm that could be intriguing down the line, the most interesting one being the lead character’s choice—after just finding out some important truths about himself—to work for the enemy, most likely as an infiltrator.

All in all: If you expected a CW show, you got exactly what you expected.

The Originals [Premiered 10/03/2013]

In this spin-off from The Vampire Diaries, the Original family of Klaus (Joseph Morgan), Elijah (Daniel Gillies), and Rebekah (Claire Holt) arrive in New Orleans to play a part in an ongoing struggle for power between vampires, werewolves, and witches in the Big Easy.

Karen Petruska [University of California – Santa Barbara]

I’m a fan of The Vampire Diaries, but I am NOT a fan of Klaus, the character whose rabid fan base prompted the CW to create a spin-off based on his petulant, whiny, egomaniacal, and—oh yeah—completely immortal hybrid werewolf-vampire character. I am giving The Originals a chance, though, since it has finally removed Klaus from TVD. The pilot suffers from too much exposition and a lack of focus. Nevertheless, I was pleasantly surprised.

The character at the center of the action in this pilot was not Klaus but rather his brother, Elijah. This is a smart choice because I suspect a little bit of Klaus goes a long way, even with his biggest fans. Elijah, on the other hand, not only has a code of honor but also tends to get stabbed on a regular basis by his brother with a magical stake (that renders him pseudo-dead); as a result, Elijah is a character for whom you can root, while Klaus is an irredeemable “dick,” as program co-creator Julie Plec called him on Twitter last night.

The fact that Klaus remains irredeemable, though, now has me intrigued. His greatest crime on TVD was his immortality, which rendered all actions against him inevitably futile: inaction is the death of a plot-based program. If The Originals chooses to focus less on Klaus to consider more the stakes of Klaus’ redemption for his long-suffering siblings, I may be able to get behind that. Beyond the Original family, other characters—particularly those of color—will likely suffer as pawns of Klaus, an unfortunate perpetuation of discomfiting racial politics that weakened TVD, as well. My determination that The Originals is not as bad as I expected is not high praise, but coming from a Klaus hater, it is pretty dang impressive.

Kyra Hunting [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

While the pilot form is always a fraught one, The Originals walks a particularly high tightrope as a spin-off of a very serial show, The Vampire Diaries. In this respect, it was quite successful; providing a logical motivation for introducing non-viewers or sporadic viewers of TVD to the history of the Originals while providing enough new material to engage fans. While it felt weighed down at times, the narrative conceit of a supernatural turf war, with the pregnant woman’s body as pawn, was interesting. The Originals narrative and dark aesthetic, which often felt like a mafia movie, also could appeal to male viewers who are underrepresented in TVD audience. While it seems improbable, in practice, that the series will gain a large number of non-Vampire Diaries viewers, its move away from this show’s valorization of romantic love to a focus on, and problematization of, familial love provides a nice bookend for Vampire Diaries fans. While there was a little characterization regression, and a “you send one of mine to the hospital I’ll send one of yours to the morgue” machismo that put me off balance at times; I found the first episode’s engagement with questions of power, loyalty, and love, as alternatively revelatory and weakness, a compelling direction for The Vampire Diary’s storyworld.

Once Upon a Time in Wonderland [Premiered 10/10/2013]

In this spin-off of ABC’s other fairy tale drama, Alice (Sophie Lowe) is institutionalized by a disbelieving father before breaking out with the Knave of Hearts (Michael Socha) and the White Rabbit (voice of John Lithgow) with the hopes of returning to Wonderland and reuniting with her true love who she believed had died at the hands of the Red Queen (Emma Rigby).

Kyra Hunting [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Once Upon a Time in Wonderland strikes me as, more than anything, an example of what can go awry when a program simply has too many resources and too much technology. As was the case with several other offerings this season, the series establishes its massive storyworld and cinematic special effects throughout the pilot. But this series suffered deeply from an over reliance on these elements and the CGI that makes them possible. Granted it is hard to create a convincing Wonderland when most viewers already have so many ingrained in their mind, but this didn’t just not feel like MY wonderland but ANY land at all; instead the CGI often pushed the landscape to far into the realm of video game animation (particularly in images of the Red Queen’s Castle) and the actors frequently felt like they were on rather then in the world.

The episode had its bright spots: Michael Socha was charming as the Knave of Heart and I am always a sucker for a girl who’s an expert in hand to hand combat (not to mention a love story). However, even its rework of Alice (from the madhouse to the battlefield) felt far too familiar after many XBox sessions of American McGee. While I could forgive familiarity—which in itself can be a pleasure—had this well worn territory been well executed, for me this adaptation lacked the wonder of Wonderland and gave away too may of its most interesting cards, particularly the fate of Cyrus, in one fell swoop. Alice, when done well, has always been an interplay of restraint and excess, and here I felt the balance was hopelessly off.

Myles McNutt [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Wonderland has a problem with balance (and I swear I wrote this before I read Kyra’s response). Once Upon a Time had similar problems, but one of its two sides was a fairly grounded small town drama that offered some semblance of stability. That the other side was a fairy tale world filled with dodgy CGI was a problem, certainly, but the show had a structure to build on.

Wonderland is far from a terrible show, but it also never feels like a cohesive whole. This is in part because it was picked up based on a twenty-minute pilot presentation, and thus the pilot is cobbled together out of existing footage and other footage designed after the show went to series. It’s not that the new footage is dramatically better or worse, but rather that the parts that weren’t there before—particularly Naveen Andrews as Jafar—are disjunctive, and make the rest of it seem equally disjunctive in the process.

The other problem is that the entire affair is heavily reliant on CGI that—while far from awful—isn’t good enough to pull off the conceit. While Once’s duality gave it space to grow at its own pace, here we’re flung into a wide-ranging adventure where both the past and the present are whimsical and magical and a bit overbearing. The show often looks very good, but the wow wore off quickly enough to make me wonder how sustainable the show’s pace/structure would be in the future, a question a pilot like this one shouldn’t pose.

Super Fun Night [Premiered 10/02/2013]

Rebel Wilson and an American accent—her choice—star in this comedy about three nerdy women (Wilson, Lauren Ash, Liza Lapira) who venture beyond their apartments to expand their horizons and enjoy an exciting night life every Friday.

Suzanne Scott [Arizona State University]

Super Fun Night, originally developed/dropped by CBS in 2012, and retooled by ABC as a single camera sitcom, feels its age.  It feels like a meeting in 2011 in which someone said, “That nerd show is ratings gold, let’s do a lady version.” In the intervening years, Big Bang Theory has winningly developed its female characters, leaving the protagonists of Super Fun Night unfashionably late to the party.  But, no matter how many HIMYM-esque quickie comedic flashbacks Super Fun Night employs, its comedy stylings feel older than 2011.  Specifically, it feels like 1982: as if someone slapped a female POV on a Zapped or Porky’s underdog story…and then arbitrarily set it in a law office. This “premiere” is clearly the second episode of the series, meaning the entire premise of the show (Rebel Wilson’s Kimmie, along with her gal pals Marika and Helen-Alice, decide to stretch themselves socially by moving their indoor kid Friday evenings outdoors) is hastily/confusingly established.  There’s real chemistry between the three friends, and Lauren Ash brings a nice, Emma Stone-esque energy to Marika.  It almost seems like we weren’t allowed to see the gang’s super fun nights in, because we’d be rooting for the ladies to stay home.  At the very least, we would have had fewer jokes about Spanx.

Jennifer Smith [University of Wisconsin – Madison]

Super Fun Night is much like an amethyst: there may be a sparkling gem hidden inside, but I’m not sure I have the fortitude to scrape up my hands on a layer of jagged gray rock to get to it.  What appealed to me about this show was the promise of a sitcom that focused on the friendships between young women who aren’t conventionally beautiful, nerds who adore each other but are still coping with high school mean girl PTSD.  In other words, I wanted a sitcom about the world in which I, personally, live.  But much like Big Bang Theory, this pilot left me with the unsettling feeling that people like me will always be the butt of jokes even when they’re ostensibly the heroes.  The fat jokes surrounding creator and star Rebel Wilson were relentless, and while I appreciate the “Fat Amy” impulse to make fun of yourself before others get the opportunity, the single-mindedness of the mockery drowned out all other character moments, and the jokes as a whole were disappointingly unoriginal.  The cast is promising – Liza Lapira, especially, is a great actress who’s had rotten luck in TV project choices, and Wilson herself is a gifted comedian who makes the physical humor (if not her abysmal American accent) work.  But I wanted, and expected, more.

~ ~ ~

Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. [Premiered 09/24/2013]

As the Marvel Cinematic Universe expands into the Marvel Televisual Universe with the help of executive producer Joss Whedon, Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg) anchors a team of investigators tasked with responding to less cataclysmic instances requiring S.H.I.E.L.D. intervention in the post-Battle of New York world, here focused on the experiment-gone-wrong Mike Peterson (J. August Richards).

Suzanne Scott [Arizona State University]

As the tagline goes, “Not all heroes are super,” and neither are most pilots. Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. is the rule rather than the exception, which isn’t to say it’s not exceptional, as both a high-profile transmedia extension of Marvel’s film universe, and as the newest televisual entry to the Whedonverse.  This doesn’t spare Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D from succumbing to pilot pitfalls (the rote “Agents, Assemble!” establishment of the ensemble, the laughably bad backlot shots of “East Los Angeles”), ones I was hoping we’d be able to skip over given our familiarity with the fictional world and the pedigree of the production.  Agent Coulson, who has served so ably as Marvel’s deadpan everyfan, the transmedia glue holding superhero teams and franchises together, also suffers from his new leading man status.  Let me be clear: I LOVE Coulson.  I think Clark Gregg is an exceptional actor, and he still lights up every scene he’s in.  But Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. also makes him a one-man Avengers: cracking wise like Tony Stark in one scene, Hulking out on his colleagues in the next, and delivering a final soliloquy worthy of his hero, Captain America.  Whether this is the origin story of a truly great ensemble show, or if it will flame out under the Extremis pressure (see what I did there?) of creating meaningful connections to the Marvel Universe, remains to be seen.

William Proctor [University of Sunderland]

Marvel’s transmedia experiment continues drawing from the model of comic book continuity and creating an interconnected universe with multiple episodes spanning multiple media windows. Following the critical and commercial triumphs of cinematic chapters, from Iron Man to Avengers, comic book tie-ins and mini-webisodes, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D pulls television into the hyperdiegesis with a blinding opening episode that embraces all the fun, fantasy and frolics of the Marvel films whilst retaining a serious post-9/11 aesthetic following the ‘Battle of New York’ featured in 2012’s blockbuster, The Avengers. The show is beautifully shot and further breaks down the barriers between cinema and TV like no other in history. The script is so polished, it shines like a brand new Iron Man suit, and the dialogue is crisp, sharp and witty. A lot happens in this opening episode, and a mystery is set up early on regarding Agent Coulson’s miraculous resurrection which hints at the intrigue to come. One caveat may be the wealth of intertextual breeding with the other Marvel films and tie-ins, but as a comic book consumer, I relish the potential here as the universe continues to expand and sprout narrative appendages that represent the apotheosis of transmedia storytelling in the 21st century. Spectacular stuff!

Derek Johnson [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Agent Simmons describes all the MacGuffins in play as “every known source of super power thrown into a blender”—an apt description for this pilot. Unlike many spin-offs, this pilot not afraid of baldly referencing the parent project(s), and I was surprised the producers drew so much so quickly, rather than meting out connections to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  Hopefully this is just flushing the system—acknowledging and moving past supersoliders, gamma radiation, Chitauri tech, and Extremis—rather than indicating intent to make every episode a mélange of familiar plot points.  If this does continue, they might as well use some kind of on-screen pop-ups to emulate the old comic book practice of editors’ footnotes.  (“Last seen in Thor—Memory Joggin’ Joss”).  Though I do want to know what resurrection meant for Coulson and his cellist.

What I couldn’t parse were the racial politics of J. August Richard’s character.  I wasn’t thrilled with the angry black man trope, but his end-of-episode speech about SHIELD’s failures and false promises seemed to double as critique of dominant white social institutions (driven home without subtlety by the multicultural mural behind him).  But then he started laying hierarchies between humans and superhero gods on top of that, and the metaphor muddied the more overt critique.

Lots more to say here—I really hope Suzanne covers the “sweaty cosplay girls”!

Kyra Hunting [University of Wisconsin – Madison]

Marvel Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. came with sky-high expectations, carrying the baggage of the massive film franchise, decades of comic books, and the involvement of Joss Whedon. It can be forgiven, therefore, if it didn’t fully meet those expectations. The series did some things well right out of the gate: I appreciated the pilot’s commitment to moral complexity, with ever-shifting notions of heroes and villains. (Although the angry young black man as literal time bomb theme was worrisome). It was also adroit at both seamlessly situating itself in its storied franchise history and setting up a workable thematic structure. Its model, investigating the strange, has great episodic and serial narrative potential, proven by programs like Warehouse 13, Supernatural and Whedon’s own early series. However, the at-times witty and referential banter was not timed quite right and the episode’s commitment to action over back story did a nice job of replicating the feel of a Marvel film but a poor job establishing enough of a relationship with the core characters. The show has definite potential, the guests stars alone! But it needs to slow down and start working on characterization soon if it is going to fulfill its high expectations. TV series are less flings and more long term relationships and while I am certainly interested in a second date, I am not yet ready to commit.

~ ~ ~

The Goldbergs [Premiered 09/24/2013]

Travel back to the 1980s, when video cameras were enormous and pant waists were high and cassette tapes were how you listened to music; anchoring this nostalgic vision is a family with parental challenges (Jeff Garlin and Wendy McLendon-Covey), teenage problems, and a pre-teen vantage point (whose adult narration is provided by Patton Oswalt) to bring this familial comedy into perspective.

Eleanor Patterson [University of Wisconsin – Madison]

Let me now dispel any question whether this show is a remake of Gertrude Berg’s The Goldbergs. It is not. That show was funny, while this product of Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison production studio is as stale and wincingly unfunny as they get. The Goldbergs is a historical TV show set in the 1980s, and does the cultural work of making the ’80s a sort of spectacle for millennial viewers. Protagonist tween Adam takes us back to his life as a in 1987 a la The Wonder Years, whose narrative structure, suburban family setting, and historical nostalgia The Goldbergs unabashedly cribs. However, where The Wonder Years was sweet and insightful, this show is contrived and devoid of likable characters. This does not invite nostalgia for a time of innocence, it is an invitation to ridicule a period it assumes we are glad to glance back at with ironic distance, in the same vein as those Awkward Family Photos. Here the ’80s are made strange through the gratuitous representation of old school technology, period fashion, and yes, an obnoxious dysfunctional Jewish family who is assimilated, but not quite as Aryan as those real Americans we remember from Family Ties or Growing Pains. Besides the title’s implicit reference to ethnic difference, many of the implicit Jewish American tropes are here, the most obvious being Wendi McLendon-Covey’s portrayal of overbearing mother Beverly who has unhealthy attachments to her awkward kids.  Frankly, this hack job excuse for a sitcom is below Covey’s amazing comedienne talent, and really, its below George Segal and Jeff Garlin, who also play central characters. However, my prediction is that they will not long be burdened with these roles.

Amanda Ann Klein [East Carolina University]

The Goldbergs opens with a montage of 80s nostalgia; we see clips from The Karate Kid, Knight Rider, and ALF while the show’s narrator, Patton Oswalt, explains that in the 1980s there were no parenting blogs, peanut allergies, or Twitter. “Back then,” Oswalt informs us, “the world was still small…” These truisms are crafted to flatter nostalgic 80s kids like myself, reminding us of our “authentic” childhoods, just as The Wonder Years’ evoked the authentic childhoods of television audiences in the 1980s. But these efforts fall flat, maybe because I’ve read too many of those “20 Signs You Were a Child of the 80s”-style Buzzfeed articles.

My primary complaint with The Goldbergs pilot, however, was its inability to balance broad, often mean-spirited humor with heartfelt emotion. For example, there’s a genuinely humorous bit in which Murray Goldberg, played by Jeff Garlin, tries (and fails) to teach his son Barry how to drive. This plot culminates with Murray cajoling a reticent Barry into singing along to “I Can’t Fight This Feeling Anymore” as they drive home. The moment is meant to be touching, with Murray attempting to connect with his son. But the scene felt too calculated, too much like an 80s punchline (remember how awful 80s music was?!), and thus, the father-son bonding unearned. Here’s hoping that The Goldbergs stays away from this kind of shorthand emotion, and concentrates instead on the one-liners that made me laugh out loud.

Jonathan Gray [University of Wisconsin – Madison]

I’m ready for some 80s nostalgia, so I wanted to like The Goldbergs. But why is everybody shouting their lines? Does the cast know that there are microphones on a television set? To be fair, I found some lines funny, and the central character was endearing in his own weird young pervert kinda way, I guess, but I so desperately wanted to ask the actors to try it from the top without yelling, or to leave me the script and just let me read it. I get it: this family fights. But especially since the show is so keen to offer schmaltzy reminders (with subtitles spelling it out, no less) that Dad really does love his kids, why put the audience on edge with all the yelling? As for the 80s nostalgia, so far it’s only background. Nothing in the script necessitates or grows out of the 80s, and thus the decade is just there as a wardrobe and a set of offhand references to Jedi masters, Burt Reynolds, and jazzercise. The pilot script could just as easily have been filmed with 70s, 60s, or 90s clothing and offhand references, and it doesn’t treat its references with much love. Oddly, then, there’s surprisingly little nostalgia in this nostalgic comedy, JUST A LOT OF SHOUTING.

~ ~ ~

Trophy Wife [Premiered 09/24/2013]

Based on the real life experience of co-creator Sarah Haskins, Malin Akerman stars as the third wife—not a trophy wife, as the title’s meant to be ironic—of a lawyer (Bradley Whitford) who inherits his two ex-wives (Michaela Watkins and Marcia Gay Harden), their three kids, and the day-to-day challenges of being a stepmother all at once; the series charts their continued negotiation of parental responsibilities and personal identities in this atypical family comedy.

Suzanne Leonard [Simmons College]

I signed up to review Trophy Wife before learning that it was co-created by feminist comedian Sarah Haskins, whose Target Women routine ironically lambasted the media for the attention it pays to feminized pursuits such as yogurt eating, wedding obsessing, and beauty improving. Trophy Wife is apparently based on Haskins’ own marriage to a divorced older man with children, a fact that made me hopeful the show would present a progressive take on women in the sitcom genre. (Similar hopes were pinned last premiere season on Mindy Kaling’s The Mindy Project.) In this respect, Trophy Wife disappoints. While star Malin Akerman embraces physical and self-deprecating humor, the show oozes with privilege, and sets up an all too familiar rivalry between Akerman and her new husband’s dour ex-wives. In the pilot, her desire to be accepted by her husband’s kids leads her to chug a water bottle full of vodka to cover for her stepdaughter, an act that establishes her likeability. But her plight seems forced and retrograde. Is combatting the wicked stepmother stereotype really still such an issue for contemporary women? Is annoying family zaniness really all that funny? Thanks to Haskins’ storied pedigree, I expected so much more.

Bärbel Göbel-Stolz [Indiana University]

I don’t take to comedy easily, but Trophy Wife took me by surprise. The series’ format, by way of 2 ex-wives adds a polyamorous charm to a classic tale. Unexpectedly, the show is oddly heart warming as it posits its viewers, via voice over intro and outro, in the lead character’s struggle to adjust to a life as a third wife and stepmother. She makes melodramatic sacrifices to connect to the children. Plot lines could have been over the top and embarrassing, but instead were funny and light hearted. A few jokes, like the suspected Oedipal complex of her stepson Warren, were expected, but intelligently repackaged by unexpected narrative turns that had been put in motion early on. The writing is, as far as the premise allows this, on the smart side, even if comedy elements in the pilot are nothing new or special viewed independently.

A few things have to be said about the characters. The Trophy Wife is depicted as irresponsible and rather simple minded, possibly misguiding the show. The character line-up’s diversity, unfortunately, feels additive rather than inclusive, but it is too soon to dismiss the adopted child or bartending best friend as mere side characters.

Sarah Murray [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Sandwiched between The Goldbergs and Lucky 7, Trophy Wife’s rag-tag family carries the burden of moving viewers through ABC’s fresh Tuesday night lineup. The show has plenty going for it with a recognizable cast (who isn’t rooting for Bradley Whitford and Marcia Gay Harden?) and a group of writers, producers, and director with credits that include The Office, Pitch Perfect, Family Tools, and Bad Teacher (we’ll forgive Lee Eisenberg that last one). When a show has such firm grounding at the outset, you watch more defensively. Maybe it was because I was waiting for Whitford to fall on his face or maybe I was still confused about the show’s name, but whatever pilot failures I was bracing for never came.

Trophy Wife is funny. Not in a mildly guilt-inducing way that makes you wonder if you should admit to watching, but in a way that demonstrates how enjoyable a blend of physical humor and well-placed dialogue can be when the pacing is just right. Whitford and Akerman have great chemistry. Whitford looks good (no more West Wing hair and baggy suits). Akerman has a sharp sense of her own physicality and is attuned to when and how to use it for laughs. This is the biggest surprise and may be the reason to keep watching. Despite their tendency toward caricature, the gaggle of ex-wives and kids are still likeable. Trophy Wife is not a complex or original pilot by any means, but it’s tight, well-written and leads with a few promising LOLs.

~ ~ ~

Lucky 7 [Premiered 09/24/2013]

In this adaptation of British series The Syndicate, Lorraine Bruce reprises her role as one of an ensemble of gas station employees who win the lottery and then face a host of difficulties ranging from petty disagreements to life-changing decisions, all without having even played 4 8 15 16 23 42.

Kit Hughes [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

My introduction to Lucky 7 came via a decontextualized video clip on ABC’s website (which I later discovered was a segment from the same network’s The Chew) in which Iron Chef’s Mario Batali opens by asking “Is this a shiny show or a dark show?” The cast jumps on the obvious answer you give to any of these meaningless either-or choices that pepper press tours and sideline reporting: both. Not only would I have to agree with them, I would go farther to suggest the show’s darkness comes from its wretchedly boring gleam. All dolled up in cinematography that makes heavy use of reflections, barriers, and telephoto lenses—not to mention its bizarre use of stop motion photography and the Fast and Furious (Lucky) Seven opening—this show lets us know: it’s serious. This is going to be about ethics, ethnics, class, the American dream, and greed. Never mind that its jokes rely on bidet humor (get it?) and it uses a passing mention of a miscarriage for pathos (for the “fat lady”). This kind of posturing is dangerous.

Also: why does the cabbie include Reagan alongside his clipped photos of Kennedy and Obama? Haunting.

Jonathan Gray [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

In many ways, this pilot is very well done. I felt I understood a fair deal about each of the central characters by the end, and got something about their complexities and nuances, which is altogether rare for a pilot to accomplish. It was paced well. Everyone held a line of performance – another feat rarely accomplished in ensemble shows – with Luis Antonio Ramos delivering an especially superb performance (and sheeeeeeeeeeeeet, Clay Davis is back on TV!). And in terms of setting up a whole bunch of issues, tensions, and conflicts for an entire season, it certainly delivered. As a drama about seven people and their families, it could be excellent, riveting even. My hesitation comes from the premise, as ultimately I don’t care about six people who have won the lottery. Either way, they’re headed for one of the two most trite, over-used sentiments of American television (and film): 1) money can’t buy you happiness, or 2) money can buy you happiness. For about twenty minutes there, American network television had a show full of working class characters, then it hit them with a gimmick, and though I’ll keep watching and will hope for the best, I feel they may never recover from that gimmick, and that the show is bound to disappoint me.

~ ~ ~

Back in the Game [Premiered 09/25/2013]

Maggie Lawson (Psych) stars as a single mother struggling with a divorce who moves back home with her father, and relives her childhood struggles with her baseball coach father (James Caan) as she inadvertently volunteers to coach her son’s misfit little league team.

Myles McNutt [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

At the recent TCA Press Tour, a critic asked whether or not Back in the Game was an underdog sports story about the misfit “Angles.” Executive producer Mark Cullen quickly set the record straight: “they’re not going to win a game all year.”

Back in the Game isn’t intended to be a feel good story: like How To Live With Your Parents For The Rest Of Your Life—yes, I referenced it mainly for an excuse to write out the title—it tells the story of a young single mother who is forced back to her childhood home and her childhood dynamics with her parents after their life falls apart. Unlike that show, however, Back in the Game has baseball to bring them together, structuring the action and giving the “starting over” narrative a hook (or, if you prefer a pun, a curveball).

Maggie Lawson is compelling as Terry, and Ben Koldyke plays a reformable asshole well, but there’s not a lot in the pilot to make James Caan’s Cannon likeable or interesting or funny. The gender politics are too broad by half, and never result in many laughs or meaningful observations, but I’m a sucker for a baseball story and a believer that calibration might get better when test audiences and in medias res openings aren’t involved.

~ ~ ~

Betrayal [Premiered 09/29/2013]

Hannah Ware stars as photographer Sara Hayward, who strays from her troubled marriage to a prosecutor (Chris Johnson) with a debonair stranger (Stuart Townsend) only to learn he’s the defense attorney in her husband’s career-defining murder trial involving a business magnate (James Cromwell).

Myles McNutt [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

The in medias res opening to Betrayal sets up two key questions: Who shot Sara Hayward, and which of the two men in her life are there to comfort her?

The remainder of Betrayal gives us little reason to care about these questions. Simultaneously mundane and ludicrous, the narrative works so hard to manufacture the conditions and circumstances of Sara’s affair that it never stops to consider what makes a mystery worth caring about. By the time Sara finally pieces together she has slept with her husband’s opposing counsel, the narrative weight of her so-called “betrayal” was almost impressively out of sync with my level of disinterest, the spilled red wine screaming out “Look at me, I symbolize her blood!” just as I was screaming out exasperation for giving myself this assignment.

Angling toward both Revenge and Scandal with its title and its emphasis on morally complex relationships, it fails not only due to a flat script and poor pacing, but also because it fails to understand what made Revenge work—note the past tense—and what makes Scandal pop: those shows had structures that gave them purpose and meaning. Betrayal has only intrigue masquerading as complexity and registering as nothing of value, empty to a degree that makes the pickup of this “limited series” feel like something of a betrayal.

Jenna Stoeber [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Having been promised a show similar to Revenge, I was starkly disappointed by Betrayal’s limp drama and uninspired acting. The emotion is so awkwardly ham-fisted that I’m forced to assume that the main actors were chosen for their attractive face-shapes instead of their acting abilities. The writing is paltry and uninspired, and it’s hard to sympathize or care about the characters.

The affair between Sarah and Jack is played with an uncomfortable romantic earnestness that disregards the context of an affair. Hoping to draw in HBO viewers with flashes of skin, the premiere features TWO sex scenes, because why build emotional intensity when the characters can just do it? Everybody moves about in a detached chess-like manner. For example, the children of the main couple show up exactly twice; once to establish them, and once as a reminder to Sarah that maybe having an affair is bad. They are otherwise an invisible presence.

There’s nothing particularly redeemable about this episode, but it’s probably not the worst thing ever put on TV. The plot groundwork has been laid for some interesting interactions, but so far the quality of the writing and acting can’t carry the depth required to span the plot points.

Dracula [Premiered 10/25/2013]

In this loose, US/UK co-produced adaptation of the Dracula mythos, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers stars as the eponymous vampire who poses as an American, travels to Victorian London, and plots his bloody revenge for wrongs done to him in centuries past by the Order of the Dragon.

Melissa Click [University of Missouri]

During his interview with Dracula (who has returned to late 19^th Century London as American industrialist Alexander Grayson), journalist Jonathan Harker writes down three words on his notepad: visionary, egomaniac, and delusional. Any of these three words could describe NBC’s decision to reboot Dracula for Friday night. Although 5.3 million viewers checked out Dracula’s premiere episode, it’s too early to know if the show will be the second hit that NBC needs this fall.

Dracula loyals may be disappointed with the way the characters have been reworked, such as Grayson’s unlikely alliance with Abraham Van Helsing. Both men are determined to destroy The Order of the Dragon, a centuries old group that has hurt them both. But the story’s lead vampire still burns in the light, turns all of the female characters’ heads, and is driven by a thirst for blood and revenge. Grayson’s geomagnetic creations (a threat to The Order of the Dragon’s investments in oil) offer an interesting twist to this story, as does his attraction to Mina Murray, who looks just like his long-dead wife. Let’s hope NBC, working with Downton Abbey’s producers, can make a compelling story out of these elements in ten episodes—and give Grimm a full-blooded companion.

Caroline Leader [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

In so many period TV shows, creators struggle with how to represent the past to a current audience. Some shows like AMC’s Mad Men luxuriate in aesthetic pleasures: form-fitting sweaters, well-groomed hair, pill-box hats, and a proliferation of cigarettes and liquor bottles. These aesthetics build atmosphere and a strong sense of place for our hungry eyes to consume. NBC’s Dracula is certainly bright and sumptuous, but lacking in truly Victorian splendor. Perhaps this is due to an attempt to modernize the fashion for today’s crowd—or because they don’t have the budget of a cinematic representation of past—but the effect misses the mark according to this fashion junkie.

Gowns and coattails aside, the much-advertised selling point of the show is Dracula, played by Jonathan Rhys-Meyers. Rhys-Meyers’ watery eyes and chiseled abs are perhaps aesthetic enough for some, and signal the audience that we’ll in for a sinister, sexy series. The pilot jumps around a lot with rushed sexy bits and fast-paced political intrigue. It’s a bit hard to keep up with Dracula’s plans, but the budding love triangle promises to be tantalizing. All in all, the show would pair well with a glass of Merlot and a Friday night at home, but I wouldn’t stay in just to watch.

Anne Gilbert [Rutgers University]

It’s remarkable, really, that a lush, decadent re-telling like Dracula can turn out so very…dull. The show looks impressive with its ornate sets and lavish costumes, but even with this and a plot of vengeful immortal beings and underhanded machinations of secret societies, the pilot is rather lifeless. Jonathan Rhys Meyers, as the titular bloodsucker, sashays about, chomps on the scenery, and affects a terrible American accent that may or may not be deliberate, and his over-the-top performance does a decent job exuding the dangerous sexuality that is meant to linger under the surface of any good vampire tale. But he is also not scary in the least, as he threatens more shady business dealings than real bodily harm.

This is meant to be a reimagining of the reliable Dracula tale, but it is not a particularly creative one. The show could have been an otherworldly horror show, a trippy steampunk innovation, or a deliciously campy guilty pleasure; there are certainly tiny nods throughout that almost go in these directions. Instead, Dracula plays it safe: A moody costume drama that plays like a better-late-than-never attempt to get in on the vampire craze that is just boring enough to miss everything appealing in a vampire craze.

Sean Saves the World [Premiered 10/03/2013]

Sean Hayes returns to TV as a gay man who finds himself raising his daughter as a single father, helped by his co-workers (Megan Hilty, Echo Kellum) and his overbearing mother (Linda Lavin).

Jennifer Smith [University of Wisconsin – Madison]

My expectations for Sean Saves the World were neither high nor low, and after watching the pilot, I can only say that my expectations were met exactly.  NBC has promoted the show as the triumphant return of Sean Hayes to network comedy, pairing him with Michael J. Fox in an attempt to sell its new Thursday night lineup as a return to the glory days of Must-See TV.  But while Fox proved himself a charming leading man in his second hit sitcom and Hollywood blockbusters, then stayed in the public consciousness through his activism and guest appearances, Hayes has been done little of notice since his breakout sidekick role on Will & Grace.  It’s not that Hayes is bad in this new, leading role; he sells the emotional moments capably, and his skill at physical comedy serves him well.  But I couldn’t help wishing he was still the wacky counterbalance to a (comedic, not sexual) “straight man” – or, preferably, that the show allowed him to be zany and over-the-top and still the lead.  Instead, the character is stuck in the middle, trapped in a mediocre, predictable sitcom, portraying the same domestic upper-middle class white male stock character that makes up 90% of the queer representation on television.  It’s fine, but it’s nothing new.

~ ~ ~

Welcome to the Family [Premiered 10/03/2013]

Two teenagers—one white, one Latino—fall in love and make a baby, not knowing their fathers (Mike O’Malley and Ricardo Chavira) have become enemies, bringing the two families—also including Mary McCormack and Justina Machado—together into one multi-racial melting pot as the new arrival beckons.

Caroline Leader [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Sitting down to a new NBC family comedy, I feel confident what I’ll see: some sort of Modern Family copy that doesn’t have the cast or writing to keep me laughing. I was pleasantly surprised, however, by the Welcome to the Family pilot. Unlike other recent short timers—NBC’s The New Normal, FOX’s Ben & Kate, and ABC’s How to Live with Your Parents (For the Rest of Your Life)—this show doesn’t come across as too saccharine or wacky. The humor is subtle, delightful, and snarky. What Welcome to the Family did particularly well was in the unraveling of the Yoder and Hernandez families in the face of crisis. As much as they are set in contrast by race and class, we are meant to see the two families as similar. Both families have macho dads and strong-willed moms—Caroline Yoder (McCormack) is especially funny as a woman about to embark on her second honeymoon with her husband. In fact, the show puts almost too much effort toward defying our class and race expectations once they are identified. Like its close relative Modern Family, with Welcome to the Family, there will be squabbles and soft-ball jabs at each family’s expensive, but we’re always safe in the homes of loving nuclear families whose dysfunctions are as well kept as their living rooms.

Alyx Vesey [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Welcome to the Family’s biracial blended family allows NBC to replace The New Normal and try to erase memories of many family sitcoms that failed to capture the attention that ABC receives for Modern Family and other comedies about “non-traditional” extended families.

However, it wobbles atop an implausible premise. When valedictorian Junior (Joey Haro) and spacey Molly (Ella Rae Peck) discover they are expecting their first child, abortion isn’t considered—this is a network sitcom—and I don’t imagine it will be entertained by Molly’s mother Caroline, who scowls at a positive home pregnancy test in the pilot’s coda.

As a result, I’m unconvinced of the leads’ chemistry. Haro’s Junior is blandly upstanding and Peck’s Molly “humorously” espouses contradictory feminist politics. Instead, the pilot focuses on the burgeoning rivalry between expectant grandfathers Dan and Miguel. Such consideration is not extended to Caroline and Lisette, nor to Junior’s gadget-obsessed younger brother Demetrio (Fabrizio Guido). If creator Mike Sikowitz and his team want to build a family, they should start by developing nuanced characters instead of archetypes who deliver hack jokes about the indiscretions of empty nest syndrome and teenage romance.

~ ~ ~

Ironside [Premiered 10/02/2013]

Blair Underwood stars as a paraplegic detective in this reboot of the 1967 police procedural.

William Proctor [University of Sunderland]

Another season, another generic crime drama, this time a reboot of cop show Ironside which originally ran for eight seasons between 1967 and 1975. The problem with this pilot is its reliance upon well-worn genre footprints that have steadily grown tired and clumsy amidst a television schedule that has so much more to offer. Fans of detective shows may find a lot to like and may take pleasure ticking off the check list of protagonist angst, but I was left cold and bored by episode end. To be sure, Blair Underwood is fine as the eponymous, paraplegic detective, but, as a character, it is difficult to empathise with someone so arrogant, angry and cynical with a questionable moral centre to boot. The opening sequence where Ironside repeatedly assaults a suspect in order to discover where a kidnapped child is being held may seem warranted when the strategy succeeds. But it also illustrates that police brutality is sometimes necessary to get the job done, something that does not sit easy with me at all. It would be remiss to suggest that the shooting that paralysed him gave birth to this ethically dubious character, but flashbacks within the episode illustrate his fondness for dangling suspects off high rise buildings prior to that tragedy. I like the idea of Ironside more than I actually like Ironside. A missed opportunity and one which I doubt will be picked up next season.

Eleanor Patterson [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Maybe it’s how the camera often shoots up at actor Blair Underwood from below, or how he manages to beat up perps, or coaches hockey, or grunts as he works out, or picks up ladies on the job, but something tells me Ironside wants us to think its wheelchair-bound protagonist is one tough mother…you know. Indeed, this show invites us to see Ironside’s physical difference as an asset. For instance, when he finds a gun at a crime scene, his supervisor asks how he noticed it. Ironside replies, “I have a different perspective from here.” Yes it’s corny. A lot of scenes are shot at Ironside’s eye level as he interrogates people in a seated position, inviting us to feel comfortable with his physical difference. There are also frequent flashbacks of an able-bodied Ironside, which not only gives us backstory, but also relieves some of the potential discomfort we might have watching different physical mobilities. I’ll admit Underwood’s charisma and the narrative’s surprises and visual pleasure drew me in. Like other contemporary network dramas, like The Good Wife and Scandal, Ironside is shot in the cinematic style of the quality television we’ve become familiar with on cable. The casting of an African American as the lead in a show about a crime solving detective solving crime might compound his otherness, to use Alfred Martin’s concept of “double duty,” Ironside is a character that does “double duty” as the only African American character and the only differently-abled character. However, this show also brings us a strong non-white hero sorely needed in prime time drama. Its low ratings might discourage NBC from picking Ironside up, but I hope I’m wrong.

~ ~ ~

The Michael J. Fox Show [Premiered 09/26/2013]

Michael J. Fox returns to TV full time for the first time since his Parkinson’s diagnosis as a news anchor returning to TV after a Parkinson’s diagnosis, exploring the impact of his work and his disease on his family (including his wife, played by Breaking Bad‘s Betsy Brandt).

Melissa A. Click [University of Missouri]

NBC’s decision to order a full 22 episodes of The Michael J. Fox Show in August 2012—before it had even been shot—caught my attention. I have enjoyed Fox’s frequent appearances on The Good Wife as lawyer Louis Canning, who uses his disability to manipulate juries, judges, and opponents. Fox has done much to raise awareness about Parkinson’s since his diagnosis in 1991, and his guest stints on Scrubs, Boston Legal, and Rescue Me have complicated television’s very limited representations of disability.

For these reasons, I had high hopes for The Michael J. Fox Show. After watching the show’s first two episodes, I think my hopes were too high. While Fox’s guest stints pushed the boundaries of television’s representations of disability, his new show places disability into a fairly predictable domestic sitcom. The show’s single-camera, mockumentary framework updates this familiar format, but its comedic orientation puts Parkinson’s in an awkward position—both normalizing it as a regular part of the family’s daily life and making it a frequent punchline, ultimately reiterating its abnormality. Fox’s new show will do great work raising awareness about Parkinson’s, but I’m not convinced the show will do much to raise the profile of the domestic sitcom.

Maria Suzanne Boyd [Georgia State University]

As a child of the 80s I might have a moral obligation to give The Michael J. Fox Show a stellar review. Sadly, as much as I wanted to love this show, it alternated between being sacchariny sweet and borderline offensive. NBC, overplayed its hand by airing the program’s first two episodes. The pilot positions Fox’s character, Mike Henry, as an inspiration and example for his family members who face much more banal problems than his ongoing battle with Parkinson’s disease. While episode two, “Neighbor,” relies on stale portrayals of women such as the hot, divorcée neighbor and the self-obsessed, still-single, thirty-something sister.

The show did have some bright moments. Betsy Brandt gives a delightful performance as Mike’s wife who secretly orchestrates his return to work. And, in what I hope will be a running gag, the show is self-aware in NBC’s desperate move to try to recreate the network’s ratings glory days of 80s and 90s “Must See TV” programming. And as the narrative explicitly states, it’s impossible not to love Michael J. Fox.

I won’t be appointment viewing, but the show has earned a spot on my DVR.

William Proctor [University of Sunderland]

I have to admit, I am completely biased when it comes to Michael J. Fox. As a kid growing up the eighties, Back to the Future’s Marty McFly was an icon, plain and simple. So I was a tad concerned that he would return to television screens as a pity-figure given his tragic struggles with Parkinson’s disease. Thankfully, my anxieties were misplaced. The Michael J. Fox Show works well as a metafiction about his life, but also a charmingly good-natured sit-com that bursts with optimism and hope. Sure, Fox is often self-deprecating but not in a cringe-inducing way. This is not comedy for the Family Guy generation. What is remarkable is that Fox’s comedy timing is spot on and the central cast all connect brilliantly. In a post-9/11 climate of despair and fear, The Michael J. Fox Show is a rare pleasure that provides a beacon of positivity to light up ubiquitous prognostications of doom and gloom. To be sure, there is tragedy and struggle, but the emotional core centres around triumph over adversity and, for that, I am grateful. The tale within the narrative about an African woman giving birth in a tree sums up the philosophy of the show succinctly. A beautiful tale expertly told. Bravo!

~ ~ ~

The Blacklist [Premiered 09/23/2013]

James Spader stars as Raymond Reddington, a criminal wanted by the FBI who offers himself over to authorities to help solve an impending terrorist attack. He’ll only speak to Elizabeth Keen (Megan Boone), who’s about to start her first day on the job as a profiler, and who believes she has no connection to Reddington; he disagrees, and their back-and-forth dynamic sets the stage for an ongoing, tentative arrangement moving forward.

Caroline Leader [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

A man in chains sits in a room, surrounded by a multitude of armed guards. He awaits his protégé: a young, female agent who will consult him on a crime about to occur. No, I’m not talking about The Silence of the Lambs. I’m referring to the suspiciously Starling-Lecter-esque relationship in NBC’s new crime drama The Blacklist.

I tried to set aside my initial prejudice against its copycatting of Lambs, but The Blacklist insists on invoking its predecessor repeatedly as Reddington probes the darkest corners of Keen’s psyche and leads her through her investigation. Keen departs somewhat from Starling; she is light-hearted, perky, maternal, but with a dark side—which incidentally is revealed very quickly. Like Starling, though, she has serious daddy issues that Reddington will likely exploit and assuage simultaneously.

Every media project has an influence, but when it imitates its antecedent too closely, the comparison may be ugly. The Blacklist’s imitation is a thinly veiled distraction for what seems to be a run-of-the-mill episodic drama with characters whose secrets have already been revealed.

Jonathan Gray [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

The Blacklist is captivating, with an impressive 24-like pace. It trusts that it will have a fifth episode, and thus is happy to leave things till later; indeed, it’s comfortable in its own skin, written, acted, and filmed with purpose. James Spader is having fun but can handle the serious parts too, Megan Boone is okay so far, and enough Larger Questions are posed, and posed well, to lure me back. I hope, though, that all the bad guys don’t end up being crazy foreigners – the “next week on” clip showed a crazy East Asian to match this week’s crazy Balkan/West-Asian/Random Arab (sorry, I wasn’t paying attention if his nationality was offered). Another concern is that Red’s obsession with Keen is really creepy, and part of a disturbing gendered politics, wherein, for instance, while Keen stands and comforts a child (while looking remarkably composed and pretty for someone whose husband was tortured in front of her last night), the men behind her run around with guns, disarm bombs, give information, solve crimes, and save America. If the show addresses that creepiness, gives Keen more to do, and gets off the black-and-brown-list occasionally, I’d feel more comfy indulging in what is a decent, promising action-thriller.

Almost Human [Premiered 11/17/2013]

Karl Urban stars as John Kennex, a no-nonsense cop in a future where every cop is paired with an android partner. Re-entering the force after a personal tragedy, he’s paired with Dorian (Michael Ealy), a rejected android model whose emotional capacities are heightened. They form an uneasy partnership to confront a corrupt world, one case at a time.

Kit Hughes [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

This is a show that wants its viewers to ask, “ah, but which one of them is ‘almost human’?”

I have other questions.

1. Why should we care about anything in this future, which seems to be populated only by abusive cops, robots with weird cheekbones, and crime/“the syndicate”?
   1. Is it because there are allegedly some good noodles places and that one pale, creepy science guy who’s in every procedural (you know, to shore up the masculinity of the protagonist) still listens to Depeche Mode?
   2. How do we distinguish allusion from cliché writing?
      1. Fake epithets (“synthetics”) and underground medicine (“Recollectionists”); seriously?
      2. Is AH’s characterization of its villains lazier for ripping off the masks in V for Vendetta or for simply calling them “the syndicate”?
      3. Why can’t people leave Blade Runner alone?
      4. Could this show actually have something interesting to say about the monstrosity of bureaucratic records-keeping systems, data collection, and the politics of access?
         1. Could it move past its gleeful focus on surveillance?
         2. Why was their evidence locker so bright? Doesn’t the future care about preservation storage conditions?
         3. Will any show ever recapture the delightful chemistry of Perfect Strangers?

Jenna Stoeber [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

A set up so classic it seems like something from a satire; technology/crime/drugs are out of control. John (Karl Urban), a renegade human police officer with a mysteriously disappeared ex-girlfriend, memory problems, a pill addiction, and a synthetic leg, loses his partner in a tragic-heroic accident. The majority of the episode takes place post-recovery, when he is partnered up with Dorian (Michael Ealy), an emotional, buggy android. The set-up is a classic buddy-cop odd-couple formula.

Like much cyberpunk media, it features a vaguely pan-Asian design-skin that looks like it was ripped from Blade Runner. The morality and characters are pure I, Robot, and there’s even a dash of the Saw franchise mixed in for flavor; The whole episode has a cinematic feel to it, perhaps due to the high production value and well executed design. And yet, there’s something distinctly uncomfortable with watching Urban rampage through the episode, alternatively harassing and assaulting people, and being generally unbearably unpleasant. I suppose his aggressive interactions with Ealy are meant to be read as social commentary, but lack the follow through to be anything other than bizarrely offensive. Luckily, after roughly 20 minutes of being partners, they bond over synthetic body parts, and, gee, discrimination is solved!

Brooklyn Nine-Nine [Premiere 09/17/2013]

A workplace comedy that happens to be set at a police station, Andy Samberg stars as a typically immature—for Samberg—detective, Jake Peralta, whose ecosystem is threatened by the presence of new chief Ray Holt, played by Andre Braugher. Surrounded by supporting players not dissimilar to those found on co-creator Mike Schur’s Parks and Recreation, including Melissa Fumero’s eager detective who looks to Holt as a mentor figure, the two cops must balance their respective career goals with the new comic situation in front of them.

Alyx Vesey [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Brooklyn Nine-Nine brings law enforcement back to the workplace sitcom. But it’s also a comment on the buddy cop genre. Molly Eichel signposted the Beastie Boys’ “Sabotage” video. I’d add The Heat, which referenced Lethal Weapon to foreground women’s professional friendships. This parallels Andy Samberg’s roast of James Franco, which mocked the “tradition” of capitulating to racist, sexist, and homophobic insult humor. Jake Peralta riffs on an archetype, trading Martin Riggs’ self-destruction for arrested development.

What is most promising about the pilot’s commentary on heteromasculinity is its pervasiveness. Take Andre Braugher’s authoritative performance as Ray Holt, precinct 99’s new no-nonsense commanding officer. Toward the end of the pilot, Holt reveals that it took so long to become captain because the NYPD was uncomfortable with his homosexuality. I like Melissa Fumero as Detective Amy Santiago, a focused, unsentimental woman who won’t back down from a challenge, even if she’s dousing sandwiches in hot sauce. I appreciated the wink to Cagney and Lacey, after whom Sergeant Terry Jeffords (Terry Crews) named his daughters. I’m also intrigued by the tentative connection between detective Rose Diaz (Stephanie Beatriz), detective Charles Boyle (Joe Lo Truglio) and administrator Gina Linetti (Chelsea Peretti), as I’d like to see gifted physical comedian Lo Truglio (the muffin scene!) play romance.

Some jokes rubbed me the wrong way. Peralta and Santiago compete to see who can arrest more people because filtering citizens through the prison industrial complex is hilarious? The Disco Strangler brandished a yo-yo, ha? But the runner of older women going about their day while the team nabs criminals tickled me. I’ll take another coffee break with this crew.

Evan Elkins [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Newsradio remains the gold standard against which I judge all ensemble television comedies. This is patently unfair, but it’s how my brain works. To my mind, the flawless cast (yes, even Joe Rogan. But seriously, take another look at that Newsradio cast) and ingenious, multi-cam-meets-Jacques-Tati staging still haven’t been matched. There are other contenders, some of which can be traced back through the lineage of Brooklyn Nine-Nine co-creator Michael Schur, but it’s Newsradio that, above all others, shows me the heights that the ensemble comedy genre can reach.

One episode in, Brooklyn Nine-Nine doesn’t wither under my harsh, Newsradio-comparing gaze as much as most programs do. In fact, it might be the funniest cop-comedy pilot since Poochinski. While it’s nothing special formally—it sticks to a now-familiar, unremarkable single-cam format, in part to half-heartedly invoke the look of a cop drama when it needs to—the cast is pretty terrific. In particular, I’m always happy to encounter Jo Lo Truglio, who can play a middle-aged sad sack better than anyone at this point (though I imagine his character’s quirks will be significantly less weird than they wound up being in the second season of Burning Love.)

Anyway, once it finds its footing—and it’s already quite a bit further along than most comedy pilots—it could contribute to a pretty solid Fox Tuesday night lineup. Just pretend Dads doesn’t exist.

Jennifer Smith [Independent Scholar]

“The only puzzle he hasn’t solved is how to grow up.” This description of protagonist Jake Peralta (at the conclusion of an awkwardly expository list of character summaries delivered by the squad’s captain early in the pilot) perfectly summarizes the central problem with Brooklyn Nine-Nine: Andy Samberg’s man-child persona. In a cast as diverse as this one, the central focus on one of the only straight white men – and a petulant, obnoxious one at that – is disappointing, if sadly unsurprising.

Creator Michael Schur’s Parks and Recreation works so well because Leslie Knope, overwhelming as she may sometimes be, is both inherently likable and unique in the current television landscape. But here, in a world (a police precinct) where the stakes are high and the supporting cast is full of complex, interesting individuals, the focus rests on the same irritating, immature, sexually-harassing schlub found at the center of any Chuck Lorre sitcom.

I’d love to keep watching for the sake of the other characters, especially the brilliant Andre Braugher’s older, gay, black police captain (the polar opposite of a stock character). But unless Peralta quickly solves the aforementioned puzzle, I’m not sure how long I can stick around.

Anne Gilbert [Rutgers University]

Brooklyn Nine-Nine has a lot going for it from the start – the writers crib effectively from police procedurals to shorthand all the crime solving, the cast has an easy sense of camaraderie, and Andre Braugher’s knowing, poker-faced delivery is comedy gold. But before I can get on board, the show needs to get to know its tone; the pilot is balancing in a no man’s land between “quirky” and “downright absurd.”

There will be inevitable comparisons to Scrubs, which juggled a similar serious content/wacky delivery approach, but Brooklyn Nine-Nine hasn’t yet made the commitment to a similar level of weird. Instead, it has a pervasive wry and offbeat tone that genuinely works, but gets thrown off-kilter with, for instance, the flashback of the Disco Strangler going after a victim with a blinking yo-yo, or Samberg’s Detective Peralta sporting a garish Speedo swimsuit in an attempt to prove a point – or, honestly, every attempt to tell me, again and again, that Peralta is actually meant to be a good detective.

As of now, it’s a fun show that, if it is able to find its feet and develop its characters, could eventually be really funny.

~ ~ ~

Sleepy Hollow [Premiered 09/16/2013]

A time-traveling Ichabod Crane (Tom Mison) wakes up in modern day Sleepy Hollow to discover his nemesis the Headless Horseman is still wreaking havoc; he also informs the Sheriff’s deputy who discovers him (Nicole Beharie) that the Headless Horseman is actually one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, Death. Death also has a machine gun. And he wants his head back. Thus begins a journey into a mythology rife with presidential bibles, witches, and fated connections between an odd-couple male/female pairing from the minds of Phillip Iscove and producers Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and director Len Wiseman.

William Proctor [University of Sunderland]

The synopsis of Sleepy Hollow sounds deliciously absurd: take the principle character of the Washington Irving novel, Ichabod Crane, and his nemesis, the Headless Horseman, throw in a dose of temporal mayhem and, like other contemporary myth translations, bring it kicking and screaming – and slicing – into the 21^st century. The pilot episode begins to develop the show’s mythos and world-building with economy and panache. There is plenty of potential here and, despite the derivative nature of the narrative – it could be a season-long arc of Supernatural, for instance – the chemistry between protagonists Ichabod and his cop side-kick is satisfying enough to warrant interest. One gets the feeling that the writers have their tongue firmly rooted in their cheek and set out to have fun. Clancy Brown, who played the Kurgan in 1980s cult classic Highlander with demonic delight, provides a cameo and is summarily decapitated early in the episode – the irony of which will not be lost on avid connoisseurs of pop culture and fans of Highlander (remember the tag-line and accompanying Queen song? ‘Don’t lose your head’). Some of the humour is in bad taste (asking a black police officer if she is ‘emancipated from slavery’ misses the mark somewhat), but the overall tone of the show is breezy and full of joie de vivre, a palliative to the sombre atmosphere of this post-Dark Knight world.

Taylor Cole Miller [University of Wisconsin-Madison]

Last week before class, I showed my students some trailers for fall premieres, among them FOX’s Sleepy Hollow. While I introduced the title, a few scooted up in their seats, excitedly anticipating what might’ve been Downton Abbey meets American Horror Story–a period scare-piece to relish in the ever-earlier, ever-colder Wisconsin darkness. After a few scenes, though, most lost interest, preferring instead to relish their last few minutes of cellular freedom. If a 1790s Sleepy Hollow was too boring for Hollywood, a 2013 “modern-day retelling” with guns was too boring for them–and for me, too.

I hesitate to be so cynical, especially because Sleepy Hollow is really more like the homely lovechild of two very capable parents: The X Files and Hocus Pocus. Perhaps I’d be quick to forgive, then, because I really want to love it. But the pilot is burdened by the weight of a new mythology that it data-dumps on us while confronting its ancient protagonist with his “enlightened” racism (“Nay, I do not support slavery!”), baffling technology, a gun-wielding redcoat, and a George-Washington Jesus.

But ultimately, I AM pessimistic. The pilot isn’t even fully invested in itself–the humor is as tentative as the horror. I’ll be unlikely to follow Sleepy Hollow as it stomps around searching for purpose–sometimes for humor, sometimes for pity–not all together unlike its infamous headless horseman himself.

C. Lee Harrington [Miami University]

Me likey! With “Sympathy for the Devil” and two beheadings in the first ten minutes, count me in. I don’t remember enough about the original story to be bothered by inconsistencies so this was pure fun: respectable acting, nice atmospheric touches, acceptable evocation of the supernatural (excepting the horse’s eyes, whaaat?), packed full of backstory, a bit of humor, and pretty much what a premiere should be.

I didn’t much go for the romantic subtext between Abby and Ichabod given everything the characters had gone through but I understand the point from a production perspective. And I didn’t much go for Ichabod’s ease with finding himself in the 21^st century: he never asks what year it is, is more bemused over a car’s power windows than freaked out that something like cars even exist, and finds the trappings of mass commercial culture only mildly interesting.

The premiere sets up interesting questions for the series as a whole: What does Andy know and how does he know it? For that matter, what did George Washington know and how did he know it? Who all is part of the coven? What’s with that bird?  I’ll definitely watch next week.

Jenna Stoeber (University of Wisconsin – Madison)

The series premiere of Sleepy Hollow starts out with a rough recounting of Washington Irving’s famous story; it has to start this way, otherwise the audience would spend the rest of the episode struggling to connect the premise of the show with the legend. The plot seems to be taking a something-for-everyone approach, offering up magic, historical fantasy, biblical prophecy, hints of an Illuminati conspiracy theory, and a guest appearance by George Washington. However, this is a minor complaint. Aside from the scattershot of plot threads and the heaps of exposition, very little about the episode feels like a premiere – in a good way. The story doesn’t dwell on the mundane aspects of the urban fantasy genre, namely the laborious magic-is-real coping that often drags down such shows. The writing is clever and entertaining, and the plot moves along at a brisk pace. Nicole Beharie, playing lieutenant Abbie Mills, performs her role like she’s been doing it for years, and the interactions between her and Tom Mison, playing Ichabod Crane, are captivating. The episode wasn’t without cheesiness – the image of the headless horseman with a bandolier and a shotgun is certainly a wake-up call – but the absurdity is grounded in Beharie’s exceptional performance. I look forward to seeing which plot threads they pick up in next week’s episode.

MasterChef Junior [Premiered 09/27/2013]

In this spinoff, Chef Gordon Ramsay invites us to remember American Juniors with a pint-size take on his successful MasterChef series, toning down the vindictive to walk talented young chefs through the competition.

R. Colin Tait [Texas Christian University]

With Friday’s release of his sixth show for the FOX network, super-chef Gordon Ramsay scores a homerun with the junior version of MasterChef. By tweaking the formula so that restaurateur Joe Bastianich and celebrity chef Gordon Eliot can praise, rather than cut down, the contestants, the creative team has created a rarity on TV – a reality show that concentrates on celebrating and supporting its competitors, rather than berating them for their lack of talent. Of course, it helps that these contestants are adorable and precocious children.

By focusing on children rather than adults, the show stacks the equation for audiences too, making it nearly impossible not to root for them, especially when they collapse into tears of joy or sadness, as they often do. These would-be chefs also bring out the soft side in the normally abrasive hosts, who are not only on their best behavior here, but whose personas actually seem charming in comparison to the adult version of the show. This is especially true of Ramsay and co-host Bastianich, whose sunny dispositions are a welcome change.

My only complaint is that these would-be-amateurs seem to come exclusively from society’s upper crust and come complete with refined palettes of the cultural elite. But, otherwise, this show is guaranteed to please parents and their children alike.

Karen Petruska [University of California – Santa Barbara]

The main reasons to watch MasterChef—both the grown-up version and the new tiny human spinoff featuring kids 8-13 years old—are the charming and charismatic chef judges (fathers all), from Gordon Ramsay of Hell’s Kitchen fame, Graham Elliot as the “nice” judge, and my personal favorite culinary crush, Joe Bastianich, know for his steely stare and for smelling food before tasting it. While this version of the program sticks closely to the tested formula established by the adult version, the series nevertheless continues to find success in mining for food-oriented tension. It also features some pretty cute kids who reveal a remarkable level of self-possession and self-confidence.

They prepare dishes from French macaroons to homemade pasta, and the judges agree that every single dish is very good, even though a few kids receive gentle critiques about dry shortcake or overcooked pasta. Ramsay is best known for his cursing, but what he really does well (especially on Hell’s Kitchen) is teach. So far it seems we won’t get contestant cattiness, always an element of the adult version, but I will be interested to see if the kids form friendships and if the program lets us see them suffer inevitable disappointment (their parents, off on the sidelines, never speak but are there to offer a hug for those who do not advance). If the program maintains its current tone of constant, consistent inspiration for the love of food, it is something I’d encourage my own nieces to watch. Maybe they’ll be inspired, too.

Nashville (Premiered 10/10/2012)

When faced with the proposition to co-headline, veteran country songbird Rayna James (Connie Britton) and crossover starlet Juliette Barnes (Hayden Panettiere) should form a sisterhood. They’d see through a braindead music industry’s patriarchal machinations to gin up rivalry and drive the tour bus off of a cliff. Created by Thelma and Louise screenwriter Callie Khouri ABC’s Nashville is a musical melodrama about negotiating power. [Alyxandra Vesey]

Lindsay Giggey – University of California – Los Angeles

Nashville takes on the familiar trope of a fading female icon whose reign is threatened by a less talented ingénue.  As a fan of female driven drama and country music, I’m most impressed by how Nashville uses music to define its central characters.

Superstar and superwoman Rayna (Connie Britton) represents authenticity inherent in traditional country music.  Rayna’s journey to maintain her integrity as both a singer and a matriarch is the narrative’s driving force.  She stands by her craft and by the end of the episode, takes on a new role, as she stands by her husband in his mayoral bid.  From her performance on the Opry stage to her rehearsal with her band, the music flows from and through Rayna.

Juliette (Hayden Panettiere), adorned in a sparkly dress and matching microphone, is quickly established as pop music and celebrity’s influence on, and threat to, the genre.  All flash and no substance, her sound is constructed and auto-tuned by men in the sound booth.  However, Juliette is an active player in her stardom from choosing the bottles for her perfume to repeatedly playing upon her sexuality and preying upon men, including Rayna’s producer and later Rayna’s bandleader, to advance her career.

Finally, we meet Scarlett (Clare Bowen)–waitress, poet, and Rayna fan.  Scarlett is mousey throughout the episode, but propels the show forward when she reluctantly opens her mouth to sing the closing number.  Whereas we repeatedly saw Rayna’s disdain for Juliette’s music throughout the episode, Rayna instantly connects when she hears Scarlett’s performance.  Scarlett is musically positioned as the rightful heir to Rayna’s country reign.

Although responses to the quality of the original songs may vary, I found them to be catchy, character appropriate, and suggestive of country music’s wide range.  I’m intrigued by the relationships between these women as Rayna and Scarlett will seemingly enter a mentoring relationship while Juliette threatens to undermine country music’s strong female tradition.  However, hopefully the show will complicate its dynamics so Rayna is not too good and/or strong to fail, Scarlett has more agency in using her voice, and Juliette is more than a power hungry vixen.  Moreover, hopefully Nashville continues to indulge in country music’s wide-ranging sounds in order to blur the distinctions.

Reece Peck – University of California – San Diego

As first glance, the premiere of ABC’s Nashville seems to be a standard soap opera about fabulous rich people but with southern accents. From the outset, the show reproduces Dynasty-esque tropes and archetypes: the power-hungry industrialist father, the love triangles, the false paternities, etc… However, the relationships and characters of Nashville are given greater meaning as they are tied to the contradictions of the country music industry. Like the opening shots, which give the viewer an aerial tour of the Nashville skyline, this first episode guides us through the different sectors of the country music artworld, sectors that are embodied by the cast of characters. The central plot tells a story about a beloved but aging country superstar Rayna James whose title as the queen of country is threatened by a younger, more pop-oriented Juliette Barnes (à la the real life dust up between Faith Hill and Carrie Underwood a few years back). Characters like Rayna and the fictional Opry legend Watty White are positioned against Juliette, her auto-tune-friendly producers, and shrewd label executives. Like White and Rayna, band member (and former lover) Deacon represents country’s soul within the Nashville machine and shuttles between the corporate world and the authentic world of the famed Blue Bird Café. Deacon’s niece Scarlett represents pure, unincorporated and uncommodifed country when she hesitantly decides to sing a Carter-Family-esque country blues song during an open mic in the final scenes.  Even Alt Country is represented by Scarlett’s “not-to-be-trusted” hipster boyfriend.

The dichotomies of commercialization and authenticity, pop and tradition have been central to the development of country music since the industry first consolidated sixty years ago in Nashville.  The promise of the series Nashville is if the show can continue to personalize these tensions through the main characters and use melodramatic narratives to probe the paradoxes that arise when a business attempts to monetize sincerity and professionalize countriness.

Alyxandra Vesey – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Though Rayna James (Connie Britton) and Juliette Barnes’ (Hayden Panettiere) drama takes center stage in Nashville, their lives are bound up in musicians struggling for a bit of the spotlight. Lead guitarist Deacon Clayborne (Charles Esten) is a guitarist caught between his past with James, his precarious future with Barnes, and his frustration that his own songwriting efforts will never be recognized outside of the local cantinas. Scarlett O’Connor (Clare Bowen) is an aspiring songwriter in a love triangle with heartbreaker boyfriend Avery Barkley (Jonathan Jackson) and would-be suitor Gunnar Scott (Sam Palladio), a sweet boy with a demo tape in his pocket.

Part of Nashville’s success will be determined by its ability to situate reinterpreted and original material within its generic milieu—a standard by which NBC mid-season replacement Smash was also measured. I particularly liked O’Connor’s interpretation of the Civil Wars’ “If I Didn’t Know Better.” Barnes’ songs believably cloak mass appeal pop hits in country drawl drag.

Nashville also focuses on how politics and family influence country music and the city. Barnes’ ruthlessness is contextualized by her desire to escape her drug addict mother Jolene (Sylvia Jefferies). James is the headstrong daughter of corrupt politician Lamar Wyatt (Powers Boothe). He’s responsible for marrying James off to Teddy Conrad (Eric Close) in order to hide her previous indiscretions. Wyatt has engineered Conrad’s mayoral campaign against Coleman Carlisle (Robert Wisdom). James plays the politician’s wife, but the twinkle in her eye comes from hearing one of O’Connor’s songs over the phone. It sounds like a hit and she has every intention to claim it for herself. I’ll be tuning in next week to find out what she does with it.

The Neighbors (Premiered 09/26/2012)

The Neighbors sees the Weaver family move into Hidden Hills, New Jersey, only to find that their neighbors are aliens stuck on Earth and waiting to return home. James Hibberd of EW christens this “WTF sitcom” holder of the award for this year’s one show “that critics start piling on long before it premieres.” Lenny Venito and Jamie Gertz star, meaning both will likely be available for new shows in production for next year. ABC had originally intended to give the show the coveted post-Modern Family time slot before backing away from this and scheduling it in the Hidden Hills, New Jersey of timeslots, after The Middle. [Jonathan Gray]

Jonathan Gray – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Most of the pilot of this odd new addition to ABC’s lineup just cruises along in a low gear of offensiveness. Its gender politics are pretty miserable, uniting two planets in which men tell women what to do and they learn to damn well like it, or complain about it while washing dishes. But most of the humor is based around “Funny Jokes.” Like when the eight (?) year-old announces he knows weird because he goes to public school. Or the Oh So Funny act of naming all the aliens after pro sports players. Or their power source being called the Poo Pa (?). And the subsequent, inevitable “Hey Perhaps You Didn’t Get Our Awesome Joke About Poop” reference, when the kid refers to their “poopie.” Or, when the aliens don’t eat at dinner because they claim they nourish themselves with their eyes and mind instead, and Marty whispers to his wife that this is “a European thing.” Surrender your Emmy, Louis C.K., ‘cause you ain’t gonna win Best Comedy Writing two years in a row now that The Neighbors are on the block.

That said, it was bad enough to be vaguely amusing as a result (and maybe even funny if you were stoned?). But then the episode ended with a joke about beating the crap out of your wife.

You can tell a lot about a sitcom from its choice in final jokes. Seinfeld, most famously, often spent an entire episode setting up that last joke. The Simpsons regularly ends with the back-and-forth of something sweet and something cynical, showing its two dominant, co-mingling energies. Community announced its awesomeness early with the sublime Troy and Abed bits. And The Neighbors? After realizing that different species can bond over their mutual desire to dominate their female partners, “Larry Bird” and Marty Weaver’s discussion about how exactly to announce this supremacy ominously closes with Marty’s concern that Larry has either disposed of his wife or beaten her senseless. Who the heck is writing this crap? Todd Akin?

So, to summarize, at best, the show is silly in a way that might have your eight year old son snorting his root beer through his nose when it makes its fifth poop joke in two minutes; at worst, it’s actively offensive.

Myles McNutt – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Earlier this semester, we were looking for an ideal clip to demonstrate the potential pitfalls of the television development system. In the Spring, we used a clip from ABC’s midseason disaster Work It, and so it seemed natural to go to The Neighbors to see if we could update our clip selection for a new development season.

The consensus was ultimately to remain with Work It, which I suppose is a compliment to The Neighbors, although not much of one. It’s still not a good show by any stretch of the imagination, but The Neighbors is less innately terrible. As silly as the show might be, it’s—mostly—harmless family-friendly sitcom fare that doesn’t insult my intelligence so much as it doesn’t bother to engage with it.

The problem is that there’s nothing to suggest this would change in future episodes. Although I suppose—and my cable listings confirm—that they’ll be sending the kids to school and further integrating the aliens into the larger community, the chances of the show breaking out of the premise’s limitations are slim. Whereas “Living with Aliens” feels like it should have endless potential, the pilot relies on the basest of observations regarding the “Suburbanites as Aliens” metaphor, observations that give no indication of an interesting or distinctive show to emerge from this scenario.

As noted above, ABC still isn’t sure what they want to do with the show, debuting it after Modern Family but quietly shuffling it into the 8:30/7:30c slot and putting their muscle behind sophomore Suburgatory instead. That show, while relying on similar interests in suburban living, felt like it had an upside; I cannot say the same for a show with Dick Butkus jokes.

Last Resort (Premiered 09/27/2012)

When the captain of the most advanced U.S. submarine (Andre Braugher) refuses a mysterious order to launch nuclear missiles at Pakistan, the submarine and its crew are declared rogue and fired upon by their own country’s ships. Taking refuge at the island of Sainte Marina and protected by the threat of mutually assured destruction, the crew members work to prove their innocence and discover who is behind this conspiracy. [Tony Tran]

Mobina Hashmi – CUNY-Brooklyn College

Probably the most ambitious series of the new season, Last Resort signals right from the first shot of a Navy SEAL team speeding through the wide-open ocean that it is willing to operate on a cinematic scale both visually and in the scope of its narrative. So, it’s not surprising that the pilot shows a nuclear attack (there goes my hometown!) that is actually set within a real-world context (a TV first?). Producers Shawn Ryan and Karl Gajdusek are familiar with the challenges of managing dense multi-layered narratives and the pilot demonstrates their confidence in their storytelling abilities that was sorely lacking from NBC’s Revolution, the other high-concept show this season.

It’s always a pleasure to watch Andre Braugher, and Scott Speedman (XO Sam Kendal) is as inoffensively charming as he was in Felicity. Along with Robert Patrick as the crusty, sexist Chief and relative newcomer Daisy Betts as the only female officer on the submarine, the core cast seems to have good chemistry. The pilot stays focused on the submarine as Chaplin and Kendal plot their course to a détente with their own government which appears to have used them to begin a nuclear war. Brief scenes set in Washington introduce a sexy high-tech military supplier (played by O.C. alum Autumn Reeser) and promise a juicy conspiracy storyline. Without being too obvious about it, the pilot sets up a number of intriguing narrative questions and organically lays the groundwork for key relationships including possible alliances and tensions that are sure to erupt in future episodes. Through Chaplin, Last Resort makes a vague political statement about loss of faith in government and a desire to escape from the messiness of politics. But, Chaplin also demonstrates the same ruthlessness shown by the U.S. government when he retaliates to threats against the submarine by firing a missile at D.C. Hopefully, future episodes will retain this moral ambiguity rather than settling into a simple hero/villain dichotomy.

Jonathan Gray – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Last Resort was an utterly compelling pilot, and the first of this season’s batch to make me excited to watch more. A lot happens in the first episode, but since we’re all (characters and audience) meant to be asking what the heck is going on, the resulting confusion helps set the mood and tone nicely. My daughter was doing her best to cut the tension by babbling up a storm, yet it was still remarkably gripping. This is helped along by a decent performance by Scott Speedman, and a riveting one by Andre Braugher.

Indeed, if this is, as some have called it, “Hunt for Red October meets Lost,” Braugher is set up to be John Locke and Ben Linus rolled into one. His recorded message to the US Government is delivered with great skill, and like his crew, I was left wondering just how messed up or not this guy is, and with a sense of how much will rely on the answer. The show promises to offer a see-saw of who we trust, in good Locke/Linus fashion, though given the military setting and seeded questions about who knows what and who is in on it, perhaps it’s more Battlestar Galactica than Lost? Or with all that questioning of the government and its actions, it’s more 24? (Though its women seem poorly written – witness the introduction of Autumn Reeser – so Lost seems operative as intertext once more). Okay, it’s not so original in its construction, but it at least promises it will go somewhere more starkly original. And for now that’s good enough for me.

I worry, though, about its ability to make good on that promise. The set-up allows for all the intrigue and major plot developments to happen back in DC, leaving a rather tepid Swiss Army Robinson scenario on the island, with occasional firefights with incursionary forces, flushings-out of moles, and a boring to-and-fro with the local crimelord needing to do the weekly work of carrying the show. None of which seems too appealing. To invoke Lost’s multiple worlds, therefore, I see one version of Last Resort’s future in which Braugher gets Emmys, and I have a much-needed new serial love affair, another one in which three weeks from now I think the show really sucks, and another in which its ho-hum ratings sink the sub before I even have a chance to like or dislike it.

666 Park Avenue (Premiered 09/30/2012)

When they land a dream job managing The Drake, one of the most luxurious apartment buildings in New York City, Jane (Rachael Taylor) and Henry (Dave Annable) cannot believe their luck. However, as the naïve couple soon discovers, the building and its owners (Terry O’Quinn and Vanessa Williams) are possessed by strange and demonic supernatural forces and Jane, Henry, and the 80 residents of The Drake may have just signed a contract with the Devil. [Tony Tran]

Myles McNutt – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Watching 666 Park Avenue, I was struck with the sense that this show could run for years. The choice to set the series within a single building, and to follow a collection of residents, means that you could bring in new characters regularly, refreshing the cast and allowing Terry O’Quinn and Vanessa Williams—both good here—to terrorize a new group of innocent people who turn to them for help in their darkest moments.

After thinking about this, though, I realized that this is actually an indictment of 666 Park Avenue in its current form, as it suggests I find the characters it has completely expendable. I actually more or less enjoyed the pilot, but I definitely saw the various characters as conduits through which we could learn more about the setting as opposed to people to become emotionally invested in. The performances are generally solid, and it’s necessary to have outlets through which exposition can be introduced, but the high body count in the premiere made me realize that I wouldn’t mind this show functioning as an anthology at the end of the day.

That won’t happen, as broadcast remains invested in having marketable—read: young and attractive—faces as a point of continuity, and Rachael Taylor and Dave Annable provide just that. As I watch, though, I’ll be interested if the writers prove any more interested in their character arcs as I was, or whether the allure of the Drake Hotel’s dark history leads them in a different direction. The worst fate for the show, honestly, is if it gets stuck inbetween: a show that wants to be about characters but doesn’t care enough about them to make that feasible.

Bill Kirkpatrick – Denison University

Finally, a factual and honest documentary about New York landlords.

Actually, it’s an intertextual smorgasbord, and part of the fun of 666 Park Avenue is playing “spot the influences,” from Faust and Mephisto to Sixth Sense and American Horror, with a little Selling New York thrown in for good measure. The direction and visual style are equally indebted to lots of things you’ve seen before, but somehow it actually coheres as an enjoyable and occasionally thrilling ride so far, just smart and spooky enough for a Sunday night.  This effect is helped immeasurably by the intertextual masterstroke of casting Lost‘s Terry O’Quinn as the villain, his eyes crinkling in twenty different emotional registers.

Myles McNutt has already asked some important questions of structure and character that keep our hopes for the show in check; mine revolve around the landlords’ weaknesses.  If they don’t have any, and O’Quinn and Williams get to make all the written, unwritten, and rewritten rules, the show will be tedious by week three–a cat batting around a fatally injured bird.  If, however, the hinted-at depths pan out to deliver temporal, spiritual, and ethical complexity–and if the characters prove to be more than cardboard Yuppie stereotypes–then the elements are in place for 666 Park to break the curse of puzzle shows and become truly compelling television.

The Mob Doctor (Premiered 09/17/2012)

As a surgical resident, Grace Devlin (Jordana Spiro) has to live up to the expectations of her direct superiors, her patients, and their families, in addition to balancing the rest of her life (which includes dating Matt Saracen M.D.). Unlike most television doctors, though, the rest of her life also involves a debt to the mob, and the show promises to follow her struggle to use her doctoring skills to save the lives of her patients, her brother, and herself. [Myles McNutt]

Myles McNutt – University of Wisconsin-Madison

It’s easy to armchair develop The Mob Doctor after it debuted to disastrous ratings, vaulting to the front of the line in terms of “Shows Destined to be Cancelled” to the point that we’re already discussing its replacement.  I discussed its low ratings with my students, and I learned two things: that its title welcomes a certain degree of ridicule in and of itself, and that almost none of my students seemed to know it existed.

Perhaps that’s because it’s not exactly clear whom this show is for. The medical procedural element seems undercooked, while the mob element is more interesting but enters the story at the wrong point. Rather than showing us what Grace’s brother did to get in trouble with the mafia, giving us the connection necessary to care about his fate and invested in Grace’s decision, we join her arrangement in media res. While the arrangement is “new” by the end of the episode, with Grace’s debt passed on from the deceased Moretti, that doesn’t mean that we didn’t need to see the beginning.

Lone Star, the last FOX series to debut to such low ratings (although with a stronger lead-in), had the same problem. The idea of a man living a double life may be a compelling structure for a series, but people won’t care about—and may in fact actively avoid—the show if they don’t understand why he made this decision. Capturing Grace’s turning point with the mafia—with her arrangement evolving from screwdrivers in the head to murdering a key prosecution witness on the operating table—may offer a more suspenseful narrative “event” for a pilot, but it doesn’t offer the development necessary to make me invested in any of the characters or the larger situation.

You can see the show laying the groundwork for serial mysteries, and the cast has a number of actors—Spiro, Zach Gilford, Zjelko Ivanek—that I feel are good here. It’s hard to talk potential, though, in light of the show’s imminent cancellation; I guess that’s the peril of joining a ratings narrative already in progress.

The Mindy Project (Premiered 09/25/2012)

The Mindy Project finds series creator/star Mindy Kaling in the world of medicine as she plays a “quirky” OB/GYN with a penchant for romantic comedies. While she attempts to find the ‘perfect man,’ she may just overlook plenty of connections with her hot-headed (and hot-bodied) co-worker (Chris Messina). [Drew Zolides]

Linde Murugan – Northwestern University

Despite her successful career as an OB/GYN, Mindy Lahiri is a bit of a mess. Rather than being bitter and single, though, she aims to get her life together by battling her penchants for casual sex and fantasies of ‘90s Meg Ryan.

Notably, this show is one of few network programs created by and starring a woman of color, the only precedents being Margaret Cho’s All American Girl and Wanda Sykes’s Wanda At Large. It is also one of the few recent comedies that star a woman of color as a leading character. Wanda at Large, Whoopi, and Ugly Betty are the only to do so since 2000, at least of the offerings by the four major broadcast networks. Yet, within this context, there is a complete absence of people of color in the supporting cast. Hopefully this changes as the season progresses, as it seems a little unbelievable that no co-worker, close friend, or love interest involved with Mindy would be of color.

Still, Kaling holds her own with a deadpan delivery and biting comebacks that convey a woman who is smart, sexy, wry, successful, and confident, if even a little frustrated and vulnerable at times. Like other ‘working girl’ shows, from That Girl to Ugly Betty, pleasure is found in watching the various costume changes. Though the lighting design downplays whatever medical seriousness the show could claim, the warm glows work to highlight Mindy’s dark brown skin as opposed to ‘whitewashing’ it out. This is quite refreshing, given the politics of shadism within the US but also in South Asia and throughout its diaspora.

In the absence of any explicit racial politics then, The Mindy Project offers us to imagine what Bridget Jones’s Diary would be like with a self-described “chubby” South Asian-American woman in the lead. Does it dismantle romantic comedies’ unproblematized championing of heteronormativity? No. In fact, every character is straight and cisgender, something that will also hopefully change. Yet, if this show means stylish outfits on a woman who I can actually relate to and looks like me and hearing M.I.A.’s “Bad Girls,” well, I can get behind that­­—at least enough to tune in to more episodes. Perhaps that sounds like shallow identity politics, but considering how the resurgence of young women on television has been wholly white (i.e. Girls, 2 Broke Girls, New Girl, Whitney), The Mindy Project is a welcome indulgence.

Liz Ellcessor – Indiana University

With the departure of The Office‘s Kelly Kapoor for Miami University (in Ohio), writer-producer-actress Mindy Kaling turns full time to her own sitcom. Developed for NBC, rejected, and then picked up and produced for FOX, the titular project would seem to be advancing our protagonist’s career and romantic life, as she recovers from a breakup, goes on a date (with a man played by Office co-star Ed Helms), and engages in push-and-pull banter and some friends-with-benefits antics with her two male coworkers.

Alternately, of course, the “project” appears to be Kaling’s. Leaving The Office, where she did excellent work writing episodes like “The Dundies” and “Niagara,” Kaling is now in the spotlight as star and producer of her own series, and is a rare woman of color to take that position in television comedy. Kaling’s character addresses her reputation among South Asian immigrants, and people without insurance, in the first episode, telling her staff she needs “more white patients?” in order to stay in practice. Yet, she continues to work with those who need but may not have the resources for medical care. Such attention to race, ethnicity, and the politics of health care are hardly par for the sitcom course, and are somewhat refreshing. Additionally, The Mindy Project carries over Kaling’s investment in the romantic comedy genre, and her smart-yet-silly voice as established through her social media use, 2011 memoir, and the numerous profiles of her that preceded this premiere. Kaling regularly veers between the frivolous and the serious, merging bravado and insecurity in ways that may result in the development of unusually three-dimensional and diverse characters on The Mindy Project.

Finally, watching the premiere, I was struck by a rare sense of recognition: from the tensions of career and romance to the incorporation of M.I.A. and Le Tigre on the soundtrack, The Mindy Project seems to directly hail an audience that resembles Kaling’s on- and off-screen personas – educated, female, and torn between life directions. I’ll be interested to see if such an audience emerges, and how The Mindy Project might shift in future episodes; either way, I’m on board.

Shilpa Davé – Brandeis University

Mindy Kaling is the first Indian American woman to headline her own show, The Mindy Project. The last Asian American woman to star in her own network comedy was Margaret Cho in All American-Girl (1994) and her show was cancelled after one year. Kaling’s experience in television should help her show, as she made great inroads in dispelling Indian stereotypes as the self absorbed, boy-crazy, customer relations’ representative Kelly Kapoor on The Office (2005-2012). Kaling has shown in her deft writing in her book and on The Office that diversity stereotypes are made to laughed at and made to be broken. Her new character is an OB/GYN physician, a professional woman more akin to comedians Mary Tyler Moore and Tina Fey (30 Rock). Her show and her character revolve around her work and her personal life, and has the ability to propel Kaling into a new category where her Indian-ness is not an exotic accent in a script but instead part of an everyday American narrative linked to working women comedies and television history.

South Asians have been appearing on American television programs with increasing frequency, but the characters are mostly young men who are a variation of Apu, such as the smart, foreign-looking, out-of-place, emasculated nerd who is always the sidekick and never the leader. Although Indian and Indian American women have appeared on television, their characters are often defined by their sexual desirability and exotic appeal. Kaling’s character acts as if being Indian is natural and part of her everyday life rather than emphasizing significant cultural traits. She does not speak with a foreign accent but ironically her rival/colleague physicians do— Dr. Jeremy Reed (British actor Ed Weeks) plays a Hugh Grant-like playboy physician with an English accent and Dr. Danny Castellano (Chris Messina) is the blunt rugged physician who speaks in a New Jersey tough guy inflected accent. Instead Dr. Mindy Lahiri is a talented and compassionate physician who dreams of love just like in the romantic comedies of Meg Ryan and Julia Roberts. Her miscues with dating and romance make her lovable and form the basis of the pilot but the first show also has comic moments that reference healthcare, race, and immigration. In The Mindy Project, the hope is that Kaling will continue to clear the way for women of color on television that move beyond sexual objects and exotic sidekicks, showcasing Indian Americans and Asian Americans in a variety of roles in American culture.

Ben and Kate (Premiered 09/25/2012)

Deadbeat parents fostered Ben and Kate’s sibling bond at an early age, but two decades later Kate’s become a responsible parent while Ben’s stuck in an extended adolescence. Hijinks ensue when Ben decides to move in and resume his big brother role, pledging to help raise Kate’s five year old daughter. Two hilarious best friend sidekicks complete this relatively unknown cast of five in a Fox comedy that comes from the producers and director of New Girl. [Sarah Murray]

Sarah Murray – University of Wisconsin-Madison

The richness with which a sibling relationship can imbue a text makes it a tried-and-true narrative formula, while failure to translate the banality of a sibling relationship always stands to threaten storytelling’s vitality. Ben and Kate, Fox’s half-hour single cam comedy from the producers and director of New Girl, straddles an amiable in-between space that encourages watching beyond the pilot. Not quite mundane, not quite nuanced, the show nevertheless manages to tap into the uneasy hilarity that comes with the permanence of family. It’s easy to relate to Kate’s (Dakota Johnson) resistance to her brother’s (Ben, played by Nat Faxon) kind-hearted foolishness because we’re working just as hard to resist the charm of this show’s refusal to take itself too seriously. While the shenanigans are predictable, the vague familiarity of the underexposed cast gives the show an open, inviting feel (you might know Nat Faxon from Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story or for his Oscar award winning adapted screenplay of The Descendants, and Dakota Johnson from 21 Jump Street). Beyond the show’s graceful display of life’s clumsiness, it’s actually funny. Kate’s best friend BJ (Lucy Punch) has a bulldozing brand of literal comedy that is smartly written into her scenes with Kate’s earnest five-year-old daughter, Maddie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones). Time will tell on whether Ben’s best friend Tommy (Echo Kellum) will be given dimension, although there are hints that he’ll play a role in a romantic subplot with Kate. Contrary to the will-they-won’t-they narrative arc that lives and dies on sexual tension, the beauty of the sibling duo lies in its potential for longevity. If the showrunners can manage to differentiate Ben from New Girl‘s Jess (Zooey Deschanel), Ben and Kate may leave a dent, although it’s unlikely it will manage to imprint on us the way a sibling does.

Phil Scepanski – Northwestern University

Ben and Kate bases its central dynamic around a pair who are forced together despite seemingly incompatible personalities. Impulsive, emotional, and living in the short term, Ben represents the Oscar/Laverne/Id archetype while his comparatively level-headed sister Kate plays the complementary Felix/Shirley/Ego. Drifting into town to romantically but haplessly disrupt his ex-girlfriend’s wedding, Ben stumbles into his sister’s more sensible attempt to negotiate a budding long-term relationship. Of course, the long-term sibling relationship demonstrates its true value over romantic ones and provides a setup for more weekly conflicts and resolutions.

But formula is in the genre’s nature. Gags, performances, and other more varied elements often make or break sitcoms. To this end, Ben and Kate does well. Ben’s childishness is a vulnerable—rather than psychopathic—one, and Nat Faxon’s expressive performance balances the goofy and pathetic elements of his character well. Similarly, while more strictly rule-bound versions of the Odd Couple dynamic would make Kate distant and unresponsive, Dakota Johnson does extremely well playing a frazzled character who aspires to, but cannot fully perform, a type A personality. Supporting characters vary more widely, with somewhat broadly-drawn wacky sidekicks played with varying comic abilities and a deadpan child seemingly drawn from the ranks of Wes Anderson films.

I enjoyed the show, but other than that Ben was moving in with Kate and her daughter, it was not clear precisely where the series was headed. This episode seemed to address some rather big crises in both main character’s lives, and it is difficult to imagine Ben interrupting a wedding every week. But if it focuses too much on daily minutiae, it may rob these actors of the reason to continue their quality performances. I plan to keep watching, but we shall see whether the promise of this first episode proves unsustainable.

The New Normal (Premiered 09/10/12)

From Glee creator Ryan Murphy and Ali Adler, David (Justin Bartha) and Bryan (Andrew Rannells) star in this new homonormative series documenting the zany antics of two upper-middle-class white gay men who want to have a baby by a surrogate, Goldie (Georgia King). She relocates from Ohio to Los Angeles to escape her stagnant life, but is tracked down by her mother, a “modern-day Archie Bunker” (Ellen Barkin), whose conservativism and rustic Midwestern values grate on and offend the couple and their employee (NeNe Leakes). [Taylor Cole Miller]

Myles McNutt – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Like most premise pilots, The New Normal‘s first episode has to do a lot of work moving pieces around: Goldie has to get to Los Angeles, Bryan and David need to decide to have a baby, and they have to meet one another to start a magical journey together. The problem is that all of it happens too fast, with perfectly reasonable decisions—like choosing to become a surrogate, or choosing to have a child through a surrogate—rushed to the point of seeming impulsive and scatterbrained. It’s all moving too fast for us to get a read on the characters, outside of the antagonistic, racist, bigoted grandmother who exists solely as a strawwoman enabling the show to pitch its rational, human decision-making as revolutionary and society-altering. Ellen Barkin, sidled with a character even less dimensional than Sue Sylvester (who occupies a strikingly similar role on Glee), will struggle to find the depth required to rescue the character within the confines of the half-hour sitcom.

Barkin’s Jane is also the one character who doesn’t feel improved by a second episode. NBC’s decision to air the two episodes on consecutive days bought the show some goodwill, as Shania’s Little Edie impression was easily the strongest comedy the show produced. While the themes remain saccharine, the removal of the “premise” from such a prominent position gave the characters some room to breathe, and you could start to see how this might work as a weekly sitcom given some strong work from Bartha and Rannells. Unfortunately, given that the show did finally reveal Goldie was pregnant, the premise isn’t going away anytime soon, and Jane continues to persist as the object of Murphy’s worst tendencies.

Taylor Cole Miller – University of Wisconsin-Madison

When I wrote this review of Ryan Murphy’s new series The New Normal for The Huffington Post, I had seen only a (very) early edit of the pilot episode. It was quite simple to disparage because, even with all the tell-tale signs of the genre of comedy (read “cue theory” from Brett Mills’ “Programmes”), the show was just unfunny. It was not even “not funny” but unfunny, as if it were dedicated to birthing a dud wrapped in an assemblage of 90s-era gay humor. I don’t belong to the camp of gay men who are offended whenever a character trots out old-school gay stereotypes (which are on welcome display in this show) because I’m aware of how the gay communities (and their media advocacies elite) have been complicit in perpetuating those stereotypes in order to combat invisibility. I also believe that offense at such characterizations is misaimed: I’ve long felt uncomfortable with campaigns against flamboyant characters, as I think such protests can feel homophobic. When heteronormative power structures impose such stereotypes on gay characters, literally using them to parody homosexuality in a marginalizing and containing way, that’s also unnerving. The predicament of The New Normal is attempting to navigate what it is that makes my experience of the show so unsettling. I’m not sure I would have arrived at such ambivalence if it weren’t for an exquisitely delivered performance of Little Edie from Grey Gardens, again begging the question I constantly ask in my research: who is this text for? Even with all its triteness, eye-rolling humor, and sea of white, upper-middle-class, monogamous bodies, The New Normal still delivers unobstructed kissing scenes, references to gay culture, and millions of eyes—Oh, it’s on NBC? Thousands, then. Thousands of eyes—witnessing the evolution of a new generation of gay representation. Cringing along though I may be, I’m invested in seeing how it unfolds, as this show (if it does indeed become a success) could serve as a political intervention, albeit one where the only perceptions changed are those about white, upper-middle-class, monogamous gay men.

Go On (Premiered 09/11/12)

Matthew Perry stars in this tale of a sports radio host who loses his wife and is forced into group therapy in order to be allowed to return to work. While this basic premise could facilitate either a comedy or a drama, the collection of zany archetypes that populates said group confirms its comic aspirations, while romantic tension with the group’s leader (Laura Benanti) will provide the requisite “Will They, Won’t They” to appease the genre gods. [Myles McNutt]

Mobina Hashmi – CUNY-Brooklyn College

I wasn’t expecting In Treatment, but I did naively hope that the dynamics of therapy would play some part in Go On. Instead, from the moment Ryan King (Matthew Perry) enters and transforms group therapy into a fast-paced playoff for the saddest story, it’s clear the producers aren’t even bothering to pretend that therapy is anything other than a flimsy pretext to bring together a group of misfits who will end up bonding into a surrogate family. As a narrative device for introducing characters “March Sadness” is cute. The problem is: a) I’ve met these folks before and nothing I’ve seen makes me believe I’m going to learn anything new about them, and b) the producers, anxious to reassure us that they’re not really mocking loss just had to include a sincere montage of group members alone and grieving. The second episode has a similar by-the-numbers feel as it dutifully establishes Ryan’s relationships with his inexplicably caring assistant Carrie (Allison Miller) and his boss Steven (John Cho).

As Eleanor points out, Go On pits masculine action against feminine stasis. I’d actually be okay with this dichotomy, crude as it is, if the show committed to it. Instead, by the end of the very first episode, Perry realizes that, as it turns out, he does need help because like any normatively-socialized straight White guy he is incapable of acknowledging his feelings without the help of a caring woman (or two) and a sufficiently-diverse microcosm of society. And, by the second episode, it’s clear that he is going to spend his time reluctantly helping the group members and rediscovering his emotions. Still, Go On might just work. It has some good one-liners, it assures us that professional sport has all the life lessons we need, and it promises guest appearances from sports celebrities. What more can you ask for?

Eleanor Patterson – University of Wisconsin-Madison

NBC is banking that the familiarity of Matthew Perry as a sarcastic, flippant erratic male at odds with the world around him will lure viewers to this contrived semblance of a sitcom. Go On’s pilot begins as Ryan (Perry) hijacks his group therapy session and coaxes them to compete for the saddest sob story. My own misfortune was just beginning, as Go On proceeded to draw broad plotlines around a cliché war of the sexes between the requisite uptight, controlling therapist Lauren and egotistical, yet fun-loving, radio host Ryan. Lauren may run the therapy group, but the show consistently portrays her to be incompetent. For instance, Ryan uncovers that Lauren’s only therapeutic qualification is her background as a Weight Watchers coach who successfully lost 40 lbs. Ryan eyes Lauren and down as she tells him this, and Lauren says, “oh yeah, it’s good,” “it” presumably being her body. This scene then allows for a subtle product placement that is not neutral, but reinforces hegemonic feminine beauty standards. It also undermines the (feminine) strategy of working out feelings through therapy, and I think the pilot hits us over the head with a “talking about your feelings is stupid, go out and do something” message. Therapy isn’t totally thrown under the bus—or else there would be no premise, right?—but that is because Matthew Perry is here (yay!), and he gets them of the therapy room and into zany gags that won’t make you laugh. Perry out acts everyone around him, except John Cho, whose talents are absolutely wasted in this dire series. Even so, Perry seems to be calling in his performance; his grief seems more proportional to losing one’s ice cream cone than losing one’s wife. Which is more grief than I will feel if this show is cancelled.

Guys with Kids (Premiered 09/12/2012)

Vanessa Cosby and Meadow Soprano’s kids and some other not-famous baby get carried around town by fathers (provided by John Wells’ dating agency: Law and Order’s Anthony Anderson and West Wing’s Jesse Bradford, respectively. Forget the not-famous one) who make lots of jokes about being in their thirties with kids yet wanting to stay young and cool. In-the-know humor ensues from the comic mind of Jimmy “doesn’t have kids” Fallon. No, it doesn’t involve an episode in which Bill Cosby and James Gandolfini show up as grandpa buddies … but with more product placement opportunities for Snugli and other baby goods than even The Apprentice could muster, it may only need a 0.5 rating for NBC to keep the show. [Jonathan Gray]

Kyra Hunting – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Dads are having their media moment right now: single fathers are the focus of the Fox comedy Raising Hope and ABC Family’s Baby Daddy and two dads are at the center of The New Normal.  From this perspective, Guys With Kids fits nicely with the trend. However, compared to their television cousins, Guys with Kids has two fatals flaws: 1) it is resoundingly not funny (see the half a dozen jokes centered on the fact that one of the father’s has four, yes four, kids) and 2) its exploration of parental masculinity often takes the form of brutal, sometimes mysogynist, stereotypes. Raising Hope, Baby Daddy, and The New Normal all include quirky, tough, women who are flawed, certainly, but ultimately likable. Guys with Kids, by comparison, offers only cookie cutter characters.

While Tempest Bledsoe breathes some life into her character Marny, its premise—the spouse of a dissatisfied househusband—manages to feel worn out despite having few TV precedents. The characters of Emily, a cheerful stay at home mom who just wants a night out, and Shiela, the shrew of an ex-wife who dictates how her husband raises there child, are even less original. While ostensibly the fathers are supposed to be the heart of the show, they fare only marginally better. Househusband Gary seems to be almost always whining and wants nothing more than access to a TV, the “traditional” dad Chris is the voice of experience but is mostly seen “wearing,” rather than interacting with, his children, and Nick asserts his parental independence by having Kareem Abdul Jabar “dunk” his baby; these fathers are painted in broad strokes as immature or detached. These simplistic character types, the normalization of stay-at-home parents in an economy that often requites two incomes, and even the live studio audience makes the show seem locked in the past.

This series had the raw materials of a really interesting show. How to negotiate being new parents and newly divorced at the same time, figuring out how to be a stay-at-home dad and how it differs from being a stay at home mom, and integrating children into a male social circle are all interesting topics that could provide fresh and fertile narratives. However, by leaning too heavily on worn gender stereotypes and trite humor, Guys With Kids manages to take a novel premise and make it feel like a program we have seen a thousand times, and are sick of already.

Jonathan Gray – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Sitcom pilots are usually bad, as the opening premise labors under the weight of endless archetypes at best, stereotypes at worst, waiting for someone’s performance, or someone’s writing to provide something interesting and new. And thus it’s perhaps banal and meaningless to say that the pilot of Guys with Kids is bad. But it is bad. On one hand, the humor is so utterly predictable, and it’s hard to look beyond the childlessness of the creative mind behind the show, Jimmy Fallon, when listening to endless jokes about life with kids that seem to be written either by people without them, or by people with them whose resulting lack of sleep has led to sloppy writing. Indeed, you’d think that my relatively new status as parent of a baby would make the characters and situation more familiar, but they still felt so very foreign to me. Louie CK, they ain’t. I laughed about three times, all thanks to Zach Cregger, the only cast member who seems at home in the format. Rounding out the cast are Anthony Anderson, whose hamming it up is more befitting of a sketch, variety, or vaudeville show than a sitcom in 2012; Jesse Bradford and Erinn Hayes, who are trying to do with the whine what David Schwimmer and Jennifer Aniston did with the pout in Friends, but I can’t see it working; Tempestt Bledsoe, who stumbles through the pilot like Han Solo coming out of carbon freezing, yet without a wookiee to guide her (or any of the coolness of Harrison Ford); and then there’s Jamie-Lynn Sigler, who apparently has been told that sitcom acting requires swinging from side to side (either that or someone showed her how to rock a kid to sleep, but she keeps doing it without the kid). And Kareem Abdul Jabbar shows up (having followed Bledsoe through a portal in time?) to be completely wasted. I won’t say it’s horrible, but it’s almost worse by being just plain old boring and unfunny.

Revolution (Premiered 09/17/2012)

Fifteen years ago, an unknown phenomena caused electricity worldwide to fail. Without technology, society fractures and the resulting post-apocalyptic landscape is ruled by sinister militias and warlords. The “epic” drama focuses on Charlie, a young woman searching for her place in this new world after her father’s sudden death and her brother’s kidnapping. Charlie heads on a mission to find her uncle and save her family, not knowing that the mission could also solve the mystery of why the power went off. With creator Eric Kripke and Bad Robot Productions at the helm, pedigree would suggest a series built on mystery and action. [Jenna Stoeber]

Mobina Hashmi – CUNY-Brooklyn College

The opening sequence of Revolution is the most compelling scene in the pilot. On the eve of the Blackout, Charlie and her younger brother Danny are hypnotized by their individual screens. Suddenly Ben bursts in warning that the end is nigh. He manages to call his brother Miles with a cryptic warning and to download something (all of civilization? Nuclear codes? The complete run of Lost?) onto a tiny shiny triangular Magic Object. Bugs Bunny flickers, distorts into static, and vanishes. The lights go out. Danny bursts into tears. It’s not clear if he’s upset about the darkness, his parents’ agitation, or the iPad dying. When Charlie remembers this scene fifteen years later, it’s as a golden memory of eating ice cream for dinner. But, as shown, it’s a bleak vision of the American family.

The rest of the pilot abandons this potentially critical perspective in favor of a libertarian family drama. Ben is now an anxious single father after his wife’s death, Charlie’s a rebellious young woman who resents Ben’s girlfriend Maggie, Danny has asthma. This uneasy domestic status quo is broken when Ben is fatally wounded, the militia takes Danny, and, in an emotional scene, Charlie is charged with finding Miles, the only one who can help her rescue Danny. We now have the separated orphans, their surrogate mother and, in Miles, a reluctant father. This family drama is, as per genre protocol, inscribed within the broader socio-political imperative to uncover the meaning of the Magic Object so that peace and prosperity can return to the land.

Like Terra Nova, Fox’s failed foray into this genre, Revolution is a fantasy of rebooting American civilization as a self-reliant homogeneous community. Safety is represented by the Mathesons’ off-the-grid lifestyle in the remnants of a suburban enclave. The only form of government, Monroe’s Republic, is an oppressive tax-collecting, people-stealing, power-hungry monster. A resistance movement is only hinted at in the pilot, but given that the other two non-White characters in the pilot (Captain Neville and Nate, a militia spy) are on the wrong side, having an African-American woman as its face doesn’t bode well for our family.

NBC did its best to hype Revolution. It reminded us of the pedigree of its producers (Supernatural, Lost, Fringe) and promised girl power in the figure of Charlie who, wielding a bow à la The Hunger Games, intones in a promo, “When the world lost its power, I found mine.” Cheesy, but potentially fun. The pilot, unfortunately, is anything but fun.

Myles McNutt – University of Wisconsin-Madison

I’m having a hard time forming any kind of strong opinion about Revolution. While you would think a high-concept show would lend itself to evaluative extremes, encouraging either appreciative obsession or frustration-fueled revulsion, the truth is Revolution is uninterested in inspiring these kinds of feelings. Instead, it’s comfortable sitting in the middle, offering the basic signifiers of serialized genre storytelling with none of the heart or character necessary to sustain them.

The problem, I think, comes with the way the pilot production process works in the post-Lost era. While networks are still in search of a similar genre success story, producers can’t bank on networks taking that risk, or more specifically they can’t bank on them taking a specific kind of risk. Revolution ended up a 10/9c series, but themes of family and the young sibling protagonists made it easy to imagine a family hour version of the series (albeit with a bit less blood) had NBC chose to schedule it accordingly. The series is underdeveloped because the development process has to leave holes, holes that are filled in once the network’s plans for the series become more fully-formed but nonetheless remain evident in the pilot.

Accordingly, I’ll likely give Revolution a few more episodes to see how it approaches its generic identity now that its relationship with NBC’s brand identity is clearer (although the show’s advertising campaign hasn’t offered much evidence of remarkable clarity in that area). This is not to say I’m optimistic that the show is capable of balancing its rote serialized mystery with uneven character dynamics in order to create truly compelling television, but I remain curious to see what show Revolution wants to be beyond ticking off the “genre” box in NBC’s pilot production slate.

Animal Practice (Premiered 09/26/2012)

Justin Kirk plays a quirky and unorthodox veterinarian named George Coleman, who works at the upscale Crane Animal Hospital in Manhattan. Live animals abound in this work place sitcom, including Dr. Rizzo, a capuchin monkey and Coleman’s best friend. Dr. Coleman is much better at interacting with animals than with humans, which may make for some interesting comedy when his ex-girlfriend Dorothy (JoAnna Garcia Swisher) inherits his business from her family. [Eleanor Patterson]

Phil Scepanski – Northwestern University

As the apparent flagship program of NBC’s new strategy to go broad in comedy, it is tempting to focus on Animal Practice‘s flaws. And it’s got them. The lead plays too deadpan to fulfill his role as audience surrogate and members of the supporting cast try so hard they seem ready to collapse from exhaustion. The animals primarily serve as background objects or vehicles for lazy sight gags, the cheapest of which come from a lab coat-wearing monkey named Dr. Rizzo. If, however, the monkey is an actual licensed veterinarian, I may grant grudging laughter to a joke so audaciously broad and bizarre.

But despite every expectation on my part, Animal Practice is not awful. It is premature to dismiss a pilot for the above reasons. The 22-minute format prevents deep characterization in ensembles and despite hacky writing, the acting behind the weakest characters made me optimistic. By the end, I even forgot Mad TV long enough to enjoy Bobby Lee’s performance.

As a statement of purpose, Animal Practice demonstrates further promise. In parodying the shaky hand-held cinematography and chaotic visual clutter of medical dramas, its visual sophistication surprises. The fact that nonhuman actors account for much of the mise-en-scene’s commotion makes it that much more impressive. Quality work from comically talented but relatively unknown guests Matt Walsh and Jessica Makinson also brightened the pilot. Walsh in particular provided my only laugh-out-loud when he reacted to Dr. Rizzo. Setting the program in an animal hospital likely signals a rotating cast of guest stars and if these two are an indication of those to come, this could be the show’s brightest element. Animal Practice is not likely to replace the medical comedy hole left by Scrubs, but I look forward to watching it develop.

Chicago Fire (Premiered 10/10/2012)

After a firehouse loses one of its own, it sets off a chain reaction of professional conflict and personal struggle for a group of Chicago firefighters and paramedics. Taylor Kinney, Jesse Spencer, and Eamonn Walker star in a Dick Wolf drama in the Dick Wolf mould, on the network that still believes America wants another Dick Wolf drama. [Myles McNutt]

Bill Kirkpatrick – Denison University

The most apt tweet I saw about NBC’s Chicago Fire: “It’s almost as good as Law & Order SVU—ALMOST!!”

Translation: if SVU is your kind of television, you might actually come close to enjoying Chicago Fire.  It has the same high production values, the same signifiers of what Hollywood imagines as “grittiness,” and the same pacing:  the mindless soft/loud/soft/loud dynamics of a bad Nirvana knock-off.

Similarly, if SVU is your go-to example of unrealistic plotting, cheap emotional manipulation, and objectifying titillation, Chicago Fire will again deliver. A key difference: SVU at least has Richard Belzer and Ice-T going for it, though in fairness the pilot is too early to judge how interesting the characters on Chicago Fire might become.   Early returns are not, however, encouraging.

Still, credit NBC for constructing a tonally cohesive Wednesday night block.  The show has already signaled its intention to become a firehouse E.R. with more beefcake, or yes, an SVU without the crime-solving narrative to hold viewers’ attention. It might become competent at that, but you probably have better things to do with your Wednesday night.

Myles McNutt – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Fighting fires isn’t the same as fighting criminals. Criminals have personalities, motives, and dynamic goals that can change over the course of an episode. Fires, meanwhile, are acts of nature without any clear motive. They have victims, in the same ways that criminals do, but the long term viability of those victims ends when they’re wheeled into the hospital and the paramedics’ job is over.

Chicago Fire understands this, which is why its group of firefighters and paramedics are defined by infighting, personal struggle, and recent tragedy. The speed at which these issues are established is easily Chicago Fire’s biggest problem: rather than feeling like we’re joining an existing firehouse in medias res, it feels like we’re joining a procedural in its opening episode. That’s bad.

This is largely because Chicago Fire isn’t really a procedural, to the degree we might think of a crime procedural or a medical procedural. While the structure of the show will be around fires- and medical emergencies-of-the-week, the aforementioned lack of dynamic perpetrators—a gunshot suspect and a hit-and-run suspect are largely irrelevant to the series—means that the dynamism is found in its characters on our side of the fight.

Unfortunately, what Chicago Fire lacks is a clear character hook in its first episode. So focused on giving each character a personal struggle (a recent breakup, a recent death, a potential lawsuit, etc.), there’s no individual character who breaks out from their pre-established identity. It’s no coincidence that the leader of the rescue squad has to rescue the head of the truck squad who he’s feuding with; in fact, despite the unpredictable nature of fire, there’s no coincidence in the episode at all.

None of this suggests that Chicago Fire would remain this predictable in the future, but none of it points to the show evolving into something more than workmanlike (and even that depends on the episode). There may not be a show about firefighters on television right now, but there are plenty of shows about messed up people fighting the good fight in a messed up world, and Chicago Fire does little to evolve beyond that. Rahm Emanuel’s cameo at the end of the episode suggests that this takes place in our world, but it needs to abandon its intensely televisual setup quickly to keep that from seeming like failed aspiration.