Why Won’t Glee Make it?

Glee was awarded a Golden Globe for Best TV Musical or Comedy. I am a big Glee fan. I paid money for both of the albums that the TV show spawned. I watch every week (admittedly usually on Hulu). I think it’s a stroke of marketing genius to take a piece of American Idol to create a show about high school misfits who sing and dance their way to friendship and life lessons. The show also does an incredible job on its musical numbers (according to this non-expert) and has found the funniest female actress on TV in Jane Lynch.

So, I don’t mind that Glee won a Golden Globe, especially since the Foreign Press is voting and the category is Comedy or Musical. I can understand that it has more appeal to foreigners than the much, much funnier Modern Family and 30 Rock. A smart, American audience is better served by those shows, especially Modern Family, which is the funniest show on television right now. But Glee needs to realize that it will quickly descend into mediocrity unless it hires some people who can write plots and develop characters. It’s well on its way to wasting the potential that it created with its pilot. Here’s what I suggest to avoid yet another Fox folly.

First of all, Fox has a history failing to capitalize on shows with huge potential. The epitome of this is Arrested Development, one of the wittiest comedies ever written. Who else would have Henry Winkler literally jump over a shark—again? The show was canceled after three seasons despite winning six Emmy Awards. Another example is Firefly, which had a strong cult following that Fox failed to figure out. Finally, there is House. House is still on, pretty much only because Hugh Laurie carries it on his shoulders, similar to how the music in Glee carries it. Clearly something is wrong at Fox.

Like most Fox shows, Glee has squandered it’s potential. It now relies too much on excellent song arrangements and performances and not enough on what sustains a great show: characters and their development. This is similar to House. Hugh Laurie plays a House, a dynamic, yet sarcastic genius, like nobody else could. (Sure, it was an obvious rip-off of Sherlock Holmes.) However, the writing staff proceeded to surround House with flat, soporific characters. And just as audiences watched just to see Laurie act, Glee audiences are pretty much just watching to see the Glee cast break into song. That’s when the show shines.

Glee aired its pilot in May of last year and then left the pilot on-line until the second episode aired in September. I watched it at least three times while waiting for the second episode. The pilot introduced characters that we could cheer and a story line that was ripe with drama, life lessons, and funny situations. Throw in phenomenally arranged and performed covers of familiar songs, and it seemed like easy money for Fox. But only some of those strengths were maintained throughout the season. The rest fell victim to bad writing.

The two elements that stayed relatively strong were the songs and the comedic element brought by Jane Lynch. I’m convinced Lynch could read the phonebook and elicit a laugh. Not every song sung by the cast is a hit for me, but enough of them are that they keep me watching. Rachel and Mercedes can sing, and the arrangers obviously know that. However, I’d like to hear a bit more from Artie and even Puck. While the music and Lynch are carrying Glee right now, there are many areas in need of improvement.

Glee’s characters have become flatter and flatter over the course of the season, despite the fact that they began with so much potential. I don’t mind them being archetypal. Have Finn be a dumb jock with a heart and voice of gold (even though it’s not, to my ear). Rachel can be over-enthusiastic to the point of nuttiness. They are the main characters and are supposed to be high schoolers, so I won’t get bent out of shape if they are a little one dimensional.

However, there are so many interesting supporting characters that the writers work with one week and completely ignore the rest of the time. Artie and Kirk are two of the losers that audiences were rooting for at the beginning of the season. Kirk’s interaction with his father, while possibly not that original, is one of the better moments for the writers. On the other hand, Artie’s episode of finally finding a friend in “Asian” is over the top and a bit boring. I don’t think they gave him the best solo that week either. Puck is nice one week and a jerk the next, as is Quinn. I think that these capricious moods are the writers’ attempts at giving the characters depth, but they are so uneven that it makes them un-relatable. Songs do take up some time, so it’s probably difficult to fit much development into a single show. But either tighten it up or make the characters flat and focus on the plot line.

The show plans on adding more characters next season. To me, that says they are having the same problem House did. The writers had written their supporting characters, House’s staff, into a yawn-worthy corner. So, they basically got rid of them and hired a bunch of new ones. I’m sure Glee won’t jettison its current cast, but if it’s already adding more to an already large cast that includes “Asian” and “Asian 2”, I’m not sure what they are hoping to accomplish. I hope it is interesting and not disappointing, like the plot has become.

The story of the season is a bit over the top, which is fine. The whole show is a little bit high school drama club-like: overly dramatic. The problem is that the plot points are so uneven. One week, there will be a bunch of major plot point scenes without much music. The next week, they will reverse the ratio. And even the scenes in which they reveal plot points are a bit forced and obvious. Obvious is fine, but bad story tempo is not. It’s like being in the ring with a good boxer: you’re just bouncing around, listening to the great songs, when WHAM!, a plot point punches you in the face. I know the plot has to be moved along, but it does so quite ungracefully. Figure it out, Glee.

Glee will make it a few seasons at least, but if it wants to become a great show and not go the way of Arrested Development, House, or Firefly, it has to improve its writing. For everybody’s sake, I hope it does. I think it still has some potential.

Avatar? Why?

The Golden Globes selected Avatar as the Best Motion Picture in the Drama category. I didn’t see any of the other nominees, but if Avatar was the best of them, then Hollywood is producing some really mediocre stuff. Avatar isn't a bad movie at all, but it’s not worthy of any awards outside of technical ones--especially one for drama.

Don't get me wrong; I like Avatar. Anybody that asks me about it gets a positive review and a recommendation to see it in the theater in 3D. It won’t be the same on a DVD. I was even willing to see it a second time (but didn’t due to a change in plans).

The cinematography is pretty amazing and the 3D effect is pretty cool even if I can't say it’s necessary. The storyline is not original by any stretch, but hey, it’s James Cameron writing it. I didn’t even mind his plotline. I was sort of surprised it didn’t offend me as a biologist. Biologists, please feel free to comment. Overall, I was pleasantly surprised by the movie. On the other hand, there were many flaws that would immediately disqualify it from being best drama.

First of all, it was as much of a drama as Star Trek or The Bourne Supremacy. All three had some human emotion, but nobody was going to those movies to be moved to tears by awe inspiring acting. They were going for special effects and action. Star Trek and The Bourne Supremacy were both better movies than Avatar in my opinion—and they weren’t even in fancy 3D. Awarding Avatar a drama award makes as much sense as keeping Jay Leno at NBC. (That's zero sense, if you were confused on where I and the rest of America stand.)

Second, the dialogue in Avatar was just plain bad. I can't quote you any lines, but the first line of the movie sets the tone. I will tolerate plenty of bad lines in an action movie. Sometimes, the writer has to move the plot along or punctuate some long-awaited act of justice. But having lines like that automatically disqualifies you from the drama category. James Cameron, I know you wrote the script, but have a little humility and let a professional help you. You’d think you’d learn your lesson after having DiCaprio say, “I’m the king of the world!” Stop being a pompous blow hard, Cameron.

Third, while I don’t always agree with the Golden Globes selection of best drama, they’ve always done a better job than Avatar (except when they chose Titanic, of course). They have chosen the third Lord of the Rings and Gladiator, which could also be considered action movies, but those were much more deserving than Avatar. And does Avatar belong in the company of the following movies: Schindler’s List, Slumdog Millionaire, The English Patient, Platoon, The Godfather, Spartacus, and Ben Hur? I’d say, “Hell, no.” It doesn't even belong in the same category.

Usually, these posts are a sort of catharsis, but this one didn’t do that for me. I realized how much James Cameron thinks of himself. Maybe for good reason, given that he has made quite a number of fun movies: True Lies, Aliens, Terminator, and The Abyss. But I wouldn’t give any of those movies an award for best drama either. Avatar was a great movie; it just wasn’t a drama, let alone the best one.

Why Pilates this Year?

I’m not making New Year’s Resolutions. Since this year’s “resolutions” are pretty much the same as last year, I’d rather just call them recommitments. Among those recommitments is maintaining what I generously call my physique. Some may say that I would have to establish a decent physical form before maintaining it. To them, I say, “Take your wit and . . . well, you have a good point.”

There were a couple of events that occurred during 2009 that did not help me reach my goal of Herculean strength. First, I played too many video games. I did not curtail my hours of open-mouthed, catatonic staring; this year will be different. Second, I dropped my rock climbing gym membership. That left a void that I have filled with Pilates DVDs. Why Pilates? Well, if you eliminate everything else using my list of criteria, that’s what you’re left with.

When choosing an activity that will shape a graduate student’s body, there are many limitations. 1) It’s got to be cheap because I make less than a kindergarten teacher. 2) It’s best if it can be done at night because lab beckons all day. 3) It has to be relatively safe because I am like fine China: extremely fragile. 4) It cannot be repetitive because I can’t stand doing the same motion over and over—call it mental weakness if you want, all of you bikers, runners, and swimmers; I’m OK with that.

Cheap. High start-up or recurring costs are prohibitive. It is one of the reasons I stopped my climbing gym membership, which cost about $600 per year. This criterion also eliminates golf, biking, skiing, wakeboarding, sky-diving, and most types of classes with any decent instruction.

Convenient. Being in lab all day is optional, but given that I am nearing the end of my grad student life (hopefully), being in lab most of the day is pretty necessary. That means working out has to happen at night if it is going to happen at all. That was one of the appealing characteristics of climbing. I could eat an early dinner and then head to the gym. Of course, there are night leagues, but that brings me to the next criterion.

Safe. I could play football, but if you’ve ever seen a bowling ball fall on a twig . . . I’m the twig. Given my long history of breaking bones, I prefer something with little chance of hospitalization. Activities that are eliminated by this include team sports with any degree of contact: rugby, football, hockey, soccer, tag team wrestling, or baseball (what if the ball hits me?). Yes, you might call me wimpy, girly, or unmanly, but I call it knowing my limits and drawing conclusions based on a large sample size of data (Six broken bones).

Repetitive sports. Finally, anything that is repetitive is just plain boring (and maybe slightly painful) to me. It really makes it difficult for me to start exercising. OK, it also makes it difficult for me to keep going once I have started. And when I’m done, I don’t feel great that I did it. I just feel relieved that I don’t have to do it again for awhile. That means any event in a triathlon, except for the changing of clothes, is something I’d rather avoid. And if changing clothes occurred repeatedly over a thirty minute time span (or four hours), I would probably avoid that part, too.

What I am left with is Pilates DVDs. They fulfill all the criteria. For now, my New Year will begin with cheap, convenient, safe, and non-repetitive Pilates DVDs. I’ll take some pictures in the future so you can see the results. Or not—I don’t want to deter you from reading the blog in the future.