The Maddening Mad Men Hiatus: When Avarice Meets Art

It is now certain that the much anticipated return of the 5th season of AMC's Mad Men will not be until 2012 (at least). The reason: the almighty dollar. It appears that the network has greenlit the return of its critically adorned hit, but with some interesting conditions. The show's creator will be forced to 'cull' two characters a season for the next 3 seasons. Hmmm...interesting. I don't know about you but this seems a little ridiculous. It's almost as if AMC is conveniently forgetting the role Mad Men played in the network's rise to acclaim. The Network Execs are like "Screw them, we still have Breaking Bad, Rubicon and the Walking Dead". If loyalty and a lust to produce quality programming isn't sufficient, how about a reality check. Breaking Bad may be one of the greatest shows on TV, but TWD and Rubicon are fairly mediocre. TWD especially is less than captivating viewing.  'Crap' I called it. A Mad Men-less AMC schedule certainly devalues the overall quality of the network.

However, if creator Matthew Wiener does agree to the gradual assassination of our beloved friends I have a solution for him: Lung cancer.

Keep Watching Your Screens

Misanthropic Ficus

Update: A deal has now been reached for the next 2 seasons, with the likelihood of a 3rd. The 5th season will premiere in March 2012. The episodes will be slightly shorter and feature more product placement.




To satisfy your thirst for Draper, Peggy and Co. during the prolonged hiatus, check out previous seasons on DVD and Blu-Ray.

WIN $2000: Open to Australian Residents Only.

Vote for this truly stunning, evocative and hilarious piece of political, historical and social satire and you could win $2000!

 

Vote Here.

Skins: Series 5...A Brief Rant.

The spawn of Monty Burns and ET?

Is it over yet? Can I open my eyes now. Geez, that was bad. This was a series which felt as if it had only just begun. It was fall of undefined characters and undeveloped relationships and Franky. Oh Franky, 'don't label me' Franky. The post-label, post-sexual, post-gender, pre-human Franky. It's as if the writers remembered the joy of having an enigmatic and ambiguous talent in 'Effy' and decided to replicate her...but something went horribly wrong...and Franky was born!

There were a couple of standout episodes, although looking back now I like Rich's episode less and less. Nick was the most interesting character, he underwent serious transformation and I imagine next season we'll see him rise like a phoenix from the ashes of his former skin.

But overall it was all too familiar, all too 'Skins-Lite'. There was too much melodrama (ficus-off wedding). The characters just seemed to hover on the edge of oblivion. Sure, previous Skins generations did a lot of drugs. But it was interspersed with meaningful connections...and...and...JJ.

Moreover, the humour at the start of the series quickly dissipated. Usually this doesn't occur until the second series of each generation. This doesn't bode well.

In conclusion,  the acting was fairly ordinary, the characters were deformed clones, the stories stale and seemingly inconsequential.

Skins may be dead friends.

But hey, it's still better than the American travesty, right?

And the Brits still have Misfits.



Until next time

Keep watching your screens

A Misanthropic Ficus

NBC renews their finest comedies...and the Office

Community, Parks and Recreation and the leader-less, rudder-less 'The Office' have all been renewed through 2011-2012. Community continues to be the most ambitious and intelligent comedy on television. Parks has continued to grow from it's rather mediocre debut season, though one wonders about the overall direction of the show given that arcs to date have been rather insignificant.

The Office will be without Steve Carell. It's fairly stale and humourless with him so it's difficult to see if it can get any worse. I'm sure you'll all tune in to find out. I know I will.



Keep Watching Your Screens

A Buoyant Ficus



Source: The Hollywood Reporter

Trouble on the Glee-rizon? Part 2.

Today, I continue my look at the problems with Glee. It isn't, perhaps, the most ideal time to post this given the rather excellent (in season 2 terms) episode that aired this past week. Indeed, keep a look out in the coming days or week for my analysis of my new favourite romantic couple on TV: Britana (Britney + Santana)

Regardless, here is the second problem with Glee, an issue which I do not foresee being remedied any time...well until the series is eventually cancelled in 2016 due to Will's hair being deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I'm with you Sue...

2.      Theme episodes


Rewind to season 1. They have a Madonna themed episode. Fine I say: Musical icon, symbol of women’s liberation from the yoke of patriarchy. Season 2, a Britney spears themed episode. Ficus-off I say. I literally had to fast-forward through much of this episode. 4 songs in 10 minutes: check. ‘Hit Me Baby One More Time’... I screamed as I gouged my metaphorical ears out with my neglected branches, sap running down my roots. Ridiculous and illogical Britney Spears guest appearance. Check. Although it was nice to see the character ‘Britney’ gain some air time.

 Then came the Rocky Horror tribute. It may have been the greatest Rocky Horror tribute ever. I haven’t seen the film so the convoluted winks and nods were all but indecipherable to me. Given the shows demographic I found it hard to believe many knew what the ficus was going on. There was one transsexual too many if you ask me.

I understand it is a musical-comedy which lends itself to musical tributes. But, as everything with Glee, the writers aren’t content with doing it once. They will squeeze that lemon until there is nothing left. Didn’t they realise it was fairly sour the first time?

Until next time

Keep watching your screens


That's how the Ficus Sees it...

Skins S05E07: What was Liv reading?

No review today.

Just though I would let you know that the book Liv was reading down by the pier was a graphic novel named 'Black Hole' by Charles Burns. It's about a bunch of teenagers who do alot of psychoactive drugs, have sex and get STD's...which causes them to become deformed...like they grow tails...and shit.

That bunch is probably still more tame than the Skins' characters.

It's truly disturbing. Great illustrations.

A Literary Ficus.

Trouble on the Glee-rizon?

Quiet times here for a TV addicted Ficus. Hiatus breeds contempts. Ficus breeds baby Ficus. Whatever that means...

I thought I might as well discuss Glee. Never felt the emotion myself. Good show though. Sometimes....

Firstly, I love Glee. I don’t luv Glee like OMG! But I do love it...like omg.

I do consider myself a gleek, newly born into the land of gleekdom.

I’m a new convert to glee-stianity, a politically active member of the gleecrats.

I mean the gleeks shall inherit the earth, right? (This is my favourite pun)

See, I watched the pilot when it first aired and I liked it, but I got sidetracked and the show fell from my radar.

Well, a couple of weeks ago I spotted the first season on ebay, bought it and watched it in a week. I have now caught up to the current episode.

I love it’s heart and its humour.... But, man, when it is bad it is horrific. Like nigh unwatchable. Like literally I have fast-forwarded through a couple of episodes.

Where do the problems lie?

Here, there, everywhere really...

1. Which Glee?


First of all, I subscribe to the theory expounded over at AVClub about the ‘three Glees’. That is, the 3 Glee creators Murphy, Falchuk and Brennan all have competing visions for the show. Consequently, whoever writes an individual episode writes it in a certain way. Murphy’s the over-the-top crazy, big-budget, theme episode guy. Falchuk’s the message, smaltzy guy. Brennan writes the more sombre, melancholic, cathartic episodes. Being misanthropic I tend towards Brennan but I do like certain episodes by each of the creators. The problem is, this makes the show very erratic and unpredictable. Sure, it’s part of the charm but it’s also very frustrating to watch.  And let’s be honest. Season 2 has magnified these inconsistencies. One week the characters seem to be heading in a certain direction only to be thrust in a completely different one as a different creator takes the reins. How can there be realistic character development with 3 versions of each star randomly appearing each week? Will is a prime example of this. He has probably suffered the most from the chef's broth fiasco. One episode he's chicken and pea, the next he is minestrone. The next he is smoked salmon...huh? Imagine how the viewer feels! The result being a character which is devoid of any real identity. He's each creator's mouthpiece...and a fracking irritating one at that.

This is probably the main issue which hinders Glee from being a truly 'great' show. It lacks a cohesive vision and a coherent set of characters.

Tune in tomorrow for another reason why I'm a little 'meh' on Glee.

Keep watching your dvds

Until next time

Ficus.