Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Saving Grace needs Redemption

Oh, how I so wanted to love this show. Instead, I'm beginning to resent it and only after the second episode. Of course, many good things take time but I'm not one to assume that a television show is one of them; there's just too many other good re-runs to watch. Here are the problems as I see them:

1. Grace is not likeable and it doesn't work. Unlike "House," who's gruff, ass-like qualities somehow draw the watcher toward the character, hoping eternally for him to see the light, Grace just makes me want to run away from her. Everything employed to make this character like the other diamond-in-the-ruff characters is too forced: the snappish dialogue is too snappy, her misgivings and failures too devastating and morally repugnant. Every redeemable character has something redeeming about them and I don't think Grace does.

2. The Angel dude needs to go. You know what...the concept of the "not yer typical" angel has been done...in a movie called "Michael"...and it sucked. Move on. Plus, it's cartoonish. I don't want to see the angel, I just want to know it's there. It would be much more complex if the only way we knew the angel existed was through Grace reacting to it. Instead we get angel blood last week and this week we have angel feathers. Hell, I'm a Catholic and even I know angels don't have physical qualities--that's why they're angels.

3. The "detective and her staff" set up is old. Question: How many other shows use this formula? Answer: TOO MANY. For a brand new show to employ this same old setting...not excusable.

To "Saving Grace" people in charge: I really want to like your show. Please fix it. Thank You.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Are the other diamond in the ruff characters that you refer to (besides House, whom I'm pretty sure is a man) women? Is it more difficult to make a character with "gruff, ass-like qualities" believable when the character is a woman? Thoughts on the matter?