But One Plays Me on TV

Reader Comments from The Fray:


Is Robert Wright a sinister force? In his review of Dark Angel he states: "I am not a superhuman product of a covert eugenics program." If he was the superhuman product of a covert eugenics program, he wouldn't admit it, because doing so would make the covert eugenics program non-covert. He also admitted that Slate hires people to do reviews based on things they know about. Everybody better watch out for this guy.

--Mark

(To reply, click here.)


Since when is having a hot female sci-fi girl who kicks butt some sort of genre-busting move? I think it's pretty standard, as far back as Molly in Neuromancer (1983) and even before then. (For those of you who don't know, Trinity from The Matrix is a Molly rip-off.)

--ConsoleJockey

(To reply, click here.)


I'm not impressed. Nor am I dying to see this. It is media hype. I hate shows that want you to watch because the media hypes it as "Boy, the girl is nice to look at."

[We at The Fray read that first paragraph and confidently assumed we understood Mr Boy's views. Were we ever wrong:]

I have lots of channels with good-looking women to look at, and most of the channels I got, these women have their clothes off so why would I want to look at this pre-pubescent newt in pleather? Bring back a Linda Carter type for this kind of TV work. I mean, if most men in the future could "genetically engineer" a superior female, she darn sure wouldn't look like this. I eventually see other "superior genetically engineered" females coming to save this program. Buffy, this child ain't.

--Idiot Boy

(To reply, click here.)

(10/3)

Reader Comments from The Fray:


The violent seizures and abstract medi-speak that run through a medical drama like Gideon's Crossing are conventions that should be accepted, so what's the point of bringing an actual doctor on to work the scalpel on them? Is it really worth hearing what a submarine captain might have to say about U-571? Or, more absurd, what an astrophysicist might have to say about Star Trek?

What's essential (and deeply promising) about Gideon's Crossing is the same thing that made Homicide--creator Paul Attanasio and Andre Braugher's last teaming--such a groundbreaking show. Like the detectives in the earlier effort, Gideon's uses the everyday intimacy these professionals have with death (and life) to consider basic philosophical questions with a seriousness that's simply unrivaled in the medium. While I think Dr Walser has some valid points about the show's aesthetic shortcomings (ie the strained absurdist subplots, the TV-commercial-like breakfast scene with the kids), I don't think her objections to its medical shortcomings have much merit.

Instead, I think what we all must do is fall on our knees and be grateful for the privilege of watching Andre Braugher perform. After Homicide, I felt no small amount of frustration that one of the best actors of his generation was getting nothing more than bit parts in bad films. But now that he's landed a more substantial role than ever, I hope people will fully acknowledge his special intensity, an ability to express incredible emotion through his posture, his movements, his measured speech and his extraordinary eyes. More than once tonight, I was reminded of Henry Fonda's famous speech in The Grapes Of Wrath. Of course, Attanasio isn't Steinbeck, but he's an awfully gifted writer and he serves up some monologues here that are absolutely heart-wrenching when delivered by an actor of Braugher's caliber.

So which is more important in a medical drama, the medicine or the drama? The answer for viewers--at least those not currently receiving treatment--should be pretty obvious.

--Scott Tobias

(To reply, click here.)


I like the show as I like ER, L&O, The Practice, West Wing, and Sports Night. Talking fast, a harried pace and ready come-backs seem to be the norm these days (thank God for VCRs). But look, these are TV dramas, they don't even claim to be "docu-" dramas! If I want real, honest-to-goodness depiction of say the ER or a court room--I'll watch a PBS documentary! Let these guys have their artistic license.

Incidentally, the review was enlightening: I didn't know a condom can get stuck "in there"; I thought a tampon might--but then again, I'm not a doctor and it's been ages since I've used either!

--Vicky Go

(To reply, click here.)


Dr. Walser hits home with her review of Gideon's Crossing. I am not a doctor, but I, too, felt the show's dialogue was so unrealistic as to be distracting--distracting from what could be an excellent program. The dialogue in ER, while fast and "dramatic," as of course these scripts need to be, is still realistic. The actors in ER come across as people--granted, beautiful people, people with incredibly exciting lives--but at least when they talk you can follow what they say and you get the sense that it "could" happen that way.

I just think that besides Braugher, the acting in Gideon's Crossing was preposterous. Even Braugher seemed thrown off by the bad actors surrounding him. The cancer victim rattled off every one of his lines in such a rehearsed fashion. He certainly looked the part and, like Dr Walser, I enjoyed the storyline surrounding his illness and therapy, but too much clutter in the way of flashy one-liners and silly side-stories kept me from getting into this show as much as I would have liked.

--Peter Knorr

(To reply, click here.)

(10/11)

Â

Reader Comment from The Fray:


It must be a constant challenge for the producers of a new TV series to come up with enough material to delineate each of the characters in the first episode and keep you coming back. Still, by about the tenth time Craig T. Nelson's character used a movie reference to elucidate the situation I was as desperate as Al Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon. No, maybe I was as irritable as Joe Pesci in Goodfellas. No, wait, maybe I was as edgy as Humphrey Bogart in The Caine Mutiny.

--Jack McCullough

(To reply, click here.)

(10/16)