Today's column (posted belatedly due to technical issues) previews tonight's episode of "My Boys," which tries very clumsily to distance the show once and for all from "Sex and the City," as well as the one-and-done fate of Fox's "Anchorwoman."UPDATE: Some specific comments on the half-hilarious, half-annoying episode in the comments.
16 comments:
I loved Glen Frey in Wiseguy, although I didn't know who he was at the time. I was just impressed they found an actor who seemed to know his way around a guitar. Never even heard about his stab at a series.
i wholeheartedly agree with the my boys criticisms. however, i must applaud the show for tackling an often overlooked, but all too common young-woman-phenomenon (though the the finer points of the subject could certainly use some improvment): the "wow, i have nothing in common with these people anymore!" phenomenon.
i think there comes a time in many women's lives when they reunite with friends they've lost touch with and realize that the material of their friendship has quickly disintegrated. for many its the "whoa, suddenly you're a suburban housewife with 2 kids, and i'm still worried about 'what i'm doing with my life,'" or perhaps the "wait, since when did you stop wearing chuck taylors and start buying manolo blanks?--oh its pronounced blah-nick?". I'm sure there are endless variations. and its my guess that the show will deal with this in a rather superficial and simplistic way (i mean, they only have 30 min). but at least its a subject i can relate to more readily than what to do when my mogul boyfriend leaves town a la ms. bradshaw, or how to handle the daily disasters writing for a live television show like liz lemon.
of course i haven't yet seen the episode, so perhaps i should reserve judgement, but in general i prefer my boys' story themes to the way they actually play out on screen. i guess tonight i'll see if i should add one more instance to the list.
Nell, I see what you're saying. It's actually a good idea, and as someone who's closer to Andy than the other boys at this point, I can certainly relate to the "nothing in common" thing. But, as you saw if you watched the episode tonight, the plot was entirely an excuse to do a lame Sex and the City spoof. Good on the blonde for getting Kim Cattrall's Mae West impersonation down, but beyond that, blech.
The d-bag intervention, on the other hand? Genius. So much to love: Bobby and Kenny's flat delivery of their letters ("It really hurts my feelings), Brendan looking like an ass in those orange Crocs, Brendan turning everyone's stomach with the gratuitous Piven namecheck, Andy forgetting whose intervention it was ("Kenny, when you act like you're on The Sopranos...") and, finally, PJ getting through to Brendan by pointing to his stupid belt.
Plus, Ryan Reynolds cameoing in the part he was born to play, baby.
You know what's really odd about it? What does TBS show right after My Boys - a Sex and the City re-run.
I also enjoyed the Mary Lou Retton leotard subplot - I'll start considering gymnastics a sport when we're allowed to rip the competitors when they fail. Seriously, if frickin' Dominique Dawes hadn't botched her landing on the vault, then Kerri Strug wouldn't have had to jump again on a broken leg. On the other hand, then we might never have gotten to see Kippi Strug, so maybe it all worked out for the best.
I liked the intervention the most, too. But I think Kenny was referring to Brendan's girl jeans, not genes. Though, amusing either way.
Five minutes into watching tonight's "My Boys," I turned to Brill and said, "Oh, Sepinwall's going to have something to say about this!"
The "Sex & the City" parody was way beneath this show. I have to wonder if there were two sets of writers for this episode.
On the intervention: Only in Chicago would a wannabe hipster be wearing Crocs. I know a dozen or so guys (and gals) just like this. Next time my boss tells me he's "doing someone a solid," I'm going to go do a solid in his Aeron chair. Douchebag.
But I think Kenny was referring to Brendan's girl jeans, not genes
D'oh! I'm sure you're right about that. "Genes" is more of a gratuitous, unprovoked insult, while "jeans" is at least on topic.
Only in Chicago would a wannabe hipster be wearing Crocs.
And yet I noticed (after watching a screener of this episode a few weeks ago) that Luke Perry's character on John From Cincy sometime wore Crocs and didn't look nearly as douche-y in them -- probably because they weren't bright orange.
It is ridiculous that they not only don't realize how similar they are to Sex and the City but that they apparently hate it so much. But the actual material within the show doing so wasn't bad. It just feels terrible because you want to scream at the writers that they've been doing so many of the same terrible things.
The really upsetting part was Hams and Tina not having any scenes together. A Berg and Irene reunion might have made me cry.
Is there a Two Guys And A Girl/My Boys connection? I can't find anything except a guy who directed episodes of the former and Jordan Spiro's other show The Huntress. Which doesn't really seem like it should count.
Loved, loved, loved the intervention. Perfect delivery from everyone. Just hilarious. The reason I like the show. The other half of the episode was tragic, although mildly amusing in the first scene.
Look at the belt. Look at it!
The really upsetting part was Hams and Tina not having any scenes together. A Berg and Irene reunion might have made me cry.
Reynolds was only in the one scene, right, and briefly at that? My guess is that he showed up as a favor for a friend (quite possibly the director you mention) but didn't have time for anything beyond that.
i The really upsetting part was Hams and Tina not having any scenes together. A Berg and Irene reunion might have made me cry.
Thanks for pointing that out... I missed that.
I also loved the D-Bag intervention... best intervention on TV since Chrissy's on the Sopranos!
So she's a stupid, femme-hating tomboy with no fashion sense? Wow, way to draw in that female, gay or straight, demographic.
There's making fun of fashion victims, and there's putting women down because they know how to be romantic better, that makes this lead character ugly on the inside.
ok, now that i've actually seen the episode, i'm appalled at the level of parody. there was no subtlety. it either assumed an audience of less than mediocre intelligence or betrays the stunted brainpower of the writers. either way, not good television.
on the other hand, i have to point out that i appreciated the corigan & piven name drops. sure, maybe its over the top, but last week i found myself wishing for more chicago-ness. though somebody got it right when they threw in the belle & sebastian, i found myself thinking the mix tape was the perfect opportunity to name check some chicago bands. why not the pumpkins? the sea and cake? wilco? at least the name drops this week appeased me there.
i also appreciated andy's comment on invented verbs. one of my pet peeves is all those PR types talking about "growing business." Come on people! the verb 'grow' can't have an object! maybe i'm just an oldschool grammarian (with a weakness for newschool epicine pronouns), but that in itself saved the episode for me.
The blonde mimicking Kim Cattrall was so "on it" he scared the bejesus out of me!
I loved PJ's disgusted/horrified reaction to Hams giving her a "6...6.5" What a jerk!
The D-Bag intervention was fantastic. Thoroughly enjoyed that part. I liked Andy throing Fitzee's cucumbers at the D-Bag, I mean, Brendan.
This was our first glimpse at the show. I think we'd watch it again. Alan: is that worth our time? Or should we rent the DVD's?
Nell,
What is "Pats of Glory"?
I loved the d-bag intervention. "Dude, you screened me!"
ryan,
a little known documentary about butter sculpting.
Post a Comment