New Trend: Parents Playing Parents?

Article first published as New Trend: Parents Playing Parents? on Blogcritics.

Acting is a craft honed with many years of practice and a large degree of talent. But talent alone may not be enough if the actors have to work with other performers with whom they just do not have chemistry. One of the greatest challenges in casting a series is picking people who have the right fit with one another, who can make it seem like their relationships go back way further than the show's timeline.

Hollywood seems to have a new solution to that problem. Why fake a relationship, when you can use one that already exists?

In HBO's Enlightened, which just began its second season, the main character of Amy is played by Laura Dern. Amy's mother is played by Diane Ladd. What may not be obvious to those who haven't bothered googling the two women is that Ladd is Dern's actual mother. They don't look a lot alike, but considering that Ladd is the person who raised Dern, it's no surprise that they can pull off a great dynamic on screen.

Their characters are antagonistic towards each other in the series, and this isn't too far-fetched to believe. Dern once sued her mother for emancipation so that she could do a movie to which her mother objected. Clearly, the two have a rocky back story, and have some real life material to draw upon for their mother-daughter roles, and this isn't the first time they've played opposite one another.

Maybe they've worked past those differences; everyone grows up. Everyone spats with their parents; not everyone sues for emancipation, but not knowing the family, I couldn't say what what motivate such an action, or how it was received. Those of us on the outside can only guess at Dern and Ladd's actual relationship.

That isn't really the point, though. The point is, these two women, both terrific actors in their own right, have found a way to use their relationship in their careers. Being on set together gives them an opportunity to spend time together. It also gives them a very authentic feel for their characters.

I wonders how much of their real relationship goes into the parts? Do they work better if they keep the characters purely on a fictional plane, or do they have no trouble pulling things from reality, in order to make the scene even more realistic? This is personal choice, of course, and there is not formula that will work for everyone.

Thinking about how it would be to work with my parents, I feel like it risks quite a bit of unprofessionalism while filming. I mean, I can't see my parents willing to set aside the fact that they are my parents, even if they are happy to help and work together. It would definitely make for a different dynamic once the cameras stop rolling, and with Dern having some creative control over the series, does that cause any tension between them?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, whether this will work or not depends on the individuals, how they feel about one another, and what the established hierarchy is in the project. It's not a choice everyone can make, even if both parent and child happen to be in the same industry. But it works for others outside of acting, too, such as when a kid takes over a retiring parent's business, and spends years training to prepare for that day, so it's about time that this is tried in the world of television.

Dern and Ladd are not alone in this arrangement. Recently, after guesting once last summer, Martin Sheen has joined the cast of FX's Anger Management, which also just began a second season. He plays Martin, the father of real-life son Charlie's character, also called Charlie. Keeping the same names blurs the lines even more. Is this a play for ratings, or did the pair really just decide they wanted to work together? 


Not so long ago, Charlie (the actor, not the character) had a huge public meltdown, which few could have missed. Martin got involved then, too. This will only fuel rumors about why Martin is now on set, and what might be going on. It could also potentially be disruptive to the filming process down the line, so it seems like a tenuous pairing, especially on a television show committed to cranking out 90 episodes over the next two years, making for a high stress, very busy environment.

Then again, maybe it's not a problem. As I said before, we can't know for certain what their relationship is, and as long as their bosses trust that whatever happens will not interrupt the production process, and it works for the network, good for them. I am certainly enjoying both casting choices so far.

There are all sorts of implications if this should become a full-blown trend. Will it be one that works, making for better television and films. Or are these two pairings just anomalies, a footnote in the history books? Could one or both of them flame out miserably because adults don't always work well with their parents? Or will it lead to them having even better relationships and more respect for one another? These four could be a bell weather if others are considering the move.

Or I could be making something out of nothing.

Want to read some of my fiction? It's on my website, JeromeWetzel.com! Also, for the latest updates and article links, as well as commentary on episodes I don't fully review, please follow me on Twitter!

Romanticising Anger Management

After a great penultimate episode, in which Charlie's (Charlie Sheen) father, Martin (Martin Sheen), came to visit, the only thing certain about the FX Anger Management season finale was that it couldn't possibly be as good. But, as a series should in its finale, the focus was on the relationship between two of the characters, rather than a terrific guest star, making it actually pretty good.

Comparatively, that is. I'm not saying Anger Management is a wonderful show. It is much more watchable and enjoyable that Sheen's last sitcom, but it's hardly breaking any new barriers. The things it has going for it are a funny ensemble, humorous plots, and a fair level of heart. Charlie is a good guy, despite his screw ups, which is why "Charlie Gets Romantic" finds you rooting for someone you may have been booing off screen only a year ago. And, with such low expectations going in, it's nice to be pleasantly surprised, which is probably why I'm still watching.

In "Charlie Gets Romantic," Kate (Selma Blair) flips out when Charlie asks her to go to the movies after sex. Their physical relationship is supposed to be emotion-free, and she doesn't want Charlie screwing that up. Charlie, who realizes he does care about her, gently lets her see what no emotion between them is like, and is on board when Kate agrees to restore some feelings to the proceedings.

Does a friends with benefits situation work? Clearly not, according to Anger Management. If anyone could have this kind of thing and be successful at it, it would be these two characters. As they age, though, and realize just how much they like being around one another, they want something more, even if it's hard to admit it. This is completely understandable. Rather than set up a "will they, won't they?" situation, as most sitcoms do, this show presents a "they will in their own time" scenario, with a gradual progress that will probably take awhile longer.

Should Anger Management get it's back 90 pick up, and there aren't many reasons right now to suspect that they won't, that growth needs to continue. In ten episodes, there are some arcs for the characters. They start in one place, and they go somewhere else, even if it's not that far a journey. In the next 90 episodes, it might be tempting to set up a status quo and remain stagnant. This is not the way to go. Being given this many hours is a gift, and it should be used wisely to tell a complete tale. Hopefully, the team behind Anger Management realizes this.

My only real complaint about "Charlie Gets Romantic" is the lack of work many of the great supporting players got. Michael (Michael Boatman) and Brett (Brett Butler) receive nice moments, and since they were each only in half the episodes, it was good to see that. Jennifer (Shawnee Smith) also appears, hopefully lying the seeds for what could be a true, three-way romantic triangle with Charlie and Kate. But the therapy group (Noureen DeWulf, Michael Arden, Derek Richardson, and Barry Corbin), who deliver some of the best scenes in the series, are given hardly anything to do. They make it work, of course, but I would have liked to have seen more from them.

Anger Management ended up being a surprisingly good, not great, show. I look forward to its return soon. Assuming it gets picked up, which it probably will.

If you like my reviews, please follow me on Twitter! Check out my new website, JeromeWetzel.com! Article first published on TheTVKing

Charlie Sheen returns in Anger Management

FX just premiered Anger Management, a sitcom loosely based on the film of the same name. The show is about a therapist named Charlie (Charlie Sheen, Two and a Half Men) who specializes in treating people with anger issues. This is appropriate, because Charlie also suffers from a rage affliction. He is seeking help in dealing with his own emotions from fellow therapist / best friend with benefits, Kate (Selma Blair, Kath & Kim), while trying to be a better father to daughter Sam (Daniela Bobadilla, Awake).

For all the Charlie Sheen haters out there, Anger Management is not as bad as you think it might be. One has to admit, Sheen is a talented performer, or he would not have gotten all of the projects he has done over the years, or created such a fervent following. Two and a Half Men is an absolutely horrible series with little redeeming value, with or without Sheen. Anger Management is not. That's not to say that Anger Management is great, by any means. But it's much better than his previous job.

The main problem with Anger Management is that it lacks a feeling of freshness or edge. There is an old, familiar formula in place here, of divorced dad failing to be there enough for his daughter, and regretting the past wrongs against his ex. The therapy sessions make it a little bit different, but not enough to set the show apart from its peers. This would not be a surprising effort on a network channel, but for FX, known for creative, groundbreaking comedies, Anger Management does not live up to the brand.

There are number of things Anger Management does right. It is funny. Whether Charlie is selling Kate on sex, or helping his messed up patients, somehow managing to keep from being judgmental, or chatting with bartender Brett (Brett Butler, Grace Under Fire), or being tortured by ex-wife, Jennifer (Shawnee Smith, Becker), the stories are amusing. A tongue in cheek opening to the pilot, "Charlie Goes Back to Therapy," which is a slam on Two and a Half Men, also works very well.

Thus, Sheen deserves the credit for many of the positive of the series. There is a huge, talented supporting cast, which also includes Michael Arden, Barry Corbin (One Tree Hill), Derek Richardson (Men in Trees), Michael Boatman (The Good Wife, Spin City) and Noureen DeWulf (Hawthorne). The second episode features a wonderful guest turn by Kerri Kenney-Silver (Reno 911!). But all of these other people revolve around the main man. In this role, Sheen balances likable with an authentic personality, admitting flaws, but working to be a better person. It's exactly the right message the actor needs to send at this point in his career, and this vehicle is perfect for him in this regard.

So will Anger Management be a triumph? It's hard to say. The ratings for the premiere will likely be inflated because of Sheen's much anticipated return to television. But will fans of his previous work stick by a tamer series? FX has a few short weeks to decide whether to order 90 more episodes or cancel the show. My gut says it will be the former, and, as weird as it is to say this, it might actually deserve to live on past these initial ten. I expected to hate it. That is amused and charmed me, even if not overly so, is a win.

Catch Anger Management Thursdays at 9 p.m. ET on FX.

If you like my reviews, please follow me on Twitter!