Wake Up to THE MORNING SHOW

Article first published as THE MORNING SHOW: TV REVIEW at Seat42F.

WARNING: This review contains spoilers for the first three episodes.

One of Apple TV+’s new dramas is THE MORNING SHOW. Set at a Good Morning America type of series, the program follows anchors past and present as they navigate through the current political climate and their own ambitions. Featuring an all-star cast, this is probably the best program I’ve seen from the brand-new streaming service so far.

As the pilot begins, sexual harassment charges go public against veteran anchor Mitch Kessler (Steve Carell, The Office). The network reacts quickly, firing him. Producer Chip Black (Mark Duplass, Togetherness) is thrown because he was preparing to let go Mitch’s on-air partner, Alex Levy (Jennifer Aniston, Friends), go for being past her prime (in talent, not age). All this drama excites the new head of news for the network, Cory Ellison (Billy Crudup, Watchmen), and other anchors like Yanko (Nestor Carbonell, Bates Motel), Daniel (Desean Terry), and Alison (Janina Gavankar, The League) want the empty seat. But it’s little known, passionate, online sensation Bradley Jackson (Reese Witherspoon, Big Little Lies) that swoops in and takes the spot.

The plot of THE MORNING SHOW is beyond juicy. It has the #MeToo controversy that is still so relevant, but also all manner of scheming and backstabbing. While none of the characters come off as unlikeable, there is plenty of insecurity and ambition. Besides those mentioned above, behind-the-scenes staff Hannah (Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Touch) and Mia (Karen Pittman, Luke Cage) seem like key players, as does Alex’s secretly estranged husband, Jason (Jack Davenport, Smash). So there’s no shortage of participants, and not all of their motivations are immediately clear.

Add to all the individual concerns, there’s the business perspective of a network and a popular, but struggling, series that that must be taken into consideration. The Morning Show is losing ground to competitor Audra (Mindy Kaling, The Mindy Project) and looking to shake things up; Cory himself is a new approach. So even before Mitch blows everything up, there’s tension. But with this latest development, no easy way out is apparent, leaving the cast to fight amongst one another.

What’s more, there are actual questions of journalism and responsibility layered in. Bradley is temperamental, to be sure, but there’s a level of genuineness and naivety to her role. She believes in the profession and the mission, and doesn’t like being used as a pawn, which she’s smart enough to pick up on immediately. Will she bring back what The Morning Show needs to rise again, or will it chew her up and force her to be something she isn’t? And which needs to happen for the show to succeed? This isn’t The Newsroom, after all, and drama can equal ratings.

Perhaps the toughest part for some to swallow is the effort made to humanize Mitch. It’s very easy to write him off as soon as the rumors start, and the all-too-ripped-from-the-headlines button under his desk does him no favors. But then, in the third installment, Mitch is talking to his high-profile friend (Martin Short, Saturday Night Live) about snap judgments and nuance, and there’s a moment where some may start to feel sorry for Mitch. Not because his behavior was excusable (it isn’t), but because he truly doesn’t know why he’s been taken down, or how what he did was wrong. Should inappropriate consensual relationships be a death knell for a career? As a straight, white man, I refuse to weigh in on that and I certainly understand how some may have no sympathy for him, but I’m fascinated by the questions raised. What is an appropriate punishment for the details of his case?

Reviews for THE MORNING SHOW have been mixed, but I like it. It’s smart, it’s quick, and it makes you think about things we should all be considering more carefully than we usually do. Catch it now on Apple TV+.

Wandering GYPSY

Article first published as TV Review: GYPSY on Seat42F.

GYPSY, Netflix’s newest drama, has a tantalizing premise. Jean Holloway (Naomi Watts) is a therapist with a double, sexy life. She seems, more or less, happily married to Michael (Billy Crudup), with whom she is raising a nine-year-old daughter (Maren Heary) with gender identity issues. But Jean also pretends to be Diane Hart, a journalist, as she engages in a heavy flirtation with younger rocker Sidney (Sophie Cookson). Will her two worlds collide? Almost certainly, considering she is definitely mixing her alter ego into the personal lives of people important to her patients.

That’s a heck of a story, with all kinds of intriguing and attractive possibilities. On Netflix, where there is no hesitation to make adult content, the leash is off and GYPSY can fully explore the concepts it has set up. This could be a very popular show that wins all kinds of awards.

Yet, I don’t think it will be. There is something essential missing, a key ingredient that has been left out of the recipe, that leaves the whole thing feeling flat. Jean isn’t all that compelling, there is no reason to root for her, nor is there exploration of her own psychological profile. The plot lacks urgency, telling us right up front things are going to fall apart (not that we need to be told something so obvious), but more than takes its time getting to anything tension-filled happening.

This is the golden age of antiheroes on television, or, at least it has been for the past decade. That means when a new series enters this particular fray, it must come with a strong, fresh identity that makes it stands out and gives viewers a reason to sign up for another half dozen seasons or so. GYPSY not only fails to do that, it fails to do anything else that makes it stand out, wasting a concept that should be a no-brainer.

I am not sure where the fault lies exactly. It certainly isn’t with Watts, Crudup, Cookson, Heary, or the rest of the cast, who are turning in consistent, fine performances. It doesn’t seem to be in the direction of the series, which fits very well with the tone GYPSY is trying to set. It isn’t in the sexiness, which does come through despite how dull most of the running time is. The parts just don’t add up to a high enough sum for the show overall, and the only thing I can think is to blame the writing, though without comparing script to screen, I can’t say that’s for sure what it comes down to.

I’m not saying GYPSY is terrible, just very mediocre. Granted, if the series had premiered fifteen years ago, I’d likely be hailing it among the best of what the small screen has to offer. Instead, it’s coming long after AMC, HBO, FX, and Netflix itself have shown us what the medium can be, and is immediately held up for comparison to all of the other fantastic programs in the present and recent past. It does not come out well when judged against its peers.

I can’t not recommend GYPSY, because, as I said, it’s hard to point out what it does wrong, other than that perhaps the writing needs to be more aggressive and contain more depth. But I can’t in good conscience recommend it, either, since, despite a few things I really like about it, it is just not going to make my list of shows to watch. I want it to, but it does not.

Netflix will need to be more careful moving forward. It still has some of the best series out there, and it likely will have other great ones in its future. But as it begins pumping out more and more content, the streaming service will lose its cache of good will if it churns out a bunch of hours that aren’t so promising. The brand is measured by everything it produces, not just the best of the bunch.

The complete first season of GYPSY is available now exclusively on Netflix.

Too Big to Fail is too good to fail

     HBO's newest TV movie is Too Big to Fail, a tale of the 2008 financial crisis in the United States, based on the book of the same name by New York Times financial columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin. Events follow real life, as Henry Paulson (William Hurt, Damages, Into the Wild), Timothy Geithner (Billy Crudup, Almost Famous, Watchmen), Ben Bernanke (Paul Giamatti, John Adams, Sideways), and their staffs try to prevent the next great depression. After bailing out Bear Sterns, Paulson is determined not to do the same for Lehman Brothers. He gathers the heads of the major investment banks, trying to push them into a private sector solution. When deals fall through, Paulson lets Lehman go bankrupt, and the economy goes from bad to worse as a result. The government employees scramble for another solution before a chain reaction cripples the country.

     Adding to the realism are actual news clips from the time, showing the real politicians and reports as the financial system gets worse and worse. These are not actors, played up for dramatic effect. These are real people reporting real stories. And Jon Stewart, ripping John McCain a (deservedly) new one.

     Is it a fair and balanced look at the fall of 2008? That's debatable. The writers have an opinion and a slant, as any dramatic work must, and so there is some bias towards certain parties. But there is also some grey area and debate, and so Too Big to Fail tries hard, and mostly succeeds, to at least give most everyone the benefit of the doubt. Or at least consideration that issues are complicated.

    The sprawling cast is top notch. There is a lot of star power, many in small roles, such as Ed Asner as Warren Buffett. Yet, not a single actor stands out as being inferior to the others. If anything can be said about HBO's films, it's that they do not shirk on casting. Each actor and actress shows a depth that really brings the characters, which are closely based on real people, to life in an authentic way. Most are matched quite well in looks, aided by expert makeup, though Crudup probably least physically resembles his counterpart, of the primary three.

     The bankers themselves are played by Tony Shalhoub (Monk, Wings), Evan Handler (Californication, Sex and the City), and Bill Pullman (Torchwood, Independence Day), among others. They are not really the blatant villains, as one might expect. While the companies they represent do take a large portion of the blame for what they have done, the men who run them generally come across as hard workers, willing to make sacrifices. They want to save their companies, but they are also willing to make a move that benefits the system as a whole, which in a roundabout way, does save their companies.

     That doesn't mean the bankers are heroes, by any stretch of the imagination. Obviously, it is because of them and their companies that the chain reaction of disaster begins. They also pocket American tax payer bailout money, which they will only take without strings, and continue to pay out huge bonuses. The public is justified in their anger at them. But because the film is made up mainly of closed door meetings of individuals, these things are sometimes downplayed, making them seem like decent guys. Hallway rants by Paulson allude to another side of the story.

    Actually, the people who come off the worst in the film are James Woods (Shark), as the head of Lehman who hesitates to try to make more money, not realizing it's too late to save the bank, and Congress, especially John McCain and the GOP. They are all slow to act, and work against what Paulson insists is necessary. It's a battle to get them to do what has to be done, and because of them, the whole system almost goes belly up several times.

     Also looking bad are the British, who have a chance to help, but sabotage a good deal that may have saved the system at the last minute. Furthermore, they begin to freeze credit after Lehman's collapse, worsening the situation. While Europe will be deeply hurt by what happens on Wall Street, they show an unwillingness to believe that America can take them down, too.

     Asians also have a chance to step in, but choose not to. One Asian company does help buy one of the American banks, but several deals with friends in the Pacific fall through as they back away from toxic assets. And who can really blame them?

     Paulson, who is really the central character, has a staff that includes actors Topher Grace (That '70's Show, Spider-man 3) and Cynthia Nixon (Sex and the City, The Big C). They try very hard to not only help their boss fix things, but also to keep him healthy, as Paulson is plagued by a lack of sleep, and looks worse and worse as the movie progresses. They are the heroes of the story, tirelessly putting their lives on hold to save the country. Whether that is true or not, the way the trio comes across makes it very easy to root for them.

     The story itself is a gripping tale of horror. What makes it even scarier is that not only is is true, but the problems shown are far from solved. A scroll at the end tells viewers that the same conditions exist today, and the economy could still easily go over the precipice, since the government has failed to act to change anything significant in the two and a half years since the events unfolded. It's a chilling realization, not one that gives any comfort.


     Too Big to Fail will repeat numerous times on HBO over the next few weeks. If you have not caught it yet, make sure to do so soon.

     If you like my reviews, please follow me on Twitter! Click here for all of my Current Season Reviews.

     Please click here to buy the book on which Too Big to Fail is based.

Article first published as TV Review: Too Big to Fail on Blogcritics.