THE DOVEKEEPERS Review

Article first published as THE DOVEKEEPERS Review on Seat42F.

CBS presents the miniseries THE DOVEKEEPERS this week. The four-hour story will be split between two consecutive nights, and tell the based-on-truth story of several women living in the first century A.D. who end up at Masada during the famous siege. Based on the novel of the same name by Alice Hoffman and produced by Roma Downey and Mark Burnett, the goal seems to present a piece both historical and biblical.

The Dovekeepers stars Rachel Brosnahan (House of Cards) and Cote De Pablo (NCIS) as two women telling their tale to a judgmental Roman scholar (Sam Neill, Jurassic Park, Peaky Blinders). This is a pretty strong central trio, as two of the three are nearly inarguably very good actors and the third is at least decent. They are all well cast in the roles they inhabit. They are joined by an ensemble, but principally Kathryn Prescott (Finding Carter) and Diego Boneta (the upcoming Scream Queens), so it seems to be they did a pretty decent job casting this piece.

The tone reminds me very much of last year’s The Red Tent. It features strong women, the central players, who listen to their heart (and perhaps a certain other organ) in making decisions. It paints them as heroic and noble, though they engage in adultery and other unsavory acts. They pray to a god whose orders they do not obey, and live in a time where such misdeeds could garner very severe punishment. So I guess we’re supposed to admire them for sleeping with married men at a time when women could be killed or ostracized for such a thing, it being brave to buck society’s rules and morals? I don’t agree with the punishment of the day, but the crime isn’t exactly to be admired, either.

The male characters are much less developed. Several are mere eye candy, while one serves as little more than a narrator to THE DOVEKEEPERS. It’s hard to attack THE DOVEKEEPERS on this, given the number of works out there where the opposite is true, but it certainly doesn’t paint as complex and fully fleshed out a world as it could.

Honestly, THE DOVEKEEPERS is a soapy women’s film with lots of romance and plenty of obstacles preventing happy endings. This is not something I am all that into, but the Hallmark Channel and Lifetime have proved there is an audience for this type of fare, and this miniseries falls somewhere between those two’s offerings, less cheesy than either, and a hair less melodramatic.

The bible-reading crowd are also likely to enjoy it. It is very in-fashion right now to do new adaptations of religious stories or other tales from that era. This is set shortly after most of the New Testament, but finds personalities with the same superstitions and beliefs as those in that tome, being set in the same part of the world. As such, it feels like it is very much a part of this same genre, even if technically it is not, complete with dreams and visions to match the other unworldly mindsets of the era.

Yet, from a storytelling perspective, THE DOVEKEEPERS is just not that great. The pacing is slower than it needs to be, and the narrative follows a very specific point of view, likely alienating those who don’t share it. Situations are presented in a very black and white fashion, with characters that disagree with the protagonists clearly painted as being in the wrong, even if it is easy to feel they are not. Such a powerful bend works well for a target audience, but not for the public in general. THE DOVEKEEPERS is just not complex enough to hold many potential viewers’ attention.

Which is not to say it’s a total waste of time. I’ve cited a couple of groups that will enjoy it, and I expect it will have plenty of viewers. It’s not for everyone, but since the airwaves are not exactly flooded with this type of fare, those in the niche it fills are likely to be appreciative.

THE DOVEKEEPERS airs this Tuesday and Wednesday nights at 9 p.m. ET.

Alcatraz finale asks more questions than it answers

FOX's Alcatraz brings season one to a close this week with "Tommy Madsen." The second of two new hours, "Tommy Madsen" finds the gang closing in on the elusive man thought to be pivotal to the main plot arc. But the closer they get, the more mysteries spring up. And Rebecca (Sarah Jones) finally catches up to Tommy, who happens to be her grandfather (David Hoflin), only to have him stab her.

Those expecting the answers to a few questions in the season finale of Alcatraz will be disappointed. Yes, a handful of clues are given as to who is behind the appearance of the '63s in 2012, as well as how they got here. But the purpose behind such an experiment is still completely unknown, as is the science responsible for the feat. A new character may shed a little light, as he appears in a hidden room that Emerson Hauser (Sam Neill) finally unlocks with a trio of keys, but he does not get the chance to spill anything before the episode comes to a close.

Similarly, Lucy's (Parminder Nagra) romance with Emerson is brought into the open, and his deep feelings, which keep him faithful for fifty years, are mentioned. But there is not any background given as to how Emerson built and funded the task force investigating Alcatraz, nor the circumstances around Lucy coming back. Or why Lucy is wanted dead by the bad guys, more so than the rest of the team. Sure, guesses can be hazarded, but confirmation is nice, too.

A major development in "Tommy Madsen" is that Emerson and company discover that the '63s are popping up all across the country, not just in San Francisco. Why only in the U.S.? Well, that isn't explained. This sets the stage for a broader story, and perhaps even a less procedural plot, going forward. This is welcome, as the case of the week focus, prevalent through much of this season, drags the story down. New cases should be integrated, not stand alone. Thankfully, as time goes on, each individual begins to play into a larger whole, making the entire thing more cohesive. And now the scale of this series has just blown up a to be much, much larger.

Oh, and Rebecca dies.

Rebecca can't be dead. She is too important to Alcatraz, and while main characters can sometimes be killed off, this one cannot, at least, not yet. The question is not, what happens now that she's dead, but instead, how can they bring her back to life? The Alcatraz docs have been shown doing some pretty crazy medicine. Surely there is a solution to this problem related to the '63s. Or Walter Bishop could lend them a hand.

Which means that Alcatraz needs a second season. Currently on the bubble, it isn't fair to the fans who have invested thirteen hours of their lives if none of the major questions get a satisfying answer. Clearly, the vision the writers have for this series is only just getting started, and there would be no good way to bring things to a close in a single season. So give them another couple years to really lay out their plan, and then judge them as to whether it works or not. The early signs are good, and getting better every week, much like the first season of Fringe, a show of which some of the Alcatraz creative team are alumni. Allow them a second chance to prove themselves. Please.

Alcatraz also stars the fantastic Jorge Garcia, and airs on FOX.

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

The innocent man of Alcatraz

This week's escaped prisoner on FOX's Alcatraz is "Clarence Montgomery." Said to be the only innocent man locked up on The Rock, Clarence (Mahershala Ali, Treme, Alphas, The 4400) begins killing for real when he emerges in 2012. What's more, he slays other inmates in the 1960s, after Dr. Beauregard (Leon Rippy, Saving Grace, Deadwood) performs some experiments on him. So how can he be stopped, and why is he acting this way?

The case of "Clarence Montgomery" is a moving one, indeed. Here is a man that was accused of a crime that he didn't commit, likely because of racist attitudes. See, he is a black man who was dating the white daughter of his boss. It isn't surprising that in the 1950s this could happen to a person of color. But it's incredibly unfair, and so viewers will quickly begin feeling for this poor man, to whom circumstance has dealt a bad hand.

The story of "Clarence Montgomery" comes to a tragic ending. Trapped by Hauser (Sam Neill) and company, Clarence's friend, Emmitt Little (Glynn Turman, House of Lies, The Wire), shoots Clarence dead. The alternative would have been to be locked up in Hauser's secret prison, and after the tortures Clarence has already undergone, death seems preferable. But that doesn't make the tale any sadder.

"Clarence Montgomery" extends fans' knowledge of what is going on in Alcatraz prison, circa 1960, as it expands Dr. Soto's (Jorge Garcia) information, as well. Soto knows about experimentation going on elsewhere, but didn't think the same things happened at Alcatraz. Until now. But what is the goal of the Alcatraz tests? Surely they are related to the disappearance of everyone in 1963, and their reemergence now. Thus, they are another piece of the larger mystery that is slowly unfolding.

Alcatraz does a lot of things right. The mystery is being doled out nicely, piece by piece, keeping fans engaged. Soto's burgeoning relationship with Nikki (Jeananne Goossen, Falcon Beach, The Vow) is sweet. Rebecca's (Sarah Jones) family secrets keep her heavily involved in the plot. Hauser's connections with local law enforcement justify much of how the team can do what they do. And the writers are very good at making viewers care about the prisoners, with intriguing, sometimes sympathetic, stories.

Unfortunately, Alcatraz also does a lot of things wrong. How are these prisoners adapting to 2012 so easily? Escpecially Clarence, who must adjust to completely different racial attitudes? The prisoners are confused by the internet, but not by the other technology all around them? They easily can get a job, often multiple jobs, without proper work history and references, when people around the country struggle to find work? None of them consider blending in for awhile and not committing crimes after being given this second chance? And in "Clarence Montgomery," we are expected to believe that Clarence is the ONLY innocent man in Alcatraz, given the history of the legal system? Really?

Perhaps I'm being picky. Yes, disbelief must be suspended to enjoy a series like Alcatraz. However, taken together they show a lack of foresight and depth to the universe presented. It makes it seem like the show doesn't have time to explore all the implications because they are being forced to stuff the stories into a crime-of-the-week procedural, which would be a logical conclusion, given the unfortunate glut of this type of programming on network TV. This is a grave mistake that could wind up killing the series quickly. Slow down, take time to fully engage with these issues, and Alcatraz could be something awesome, rather than a great show that falls apart under close scrutiny.

Hopefully, these wrongs will be righted soon. You can watch Alcatraz Mondays at 9:00 p.m. ET on FOX.

If you like my reviews, please follow me on Twitter! Article first published as TV Review: Alcatraz - "Clarence Montgomery" on Blogcritics.

Alcatraz is a mysterious island

     FOX's Alcatraz begins with over three hundred prisoners and prison employees disappearing inexplicably in 1963. In the present day, Detective Rebecca Madsen (Sarah Jones, Sons of Anarchy, Big Love), who lost her partner three months ago, encounters one of those prisoners, who hasn't aged a day. With the help of Alcatraz expert Doctor Diego Soto (Jorge Garcia, Lost, Becker), Rebecca uncovers a secret federal investigation led by one of the guards who found the empty prison fifty years ago, Emerson Hauser (Sam Neill, The Tudors, Jurassic Park). Emerson won't give the unlikely duo hardly any information, but does allow them to work for him, hunting down these reappearing baddies. 

     Alcatraz brings to mind two other series J.J. Abrams had a hand in: Lost and Fringe. Look at the facts. There is a mysterious island. Characters show up with no idea what is going on. Portions of every episode are flashbacks to prior events. It's a procedural where a small team investigates things the public at large can't know about to protect the greater good. Plus, the tone and music match up pretty well with both of those other shows.

     Which is not to say that Alcatraz is a copy cat, because it's far from it. It brings it's own story completely, with a talented cast and some superb writing. It does harken back to early Fringe somewhat in its setup, but is likely to branch out in various ways as it goes on. The concept of some unseen evil putting things into motion isn't unique, and yet, it manages to feel fresh when the questions are laid out in such a neat, intriguing way. Some reviewers have panned it, but that seems odd, because this one has really no beef with the first two hours, which thrill. Even a couple of things that seem odd, like characters not questioning plot points, start to appear more than surface, and so a set up for back story or depth.

     The cast is terrific. One cannot possibly get enough of Sam Neill or Jorge Garcia in one's lifetime. Neill goes for a level of malice he honed in The Tudors, but seems to have a vulnerable, friendly side he is trying to hide. Garcia isn't as much the comic relief that he was in Lost, since he needs to carry this series more squarely. He gets serious, but is still the relatable one, viewers' entry into this world. Jones is good, make no mistake about it, though the role does scream for Battlestar Galactica's Katee Sackhoff, and since there is a physical resemblance, it's hard not to be disappointed that Alcatraz goes for a lesser known thespian. That being said, given how comfortable the actress seems in the part, it likely won't be long before Jones firmly takes Rebecca as her own, and any comparisons drop away.

     Setting part of the series in the past is an interesting choice, made all the more so by the decision of the writers to have the flashback scenes in both the "Pilot" and the second hour, "Ernest Cobb," take place in 1960, three years prior to the disappearance. What is the significance with allowing for a three year build up? Does that mean this trope will be used for three seasons, like in Lost, with a major mystery concluding at that point? Or will it progress more quickly, as a specific story needs to be told in that era, and it will play out in one season.

     Alcatraz is unlikely to stay in the present anytime soon, given the inclusion of two series regulars that only appear in the 1960's timeframe. Jonny Coyne (The Bill) plays Chief Warden Edwin James, a somewhat sadistic, tough man seemingly totally in charge of the island. Jason Butler Harner (Next) is Deputy Warden E.B. Tiller, a character murdered in present day by the first escaped convict in the "Pilot." James is dead before the series begins. So, yeah, they need to stay in the past.

     Part of the mystique of the show centers around Rebecca, obviously a focal point. Not only is she raised by former Alcatraz guard Ray Archer (Robert Forster, Heroes), but the man she is chasing when her partner dies is none other the her grandfather, Tommy Madsen (David Hoflin, Neighbours), whom she is startled to learn was a prisoner on The Rock! What is Tommy doing there, and why is he sneaking around? What's more, Tommy is definitely aware of who Rebecca is, given the way that he looks at her.

     The biggest impact so far, though, is the surprise sniping of Hauser's assistant (whom may be a bit more than that), Lucy Banerjee (Parminder Nagra, ER). Even more shocking, she shows up in 1960's Alcatraz! Which means she could be the key to what Hauser knows, and why the whole investigation is set up. She may know almost nothing, like the two prisoners caught so far, who do things that they cannot explain their motivation for, or she may have already figured it out. Or maybe she is partly responsible for what happened. There is no telling at this point, but it's a hell of a set up for what's to come.

     The only fear with Alcatraz is that broadcast networks tend to prefer procedurals. Fringe flirts with that format from time to time, but mostly stays its own thing. But Fringe also suffers from low ratings, despite how wonderfully creative it is. Alcatraz has the potential to be a heck of a serial, one that draws people in week after week, if FOX will allow it to be such. Unfortunately, many viewers, and thus advertisers, prefer mindless crap. Some behind the scenes drama worries that this will be the case, and episodes will start to fall into a familiar formula. If it can avoid that pitfall, Alcatraz will soar. If not, it won't be worth watching for long.

     Watch Alcatraz Mondays at 9 p.m. ET on FOX.

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