Lately I've been on a bit of an F/X rant, but
I'm the first to admit it because thus far they haven't produced one program that I didn't enjoy. Over*There was no exception. It was produced by Steven Bochco which
automatically gave it some "street cred" in the TV world, but I think what ultimately killed the show was its
timing. It's the first show that has ever depicted soldiers during an actual war, and even though it created an outlet
for people to maybe try and cope with the war that's still going on, it was placed in a position where it suffered from
overexposure. People had seen enough war on the news, and it seems likely that when Over*There came on many
people probably opted to change the channel.I caught the entire season and believe me when I say that this show was a quality slice of television. Great performances were turned in by some lesser known actors and the show managed to be funny, sad, and perhaps too real all at the same time. Sgt. Scream was a standout character. Played by Erik Palladino (you might remember him as Cousin Ron, the guy who tried to make out with Jennifer Love Hewitt in Can't Hardly Wait), Scream was the perfect blend of hard-ass and nice guy.
Scream wasn't the only one though. Characters are what made this show. I'll never forget the way the show started in the pilot episode as it introduced each character and their names, ranks, and ages flashed across the screen. It sent chills down your spine because they humanized everyone within the first thirty seconds before you even had a chance to figure who to root for and who to hate. It became hard to dislike any of the main cast.
Many of the episodes resonated powerfully too. The writers certainly adhered to the "ripped from the headlines" mantra and it was fantastic to see a fictional story based on a news item you read about in the paper two months ago. Everything that has become synonymous with the war (orphans, Iraqi palaces, independent contractors, prisons, suicide bombers) all played a role at some point in the season. But as I stated earlier, maybe all this was too much at once for some people. F/X ran the whole season but chose not to renew it for a second. I'd like to hear what other people thought though. Does anyone think that this show might have had more staying power had it come out in four or five years from now when hopefully (fingers crossed) the war in Iraq is long over?
Andy Richter: The TV Squad Interview
Have any questions for Vik Sahay of Chuck? Ask them here!
Mike Henry and Daryl Hall on a Cleveland Show Thanksgiving
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-02-2006 @ 10:00PM
Spence said...
I don't think Over*There should have gone as long as it did. Mostly because, while it was a pretty good stab at it for Hollywood, it still was Hollywood. The characters were two dimensional Hollywood stereotypes and didn't resemble any of the people I know in the military presently or any of them I knew while in myself. There was plenty of gratuitous violence but they could have hired at least one professional to inject a little bit of reality. While I didn't watch many of the episodes the ones I did watch were fairly ludicrous. Unless wild panic and 1960's stereotypes describe the current crop of service members. It probably was good for the uniformed and the A-Team crowd, the JAG types would like it too, but fantasy is in nowadays. Technically very well made, for what it was. Based on reality, not.
Reply
1-02-2006 @ 10:30PM
Dorv said...
I thought the show was pretty damn good. While I cannot account for its accuracy like the last poster, I disagree with the sentiment that the characters were two dimensional... Well, maybe 2.5 dimensions??
I particularly liked the arc that Sgt. Scream had in the second half of the season, from having problems with the overbearing officer who had no clue what he was doing, to the decisions he made re: the orphange.
The only ongoing arc that I didn't like was that of "Doublewide" and her husband back home. While I understand the separation of families is a very real issue, I felt that this portrayal just fell flat.
Reply
1-03-2006 @ 2:24AM
ElleEstTrois said...
What turned me off about the epi I saw was the proselytizing; it was waaay out of anyone's character and left a bad taste in my mouth. (I believe one soldier was waxing on the "soldierness" of a newbie. Another moment was a mini soliliquy by another soldier. Mind you, I have no clue who the characters are as I just couldn't suspend that make disbelief. It felt that immediately faux.)
Jonathan has a good point about timing. I was angry that they would choose to fictionize an on-going war/battle/situation/mistake when attention really needs paid to the reality.
Reply
1-03-2006 @ 2:40AM
debbi said...
When I saw previews for the show, Over There, I was enraged. After having lost my son in Operation Iraqi Freedom, I found the irony of the entertainment industry trying to make money off of the ongoing conflict where men and women were actually dying. I felt my son had been betrayed. The whole concept was in extreme poor taste, to me, and only reinforced the grief and rage I felt over my son's death.
Reply
1-03-2006 @ 6:24AM
Jim said...
I tried to watch the pilot and thought all the characters were cliches.
Reply
1-03-2006 @ 8:34AM
Jamie said...
The timing of the show was a big mistake. one of the reasons MASH was set in Korea instead of vietnam was to avoid the dilemma of featuring an entertainment show shotly after seeing the real war on the evening news. Perhaps if ,i>Over There has been produced 5-6 years from now, it would have been a critical success at least. As it is, it was in poor taste.
Reply
1-03-2006 @ 9:45AM
A Boy Named Mole said...
I quite enjoyed the whole series, should we not sensationalize all hospital dramas until we cure all diseases known to man? Of course not, then why can't we have a "television" show based off current true events, (/me flashes to a promo from L&O, ripped from the headlines). I thought the writing and acting was top notch, and was bery much upset to hear it wasnt renewed, I look forward to a dvd release with some commentaries from cast and crew.
Reply
1-03-2006 @ 11:27AM
Andy said...
As a TV show, it was interesting and dramatic, with good writing, characters, and direction, and good production value. My take on what happened is that the show started off very hot, with very strong story arcs, intense action and intriguing plot lines. Then as the season wore on the writers seemed to lose steam or lose their sense of direction, and the drama and intensity waned. You can't sustain a drama on action alone. You have to keep the personal stories interesting. It seemed that the writers weren't as adept at exploring character as they were at staging intense, action-oriented storylines.
As for the lack of "realism", it's pretty naive to expect realism on television. Even "reality" shows are staged, and "news" is more about entertainment than real news. If you want realism, turn off your TV and go outside.
Reply