Spoilers for Ed and the O.C.

Written by Amber Gertzbein
Published December 16, 2003
page 1 | 2

Other shows that have run out of steam this season: 24 seems to still be shell-shocked from a crack-team of bizarro storylines in season 2, although last week's hook of Guyal, Tony, Jack and Hector Salazar secretly working together seems potentially interesting. I have to admit, I have no patience for Michelle's concerned wife deal, and Kim and Chase are practically irrelevant characters at this point. Is it just me, or does no one care about President Palmer this season? It seems like everything except the Jack-Tony-Hector-Guyal-Ramone storyline is just filler. Especially the deal with Hector's girlfriend. Even if it's foreshadowing that she's a mole and really secretly involved with Jack (because everyone knows Kiefer needs a love interest), I can't recommend watching it over whatever else is on at 9pm on a Tuesday.

Alias tied up a bunch of loose ends last week with Allison's death and Sark's encounter with his dad, and Sydney getting it on with Will, but it was kind of a denoument. Where do they go from here? Syd's not on the run anymore, the main source of conflict (Lyndsey) is dead, and aside from Jack being turned into an absolute caricature of an Electra Complex dad (haha...funny Daredevil joke, I wonder if that's what JJ Abrams was going for), there doesn't seem to be a lot of jeopardy anymore. Dixon's director again. Will's not going back to Witness Protection, Leno Olin's nowhere to be found, and there's a teeny amount of intrigue with Sloane's extra-curricular activity.

Who knows, maybe Rimbaldi will be interesting again. We'll have to wait to see.

Happy holidays folks. See you next year.

page 1 | 2
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Spoilers for Ed and the O.C.
Published: December 16, 2003
Type:
Section: Video
Filed Under: Video: Television
Writer: Amber Gertzbein
Amber Gertzbein's BC Writer page
Amber Gertzbein's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Amber Gertzbein
Video: Television
All Video Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — December 16, 2003 @ 11:43AM — Tom Johnson [URL]

I would not be surprised if Ed kissing this woman wasn't part of a dream or something. NBC has a nasty habit of leading viewers on to believe one thing and doing exactly the opposite. I will say, however, that if they throw Ed & Carol's relationship into question again I won't be returning to it when the show returns after the holidays. Enough is enough. Let them be together and focus on the other, more entertaining characters for a while.

#2 — December 16, 2003 @ 12:42PM — Mark Saleski [URL]

i'm with ya on that one tom.

just what is it about the portrayal of couples on the tube anyway?

i can see the will-they-or-won't-they aspect of it...but it gets dragged out in extremely artificial ways.

is there nothing interesting that writers can do with a happily together couple?

cripes, ed & carol have been together for just a couple of weeks and there's already a problem?

#3 — December 16, 2003 @ 12:52PM — Amber [URL]

See, I think the TV execs are all bunched up jonesing for conflict. They need relationships to be in jeopardy in a drama because that's what we watch? Didn't Ed get more interesting when Eli *didn't* kiss miss Jenny-fair? Wasn't it more interesting that Burt Reynolds burnt down Mike and Nancy's house? Now they have conflict trying to getting the house rebuilt, and Burt Reynolds will forever be the jackass with erectile dysfunction that burnt their house down.

If I wanted to watch happy couples, I'd watch Trista and Ryan. I'd watch Raymond and Debra. Happy couples are boring. Just look at Sandy and Kirsten on the O.C. Happy couple = we're in a rut therfore let's go to a swingers party = instant conflict.

That's why people love Soaps so much. They're the epitome of conflict. They drag out every possible scenario for conflict and then throw in a dead horse for good measure.

Yes, there's overkill, but if we were all happy couples already, we wouldn't be watching tv.

#4 — December 16, 2003 @ 12:58PM — Mark Saleski [URL]

i guess what bugs me is the shortened timescale. we've been wondering about ed & carol for what seems like five years. then, in a matter of a week or two (in tv reality it's been, what, two or three months?) there's trouble.

i dunno, i guess i don't thrive on the conflict.

burt reynolds was disturbing...for the amount of plastic surgury he's had (i'm used to the rug after all these years).

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/11016)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments