Finally, something to enjoy on Showtime’s Weeds. It’s been a long time since the show did little more than make me feel uncomfortable watching my television. While everything isn’t back to normal, the premiere of the dark comedy did little to disappoint.
A major theme that I picked up in the episode was relationships. Between Nancy (Mary-Louise Parker) and Esteban (Demian Bichir), Nancy and Andy (Justin Kirk), Andy and Silas (Hunter Parrish), Silas and Doug (Kevin Nealon), and, of course, Celia (Elizabeth Perkins) and all of our favorite characters. It’s surprising to think that a show about a woman trying to keep her family afloat could go so long without concentrating on relationships, but there you go.
First of all, how funny was the Celia ransom thing? I really enjoyed how the episode not only made the calls a continuous, random thing, but also how the writers were true to the history behind Celia and all of the other characters. Nancy despises her for the combination blackmail and guilt that Celia rained down upon her in the past. Doug had his tumultuous fling with Celia, which led to Celia and Dean’s (Andy Milder) nasty split. And Andy just never got along with her. Bravo on such a cute sub-plot.
The other really interesting thing to watch is how Silas is developing into a man. What does bother me about him is his lack of interest in becoming a more responsible member of his family. I don’t buy into the idea that he had to become the “man of the house,” especially since there isn’t much of a cohesive home-life to speak of for the Botwins. But he does need to get a little bit out of the “all about me” phase of a teenager, and start realizing that he has a widowed mother, and a very lost brother, to keep an eye on.
What I do like is that he’s grown so much from his days with Quinn (Haley Hudson). Silas’ relationship with his uncle Andy, as well as with Doug (how did he end up as a member of the extended family, again?), are not just funny. They also paint a picture of someone who’s searching for a male role model, someone desperate to learn how to become an adult, and a responsible member of the community.
Sure, his chosen profession involves growing and selling his own strain of pot, but the details aren’t as significant as the idea: Silas realizes that he’s not a kid any more. What would be great is if he also realized that with adulthood comes certain responsibilities, especially when your home is an unstable one. Instead of seeing Nancy as a peer, he needs to remember that, whether she acts like it or not, she’s his mother, and she needs his help.
With all of that, I was very into where the show appears to be going, on many fronts. Hopefully Mexico was but a short detour, one that will add some color to where we’re going next. I do know that now, once again, I’m fully onboard for the ride.
I’ve also got my eye out for a live Flash Mob … anyone have any personal experiences with one to share?
Clacked by Aryeh S.
on Jun 09, 2009 @ 09:00 EST5EDT
I think they should kill Nancy off, she is easily the worst character on the show. The show went from a dark comedy to a dark drama with some comedy thrown in. The Celia thing was funny as hell.
Also the best line had to be Silas “Dad would be so proud”.
That’s interesting that you said that about Nancy being killed off because i said that same thing last night. Now that she’s preggo, maybe not killed off, but she seriously needs to be slapped. MORE CELIA AND DOUG!
Well I think now wouldn’t work with killing her, but she should have a miscarriage and then they kill her because the only reason she is alive is because of the baby. Next season can end the show with everyone dealing with moving on.
I don’t normally like Celia, she is a bitch, but it’s so funny that she finally realized no one liked her.
Also shouldn’t Silas be anti-drugs? He sees how big of a mess his mom has gotten into and is still going down that road? I guess the writers realized that someone on the show needs to grow and deal weed because Nancy clearly isn’t.
*POST AUTHOR*
Okay, wow … what? ;)
I think Nancy took a very crappy turn last year, which is why the show went a bit south, but I thought she was really enjoyable in the premiere. I think this is a consistent character for Mary-Louis Parker; I see her in my mind chewing on the straw of her big drink, which is a bit of a personality thing, and something she displayed on The West Wing, too (forgive me, Ryan, if you’re reading this!)
I think what made her so great in the beginning was that Nancy was written for her, but last season, the writers let the show lead the actress, instead of vice versa. I think that Nancy’s the least of their problems, because there’s no way you got into the show in the first place without liking her persona circa seasons 1-3. In that case, you have to recognize that she’s not the problem.
Hi, Aryeh – I’ve been watching the free episode podcasts from Showtime, so just viewed this season opener last night. It’s the only episode of Weeds I’ve seen, but absolutely hated Nancy, so I won’t be cluttering up future posts with my comments. Liked Celia and Andy, though. Loved United States of Tara, thought The L Word was adequate, and will spool up Nurse Jackie next.
I don’t object to TWW comparisons, it’s just bringing up the same one every time you mention the actor (Malina) that gets on my nerves. ;-)
*POST AUTHOR*
Ah, so you’re stalking my other posts about shows that star former West Wing cast members to keep me in line … crafty! ;)
If you can get a hold of them, watch Weeds seasons 1-4. Nancy was, and will again be, a very different person. It’s worth the time, if you’re willing.
So are Brotherhood, Californication, and The Tudors, if you’ve got a free month. :)
Well, I would if I knew anything about TWW, but I never watched it. What I loved Mary McCormack for was High Heels and Low Lifes. And Mark Harmon for The Presidio. And I didn’t know Richard Schiff at all.
I’m only trying these shows out because Showtime is offering an edited sample episode for free. I’m bemused to find that it’s not the nudity or gore of pay cable that repels me so much as the rampant profanity (I preferred to watch Dexter on CBS rather than DVD for that reason). My friends all say that I’d love Deadwood (McShane, Dillahunt, etc.), but I think I’d have much the same problem there.
*POST AUTHOR*
I’m a big fan of a lot of HBO and Showtime series, and I think that, where the nudity and profanity is fluid, it goes largely unnoticeable. As odd as it is to see random clips of topless strippers on the show, it makes sense that Tony Soprano and crew would conduct their business at a strip club (though, if they still air them, A&E has edited versions of the episodes).
What I do find off-putting, is something like Oz, which I’m trying now that DirecTV is airing it on their own channel. Everything is so gratuitous, and seemingly unnecessary, that I don’t know how much more of it I can stomach. The satellite provider is also airing Deadwood, so I have the first few episodes of that recorded. We shall see how bad it is.
But, in some of these cases, I definitely hear where you’re coming from.
I want to state for the record that I have no problem with the nudity. Just sayin’.
But seriously, folks … I guess I just don’t think that the language is gratuitous. I think its organic and real. I’m around people that cuss like sailors all the time. Take Oz as the example Aryeh mentioned … Do you not think that’s is a semi-accurate portrayal (Thematically and situationally) of prison life?
*POST AUTHOR*
Ivey – I have little doubt that you’re likely correct (I won’t pry ;)), but I guess I’m still left feeling very dirty after watching an episode of Oz. Maybe, for me, the show’s gratuitous in nature, because prison is such. I don’t know.
I can tell you that, through Entourage (good balance), Big Love (is this on cable because of the subject matter alone?), The Wire (no complaining with brilliance), The Sopranos (see previous), Brotherhood (a little too much, but it’s the Irish mob), Californication (Hank’s supposed to be too much, but the daughter needs a muzzle), Weeds (drug-life … enough said), and even Nurse Jackie (again, drug life), I’ve never felt like I was being hit over the head with that stuff.
Rome, and The Tudors, can get a little bit too trying, particularly because I think the writers are taking advantage of the fact that we have no frame of reference for those times, so can’t factually argue what is and isn’t accurate in terms of sex, violence, and language.
Even with all of that, Oz makes me sick. I did see something different in episode two, a little bit more story as the characters are being introduced, but it could just be that prison life is not something I can deal with watching for entertainment. We’ll soon see where Deadwood falls in.
I was always under the impression that Rome was as historically accurate as current historians understand the times. But, for all I know, I saw that in some piece of HBO marketing.
I actually don’t (or didn’t) watch most of those shows, Brotherhood and (most of) the Sopranos being the only real exception.
But there is a cable premium (mini) series that I feel like I might be able to claim some expertise in, and that’s the Band of Brothers series. It was historically accurate (with a few “show biz” liberties in there).
I don’t know… I’ve always felt that these shows are BOTH ‘gritty for the sake of being gritty’ and also accurate portrayals.
*POST AUTHOR*
Like I said, I have to agree for the most part. If, however, you want to single out historical portrayals … I can’t speak to pagan Rome, but I often have trouble with The Tudors, for instance, juxtaposing what we know today as Judeo-Christian values on a time that should have championed them. Yet, there are all these people, Cardinals included, having affairs, pre-marital sex, etc. Is that accurate, or just our societal standards being applied to the past?
Beats the poop out of be, because I don’t watch the Tudors, nor do I know much about the era.
I had always been under the impression, however, that we were/are living in a more conservative era as far as sex was concerned (and by era, I mean post-Columbus America, and not, you know, the 90’s and 00’s). But, I also don’t know much about what I’m current talking about so….
Oh, I don’t doubt that the more prurient aspects of these critically lauded shows are well earned, it’s just the constant and unimaginative stream of vulgarities some characters spout that offends me personally, just as in real life. I also tend to view such characters as less intelligent and having poorer judgment, even if that is not the case. Swear words are shocking when they are few and far between, but if “f***ing” replaces every adjective and adverb in dialogue it loses any power.
I agree that the language is appropriate for the characters you two’ve sketched here, but I would still rather watch them toned down to broadcast standards.
I have no problem with most nudity, and with dramatically appropriate or artistic violence. And you can’t properly treat the senatorial and equestrian classes of the Empire without rampant nudity, immorality, stabbings, incest, poisonings, adultery, inbreeding, debauchery, proscriptions, hypocritical moralism, and the occasional imperial edicts of death through beatings or starvation. The tyrant Gaius Julius Caesar comes off pretty well in comparison to some of these people.
*POST AUTHOR*
As I said somewhere above, I feel that if it’s fluid, it works.
I’ve actually gotten the chance to see the first three episodes of both Oz and Deadwood at this point. While I feel more comfortable with the situation on Oz, in terms of how natural the violence, cursing, sex, etc. are, I think I’m still uncomfortable with it because the natural environment that they portray is just so jarring. I’m not sure how much more of it my senses can take.
On the other hand, while I’m sure that Deadwood is spot on historically, the show just isn’t very good. I know I just offended countless people on this site who’ve told me that I had to see it, but it just isn’t. It’s a case where, natural or not, it feels as if they replace every adjective with a curse, just for the sake of taking advantage of being on cable.
I’m assured that the show gets better, but I don’t think it’s good enough right now to keep me hanging on. We’ll see what happens.
Nancy is my least favorite character and always has been. She is one of the stupidest women on TV. I pretty much love everyone else. Hopefully, the writers will work on the boys as family this season since they definatly are growing up. Doug anc Celia are both hilarious and I love Andy. Can’t wait to see him with Jennifer Jason Leigh.
*POST AUTHOR*
Clearly I’m in the minority here, but since she spun out of control, I’ve really disliked Celia. I think until she and Dean split she was fine, but, afterwards? I can’t find anything redeemable, or enjoyable, about her. But I like Nancy, so I guess we all get one.
I was surprised they worked a flash mob into the show… they’ve been around for about 6 years now (at least in NYC, anyway) so it’s kind of a dated reference…
*POST AUTHOR*
Ouch; I thought I was with it.
I think Ren Mar is like Canada (How I Met Your Mother): the 80’s got there in 1993, so, if you think about it, Flash Mobs are hitting them early! Trend setters!