What's it about?
It's the early 1960s, and at the center of Chicago lies the legendary and seductive PlayboyClub, a living, breathing fantasy world filled with $1.50 cocktails, music, glitter and of course, beautiful Bunnies. The key to the club, which offers the ultimate in beauty, is the most sought-after status symbol of its time. But all that glitters isn't gold, and in the back rooms and alleys behind the club, life happens - both good and bad.
So, how was it?
Since long before last night's premiere, this show (as well as ABC's upcoming PAN AM) has drawn endless parallels to AMC's MAD MEN. This is mostly due to its being set in the 1960s, a time period that MAD MEN made mega-popular four years ago, to the point that Banana Republic launched an entire fashion campaign centered around the style of the decade. Who wouldn't want to capitalize on the world's newfound fascination for that bygone era? Obviously NBC wanted a piece of the action, but was this really the best they could come up?
The show stars Eddie Cibrian as a tall-dark-and-handsome, suit-wearing babe magnet, the powerful and rich laides man
The rest of the characters are as poorly drawn as Dalton. The Bunnies are cardboard cutout archetypes. There's the jealous older Bunny who wants to run the show; the black Bunny who's got big dreams; the sexy Bunny with a secret (gasp! she's already married!); the outwardly naive Bunny (gasp! she's actually a lesbian!); and our protagonist, the naive new girl Bunny, played by the blandly beautiful Amber Heard.
I was not alive during the 60s, but from what I understand, the Playboy Club that is represented in this show is not an accurate portrayal of actual Playboy Clubs of the time. In the three minutes of research that I did before writing this review, I found that actual Playboy Clubs had very strict rules -- patrons would not be allowed to make such lewd comments, passes and gropings that we see occur in this show. Every Club had special workers disguised as patrons whose sole responsibility was to enforce the Club's very strict regulations and prevent such behavior. If I could find that on Wikipedia in two minutes, why did the writers apparently miss it? It seems like they're trying to rewrite history to make us feel better -- Sure, women may still be fighting for equal standing with men in the work force, but at least we don't treat them like THAT anymore! -- when the reality was much more complex: the Bunnies were simultaneously objectified and respected.
This pilot tried to do way too much in its first hour. It felt at times like a highlight reel of topical issues of the 60s crammed into 45 minutes of screen time. We touched on women's rights, black rights, gay rights, the Mob, and more! It felt like the writers were trying to apologize to the people whose sensibilities they'd offended by making a show about Playboy Bunnies in the first place by saying, "Look! We're not demeaning women, we're actually really progressive! Look at us having gay characters!" But the people who are offended by the idea of a show about Playboy weren't watching anyway -- they should've focused on the people who WANT to watch the show and played up the edginess instead of trying to apologize for it.
I've saved the worst for last. The show's biggest and most glaring problem was one of the first things to happen on screen. Within the first five minutes, the new-girl-Bunny has killed a man by stabbing him in the jugular with her stiletto heel. (Great aim, by the way!) That man turns out to be the head of the Mob. Dalton helps her cover it up by wrapping the body in heavy chains and dumping it in the river. I'm not kidding. This happened before the first commercial break, was the focus of the rest of the episode, and from what I can tell, will be the focus of the entire season. It's like the writers were screaming at us, "We don't have confidence in our characters so we have to insert a completely ridiculous and entirely generic murder storyline into our show to keep you interested!" That one decision undermined their entire show. Instead of focusing on their characters, giving them unique and interesting traits, and making sure the audience is invested in them, the writers decided to never give them a chance, trying instead to invest the audience in some absurd mob drama. What a shame. MAD MEN has kept me and many people invested in its show for four years without once killing a mob boss with a high heel. When you have well-developed characters, good writing, and above average acting, you don't need to do that. Unfortunately, THE PLAYBOY CLUB lacks any of those qualities.
I understand that while the writers wanted to cash in on MAD MEN's success, they also didn't want to just make the same show. That would have simply invited a different kind of criticism. So they made a potentially good decision in deciding to make their show inherently plot-based instead of character-based. This format can be successful -- look at 24 for a supreme example. However, this show fails at even that. 24 kept us on the edge of our seats with a complicated, interesting plot and characters that, while not the most complex, were at least well-acted. THE PLAYBOY CLUB, on the other hand, has neither an interesting enough plot nor good enough acting to keep me coming back week to week.
Rating:
* Atrocious. I will never watch this show again. Ever.
The least sexy show about sex I've ever seen and by far the worst pilot of the season thus far. A sad attempt at capitalizing on the MAD MEN craze that falls spectacularly short in every single way. At least we've still got one more chance at a 60s show with PAN AM. Hopefully that show will be better. One can only hope.
Your turn, Fellow Addicts! Was I way too harsh? Or do you agree? Vote in the poll and then sound off in the comments!
(For a quick glance at the other pilots coming out, check out my Fall TV Preview.)
No worries. The ratings were worse than Chase last year. It has no chance against Hawaii Five-0 and Castle. Good luck getting past 6 episodes.
ReplyDelete