Clichés in Korean Dramas

Today is my rant day.  And today's victim is Korean dramas. So...

Must someone always throw themselves into a river to escape capture in every action/historical drama? And must royal babies always disappear only to reappear 20 years later?

Must the heel of a girl's shoe always break off at an important function in every modern romance?

Must each episode of a court drama act like a murder mystery?

Must a divorce couple always reconcile?

Must every ajumma with an adulterous husband become some kind of celebrity? (In My Rosy Life, the ajumma dies from cancer, which is just the other side of the coin since death by cancer turns an ajumma into a saint.)

Must Ryu Tae-Jun lose the girl every time? (He's totally hot. How can he lose the girl even once? OK. In Hwang Jin Yi he was a little evil, but...he's hot...and in period costume!)

Must Dong Chul get beaten up at the end of every episode of East of Eden? By episode 25, the guy should be suffering from some degenerative brain disease from all that trauma.

Must implausible coincidences always drive the plot?

Why are we always at the airport at the beginning of every last episode of a modern-day series?

And what's with the endings on these dramas? How come they suck so much? The only decent ending I can think of was in Couple or Trouble. Stars Falling From the Skies, too. Now that was a cute drama with a great beginning, middle and end. Of course there was that coincidence thing...

Masterpiece Theatre

Let me just begin by saying I grew up on Masterpiece Theatre. Some Americans think I speak with a slight British accent, and if I do, it might possibly be because I watched so much Masterpiece Theatre. And I still watch Masterpiece Theatre, but I really don't understand what's going on behind the scenes. I mean, it's not even called Masterpiece Theatre anymore. Instead it's either Masterpiece Classic or Masterpiece Contemporary or Masterpiece Mystery or some such nonsense, depending on what kind of show they're airing.  And while they still do intros, they now have actors delivering information in the most snarky voice possible. What's with that? Do the producers think snarky means hip?  More intelligent? More in keeping with British television? More modern? Or do they secretly despise the very shows they're airing? Personally, I just don't find contempt a very nice prelude to a show like Downton Abbey.

Look At Flower In Fog

Lately I've been watching Look At Flower In Fog on ICN. A Chinese drama, it takes place in modern China and it's all about the antique business.  That alone is fascinating, the drama going into depth about all the fakery and fraud that goes on, like taking ancient jade and machine cutting it into a "rare" object or using laborious ancient techniques to manufacture exquisite pottery that are as good as the ones from famous eras.  The plot itself is just as complex, no one knowing who's really who, who's conspiring with whom.  But what really keeps me coming back is the excellence of the script, the directing and the acting.  Every scene is filled with tension, even a simple breakfast scene where a father warns a daughter to eat slower.  There was this one amazing scene:  a man and a woman, co-workers, arguing in a corridor; she's in love with him; he's in trouble (a client has complained that he's conned her); the woman, in a fit of anger, declares that the client is a whore and she's going to slug her; for a moment, absolute silence as each absorbs the outburst; then the man smiles and says, "That's so nice of you." Absolutely wonderful.

Pioneers of Television

I just spent the nicest hour watching Pioneers of Television. The episode was about the birth of science fiction, interviewing past stars of Star Trek, Lost in Space, etc. and you got to find out what fascinating people Gene Roddenberry and Irwin Allen were. But what was really a surprise was the attitude of the show, relaxed, good-spirited, fun. There wasn't anything snarky or muckraking, no "so and so were doing drugs" and "so and so were sleeping together". Nothing juvenile. I felt a little like I'd gone back in time, watching a tribute show from the 70s.

Unisex Bud Light

So I'm watching this commercial and I'm thinking "typical sexist ad geared towards stupid guys" when my brain does a spin because the final punch line is for the gals. Now everyone knows how impossible it is to market to both guys and girls so I have to hand it to the Bud Light team for doing it so brilliantly. (Not that I'm switching to Bud Light or anything...)

Sherlock

This network TV season has been so dismal, I'm flabbergasted. I'm talking about the new shows. There's almost nothing (Raising Hope is cute). Is there some kind of virus going around Hollywood that's exhausted all creativity? Even the new J.J. Abrams show Undercovers is like a lame rip-off of a J.J. Abrams show. What's going on? I was in complete despair until I accidentally tumbled upon Sherlock. Reading the promo, I didn't have high hopes, let me tell you. I mean, another retelling of the Sherlock Holmes tale? Come on!  So imagine my shock when I'm finding myself having some serious fun.

Sherlock is not from Hollywood.  It's a co-production of BBC Wales and WGBH for PBS's Masterpiece Mystery. The co-creators are two writers from the Russell T. Davies re-imagined Doctor Who series. And it's a little Doctor Who, a little graphic novel, a little Arthur Conan Doyle. At this point, I dread telling you the premise because it might turn you off:  Sherlock is now a modern guy with a nicotine addiction instead of heroin and he's a sociopath; Watson is an ex-army doctor who saw action in Afghanistan. Now here's the fun stuff:  smart dialog, rapid-fire delivery, great chemistry between Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock) and Martin Freeman (Watson), a charming Rupert Graves as a hopeless detective, and a wonderfully batty Mrs. Hudson (Una Stubbs) who keeps singing, "Just this once, dear — I'm not your housekeeper!"

But see for yourself:

A Tale Of Two TV Shows

The Defenders vs Hawaii Five-O (2010).

Both shows are mostly about guys doing guy things. Both shows try to be funny. Both shows have convoluted action. Both shows are boring. I keep thinking both shows should be good.

The Defenders have great leads who have real chemistry together. But everything else is so boring.

Hawaii Five-O doesn't even have that. The two male leads have zero chemistry. And it's not like they're not trying. God, they're trying. Make them stop trying. The two supporting characters are great though. Played by Daniel Day Kim and Grace Park, they make me miss Lost and Battlestar Galactica.