|
Great debate we've got going here! Keep it up!
Okay, I get that Everwood is a drama, not a comedy (Der Bingle impressions aside), so either wanting or expecting a major story line to be left drama-free is a tad unrealistic. I have no problem with that. Where I'm having a problem, lately especially, is with the dramatic choices being made and how they are being presented.
I confess to being overly-sensitive to drama relating to the E/A relationship for two reasons:
1) We've been asked to wait for a long time while rooting for these two, officially designated as "fated to be more than friends", to make it to that status. And we did wait. And, finally, we were rewarded, as were E/A. The inevitability of them being together was an accepted part of the first two seasons. And the development of their relationship was certainly not without drama! But they made it! They, and us viewers, deserve a longer time to enjoy them having gotten to this level.
2) This relationship has been crafted so carefully, with such attention to detail and such care taken to make it believable and real, that I don't consider it anything like the average teen relationship shown on TV. It transcends that status. So, the "TV rules" that make it compulsary for any young couple to experience weekly break-up threats for dramatic effect simply shouldn't apply here. It perpetuates the message that all young relationships are wrong and must be constantly threatened (especially if they dare to have SEX!).
The above said, I concede the need for a healthy amount of drama in each show, but:
1) Who says that drama has to constantly involve threatening this relationship? Why can't it be concentrated in the other characters' story lines, just for awhile? Wouldn't the dramatic affect of the ticking time bombs we know are out there be heightened if the relationship was allowed to develop more first? And if I were to concede that going several episodes further without any E/A breakup threats tossed at them (and us) would make the show boring, and I do not do so, how about investigating other types of drama for them, like; illness, an accident, one of them getting lost in the woods, Ephram's hair dilemma (hee hee), dealing with a family crisis, etc.? Things that would allow them to demonstrate their support for each other, instead of representing these constant threats to their being together.
2) The most effective dramatic moments are those which seem the most genuine (and least contrived), in that they portray the principals acting in ways true to their established characters. (In fact, you could apply that to the funny, warm, tender, and happy moments also). My main objections to Monday night's traumas is that this did not happen. Neither Ephram, Bright, Andy, or even Harold (Mr. Holliday?), acted in a manner consistent with what we have long-accepted, and expected, from their characters. The Amy and Amy/Hannah moments came off as genuinely moving because they involved emotions and behavior we could easily expect from those two. Ephram's Christmas shopping scene with Delia; the same. Andy's heartfelt talk with Ephram about the difference between thinking and doing; same thing. Each of those characters has a solid history of behavior which made those moments seem completely appropriate.
However, the way Ephram acted toward Amy; I don't think so. Bright's advice; no thanks. Andy a prick; nope. All of these elements smacked of the LEAST effective form of drama; the type that is so contrived (and stale) that it required the behavior manipulation of everyone involved to "work". This is lazy writing, or else it's writing from a staff of writers who are either fresh out of viable ideas, or who have lost touch with what has made the show great.
Good drama: fine. This type of drama: bleah!
|