“Weeds,” a mixed bag
I always been on the fence with Weeds, Showtime’s best bet at grabbing some of HBO’s audience (and when you’re talking about a hot suburban mom selling pot, it’s possible to do that). It’s a funny show, but it never seemed it was ever funny enough. It also is suppose to be a biting satire on life in suburbia. In that regard the show is about as subtle as a .45 to the back of the head, but perhaps more importantly… so what? I feel like the whole “there’s trouble a-brewin’ in them there gated communities” angle is a bit played out. Maybe not even “played out” but wrong. As a product of the suburbs (and as one who secretly, deep down, kind of loves it), I think what really bothers me about those shows or movies that claim to poke holes in the lifestyle is that none of them seem to be asking the right questions. What’s interesting and funny about suburbia isn’t the fact that everything looks the same or that families are dysfunctional, but instead how things came to be that way and why people accept it and embrace it.
There’s also a weird give and take between the white characters on the show and the black characters on the show. Being Whity McSuburbia-lover, I can never tell if the series is being clever or vaguely racist. Maybe a little of both, in which case they might cancel each other out. Either way, Conrad and his family are arguably the best written characters in the series.
Last night’s episode, however, was mostly great (a rating that seems to be directly proportional to how funny the episode is). Now that the plot is moving and all the characters are established from the first season the show is able to sit back a little and let the situations drive the humor. I laughed out loud at least three times.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:08 pm
First of all, i love you and your blog. Second of all, I love myself a little hot suburban pot selling mom. I am basically full of love.
August 26th, 2006 at 11:42 pm
I just finished watching Season One on DVD. I think it’s a great point that there are some racist undertones when it comes to Nancy’s interactions with the black characters. However, I think maybe the writers consciously place them there… they are a “comment” on the unequal distribution of the benefits and consequences of the drug culture in the U.S., perhaps? Now, whether race-based undertones in a television show should be excused simply because they are placed there “on purpose” is a whole other question (see, for example, the next season of Survivor). Anyway, the best part about this show (other than the opening credit and theme song) is Mary Louise Parker and her 1,001 facial expressions. I never get tired of Weeds when she’s on the screen— and she’s on the screen a lot. So, it’s a soft “thumb’s up” for me. ‘Still not quite worth a Showtime subscription, though. (Also, watching this show reminds me that Bradley Whitford’s character in The West Wing SOO should have ended up with Mary Louise Parker’s character. The Josh/Donna match-up was allll wrong.)