This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Let's be bad guys."
11972 members | you are not logged in | 24 November 2020


June 12 2005

New Yorker Reviews "The Inside". Nancy Franklin, the television critic, unfavorably reviews The Inside.

Re-appearing to say:

I really enjoyed the show, much more than I've enjoyed any other "crime show", and much more than I've enjoyed many pilot episodes.

In regards to the mixed reviews - I think The Inside may be victim to the fact that, while it seems to be different from most crime shows (more character, less forensic science, etc.), it's still that: A crime show. For those of us who aren't, well, us, it looks like another show featuring a couple of investigators who spend their free time coming up with snappy, "look, I found another dead body" one-liners, while working in a building that, judging by its lighting, hasn't paid the electric bill in a while. Again, I know The Inside is not That Show. But after watching it, I feared that the casual viewer would be left thinking, "Nice, but...why bother?" While I trust that they dropped it for good reason (or against their will), I can't help but think people would be seeing the show in a different light if they'd held onto the original "undercover high school" concept.

[ edited by VampiresSuckLOLOLGetIt on 2005-06-12 18:47 ]
At least the reviewer spent most of the article on Tim's show. More creative titles couldn't have hurt either show. "The Inside" and "The Closer" are about as bland and drab as titles can get. Even dropping the "the" to make "Inside" the title works better, although if one did that with the other show you'd wind up with a Mike Nichols movie.
I'm sorry to say it, but "The Inside" = Bleh, to me. It was not very good and I wasn't very impressed. I do like crime shows, but something seemed off to me. Hopefully I'll like DB new show Bones better,
It's one of TV Guides Hits on the Hit or Miss page for this week. They gave it a 7.
I very much enjoyed The Inside, but 'to each one's own', I suppose.
I don't get why these reviewers have a problem with the main character getting into trouble and having to be rescued in the first three episodes, after all she has had little or no field experience in the position she is in. Maybe she will become the super-chick that they expect her to be in the fourth episode. Sheesh!

I know that Tim and his team of writers, directors and actors are going to turn this show in to a great show, but it might take them longer than three episodes, after all I don't think Angel hit it's mark until the end of season 1 and as long as they don't give the main character a baby to look after I think they will be okay.
I missed it - well, I taped it but we had a rain storm and when the rain is heavy my satellite dish goes out so I had an hours worth of a black screen. Any chance they'll be showing the first episode again before they show #2? And do I need to see the first episode to understand what's going on in the second?

If I do need to know what happened in the first episode is there a good summary written up somewhere?

[ edited by Firefly Flanatic on 2005-06-13 07:02 ]
There's a good summary at the official site for The Inside -

It would probably help to read it so you know about the relationship of the three main characters.
Good review here, and the New York Times says nice things here.

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home