|
Over the past week, I watched the first season of the British dramody with my spouse. There were several aspects of the show I especially appreciated:
1) British actors are not as beautiful as American actors. (And I use "actor" as a gender-neutral term.) The performers weren't ugly, but they looked a little strange at first. Yet like all real-life relationships, the characters grew more and more attractive in their own ways as the story progressed.
Sadly, I think that in America we confuse beauty with talent. For instance, though I don't disputing Charlize Theron's abilities, I was so tired of hearing about her uglifying program for MONSTER several years ago. I have a hunch that if a more normal-looking woman were to have played that part just as well, there may not have been such media hoo-ha about the film or actor.
2) British writers avoid characturization of the characters. Think of FRIENDS: you've got the "smart" guy, the guy who tries to be funny, the failing actor, the anal retentive sister, the ex-hippie, and the romantically confused blond. Hm. Great. If only my friends were as interesting.
But in COLD FEET, the characters are complex (like we are in real life.) Yes, David is an ass...at first...and Adam can't commit...sort of...and Jenny loves Pete (really?) I suppose someone could argue with me about this and say that FRIENDS is deep and thoughtful. But why, then did Joey never end his girl-on-girl action obsession?
People change and they don't change. I know. That's my mantra. But certainly, no person is as flat as the characters on most American sitcoms. We need reality (not uber-edited "reality shows") but truth told by stories that capture the complexity of human nature, cold feet and all.
|