Even More Hidden Palms Publicity!
It's Hidden Palms premiere day, and the media world is still buzzing about the new CW drama.
Zap2it's got an interview with Kevin Williamson, who promises juicy summertime viewing: "I hope that people sample it and give it a try and stick with it. It's good summer fun. We wrap it up in eight in terms of mystery, but we certainly open up the door to more."
The New York Times weighs in, too, saying "'Hidden Palms' is high soap opera, a kind of 'Masterpiece Theater' of unjustifiable television, which means that there won’t be anything quite so much fun to watch all summer" (you may have to watch an ad to read the article).
As is the Times' nature, the article savors the backdrop as much as the drama: "The mood is severe, but the colors are happy. Mr. Williamson has created a sick world, but one for which you wouldn’t mind having the swatches."
And in still more HP news, Zap2it reports that Amber Heard, who plays pouty Greta, has scored the female lead role in a new movie, "Get Some," about an underground fighting league.
Just a few more hours to go... we can't wait for the premiere!
Comments
No problem, Jul. I definitely see your point, too. And I agree that if we were talking in person, we'd probably all see eye-to-eye much sooner -- tone is hard to read in print.
I enjoyed the discussion, though! Always good to have an online debate that's well-thought-out on all sides.
Posted by: Rebecca | May 31, 2007 3:10 PM
Rebecca, sorry, I was making a general observation, which wasn't directed at you in particular. I didn't mean for it to appear that way.
I hear what you're saying. If I was a parent, the teen in rehab would be at the top of my "issues" list.
Gotta love controversy. Makes discussions interesting. Although, it's easier to get a point across (and tone) when speaking to someone in person.
BTW: Thanks for the details to the scene in question. Much appreciated.
Posted by: jul | May 31, 2007 12:57 PM
LB, no problem. I get what you're saying now. I think we can both agree that animal cruelty, in any form, is awful! I'm not giving up on the show yet, though (hopefully that'll be the last animal kicking we see!).
Posted by: Rebecca | May 31, 2007 12:09 PM
Rebecca,I just feel that anytime something like animal cruelty is put on the screen for public view,it can put a message in the mind of someone who may be potentially unstable, hence my statement,"promoting cruelty".I did not mean that someone got on and said,"hey, it's cool to abuse animals", but someone might SEE it as that. The suicide was TRAGIC,don't get me wrong, and I cannot ever imagine dealing with something that sad.I did not mean that nothing else in the show was sad.Sorry if I gave you the wrong idea.
Posted by: LB | May 31, 2007 11:48 AM
Hey, jul,
I happen to love animals, too. I never said that I feel superior to them or that they're emotionally void. I'm sorry you inferred that from my post.
But in the episode, the pug kick was only implied -- it was SHOWN OFFSCREEN. There's no way it was hurt. You see Cliff petting the pug. Then the camera cuts to his face and we hear the kick... and then you see the pug running away.
And like I said, it was there to make us hate the character, because kicking animals is pretty much universally agreed to be wrong! It's not like Rory Gilmore was out kicking animals and we're supposed to cheer. I don't think anyone is going to go punt some pugs after watching this.
I wasn't trying to say animals aren't worthy of our compassion -- just that of all the scandalous and hateful things that happened in the episode, an offscreen pug kick was one of the least offensive to me. If the pug was indeed harmed, I'd be as angry as you guys are. But I don't see how any producer with half a brain (or a heart) would harm a pug for an offscreen kick. Hope this makes my case clearer.
Posted by: Rebecca | May 31, 2007 11:23 AM
Rebecca: Some people have a greater compassion for animals than others. LB is not alone.
There are people in this world who think humans are soooo superior that animals are emotionally void, a lesser life form and don't care how animals are treated in this world.
Others believe and feel otherwise. Some like myself refrain from eating meat including fish and shop for animal friendly products.
I have not watched the pilot yet because it was preempted in Chicago for a Cubs game.
I will tune into the pilot, but if it appears that the dog was actually hurt during the filming I will never watch this program again.
Posted by: jul | May 31, 2007 10:10 AM
Hey, LB... um, the animal cruelty incident was meant to show that Cliff is an evil guy. I don't think the show was promoting animal cruelty -- the point is that we're supposed to hate anyone that kicks cute, innocent animals! And I have to say... THAT's what turned you off? Not the teen in rehab, the suicide in front of his face, the apparently psychopathic neighbor... but the kicking of a small dog? I'm endlessly fascinated by what offends people.
Posted by: Rebecca | May 31, 2007 9:51 AM
I want to say that I was really liking the show up until the animal cruelty incident. That was really a disappointment.I just don't see the reasoning for this and you have definitely lost me as a viewer.How lame to promote that in a world that is already too violent.
See ya.
Posted by: LB | May 31, 2007 9:39 AM
THIS SUCKS BIG TIME!
Teeny crap all the way.
The CW will never grow as a network with this kind of lame shows.
You have already some good intelligent shows with a solid fanbase.
All the new shows suck.
Posted by: Willy Wonka | May 30, 2007 6:21 PM