Count me as one of the people who rolled their eyes when NBC made the decision to axe the reinvigorated Law & Order right before it made TV history, only to replace it with this West Coast spinoff in the same timeslot. Why, I thought, do you get rid of a show that’s getting its second wind…and then why do you replace it with a version of itself? It seemed a slap in the face to Law & Order fans.
The show didn’t do itself any favors with its unorthodox opening sequence, which threw out the beloved Steve Zirnkilton narration in favor of just putting the show’s logo over a black-and-white map of the Los Angeles area and the beat of some pop music. In fact, it makes the unfortunate choice to bypass an opening sequence altogether, going for the now-commonplace tactic of running credits over the first act. While for some shows this doesn’t matter, Law & Order‘s opening is so iconic that it seems a sin of omission. In fact, series composer Mike Post is gone from this incarnation, despite doing the music for Law & Order, Special Victims Unit, and Criminal Intent. Yet that turns out to be just one of several major changes.
The episode’s plot is, of course, ripped from the headlines – this time lifted from the ‘Hollywood Hills Burglar Bunch‘ robberies from 2009, except this time there are dead bodies, injured parties, and shootings involved. Of course, as with most things regarding the young, rich and famous, it’s not long before people are double-crossing each other and things are a tangled mess. Like the parent series, the plots don’t take a genius to figure out, and “Hollywood” is no exception, which makes the characters all that more crucial to the enjoyment of the series. A fairly routine plot can be lifted up by great characters, but it takes a certain kind of actor to create a fully-drawn character within the constraints of the Law & Order formula, which is notorious for skimping in that department. (I’m reminded of a conversation I had with an acquaintance who starred in the remake of Dragnet – also a Dick Wolf product – where we counted that his character had literally three facts of backstory provided over the entire run.) This, of course, brings me to the new cast, a combination of promising and uncertain.
Investigating the crimes are our two new detectives: Rex Winters (Jericho‘s Skeet Ulrich, trying yet again to show his considerable talents in a show that isn’t axed prematurely) and Tomas “TJ” Jaruszalski (ER‘s Corey Stoll). It’s hard to get a read on who either Winters or TJ really are in the first hour, though Ulrich is as likeable as ever (if anyone can salvage likeability out of what’s already been leaked of Winters’ messy personal life, it’s Ulrich). While they’ll no doubt be compared to the gold standard of Law & Order detectives known as Jerry Orbach, they make a decent showing of themselves and show the possibility of gelling well together later on. They certainly held my interest. Their boss is played well enough by Wanda De Jesus, but it’s hard to care when we already know she’s being replaced by Rachel Ticotin next week.
It’s an interesting change to not have a definitive arrest by the end of the first half of the show; normally on a Law & Order, you can set your watch by the idea that someone will be locked up in thirty minutes. Yet in “Hollywood,” we meet Deputy D.A. Peter Morales (Alfred Molina) and his second chair Evelyn Price (Ally McBeal‘s Regina Hall) while the case is still open. Molina seems out of place so far; Hall is decent enough, but it says something when the most interesting attorney in the episode is the defense attorney played by veteran character actor Michael O’Neill. Molina has only done infrequent work in TV (though he did appear as a defense attorney in the SVU/Trial By Jury crossover episodes), so perhaps he just needs time to settle into the role; alternating episodes with Terrence Howard will no doubt help alleviate the idea that he has to be the driving force in the second half of the show. Viewers of the franchise have been spoiled, however, by the forceful personalities of EADAs played by the likes of Michael Moriarty and Linus Roache on the original series (the latter in particular, who always seemed to do something every episode to capture attention), and they won’t find that same intensity here.
“Hollywood” stacks itself with guest stars in a presumable attempt to draw some power to the premiere, whether it’s Oded Fehr, Desperate Housewives‘ Danielle Panabaker, or Babylon 5‘s Mira Furlan. However, all the guest stars in the world can’t help a show if the regular product isn’t worth the trouble. As it is, the series generally sticks to the formula with the plot, but the actors are still trying to settle into their characters (some more than others), and it shows. There’s just not anything here to get excited about, not yet, anyway. While Ulrich and Stoll show promise as a new detective pair, the attorneys leave something to be desired, and the plot doesn’t even have that question for the viewers to chew on at episode’s end that made even the most rote Law & Order episodes at least worth thinking over.
Interestingly, Law & Order: LA is the first of the brand – even counting Law & Order: Trial by Jury and Conviction – that Dick Wolf isn’t the sole creator of; he’s joined here by Blake Masters (who also created Showtime’s Brotherhood). I’m cautiously optimistic for their series. On one hand, we’ve seen the spinoffs that differ from the brand’s formula (Trial By Jury, Conviction) fail miserably, and Los Angeles definitely deviates from that formula. On the other, the show’s competition is the underperforming The Whole Truth, the oddball The Defenders and the local news, so perhaps the time slot and name recognition will work in the show’s favor. I expect the premiere to draw large numbers out of curiosity alone, but I wonder how many Law & Order purists will stay tuned; there seems to be no middle ground with this franchise. Either a spinoff sticks for a good decade, or it goes down by season’s end. Unfortunately, Los Angeles seems to lean toward the latter thus far.
My chief objection with Law & Order: LA is the same one I had with Nikita: if you’re going to borrow from or be part of an existing property, you have to appreciate that property. At least Nikita is trying to tell a new story and take things in a new direction, for better or for worse; this series wants to stay in the same space but without respecting what that means. Los Angeles didn’t just get rid of the iconic music and title sequence; it also lost the great characters that the original had and the food for thought that the brand’s scripts so often provide. Unless some of that comes back over time, it’s not going to be Law & Order, just another generic cops-and-lawyers show in a world already oversaturated with the genre.
That said, next Wednesday sees Howard’s debut in the DDA role, plus a guest appearance from the always stellar Jay Karnes (of The Shield and Burn Notice fame) as a defense attorney, so I’m willing to give the show one more look. What about you? Are you put off by the changes or embracing the differences? How does this version stack up to the previous incarnations? Let me hear your thoughts.
Follow Us
Whoever had the "brilliant" idea to toss out the opening, which has become an invaluable hook, had better reverse that decision in a hurry. We kept waiting…waiting…and it was a serious disappointment. It sets the tone and makes the show indubitably "Law and Order." Bad, bad move.
I like Terence Howard. I like Alfred Molina (any other Marvel characters waiting in the wings?). So far, no one stands out, but I see Molina becoming a great character, if he warms up to the style of the show. I kept hoping for those strong "love 'em, hate 'em" characters. But, of course, the first few shows of a new series often are not representative of what that show will actually become, so I'll reserve judgement for a while and see what happens.
I WANT to like this show, just because I've been a fan of the franchise since its inception.
Don't let us down, Dick.
And for Pete's sake, bring back the voice, bring back the music. The best variation on Post's theme is the "Criminal Intent" adoption of the "Trial by Jury" version: if you're not going to use it for "CI," carry it over: nobody will object and it will be a bridge to connect us to the predecessors, which is a good idea for this series.
I miss the idea of opening sequences in general, but especially this one. I grew up geeking out on TV themes and enjoying opening credits; now they seem to be done away with. For the most part I just mutter and get over it, but you can't do that with L&O. It's just a major part of what makes the show what it is.
I agree with you that the cast is going to take awhile to settle in and gel. I just hope they do. Admittedly, I think we were spoiled by the great cast the original had in its final years. I think the combination of Merkerson, Sisto, Anderson, Roache, De La Garza and Waterston was one of the best, certainly one of the best the show had in the last few years.
I have been a L&O fan since its inception. I own every season of L&O, L&O:CI., and a few of L&O:SVU. I found the pilot to be disappointing. I sure hope this show grows on me because it was uncomfortably glossy and almost prissy. Nothing like the L&O brand. It reminded me of that "new" Coke product that was launched years ago and then withdrawn because their customer base felt betrayed.
L&O always had a grit about it that was completely missing from this episode. If it doesn't improve, I don't see myself being a fan of this show.
I can't believe they canceled the original L&O. That was not a good move.
It wasn't. It stunned me how quickly the show went from "sure renewal" to "canceled." I've heard from various people that it may have been a financial disagreement between Wolf and NBC, and if that's the case, it's sad that fighting over money got the show tanked when it was on the verge of history. It's an even weirder move to bring in the spinoff the same year and in the same timeslot too. If this show had come on next year, I might be slightly less annoyed about it.
But I wholeheartedly agree with you, this doesn't feel like L&O at all.
I have been a L&O fan forever and still watch every episode. I was sooo disappointed with the new LA franchise. I could not connect with the actors at all. The story line was not bad but I really felt that overall the acting was poor. I hope that it gets better. I probably also am still in mourning over the original L&O NY!!!!!
The actors are hit and miss for me. I'd like to see if they settle into their roles.
Both my husband and I have been addicted to Law & Order, forever! We watch new episodes and reruns, which take precedence over anything else on TV. I was bored with LOLA. I switched channels about halfway through. I don't know if I really don't like the characters/actors/sets….or……maybe I just don't want a show about the craziness that defines LA, with its child-stars, reality shows, and two -minute marriages. I'm an east coast gal, and seeing Law & Order in L.A., just felt ho hum and wrong.
To be fair, all those things you mentioned take place all over the country. I agree with you, though, that LOLA just seems to have no soul. It's a big, glitzy package with nothing much inside.