To my friends who I ramble incessantly to about NUMB3RS, I'm really sorry but you all knew that this had to happen someday.I started watching reruns of NUMB3RS this summer. First, the math angle attracted me and not much else. The show wasn't that stellar to begin with, but it really took a turn for the worse this season (I am saying this as a pretty serious NUMB3RS fan).
There are two good characters on the show: Peter MacNicol (Larry Fleinheart) and Judd Hirsch (Alan Eppes). The creators should also be commended for trying to teach the American public some math, but the actual show itself falls dismally flat.
I can see two real problems with the show. The first is the cramming factor. The second is the mundane screenwriting that borders on the horrendous at times.
NUMB3RS is a crime procedural drama, something that CBS does with its eyes closed (It's one of eleven on the Eye). The problem with NUMB3RS is that it takes a three-pronged approach. The show endeavors to show the world of Don Eppes and his warm-hearted but tough FBI colleagues, Charlie Eppes and his world of academia, and the family angle of the the Eppes brothers and their father Alan. Considering that the cast and crew only have approximately forty-five minutes to work in all three angles, it's not surprising that two out of the three crucial environments are minimized. It's endearing that the creators of the show put such a heavy emphasis on the math, but the other components are sadly suffering as a result. Most other CBS crime procedurals focus only on the agents and the job at hand, which provides continuity to the story and fleshes out the characters themselves. This is certainly not the case for NUMB3RS.
The other major complaint would be the screenwriting. Instead of the sharp dialogue found on NCIS, Without a Trace, and other crime procedurals, charcters on NUMB3RS deliver lines that are completely flat. Lines such as "Yeah" and "What've you got, Charlie" are fine examples of everday speak but not something that anyone would turn on the TV for. The goal should not be to imitate bits and pieces of dialogue thrown around in real life but something that is a bit more clever and elegant. Furthermore, the show relies on too much exposition. It seems that half of the forty-five minutes is taken up by Charlie rambling on about this theory or that. The screenwriters should make more of an effort to weave the information in the plot line rather than breaking it abruptly with mini-lectures. Lectures are available on virtually every university's website.
Going back to the point about cramming in too many characters, too much information, and too much plot, NUMB3RS has eight main and important secondary characters. Don Eppes, Charlie Eppes, Alan Eppes, Amita Ramanujan, Larry Fleinheart, Megan Reeves, David Sinclair, and Colby Granger. If this list seems extremely long, it's because it is. Squeezing in eight characters per episode is difficult. One of the problems I have with the second season is that the character of Don Eppes seems like he's being phased out, although Don is undoubtedly one of the two main characters on the show. He's been relegated to the cookie-cutter middle-management role, asking dumb questions to get the ball rolling, then sitting around and watching as his co-workers and genius brother solves the case. We as the audience never really got to know Don very well. Now he's being passed over for major 'minor' characters. Rob Morrow, who plays Don Eppes, has decent range and above-average acting abilities. He should expand his character instead of asking stupid questions and being about as useful as a piece of furniture. It's a waste of talent.
The second season also has a new look which doesn't enhance the storyline at all. The shots of the FBI office are a deep blue, which brings a somber tone to the story. The camera angles are decent but not above-average. There isn't the crispness that distinguishes NCIS or some of the other shows.
For all of its effort, NUMB3RS is lacking in depth and continuity. The acting is not bad, but the story seems extremely rushed except for the long mathematical expositions, which are painstakingly slow. I like the fact that the creators of the show illustrate concepts pictorally, but there is no need to cram in three or four new concepts per episode. Two would probably be sufficient. Also, cramming in concepts that have no relation to each other is distracting and breaks the flow of the storyline. The cases themselves are not original by any stretch of the imagination. That's fine since the focus is really on the mathematics. If each episode had half as much information and was tighter, the overall effect would be much better.
Although the screenwriting is atrocious, the acting is not bad and could be so much better with better lines and better direction. Rob Morrow is underused, David Krumholtz (Charlie Eppes) acts well, if over the top at times, and Diane Farr (Megan Reeves), Alimi Ballard (David Sinclair), and Dylan Bruno (Colby Granger) are slightly above-average actors. As mentioned before, Judd Hirsch and Peter MacNicol are wonderful actors. NUMB3RS needs to show, not tell.
The show's other saving grace is the camaderie between the Eppes boys and their father. The Charlie/Don scenes are always deeper than any of the other scenes, with an unbelievably real amount of brotherly affection and teasing. These moments seem real and well-done.
Although NUMB3RS sweeps the friday night ratings, there are many improvements that could make the show much more enjoyable. Each episode would be better overall if the number of characters were reduced, or if the show didn't try to accomplish too much at once. It would also be pleasant to have a mostly math-free episode one of these fridays. The writers should seriously decide what direction the show is going and steer it that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment