Been watching Brotherhood, a recent Showtime series about two, well, brothers. Tommy Caffee is a local politician while Michael Caffee is a criminal. Think no further than the obvious: West Wing meets Sopranos.
Here's what's written on the DVD cover:
"Welcome to "The Hill," an Irish working-class neighbourhood of Providence, Rhode Island - where mothers choose their favourites, wives keep secrets, and friends are won and loss by the deals they make. Tommy Caffee pursues his ambitions in politics, while his brother Michael seeks power the only way he knows - within the gritty underworld of violence and crime."
You love it already, right. Who said blurb is stupid? Well, a friend of mine back in WA, actually, who summed up a local cretin thus: "He's so stupid he believes what's written on video boxes."
Anyhoo, Brotherhood is pretty reasonable viewing despite the odd fault. It's neither as moody as The Sopranos nor as politically supercharged as West Wing. Which isn't, of itself, a bad thing. Jason Clarke is reasonable as Tommy and at his best wheeling and dealing among a well cast group of political hacks, flacks and heavy hitters. Still, his acting doesn't exactly threaten the scenery; he could do with a directorial kick up the arse. Sorry - ass. Nor is his wife, Eileen (Annabeth Gish), a scene pilferer. Sure, she's got drug addictions, roots around, and is basically a fuck up, but there are lots of those in TV land. I don't buy her performance, there's something NQR. Tommy's mum, Mary Rose (Fionnula Flanagan), is a nag, a belligerent union rep until she gets the sack and the firebrand most Irish movie mums are supposed to be, but she keeps reminding me of the old lady in Outlaw Josey Wales. It's brother Michael (Jason Isaacs) who does the best work; and to a lesser extent, his offsider Pete (Stivi Paskoski). Mike is an extremely nasty piece of work - or wark, should you feel the need to slip into American brogue - willing to shake down everyone from a woman who runs a bottle shop by threatening her slow-learner son, to a gang of Armenian drug gangsters. If American TV and movies have taught us anything lately, it's that you don't fuck with eastern Europeans. Micheal's antics, though, lead to a not insignificant quibble: it doesn't seem credible Tommy is able to strut his political stuff while Michael terrorises Providence. Or maybe all Rhode Island politicians have a violent gangster in the family.
Nevertheless, you could do worse than kill a few hours watching Brotherhood.
It even contains one of the classics: the there/not there. Somehow this gimmick has escaped horror and super soldier movies and has snuck into shows about "ordinary" people. Dunno why. I mean, when's the last time you walked down the street, spotted a person, looked away, looked back at the person was gone? I don't think I've ever had that happen to me, but in show after show, there it is, and isn't.
'Dunno why. I mean, when's the last time you walked down the street, spotted a person, looked away, looked back at the person was gone?'
Only if they owe me money...
Posted by: nick | 11 October 2007 at 22:33
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,22572540-12428,00.html
The people in the crowd in this story will be gone as of tomorrow. Gone from the public eye that is. Just pop this story and the reaction to it in your memory banks...and go back to it when the chucker lands later this year.
Posted by: nick | 12 October 2007 at 02:22
I saw that, Nick. Responsive comment pieces can only be a print-run away.
"As an orange sun set over dusty, noisy Vadodora, the ugly spectre of racism returned to cricket when Andrew Symonds allowed himself to be taunted by the charming local fans."
Posted by: Tony T. | 12 October 2007 at 10:14
Update! Michael's criminality and Tommy's political situation come together late in the series; especially in a pretty damn reasonable last episode featuring a long wedding sequence.
Posted by: Tony T. | 15 October 2007 at 17:53
This probably needs a new category, and maybe Aftergrogblog could set it up as such.
Did anyone else watch the new ABC-TV show The Librarians last night?
I gather it is some form of free-styling comedy as there appeared to be no script. I have vented my feelings elsewhere, and was pleased to see I was not the only person with thoughts such as "unadulterated crap" -- but tell me, a-g-bloggers, have I got it completely wrong?
Posted by: Professor Rosseforp | 01 November 2007 at 20:36
Didn't see it, Prof, but I'll make sure I avoid it in future. Or at least, if I do manage to stumble across it, I'll bear this in mind.
Posted by: Tony T. | 02 November 2007 at 11:35