Skip to main content

Talk Back: ABC's "Life on Mars" Series Premiere

How many of you tuned in to watch the launch of ABC's Life on Mars last night?

Likely by now you've already read my original review of the pilot episode (back when David E. Kelley was the showrunner) from back in May as well as my review of the reshot pilot (under the direction of executive producers/showrunners Josh Appelbaum, Andre Nemec, and Scott Rosenberg) but now you've had a chance to watch the premiere episode, with Jason O'Mara (Men in Trees) filling in for the original's John Simm as Detective Sam Tyler, who finds himself inexplicably stuck in 1973.

Is he in a coma? Has he traveled through time? Or is something else altogether going on here? It looks like the producers aren't revealing though they do say that Sam isn't necessarily in a coma, which was a given fact of the original BBC series.

But I am curious to see what everyone thought of Life on Mars' premiere episode ("Out Here in the Fields"), both those of you who are fans of the original and newbies coming to ABC's version without any preconceived notions. Did you like O'Mara as Sam Tyler? Were you totally engrossed by Lisa Bonet? Are you in awe of Harvey Keitel? Or do you think Philip Glenister does Gene Hunt better?

Talk back here.


Anonymous said…
If you haven't seen the original, this is a decent show. Good cast. Interesting premise. But for those of us who have seen (and loved) the original, the US version really can't compare...especially if they end up following the same storylines beat for beat. They'd have to take it in a new, original direction for me to really be interested.
R.A. Porter said…
I turned it off at teaser-out. The gratuitous shot of the WTC, intended to shock the audience, just nauseated me. I stopped my Tivo.

Had they held back, shown us Sam's struggle to make sense of his situation and his anxiety about getting back to save Maya, and then dropped the image of the towers as the act 4-out (as it was ABC, I'm assuming a five act structure) I'd have been okay. They would have earned it.

They earned nothing from me after the teaser.

Here are my fuller thoughts.
Anonymous said…
I have to say that I agree with R.A. Porter. The shot of the World Trade Center was completely gratuitous and not at all earned. It frankly made me sick to my stomach to see that and was completely unnecessary to the story to have Sam see the towers like that. I won't be watching again and ABC should be ashamed of themselves for showing that.
Anonymous said…
There's a point to bringing BBC greats to America, and it has to do with American TV frequently being gratuitous, crass, poorly acted, poorly written, in your face and as subtle as a skunk. Why quit now? ABC's Life on Mars is but a campy spoof of the original.

Give it a pass and go watch a REAL talented actor play Sam on BBC America. It looks like ABC saw a show with Chemistry in Life on Mars, but had no idea what really made it great. Consequently, their remake left ME and my husband both completely flat. There was no reason to remake this when they are copying the dialogue line for line with MUCH lessor actors.

Shame on you ABC.
Anonymous said…
I love the original Brit series, and the American version didn't do it for me at all. Jason O'Mara lacks the intensity needed for Sam Tyler in my opinion. Keitel is too old and makes for a mild Gene Hunt, which is probably in part due to American censors. Gretchen Mol was entirely unsympathetic and uninteresting. Also, I have no doubt in my mind that the show is going to be stretched to its thinnest limits by ABC, and they'll eventually lose what little steam they do have in exchange for more money. This, like, other American shows will lose its point and go into an unnecessary number of seasons if it gets the ratings it needs, so by the time they do end it, no one will care anymore.

The World Trade Center thing didn't bother me because of its shock value. What did bother me is the fact that I'm pretty sure they hadn't completed construction on it in 1973. Um...WTF?
Anonymous said…
@Emleigh. If you bothered to do a quick Wikipedia search you'd see that the ribbon cutting ceremony was held on April 4, 1973 so you're wrong! I liked the episode but I've never seen the British one.
Anonymous said…
@Ari. Fair enough that I'm wrong. I brought it up as a secondary issue and preceded it with "I thought" because I did only get my info from someone who was living there at the time of construction. If I had researched it before I decided to post a comment, which I should have, I'd have probably found something more reliable than Wiki to support my facts. Otherwise, again, fair enough.
Anonymous said…
This was much better than the pre-air screener which was dull and flat. I think moving the show to NYC and replacing most of the cast was the right decision. I wasn't too impressed with Jason O'Mara the first time around but with a better cast he's a better actor.
For the record, I've seen and adore the original BBC version.
Anonymous said…
"It looks like the producers aren't revealing though they do say that Sam isn't necessarily in a coma, which was a given fact of the original BBC series."

The producers may say that, but this only provides further proof that they didn't really understand their source material.

And while I see what they were trying to do, making the beginning more like an episode of CSI or something, identical twins? Really?

A very different feel to the BBC version, which was to be expected, but that feel had been what dragged me in to the original. I'd recommend the original to anyone, as it appeals on so many levels; I think I'd only recommend this version to people who were really in to CSI.
TxGowan said…
It left me unimpressed. I wasn't bothered by the shot of the Towers. The whole show just seemed kind of flat to me. I like Gretchen Mol and I have liked Jason Mara in other roles, but Harvey Keitel just felt out of place.

I'll give the show a shot, though. Maybe like other adaptations that have worked, it'll just take a few episodes to find its legs.
Anonymous said…
I live in NYC and had no problem with the WTC shot. I thought it was good use of them actually. What would be the most shocking thing to see as a NYer post 9/11? Tats up there on my list. I dont get why people have a problem with it.
I have never seen the BBC version, but I did some marketing on the ABC series and really stand behind it. i think the show is great and the cast is outstanding!
R.A. Porter said…
@leah, I can't speak for anyone else, but if you'd read my comment closely, you'd have seen my problem was that the producers used the shot of the WTC as a cheap shortcut to generate emotion.

Had they had even the ounce of skill the guys producing Knight Rider have, they'd have earned the right by pushing Sam around for the first four acts and then had a powerful act-out for 4. But they made the laziest possible choice instead.

Popular posts from this blog

Have a Burning Question for Team Darlton, Matthew Fox, Evangeline Lilly, or Michael Emerson?

Lost fans: you don't have to make your way to the island via Ajira Airways in order to ask a question of the creative team or the series' stars. Televisionary is taking questions from fans to put to Lost 's executive producers/showrunners Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse and stars Matthew Fox ("Jack Shephard"), Evangeline Lilly ("Kate Austen"), and Michael Emerson ("Benjamin Linus") for a series of on-camera interviews taking place this weekend. If you have a specific question for any of the above producers or actors from Lost , please leave it in the comments section below . I'll be accepting questions until midnight PT tonight and, while I can't promise I'll be able to ask any specific inquiry due to the brevity of these on-camera interviews, I am looking for some insightful and thought-provoking questions to add to the mix. So who knows: your burning question might get asked after all.

What's Done is Done: The Eternal Struggle Between Good and Evil on the Season Finale of "Lost"

Every story begins with thread. It's up to the storyteller to determine just how much they need to parcel out, what pattern they're making, and when to cut it short and tie it off. With last night's penultimate season finale of Lost ("The Incident, Parts One and Two"), written by Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse, we began to see the pattern that Lindelof and Cuse have been designing towards the last five seasons of this serpentine series. And it was only fitting that the two-hour finale, which pushes us on the road to the final season of Lost , should begin with thread, a loom, and a tapestry. Would Jack follow through on his plan to detonate the island and therefore reset their lives aboard Oceanic Flight 815 ? Why did Locke want to kill Jacob? What caused The Incident? What was in the box and just what lies in the shadow of the statue? We got the answers to these in a two-hour season finale that didn't quite pack the same emotional wallop of previous season

Pilot Inspektor: CBS' "Smith"

I may just have to change my original "What I'll Be Watching This Fall" post, as I sat down and finally watched CBS' new crime drama Smith this weekend. (What? It's taken me a long time to make my way through the stack of pilot DVDs.) While it's on following Gilmore Girls and Veronica Mars on Tuesday nights (10 pm ET/PT, to be exact), I'm going to be sure to leave enough room on my TiVo to make sure that I catch this compelling, amoral drama. While one can't help but be impressed by what might just be the most marquee-friendly cast in primetime--Ray Liotta, Virginia Madsen, Jonny Lee Miller, Amy Smart, Simon Baker, and Franky G all star and Shohreh Aghdashloo has a recurring role--the pilot's premise alone earned major points in my book: it's a crime drama from the point of view of the criminals, who engage in high-stakes heists. But don't be alarmed; it's nothing like NBC's short-lived Heist . Instead, think of it as The Italian