![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
How to Get Away with Murder, ABC
Sep. 26th, 2014 08:22 amI find I don't have that much to say about How to Get Away with Murder, the new vehicle kinda from Shonda Rhimes - she's not writing this one, just producing it, a distinction that a certain reviewer over at the New York Times completely missed. This is perhaps the only mistake in that now-infamous review that is marginally forgiveable, since How to Get Away with Murder does have quite a few traits I associate with Scandal: sharp edits! shocking twists! Lots of sex! (Because of course getting away with murder requires random sex. Did you think it wouldn't?) Betrayal! More sex! Wine! Revealing moments in bathrooms! And, of course, covering up for people who do really really bad things.
And yes, some of the setup is identical to Scandal: Viola Davis plays Professor Keating, who when not terrorizing law students defends murderers. She's also the leader of a group of employees/followers/sycophants, at least one of whom wants to be just like her (shades of Original Quinn back on Scandal), and one of whom seems to have actual - gasp - ethics. (He kinda stands out in the group.) The main plot goes more or less the way it did in Scandal's first two seasons (the pattern that show, thankfully, appears to be returning to): client has problem, said group runs around trying to solve problem, while BETRAYALS and SEX litter the background. The one major difference: How to Get Away with Murder also intersperses this with fairly lengthy flashbacks, something Scandal has generally used sparsely, and only to explain current things: How to Get Away with Murder, more or less borrowing from Revenge, uses these flashbacks to increase the mystery/tension and leave viewers wanting an explanation.
The chief difference, and one that apparently missed The New York Times completely, is that Olivia Pope at least believes she has ethics and believes that she is doing the right thing. She's wrong, of course, and Scandal doesn't flinch from that,* but she is astonishingly good at self-deception here, partly because she's surrounded by a bunch of unethical sociopaths.
The portrayal of Professor Keating is far more ambiguous. It's not at all clear that Keating has any ethics whatsoever, although one scene suggests that she's at least aware of that lack, and another small scene does suggest that she strongly believes that all of her students have the right to learn things. Olivia Pope ives and works in a world of massive deception. Professor Keating - so far, at least - appears to be trying to create a second one.
Anyway, two things became apparent: one, this will probably be another hit, and two, it's going to be another one of those shows that works best either through livetweeting and gasping along with other viewers, or marathoning later. I think I'm going to choose the second option: I am kinda curious to see just how unethical this show can get.
* Although an actually ethical person would have shot Fitz by now and them stomped all over him while he was dying**, Olivia, TAKE NOTE.
**Scandal is going to end with Olivia and Mellie teaming up to kill him, right? Right? REASSURE ME, everyone!
And yes, some of the setup is identical to Scandal: Viola Davis plays Professor Keating, who when not terrorizing law students defends murderers. She's also the leader of a group of employees/followers/sycophants, at least one of whom wants to be just like her (shades of Original Quinn back on Scandal), and one of whom seems to have actual - gasp - ethics. (He kinda stands out in the group.) The main plot goes more or less the way it did in Scandal's first two seasons (the pattern that show, thankfully, appears to be returning to): client has problem, said group runs around trying to solve problem, while BETRAYALS and SEX litter the background. The one major difference: How to Get Away with Murder also intersperses this with fairly lengthy flashbacks, something Scandal has generally used sparsely, and only to explain current things: How to Get Away with Murder, more or less borrowing from Revenge, uses these flashbacks to increase the mystery/tension and leave viewers wanting an explanation.
The chief difference, and one that apparently missed The New York Times completely, is that Olivia Pope at least believes she has ethics and believes that she is doing the right thing. She's wrong, of course, and Scandal doesn't flinch from that,* but she is astonishingly good at self-deception here, partly because she's surrounded by a bunch of unethical sociopaths.
The portrayal of Professor Keating is far more ambiguous. It's not at all clear that Keating has any ethics whatsoever, although one scene suggests that she's at least aware of that lack, and another small scene does suggest that she strongly believes that all of her students have the right to learn things. Olivia Pope ives and works in a world of massive deception. Professor Keating - so far, at least - appears to be trying to create a second one.
Anyway, two things became apparent: one, this will probably be another hit, and two, it's going to be another one of those shows that works best either through livetweeting and gasping along with other viewers, or marathoning later. I think I'm going to choose the second option: I am kinda curious to see just how unethical this show can get.
* Although an actually ethical person would have shot Fitz by now and them stomped all over him while he was dying**, Olivia, TAKE NOTE.
**Scandal is going to end with Olivia and Mellie teaming up to kill him, right? Right? REASSURE ME, everyone!
