The Bingeworthy™ Breakdown is an occasional look at new TV shows. An estimated 500 scripted seasons of TV will air in 2017, and to help you sort the wheat from the chaff, we’re going to give you the lowdown to help you work out whether it’s worth tuning in every week for them or waiting to binge later. Today we look at HBO’s just-debuted new show “The Deuce.”
Time to break down the binge-worthiness of David Simon’s “The Deuce.” You ready?
Ready as I’ll ever be.
It’s about porn in the 70s, correct?
It’s about porn in the 70s the same way “Mad Men” was about men who slice off their own nipples, which is to say: sure, porn is involved, but only barely.
Huh. So if it’s not about porn in the 70s, what is it about?
Prostitution in the 70s.
Gotcha, gotcha. There’s a misleading advertising campaign for you.
No shit.
Please tell me that there are two James Francos; I’ve been promised that there will be two James Francos.
There are, indeed, two James Francos.
Oh, thank the Lord.
Franco plays twin brothers Vince and Frankie. Vince is the responsible, put-together twin whose business acumen endear him to a New York mob boss as the series starts. Frankie is the degenerate gambler twin always getting Vince into trouble.
What else ya got?
Maggie Gyllenhaal plays Eileen, a prostitute who refuses to work with a pimp. In the most recent episode, her pimp-lessness has some dire consequences, but the business model affords Eileen significantly more personal freedom than her pimped colleagues.
We spend a lot of time with the pimps – one of whom is played by Method Man – and they are not, shockingly, good dudes. There’s a reporter named Sandra, who flirts with a cop (Officer Alston, played by Lawrence Gilliard Jr.) so as to gain access to the pimps to mine them for information. She’s writing an expose on the prostitute-pimp relationship.
There’s also Abby (Margarita Levieva), a college drop-out who works for Vince (Vince runs a bar, did I forget to mention that?) My guess is that she ends up in sex work, one way or another.
Lotta characters.
Lotta characters. Very ‘Wire’-esque.
David Simon gonna David Simon.
Wise words.
So why has everything I’ve seen or read about this show indicated that it is about pornography rather than prostitution?
Because the show is moving at a snail-like pace toward taking on a real porn storyline – Eileen in particular is interested in the “movie business.” But as of yet, porn is only focused on tangentially. The vast majority of the episodes aired thus far are focused on two things: prostitutes and pimps, and Vince’s business endeavors.
Tell me about Good Franco’s business endeavors.
So he starts out as a bartender, but the mob offers him the opportunity to run a bar of his own. He’s an innovator, by which I mean he dresses the waitresses in skimpy outfits to draw in more business – a proto-Hooters, if you will.
Brass tacks – worth watching?
Definitely worth watching. It’s a David Simon show with two James Francos.
Is it good?
Tough question to answer. It’s incredibly well put-together; Simon is a bit of a genius.
So what’s the problem?
As well-made as the show is, it somehow completely fails to make any of its characters stand out as especially engaging.
Is Franco good in it?
He is! He totally is. But…
But?
But he’s never not James Franco. No matter what. He’s playing Vince, he’s playing Frankie, but he’s always just James Franco. It’s not to fault his performance, not at all – he’s quite good – but to anchor a show like this, you need a Jon Hamm or a James Gandolfini, or even a Bryan Cranston, someone whose persona is malleable, someone who is obscure enough to fully become the anti-hero at the center of a prestige drama. Franco, sadly, comes with so very much baggage that this is impossible for him to achieve. He’s incredibly fascinating to watch, but the show fails to make Vince or Frankie anything other than slightly better-than-usual James Franco performances.
I see. And the other performances/characters?
The only one to make any sort of impact is Gyllenhaal, who is very good in her portrayal of Eileen’s depressing mess of a life.
Are you saying that this show is bad?
Far from it. It’s not bad. The James Franco thing is not really anyone’s fault (although casting him here was a bad call), and the craft that goes into every episode is astonishing. It’s very good. It’s just missing the most important element of any show along these lines: compelling central characters. Which is, it must be said, a giant problem.
So I’m not going to finish episode four, say, and be like “I’m dying to know what’s going to happen next with Good Franco” like I might have with Don Draper or Walter White?
God no.
It’s still early days, though, right?
True. It could get a lot better any week now. But still, “Mad Men” was great right off the bat. As was “The Sopranos.” It’s not really an excuse.
It still sounds like you’re recommending it, right? Even if it’s not spectacular?
Right. But, and I should have already mentioned this, the episodes are insanely long. It’s a time commitment. Which would be fine, if you got invested in the characters. Which you don’t.
This is a very tepid recommend, is it not?
No. You should absolutely check it out. See if you give a crap about Good Franco. Maybe his moustache will do it for you. And again, it’s meticulously constructed. But be prepared to not care. [B]