WHITE COLLAR on the USA Network (1 Viewer)

[Adam Lenhardt]

Since Zack Gibbs asked for it, a thread for USA Network's new sleuth dramedy "White Collar". I liked the pilot alright, but I'm not sure the "Monk" lead-in will be enough to keep me into the show. We all love Tiffani Thiessen from "Saved by the Bell" or "Beverly Hills: 90210", but her range is limited and her character is worse than useless. Alexandra Daddario is more compelling as Kate in security cam footage and a couple photographs, and the character holds a lot more promise. Tim DeKay gives a hero's effort trying to transform his straight-laced FBI protagonist into someone interesting. Matthew Bomer is the only one whose role has any meat, and he does a compelling job with it. I have to wonder what Willie Garson's character gets out of doing Bomer's grunt work for him.

 

[Zack Gibbs]

I liked it more than I thought I would. I hope White Collar man still shows up on Chuck if they want him to.

I didn't much care for a couple of early events. Bryce's (lets call him that for now) knowledge of the Canadian currency wasn't plausible at all for a 4 year convict. Even worse was his falling into a life of luxury at the thrift shop. I presume they were tying to set up his resourcefulness and skill-sets here, but they came off more like magic to me. The rest of the episode fared much better though.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

White Collar was pretty good - the two leads work well off one another.

Great to see actors from my 2 of my favourite shows - Chuck and Carnivale working together. Bomer has the more engaging role, and easier one to play too, but I found DeKay easily comported himself as well.

 

[Walter C]

I just saw the Pilot, and it looks like another fun series. Another winner for USA, which is on fire with hit shows.

 

[Ed Moroughan]

I liked it quite a bit too. Hopefully it will improve now that they got all the character bits established. Mmm, Tiffani Thiessen.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Elizabeth is way too hot to Peter, at least by 2 levels from 0-10 scale.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I liked the pilot quite a bit.

If he packs on some more muscle, Matt Bomer would make a great Superman.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Bomer auditioned for the part in Superman Returns, but Routh was picked over Bomer and others. Bomer's a little short (not quite 6 feet tall) for that role.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

He also looked far too young four years ago when they were casting the film.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

I did not see it yet. But I think I have heard the premis before. Let's see. Oh yea, It Takes a Thief with Robert Wagner.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Bomer and DeKay can be seen meshing better in the second episode so that bodes well for the chemistry of the show. Everytime Bomer raised his hand at the police station I had to chuckle. Found the crime of the week weak though - the Ghost sure got flushed out very quickly.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Yeah, the show's still not quite working for me. If it weren't on directly after "Monk", I wouldn't seek it out. The Kate macro mystery has captured my interest.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I still can't say I'd stick around if it wasn't airing following "Monk", but after tonight's episode I am prepared to say that White Collar's Kate has the most beautiful eyes on television.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

After a pretty bland half the a season, the fall finale finally got me to sit up and take notice. Since I was planning on dumping the show once the pair-up with "Monk" was over, I guess it happened just in time.

The whole episode was brilliantly played. We were misdirected to believe that Noah Emmerich's character was rotten, but nothing they showed us specifically tied his character to anything dirty. Because Neil been so consistently more interesting than Peter's, I just naturally assumed they were tapping his phone to get to Neil -- never considering that they were tapping Peter's phone to get to Peter. Likewise, all of the evidence used to frame Neil was tied to Peter and Noah Emmerich's character. But because we were there in real time as Peter collected all of the evidence used to frame Neil, I assumed that it had to be Noah Emmerich's character with the nefarious motive. Instead, Noah Emmerich's character was following the same paper trail that Neil was -- only slightly ahead of him.

It casts everything in a new light: the thief wasn't refusing to turn state's witness because Noah Emmerich's character, peering in, made it futile. He was refusing to turn state's witness because the guy sitting across the table from him was the one who set the whole thing up.

I have no idea where the show is going from here, since the revelation at the end makes it impossible to return to the status quo. And that's what's going to bring me back in January.

In one episode, they reverse who's the straight man that provides the window into this world and enigmatic character that keeps us watching. Brilliant.

 

[Elizabeth S]

I felt the show was feeling a bit repetitious with the "can Neil be trusted" theme over and over. I also haven't found the mystery about Kate very compelling at all, and found myself annoyed at Neil's obsession with it.

However, this fall finale episode really brought up some intriguing plot points, so I guess I'll be back in January.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

I think its a feint. The last scene with Peter is OOC given how he has been portrayed as a straight shooter. Something else is up.

 

[Zack Gibbs]

^^ Of course it is Lou. To reference Adam's post, the "status quo" will be returned in no time at all.

That doesn't make the episode any less effective, I enjoyed it quite a bit. They played the strings perfectly this time.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The question is: what form of status quo will that be? I envision two possible scenarios: 1) everything that the fall finale implicated about Peter is true, and we go back to solving cases of the week knowing that Peter actually can't be trusted, and Neil knowing that Peter can't actually be trusted. 2) everything about the fall finale played as we originally thought it had before the reveal at the end, and Peter's rendezvous with Kate is the first time they're meeting; he's actually trying to help Kate, and he was just better at tracking her down than Neil has been.

And, of course, the third option: everything doesn't return to the status quo in a slightly different tenor, and the rhythm of the show changes dramatically. Point #2 would be the most disappointing for me, but even that would leave the show in a more interesting place than we were at before.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Originally Posted by Zack Gibbs

^^ Of course it is Lou. To reference Adam's post, the "status quo" will be returned in no time at all.

That doesn't make the episode any less effective, I enjoyed it quite a bit. They played the strings perfectly this time.

As Adam reiterates in his post above, to what status quo will that be? Can they go back to the original one?

As to playing the strings perfectly, only time will tell. Need to see the context of Peter's duplicity. Right now it feels like they have pulled a fast one. Especially if they do return to the established status quo after this story line plays out.

 

[MandyHan]

Here's my thought... what if this has been Peter's plan from the start? Peter needed Neal, but there is no way to make him help if he had finished his sentence. So he has orchestrated this Kate situation since before the Pilot.

Anyway, I'm counting down to the new episodes starting January 19th. This show certainly has perfected the art of a cliffhanger.