I watched this and I have to say that I was not impressed. The SF Chronicle TV critic raved about this show, even saying that the lead actress deserves an Emmy. Over Amber Tamblyn? No, I don't think so. She's certainly a capable actress, but no way does she have the charisma or dramatic acting chops of Ms Tamblyn.
Anyway, I thought the writing was weak. It reminded me of later seasons of Ally McBeal, when the show just wandered off into pointless self-indulgent quirkiness and silly fantasy sequences. 'Wonderfalls' seems so determined to be quirky and eccentric that it just chokes the life out of everything that might be interesting about the show and the concept. And Jaye reminded me of Ally McBeal too, in that she can't go more than 5 minutes without fainting, tripping over or choking on something. (Women are all so helpless, doncha know?) Other than being a lesbian, the sister is an exact copy of Meredith on 'Tru Calling' - they even look similar! The only character I actually liked was Jaye's best friend, but she only had 2 or 3 scenes.
I thought the talking animals weren't as cheesy as they could have been, but they were still cheesy.
My husband said - and I agreed - that the main problem with the pilot ep. was that there was absolutely no emotional hook to it. Why should we give a toss about any of these people? They are written in such a shallow way, and all of them only seem to be there to either look cute, spout comforting platitudes or be funny.
Compare the pilot ep of this show to the pilot ep of 'Joan of Arcadia'. In the first episode of Joan, it was established that, yes, it was God talking to her, and that her missions actually had a point and were doing some good. In the first episode of 'Wonderfalls', Jaye did some good - but the whole issue of why the animals are talking to her in the first place is left hanging. Is it her imagination? Her subconscious? Is it divine intervention? Is she hallucinating because she took drugs in the past? I have no fricking clue, because the writers apparently couldn't be bothered to think up a reason, and it showed. (Maybe they will reveal the reasons behind the phenomenon in future eps, and they were trying to keep it mysterious in the pilot because they hadn't decided yet, or they wanted to keep viewers intrigued enough to tune in again. Yet 'Joan of Arcadia' firmly established the reasons behind the show's main concept in the first episode, and people are still tuning in.)
If I really liked the characters, or I thought that the writing was excellent (which is what kept me watching JoA, even though I was initially iffy about the concept), or I thought the concept was sufficiently well-realised, I would be tuning in again on a regular basis. As it is, I'll only check in occasionally to see if it's going to get any better or worse.
Oh, and here's a review from a critic who didn't like the show. I've read 5 or 6 reviews of it - 2 were raves, and the rest were either lukewarm or negative. So don't buy the 'universal critical acclaim' thing. It ain't true.
Quote:
Fox’s ’Wonderfalls’ not all that amazing
From Contracostatimes.com
Posted on Sat, Mar. 13, 2004
CHUCK BARNEY: AS SEEN ON TV
Fox’s ’Wonderfalls’ not all that amazing
In "Wonderfalls," a fanciful new dramedy from Fox, a bitter souvenir shop employee freaks out when inanimate objects -- wax lions, brass monkeys, stuffed bears -- begin mouthing off and telling her what to do.
All of which has me a bit jittery because, as I type up this review, I’m staring at several TV-related figurines that have convened on my desk over the years. So, will the Anna Nicole bobblehead suddenly spout dietary advice? Will my dancing Homer Simpson instruct me to forgo the joys of newspaper work to embark on a tireless search for the perfect doughnut? Will the Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie cardboard cutouts come to life and force me to join their hedonistic pursuits?
Ah, the possibilities are endless and it’s tempting to believe that, if I slurped up enough Jack Daniels, these silly objects might indeed go vocal on me and I’d have the basis for my own prime-time series. Just call it "Stupid Tchotchke Tricks."
Alas, the publicity material supplied by Fox does not reveal whether "Wonderland" creators Bryan Fuller and Todd Holland were ingesting Jack Daniels or other mind-scrambling substances when they came up with the idea for their show. But come up with it they did, and someone at Fox was kooky enough to go along for the ride, so bully for them.
In the opener, we meet the mystifying, 24-year-old Jaye Tyler (Canadian actress Caroline Dhavernas). She’s an over-educated and undermotivated slacker who lives in a trailer park called the High and Dry and holds down a dead-end job as a clerk in a kitschy Niagara Falls tourist store where she fritters away the hours in an ongoing state of existential apathy.
Cynical and snarky, Jaye is determined to dislike just about everybody, including her dimwitted young boss, her clueless customers, her eccentric family and, most of all, herself. "You’re spiteful in a way that the definition of spiteful doesn’t quite prepare you for," says her only real friend, Mahandra (Tracie Thoms), and you can’t help but agree.
Ah, but there is hope. In true "Joan of Arcadia" style, our mopey heroine begins to hear voices. Only this time they’re emanating from the lips of various toys and objects, which urge her to help others and therefore help herself. The cryptic messages initially make little sense, but they tend to set into motion a chain of madcap events that invariably lead Jaye into the lives of others in need -- even though she has no desire to go there (shades of "Joan" again).
So, are the voices real or just Jaye’s imagination? Should she see a shrink or surrender to destiny? Can this bizarre show possibly hit Nielsen pay dirt or is it a sure goner? Keep your ears open. Perhaps a little voice from out of nowhere will let us know.
Despite my own snarkiness, there is a lot to like about "Wonderfalls." In addition to its luminous, fresh-faced lead actress and adventurous concept, it has a funky visual style, some smart writing and a few doses of snicker-inducing dark humor. In short, it is the kind of risk-taking show upon which TV critics typically plant big wet smooches. And I have to admit that I regarded it as one of the best series of the season when I took a quick peek at the pilot last summer.
But something has happened since to lessen the luster. Fox, as it is so often wont to do, scrapped plans for an early-season release and delayed "Wonderfalls" for months and months. Since then, I’ve seen additional episodes that don’t captivate me nearly as much and, of course, in the meantime we’ve been able to witness the girl-hears-voices concept that somehow comes across as more engaging and makes more sense on the aforementioned "Joan of Arcadia."
And so, as much as I’d like to, I just can’t bring myself to give "Wonderfalls" a rousing, wholehearted endorsement. For me, the main problem leads right back to the main character. For one thing, it’s difficult to believe that someone as smart (she has a Ph.D. from Brown) and as attractive as Jaye would be mired in such a hopeless situation. For another, I consider her cynicism to be more tiresome and off-putting than charming.
Consequently, I just couldn’t bring myself to really care about what happens to the scorn-spewing Jaye and, ultimately, when you don’t care about a character, that’s a deal-breaker. It doesn’t help matters, either, that I found a couple of the episodes after the pilot to be plagued by a rather tedious pace and to be teeming with annoyingly quirky characters.
At a time when prime time is saturated with derivative reality fare and procedural cop dramas, the emergence of such an offbeat, whimsical show is cause for at least a modicum of excitement. Still, I’d be much happier if "Wonderfalls" didn’t fall so short of being completely wondrous.
at: 3/12/04 2:59 pm
Out 
on his beloved "Fruitfly", which (to put it charitably) I Just Didn't Get. So I'm not even going to try with this other new show now. I'd rather have a life instead.
Out 
Not much of a contest there, in my book anyway. 
at: 3/14/04 3:24 pm
(Plus, there's the well-known fact that trailer parks always seem to "attract" storms and floods 
Out 
Out 
Out