Shameless (US): reviews

The new version of Shameless premieres in the US this week, ironically on the same night as Episodes, the Matt LeBlanc comedy about UK shows that end up with bad US remakes.

There are mixed feeling about how well the comedy, starring William H. Macy, has translated according to these critics.

No word on who is picking this up for Australia yet.

The Hollywood Reporter:

Shameless has a sprawling cast — 11 actors — but they seem close-knit as everyone bands together to make ends meet on the other side of the tracks. The realism that Abbott was able to tap into in England continues — and that might mean the show’s biggest hurdle has been cleared. You can’t choose your family — Shameless proves that in every episode — but rather than fracture under the borderline-poverty conditions, the Gallaghers typify a real family forced to keep things together. In their ramshackle existence, if one messes up, they all go down. Besides, with Frank messing up so spectacularly every day, dealing with the fallout keeps everyone else in line. Shameless is excellent, compelling television from the first moment. As long as it stays true to the roots of the original, it’s going to be essential viewing.

Chicago Tribune:
Lacking the long, droopy, manic clown face of British actor David Threlfall (Frank in the original), Macy doesn’t instantly register Frank’s tawdry charm. Self-centered though he may be — a man as likely to head butt one of his kids as share a beer with them — we’re meant to feel a conflicted affection for the guy. As an actor, Macy (a one-time Chicagoan early in his career) can be enigmatic, and his characters tend to be unknowable men. That creates certain challenges, because Frank isn’t that much of a puzzle. Macy nails the bleary, weather-beaten part but still has to establish Frank as the kind of amusingly blinkered presence you want around. There’s no reason that can’t happen—as the NBC version of “The Office proved, it can take a few episodes for an American reboot to settle in and find its own sensibility. The actors portraying the rest of the Gallagher clan have a nice, we’re-stuck-together chemistry, particularly during a tense confrontation about homosexuality between Jeremy Allen White and Cameron Monaghan (playing teenage brothers) that is fraught with real-life anxiety.

Chicago Now:
It’s been a long time since I watched the original “Shameless,” so I haven’t been bothered that this version, apparently, follows the British one closely–including a whole lot of nudity (you could play a butt-sighting drinking game). Abbott and Wells have given their new venture a distinct sense of place by shooting all the exteriors in Chicago, and writing local fixtures into the story. Still, Frank puts me off, but Macy’s performance isn’t the problem. It’s his alcoholism. Should the writers make jokes out of Frank’s substance abuse problems and subsequent neglect of his kids? And should we be laughing? I suppose if Frank weren’t such an irresponsible ass, his kids wouldn’t be so wonderfully resourceful and marvelously fascinating. Despite Frank’s shortcomings, most of his kids still love him. Despite Frank, I adore “Shameless.”

Washington Post:
This version is executive-produced by network series impresario John Wells, whose credits include “E.R.” and “The West Wing.” Wells’s ensemble projects don’t always succeed – I still can’t muster interest in his cop drama “Southland,” which just began a new season on TNT – but the producer’s sense of polish and momentum hits just the right spot here. Living down to its title in every possible way, the show’s apparent lack of moral center and a prurient default setting will certainly put off some viewers; the Gallagher teens are sexually active, smoke joints in their bedrooms and walk around the house with open beers. It asks for your full surrender of conscience; indeed, shows like this bank on our uncomfortable ambivalence about being entertained by material that can be so relentlessly dirty.

LA Times:
But though an air of sweetness and subtlety pervades the original, Showtime’s “Shameless” seems determined to knock viewers on the head by turns with sledgehammers of grittiness and preachiness, never a good combination. Macy is bound and determined to make Frank utterly unlovable, which is to say an actual drunk — despite what Eugene O’Neill has led us to believe, drunks are only fascinating to themselves. And while that is a brave and actorly decision, he seems to be part of another story entirely — in “Shameless,” his ruthless narcissism makes his children’s rueful fondness less about the cracked but still functioning heart of family and more like horrifying psychosis, which is never acknowledged as such.

Variety:
Much of the rest of the three episodes previewed, by contrast, simply stumble along, employing what’s becoming an overused mix of broad, almost silly comedy with more sober exchanges. Other than passing out hammered, Frank doesn’t contribute much on any level, and while Macy can look woeful with the best of them, there’s precious little he can do with a character that spends long stretches passed out on the floor. Rossum is certainly appealing, but too many of the supporting players (led by Joan Cusack as a germaphobic mom, and the Gallaghers’ wacky neighbors) come across as cartoonish concoctions there to capitalize on pay-cable license rather than service the story. The series does cast light on a world (relocated to the grimiest part of Chicago) where nothing comes easy, and kids don’t have the luxury of idleness or childhood. For the most part, there’s nothing here to be ashamed of. It’s just that at a time when TV drama is so flush with riches, “Shameless” plays like a poor relative.

Huffington Post:
Make no mistake: There is much potentially objectionable content in Shameless, but within the context of the show it isn’t necessarily offensive, given the underlying love and compassion many of the characters have for each other and the fact that many of them maintain a strong sense of humor in even the most dire of circumstances. More significantly, the specifics of their circumstances, however unpleasant, aren’t there for shock value. All of the bad things these people do are richly and intimately explored as the series progresses — except for this brief sequence of suggested animal torture. Everything about it indicates that the writers crafted it as something intended to be a quick hit of sick fun. (It even has a twisted punch line of sorts — the cat’s cry when Carl lights the torch.)