The Bedford Diaries

I have watched both of the episodes shown so far of this show. Though it seems a bit risky in some of it's subject manner, i think overall the show is very good. The characters have many different ties together, and it is all attached in different ways, in many creative ways. Though some of the moments are a bit boring, the show is still interesting, and i still want to go on watching it. I feel the show really can develop into something wonderful with the right push. The character development is creative, yet basic, and with every few moments, something new seems to develop. I would suggest this show to anyone who is looking for something new, yet with the same underlying subject, the complications of sex and life.

I expected a lot more from this show. I try, I try hard to like it, but I just can't. Bad actors, bad plot, poor characters, boring situations. It's extremely easy to guess what is going to happen next, and including suicide, pregnancy and... what will be next? incest? AIDS? doesn't change that much, and doesn't make it more interesting either. As a college student I can't help but laugh at the way they speak or they behave given certain situations. Ventimiglia's character is like putting "Jess" from Gilmore Girls in college. He's the bad teen who became a clever, sophisticated adult, he is cute, intelligent, with some rebel attitude, but sweet in the inside. Just like Jess. Can't this guy play a different role?

The premise for this show catches viewers' attention with its promise of an intricate and well-intentioned (if not somewhat self-indulgent) look into the sexual fabric of an upscale college campus. What it delivers is a well-plotted, insightful, and amusing side-glance into the emotional psyche of human sexuality in any capacity.

With a highly talented cast (including WB runaround Milo Ventimiglia), we are not offered the often self-righteous scripting of the like-minded (and WB alum) Dawson's Creek, but rather a well-crafted and highly intelligent converse between realistic individuals who have encountered (or are maybe yet to encounter) the everyday events "our friends down there" often create.

And one even leaves considering that talking about it isn't as overrated as we've come to believe.

I'm a huge fan of Tom Fontana's "OZ," and when I learned he had a show coming out, especially one on a mainstream channel, I was anticipating it and expecting it to be good.

Imagine my surprise when I turned on my TV to behold the dull, namby-pamby could-be-a-catastrophe-if-you-don't-die-of-boredom-first one-hour premier of "Bedford Diaries." Obviously, there are limitations to writing a show about sex for the WB, but those limitations don't prescribe a forty-five-minute exploration of Dr. Phil-inspired psychobabble, fundamentally unlikable characters, and plot so flat that it blows the topography of Kansas out of the water.

The show's problems arise from both the bland story lines and the lack of sympathy a viewer feels for the characters. When four white kids, one black kid, and one Hispanic kid, all cute and bubbly and scholastically successful, whine about "trust issues" and "love," forgive me if I am pulled to vomit. Some characters are wrath-deserving from the get-go: one was pulled to do drastic, irrational things after a break-up with her boyfriend; another suffers from the irritating "meanie" paradox: one minute, he's a total ass and the next, he's deconstructing his difficult nature and attributing it to, again, a break-up. Boring television is what that makes, unless you're a fan of pre-packaged repartee straight from the TV therapist or Reality Show du Jour.

One of the most disappointing aspects of "Bedford Diaries," for me, was the dialogue. In the past, even when the story suffered, Fontana's writing was at least engaging. Because this show features characters who are supposedly under forty (an age when most people soften out and disappear...), it contractually MUST include a lot of snappy back-and-forth. This, alas, is not to be. While some of the dialogue can be very sporadically amusing (and I mean VERY sporadically), most of the zest is missing. In other words, with all the cleverness and sarcasm of "Step by Step," "Bedford Diaries" talk is harmless: all talk, if you will, and no action, which is a very fitting adage for the show in general.

Lastly, not that the WB is a bastion of incredible art or anything, but the acting on "Bedford Diaries" is abysmal. It's almost as if the actors' skills decided to work in concert with Fontana's sensory lapses and make the worst show from one great and a few decent people possible. The kids' line deliveries aren't just far deviated from realism; they're also thoroughly uninvolving. This factor trumps "Bedford" even further into the ground with other adolescent dreck.

Bottom line: only watch this garbage if you have a special attachment to any of the people involved. Otherwise, go read a book instead and save yourself sixty minutes of life that you'll never get back (provided, of course, that you're cognizant enough to only watch one episode).

What happens when you take College students and throw them into a avant-garde professor's human sexuality course at a prominent NYC University? That's what this program hoped to find out.

The year was 2006. Jake Macklin (Matthew Modine) professor at the prestigious (and fictional) Bedford University is running a very different kind of learning experience for his students. His seminar is designed to make them consider life through the lens of their sexual interests. A core question that must be faced is the difference between sex and love, one of many earth shaking and heartrending issues these people must face, head on.

Macklin requires his students to make video diary entries about their observations, their experiences and their understanding of human sexuality, based on the empirical knowledge they acquired. And they all have their own takes on each issue.

Notable here is Richard Thorne, played by Milo Ventimiglia in his first starring role in a series, and he proves why he quickly started getting booked for more, one of the most standout performances of the ensemble, both in believability and vulnerability.

Likewise, Penn Badgley, also makes an impression (though not nearly as good as one we'll eventually get to on this list of Notable Shows set in New York City - his previous role on "Gossip Girl"). Here, he played a frosh trying to learn as much as he can about sex from as many women willing to teach him.

Of course, this seminar is not without its controversies, as Macklin is seen as a questionable character on the faculty and his methodology of teaching is likewise viewed as contentious. Just what's going on in this course, what are the specific assignments and how are these students getting graded?

Part of the show's problem is in not getting into the bare bones of the relationships and hanging too much on these video diary entries, where the discussion about what the students have observed or participated in get revealed. But then again, this isn't HBO, Showtime or Cinemax, where showing, not telling could have been an option for some of these scenarios. You couldn't get that racy on broadcast television.

New York plays a part because it's still a City of Sin, even after Times Square excised the porn of X Rated Theaters to turn it into a family friendly playground. The sheer numbers of people out there meant that the next "learning experience" was just around the corner.

Perhaps the most notable thing about this series is that it was the final new show to debut on The Dubba, Dubba, Dubba You Bee. The following year, they merged with that other foundering network, UPN to create The CW, sending The WB's mascot, Michigan J. Frog, back to his quiet and retired life, much like the professor and his students at Bedford disappeared, as well.