New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Okay, I debated long and hard on this topic. A semi-mythology show by the name of Chuck is on the brink of cancellation. It's got a devoted geek following, pretty decent reviews, and mediocre ratings. Its season is over, so any last minute appeals to watch are moot. I do consider it to be of quality, but I respect and appreciate it more than like it. I guess the only reason why I decided to do a piece on Chuck is because it's a decent show, and I'm of the opinion that television gets such a bum rap, that even the merely decent shows deserve a bit of a spotlight.

Chuck debuted in the strike shortened '07-'08 season, and it likely has the strike to thank for its second year. The networks had a severe shortage of new material in the strike's wake and, as such, renewed a lot of shows, which might otherwise have never seen a second chance. Chuck, right from the start, had average ratings at best and, despite positive notices, has had very little luck growing its numbers beyond the de rigueur mythology show cult fan base. Then, in the following season, few shows, new or otherwise, rebounded to the numbers posted pre-strike. Comparatively, Chuck's not doing too badly, but it's not a decisive victory by any stretch of the imagination, and, as of this writing, it totters on the infamous bubble, its third season hanging in the balance.

We all know the story, but here it is. Chuck is a geeky employee at the Best Buy stand-in known as Buy More. A former pal, now in the CIA or something, downloads an enormous database of classified intelligence called the Intersect into Chuck's brain. He has to keep this knowledge secret, keeping it out of the knowledge of friends, co-workers and sister while aiding two agents in their battles with the evil organization known as Fulcrum.

The cast is pretty winning all around. Zachary Levi is a revelation in my view. He's both funny and endearing, enthusiastic and lamenting. I don't know how creator Josh Schwartz found this guy, but something tells me that, were Chuck to not get a third season, we've not seen the last of him. His love interest and CIA protector Sarah is portrayed by Yvonne Strahovski. She's certainly captured the hearts of male nerds everywhere, and has shown to have a strong enough presence that we accept this sexy blonde as an ass-kicking agent of the Sydney Bristow ilk. Nerd fan favorite Adam Baldwin of Firefly, Angel and X-Files fame plays NSA agent John Casey. Playing his usual right wing badass, Baldwin is a perfect foil for Levi's sentimental dweeb.

The show balances some soft spy mythology involving Fulcrum, Chuck's parentage and his old college buddy turned CIA agent Bryce Larkin. The style is affectionate parody of the spy genre and is a welcome lighthearted antidote to the far more serious nerd shows of the day such as Lost and Heroes, not to mention big sister Alias. So why am I so hesitant?

I think it's because the stakes are so low. It's like one of these shows that have high ambition to create sprawling, complex arcs, but the studio's stepping in and trying to keep it self contained. Arcs start and, if we're lucky, last a few episodes but, for the most part, it's mission-of-the-week nonsense. Not that self-contained is necessarily a problem in and of itself, it's just that, as I said, it lowers the stakes. There is that horrible television convention called "the reset button" which returns all elements to the status quo. This is a valuable tool when creating disposable, bite-sized weekly entertainment, but when the possibilities are so much grander, it's dramatically unsatisfying. It's fast food, when it could be a meal.

I think of Lost, 24 or Buffy the Vampire Slayer, shows which have little problem upsetting the wheel cart. Each episode is its own entity, and anything can happen. Character dynamics can change forever, characters can die without warning, and surviving characters can evolve in immutable ways. Contrast this with the wheel spinning most shows resort to in order to make sure no storylines really progress, no characters really develop. Nothing is for keeps in the reset model, thus low stakes. We know everything will turn out all right, and go back to normal. There's a reason South Park mocks this trope with the perpetually dying Kenny.

Chuck walks a line between the two extremes. It has mini-arcs, and a flimsy mythology, but I sense Schwartz and Fedak's ambition is muted. Perhaps I'm giving them too much credit, but I feel the seeds of something bigger, perhaps still light, but far less redundant in the DNA of the show. Thing is, making the show disposable and episodic hasn't really helped the ratings. So if NBC does bless them with a season three, I would hope that they really branch out. Add weight to the adventures and relationships. Allow things to evolve, develop and change. And don't feel the need to have a mission of the week with all loose threads tied up in 44 minutes.

I really do like Chuck, and I always feel that television could use more good programming to combat the negative image our society has of it. I just feel, much like the teacher bemoaning the student who doesn't apply him or herself, that Chuck has so much untapped potential to be really great. Instead, it's just good. Better than most programming, sure, but so what? I think we should shoot for an A, and not be satisfied with just a B.