TV Review: “Sons of Tucson”
By Ross Moody
March 10, 2010 9:55 p.m.
Having already proven his ability to make a quirky TV comedy with “Malcolm in the Middle,” “Sons of Tucson” director and executive producer Todd Holland proves that, even as a fairly experienced filmmaker, he’s not ashamed to make half-baked work for network audiences. Holland’s new show is one that goes for all sorts of laughs and clumsily scoops up a few during every episode. However, most of these laughs are also expressions of embarrassment at the show’s failure to make something genuinely funny out of its premise and characters.
The show follows the story of sporting goods store salesman and amateur con man Ron Snuffkin (Tyler Labine, “Zack and Miri Make A Porno”), whose part-time job is posing as the father of three boys whose real dad has been sent to jail for a white-collar crime. Ron first acts the part in order to help pay back money that he owes to a gangster. Then he finds out that his new charges have come all the way from New Jersey to Arizona, where their parents have invested in a nice McMansion. For Ron, who is living in his car, this is paradise, and his occupation of keeping the kids out of a foster home becomes indefinite.
“Sons” almost becomes darkly refreshing in that it almost doesn’t try to convert fake father Ron into an emotional surrogate for the boys, but “almost” is the key word here. It squeezes in some tender moments, such as a game of catch between “father” and son, where they do not belong, and they end up being about as heartfelt as the foreign ministers at a G-20 summit.
As suggested before, another point where “Sons” flails wildly is in its humor. The show is certainly not risque, though it is hard to imagine it having any appeal as a family program because it and its protagonist treat the prospect of raising a family so lightly. It allows itself the possibility of political incorrectness of programs like “Family Guy” and Cartoon Network’s “Adult Swim” original shows, yet it never commits to providing the suggested 18-to-35 age niche with any really satisfying moments. Ron’s sleaziness is the only thing that is supposed to support us in our struggle to enjoy the “adult” humor in the show.
Meanwhile, the three kids are basically a rehash of the main trio in “Malcolm in the Middle.” Robby, the youngest, is pouty; Gary, the middle child, is a bit wimpy but intelligent and driven; and Brandon, the oldest, is subversive. To add insult to injury, the show neglects any attempt to depict dysfunction between the kids. Besides the copious times during the show’s first three episodes that Robby and Gary yell at Ron, there isn’t much of an attempt to showcase any of the child-parent dysfunction that made “Malcolm” great. Ron’s bumbling is this show’s version of dysfunction. Although expectations of Holland’s new work should not be tied strictly to his past, one expects better than this when it’s obvious that the show in question is supposed to be a replacement for another.
Added to dysfunction as a source of humor is the odd slapstick moment involving baseball bats, private parts and the like. These moments are not satisfying at all either ““ if you’ve ever seen “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” then you will probably be relatively underwhelmed by “Sons of Tucson.”
You might actually like this show if you enjoy shamelessness in bad shows. Watching “Sons of Tucson” was a thoroughly entertaining experience for me for this reason, in the same way that watching “Nacho Libre” was maybe one of my all-time favorite theatergoing experiences. If you aren’t into laughing at the laziness of Hollywood film studios and their TV adjuncts, however, you will definitely not find “Sons of Tucson” enjoyable.
E-mail Moody at [email protected].
