A weekly series starring Brit Marling (“I Origins”, “Another
Earth”) and James Nesbitt (“The Missing”, “The Hobbit”) from Oscar-winner Danny
Boyle (“127 Hours”, “Slumdog Millionaire”) should be major news and appointment
television around the world. Add to that pedigree in front of and behind the
camera the fact that “Babylon,” premiering Thursday night on The Sundance
Channel at 10pm EST, is ostensibly a witty commentary on the backstabbing
politics behind the politics not unlike Armando Ianucci’s “The Thick of It” and
“Veep,” and my anticipation level was sky high. So what’s wrong with “Babylon”?
Why is it just so-so? Is it a matter of expectations? You get people as talented
as Marling, Nesbitt and Boyle together and people are going to bring different
baggage to how they experience the final product. And, to be fair, Marling and
Nesbitt are the best things about “Babylon,” by far. No, the problem lies, as
it so often does in shows like this one, with a tonal imbalance in the writing.
Attempts at dry, workplace humor are intermingled with commentary on how much
perception dictates policy. That’s all well and good but the humor isn’t funny
enough and the commentary isn’t sharp enough. Other than the occasional spark
provided by Marling or the consistently great work by Nesbitt (the scenes
between the two of them almost make the show work on their very own), I just
don’t care about “Babylon.”
Marling plays Liz Garvey, an American transplant hired to
climb a seemingly impossibly steep mountain in that she’s been tasked with
repairing the damaged public image of the London police force. Viewed as either
corrupt or inept, depending on who you talk to at the pub, the London police
don’t exactly know how to handle a world in which social media and smart phones
have redefined the way they are perceived. Given the current conversation about
the U.S. police force and how much social media has impacted that discussion,
one would think there’s room for precise, detailed, sharp commentary in a
concept like the one for “Babylon,” but the narratives too often focus on the
PR of politics more than the personal. Yes, it’s interesting to see how
internal disagreements can lead to inconsistent enforcement such as in the
second episode but it doesn’t make for scintillating TV.
Garvey butts heads regularly with Chief Constable Richard
Miller (Nesbitt) and these scenes have a palpable energy missing from the rest
of “Babylon.” Much of the episodic nature of “Babylon” follows London cops on
the street, dealing with suspects trying to film them on their smart phone or
uncertain how to respond to an unarmed enemy. This material is just too
familiar and over-crowded to work (there’s a misguided sense that the more “casual cop” conversations per episode, the more believable the overall production will feel). A narrative about an officer who is rattled after a
call ended in a shooting has some weight, but even that feels familiar and
mishandled. Again, “Babylon” delivers a mixed bag in which it’s deceptively
simple to applaud the effort to handle the bizarre intersection of publicity
and policing, and yet that attempt doesn’t make it entertaining or insightful
on its own.
Perhaps “Babylon” would have worked more as a straight-up
drama instead of the Ianucci-esque stabs at humor. We are in a time in which
perception of authority is going to be one of the defining issues of the year,
and it is the humorous asides of “Babylon” that feel the most undercooked and
ill-conceived. “Babylon” has an opportunity to really show people how a machine
like the police force has to balance transparency and privacy to get its most
important job done. If the show succeeds and they come back for season two, let’s
hope they take that chance.
