Public Service Announcement 25 of 2016: Hooten & The Lady, Private Eyes

Sky 1’s new action drama, Hooten & The Lady, seems to be an unashamed throwback to the Indiana Jones/Romancing The Stone globetrotting-escapades films of the 80s (which, of course, were themselves a throwback to an earlier era). Hooten’s a roguish American treasure-hunting adventurer, and Lady Alexandra Lindo-Parker is a expert at the British Museum, looking for something more stimulating. Normally Unpopcult probably wouldn’t bother. But there are two reasons – and we’re not proud of them – why we’re going to take a look at Hooten & The Lady. For CJ it’s Hooten (Michael Landes, who was Jimmy Olsen in the first season of The New Adventures of Superman). For me it’s The Lady (Ophelia Lovibond, who lit up the third season of Elementary). The advance word, though, is that Hooten and the Lady will not be hooking up. I suspect that to be a mistake, to say the least, because Unpopcult can’t have been alone in hoping for, if you will, Raiders of the Lost Ship. But we’ll report back on the first episode at least (Friday 16 September, Sky 1, 9pm).

One assumes that the makers of Canadian dramedy Private Eyes, on the other hand, know what needs to be done when you have Jason Priestley playing Matt, a hockey player turned private investigator, and Cindy Sampson (Supernatural) playing Angie, his feisty business partner. Faites vos jeux, ladies and gentlemen. As far as I can tell it’s light-hearted escapist fluff – which I mean as a compliment – in the mould of Castle (Monday 19 September, Universal, 8pm).

Also starting: season 6 of American Horror Story, commendably no more than a day or two behind American transmission (Friday, FOX UK, 10pm); season 2 of Aquarius (Friday, Sky Atlantic, 9pm).

11 thoughts on “Public Service Announcement 25 of 2016: Hooten & The Lady, Private Eyes

  1. e September 15, 2016 / 10:04 pm

    J’adore Private Eyes

    • Jed Bartlet September 15, 2016 / 10:15 pm

      You’ve rarely (if ever?) steered us wrong, e…

      • e September 16, 2016 / 6:39 am

        I’m not saying it’s genius or anything, but it’s a lovely warm show to snuggle up to with a hot beverage and nothing to do for an hour. Jason Priestly is much more likable here than he was in Haven or Fitz, and the supporting actors (it’s Canadian, so expect a very tiny cast) are lovely too.

          • e September 16, 2016 / 4:30 pm

            Madame, your ship awaits

  2. CJ Cregg September 16, 2016 / 11:54 am

    The more I think about it, the more baffled I get – I can’t understand how Hooten and the Lady is supposed to work *without* the prospect of them getting together. Why would you build a show round a shipping opportunity then take the shipping opportunity away? Without the “will they/ won’t they,” it’s just two people arguing in a different location each week. Where’s the fun in that?

  3. Jed Bartlet September 16, 2016 / 12:32 pm

    I have NO IDEA what they think they’re doing. It’s one thing if you’re making a serious piece of drama and you want to reinforce the point that not every male/female relationship leads to the bedroom. (I’d be less likely to watch, obvs, but that’s me. I want a ship.) But this is effing Hooten & the effing Lady, not The Wire.

  4. Traxy October 11, 2016 / 1:13 am

    ^^ All of that. So far the premise is definitely will they/won’t they, which is what makes it fun!

    • Jed Bartlet October 11, 2016 / 6:50 pm

      Good to hear from you, Traxy – as you’ll have gathered, we occasionally pretend to be sophisticated TV viewers, but in reality we’re all about the shipping… In which context Private Eyes is also definitely worth a look. It’s lovely.

      • Traxy October 13, 2016 / 11:45 pm

        Thanks, I’ll look it up! 🙂

        BTW, I now have a theory about how/why they’re not shipping the otherwise blatantly obvious ship. Think I’ll go out of blogging hibernation just to write about it in more detail, but my theory is that they’re related. Might be flawed because of age differences, but aside from that, if they’d turn out to be brother and sister, it would make sense why they could get away with refusing to let that ship sail. Because if they didn’t let it sail, and have them playing on will they won’t they every week without an actual pay-off (hook-up), viewers are likely to feel cheated. (Imagine if Castle and Beckett hadn’t hooked up! Or, in other terms without needing to imagine anything at all: the “Lost” finale …) If they’re related, viewers would instead go “oh yeah, of course they won’t hook up then” (eh, apart from those who just shrug while quietly humming the “Game of Thrones” theme in the background 😉 ). Or they could just be messing with us. Guess we’ll have to wait and see.

        At any rate, I wonder if I should head to the betting office and put a tenner on it being renewed for a s2 and then being cancelled before getting a s3 commissioned. Sky has so far done that to three shows that I got very attached to. 😦

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.