I thought I’d take a break from my “X-Files” seasonal reviews to look at “Miracles” (2003, ABC), which I consider to be part of the “X-Files” family. It’s noteworthy because it was the first network show after the end of “The X-Files” in 2002 to attempt to fill the void.
So I recently received the DVD in the mail and settled in with the same approach I use for enjoying “The X-Files,” namely, turning off all the lights. Watching the pilot episode, I thought, “Uh-oh, this is actually scary. This is a horror show.” It had spooky writing in blood (“God is nowhere” or “God is now here” depending on what you want to see), a creepy kid with healing powers, a woman with pure white eyes, understated strains of music that would suddenly get loud; plus, a sense of loneliness through Paul Callan (Skeet Ulrich), who investigates (and usually debunks) potential miracles. It almost made me want to turn the lights on.
After the beautiful pilot, though, “Miracles” hits the groove it will maintain for the next 12 episodes: a deliberately paced, meticulously crafted, investigative show that seems to be made by film-school perfectionists with an indie aesthetic. Certainly, this spiritual take on “The X-Files” feels like nothing on TV today, and maybe even in 2003, and that’s to its credit. However, creator Richard Hatem (who later worked on “The Inside,” another moody one-season wonder I might review in a future post) and producer David Greenwalt (“Angel”) often use the word “mundane” (they liked the idea of hauntings in everyday places like mini-marts and real-estate offices) in describing their vision for this show, and — for better or worse — it’s the right word.
“Miracles” rests somewhere on the quality scale between “The X-Files” and “Ghost Whisperer.” The former often offered a couple different possible answers (scientifically based versus supernatural); the latter always had one possibility (supernatural). On “Miracles,” likewise, the solution is always supernatural; in that sense, it’s not an investigative show at all, because the explanation is never in doubt to us viewers.
So why watch at all? Well, “Miracles” is about characters, particularly the main trio, who have good chemistry as they work together at SQ, a donation-funded organization that explores potential miracles. Paul wants to give people solid answers and comfort, and he’s stressed that he can’t do that. Ulrich might’ve been cast because he’s innately likable (see also “Law & Order: Los Angeles”) but also because he can bow his head, glare up at you and look creepy (a la his character in “Scream”); the writers played with the idea that Paul might be in touch with the Devil because he saw writing in his own blood in the pilot episode. Enhancing Paul’s broodiness, he is an orphan who was raised by the church; Hector Elizondo plays his loving father figure (almost too well; I thought he actually was Paul’s father for many episodes).
Angus Macfadyen is Alva Keel, who is more interested in compiling data about the supernatural than solving every case; he’s definitely a “big picture” guy. Marisa Ramirez is Evelyn Santos, the warm-hearted den mother of the trio, who gets the deskwork done at SQ while Keel and Paul are caught up in their existential angst.
If you give “Miracles” a try, you might enjoy the guest casting. Look for two stars from “Lost” (which had a “Miracles” feel to it in the more spiritually oriented episodes), Maggie Grace and Sam Anderson, in “Mother’s Daughter.” Gloria Stewart from “Titanic” adds a lot of heart — simply via a monologue in her wonderfully evocative voice — to “Little Miss Lost,” an episode I remembered from the original airing because of her performance.
I think the best episode (other than the pilot, which offered promise the series never quite lived up to) is “The Letter.” It has a lot of warmth to it as we meet Paul’s foster sister, Georgia, who begins getting letters from her late father via God by way of a death-row inmate (maybe). This episode is a successful example of what “Miracles” strived to do: Present a dilemma to characters dealing with life-defining problems. Should the victims’ families pardon the killer because he is the now a conduit to their loved ones? (And yes, the character’s problem was almost always the loss of a loved one — a child losing a parent or vice versa — which is why the “Ghost Whisperer” comparison unfortunately can’t be denied.)
“Miracles” is an acquired taste, so I won’t recommend it even if you like “The X-Files” and are reading along with my reviews of that series. Truthfully, I think I only watched three of the six episodes that aired originally because I kind of got bored with it. Watching the entire series now on DVD, I can’t say I love it, but because it tried to fill a void on TV and bring back a little of that moody spirit to the investigative genre, I have a soft spot for it. Maybe “Miracles” was a failure, but it was a noble failure.