TVSquad Talks To Alfred Molina about the "Law & Order: LA" Revamp

[JamesG]

Alfred Molina on the "Law & Order: Los Angeles" Revamp
by Joel Keller
posted Apr 5th 2011


When "Law & Order: Los Angeles" wasn't getting the ratings that NBC expects from a member of the "L&O" franchise, the network didn't throw in the towel.

In fact, it asked "L&O" impresario Dick Wolf and his producers to go back and retool the show for the second half of its first season.






Audiences will see the result of that retooling starting Monday, April 11, at 9PM ET. Among the biggest changes is that Alfred Molina's character, Deputy D.A. Ricardo Morales, will return to the LAPD as a detective.

The backstory of how that happens, including what happens to who he's replacing, Det. Rex Winters (Skeet Ulrich), will be sorted out during the first few episodes of the show's return.





I spoke to Molina last month about his thoughts on the switch, which will involve his working on every episode -- as a D.A., Molina's character was alternating episodes with Terrence Howard's character, Deputy D.A. Jonah Dekker -- and why he decided to go back to series TV after a nine-year absence.




This is an unusual situation, not that a show's getting retooled, but that one of the characters is going to take on a bit of a different role.

When you were approached with the idea of going from a lawyer to a cop, what were your thoughts on that?

Well it sounded like a very exciting idea. The way they explained it was that we would create this back story where my character, Ricardo Morales, was a policeman originally, a detective, and then became a lawyer.

His dissatisfaction with his effectiveness in the D.A.'s office prompts him, because of a particular event that happens in this (upcoming) episode, prompts him to quit the D.A.'s office and go back to being a detective where he feels he can be more effective.

It's a huge shift for the show and for the character, but it's played as part of his development. It's not like suddenly he becomes a cop again and doesn't quite know what happened to him. It's a process that happens over a couple of episodes.











Were you afraid that it wouldn't be organic to the character, that it would just be a shift?

Well I think any change to a character is organic if it's if it's dealt with correctly. If there's cogent reasons for it, if there's dramatically appropriate reasons for it, I think that it can work.

It's when you make those choices that are dramatically inappropriate or illogical, you know, when a character dies, and then comes back, and someone says, "Oh, it's his long lost twin brother."


But this is a journey, in a sense, this is a journey where a character is actually going back to some kind of root, back to something he understood and felt more comfortable with.

So it's not quite, it's not a leap in the dark. In a way, it's just sort of, it's a step back to a situation that he understands more.











Have you ever been on a show where you came back as your own twin brother?

No, I haven't. But I've seen plenty of them.
And as an audience member, you kind of go, "Oh, do me a favor!" You know? Don't insult my intelligence.











We've been hearing that the show is going to stylistically go back towards what the other "L&O" shows are like, and be a little darker.

Have have you been seeing that when you've been shooting the new episodes?

Yeah, I think there is a more conscious attempt to get back to the core values of the show, which can't be a bad thing. That's kind of exciting, in itself, because it's getting back to the core value of the show in a whole new context. Because I always thought of New York as the uncredited last member of the cast, in previous shows.

And I think the same thing's going to happen with Los Angeles. The city itself is going to have a prominent position in the show. It's going to, in a sense, inform the show. And I think that's hopefully what the producers are aiming for with this new incarnation.











What do you think it was about that first set of episodes that didn't really connect with viewers the way the other "Law & Order" franchises had in the past?

I really don't know. I mean, personally, I thought they were pretty good. You'd have to ask viewers that. To a certain extent, as I'm sure you know, TV's a bit of a crap shoot, especially in America. The rewards and success are so huge, and the pressures are so vast to get it right, that I think when things don't quite work, there's a sort of industry-wide panic.

But the truth is that all shows can take a bit of time to kind of find their feet, find their groove. And if a show didn't quite sit as well with long-time viewers and new viewers, then that's as much to do with their response as our responsibility.

I think Dick Wolf and all the "Law & Order" people sort of listen very carefully to people's reactions, and responded accordingly.











When you and Terrence Howard found out that you both were going to be on every episode, instead of every other episode, was this a challenge you guys welcomed as actors?

Oh yeah! I mean, there's no doubt about it. It's more work, obviously, and you know, longer hours and everything, but that's fine. You know, actors have never been shy of work. We've been short of work. We've never been shy of it. It's good.

I was very happy to know that I'd be working on every episode. I mean, I was enjoying the one episode on, one episode off routine. It was very of easy and relaxed. But when this possibility came along, I thought, "this is great." I was very happy to get involved in this way.











Is there a "Law & Order" actor that you look to as guidance or inspiration for what you're doing in L.A.?

Yeah, well I think the guy who, I think for me, totally epitomized the show was Jerry Orbach, who defined the show in a way that -- with all due respect to all the other actors who have played detectives in the show, and they've all been wonderful, there's been some marvelous actors playing the detectives in the show -- I think Jerry was the one who in a sense defined it. That's the only way I can put it.

I mean, he's the first and last person you think of, in a way. And it was interesting that it was a good few years into the show before he arrived. But when he did, it all kind of started making sense. The older detectives, wise and slightly more cynical, sort of a bit frayed around the edges, a bit bruised, with the younger, idealistic, more sort of hard-headed part, and that balance of worldly wisdom and youthful enthusiasm.

And I think, I'm hoping, not that I'm comparing myself in any way to Jerry, but I think that dynamic of an older detective with a younger is what we're trying to imitate now.











You haven't done American series TV in almost a decade.
What mad you decide go back to doing a series?

Well, it was very simple. You know, I'm in my mid-50s and I wanted a job where I could stay home more. You know, I've been making movies for the best part of 30 years, and I've spend most of my working life away from home, either on location, or on tour, or doing a play in a different city from where I'm living.

And I was beginning to feel that -- and don't get me wrong, this is not a complaint by any means; I've been busy, I've been working, and I've been very, very happy with that -- but I was sitting in my dressing room in NY, doing a play, and I suddenly thought, "You know what, it'd be really nice to get a nice, interesting job at home so I could go home at night and have dinner with my wife, rather than having room service or hanging out with the film crew." And I just thought, "Is that too much to ask?"

Then lo and behold, a month after I had that little reverie, I've come to this offer. So maybe it was in the air. Maybe it was meant to be. But it's something that I was happy to welcome, as a new sort of phase in my professional career.




And you get to do only one accent now for a while.

That's right. Yes, exactly. Unless it slips and I go somewhere else. Which I'm sure I'll be pulled up short if that happens.

http://www.tvsquad.com/2011/04/05/al...les-interview/