Question: I was wondering what you thought about Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. I love it. When I first saw the promos during the Super Bowl, I thought it was going to be cheesy as heck. But I gave it a chance and damn, I was impressed. When Monday comes rolling around, I'm glued to my TV as soon as TSCC starts. However, I've been hearing around that the show hasn't been getting off-the- chart ratings. Do you think Fox would cancel the show even though they have filmed about 10 episodes for this season already? Would they maybe consider moving to a different time slot?
Answer: Now this is a show (going back to the Bones discussion above) that would qualify for cult status. It's in one of the week's toughest time periods, and while its overall ratings aren't anything to cheer, here's where audience demographics factor in. Terminator's goal is to attract viewers exactly like this fan: sports nuts who don't watch a lot of regular prime-time TV, but enjoy this sort of high-octane
...
read more
Question: I have a bad feeling about Dollhouse with all the changes that Joss Whedon is having to make. Actually, I had a foreboding right from the beginning. There's no question Whedon is a genius. There are episodes of Buffy that no one else could have conceived, or even conceived anything remotely like them. There will certainly never be another science-fiction series like, or maybe as good as, Firefly. On the other hand, Whedon is not a very smart genius. Read the transcript of almost any interview or listen to his commentary on any DVD episode and several things become clear. One is that he's his own greatest fan. Another is that he has no respect for what he considers the "average" viewer. His attitude is that if you don't get it, he doesn't want you in the audience. So he gives each brilliant series an unattractive or at least uninformative name and then can't persuade the networks to properly promote or (in the case of Fox and Firefly) even properly broadcast it. So, actors ...
read more
Question: Being such a fan of Mad Men, I envision certain filmmakers directing an episode or two. I have always thought that a director like Martin Scorsese or even the amazing Hong Kong director Wong Kar Wai would have interesting takes on NY in the early 1960s. In particular, Wong Kar Wai's style is rich in voyeurism, and he has such a fascination with the early 1960s. If you have seen his film In the Mood for Love, it is shot similarly like Mad Men, but he has an interesting way of incorporating music and movement. The Coen brothers would also be an interesting choice for obvious reasons. I was wondering if you think Mad Men would benefit from different directorial styles, or would it make the show's style too jumbled, as I consider it more like art television rather than an ordinary TV drama.
Answer: An interesting idea, especially considering the show airs on AMC (the middle initial standing for "Movie"). It's a very seductive notion to have masters of cinema take a crack at ...
read more
Question: Don't you think that when a deserving show like the utterly brilliant Pushing Daisies barely squeaks through with a directing Emmy for Barry Sonnenfeld, it's time for the Emmys to seriously consider a new category for dramedies? I know you've fielded this question before, when people lamented the losses by Gilmore Girls, but the answer then always seemed to be that they were being snubbed because they were on minor networks. Pushing Daisies is on the Alphabet, most definitely not a minor network, and Lee Pace and Kristin Chenoweth seemed lucky to be nominated, while great performances by Anna Friel and Chi McBride didn't even get that much. Besides, how can the voters really consider a hybrid dramedy like Pushing Daisies against more traditional comedies like 30 Rock and Samantha Who?
Answer: Pushing Daisies was also handicapped by only airing nine episodes last season and being off the air since last December. The fact that it got as many nominations as it did was something
...
read more
Question: I just read an interview with Grey's Anatomy creator Shonda Rhimes where she made this statement about her core show couple of Meredith (Ellen Pompeo) and Derek (Patrick Dempsey): "For good' doesn't necessarily go past this season," Rhimes says. "But they're definitely together for good for now." This is just one example of many where Rhimes continually uses the media to make statements to her fans to either create buzz or pacify them, only to come back and go against her original statements. At the end of season four, Rhimes went to many media outlets to assure fans her key couple would be together "for good" and then went on to explain the ups and downs of any ongoing TV relationship and was excited to see how fans would follow them. Show producer Betsy Beers also echoed this statement as recently as two weeks ago. Why do you think Rhimes does this? Obviously fans had an idea of what "for good" meant, and personally, I don't think they were off. Now the fans are all over ...
read more
David Caruso, CSI: Miami
Question: So, we were looking forward to the season premiere of CSI: Miami. We actually do like it. Never thought the acting was God-awful, though the Caruso sunglass removal is a bit much sometimes. But last Monday's broadcast has me wondering if we were watching a totally different show. It seemed almost cobbled together, and I am not sure what was worse: the script or the players' attempt to interpret it. My husband was in and out of sleep and even commented on the lack of acting skill. Also, I believe David Caruso set a new personal record for the sunglass removal. Emily Proctor was a beautiful woman, until she discovered either collagen or Botox. Anyway, it would appear the shark has been jumped. I feel better now.
Answer: Shark-jump spotting is not my favorite pastime, to put it mildly, but for me, this show effectively ended a few seasons back when Horatio rode a tsunami wave into town. There are times I can appreciate a show like CSI: Miami as fun, formulaic escapism, but the
...
read more
Question: Do you ever find yourself getting sick of "shock-ending" season finales? I bring this up because I just finished watching the "mid-season finale" of one of my favorite shows, Sci Fi's Eureka. (Spoiler alert.) In the last minutes of the episode, Sheriff Carter is fired. To me, this seems pointless. We all know Carter isn't going to stay fired. Moreover, no one who wasn't already tuning in is going to come back specifically to see if Carter is actually fired, so the whole thing doesn't even achieve the desired result. What it does do is make me dread the season opener where we have to sit through at least one episode wasted on the characters extracting themselves from a situation that was obviously created for nothing more than shock value. (I guess you have to give kudos to House for being the one show to actually follow through with this sort of thing, but being that it ended in disaster I'd almost say it validates my point more.) Don't get me wrong, I'm not against ...
read more
Question: I have read from time to time the show Bones referred to as a cult hit. I would appreciate if you could explain what the philosophy and/or the ratings must be in giving the show that description. In checking the ratings this season, it seems to be at the 9 to 10 million mark and with DVR audiences goes over the 10 million mark. It seems to be a solid performer for Fox, no matter how many times they change its schedule, so could you explain what numbers it needs to be moved beyond cult status? Other Fox shows, other than House and Fringe seem to be going down in the ratings, so I just wondered where Bones stood. I realize the competition for Bones is just starting up for the fall season, so I was just curious as to your views. I know you are a Pushing Daisies fan, so I'll just hope you would still fall into the DVR group for Bones.
Answer: If I've ever patronized Bones as something of a cult curiosity, I take it back. But there is a sense, given the show's erratic scheduling,
...
read more
Question: Like so many people, I have very much been looking forward to Fringe, but I find myself unable to watch. I realize this may sound like a whiny complaint, but I'm squeamish. I love good sci-fi/fantasy, but to me, this series is entirely too graphic. I enjoy the characters a great deal, and the story line is generally intriguing, but I simply cannot watch paralyzed but completely conscious women having parts of their brains removed through the inside of their upper lips. Why is it necessary to show this? I want to watch Fringe but I can't get past the gore, and as a result will be skipping it entirely. I would love to hear your thoughts on this issue. Am I overly sensitive or is just a question of one's tolerance? Frankly, this is the same reason I don't watch House or any of the crime dramas. Though the story lines are well done and the characters compelling, I can't handle the blood and guts. I suspect in these days of cartoonish violence around every corner I'm in the ...
read more
Question: When I learned that Chuck was premiering a week after Heroes, I assumed it was because of Heroes' two-hour premiere. So imagine my surprise when I finally discovered that the Chuck premiere was being pre-empted for a Heroes countdown special. Am I crazy, or was this an insane waste of time on NBC's part? I've come to accept that Heroes is an inexplicable hit. But why waste an hour of prime-time television counting down to this uneven series when you could have used the ridiculously anticipated Heroes as an opportunity to bring attention to Chuck's sophomore season, or, if you absolutely have to, to launch the new My Own Worst Enemy?
Answer: The recap special was a ratings bust, but I get why NBC tried to make the return of Heroes into a night-long "event." The show had been off the air for so long, and the two-hour opener was so long-awaited (at least by the show's more loyal fans), that event-izing the premiere is very much in keeping with network programming practices these
...
read more
