Flaming Orbs of Sigmund aka The Golden Globes

The Golden Globe nominations came down today and here is a quick overview with some selected commentary on who I think will and/or should win.

BEST DRAMA TV SERIES
24
Big Love
Grey's Anatomy
Heroes
Lost

"Heroes" is definitely the best new series out this year, but it might be too new to take the win. Not to mention it's going up against what was probably the best season of "24" so far and "Lost" which had a killer second season and a pretty good start to it's third. I'd probably vote for "Lost", but I have a feeling "24" will win.

BEST ACTOR IN A DRAMA SERIES
Patrick Dempsey, Grey's Anatomy
Michael C. Hall, Dexter
Hugh Laurie, House
Bill Paxton, Big Love
Kiefer Sutherland, 24

BEST ACTRESS IN A DRAMA SERIES
Patricia Arquette, Medium
Edie Falco, The Sopranos
Evangeline Lilly, Lost
Ellen Pompeo, Grey's Anatomy
Kyra Sedgwick, The Closer

I'm gonna go with Kyra Sedgwick in this category. Though "The Closer" can be a little formulaic in its structure, its a good show and she is a well developed multidimensional character. Not to mention pulling off that accent week after week.

BEST MUSICAL OR COMEDY TV SERIES
Desperate Housewives
Entourage
The Office
Ugly Betty
Weeds

Hands down it has to be "The Office". There is no funnier show on TV right now.

BEST ACTOR IN A MUSICAL OR COMEDY TV SERIES
Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock
Zach Braff, Scrubs
Steve Carrell, The Office
Jason Lee, My Name Is Earl
Tony Shalhoub, Monk

Hands down it has to be Alec Baldwin. There is no funnier guy on TV right now. See one of my earlier posts for my rationale.

BEST ACTRESS IN A MUSICAL OR COMEDY TV SERIES
Marcia Cross, Desperate Housewives
America Ferrera, Ugly Betty
Felicity Huffman, Desperate Housewives
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, The New Adventures of Old Christine
Mary-Louise Parker, Weeds

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR IN A SERIES, MINISERIES, OR TV MOVIE
Thomas Haden Church, Broken Trails
Jeremy Irons, Elizabeth I
Justin Kirk, Weeds
Masi Oka, Heroes
Jeremy Piven, Entourage

I like Oka here. His character Hiro is a fan favorite because of his ability to play him with a certain naive giddiness a comic book geek would have if he found powers of his own. He is also able to give him enough gravity when needed without taking himself to seriously.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS IN A SERIES, MINISERIES, OR TV MOVIE
Emily Blunt, Gideon's Daughter
Toni Collette, Tsunami, the Aftermath
Katherine Heigl, Grey's Anatomy
Sarah Paulson, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
Elizabeth Perkins, Weeds

I'm a little disappointed that some actors or shows didn't get recognized, but there you go. Tune in January 15th to see the winners.

Get Yer Ra Ra's Out!

Just read an interesting article in the Washington Post about Prince being selected as the half-time performer for this year's Super Bowl. The article's main focus was on how since "Nipplegate" happened, it's been all male performers during half-time. Guess it's less likely anything will slip out, especially if a button fly is involved.

Anyway it got me to thinking. Not about how ridiculously puritanical this country can be at times, but rather why the producers of the Super Bowl broadcast don't come up with something a little more entertaining than their run of the mill, completely un-hip half-time musical performance. Not only are these performances overblown, over rehearsed, dull-fests, but could they get less relevant artists at this point to do the show? Prince, Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, Janet Jackson, and Britney Spears and Aerosmith are the most recent acts I can remember and aside from Britney, I don't think any of them has had a hit record so far this century. Who are they trying to appeal to with this crap? Granted I own albums by almost all of the performers listed above, but their heydays have come and gone and I don't see how any of them appeal to a mass audience in 2006.

Super Bowl producers you can do better. Why not have the kid's Pass, Punt, Kick finals or a Pop-Warner league super bowl go on during half-time? Better yet, put the cheerleaders from each team out on the field for 30 minutes of touch football. You couldn't peel guys away from the TV for that!

Lost in the Shuffle

When it returns in February, "Lost" will be moving from 9pm to 10pm on Wednesdays. The full story can be found here. I hope we aren't getting into slippery slope territory, because there is nothing more annoying than having one of your favorite shows get shuffled around more than once or twice. I used to be a devoted "Scrubs" watcher the first two seasons, until NBC moved it so many times I didn't know where to find it. I eventually gave up looking. Only recently, thanks to Comedy Central reruns, have I developed a renewed interest in the show; which is still very good by the way. Anyway, ABC made similar moves with "Alias", and with increasingly annoying frequency as the show started struggling. Not that "Lost" is struggling. In fact, I have a feeling this move might be to make sure that it doesn't start struggling. Regardless, I'll be there at 10pm with bells on.

But I'll take the bells off come 11. The article suggests that a later start may help out the local newscast on ABC affiliates at 11pm. This is an interesting statement in light of a recent Washington Post article which talks about ratings troubles for 11 o'clock news broadcasts in the D.C. area. Maybe if local news wasn't the absolute skankiest form of journalism more people would watch it. At least in my case, moving a favorite show to a lead-in spot for the local news affiliate is not going to make me anymore inclined to stay tuned for what has essentially become the nightly crime report, with a story about a bear that wandered into a swimming pool tacked on to lighten things up.

Who Needs a Cape?!

So "Heroes" was AWWWWESOME last night! Really, that's all there is to say about it. Though if you would like to hear someone more eloquent then me explain why it was so great, you can do so here. I have never felt so satisfied, yet still intrigued by a cliffhanger finale. (The season two finale of "Lost" is a very close second.) Anyone have any theories on Peter's flu-like symptoms? Whatever their cause they made for some pretty freaky (and cool) fever dreams. Can't wait 'til January!!

In other news TV Gal has a quick rundown of her ten favorite current TV characters. It's definitely worth a glance.

Roundup and Recap

Reports of the Sitcom's Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated
USA Today this week had a great interview with producers from the shows making up NBC's revamped must-see-tv block on Thursday nights. Among the topics are ratings, the new style of sitcom, and as always, whether the sitcom is dead; to which Bill Lawrence, exec. producer of "Scrubs", has the best answer I've heard in a while:

The only thing really dead about comedy right now is that everybody has so many options about what to watch that crappy comedy is dead. Crappy television is dead. The days of putting anything on at 8:30 just because it's after a hit and expecting people to watch it, I think that's over with.

Of course crappy television isn't quite dead yet (somebody put "Twenty Good Years" on the air after all), but his point is a good one.

Shielded Cable
Also in USA Today, speculation that broadcast decency standards may be applied to basic cable in the not too distant future. I'm a still on the fence about that. There's a lot of questionable stuff on some cable channels even during the middle of the day. But nobody's forcing me to buy basic cable, and most cable boxes these days have more parental control options than they do channels. Plus, the only chance I get to watch "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" is when they're rerun at 8am, and I'm pretty sure a change in the rules would take that away from me.

Fake News Alert!
Speaking of the "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report"; executive producer for both shows, Ben Karlin, has decided it's time to move on. Luckily he will stick around as a consultant. Get the whole skinny from the NY Times here.

30 + 60 = 90 Minutes of Quality TV
Alessandra Stanley compares "30 Rock" and "Studio 60" in an interesting piece in the New York Times. She likes both shows, but notices many of the same annoyances with "Studio 60" that I do.

"30 Rock"s on!
Good news for fans of "30 Rock", which includes me. NBC has picked up the show for a full season. Details are here at zap2it.com.


Quick Recap
Solid episodes this week from "The Office" (of course), "Heroes" and "3o Rock". I didn't get a chance to watch "Studio 60" yet. First there was Monday Night Football, and after that I was a little busy with the Superman box set that came out this week.

I saw my first broadcast of Thursday Night Football. Not only wasn't I really interested in the match up (though I do have Baltimore's defense in my fantasy league), but I had a hard time with Bryant Gumbel doing play-by-play. There's something off-putting in his nasally, high-pitched delivery that doesn't really go too well with football. I'll take Greg doing a game any day.

Friday night marked the first on-screen appearance of my brother-in-law Ken. Usually he works behind the scenes, but last night he got some face time and stole the show, leaving at least one viewer (his sister) asking for more. Nice work Ken!

The Kids Aren't So Alright Anymore and General Miscellany

Baby Boomers are feeling left behind by today's TV programmers and advertisers. According to a recent study by Harris Interactive, folks in the 49+ demo feel "alienated" by what's on their TVs these days; both the shows and the ads.

Depending on what you watch and where you watch it, they may be justified. There are a lot of shows and, accordingly, a lot of ads that are targeted towards a much younger demographic than those of the boomer generation. As described in an article by the AP's David Bauder:

The theory among advertisers is that it's important to reach young people as their preferences are forming — get them hooked on a certain toothpaste or soda early and they'll be hooked for life. Advertisers will pay a premium for young viewers: $335 for every thousand people in the 18-to-24 age range that a network delivers, for example. Viewers aged 55-to-64 are worth only $119 for every thousand, according to Nielsen Media Research.

I've never been able to see the logic in the second part of that statement. People in the 18-24 range are, in my mind, less apt to watch as much TV as those in the 55-64 range. Not only that, but 18 to 24 yr olds have a heck of lot less discretionary income. So why pay a premium to reach people who aren't as reachable or as able to afford your product? And as far as preferences are concerned, everyone has favorite brands, but when money is tight (which it usually is when your in your late teens/early 20s) price is usually all that matters. Find the biggest dolt in any college dorm and he'll know you get a better deal buying a case of Milwaukee's Best than a 12 pack of Sam Adam's. What's more is that's he's probably never seen a commercial for the "beast".

The results of the study are prompting some in the industry to question whether the above ratios make sense anymore. But while programming execs and marketing agents need to consider whether they are willing to alienate their biggest demographic just on the hope that they can create brand loyalty among a smaller group of viewers, they should also consider the words of Evan Shapiro, head of the Independent Film Channel:

"If you are a 50-year-old male or female, there is an enormous amount of television for you. It's just not on all the places that it used to be."

You know what? He's right. I stopped whining years ago about how crappy MTV had become and just accepted I was no longer part of the channel's target market. Besides, there are other channels that do what MTV used to do, and who do it better. Twenty years ago that might not have been true, and though the major networks are still behind the curve in orignial and innovative models of programming, the niche programming provided by cable allows for unheard of possibilities for both viewers and advertisers.

Miscellaneous Notes

• ABC has put "The Nine" on indefinite hiatus. They say the show will return, but are not forthcoming as to when.

• For those who still watch, and I'm not one of them, tonight is the fall finale of "Prison Break". New episodes should return in January to coincide with the start of the sixth season of "24".

• "Scrubs" returns for it's sixth season Thursday night following "30 Rock", for which NBC requested three more scripts. Let's hope they request additional episodes.

"The Nine's" Lives Are Just About Up

So about 2/3 of the way through last week's episode of "The Nine" I decided it was time to give up. I didn't even bother to finish watching the episode, I just got up off the couch, grabbed -GASP!- a book, and headed off to bed. You can only allow yourself to be bored for so long. Every man has his breaking point, and as soon as Audrey (or the chick who played Audrey in "24" - I can't remember her character's name on this show) started whining to her shrink, I realized I had hit mine.

Anyway, last night I found myself staring at the screen and thinking of a million different things, not one of which had to do with anything that was being reflected onto my retinas from the direction of the TV. Thus I realized that I don't really care what happened in the bank, largely because I don't really care about the characters. When you're dealing with a show who's premise requires it to be both story and character driven, you better make sure that both are equally compelling, a la "Heroes" or "Lost".

And maybe that's the problem with "The Nine". In both "Heroes" and "Lost" we are living the mystery with the characters, and seeing their true essence and identity develop and evolve as a result of their trying to find the same answers as the audience. "The Nine" on the other hand, has created a "mystery" solely for the purpose of enticing viewers. The characters know what happened in the bank, it's only the audience that doesn't. In that context the mystery aspect of the story can't possibly provide for effective or satisfying character development the way it does in the other shows. My feeling is that the creators are trying to show how a traumatic event such as the one depicted affects the lives of everyone involved. That by itself is actually an interesting idea for a show; so why bog it down with a gimmick that distracts from that goal? Getting rid of that excess baggage would have allowed the writers to create a group of truly complex, compelling characters rather than a bunch of 2-dimensional stereotypes.

Anyway, I gave this show a few weeks, but now I think I quit. I hung around because the pilot was decent, but mostly because I like Tim Daly and want to root for shows he's in. I always thought "Wings" was a decent show, and I really liked last year's cancelled-much-too-early "Eyes", which was also on ABC. But as I've said in other posts, goodwill can only get you so far, and right now "The Nine" is just about out of lives.

"I once drove a rental car into the Hudson, just to practice escaping."

Alec Baldwin is the funniest guy in primetime. Sure, the folks from The Office give you the most bang for your buck week after week, but that's more of a collective hilarity. Alec Baldwin is a one man juggernaut who could do a five-minute monologue and have you rolling on the floor the entire time. If you need proof, track down last night's episode of 30 Rock and watch the scene with the b-roll of his character's attempt to make a promo tape for a new GE product. Besides, if you've ever seen any of his dozen or so appearances on SNL (Brasky, Kanker, etc.), not to mention his unexpected cameos in countless movies and shows, then my opening statement should come as no surprise.

A recent profile of entertainment's latest utility man can be found here.

As for the show, 30 Rock is solid. Not great, yet, but very entertaining. There are usually one or two laugh out loud moments a week, which is more than I can say for anything ABC ever aired as part of it's popular TGIF programming. It's also more than I am willing to say for a lot of this year's current crop of new comedies. The writing is clever, the acting is good, and the show seems to have worked out some of it's early kinks. Tom Shales had some nice things to say about the series and last night's episode in particular in yesterday's Washington Post.

Though it hasn't done spectacular in the ratings, that may soon change. The show has just been moved to Thursday nights, and beginning on Nov. 30 it will find a new home sandwiched between The Office and Scrubs, which is finally getting it's sixth season underway.

However, if ratings don't improve and NBC decides to shelve the show, they really need to consider creating a project for Mr. Baldwin. As Kenny Bania would say; "He's gold, Jerry! Gold!"

Feeling Lostless?

For those of us who will be going through "Lost" withdrawal during the next two and a half months, there is some good news. It seems ABC is going to play some teasers for the second half of the season during the new show "Daybreak" which will occupy "Lost's" time slot at 9 pm Wednesday nights. The full story is here.

While this isn't enough to get me to watch what is essentially "Groundhog Day" turned into a crime drama, it's nice to know they are doing at least a little something to satiate the faithful. Luckily, the teasers will be available for viewing on the "Lost" page at abc.com the day after they air, along with all six episodes that have aired so far this season.

Selected Recaps for the Week of 11/6

POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT!!!!

Heroes:
Nikki tries to get her dark side to come out, while we find out that Micah has some abilities of his own. Meanwhile, we see some possible alliance foreshadowing with Hiro helping DL save the car crash victims. Peter asks for Nathan's help in retrieving the missing picture that will help solve the riddle of the "Save the Cheerleader, Save the World" tagline. Nathan gets it, but lies to Peter about having it. What's up with that? And what's up with different groups of people having similar tattoos?

Studio 60:
See in-depth critique below. This episode was OK. Tonight is the conclusion. We'll find out the compelling mystery as to why Tom was driving 120mph in Nevada. Should be a nail biter!

Lost:
Pretty good ep. Though a few too many things left hanging for what is essentially the fall season finale. I'm still not sure Kate doesn't love Jack. His trick at the end with Henry Gale and the walkie talkie was pretty 007. Can't wait for February! EW.com has a great recap available here.

Dancing with the Stars:
It's down to Emmit and Slater!!

The Office:
Quite possibly the best opening ever for this show with the "Future Dwight" fax prank. Scranton branch closes, then doesn't. Jim's coming back to Stanford, along with the girl who is "kinda in to him", and I don't mean Pam. Ryan's joke about the business cards was priceless, and right on. There is an extended version of this ep at www.nbc.com/office.

Smallville:
I was so excited when Lana was fainting and getting checked out in the hospital. I wish they would kill her off, she is the most one-dimensional character on television. Of course my excitement turned to disappointment when it turned out she was only pregnant. There was a cool inside joke about Green Arrow not being in Clark's "league".

Studio 60, Season 1: The Culture Wars

This weekend found me working my way through my DVR backlog, catching up on last week's crop of new episodes, when I got to the latest episode of "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip". I never look forward to watching this show the way I do "Lost" or the way I used to with "Smallville", but nonetheless I record it every week, knowing that it can get better, and hoping that it will.

I started watching this show largely because of its pedigree. I will watch anything, just on general principle, if it is brought to us by the same people who created "Sports Night" and "The West Wing". But the goodwill these guys have created with me is almost used up.

Enough with the Hollywood vs. Religious Right theme! It was a decent idea for a story or two, but in no way should it be used as the base premise for the series, and that's where it feels like this show is going. It worked well when they used it as the plot device for the first couple episodes, but now it seems like every week the whole religion thing is either the plot or sub-plot of the show. Not only does this theme appear in virtually every episode, but the sketch show within the show has a religion-related sketch every week as well. Ironic? No. Overly redundant, boring and ridiculous? Yes.

One of Sorkin's minor drawbacks, as evidenced in both "Sports Night" and "The West Wing", is that he can fall into "preachy" pretty quick. This becomes a major drawback when the stories lend themselves to this week after week.

The show does draw some critical raves and it should; it is well acted, well written, and mildly entertaining for the most part. Most reviewers agree that the major drawback is how unfunny the SNL type show within a show is. Tim Cuprisin from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel has an article out today that focuses on this and a couple other problems he has with the show.

Regardless, the show has been picked up for a full season (read the AP story here), so hopefully the writers will start to work out the kinks and concentrate on making a must-watch show rather than a weekly rant against the religious right that people watch out of faith in the creators. Now that's ironic.

Welcome

Welcome! This blog is meant to be a place for me to live out my fantasy of being a television columnist. I've watched way too much TV throughout the course of my life not to do something at least nominally productive with it. Check back for updates on all things old and new regarding TV.