The Show Must Go On and On and On and On and...

The official tally for last night's Oscar telecast was 3 hours, 52 minutes. Marathons take less time. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of just hitting record on the DVR, forgetting that it would only tape the show until it's scheduled end (11:30pm). Since the show went on for close to another hour after that, I had to look up the remaining winners (including most of the major categories) online. (To digress for a moment, I found it kind of annoying that they don't have video of the acceptance speeches on the Oscar.com website.)

So even though I missed the biggest awards of the evening, I still feel confident in rating the overall presentation. It was OK. It wasn't the greatest I've seen, nor was it the worst. It was entertaining and harmless for the most part. My biggest complaint, as with others I've read today, was the pacing. It just felt like it was taking forever to get to anything. If the directors/producers of last night's show even get nominated for an Emmy in the outstanding variety category, I'll be dumbstruck. There was no way that the schedule of that show, even on paper, was going to fit in the 3 hour time slot.

Main problem: production numbers. Didn't need the interpretive dance, didn't need the Jack Black/Will Ferrel routine (didn't they do something similar at another recent awards show?), and while I love a good montage, there were a few too many last night (though I did miss the Michael Mann one that ran during the last hour). And I definitely didn't need Al Gore telling me how "green" the Academy is. Are you kidding? The amount of waste involved in even the smallest Hollywood production dwarfs what contribution to global warming most of us will make in our lifetime.

As for the hosting duties. I've never found Ellen DeGeneres that funny. I remember her from her stand-up days; before her coming out, her sitcom, her talk show, etc. I don't have anything against her, I just never thought she was that funny. That being said she did a decent job last night, though not nearly as edgy as the last couple years. That's probably why they chose her though, and probably why I've never laughed at one of her jokes, once, ever.

In spite of all this, there were some treats buried within last night's sea of self congratulation. I really liked how the nominees for screenwriting were presented, the presenters reading excerpts from the script. I also thought the Errol Morris montage of nominees at the beginning was pretty cool, though it did slightly make me think it was going to end with and ad for Apple. Coolest of all though, was the sound effects chorus. That was spectacular. It was like watching two dozen of the guy from the Police Academy movies. Seriously though, that was pretty awesome.

In spite of the lengthiness of the broadcast ratings were up this year over last, probably cause many categories seemed wide open. I would be interested in seeing a breakdown of ratings throughout the telecast, i.e. how much viewership dropped as the show went on and on and on and ...

p.s.

This is a funny quote:

ABC says about 74.8 million people watched at least six minutes of the broadcast. Cut that down to one minute, and the number rises to 87 million.

If they round up to a minute like the phone companies do, then I would guess those 13 million viewers just happened to stop while channel surfing.

Padding Stats

Have you ever been in this situation? You're watching a network show and during one of the breaks they promote another show as the "season's most watched new series" or "Thursday's most watched show". After hearing this you wonder how this can be since the show in question is really a piece of crap. And you know for sure there are others out there doing better in the ratings. Turns out they (CBS in particular) are doing a little creative accounting, as detailed in a recent Washington Post article:

According to Nielsen, claims of 'most watched' can only be made based on gross impressions, which is number of telecasts multiplied by the program's average audience," the network said in a statement sent to The TV Column.

"In the case of 'Shark,' it's based on 20 broadcasts multiplied by its average audience of 13.37 million viewers, which equals 267.38 million gross impressions, more than any other new series," the network said.

"Heroes," on the other hand, had aired only 15 times through last weekend, which, when multiplied by its season average of 14.5 million viewers, works out to about 217 million gross impressions.

It's this same kind of big picture, out-of-the-box thinking that makes "CSI" the season's most watched series though it's eating "Idol's" dust each week.

I kind of always guessed there was some fuzzy math going on there, but my question is...how many viewers does such bravado actually bring to a show? I suppose it must work or else they wouldn't waste the precious ad time, and I know a lot of people don't want to be out of the loop or miss the next big thing. I guess I'm too cynical though, 'cause at the same time my brain tries to reconcile such statements with the facts, two things go through my head: 1) They're making that up and 2) Guess I won't be watching that, I don't wanna be like everyone else. And while I guess I've been right along on number 1, I do (for better or worse) sometimes get drawn in by the hype. Thankfully though, it's not usually something on CBS.

"Unexpected" Delight

So I really liked this week's episode of Heroes, a lot. I've liked the show all along, but this was really the first episode where I was still thinking about it after it ended. Maybe this is because stuff actually happened this week as opposed to what has just seemed like episode after episode of build up. Hiro and Ando go their separate ways, Claire's family gets held hostage by Ted the Atom Man and Park-Man, and perhaps the coolest thing we discover is that Peter not only absorbs other people's powers, but he was also able to absorb those stolen from others by Sylar, which means he can do quite a bit.

I thought it was neat how Sylar bit off more than he could chew. I wonder if he'll remember that the lady's defense against super hearing was to listen to rap music? I also thought it was interesting that Hiro not only turned back time, but actually altered it. When he willed the bullet back into the gun, the gun kicked back on the girl giving Dauber time to tackle her. That's a pretty significant difference than just being able to put the bullet back and jump out of the way.

I'm feeling better and better about this show and am glad to finally be seeing some payoff. How about you?

Another Day, Another Overthrow

I came across this quote within an article about a miniseries on BBC America and I found myself (surprisingly) agreeing with it:

Viewers already are on their sixth trek down this road on 24, a show that, after a great seasonal start, seems to be plunging off the conspiracy deep end. (Another attempt to overthrow the president? Doesn't anyone in the Palmer family know how to staff a White House?)

Last week I remember remarking, while watching Lennox and Reed plan what can only be an assassination plot, that 24 has gone to this well once too often. The political intrigue of last season was the basis of the plot and therefore mesmerizing, not only because the President was involved in allowing a terrorist attack to happen, but also because he was basically a puppet. But after a whole season of political infighting and undermining the show needs to find a different focus. Hopefully they will resolve this storyline quickly and focus on what is really the captivating theme of this season: Jack fighting his family and his demons.

Found. (Part 2)

Lost got it's groove back this week, although in my opinion it never really lost it. Most of the negative press the show is getting seems to me to be the standard response people have when something really good disappoints them in even a minuscule way. There are a ton of shows out there that disappoint week after week, so maybe Lost's critics can take a crack at some of those and stop trying to kill my buzz.

There was a great in-depth article in this week's issue of "Entertainment Weekly" that covered a lot of this ground as well as some hints at future developments in the series. The whole article can be found online here.

Anyway, this week's episode was very cool. Ben waking up in the middle of his surgery was awesome, as was the fact that it appears whatever organization The Others are a part of were actually able to have Juliet's ex-husband get hit by a bus after she made a stressed-out, impetuous wish to that effect. We've already seen how ruthless these guys can be, but I had no idea they had the cojones to kidnap people from back in the real world. Do you get the feeling that a lot of The Others like Jack, or at least respect him? Can't wait for next week's Desmond flashback.


Quick Notes

24 picked up the pace again after what seemed like a placeholder episode last week. Maybe it's my dark side welling up, but it was pretty awesome to see Jack torture his own brother.

Heroes banked another good episode. I was a little afraid that George Takei's guest spot might be a little over the top, but since he didn't speak English I think it kept it from going campy.

I've officially given up on Studio 60.

Both 30 Rock and The Office were stellar this week, as usual. Scrubs was good too, and a little sad when we found out that J.D.'s girlfriend lied about having a miscarriage.

Smallville must have heard about my post from a couple weeks past because this and last week's episodes were definitely an improvement over what we've seen from that show lately.

Finally, The Police are reuniting for the Grammy's tomorrow night. I will be sure to record the show and just watch that performance. The Grammy's have become not only irrelevant but also, in comic-book-guy ease, the worst...awards...show...ever.

Major League Stupidity

Major League Baseball is once again trying their damndest to lose fans. First was their insanely ridiculous idea to charge fantasy baseball sites for the use of "their" statistics. Let's just forget about how arrogant you have to be to think you could copyright facts, and discuss for a moment why such a hairbrained scheme is bad for business. On second thought, let's let someone from the Wharton School of Business do that:

Although Major League Baseball has the right to try to protect its property, by picking a fight with CBC, it risks alienating fans, damaging its brand and sacrificing future revenues for a small gain, say Wharton faculty and other baseball spectators. "Even if Major League Baseball has the legal right to do this, they are stupid to," says Wharton marketing professor Pete Fader. "This is a sport that has all the Barry Bonds and steroids junk going on. And now people are talking about how greedy Major League Baseball is. The League doesn't want that. The upside potential isn't worth it."

That was last year. Now, it seems MLB is in negotiations with DirectTV to provide it with exclusive rights to its ExtraInnings package. According to a recent USA Today article, there are 63 million homes in America that have access to digital cable and/or satellite tv. Currently, any of these subscribers can purchase the ExtraInnings package, which provides up to 60 games a week from all over the league. I've bought this package the last few years and been pretty happy with it, with the lone exception that the games are not broadcast in HD. If the deal with DirectTV goes through, the market for the package drops to 15 million. Smart business sense? No. I'm sure MLB thinks enough people will make the move to satellite to make it make sense, but I don't think they will. I know I won't. Not just for that.

So...thanks Major League Baseball, for giving me the opportunity to do something else with my time this summer.

Found? (Part I)

After a long, mild winter Lost finally returns this Wednesday in it's new time slot (10pm). By most accounts the episode is worth the wait. The "What to Watch" section in this week's "Entertainment Weekly" describes the episode as "good...really good...first season what's-in-the-hatch good". TV Gal over at zap2it.com makes the same claim, and with such a great finish to the last ep in Nov - "Kate, Dammit, Run!"- how could picking up where we left off not be equally as good. By the way, over at ABC Lost's site you can watch some previews of the upcoming episode and season (Tip: Be patient. There are a number of previews, but there are short ads between each).

In related news, USA Today has a piece about the show's return, it's prospects for increasing it's ratings, and whether it really is at a creative crossroads. My answer to that last question is no; the show is as good as it has ever been. The problem, in my opinion, lies with the instant-gratification portion of the audience who are unwilling or unable to wait out a mystery. Isn't that the point?

Finally, the Washington Post has a rather extensive article on the number of shows taking relatively lengthy hiatuses (hiati??) this season, including Lost. Are such breaks good for these series? I would say yes. Why not have every serialized drama run their seasons like 24? I can wait a year between seasons if I know I don't have to sit through weeks of reruns. And right now I can't think of anything better than knowing that I have sixteen straight weeks of Lost coming my way.

And The Kenmore Pro Kitchen Goes To...

For some reason, last night's season finale of Top Chef felt a little anticlimactic. Perhaps it was because my pick for winner, Sam, was relegated to a line cook. Or maybe it was because there didn't seem to be enough analysis from the judges, neither during the meal nor at the judges table later. While it was a little underwhelming, it was nonetheless still compelling, due in no small part to the extremely gratifying opportunity to see Marcel squirm when Ilan was announced as the winner. His expression and post-game interview after his loss made my night. The only thing that would have made that moment better is if Padma had announced the winner by saying " Marcel...congratulate Ilan on being the Top Chef."

Enough with the petty personal politics though. That's not what this show is about, and it's for that reason that it is one of the only reality shows that I can actually stomach. Mostly, this is because it actually focuses on the competition rather than on the personalities. It also functions the way similar situations really would in a working kitchen. Frank Bruni, the New York Times restaurant critic, speaks to all of this and more in a piece from yesterday's issue:

No, Mr. Vigneron, 26, and Mr. Hall, 24, aren’t the most likable of the 15 chefs who participated in the competition. Could it be that they’re the last two standing because they’re actually the most talented? It’s possible. Definitely possible.

And that’s a big part of why “Top Chef” works so well and why so many food lovers will tune in to the season finale tonight on Bravo.

For all its generically hyped-up drama, cheesy gimmickry and abject fealty to the tropes of reality television, “Top Chef” really is about cooking: what goes into it; what comes out of it; what reliably succeeds in the kitchen and on the plate; what predictably doesn’t.

It’s not just “The Apprentice” with the chef Tom Colicchio subbing for the emperor Donald Trump, not just “America’s Next Top Model” with a much higher calorie count. It’s a look at the imagination, desperation, judgment and serendipity that inform any great meal.

Bruni's whole article is definitely worth a read as he breaks down all the reasons to like this show.

After thoroughly (and surprisingly) enjoying season one, I was a little afraid Top Chef in its second season might fall into the trap that a lot of these reality competitions do: changing focus to the interpersonal relationships rather than the contest. It's for that reason that I stopped watching The Apprentice after its first season and conversely is why it should be no wonder The Amazing Race wins Best Reality Emmy every year. They focus on the competition primarily, and not the adolescent relationship crap that is the ultimate legacy of The Real World.

Regardless, my fears were unfounded. Not only was the cooking at the forefront of each episode this season, but you could tell by head judge Tom Colicchio's expressions when confronted with whining from the contestants that he wants nothing to do with petty carping and relationship counseling. He simply wants to see these folks cook. You cold almost sense his exasperation in the second to last episode when Elia and Ilan tried to peg Marcel as a cheater. After sending someone home for cheating in one episode, not sending someone home for the same reason in another, and having to send yet another home for a non-competition rules violation, he seemed pretty happy in the finale to be focused solely on judging cooking.

That sort of centeredness is a major reason why I will be tuning in when season three hits the airwaves.