The Brainer - Anticipation Tastes Like M&Ms

And I make my victorious return to the blog place, after a summer of depravity and corruption.  Okay, so that’s a lie.  I just liked the sound of it.  In reality it was a summer of writing, resulting in a first draft of a screenplay for a rock opera and a first draft of a YA novel co-authored with my friend Nikki.  The latter was completed in 72 hours over Labor Day weekend for the annual 3-Day Novel Contest, and I’ve spent the rest of September magically regenerating the brain cells that leaked out through my ears during that experience.

Now, don’t think this means that I have nothing to say about summer television.  It wasn’t all pen and paper, or fingers and keyboard.  I’ve watched my share of shows, and I look forward to discussing my experiences in great detail, regurgitating my disappointments and delights all over this laptop. 

Today, however, is a day of anticipation.  Last night was the season premiere of The Brainer (that’s The Mentalist, for the uninitiated).  I haven’t watched yet, but that’s my plan for later this evening, and I’m interested to see how they keep Patrick Jane as a main character while he’s serving time for murdering a man in a shopping mall.  (Or, more likely, what angle they play to plausibly keep him out of prison…)

Several issues come into play here, not the least of which is that someone is going to have to prove that the man that Jane shot is actually Red John.  Considering how careful he’s been in the past, odds are low that they’ll cruise by his home/apartment/hotel room and find a big banner proclaiming his identity for all the world to see.  There’s also the fact that Patrick Jane, who has never shown any interest in guns, just happened to be carrying one with him on this particular occasion.   The jury ponders why he would do that, unless he suspected that he’d be meeting Red John that day.

Of course it’s possible that the CBI will have more luck working backward than they did working forward, and they may find links tying this stranger to the Red John case.  It’s also possible that a prosecutor would be unable to prove that Jane didn’t carry a gun on other occasions.  Then, there’s the remote possibility that Director Bertram is tied to Red John (he did quote William Blake last season, and could be the reason that Red John knew to go to the mall) and he’ll spill the beans and help with Jane’s exoneration…   Hell, maybe the governor will grant a pardon.  Who knows?  Well, the people who watched the premiere last night do, I suppose.  And the cast and crew of the show know.  And a psychic who didn’t watch the show might know anyways…

Ahem.  So, these are the things I’m thinking about as I wait patiently for the fateful moment to arrive.  Part of me wants to see Jane in prison again.  He’d totally rule the place, and the CBI would have to come visit him for help on cases.  That’d be a good episode or two, but it would be a different show without his interaction with the suspects and victims.

Before I go hunt and forage for my dinner, let me just express my excitement about Bradley Whitford as Red John.  Come on, you felt it too.  That first moment when you noticed him in the foreground of a shot and went, ‘Holy crap – is that Bradley Whitford?!’  It takes me back to the ‘90s, and Profiler with Ally Walker.  There was a similar story line, with a serial killer that had ties to the main character, who we never saw.  There were hints – the partially obscured face, the phone message – but the big reveal was when they finally met face to face in confrontation.  By the time it happened, I was part of an underground movement (I mean, a group of friends…) that was pretty sure that Dennis Christopher was the big bad guy.  Boy, were we so right, and that was awesome.  Now, there wasn’t any tease about who was playing Red John, but the reveal was just as satisfying.  I bow down to Bradley Whitford.

Battlestar Galactica (2004) - Frakkin' Amazing And Not Just SciFi

I recently asked a friend if she had watched Battlestar Galactica (the reboot).  She replied, "No, I don't really watch scifi."  After smacking her repeatedly about the head and shoulders, I grabbed the opportunity to express how much she'd love the show, and how much it really isn't scifi.  Let's take advantage of this moment to redefine the Battlestar Galactica reboot as a drama that just happens to take place in space.  (I love my scifi, but I know what needs to be done to bring it to the mainstream.)

For the reboot, in addition to wiping out most of the campiness, the writers cleverly scrubbed the more science-fictiony elements from the show.  In the original series, the cylons were part of an alien race.  These aliens didn't exist in the reboot.  People created cylons, who then created more of themselves.  The original show focused on fighting cylons and finding the occasional alien life form on the planets they passed.  The reboot maintains focus on fighting cylons, with the aliens completely gone, replaced by a surprising depth of characters and stories that focus on the issues of trying to hold together the remnants of humanity and make decisions that are in the best interest of the very different groups that make up this new society.  There's political intrigue, military action, radicals on both ends of the spectrum and, in one of the many notable episodes, there are terrorists - suicide bombers - who represent the 'good guys.'  All of these story elements could happen in any setting - it's incidental that they're happening in outer space.  The cylons, many of whom look human, could be any standard wartime enemy.

After having this conversation, I went back and watched the pilot for the show.  The production values are outstanding (surprising when you remember that this aired on the channel formerly known as SciFi) and the acting is amazing.  It speaks volumes for the quality of the show when you realize that they landed Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell for two of the leads.  The story involves the return of the Cylons after a number of years without contact.  Their return marks the end of the human colonies which fall under the cylon attack.

The pilot is laden with all the exposition that you would expect, but the writers recognize that we are intelligent enough to figure out the people and the plot without having everything spelled out (another surprise, considering the source channel).  The characters on the original show were campy - there were heroic good guys and evil bad guys, but not a real depth to anyone.  The re-imagined characters are so much more...well, human.  There are flashes of brilliance and nobility and there are moments of sheer, cringe-worthy stupidity.  And you may see the entire spectrum from the same character.  In fact, there is more than one example of a character who seems either incredibly heroic or incredibly weak coming full circle over the course of a season.  One main character - who I despised for his weakness - became a favorite by the end of the series.  The pilot, alone, depicts the best and worst of humans.  We see society collapse and witness all the desperation, terror and resignation that accompanies this - people at their best and worst.  Even the smallest characters have importance.  We see a small girl, on her way to meet her parents, who has no idea that the world as she knows it has ended.  Later, we watch the same girl play with her doll, unaware of the cylon missiles that are behind her, about to destroy the ship she's traveling on.  We watch friends reunited after the colonies are destroyed and we see the silent despair of others who are unable to find their loved ones.

Now, I will be one of the first to admit that the finale of the show was a bit of a let-down but, in this case, it is the journey that's important, not the destination.  Overlooking the issues that the finale presents, it does provide satisfactory resolution for the overall story.  And it's the story that is the important thing here, throughout the entire series.  The writers remain true to the story and the characters in a way that is rarely maintained over multiple seasons.  Everyone should watch the pilot and the first two or three episodes before dismissing the show as standard scifi.

Castle - The Taste Of Betrayal

I went back to the season finale of Castle, having - as predicted - forgotten most of the specifics of those final minutes.  I mean, the key points were still with me but, if they managed to hang on this long, odds of my forgetting them...low.

I really thought that the episode was going to be all about that big betrayal at the end.  It turns out, though, that everyone got a little taste of it along the way.  For those that have never experienced it, betrayal tastes like a combination of salt and stale cigarettes, and it feels something like a large animal sitting on your chest - you're still getting air, but you know it's not enough.

Poor Beckett takes the brunt of the betrayals and the slightly less paralyzing disappointments for this episode.  I'm sure she was relieved to get to spend the last couple minutes of the show lying on her back, ignoring everyone.  Let's see...

• Beckett's Dad, who doesn't even really know Castle, goes behind her back to him to try to get her off her Mom's murder case.  (Sure, it's the old 'just want to keep you safe' gambit - still sneaky and hurtful...)
• The friendly guard that was buddying up to Beckett turned out to be dirty - taking a bribe to help set up a prison murder.  (She only saw him once a week, although he was supposedly going to ask her out...)
• Castle goes behind Beckett's back to Captain Montgomery, to try to get her taken off her Mom's case.  (Because, even though he's been working with her forever and is deeply in love with her, he doesn't realize how important this is to her, or how much that betrayal would hurt her.) Montgomery says no, and tells Castle she wouldn't listen anyway. He indicates that Castle's the only one Beckett might listen to, so...
• Being incredibly dumb... I mean because he's so afraid she'll get hurt, Castle goes to see Beckett at home to talk her into letting this one go.  This is the man that has helped her with the case every step of the way up to this point so, while I understand that he's afraid she'll get killed, it really bugs me that he's suddenly okay with just walking away when they're so close to the murderer.  Apparently Beckett watched the same episodes that I did, as she tells him to go away and never come back, ever.
• Now Ryan and Esposito get their chance to make prune-faces of disbelief and distaste, as they are the ones who discover that 'boss of the year' Captain Montgomery is 'the third man'.  They get a nice little scene where they don't agree on this and it looks like they might beat the shit out of each other.
• Beckett, of course, is the one that gets to confront Oh-Captain-My-Captain face to face, and this is where I came in the first time around. Still sleepy and confused, and having missed all that came before, I have to admit that the Captain's motives made very little sense to me.  While I found it much clearer in the light of day with all brain cells firing, I still don't think it was done as well as it could have been.  The writers obviously wanted us to be uncertain as to whether or not Montgomery was going to hand over Beckett, and they obviously wanted Montgomery to redeem himself.  He did, to an extent, but I have to wonder - if he really wanted redemption, why didn't he give up the name of the big bad?  How did a standoff with a bunch of armed guys - alone - seem like a good idea?  The odds were against him and, if he hadn't succeeded, then Beckett would still have been a target.  He also implied that he'd taken care of her - that she wasn't going to be in any future danger.  Talk about an epic fail, huh?  So the intentions were good, the method sucked, the execution was acceptable - he got what he wanted - bad guys dead and no jail for him, and the aftermath was not planned for at all.  Logically, if Montgomery was a good guy who'd made a terrible mistake a long time ago and been working to make up for it through his entire career, and he planned to end the night dead rather than going to jail, wouldn't he have given Beckett the name she was looking for?  We'll call that one last big betrayal...

Torchwood - Have You Seen A Blowfish Driving A Sportcar?

Torchwood, that crazy Doctor Who spinoff from the BBC, premieres its new season on July 8 on Starz.  I'm interested to see how Americanized it's been, and I'm curious as to how the remaining original cast members will fit in with the new arrivals.

We all recognize that the month of June marks a serious dip in the number of original episodes that are available for quality shows so, if you haven't already seen Torchwood, I expect you to use this time wisely and commit to watching the first three seasons.  Series one and two (as the Brits call them) are full seasons of 13 episodes each, while season three is ten hours, over five parts.  No excuse for not watching. At all.

While Doctor Who is about a Time Lord, travelling through space and time with his human companions, meeting other aliens all over the place and righting wrongs, the characters of Torchwood are all human (although Captain Jack is a little bit special...) and are generally found in their own space and time, protecting the Earth from alien threats and collecting really cool alien toys.  The connection to Doctor Who is through Captain Jack Harkness, who traveled with the Doctor for part of a season.  The show was originally billed as darker and sexier than Doctor Who, and it certainly doesn't disappoint.

Also, there's a story arc that opens and closes the second season that features James Marsters (Spike from Buffy the Vampire Slayer) and is really excellent.

Hawaii Five-Abs - It Wasn't Me, It Was The Chairman From Iron Chef America!

So yeah, I finished watching Hawaii Five-Abs, and I just dropped in for a second before bed to say that it was all that I though it would be, which is to say, so much less than it could have been.

Things that are awesome:

1.  Larisa Oleynik is a nice addition, although her expertise is a little murky.  She's an analyst, but she's got an uncanny familiarity with the makings of car bombs.  Yeah, I get that it's the same type of bomb that Wo Fat used previously, but she didn't know that until she started looking, and the fact that she started, well, is she a bomb expert?

2.  The Chairman is the big bad guy.  That's right.  The guy that introduces the secret ingredient on Iron Chef America is planning to take over Hawaii.  And then probably the world!!!!

Things I don't buy:

1.  The governor keeping her enemies close.  I just don't think that she would give McGarrett his own unit and complete freedom to operate, particularly when the only reason he's accepting the job is because it gives him the opportunity to find his father's killer.  Seriously, send him as far away as you can.  She must have had some military strings that she could have pulled - didn't she have to pull them to keep him there?  It's like the writers decided suddenly that they weren't doing enough with Jean Smart, so they did their best to figure out how to make her evil in a hurry.

2.  How scummy was Danny - sleeping with his ex-wife and getting her pregnant while she's still married to (and living with) hubby number two?  Not a very good good-guy...

3.  Sure, your ex-husband slept with you and put a bun in your oven, and now you have to tell your current spouse that you're leaving him.  Is it really necessary to tell him about the baby?  That just seems hurtful and unnecessary to me...

4.  After the big deal in the pilot about McGarrett's dad trusting Chin, I think he's got to be working the inside.  Loyalty is a huge thing for him, so I expect he's going to be pivotal in getting the team back together.

5.  Should there, realistically, be a 'back together' for the team?  Two of them are in prison, one is going back to Jersey, and the fourth has his PD career back.  Plus, their supporter, the governor, is gone.  Who's going to grant that immunity now?  Where's their funding going to come from?  How easy can it be to find a new boss when, rumor has it, you killed your old one?

Supernatural - Home Of The Ham-Handed Reveal

Sometimes it makes sense to pour your guts out at a scenic overlook in the middle of nowhere - those panoramic views would make anyone emotional.

A charged exchange over the roof of the car - well, sure, they'll be driving somewhere when they're done.

Picnic table by the water... hmm... okay. I mean, people have to eat and it could conceivably happen that they do it in a ridiculously pretty place that serves as a lovely counterpoint to their eruption of angst.

I draw the line, however, at those completely random stops in the middle of nowhere during which two grown men - with or without beer (and, hey, you're driving!) - sit on the front of the car or turn back-to, presenting manly shoulders of pain to the other.  This is the clumsily executed setting where the brothers discuss the stuff that we all know but they've been to manly and stubborn to share.

Don't get me wrong - I love this show. Part of me recognizes that these guys - particularly Dean - have been horribly emotionally damaged by their upbringing, and these moments are painfully awkward for them, so of course they look awkward to us.  But how often do you stop by the side of the road while driving somewhere with a family member and share your innermost feelings?  That can't wait till the next motel?  Now, I see that the decision to open a festering psychological wound (think, Dad is dead because of me) is monumental and can't be approached casually.  On that occasion, the clumsiness of that moment was somehow appropriate.  However, the writers' decision to return to this device for most of the big reveals seems kind of cheap and redundant.  Since the emotional reveal has become almost a weekly device, it doesn't need to appear so clumsy and awkward anymore.  The brothers have been doing this off and on since season two and it loses some of its emotional charge due to the frequency and ham-handedness.  Jensen Ackles continues to be the prettiest man on television and there's a lot of talent there, but the material has really declined in its repetitiveness.  Come on, these guys should be accustomed to sharing and caring by now - they shouldn't continue to be so bad at it.

All this torment and angst, which made the characters very attractive in the early seasons (remember the episode 'Home' from the first season?) has managed to transform them over time into something a lot less appealing.  Remember Spike from Buffy the Vampire Slayer?  That character was a great villain in the early seasons, was still interesting as love's bitch in season five, and then got progressively less interesting as the writers forgot for a while that - as a fighter - he should be Buffy's equal, and then made him souled and mopey for most of the final season.

It was announced recently that Supernatural will be around for a seventh season, and I can only hope that the writers will use the summer as an opportunity to review their body of work and try to recapture the original spirit of the show.

I Am So Spoiled - The Hazards Of Previews, Recaps and Random Naptimes

I feel like it should go without saying on a blog like this but, just in case, if you don't want to know about the next-to-last episode of Bones or the finales for Castle or Hawaii Five-O, proceed with caution.  And let me  add that all three of these shows were spoiled for me, in three different ways.

First, as previously discussed, I saw a preview for the Bones episode where one of the team was supposed to die.  The ad implied 'main character' so I watched half of the episode fuming about how they'd ripped me off.  It was ultimately a good episode though, so I'm much calmer although still rather sheepish about how I let them play me.  Beware of the vicious, false preview.

Next in this spiral of doom was Castle. I fell asleep in front of the television at an embarrassingly early hour on Monday night, waking up at approximately 10:50pm.  My DVR - tasked with recording both Castle and Hawaii 5-Abs - had tuned itself to ABC while I slept, so my groggy brain absorbed the last ten minutes of Castle before it was able to signal my hand to tune to something else or just turn the TV off.  In a normal week - no big deal.  However, during the week of finales, this was a huge faux-pas.  I watched ten minutes of betrayal, sacrifice, mourning and WTF?!  I'm not sure if my sleep-addled brain was the problem, but the "bad" guy's motivations in those final minutes didn't make much sense to me, and even he didn't seem sure about what he was doing.  I definitely will need to see the whole episode while fully awake and give the writers the opportunity to convince me otherwise.  I'm just giving it a little time in hopes that my notoriously poor memory will forget the whole experience.

Finally - and most unfortunately - there was Hawaii Five-Abs.  I began watching the season finale with few to no expectations other than pretty people fighting crime.  This is a show that I love to watch, but it has the depth of a wading pool.  For this episode though, they apparently threw away style for substance.  I say 'apparently' because I haven't finished watching the episode.  While watching, I happened to read a recap on Facebook about the evil governor and the team breaking up and people being arrested and I had to stop watching because... well, what the hell?!  If the governor is evil then why does the team exist?  Perhaps this is addressed in the episode, but it seems to me that if you don't want someone in the military to interfere in your crime world, wouldn't you just let them continue their military service - probably back overseas?  Wouldn't you...  My list is long and, rather than sharing it now, perhaps I should watch the episode - on the off chance that it provides satisfactory answers - and get back to you...

Human Target: Watch The First Two Seasons So You Can Feel My Pain

Chris likes to point out that all the shows I watch get cancelled. In my defense, everything ends eventually, and some of "my" shows - ER, Supernatural - last longer than they should.  Others are shows that I missed the first time around and didn't find until after cancellation.

Human Target doesn't fit either of these categories.  It's a show that I found at the beginning of season one that should have lasted a lot longer than it did.  The characters were interesting, there were some outstanding guest stars (Lee Majors, Armand Assante and Timothy Omundson all in the same episode!!), and the production values and writing made it feel like watching a series of short movies.

Unfortunately, Fox didn't share my enthusiasm for the show.  After premiering it as a mid-season replacement in January of 2010, they bounced it around their schedule a bit, gave it a few weeks off, and did very little to promote it or help it to succeed.

Remarkably, down to the wire, a second season was ordered.  However, the network brass apparently decided that the chemistry between - and appeal of - Mark Valley, Chi McBride and the outstanding Jackie Earle Haley wasn't enough, and two female characters were added.  They were okay, although one was regularly irritating for much of the beginning of the season and the other was so underutilized that you'd wonder why she was credited some weeks.  The writers didn't seem to be equipped to write female roles larger than damsel-in-distress-of-the-week.  Fortunately the main characters continued to be kick-ass, which kept the show from becoming sucktastic.  Also, there's something warm and fuzzy about watching two former assassins helping people and doing the right thing - especially when they have very different reasons for it.

Ignore the sad truth that there will be no more episodes and we'll never be privy to Guerrero's back story.  If you choose to watch this show that will be the only disappointment you'll have to face.

Bones: The End Of Season Cop-Out

In recent years a number of shows have taken things to a whole new level by killing off main characters and establishing the real-world mentality that no one is safe.  Think of Heroes, Lost, 24 and even Supernatural, where each of the main characters has died at least once. (Sure, they cheat and bring them back, but remember that first time when we didn't know that they would...)  These shows set the bar high, making our expectations bigger.  Hell, even Bones used this in the second season when one of the main characters - Zack - becomes a villain and is ultimately arrested and leaves the show.

I'm not a rabid Bones fan, but I do watch the show regularly and I have to admit that I was intrigued by the commercial for the most recent episode, which indicated that the team would lose one of their own and cycled through pictures of all the main characters.  Unfortunate advertising choices on the part of Fox resulted in an ad for the season finale airing prior to the episode of doom and, based on the images shown, I was able to deduce that all of the main characters were safe except Sweets (nooooooooooo!!!) and Cam.  So I settled in to watch the episode convinced that the writers would eliminate the always-interesting Sweets rather than the generally-bland and under-utilized Cam.  Turns out that my worry was misdirected.  Instead of killing off a main character, the writers built the suspense then chose to eliminate one of the squinterns - Mr. Vincent Nigel-Murray.

Now, I'm not saying that Mr. Nigel-Murray didn't have a kick-ass death scene.  I'm just pointing out the falsely-advertised, cheesy cop-out that was his death.  I'm not even sure that I can fault the writers for this - it's a solid episode.  The main issue here is that the episode didn't produce what was advertised.  Who put those previews together, anyway?

I'm also irritated because the show has been a revolving carousel of squinterns this season, and the writers chose to kill off the best one.  Bones told him - as he bled out on the floor - that he was her favorite, and I echo that sentiment.  He was better than Depressed Guy, better than Repressed Guy, better than Broke-Slept-With-Angela Guy, and certainly better than Daisy.

There were some good dramatic moments in the episode but a lot of the emotional power was lost because the actual product fell short of the expectations generated by the advertising.

Doctor Who: Everything Is Better With Pirates, Except When It Isn't

Not only was last week's episode of Doctor Who disappointing, it also disproved what I had taken to be a given in life: Everything is better with pirates. (If you don't know where I learned this important lesson, watch this. It is outstanding.)

The beginning of the episode was strong - the appearance of the Doctor and his companions on the pirate ship was amusing, and Amy Pond demonstrated that she has plenty of swash and an adequate amount of buckle. From that point, though, it was pretty much downhill.

The characters were believably in-character and the acting was - as always - very good.  Even the concept of the episode was strong.  The execution of the idea, however, was sub-par, courtesy of poor writing.

Well, okay, the writing wasn't truly horrible - the dialogue was believable, but the story itself wasn't well thought out and there were plot holes so large that I expected a shark to appear out of the ocean and swim through them while rolling his eyes in embarrassment at having any part in this debacle.

In the episode the group faces a "siren" who appears out of the water and makes people disappear if they get injured.  Cool, right?  They all hide from her in a dry room - no water, so she can't get to them.  Then the Doctor realizes that she's not using water for access, she's able to appear through reflective surfaces. At this point everything falls apart.

1.  Why not use soap or grease on the windows and particularly on the mirror?  Breaking them apart just makes smaller reflective surfaces...

2.  Why didn't the siren use the reflective medallion to get to the captain's son as soon as he was marked? We don't see her use reflections until the Doctor tells us that she can...

3.  When the Tardis disappears inexplicably, the Doctor just lets it go without explanation as to why it's better to let it go than to stay with it, fix it, and return...

4.  With only the Doctor, the Captain and Amy left, the Doctor speculates that maybe everyone else hasn't been killed, maybe they were just transported somewhere else.  His speculation seems more like wishful thinking than the sound theory that we're used to hearing from him.  So, based on his flight of fancy, they all let the siren take them...

This is Steve Thompson's first writing credit for the show, and I have to wonder if Russell T. Davies and Steven Moffat went on vacation to Antarctica and forgot their satellite phone.  Seriously, did no one read this thing before the cameras started rolling?

On the bright side, the Neil Gaiman episode airs next and, in spite of my deep disappointment in this most recent offering, I have high hopes for it.

The Brainer - From A Place Of Love

At first glance The Mentalist - known as The Brainer in my circle - appears to be yet another crime procedural, along the lines of CSI and all the other alphabet shows. I've also heard it referred to as a 'serious' Psyche.

In reality it is both of these things, but it's also much more. Granted, there is a strong connection to USA Network's Psyche - both main characters are fraudulent psychics who use their powers of observation and deduction to help the police solve crimes. This is where the similarities end.  While Psych's main character is surrounded by family and friends and usually has the personality of a big kid, The Mentalist's lead, Patrick Jane, is a tormented, lonely man who was responsible for the murder of his wife and child and, as a result of his guilt, doesn't allow anyone to get close to him.  That's not to say he doesn't ever have fun or joke around or act like a child, but there's always a layer of sadness lurking just beneath the surface.

Comparisons to other crime procedurals are also not out of line.  The show follows the general formula, introducing a new crime to be solved every week, and these crimes are almost always solved within the allotted hour (or 40 minutes, allowing for commercials...).  There is however, an over-arching story involving the serial killer who killed Jane's family and is still focused on him and the people around him.  There is also a strong cast of supporting characters who bring depth to the episodes. In the second season, for example, Gregory Itzin - who guest starred periodically as a CBI (California Bureau of Investigation) supervisor - gives an incredible interview to a group of over-inquisitive reporters, which unfortunately was the swan song for his character. Currently, Pruitt Taylor Vince (whom you might recognize from Deadwood or Constantine, or any number of television or movie appearances) is filling the role of supervisor,  with a character who is somehow both loathsome and sympathetic at the same time.  And these are just the guest stars. The regular cast is also amazing, with the standout being Tim Kang, who plays Investigator Kimball Cho with a deadpan delivery that is absolutely hysterical.

With the tragic backstory of the main character, the show could be dark and disturbing (and is, at times). However, Cho's one liners are not the only humor to be found.  Jane brings an often childlike exuberance to many of his interactions with the rest of the team, and the writers provide plenty of witty, humorous dialogue all around.  On this week's show, for example, when Jane uncovers the killer, they pull a gun on him and tell him, "I'm sorry I have to kill you, but I'm doing it from a place of love."  How can you beat that?

So yes, these comparisons are not inaccurate, but they also don't give the full picture of what the show is about, or how absolutely awesome it is.

Glee - The Sound of My Dream Dying

I'm sure no one who knows me would be surprised to know that I took Glee for a test drive in my brain sometime between the first and second seasons. I resisted for as long as I could, but my ideal world is one where all oral communication would be through song. I feel certain that everyone would be happier if life was a musical. I... well, you get the idea.

I was skeptical as I sat down in front of the pilot episode, pretty certain that I'd be watching a bunch of teenagers singing songs that I wouldn't know and wouldn't like. (The musical part of my brain is trapped in the 1980s.)  It was a pleasant surprise when the music was mostly recognizable and inoffensive, and the story lines were not incredibly stupid.  Yes, Mr. Schuester blackmailed a student into joining the glee club, but I was willing to let that pass for the moment. As the end of the show approached, I felt pretty ambivalent.  The show was okay - there was nothing offensive, but also nothing exciting.  I was committed to watch the last ten minutes, then walk away from Glee, never looking back. Then, with about five minutes remaining, they performed Don't Stop Believin' by Journey. I was all in - watching the remainder of season one over the next few weeks, as the show slowly, bit by bit, lost me...

Here's my issue:  I understand that the glee kids, most of whom are painfully socially awkward, might find it easier to communicate their feelings via music. I applaud Will Schuester for providing them with this outlet.  However, I don't enjoy the episodes where he uses music the same way.  I can understand why he would sing during a rehearsal, if it helped to show the kids how to express themselves.  That I can accept.  What I don't like is when he serenades Miss Emma Pillsbury (hmmm...I still need to find a pie recipe for this week...) instead of just speaking to her like an adult.  Yes, it's true - Matthew Morrison and Glee have killed my dream. I no longer think that I could stomach people mooning around, singing about their feelings.

I haven't watched much of season two at all. I will admit that I was excited to see the Rocky Horror episode but I ended up turning it off before the end. I accepted the student love triangles from season one, and I even lived with all the adult relationship drama.  What killed me about the Rocky Horror episode was that Schuester was willing to twist the show around - to the detriment of both the student performances and the show itself - in an attempt to win Emma back from her new boyfriend.  Forget the fact that it was his own damned fault that he wasn't that boyfriend. The way that he disregarded what was best for everyone except himself totally disgusted me.  Dude, you're supposed to be one of the adults, and a role model. For the love of god, act your age.

I do want to point out that - outside of Schuester being an idiot - there are some good things about the show.  The guest stars have been great - Kristen Chenoweth, Idina Menzel, John Stamos, and Neil Patrick Harris (who was phenomenal, and clearly should have beaten Schuester in their audition).  I also think that Mike O'Malley is excellent - and surprisingly touching - as Kurt's father.  He so obviously loves and supports his son, even though he clearly doesn't understand what's going on with him. 

Romo Lampkin By Any Other Name Is Just As Awesome!!

Mark A. Sheppard is my hero.  When I first noticed him, as Romo Lampkin on Battlestar Galactica, I recognized his awesomeness.  Since BSG, he's been on almost scifi/fantasy show out there and, in fact, almost every television show that I watch - Burn Notice, The Middleman, Dollhouse, Leverage, Chuck, Warehouse 13, and Supernatural (starring The Prettiest Man on Television) to name a few.  This past weekend, Mr. Sheppard made his first appearance on Doctor Who. AND...HE...WAS...AWESOME!!!  I was relatively unspoiled going into the episode, and had no idea that he was going to be in it.  His first screen moment in anything always warrants a cry of, "Romo Lampkin!!"  However, his appearance on a show that has long been a pillar of the scifi genre further warranted an excited full-body-flail-of-happiness.  (Which was followed by intent focus on every remaining moment of the episode, waiting for his character to be killed off.)  As of the cliffhanger conclusion of the episode, he has not yet died.  I'm sure that this week's installment will require the same rapt attention, as if the focused powers of my mind could keep a fictional television character alive.  Actually...hmmm...

Five Was The Magic Number, Dammit

Have you ever had a favorite show that you wished would go on forever, only to have it disappoint you when it tried to do just that?

Believe it or not, I've already discussed how great it would have been if Supernatural had ended about five minutes before the end of the season five finale, and that discussion took place long before the first episode of season six ever hit the airwaves. Let's shave off everything after Dean and Castiel's conversation in the Impala. No Chuck-voice-over, no goodbye to Bobby, no settling down with Lisa, and definitely no resurrected Sam. Just Castiel disappearing and Dean driving through the rain and the darkness, alone with his car.  Now, if that's too ambiguous for the rest of the world, I'm not opposed to Dean vocalizing a final goodbye to his PERMANENTLY dead brother, or a closing shot of Dean arriving at Bobby's. Hell, even his arrival at Lisa's, although I think that's wildly against character - family has always been the most important thing to Dean, so he should be reluctant to let Bobby, his surrogate father, out of his sight. 

Regardless, the bottom line is that the episode could have wrapped up five years of story in a neat little package, but instead the ribbon was pulled off and the wrapping paper torn so that they could give us a cliffhanger to bring us back for an additional season. Instead we got excessive voice over (for those of us who weren't bright enough to follow what was happening without being led by the nose). We got Dean and Bobby parting. We got Sam returning from Hell (Hmmm...that seems somehow familiar...). And we got a sixth season of a show that was supposed to only run for five; a sixth season full of character flaws and plot holes the size of whales. (Go to the Museum of Natural History in NYC - whales are huge!)

I got through the first seven episodes of season six before deciding that Supernatural and I needed some time apart. This was a tough decision, since our five year relationship was obviously much more than a summer fling. I've just come back to the show this week, and I realize that I made the right choice. Jensen Ackles is still the prettiest man on television, but the rest of this season is a hot mess:

1. No Kripke - This was a warning flag when they announced it last spring. The man had carefully put together a five-season story arc, culminating in the Winchesters saving the world. Where could they possibly go from there?
2. Sam returns from Hell - Yawn. Dean already did this in season four, and Sam already returned from the dead in season two. Sam is soulless this time, you argue? Well, is there such a big difference between angry-resurrected-maybe-evil Sam from season three and indifferent-resurrected-maybe-evil Sam from season six? Um...less yelling, maybe? And I guess the lack of soul means less angst...
3. Grandpa Campbell is pointless. Really pointless. Crowley didn't need him as a middle man - he could have just used Sam's soul to make Sam and Dean do what he wants. And are we supposed to believe that the hunters of the Campbell clan are all going to welcome Grandpa back with open arms and let him boss them around? Even if good old GC serves a larger purpose before the season is out, his entire story line thus far is weak. Also, the rest of the Campbells remind me of the potential slayers from Buffy or the red shirts from Star Trek - cannon fodder.
4. The writers have apparently forgotten who their characters are. In one episode, Dean objects to Sam hitting on a waitress when the world is collapsing around them. Remember when Dean used to try to get his brother laid? Remember when Dean would allow himself to be distracted by any pretty woman who walked by? Also, Sam wavers between being a soulless ass and being normal Sam. I'd love to say that this represents Sam putting on a front that sometimes slips but, if that's the case, it's done so badly that everyone involved should deny that's what they were going for.
5. Inane dialogue runs rampant. For example, in at least two episodes this season, Dean asks Sam, "We have a Plan B?" Because, after spending his entire life hunting monsters, a backup plan wouldn't be automatic?
6. Not enough Castiel, Bobby, or Romo Lampkin...I mean Crowley. It's sad that the supporting characters are more interesting than the brothers but, let's face it, they're - at the very least - a lot less whiny.

Oh, good. In yet another example of how the writers are no longer writing to tell a story, but are instead just marking time between the characters' bitching at each other, Sam just pointed out that Meg couldn't kill them because she needed them to take her to Crowley, and Meg totally missed the opportunity to slit Dean's throat, turn around, and tell Sam,"I only need one of you." Not that I'd ever want to see Dean's throat slit because, hey, Jensen Ackles, but come on writers!!

That's not to say that it's all bad.  There's a redemptive moment for the writers when Sam rips open his own wrist with his teeth in order to make a devil's trap... I'm going to hang in there and get all caught up as we inch closer to the season (but probably still not series) finale. I like to watch Jensen Ackles (of course), and part of me is still clinging to the slim hope that the season will conclude in a way that clears away all the early-season murk and restores the awesomeness of which I know the show is capable...

Murder One - And Only One

And who knows what I'm talking about when I say, "...that TV show from the mid-ninties, Murder One, with all those lawyers and Jason Gedrick..."? Don't all raise your hands at once.  Here's a little more help: it's also got Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson, and it stars a guy that looks a lot like Daddy Warbucks.

This is a show that - even if you haven't ever heard of it - is worthy of your attention.  It's not the best legal procedural drama ever to air on network television, but it may well be the first to present a single case that spanned an entire season.  This show was 24 and Lost before they were even born.  I've only recently found it again, and started re-watching the first few episodes, and I have to say that it's holding my interest so far.  So, go forth, be fruitful, find Murder One, and watch the hell out of it - you'll be watching a piece of television history...

Not House, Christopher, but Home. And that's the problem...

Okay, so we watched House together and came out the other side with the same feelings - Masters was bringing something new to the show and it sucks that she left; some Thirteen stories are good, but how much more can there be while maintaining the character's freakish desire for privacy; the Cuddy/House breakup didn't make as much sense as the writers might have hoped; apparently the writers care even less than I do that House is back on the pill.

I was never a Cameron fan, so it surprised me that I liked Masters so much - she's got all the Cameron traits multiplied times at least 500... I have to say that it was refreshing to see someone stand up to House without compromise.  On the other hand, the longer she stayed, the more likely that she would start to compromise her ideals (as we saw in this week's episode), so her departure is actually timely - she chooses to leave rather than to change for him. Go Masters!

I know that lots of people don't care for Thirteen, but I've liked her from the start. She's a good doctor, despite the fact that she got her job as much for the mystery that she presented as for her medical ability.  More importantly, she's another character that doesn't cater to House.  How long did she maintain the secret of her past? The episode from last week was great, and I loved the peek at Thirteen's life, but I don't want more right away.  The best way to ruin the character would be to give us the rest of her story now.  Let's give the guys the chance to try to figure out what's going on with her.  I'd even accept some Foreman-House-Thirteen tension as Foreman tries to find answers that he knows House already has.

Do you think the writers woke up one morning and said, "House and Cuddy...what were we thinking...let's end that thing right now...?"  I don't necessarily think that Cuddy arrived at the wrong answer, but I agree that the timing of it really doesn't make sense. It was very abrupt and didn't seem particularly thought out.  It was more of a gut-reaction that left me expecting Cuddy to snap out of it and take it all back within the next week.

Finally, House back on the Vicodin is about as interesting to me as watching paint dry.  (I mean paint that's being applied by someone other than Jensen Ackles - I'd be perfectly content to watch him paint anything...)  I'm terrified that the writers are going to think that it's a good idea to take the House story full circle and we'll get to watch the character devolve over the remainder of the season.

Story-wise, I think we're both concerned that it's going to go to that ugly place where the guest star of the week has some horrible disease and after 4 or 5 misdiagnoses House will swoop in and save the day while popping the V and haranguing his staff.  Foreman will continue to be boring and serve as House's mini-me. Taub will continue to be a womanizing schmoe, Chase will continue to have too little to do, since Taub is filling the womanizer role, and Thirteen will be secretive and terminally ill.  The chicken bet between House and Wilson was hysterical, but if that's all the interaction we see with Wilson, well, that's just unfortunate.

We need:
More Foreman and Taub - it's in their interactions that Foreman exhibits the most personality I've seen from him since early in the series.
More House and Wilson - bring on the bromance. It would be nice to see more of Wilson's reaction to the breakup and the return to Vicodin.  It's hard to believe that the character can be this unemotional about both of these things...
Taub and Foreman and Thirteen - Taub's nosy (no pun intended) and Foreman's still got feelings for her, so they should be all up in her business to try to find out where she's been.  I left Chase out because he seems pretty aloof and indifferent about everything lately.  Talk about a waste of a good character.

House

So I watched this weeks episode of House, with you, and I had a few thoughts about it which I will now share with you and the Internet. I have this horrible feeling now that Masters is gone the show might fall once again into a dry rut of a routine. Although there are some story lines with 13 in them that I enjoy I feel like there isn't much more to do with the existing character dynamic. I miss the days of House being this character that regardless of all of his flaws we still felt sorry for him, and I feel like that aspect of the show is missing in this season. I felt that the Cutty breakup was abrupt and slightly unjustified. I also and confused at why they still have not completely gone into when and why he started using drugs again. The development of the House character seems to have come to a grinding halt. In my mind this ended after the first episode of season 6, or "House The Movie" as I usually call it.
My favorite season to date is season 4. In this season they reinvented the cast, reinvented the dynamic of the character interactions and once again reminded us that although House is brilliant, he also alienates everybody he cares about and is terribly damaged. They also displayed exactly how much House loves Wilson and to what lengths he was willing to go through for his friend.
~ Chris

Pie is Like a Birdhouse in Your Soul. No...Eating Daisies? Hmmm...

I have recently developed a strange fascination with the baking of pies, to the point that I'm embarking on a pie project that will revolutionize...ahem...sorry, I'm drifting off topic, as always.  Anyhow, the prospect of baking and eating lots of pie made me nostalgic for a brilliant show from 2007 that was all about pie and, despite that universal appeal, was canceled far too soon.  Of course, you immediately realized that I'm talking about Pushing Daisies - the best pie show ever.

In addition to pie, the show features a great cast, superb writing, and really outstanding visual design that makes the show look like a fairy tale about death... and pie.  In addition to the ability to bake really killer pies, Ned (the main character) has the ability to bring dead things back to life by touching them once.  This seems like a really cool ability but it turns out, if he touches them a second time, they die again (which is really tragic because it means he often can't eat his own pies when he "revives" the fruit for them). Oh, and if he doesn't touch them a second time then they don't die again, but something/someone else dies in their place.  Ned uses this ability to help the awesomely named Emerson Cod, P.I. to solve crimes and collect rewards. He also uses it to revive his childhood sweetheart whom he then can't touch again, potentially ever.

It's quirky, it has fun dialogue, it's really pretty to look at, and it has a scene midway through season one where Kristen Chenoweth (Wicked) and Ellen Greene (Little Shop of Horrors) sing They Might Be Giants' Birdhouse In Your Soul. Yes, really. Also, there's pie.

Seriously, if you haven't seen this show, it's time to go stream it from Netflix.  This is the perfect time of year (the doldrums between the February sweeps and the May sweeps) to get acquainted - or reacquainted - with a brilliant-but-canceled show.

The Story of How Tom Selleck's Mustache Lost a Step - Or Did It?

Tom Selleck has long had one of the sexiest mustaches on television.  Even if you didn't get to see it on Magnum P.I. in the '80s, you might have caught its guest appearance on Friends in the '90s, or on Boston Legal in the early 2000s.  The mustache was a brilliant star - or guest star - over three decades of television.

Imagine my surprise when I tuned in to the pilot episode of Blue Bloods and that brilliant, scene-stealing mustache was nowhere to be found.  Tom Selleck was there and still a very solid actor, but something about the mustache just wasn't the same.  I consulted the internet, feverishly comparing photos, and came to the devastating conclusion that the mustache had lost a step.  As I lamented this sad discovery, Ian happened along with a promising alternative, pointing out that it's more likely that the mustache was trimmed so that it wouldn't steal the show from the other actors.  I'm actually ashamed that this never occurred to me.  My shame knows no bounds.  After all, there's no question that the mustache would have stolen the show.  I mean, sure, it's a very solid cast, but who can compete with the power of the mustache?  This wasn't a problem for guest roles, or for Magnum, but what police commissioner would have such a sexy mustache?  Certainly the all-business 'stache is much more appropriate for the tone of the show.  So, with this resolved, all that remains is to enjoy the show - which is really quite good - and cling to the knowledge that someday, down the road, the mustache will return.

I Hate You!! You're Horrible and We're Not Friends Anymore...

No,no, not you. Sorry, didn't mean to upset you.  It's just this thing I saw that, well... Have you ever watched a TV show where one of the characters is so terrible (self-involved or horribly inept or just plain mean) that you just can't understand why the other characters would want anything to do with him/her?

I had this experience not long ago, when Chris exposed me to the Dungeons and Dragons episode of Community.  I'm not a regular watcher of Community - it's not one of the shows that I religiously record and watch as soon as possible.  I do enjoy the show though, and I've seen most of the episodes. I am, on the other hand, a fan of gaming (although not specifically D&D), and any reference to tabletop gaming reminds me of one of the best low budget movies EVER - The Gamers: Dorkness Rising.  Seriously - if you haven't seen it, stop reading, go find it and watch it right now.

Meandering back to the topic at hand, I was very excited about this episode of Community, and it really did include a number of great moments.  Abed was a great dungeon master (and who didn't expect him to be awesome...), the scene involving Annie and the elf was hysterical, and Chang's dark elf... I would venture to say that this was one of the best episodes of Community that I've seen, so why did I come away from it so unsettled?  Two words: Pierce Hawthorne.  Pierce is a raging dickhead most of the time.  He's selfish. He's rude. He's bigoted. He's mean. Yet his behavior, while obnoxious, is usually amusing and often accompanied by some piece of information that makes it believable (and on occasion even acceptable) that he would act that way.  I felt like he crossed a line in this episode - there was no way to rationalize his behavior, it was just too much.

Pierce has demonstrated in the past that he doesn't like to be excluded.  (I'm thinking of the episode with the secret trampoline.)  He reminds us, from his first appearance in this episode, how badly he reacts to being snubbed.  The rest of the group is playing D&D with Fat Neil, trying to make him feel warm and fuzzy so he won't kill himself.  Pierce was not invited because he's an insensitive jerk, but he finds them all in the study room and immediately lashes out at Fat Neil for taking his chair/his place in the group.  This is classic Pierce and is funny while at the same time making you shake your head at his behavior.  At this point he's taken aside and the purpose of the game is explained.

Now, I recognize that the study group as a whole is not the most sensitive or considerate group of people.  They often seem to have no concern for people outside of their group, and no awareness of how their actions affect others.  However, when they become aware that they have hurt someone (as Jeff did Fat Neil in this episode) they always express remorse and try to make things better.  Granted, this doesn't generally extend to Pierce, but I've also never seen him push something so far that it lost the humor for me... until this episode.

Even after being told that the purpose of the D&D game is to prevent Fat Neil from killing himself, Pierce continues to insult and attack Neil, both verbally and through the game.  His lack of concern for this obviously emotionally fragile person, and the fact that striking out at the group and at Neil to retaliate for his hurt feelings is more important than another person's life is offensive to me, leading me to my earlier question.  Pierce is frequently the foil, often the butt of the joke, and regularly offensive.  He is sometimes amusing and occasionally redeems himself with some sort of positive behavior, but it seems like the bad usually outweighs the good.  So why does the group tolerate him?  Is it just because they feel sorry for him?  Granted, by the end of the show, Pierce is displayed in a slightly better light. It's very clear, though, that anything positive that came from his actions was incidental.  My question is, how offensive or mean-spirited does a friend have to be before you decide that their behavior is intolerable? Shouldn't the rest of the group be trying to convince Pierce that he's a raving asshat?  Shouldn't they be encouraging better behavior?  And, failing at that, why would they want to keep this guy around?

In conclusion - and waaaaaay off topic - let me say that I'm watching Julie & Julia, and Julia Child was a rock star.

Winter is Coming...In April...

Is there anyone who's read George R.R. Martin who isn't waiting impatiently for April 17?  There is nothing more exciting than HBO (the network that brought us Rome, John Adams, Deadwood, The Sopranos...) taking the reins on a new series based on Mr. Martin's Game of Thrones.  Not only will we have the opportunity to actually see these brilliant books interpreted for the small screen, but the production may help to dynamite book five from the limbo where it has apparently been floating aimlessly for the past five years.  My assumption is that Mr. Martin is hoping to rival the 22-year project that was Stephen King's Dark Tower series.  After suffering quietly through those 22 years, I'm happy to report that I came late to the GoT party, just starting the series within the past couple years.  Unfortunately, Mr. King has apparently used up all of my patience.  I've been trying to drag out book four so that I don't finish it until book five is available, but that's just making me crabbier...

So, in summary, three and a half awesome books, with a series upcoming on HBO in less than a month.  George R.R. Martin is apparently involved in the project, so that certainly bodes well for readers.  (Unless, horribly, we've all misinterpreted his work and are served something completely different on the screen!!)  The only concern that I have (well, the only serious one...) is in the casting of the children.  Most of the children have pretty important - even major - parts in the books, and part of what makes the story so compelling is that we are presented with children (usually behaving admirably) in appalling situations.  A lot of the connection to these characters is on a very emotional level as we "see" them being forced to deal with things that children of their ages should never have to face.  I'm afraid that, by casting several of these parts with older actors, the sympathy...empathy...even horror we feel for the characters may be muted or lost.  The three characters that concern me the most, based on the cast photos, are Robb Stark (15-16), Jon Snow (15-16) and Daenerys Targaryen (14-15).  All three of the actors are over 20, with the oldest being 24.  In the case of both of the boys, there should be a noticeable difference between them and the men that they lead.  Part of the appeal and heroism of both characters is that they are forced to step into roles that they shouldn't be expected to assume, due to their young age.  The casting of Daenerys can probably be more easily excused, simply because the demands of the role might be inappropriate or uncomfortable for a younger actor. The cast photo of Emilia Clarke is not horribly off target from how Danys is described in the book, but I'll reserve judgement for now based on the fact that there is generally a big difference in appearance between a 14 year old girl and a 20 year old woman...

In spite of these reservations, I remain both optimistic and excited, and can't wait for April 17 to roll around, giving HBO the opportunity to laugh in the face of my concerns and prove me so very wrong.

The Robinsons: Lost in Space (and in a drawer somewhere...)

I recently came across the unaired pilot for a proposed reinterpretation of the classic 1965 series Lost in Space called The Robinsons: Lost in Space, and I finally sat down to watch it this morning.  (Go visit IMDb, here, for more info) I went into it with limited expectations, which helped me get through the first 30 minutes of clunky exposition and teen angst.  It wasn't until I had already started watching that I looked up anything about the show. My first concern was trying to find out why Penny Robinson was replaced by an older sibling named David. The answer was pretty clear when, at the end of the pilot, (Here there be spoilers! Highlight ahead to view...) David was either killed or taken hostage by attacking aliens. Wrong though it may be, it's more acceptable culturally and easier to watch a male get killed/captured.  Anyhow, in the process of my investigation, I learned that the pilot was directed by John Woo, explaining the slick look (other than some of the missing effects that were never added because the series wasn't picked up), and written by Douglas Petrie, from the Joss Whedon brain-trust, explaining why, despite the initial clunkiness, the pilot was able to hold my attention.

So, we have the Robinson parents, who are not changed to the point that they aren't recognizable, and Will Robinson, who is pretty much the same brainy kid.  The remainder of the cast illustrates the departure from the plot of the original show, which is why I'm referring to this as a reinterpretation rather than a remake. First, there is no sign of Dr. Smith in the pilot.  There's no sabotage and, when we briefly see it, the robot is a creation of Will's, designed to protect him from bullies at school.  Judy appears to be a 19 or 20 year old girl (returning to canon,  after Heather Graham played an older version in the 1998 movie).  Instead of aging Judy, this production chooses to make Don West younger, reducing the age difference in order to focus on the romance that was prominent in the movie but never developed in the original series.  Unfortunately, Mike Erwin, who was 26 at the time, looks like a high school kid and just isn't believable as a seasoned military pilot.  So, that leaves Penny who, as mentioned above, is rewritten as a boy and renamed David.  It's not clear to me whether he's the oldest sibling, a year or two younger than Judy, or maybe Judy's twin. (I like to think twin because they get along far better than a pair of teenaged siblings ever should.)  Penny is just gone, unless the random baby that Maureen (Mom Robinson) is schlepping around through the later half of the show happens to be named Penny...

So, I have a pet peeve with remakes that pretend that they are the same as the original but then make random changes for no apparent reason.  This extends to television shows being remade, TV shows that are turned into movies, movies turned into TV shows, and books made into movies.  I don't think that I'm unreasonable about this.  If the changes make sense in the context of the show then, hey, awesome. (The Battlestar Galactica reboot is an example.  I loved Dirk Benedict in the original, but the whole 'Starbuck is a girl!' really added to the Apollo/Starbuck dynamic.)  However, if you change character names for no apparent reason or make gigantic changes to the main plot that turn it into a completely different story, well... change the name of your final product. (For example, the Angels & Demons movie should have been renamed to "A Very Loose Interpretation of Angels & Demons That Eliminates Major Plot Points And Is Unquestionably Inferior, But Could Have Been An Acceptable Summer Movie If It Had A Different Title.")

Oops, I digressed.  The point that I was tap dancing around like an over-caffeinated squirrel is that, in spite of some crazy plot changes, this show actually worked.  The Robinsons are not alone on the Jupiter 2 initially, and they aren't in charge of the trip to colonize another planet.  They are part of a group of civilian colonists.  Dr Smith and Robot - and the whole sabotage plot - are replaced by an alien attack on the "main ship".  In the process of evacuating, the Robinsons and Don West find themselves on the Jupiter 2.  Yes, a main character was completely reconceived but, as noted above, it makes sense with the plot.

So, if you happen to stumble across the unaired pilot for The Robinsons: Lost in Space, I wouldn't discourage you from watching it. (Unless you have a serious problem with cliffhangers because, let's face it, we're never finding out how it ends.)

I Like Cheese

Let me apologize up front to lovers of dairy products, but this post is not about the 30 minutes I spent perusing the cheese counter at the local Fairway. Although that was some of the sexiest cheese I've seen in my life and, hey, a whole counter just dedicated to cheese!! But I digress...

So, anyhow, the cheese I'm referring to is that wholesome, embarrassingly entertaining cheese that can only be found by watching 80s television shows.

The best return - for both the embarrassment factor (as in "I can't believe I'm watching this") and the laugh factor (as in "I'm sure that they didn't intend this to be funny, but I think I just peed a little")- is the genre of 80s programming featuring the "super vehicle".  Think Knight Rider, Airwolf, Street Hawk and Blue Thunder (listed in order of watchability, from the most watchable to the least).  These shows all involve some form of travel that has been tweaked into a high-powered, crime-fighting machine.


Knight Rider: A police officer is shot in the face and left to die. A millionare conveniently happens to be watching him and rescues him, saving his life, giving him a new identity and a new face, and a super car that talks to him and helps him fight crime.  I almost picked the Emmy-winning (yes, really) Airwolf as the most watchable of these shows, but then it occurred to me that it's always better not to hassle the Hoff.  Plus, this show goes to fun, campy places (not usually intentionally, I'm afraid) that the darker Airwolf never touches.

Airwolf:  A broody ex-military type is one of the test pilots for a government-sponsored super helicopter. When the chopper is stolen, he's called upon to help the government get it back.  Instead of returning it to them, he hides it away and uses it to force the government to find his MIA brother. Of course, why steal such a nifty toy if you aren't going to use it, so he teams with a private agency and uses his super helicopter to fight crime.  This works out admirably since it apparently occurs to no one to follow Stringfellow Hawke (our hero) to find the secret location of Airwolf.

Street Hawk: A cop who is (apparently) a motorcycle-riding prodigy suffers a knee injury that turns him into a desk jockey.  Lucky for him, he's apparently the best motorcycle rider in the area and the only one who can handle the super-secret super motorcycle that has been created by some organization or other... They fix his injury and stick him on this motorcycle to fight crime under the secret identity of "Street Hawk" (because a motorcycle that can go 300mph, operated by a guy who recently suffered a serious, potentially career-ending injury, is always a good idea...).

Blue Thunder:  Also a helicopter show, but in this case the super chopper belongs to the police department and is used in the line of duty to fight crime. (I'm a little foggy on the plot, as I was unable to sit through an entire episode.)  This show actually beat Airwolf to air by a couple weeks, but a little head start didn't help. In fact, even the presence of Dana Carvey and ex-football players Dick Butkus and Bubba Smith (don't mock - they were actually pretty big at the time) didn't salvage the show.

Funny, isn't it, that the most plausible of these shows is also the least watchable?  Then again, plausibility was never a big concern for 80s television, which is probably why it's still watchable today.  I mean, take a show that has a serious, believable premise.  That realism is likely to be very dated today, and probably not as believable. On the other hand, a show that was never seriously believable isn't going to disappoint - it's probably still unbelievable, making its attempts to be meaningful all the more entertaining.

The Academy AwardZZZzzz...

Honestly, I haven't watched the Academy Awards since the last of the Billy Crystal years. (Other than in 2008 because, regardless of my love for Dr. Cox on Scrubs, Hugh Jackman is one of those actors who could get me to tune in and watch them paint a barn.) So when Chris suggested that we should watch the show "together" (with over 30 miles between us, via cell phone) it was with a certain amount of reluctance that I agreed. Good call - Best. Oscars. In a Long Time.

Oops. Excuse me for about 30 minutes - this week is apparently Teen Jeopardy, which always makes me feel really smart...

And I return, brilliant and victorious. So, the show itself was not that great. I thought Anne Hathaway did a pretty decent job but James Franco lost my interest shortly after I told Chris that he recognized him from Spiderman.

So, Kat, why would you describe the Oscars as the best if you didn't enjoy the show?

Well, creepy voice in my head, I'm so glad you asked. Perhaps a description of last night's viewing experience can shed some light on this paradox:

8:10 Fine, Chris, I'm turning on the television, but I'm totally going to play around on Facebook while we watch.

8:50 Kirk Douglas is 94 years old and amazing. Chris asked who he is. I think he was kidding, but I answered, just in case - He is Michael Douglas' father. He is Spartacus. He is one of the reasons that the era of McCarthyism came to an end. He is 94 and still larger than life, and this was the best part of the entire show.

9:08 I realize that I'd feel much more informed about this if I'd seen any of these movies. Then I realize that I don't really care who wins as long as they keep the acceptance speech short.

9:10 I remember how much I hate watching TV live - stupid commercials. My DVR has spoiled me. Like the typical American, I have the attention span of that squirrel from Hoodwinked, and no longer have the patience to sit through commercial breaks. Oh, and no, I don't want to see Dancing With The Stars. Ever.

9:14 Aaron Sorkin wins, of course. How can you not win when you've written an interesting screenplay covering material that people didn't believe could make an interesting movie?

9:27 I understand that the category is foreign language films, but seeing a nominee from Canada is kinda weird. It makes me want to make an awesome foreign language film so they have to announce a nominee from the United States.

9:33 Christian Bale brings some excitement as we all wait to see what's going to come out of his mouth. Disappointingly, his beard is wilder than his speech.

9:36 These commercials aren't so bad. We are totally going to see Super 8. Not positive what it is but, hey, J.J. Abrams...

9:38 Mercedes Benz lifts its doors and checks its armpits. What a great concept - using a car in a deodorant commercial.

9:40 Hugh Jackman is pretty.

9:43 Chris permanently damages my left eardrum as The Social Network takes best original score. Wait, that's a movie I've seen... pardon me while I check for increased level of commitment to the ceremony...Okay, no, I'm good. No change in my interest, or lack thereof.

9:50 Marissa Tomei and the "nerds" (as James Franco called them). Why can't we see those awards? I think the behind-the-scenes technology would be a lot more interesting to watch than these standard movie clips, don't you?

10:08 Chris was right - broadcast media is one giant car commercial.

10:24 Another car commercial.

10:26 Billy Crystal livens things up. Why isn't he hosting? Oh, and another reference to Hugh Jackman, but they didn't show him this time. I must be prepared for these small disappointments.

10:35 I would totally give Jude Law a ride to the after party.

10:40 Chris just noticed that Anne Hathaway has been changing dresses and hairstyles all night.

10:47 Randy Newman's 2nd win in 20 nominations. I suppose he has the right to babble a bit, but too much babble and it'll be no surprise if he's nominated another 10 times before he wins again.

10:49 Oh, good, another car commercial.

10:52 Celine Dion appeared on stage. Chris told 'him' that 'he' was very rude to start singing without introduction, and threatened to kick 'him' in the junk.

10:57 I refer to Halle Berry as an Oscar winner. Chris decides it's for her brilliant work as Batgirl. I try to clarify that she didn't play Batgirl - she was Catwoman, but now he's convinced that she won an Oscar for being a superhero. Part of me is worried that he might be serious, but the other part of me points out that she was also an X-Man.

10:59 Oh, look, another car commercial.

11:08 I love Eli Wallach. Really. I can't think of any movies he's been in where he wasn't awesome.

11:16 I wasn't aware that Natalie Portman was EXTREMELY pregnant (not just a little bit). In the sweetest moment of the show, her fiance helps her up the stairs.

11:29 Car commercial.

11:30 Wouldn't it be funny if they just stopped broadcasting when their time was up? Picture our hosts (which might be tough since they made very little impression) expressing their regret that we've run out of time and will not have a Best Picture winner this year.

11:36 Chris asked, "Who's that old dude giving out statues?" as Stephen Spielberg was presenting to The King's Speech people, and I can't imagine, having shared that, that there's anything more that I can say on this topic.

Hawaii Five-Abs

So, Chris was good enough to add Hawaii Five-0 to his series list on his spanking-new DVR. This is a show that I've watched regularly all season but, when we settled down in front of the massive flatscreen this afternoon, it was his first time experiencing the series.  We made it about five minutes in before the first question came, and I decided that I should pause the show and provide a synopsis, which went something like this:

"That's Alex O'Loughlin. He was on Moonlight a couple years ago.  He's not the greatest actor ever, but did you see those abs in the opening credits? And it's not just about the abs - he's very nice to look at, even with a shirt on... not on the same level as the prettiest-man-on-television (Jensen Ackles, of course) but nice." Moving closer to the ginormo TV, using the remote as a pointer, "And Scott Caan is kinda short, but he's not bad to look at either, and he's funny, and he totally can act. And you can't see them here, but the rest of the team is that guy from Lost and Eight/Boomer from Battlestar Galactica.  They're sort of cops but they've got more authority and somehow have the governor in their pocket, so they can do what they want or something...and they're pretty...and Hawaii's pretty too..."

I feel strongly that my recognition of the shallowness of the show cancels out my own apparent shallowness for watching it.  I mean, so what if Alex O'Loughlin has the acting depth of a pothole in a rain shower. At least he has the sense to take roles where that works. Everyone knows that vampires are stoic, and a soldier (or is he a former soldier...) who's lost his parents under suspicious circumstances might be a little emotionally reserved...  And the interaction between his character and Scott Caan's Danno is actually fun and provides most of the limited depth that the show has, with any other meaning or emotional commitment coming from the  awesomeness that is Scott Caan slumming on network television.