Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 86

It all depends on the contracts. I would assume Whitfield, Perry and Peet got paid whether they appeared or not.

The episode crystallized one of my problems with the show: the lesser cast members just don't seem to belong at the same level of the stars. Without the big three, the show is just mediocre -- no matter how well written.

It was fun to see Busfield get more screen time, though.

But I can surely see why NBC decided to not use this episode on the February sweep.

Thanks for the compliment, joblo.

Keep checking in during the next few weeks as cast changes and other anouncements slowly trickle in.

And the Television Critics Association will announce its award nominees in the next few days.

Then, the three-week TCA Summer tour hits in July and there will be lots of news coming out of that.

The TV Column
Fox Can Sing a Happier Tune Thanks to 'Idol' Numbers

By Lisa de Moraes Washington Post Friday, May 25, 2007

About 31 million people watched Wednesday as Jordin Sparks was crowned the youngest, and least Southern, "American Idol" ever.

While that's about 5.4 million viewers shy of last year's finale -- "Idol's" best coronation ratings ever -- it's a better performance than the show enjoyed on the final Wednesday in '05, '04 and '02.

It's also something of a relief for Fox, which the night before suffered an ignominious ratings defeat when ABC's "Dancing With the Stars" season finale gave that network an average audience of 23 million viewers for two hours, while Fox aired just one hour of "Idol," with its average of 25 million, followed by a one-hour preview of the new reality series "On the Lot," which held just 8.5 million of those viewers.

Fox finished the night with fewer than 17 million viewers, ABC with nearly 18 million. It's the first time ever that Fox has not won an "American Idol" Tuesday.

Fox decided to forgo the traditional airing of the "House" season finale in the hour following the last "Idol" performance night. Instead, it unveiled the let's-make-a-movie competition series there, because ooooh, it's from Steven Spielberg! Last year, on the comparable Tuesday, the season finale of "House" logged 25.5 million.

This year, the season finale of "House" is airing next week, when the official TV season, and the May sweeps ratings derby, are over.

As a result of Fox's "House" delay, ABC finished the May sweeps ranked No. 1 across all female demographic groups, including a tie with Fox for No. 1 among chicks aged 18 to 34. This most likely would not have been the case had the "House" finale aired Tuesday night.

Funny how things turn out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...402544_pf.html

TV Notebook
Rosie O'Donnell unsure if she'll return to 'The View'
She takes a day off after a heated exchange with co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck. Her return is uncertain.
By Matea Gold Los Angeles Times Staff Writer May 25, 2007

NEW YORK A day after she and Elisabeth Hasselbeck clashed angrily on "The View," Rosie O'Donnell took the day off Thursday to celebrate her partner Kelli Carpenter O'Donnell's 40th birthday and indicated that she is unsure whether she will return to the program.

O'Donnell told a viewer on her personal blog that she has "no idea" when or if she will go back on the ABC daytime talk show for the remaining month of her contract. To another fan who urged her to walk away, she wrote: "well u know when its time 2 go."

With the program running taped editions Friday and Monday, O'Donnell's next live appearance is scheduled for Tuesday. A spokesman for "The View" did not respond to a question about whether she would return.

O'Donnell and Hasselbeck, who have professed to be friends despite their political differences, waged a fierce verbal battle Wednesday over a remark O'Donnell made last week in which she implied the U.S. has engaged in terrorism in Iraq.

O'Donnell complained that Hasselbeck did not defend her against conservative critics who claimed she had called the troops "terrorists." The younger co-host pushed back, saying O'Donnell had a responsibility to defend her own words.

The back-and-forth escalated as the two women raised their voices, pointedly jabbed their fingers in the air and called each other "cowardly."

Barbara Walters, the show's creator and co-producer, was not on the program Wednesday, but when she returned Thursday, she declared that "Aunt Barbara is back and there will be peace in the kingdom."

"It's a hot weekend, so everybody can cool off," she said in a video statement on ABCNews .com.

Indeed, Hasselbeck was substantially calmer during the program's "Hot Topics" segment. Noting that the show was being preempted on the East Coast for President Bush's news conference, the co-host said wryly: "I just want to know where he was yesterday. We could have used a little of that."

It remains to be seen whether she and O'Donnell can mend their relationship. The comedian, who announced last month that she and ABC could not agree on terms for extending her contract, is set to the leave the program June 21.

During Thursday's show, Walters noted that O'Donnell had the day off but did not address the question of her return. She said she did not want to rehash the fight.

"What this show was for many years, and for most of this year, was that women could talk and argue and debate without it getting personal and nasty," Walters said. "And this is the way women are at home, and this is the way we want it to be and the way it has been. And that's the way it will be."

"We were all on the same team," she added later. "And usually, if we had big things to discuss we used to do them off camera. Yesterday it was on camera. But on the other hand, the show went on yesterday as normal if there's such a thing as normal on this show."

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et...?coll=cl-tvent

Scary but true. (And welcome back to the thread!)

I wouldn't say I got no pleasure out of it, foxeng, but it surely moved from my "I want to see this so badly I'll watch in in SD on the East Coast feed" list to my "I'll DVR it and get to it sometime" list in one episode.

Of course, maybe that is a combination of a weak episode, a long hiatus, and the fact we know the show is just limping toward cancellation.

The 2006-2007 Season Wrap Up
Network news making headlines
Couric's debut, exec ousters kept things moving
By Paul J. Gough The Hollywood Reporter May 25, 2007

NEW YORK -- A year ago at CBS' upfront presentation at Carnegie Hall, newly crowned network star Katie Couric made a grand entrance amid hopes that her anchorship of the "CBS Evening News" would be a strong step forward for women as well as the boost that the third-place newscast would need to make the leap to first place.

It didn't work out that way.

In the year since the announcement, the hope has turned to the realization that the "CBS Evening News" isn't destined for first place anytime soon. But another newcomer to the evening news, ABC's Charles Gibson, has leaped into first place in recent months and is poised to overtake traditional leader Brian Williams in the next few months.

That has caused a lot of turmoil in the traditionally staid world of the network evening newscasts, with NBC and CBS showing their executive producers the door this spring and hard-luck ABC heading to the top with a traditional newscast and a familiar face. NBC has been unable to stem ABC's advances, while CBS stays in third place no matter what the network does.

It's quite a change from a year ago, when NBC still was riding high from its high-profile and award-winning coverage of Hurricane Katrina that gave Williams the big story he needed to help viewers put his predecessor Tom Brokaw firmly in the past. Williams and NBC also was the beneficiary of the strong transition plan the network had, something that neither ABC nor CBS had in place when they unexpectedly lost their anchors.

Gibson was selected to anchor "ABC World News" after more than a year of reeling in the face of the death of longtime anchor Peter Jennings and the near fatal-injury of new co-anchor Bob Woodruff in Iraq. Woodruff's injury led to ABC re-evaluating its pairing of Woodruff and Elizabeth Vargas. Vargas soon stepped aside in favor of Gibson, who began his job last May.

Gibson's move from "Good Morning America" to the evening news anchor chair was mostly overshadowed by Couric, which suited Gibson just fine and gave the network time to strengthen its fundamentals in time to make a run at No. 1 under the helm of executive producer Jon Banner. Meanwhile, "Today" star Couric and CBS spent the summer contemplating ways to reinvent the evening news broadcast.

Following a massive marketing campaign, "CBS Evening News With Katie Couric" had a big debut, drawing 13 million viewers in its first broadcast Sept. 5, far eclipsing its rivals. But the Couric-anchored newscast, which received mixed reviews, quickly lost momentum, and NBC returned to the top spot in the ratings. Then in February, ABC's "World News" and anchor Gibson began a hot streak. Adding insult to injury, CBS continued to decline and, in recent weeks, posted historic lows for the broadcast in viewership.

The poor ratings cost CBS executive producer Rome Hartman his job; he was replaced by news vet Rick Kaplan, who immediately made the show much more harder news and CBS execs acknowledged that they misread the capacity for the evening news viewer to watch something different.

Over at "NBC Nightly News," executive producer John Reiss was replaced by NBC News vp Alex Wallace, who left the executive suite to shape up the newscast as it felt the pressure to battle a resurgent ABC. Results so far have been mixed.
Last week, the ABC newscast won the fourth straight week in viewership, households and the adults 25-54 demographic -- the first time ABC had won all three categories for four straight weeks since November 1996.

The anchor changes on ABC and CBS' evening newscasts had a ripple effect in the morning this past season. Both ABC's "GMA" and NBC's "Today" have posted declines since Gibson and Couric left the early shift.

NBC has suffered without Couric, who was replaced by Meredith Vieira in a smooth on-air transition that has yet to reap the viewership that Couric attracted. ABC also has had tougher sledding with the departure of Gibson in favor of Diane Sawyer and Robin Roberts along with a supporting cast that includes Chris Cuomo and Sam Champion.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...a8f38c7c354932

Thursday's metered market over-night prime-time ratings - and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman's view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the second post in this thread.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&#post10367387

I am sure you are right. I zipped through the breaks on my DVR -- they just seemed really shorter. I guess the reality is there was less programming.

TV Sports
NHL on Versus:
Is it a shame for the game?
By Larry Stewart Los Angeles Times Staff Writer May 25, 2007

It's Memorial Day Weekend, and that means on Sunday it will be men and women drivers versus machines in the Indianapolis 500 on ABC and, later in the day, the NASCAR boys versus their machines at Lowe's Motor Speedway in Concord, N.C., on Fox.

That's a good thing for motor racing fans.

For hockey fans, "versus" does not have such a favorable connotation. Versus is the cable television network that carries the NHL, and at times during the playoffs it has been fans and critics versus Versus.

For one thing, there have been distribution issues. The network is in 72 million television households, about 20 million fewer than ESPN or ESPN2. In the L.A. market, where there are 3 million cable households, only 50% get Versus.

Then came last Saturday, when NBC was televising Game 5 of the Eastern Conference finals and then the Preakness. But the game between the Ottawa Senators and Buffalo Sabres went into overtime and suddenly overlapped the Preakness coverage. NBC, facing contractual commitments to sponsors of the Preakness, bailed on the game and handed it off to Versus.

But because of a human error, Versus was slow in making the transition taking about two minutes and so viewers who made the switch initially got a "Strongman" competition. Some gave up, figuring they had been strong-armed out of seeing the rest of the game in which the Senators clinched a berth in the Stanley Cup finals with a 3-2 victory at 9:32 of overtime.

"It could have gone smoother," Versus President Gavin Harvey said. "But not a second of game action was missed."

Also, critics jumped on the fact that NBC didn't stick with the game.

"This is a new low for the NHL," ESPN's Tony Kornheiser said.

Other critics yearned for the days before the lockout season of 2004-05 when ESPN televised hockey, forgetting it was the network rejecting the NHL, not the other way around.

It is amid this atmosphere that the Stanley Cup finals between the Ducks and Senators begins on Monday. Versus will televise the first two games, NBC the rest. NBC spokesman Brian Walker promises there will be no cutting away.

"The only situation where that was going to happen was the day of the Kentucky Derby or the day of the Preakness," he said, "and the NHL knew that going in."

NBC can't be blamed too much. The Preakness coverage drew 7.2 million viewers, the hockey game that preceded it only 1.2 million. In Canada, which has a population of about 33 million, the CBC audience for the hockey game was 1.4 million.

From a U.S. ratings standpoint, the TV matchup for the Stanley Cup finals Ottawa against the Ducks is hardly ideal. One team is from a non-U.S. market, the other from a market that gets dismal hockey ratings. The NHL on Versus during the regular season averaged only a .03 rating in L.A., which tied for 48th among the nation's 55 metered markets.

But Harvey, for one, doesn't see a bleak picture.

"The most important thing isn't where the teams are from," he said. "It's getting dramatic games and an incredible series like we did last year with Edmonton and Carolina.

"And if people will dig down they will see that this year we have a great matchup a defensively strong team in the Ducks against a powerful offensive team that skates like lightning."

Harvey also sees a silver lining in the ratings. He pointed out that his network averaged a .71 rating in L.A. for the five games it televised during the Ducks' series with Detroit, and that's up from a .34 for the five games that Versus, then OLN, televised last year during the Western Conference finals between the Ducks and Edmonton. Game 5 of the Ducks-Red Wings series on Sunday, televised by NBC, got a respectable 1.4 rating (2.2 in L.A.) and drew 2.1 million viewers.

Overall, Harvey said Versus' NHL ratings are up from last year and that the network is continually working on improving its distribution. He also calls Versus' high-definition coverage the "best hockey production ever seen on television."

Now it's up to the Ducks and Senators to deliver the kind of series its television partners are yearning for.

Ratings game

As for NBA playoff ratings, it's not a real pretty picture either. Through the first two rounds, TNT was averaging a 2.1 rating and 3 million viewers, down from a 2.2 and 3.1 million viewers last year. ESPN/ESPN2 was averaging a 1.8 and 2.5 million viewers, down from a 2.1 and 2.9 million viewers last year.

Game 1 of the Western Conference finals between San Antonio and Utah on ABC last Sunday got only a 3.0 rating with 4.4 million viewers. Game 1 of the Eastern Conference finals last year between Miami and Detroit, despite being on ESPN, got a 3.7 rating with 5.4 million viewers. Cable networks such as ESPN generally get lower ratings than over-the-air broadcast networks.

TNT gets a break this Sunday when it televises Game 3 of the Detroit-Cleveland series at 5:30 p.m. Normally, it would be going up against HBO's "The Sopranos" in the East, but because of the Memorial Day holiday, HBO is not televising cable's highest-rated show this weekend.

In auto racing, Speed got a 3.5 rating and an audience of 2.5 million for its Nextel Cup All-Star Challenge race coverage last Saturday. The event got a 3.3 on FX last year.

Short waves

For the first time, the Indy 500 will be televised in high-definition. There are three women drivers in the field, and there will be two women pit reporters working the telecast Jamie Little and Brienne Pedigo.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-sp...?coll=cl-tvent

TV Sports
TV ratings down for NBA

By Barry Jackson Miami Herald May 25, 2007

NBA playoff musings from the couch, while wondering if Bill Walton blurts ''horrible'' and ''terrible'' when he watches a game in his living room:

NBA ratings are down across the board, and a few things have become clear: 1) San Antonio-Utah is hardly capturing America's imagination. 2) LeBron James, at least so far, isn't luring as many eyeballs as the NBA probably would have hoped. 3) Lots of fans apparently would prefer to watch the Heat, Mavericks and Suns.

Among the somewhat surprising developments: Game 1 of Detroit-Cleveland on Monday was seen in 1 million fewer homes (3.1 million/2.7 rating) than Game 1 of last year's Heat-Pistons Eastern Conference finals (4.1 million/3.7 rating). Both games were on cable -- with Monday's on TNT and last year's on ESPN. Meanwhile, the Western Conference finals ratings suggest viewers miss the entertaining styles of Phoenix and Dallas. ABC's 2.9 for Game 1 of Spurs-Jazz on Sunday barely beat the 2.8 for Fox's regional coverage of regular-season interleague baseball Saturday (Yankees-Mets and White Sox-Cubs). And consider this: Game 1 of last year's Mavericks-Suns Western Conference finals on TNT drew a higher rating (3.5) than Game 1 of Spurs-Jazz -- impressive considering the Spurs game was available in 20 million more homes than the Mavs game. Suns fans, of course, are probably saying NBA commissioner David Stern is getting what he deserves. By suspending Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw for Game 5 of the Spurs-Suns series, Stern reduced the chance of Phoenix -- the league's most artistic, captivating team (aside from Golden State) -- from advancing to the Western finals. (Of course, the Spurs might have won even without the suspensions.) Overall, ABC's playoff ratings are down 19 percent. ESPN and TNT also are down.

Although TNT's troika of Marv Albert- Doug Collins- Steve Kerr still sets the standard for NBA broadcasts, ABC's new lead team of Mike Breen, Mark Jackson and Jeff Van Gundy shows potential -- enough that ABC announced this week that Van Gundy will remain on board through the NBA Finals. During Game 2 of Jazz-Spurs, Jackson and his former coach, Van Gundy, showed a willingness to kid with each other -- and it made for good television. When Van Gundy said too many charges are being called, Jackson said, ''I can't believe you're saying that. You taught that every day!'' When Jackson noted the Jazz has not played a team as strong defensively as the Spurs, Van Gundy said, ''Hey, we had the No. 1 defense'' in field-goal percentage. (Van Gundy was fired by the Rockets less than two weeks after they lost to Utah in the first round.)

Jackson, in his first year replacing Hubie Brown on ABC's No. 1 team, offers generally cogent points, such as noting it makes ''no sense'' for Utah to post up Mehmet Okur against Tim Duncan, ''the best post defender in basketball.'' Still, some of Jackson's remarks are elementary, including his comment that the Spurs ``understand it's a 48-minute game and they compete.''

Although some of Jackson's attempts at humor seem forced, he usually delivers a line or two that at least elicit a smile. Jackson also cross-references sports more than any game analyst in memory. He has compared the Spurs' Manu Ginobili to former NFL great Earl Campbell and dropped references to Hall of Fame quarterback Steve Young and Yankees reliever Mariano Rivera.

Van Gundy surprises some viewers with his dry wit. When Phoenix coach Mike D'Antoni was angry with the referees late in the Spurs' series-clinching victory, Van Gundy deadpanned, ``He's just got to calm down and enjoy the game. What's wrong with these coaches?''

ESPN's studio show is like a box of chocolates -- you never know what you're going to get. (Unfortunately, it's not nearly as enjoyable.) Some nights, it's Greg Anthony. Others, Screamin' Stephen A. Smith. Still others, Jamal Mashburn, Allan Houston, Tim Legler or guest analysts Rick Carlisle or Alonzo Mourning. (Don't you think five years is enough time for ESPN to find the right mix?)

The good news for ESPN is that Carlisle has been a pleasant surprise. Among other things, he noted that Detroit wants to prove it can win a championship without Ben Wallace -- a point we hadn't heard before.

ABC's best studio move was giving a role to opinionated Michael Wilbon, who validated the point that the Spurs aren't particularly popular by noting that even the Charlotte Bobcats had higher road attendance than the Spurs, who ranked 23rd.

Although TNT's Charles Barkley amuses more than any studio analyst on TV, we wish he wouldn't repeat the same point three or four times. And his Bay Area bashing during the playoffs was a bit much.

Still, this is the reality: You don't want to leave the room at halftime of TNT games because you never know what Charles and Kenny Smith are going to say. Nobody has ever said that about ESPN's halftime show -- and the contrast is glaring this week because the networks alternate conference finals broadcasts.

Barkley has delivered his usual share of hilarity -- political correctness be damned. When Golden State's Stephen Jackson wouldn't leave the court in a timely fashion against Dallas, Barkley asserted, ''You can't suspend him for being a nitwit.'' When Smith missed a night in TNT's studio, Barkley cracked, ``I'm glad y'all fired George Jefferson.''

And Barkley announced, 'I'm not going to use the term `midgets' anymore. I got a memo from the Little People of America. You want to be called 'vertically challenged' or 'little people' . . . But don't be mad at me, be mad at God.''

Fox NFL reporter and TNT part-timer Pam Oliver must have had football on her mind when she referred to Golden State's Jackson as Stephen Davis (the veteran running back).

http://www.miamiherald.com/588/v-pri...ry/118130.html

If anyone can go the THR link listed at the bottom of this post, and post this as a chart, I'd be very happy. It would be far easier to read. (Then if you could teach/show me how to do that, too, it would make this thread much more enjoyable for all.)

The 2006-2007 Season
2006-07 primetime wrap
Series programming results
(Viewers are total 2+, listed in millions)
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...9a71cad261604f

Technology Notebook
SED Postponed Indefinitely
By Greg Tarr TWICE 5/25/2007

Tokyo Toshiba and Canon sent out official notices Friday that they have postponed the launch of surface-conduction electron-emitter display (SED) TVs, which were originally planned to launch in the fourth quarter of 2007.

In a statement, Toshiba said the decision is based on information provided by Canon, indicating that Canon will not be able to provide SED panels to the original schedule.

Canon said Friday that prices of flat panels are declining more rapidly than expected. The company said it has to institute new production techniques to improve mass production efficiency.

Both Canon and Toshiba said they could not give a specific timeframe for the launch of SED TVs at this time.

Plans for mass production of 55-inch 1080p SED TVs which are flat-panel sets designed to produce extremely high contrast, black level and color saturation levels were dealt a blow, by Nano-Proprietary, a company that developed a key piece of technology that Canon was to license to produce the sets.

Nano-Proprietary claimed that Canon broke an exclusivity agreement by sharing information related to electron emissions from carbon nanotubes with Toshiba.

As a result of the suit, Toshiba ended its role as a equity partner with Canon in the SED production company in order to satisfy Nano-Proprietary's complaints.

Last February, a Federal Court ruled that Canon had violated its agreement with Nano-Proprietary by forming a joint television venture with Toshiba.

On May 3, a jury ruled that no additional damages beyond the $5.5 million fee for the original licensing contract were due.

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6446612.html

Had "Studio 60" shown a lot more interest in the show within the show, I suspect it would have been a lot more successful.

But I would hazard a guess that since writing comedy is clearly not Sorkin's strong suit, he consciously decided not to do that. Big mistake.

Thursday's fast national over night prime-time ratings - and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman's view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the second post in this thread.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&#post10367387

TV Q&A:
Ask Matt
House, Grey's Anatomy, Brothers & Sisters, Lost, Jericho and More
By Matt Roush: TV Guide. Critic Friday, May 25, 2007

Question: I love House and think it is Fox's best show on the air right now. I'm still asking myself, though, why the network has given it the post-Super Bowl slot next February. House already gets the best possible lead-in any show could ask for on any network: American Idol. Why not share the wealth and use the Super Bowl to promote a freshman show like The Sarah Connor Chronicles or Back to You, so that it has a deeper roster of high-rated shows to utilize during its lean fall season? Chris L.

Matt Roush: There are lots of different ways to look at that post-Super Bowl slot, but it all boils down to one thing: money. (That's what the whole night's about, after all: ad dollars.) Here's how Fox's scheduling chief Preston Beckman explained it to Variety: "Of all the shows we have, this is the biggest scripted one. And to maximize revenue, you want to put a big show behind the Super Bowl." Some years, a network chooses to program a show there to take it to the next level (think ABC and Grey's Anatomy). Other years, a network chooses to capitalize on one of its biggest hits with a big stunt episode (think NBC and Friends, or Fox with The Simpsons in the past) to make the entire night a big, splashy event. That's the tack Fox is taking this year. The days of using this slot to boost the fortunes of a struggling show are probably over (think ABC's Alias debacle, which was as much a scheduling snafu as a programming blunder). With Fox using House this way, I like to think of it as a reward for a show that is at the peak of its popularity, as well as a reward for the viewer. House has incredible mass appeal and is the perfect way to end a huge night of TV. It's a far more appropriate choice than how CBS chose to program the slot this year.

Question: What's your take on Grey's Anatomy's season finale? I have to say, it left me rather cold. Last year I was breathless; this year I was bored. I was initially drawn to Grey's because I could find a bit of myself in each of the five interns (who really were the focus of the show). Now, I simply don't care about the interns (including Meredith, whose mommy and fake mommy died, and who died herself that should at least stir some kind of pathos in a viewer). I understand the need for character development, but must they devolve into such despicable people (Izzie)? And most of that complaint goes to the residents and attendings, too, with one caveat: Chandra Wilson's Miranda Bailey, though her story lines have been marginalized, remains the kind of person we can only hope our doctors are. In my opinion, the best scene of the finale was the discussion of "failure" between Miranda and George. Ultimately, I am worried that Grey's needs much attention to put it back on course, but with Shonda Rhimes splitting duty between this and Private Practice, are we going to be left with two decent shows that aren't appointment TV? Erin

Matt Roush: That's certainly a justifiable fear. I was dismayed at the way the Grey's finale just piled on the misery, character after character. As Andrea remarked in a separate letter: "The finale was just bizarre to me. Why did Meredith reject Derek? I thought she was in love with him? Why did Burke call off the wedding and leave? Why did Derek reject the chief of surgery job? What's going on with George and Callie? None of it makes sense to me. It feels like the characters have been possessed by aliens." Kind of true. I will say I was blown away by Sandra Oh's performance as she melted down after being left at the altar. I loved the George-Bailey scene; she really can do no wrong. And I was with the Alex-Jane Doe story to the end, even accepting the bittersweet outcome. But for Meredith to walk away from Derek when he reached out: blech. Asking us to think that Izzie sees George as a love mate (as opposed to soul mate): double blech. And so on. I don't mind twists on a heightened romantic soap to be contrived, but I would like them at least to be fun. That was the case with the show a year ago. Not so much now. The fact that this is the time that ABC and the producers are choosing to launch a spin-off is worrisome, to be sure.

Question: What are your thoughts on the Brothers & Sisters finale? I thought it was a perfectly understated finale with no big cliff-hanger, but plenty of plot twists to chew on over the summer. It was refreshing to not have a cliff-hanger just for the sake of suspense. What a great series this has become since its rocky start (something you highlighted in a recent column). If Sally Field is not nominated for an Emmy, I will be very disappointed. What a perfect matriarch for this crazy bunch. Can't wait until next season! Steven

Matt Roush: After the Grey's finale, not to mention the capper to a dreary season of Desperate Housewives, the Brothers finale came as a relief. I was touched, I was amused, I was entertained although I did think the depiction of the senator's family went too over-the-top; in what world are Rob Lowe and Garry Marshall from the same extended family? Over the season, this evolved into one of my favorite shows. Like Grey's in previous seasons (when it aired on Sundays), it's a perfectly enjoyable way to wrap the weekend before diving in to the work week. It may not be a great or particularly important show (except maybe in its matter-of-fact treatment of gay characters and issues), but it is often delightful and moving, and very well written and acted. Sally Field, like Chandra Wilson, can do no wrong.

Question: If you could pick one pair of costars from any show on television that you would say has the best on-screen chemistry, who would you pick and why? My choice, not to influence a great critic or anything, would be Elizabeth Mitchell as Juliet and Matthew Fox as Jack on Lost. PGP

Matt Roush: From Lost, that's a great choice. She's the best thing to happen to that show since Season 1. (By the way, any discussion of the Lost finale in Ask Matt will have to wait until next Friday's column, because of the holiday and other deadlines.) Also from Lost, I'd have to nominate Daniel Dae Kim and Yunjin Kim as Jin and Sun. They glow in their scenes together. But my No. 1 couple with chemistry this season, without hesitation, is Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton as the coach and his wife on Friday Night Lights. The most believable, the sexiest, the most intimately in-tune married couple I may ever have seen on TV. Once again, they can do no wrong.

Question: I truly respect your damning assessment of Season 6 of 24, I do, even if I don't feel as strongly as you do. I really feel as if the show has been running out of creative ideas. But the one thing that I can't get is the venomous, spiteful reaction from the press, which to me slightly smacks of an over-eagerness to join the bandwagon of 24 bashing. Components of the show, such as CTU and the White House, received little criticism last season, but the recent rush to condemn them as the weaknesses of 24 puzzles me. Season 4, which to me was far inferior, got great reviews, despite the many unrealistic elements, like the repetitive Marwan escapes. Please share your thoughts. Yong

Matt Roush: What you call venomous and spiteful coverage I see more as an expression of profound disappointment and dismay at how the show collapsed from its best-ever season (the Emmy-winning fifth) to its worst, which after a strong start spiraled downward and, unlike past seasons, never pulled itself out. Why would we have complained about CTU and the White House last season when there were so many thrills in those arenas? The duplicitous president, his fabulous first lady, Agent Aaron Pierce, the death of Edgar need I go on? This year felt hollow and repetitive by comparison. Every decision felt wrong. Wayne Palmer was a pale shadow of his brother David, and Powers Boothe's caricature of a snarling hawk of a VP was more comical than menacing. Splitting the focus between an often-underused Jack Bauer (distracted by wacky family problems), the dead zone of a CTU with few if any compelling characters, and a presidential bunker a continent away didn't work, either. Season 4 may not have been perfect, but it did give us the Araz family (including an incredible performance by Shohreh Aghdashloo) and sustained a fair amount of tension. Most seasons (with the exception of 5) have had their rough spots, but this season was the first time the show went into total collapse and never recovered. I'm moving on.

Question: What shows do you think were the best overall this season? I mean all around: writing, acting, special effects, etc. My picks are Lost, Supernatural, House (the episode two weeks ago, with a drugged-up Wilson, was one of the funniest scenes I've seen in a while and entirely makes up for the Tritter mess), Friday Night Lights, How I Met Your Mother and Heroes (though, granted, it had a teetering start). Maddi

Matt Roush: All acceptable choices. But looking at the season as a totality, the shows that brought me the most consistent pleasure or at least had me anticipating the next episode with the most enthusiasm and interest include (I'll stop at 10): Friday Night Lights, Lost (putting aside the fall problems), The Shield, 30 Rock, The Office, Battlestar Galactica, Ugly Betty, Brothers & Sisters, The Sopranos and Dexter. OK, make it 11: I ate up Entourage, too.

Question: When a semi-quality show like Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip gets canceled by NBC, what are the chances of a smaller network like the CW picking it up? Is it a cost issue, a contract issue or something else that keeps it from happening? After all, Studio 60 likely has a bigger fan base than any of the shows the CW is currently airing. I recall the WB picked up Grounded for Life after Fox dropped it a few years back. Frank

Matt Roush: First off, thanks for giving me a laugh with your description of Studio 60 as "semi-quality." How true. Second, there are any number of reasons why no network, and particularly not the CW, would resurrect this show. It is too expensive, true, but there's also no way Studio 60, with its cast of adults (though many acted like children), fits the CW brand. No one's going to pony up to try to keep alive a show that costs this much money. It's a lot different with a sitcom, and (if memory serves) when Grounded for Life moved from Fox to the WB, it took a budget cut along the way. At this time of year, it's always helpful to remind people (including those Jericho fans I'll be addressing further down): 99 percent of the time, when a show is canceled, it's dead. No one's going to pick it up, network or cable.

Question: Ever since Veronica Mars' cancellation was announced, the CW has been taking quite a beating in the blogosphere. I am an avid fan of Veronica and am saddened that it won't be returning next season, but what more could the CW have done for this show? It paired it with one of its top-ranked shows, which should have provided it with the targeted demographic audience, and yet Veronica was always as ratings-starved as it was on UPN. In your opinion, why couldn't Veronica find an audience? Was it, like Arrested Development, "too smart" for TV? Chris

Matt Roush: I really don't buy the theory that any show is "too smart" for TV. Too different, too hard to sell, too specialized in its taste, maybe. When Veronica launched its first and finest season, I said at the time it had "cult TV" written all over it. It didn't pander, but it also didn't fit the mold and was destined always to fly under the ratings radar. I agree that when the CW paired it with Gilmore Girls this season, this was its best and last shot. Simply put, it didn't attract or appeal to enough viewers. Even when it was at its best (I still mostly liked it when it was uneven), Veronica lived uneasily in a world between teen drama and young-adult/adult mystery. Even its fan base was exacting and unforgiving (according to my mail) when the show went into directions that alienated parts of its audience. It never really had a chance.

Question: I know each year networks must make cuts. The problem I have is that if they are going to cancel a show, it would be great if they could at least plan for a finale. Of course, the show I am referring to is Jericho. I watched the show all season long and now will never know what happened. Isn't it possible for the networks to allow the creators of the show, say, two or three episodes to wrap the story up and at least air during the summer months? I was also a fan of Kidnapped on NBC. Even though the show got canceled, I still get to see how everything played out on DVD, because NBC allowed the creators of the show the chance to wrap everything up. Was this an abnormality? Or do you think we might one day get to see how these canceled series finish up either on DVD or during the summer months? Jeff

Matt Roush: Kidnapped was an unusual exception, canceled after five episodes had aired but able to wrap up its story (so I hear) in the 13 episodes originally ordered by NBC and which the production company completed just so it could be released on DVD. That is pretty rare. Now to address Jericho, about which I have gotten more mail than any other cancellation this season. While I appreciate the passion and sentiment, please, can I beg the fans to stop sending me multiples of form letters, which tend to annoy the media as much as they are ignored by the networks? It is naive to think that a network or production arm (in this case, part of the same Paramount family) will give any show "two or three episodes" beyond an initial production order to wrap things up, especially if the show is failing. The business doesn't work that way. I personally think the Jericho producers made a calculated error by not resolving the Jericho-New Bern war in that season finale. There was no guarantee the show would return, and everyone knew it. To go to black with the sound of gunfire was, in effect, shooting themselves in the foot and leaving the fans unnecessarily hanging.

Question: Do you think that Jericho can be saved? I hear there is a large outcry of disbelief and a growing campaign to save the show. If CBS doesn't bring it back, could it go to another network? Jim E.

Matt Roush: As I noted earlier, Jericho is not the sort of show to be picked up by another network. It was produced by Paramount, which is part of the same corporation as CBS, so they're both buyer and producer, and there's really nowhere else for it to go. (The CW? Hardly.) Can it be saved? Despite the impressive outcry, doubtful. As Michael Ausiello has reported, CBS has made some noise about providing closure for fans, so let's see where that goes. If it were up to me, I'd commission a TV-movie finale, something like Jericho: Aftermath, built around a memorial tribute to fallen town hero Johnston Green (Gerald McRaney) at which point we'd learn what happened to the rest of the characters the fans cared about.
A final note on Jericho for now, to demonstrate the range of mail I've gotten on the subject:
From Calvin: : "I imagine many of the angry e-mails you are getting on Jericho (as mentioned in your Dispatch) have chosen to blame the show's hiatus for its demise. I'd like to put forxultth another theory. Maybe the show was just too depressing, and people who were already planning to leave just saw the break as a convenient cutoff point. As cheesy as the mayor's speech was in the pilot, it was pretty much the last bit of optimism we'd see all season. If Lost is "live together, die alone," Jericho was "just die already, because everyone's a bad guy anyway." There was just never any good news. Every interaction with the outside world was a bad one, every piece of news was awful, and you couldn't step two feet out of that town without running into vicious looters. Not that the town itself was much better. The bad guy won the election, the innocent kids turned into heartless opportunists, and the pregnant woman died (as did her baby). I get the apocalypse motif, but shouldn't there be a few good moments amid the horror? Can I get just a little "triumph of the human spirit" here? By the end, Gerald McRaney's character was really the only reason left to watch, and now he's dead (more bad news, what were the odds?). So for me, I say good riddance."

Matt Roush: It's true that before the cancellation was official, I was fielding angry mail from viewers who'd pledged never to watch again after McRaney was killed off. Moot point now. The bottom line on Jericho: It was a risky project, to be sure, especially for a network like CBS that until lately had rarely strayed into this sort of buzz-generating serial, and look what it got them. I imagine they're rocked by the reaction to this cancellation, the loudest they've experienced since dropping Joan of Arcadia, and this response seems much more ferocious. The downbeat nature of the show was, I'm sure, a turnoff for many. Others, however, found the survival-against-the-odds angle inspiring. I thought the show improved as it went on, especially once it moved beyond Super Jake heroics, and I'm frankly surprised that CBS, which is in the market for shows that stimulate a bit more fan buzz than the garden-variety procedural tends to do, didn't try to nurture the show at least into a second season. The network is paying for its short-sightedness right now. (For those who are somehow out of the loop, the link I get most frequently from protesters is jericholives.com. Beyond that, I'm staying out of it.)

http://www.tvguide.com/News-Views/Co....aspx#01heroes

"Grey's" is, it sees to me at a crossroads.

It is a show I have loved, but the past 10 episodes or so, starting with Meredith's "drowning" story arc have left me figuratively gasping for air.

And to knock of her step mother, almost casually, at the end of the seaosn cuts off all those great storylines about having her face her past.

I can only assume Ms. Rhimes was spending a lot of time developing "Private Practice". And that is too bad, because there is a show which is going to need major, major work before it even comes close to becoming what "Grey's" was.

At some point the networks may realize that just because a creator/producer/writer comes uyp with one (or two) great show ideas does not in any way guarantee anything for the future. Although, sadly, I doubt it.

We have discussed that here recently -- and although it is "safe" to pick up a show from an "established" producer, it sure doesn't seem to work out in the long run most of the time.
But it would take guts for a network to turn down such a producer, and the fear is that he or she would quickly sell the idea to a competitor.

I am not sure we will see the return of such network guts before the networks themselves fade away in the next decade or so.

Weekly Cable Nielsen Notebook
MSNBC Eyes Scarborough as Imus Replacement
By Steve Donohue Multichannel News 5/25/2007

MSNBC is eying former Florida Congressman Joe Scarborough as a possible replacement for its Imus in The Morning program, which it dropped last month.

While network executives emphasize that they have not made a final decision on a replacement for Imus -- who was dropped after directing a racial insult at the Rutgers University women's basketball team -- they say Scarborough has impressed them on trial runs in the morning slot.

Scarborough currently hosts a one-hour newscast called Scarborough Country on MSNBC Mondays through Thursday. He filled in the week of May 14 in the morning slot, with a show called Morning Joe that featured lengthy live interviews with notables such as Walter Isaacson, author of a best-seller on Albert Einstein, and banter with a collection of sidekicks with diverse professional backgrounds.

Joe was on a week ago, and he put together a team of people [including African-American screenwriter and frequent National Public Radio guest John Ridley and MSNBC commentator Willie Geist]. And I think he really impressed people with his performance, MSNBC general manager Dan Abrams said.

Scarborough was on vacation last week and not available for an interview, MSNBC vice president of media relations Jeremy Gaines said.

Abrams said Scarborough will take over Imus's old time slot once again this week.

MSNBC has tested several replacement anchors and formats for the 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. slot since it dumped the Imus In The Morning simulcast on April 11. The network has tested other morning radio hosts, including ABC Radio's Larry Elder, liberal talk radio program The Stephanie Miller Show, and Philadelphia-based radio host Michael Smerconish.

In addition to Scarborough, Abrams has also given NBC News talent David Gregory, Jim Cramer and Tucker Carlson a crack at the morning slot.

Cramer, who hosts Mad Money on CNBC, filled in during the morning slot on MSNBC last week. He began the week on Monday sitting behind an anchor desk, but for the rest of the week walked around MSNBC's Secaucus, N.J., studio, relying some of the props and sound effects that he uses on Mad Money.

What we've been saying to all of the people that have been doing it in the morning is to do your own thing and try to make it work for you, and I think that's consistent with what Cramer has done, Abrams said.

MSNBC's morning ratings have plummeted since it dropped Imus. In March, the last full month it had Imus on the air, the network averaged a 0.4 rating and 316,000 households from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m., according to Nielsen Media Research numbers. So far in May (though last Tuesday), MSNBC is averaging a 0.2 rating and 177,000 households, down 50% from its March numbers.

Fox News Channel and its Fox & Friends program dominates the morning slot compared to its cable news rivals. Fox is averaging a 0.7 rating and 655,000 households in May during the 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. slot, while CNN is averaging a 0.4 rating and 351,000 households.

There's no question that the numbers have been down since Imus left, Abrams said. I think the MSNBC morning viewers had become accustomed to seeing Imus In The Morning. And our goal now is to pick a new host and a new show and a new format, and build an audience again where people will come back to see that show, Abrams said.

Asked if he missed Imus, Abrams said, Sure we miss Imus. We miss Imus's program.

While Abrams said the network hasn't set a solid timeline for picking a permanent replacement for Imus, he said a decision would be made sooner rather than later.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6446688.html

Critic's Notebook
Season finales sputter
By Rob Owen Pittsburgh Post-Gazette TV Editor in his blog Tuned In May 25, 2007

It's been a disappointing May for broadcast network series' season finales. Few have offered the nail-biting cliffhangers or surprise twists that viewers have come to expect. Here's a rundown on some (not all) of the season finales.

"24" -- How many times can Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) give the sad puppy dog look before viewers throw things at the TV and say, "If you really want to get a new, non-CTU life, then just do it!" It was a terrible season for "24" and making Chloe (Mary Lyn Rajskub) pregnant doesn't bode well for Jack's next "24" day.

"Desperate Housewives" -- The return of Bree (Marcia Cross) was welcome and her plan to keep her daughter's child and raise it as her own may give the show a much-needed jolt. But it's completely out of character for Edie (Nicollette Sheridan) to commit suicide. Even if she's not dead, I don't buy it that the character would make the attempt. Edie's a fighter. Yes, the writers have tried to make her more vulnerable, but that doesn't mean she's suicidal.

"Brothers & Sisters" -- This show has grown on me, aside from the Calista Flockhart and Rob Lowe scenes, which often seem like another series entirely. I did like Flockhart and Sally Field running through the airport together. Actually, any scene with Field is a winner. But the choice to end the season with the entire cast playfully jumping in the pool where the family patriarch died in the premiere was odd and borderline icky.

"Heroes" -- I didn't mind the season finale that much, but after talking to friends who more readily picked it apart, I now tend to agree: We built the whole season to a crescendo that ends with chatter about the power of love? Why was Claire (Hayden Panettiere) necessary in saving New York? Couldn't Peter (Milo Ventimiglia) have tapped into Nathan's (Adrian Pasdar) ability to fly and soared on his own? (Series creator Tim King gives a lame answer here: http://community.tvguide.com/blog-en...lves/800015727) How did Sylar (Zachary Quinto) slither into the sewer? Did he turn himself into a cockroach? Great show, not a super season finale.

"The Office" -- Runner up to the best season finale I saw: Fans of Pam (Jenna Fischer) and Jim (John Krasinski) got what they wanted with the couple reuniting. Plus, it was a true shock that intern Ryan (B.J. Novak) got the New York job, making him Michael's supervisor. His quick decision to dump Kelly (Mindy Kaling) was as cruel as it was funny.

"Grey's Anatomy" -- What a complete and total downer. While it went against expectations that George (T.R. Knight) failed the test and Callie (Sara Ramirez) became chief resident, the episode was still a big bummer with Cristina (Sandra Oh) calling off her wedding to Burke (Isaiah Washington) and Meredith (Ellen Pompeo) dissing McDreamy (Patrick Dempsey), who now has the hots for her half-sister (Chyler Leigh). It's one thing to make one character miserable, but to create sad endings for almost everyone may be more than some viewers care to bear.

"Ugly Betty" -- Definitely one of the better season finales thanks to a snappy music montage at the end. True to its telenovela roots, many questions linger for fans to mull over the summer.

"ER" -- Ray (Shane West) is an amputee and Neela (Parminder Nagra) got trampled at a war protest. Topical. But I was annoyed with the introduction of the new doc played by Stanley Tucci. At first he seemed just sort of demanding of his colleagues, which would be OK, but when he called out Abby for her relationship with Luka, it made Tucci's character a moustache twirling jerk, subtlety be damned.

"NCIS" -- Since I don't watch this one regularly, I had no idea what was going on through much of the episode, which had a pretty anti-climactic ending (nothing as shocking as Kate's death in season one).

"Ghost Whisperer" -- A nice game changer finale that also referenced last year's cliffhanger. Was Melinda (Jennifer Love Hewitt) briefly dead? Does she really have a brother? It was a pretty decent tease to woo fans back in the fall.

"Veronica Mars" -- My Comcast DVR failed to record the first hour of the last two episodes, but at least I got to see the series finale, which had (yet another) downer ending. Much as I liked the full-circle feeling with the return of Jake Kane (Kyle Secor) and his cronies, it was a complete bummer to end the series with Veronica's dad likely losing his sheriff's job (again) and Veronica's relationships unresolved.

"Lost" -- ABC saved the best for last. Easily the best season finale among all the ones I watched, "Lost" ended its season on a high note with a two-hour finale with an unprecedented change-up. Rather than a flashback, the episode was framed by a flash forward to a time when Jack and Kate have made it off the island and Jack is a drunken lush. It's a brilliant move. Though producers are declining to say if all episodes from here forward will be framed by flash forwards, it would make sense. "Lost" isn't the kind of show that you want to end with a rescue from the island. Fans will want to know how the characters re-integrate back into society and flash forwards will give them the opportunity to see that. "China Beach" used a similar story telling structure in its final, low-rated season.

http://www.post-gazette.com/tv/tunedin/

Critic's Notebook
"House," "Boston Legal" offer season finales Tuesday
By Hal Boedeker Orlando Sentinel Television Critic in his TV Guy blog May 25, 2007

Can't get enough season finales? There are still are two notables ones, which were pushed out of the May sweeps to accommodate reality.

"House" offers its season wrapup at 9 ET/PT Tuesday on Fox. The episode title: "Human Error." As the promos indicate, House (Hugh Laurie) is stunned by the case of a Cuban immigrant. Will Foreman (Omar Epps) leave? ("House" vacated its slot for "On the Lot.)

On "Boston Legal," the case sounds like a variation on the Menendez brothers. Alan Shore and Denny Crane are the defense for the brothers. The finale airs at 10 ET/PT Tuesday on ABC.

"Boston Legal" gave up its time slot to the season finale of "Dancing With the Stars."

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ent...boston_le.html

Yes, he shouldn't have mentioned it if he didn't know what he was watching.

Surley it didn't have the same immediate dramatic impact of the Kate shooting two years ago, but it surely sets up all kinds of interesting plot developments for next season.

This is just another example that people probably shouldn't comment on things they know little about.

We can't expect all TV critics to follow each series religiously. But if they don't havea decent knowledge about a show, they would be better off just not commenting.

After all, would anyone have noticed if Owen hadn't mentioned NCIS at all?

TV Notebook
Rosie won't be back on 'The View'
By The Associated Press May 25, 2007

NEW YORK- Rosie O'Donnell has fought her last fight at 'The View.' ABC said Friday she won't be back on the show following her angry confrontation with co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck on Wednesday.

O'Donnell asked for, and received, an early exit from her contract. She was due to leave "The View" in mid-June.

The entire article is here:
http://www.mercurynews.com/tv/ci_5987654?nclick_check=1