Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 164

Cable Nielsen Notes
Paris spikes King ratings
From Variety

CNN's "hard news" rep took a hit, but Paris Hilton brought in the viewers, as her exclusive tell-all with Larry King drew 3.2 million viewers -- more than triple King's regular average.

Ratings for the Paris edition of "Larry King Live" exceeded those for CNN's last two presidential debates. CNN drew 2.78 million for its debate between the Democratic contenders and 2.05 million for its Republican debate, earlier in June.

"Someone said this is the second biggest guest you can get in the world," King told "Entertainment Tonight." "The first would be Osama Bin Laden. Now, what is that saying about us?"

King landed the Hilton interview after an embarrassing behind-the-scenes auction in which NBC trumped ABC's Barbara Walters by offering the Hilton family close to $1 million for a production deal that would include an interview on "Today" and "NBC Dateline."

Walters, who acted as something of a family confidant during Hilton's incarceration, believed she'd landed the exclusive and was incensed to learn ABC News had been outbid by NBC. ABC News had agreed to pay close to $100,000 to license family photos and video for a primetime "20/20" special, with ABC execs characterizing the sum as a reasonable license fee.

When NBC's offer became public, the Hiltons backtracked and tried to accept Walters' initial offer, but she declined. NBC News said it stopped pursuing a Hilton interview as well, so Hilton turned to King, who offers a smaller audience but a gentle stop on the celebrity rehab circuit.

CNN exhaustively promoted King's "get," including a countdown clock during "Paula Zahn Now" in the preceding hour. Afterwards Anderson Cooper showed his contempt for the story but nevertheless enlisted a panel to "analyze" what had just transpired. "We can't be above the news of the moment," he said at the top of "Anderson Cooper 360."

Telecast was King's highest-rated since 2005 but only his 53rd highest-rated in 10 years at CNN, according to Nielsen Media Research. Some 1.4 million adults 25-54 tuned in for Hilton, more than three times King's regular average, meaning more young people tuned in than is typical for a King show.

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?lay...&categoryid=14

Nielsen Notes
Wednesday Original Nielsen finals
(Posted by Travis Yanan in Marc Berman's Programming Insider blog)

So You Think You Can Dance (9pm)
- 9.829 million viewers
- 6.0/10 HH
- 3.8/11 A18-49

So You Think You Can Dance (8pm)
- 8.654 million viewers
- 5.4/10 HH
- 3.3/11 A18-49

The Next Best Thing
- 7.234 million viewers
- 4.6/8 HH
- 2.2/7 A18-49

Dateline
- 5.823 million viewers
- 4.1/7 HH
- 2.1/6 A18-49

American Inventor
- 6.501 million viewers
- 4.1/7 HH
- 2.3/7 A18-49

Last Comic Standing (9pm)
- 5.625 million viewers
- 3.4/6 HH
- 2.5/7 A18-49

Traveler
- 3.935 million viewers
- 2.7/5 HH
- 1.4/4 A18-49

Rescue Me
- 2.220 million viewers
- 1.4/3 HH
- 1.2/4 A18-49

Top Chef
- 1.973 million viewers
- 1.3/2 HH
- 0.9/3 A18-49

Hidden Palms (8pm)
- 1.419 million viewers
- 0.9/2 HH
- 0.5/2 A18-49
- 0.6/2 A18-34

Hidden Palms (9pm)
- 1.390 million viewers
- 0.8/1 HH
- 0.5/2 A18-49
- 0.6/2 A18-34

http://pifeedback.com/eve/forums/a/t...10595#49310595

Those Larry King ratings were expected, but still pretty sad.

For what it is worth, which is not much, I enoyed the final episode of "Studio 60" and am sorry it won't return.

I am not about to join others in annointing him the God of TV writers, though. Were he worthy of that adulation he would have made us care about the characters long before the average viewer left.

But he didn't, and by the end of the very first hour he had, in effect, written the show into a TV grave.

That is too bad. His genius would be best served with someone who could save no to him -- and have him respectfully and thankfully listen to that person's voice.

The TV Column
3.2 Million Pay a Visit to Paris Via CNN
By Lisa de Moraes Washington Post Friday, June 29, 2007, 2007

Larry King tripled his audience by lobbing softball questions at a vacant-looking Paris Hilton in her first TV chat since her release from jail early Tuesday.

After which, the son of Gloria Vanderbilt more than doubled his usual "Anderson Cooper 360°" crowd with his neo-ironic performance of a journalist holding his nose and whining about having to analyze King's interview with the privileged child of a gillionaire. In so doing, Cooper joined all those media columnists who for weeks had been sniffing about journalism embracing tabloid instincts in re the Paris story, only to stick their own greedy snouts into the trough holding the juiciest pop-culture gruel served up in ages.

And Barbara Walters sat bolt upright on her Disney Throne of Principles, mumbling "tawdry" while dialing Lionel Richie on his private line to say "Hi!"

Hilton's Wednesday night chat on "Larry King Live"-- her first since being sent to the slammer for about 23 days with only bologna sandwiches and a Bible to comfort her -- clocked about 3.2 million viewers. They came to hear her declare she had emerged from the ordeal a new, improved Paris Hilton, one dedicated to raising money for kids and to fight breast cancer and multiple sclerosis, one determined not to let her voice get really high when she gets nervous, one who will never again be sent to prison for driving with a suspended license and violating probation on an alcohol-related reckless-driving charge but who will instead call the family driver to take her to In-N-Out Burger.

Nearly 2 million of those viewers were 50 and older, which is par for King's course, but not exactly the demo Paris presumably was targeting when Mommy and Daddy were trying to sell their little girl to the highest bidder at a broadcast network.

(Babs Walters had had the inside track -- simpering on her daytime show "The View" June 11 about having chatted up Momsie on the phone the day before and even receiving a collect call from Incarcerated Paris herself. Only then Daddums reportedly called to say another network that starts with N-B-C was talking about tacking another zero onto the $100,000 ABC had agreed to pony up for use of the family photo album and home videos. Word of the negotiations mysteriously leaked to the media, scuttling the negotiations and paving the way for King to land the "get.")

Cooper's post-interview "360" telecast clocked nearly 2 million viewers -- a big jump from his calendar-year average of just 812,000.

To put these numbers in perspective, Paris got nowhere near the crowd who'd tuned in to King's show in 2005 when a JetBlue plane had to make an emergency landing with its landing gear on the fritz. Nearly 5 million were glued to his coverage that night. Because we don't just love tabloid journalism -- we also love tragedy, or the possibility of seeing it.

And speaking of Walters, when Star Jones went on King's show two days after she ambushed Walters on "The View" and announced she was leaving before Walters could announce she'd given Star the hook, "LKL" logged 3 million viewers, nearly matching Paris's numbers.

But, of course, all these stats combined can't match that "LKL" telecast in 1993 when Al Gore went mano a mano with Ross Perot, attracting a morbid 16.8 million viewers -- the biggest number of all time for an ad-supported cable telecast.



Defying prayer chains, ABC yesterday announced it will bring back "According to Jim" for a seventh season of 18 episodes, setting off rampant speculation among The Reporters Who Cover Television that suits at the network must finally have seen the sixth episode of "Cavemen." (6 + 18 = 24, a.k.a. a full season.)

"Cavemen" -- and yes, the writing and the acting are far superior in the Geico auto-insurance cavemen ads -- is the only new laugh-tracked sitcom on ABC's fall lineup.

In its announcement, ABC reminded those of you who have managed to block all memory of "Jim" that it's about a guy named Jim, played by Jim Belushi, who "has it all," including "a gorgeous wife, Cheryl (Courtney Thorne-Smith), whom he challenges with his stubborn manliness."

Star Belushi is quoted promising this season would top all the rest, by which we presume he means a higher concentration of scenes in which he appears without a shirt. To be fair, the Lesser Belushi's flabby, hairy torso is less repulsive than the matted-hairy torso of the lead caveman to which you are going to be treated in the first episode of "Cavemen."

ABC suits kept insisting when they unveiled their fall "Jim"-less prime-time lineup last month that the show had not been canceled, an order for a midseason pickup was delayed as they haggled over number of episodes to be ordered, etc.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...062802420.html

Critic's Notes
Noting TV's need for good editors
Even the best writers have their off days
By Brian Lowry Variety

Chuck Lorre was speaking with admiration when he told the New York Times regarding "The Sopranos" finale, "This is what you get when you let a writer do whatever he wants." But the "Two and a Half Men" co-creator's observation exposes a larger point.

Network notes have gotten a bad rap, but as several recent programs attest -- including David Milch's bizarre "John From Cincinnati," Aaron Sorkin's self-indulgent "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" and, yes, David Chase's much-debated blackout -- left to their own devices, even the finest writers can produce material that leave audiences cold and occasionally slack jawed.

Executives once joked that every A-list producer has a dud inside them just waiting for its owner to achieve success affording them the freedom to release the beast -- a dynamic that begs the age-old question of how to guide creativity without shackling it.

Chalk up the aforementioned misfires in part to the "No guts, no glory" rationale, where those granted the license to dream big have a desire and even mandate to generate out-of-the-box thinking. Writing about the surf drama "John" in the latest New Yorker, critic Nancy Franklin offered this defense, stating that it's inevitable a genius of Milch's caliber will periodically conjure up a flop "If you let him," then added, "Networks don't let that happen; HBO does. It takes risks."

Come again? HBO might take more outlandish chances than the major broadcasters, but the entire business is a crapshoot, and the networks can point to commercial failures by star producers Sorkin, Paul Haggis, John Wells and David E. Kelley -- all launched last season -- to prove it. Indeed, Haggis' "The Black Donnellys" is practically a poster child for the kind of ill-conceived series writers can unleash once they have gained the clout (in Haggis' case, an Oscar for "Crash") to slough off parental supervision.

If anything, desperation by programmers and a proliferation of options for original shows has theoretically created more opportunities to get their work seen in less-filtered form. On the flip side, writers tend to trust "suits" less, often with good reason: Not only did companies grow more bottom-line-minded as they became cogs in vast international enterprises, but the fact that networks and studios frequently share parentage eliminates lines of defense that once helped shield writers from interference.

Put simply, NBC Universal is less likely to go to war with NBC or USA to protect somebody's creative vision when everybody breaks bread at the same corporate retreat. Six Sigma, kids!

Still, the aforementioned programs' shortcomings remind us that notes aren't inherently bad; bad notes are, and even pedigreed talent can benefit from a little direction.

"Get Smart" producer Leonard Stern is something of an authority on notes, having assembled a very funny book of idiotic but true memos from network executives titled "A Martian Wouldn't Say That!" -- deriving its title from a CBS executive's objection to dialogue on "My Favorite Martian."

Asked if there's such a thing as a good note, Stern quipped, "It's generally the one you don't get." He then suggested that the best advice traditionally comes from other writers, recalling that networks once employed staff writers to function as intermediaries -- bringing a credible, less threatening and authoritarian voice to the process.

Stern agreed that writers have cause for skepticism in dealings with executives, especially when the suits cite research and testing -- betraying their willingness to "surrender instincts, or a refusal to acquire them."

Yet while writers have always chafed at network meddling, few acknowledge the opposite -- that Sorkin's final volley of "Studio 60" episodes, for example, underscores his brilliance but also the need for an editor, somebody to curb that habit of making conspicuous detours to deliver thinly veiled lectures and vent about pressure groups, distracting from the larger story.

It really is, in other words, a symbiosis if not a precise collaboration. And if everyone does their jobs, executives can actually help steer writers toward the Promised Land, or at the least away from a hidden reef.

Maybe both sides will figure that out someday -- but think of this as just a friendly suggestion, not a "note." That way, someone might actually listen to it.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...ryid=1682&cs=1

TV Notes
Sedgwick, Cryer to announce Emmy nominations
By Kimberly Nordyke The Hollywood Reporter June 29, 2007

Emmy-nominated actors Jon Cryer and Kyra Sedgwick will join Dick Askin, chairman and CEO of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, to announce the 59th Primetime Emmy Awards nominations July 19.

The announcement will take place at the academy's Leonard H. Goldenson Theatre in North Hollywood, starting at 5:40 a.m.

Nominees in the top 11 categories will be announced during the four-minute live ceremony. For the 17th consecutive year, Douglass M. Stewart Jr. will produce the event.

The Primetime Emmy Awards ceremony will air live on Fox from 8-11 p.m. EST on Sept. 16 from the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles.

Cryer was nominated for a supporting actor Emmy last year for his role in the CBS comedy series "Two and a Half Men," while Sedgwick was nominated for a lead actress Emmy for her role in the TNT drama series "The Closer."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...399512871dc978

TV Notes
Emmys cut judges' voting power!
But they're dancing with the stars!
By Tom O'Neil Los Angeles Times Staff Writer In The Gold Derby Emmy Award blog

Memo to those dutiful TV showbizzers giving up their next two weekends to endure the drudgery of sitting on judging panels at the Academy of TV Arts & Sciences headquarters: Are you aware that your vote only counts half as much as last year?

That's because ATAS chiefs decided that the solution to all Emmy ills the way to fix the voting procedure once and for all was to use the same process used on "Dancing with the Stars"!

That's right! After you're done spending grueling hours watching a sample episode from all 10 contenders for best drama and comedy series, academy accountants plan to reduce the importance of your vote by one half. Last year your vote counted fully toward determining the five nominees per category, of course, but you were a naughty judge. You didn't pick "Lost" for best drama series and now can't be trusted fully.

Never mind "Lost" producers submitted an episode sample full of dangling plot lines ("Man of Science, Man of Faith") that made no sense to judges who aren't regular viewers of the series. Producers were SUPPOSED to submit their BEST episode of the year, which TV Guide said was the Tailies one. Conveniently, that eppy happened to have a self-contained, sensible story line that probably would've resulted in a nomination for best drama series and maybe even a win.

But "Lost" which had won best drama series the previous year submitted a lesser choice instead and got snubbed. Producers and ABC didn't want to accept the blame for playing the Emmy game poorly so they fingered the TV academy and screamed, "J'Accuse!" When reporting on the hubbub that followed, most journalists piled on top of ATAS, too, because, after all, the Emmys aren't the Oscars and must be punished for it.

When covering sports, journalists never blame the Olympics for failing to give the gold to an athlete performing poorly, but, strangely, nobody blamed "Lost" last year for stumbling in the Emmy race. That's because nobody understands the Emmy Award. It's the only showbiz prize that requires contenders to pay attention to the voting process and actually compete. When players don't, we witness The Susan Lucci Syndrome: careless contenders continuing to get snubbed when they hand in junk to judging panels. Lucci only won at last when she finally figured out what the judges wanted to see: a full-spectrum acting sample, not just a videotape full of diva screaming. Imagine that. Had that dawned on La Lucci earlier she might have avoided the public humiliation of being slapped by her peers 18 times.

Last year, when the "Lost" flapdoodle erupted, ATAS chiefs panicked and decided to slap the judges in turn, taking away half of the impact of their vote in the future.

ATAS decided to use the same voting model as "Dancing with the Stars," which combines an equal 50/50 mix of judges' scores with popular vote. If pressed, ATAS chiefs will probably deny that they copied it deliberately. But the result is the same. They decided to combine their judges' scores with results of the original popular vote of ATAS members, which concluded last Friday and resulted in the Top 10 finalist lists.

Panels convene at the academy's headquarters in North Hollywood over the next two weekends to vote on best drama and comedy series. Since actors are a pampered lot and must be coddled, they don't have to leave their private whirlpools to cast their votes for the acting races. They get shipped DVD screeners of sample episodes to watch at home where they vote after signing affadavits attesting that they've viewed everything. They don't have monitors standing over them to make sure they actually watched it all like the judges do who screen the drama- and comedy-series categories at the academy's panel sessions.

Nominations will be unveiled on July 19.

What's wrong with this new voting system is that it's probably going to result in the exact opposite of its intent, which was to quiet the screams of damning TV critics furious over the Emmys failing to nominate the obvious.

The problem with this new approach is that it screws over low-rated shows. This year the TV critics' darling happens to be one of them "Friday Night Lights." If it doesn't get nominated for best drama series, expect all Emmy hell to break loose.

Ironically, "FNL" may be gypped out of a nomination thanks to a new voting system put into place in order to stop critics from screaming LAST YEAR.

"FNL" ended this TV season ranked 95th in the Nielsens. There's a good chance it might not even squeak into the Top 10. If it does, it's probably in the bottom rung ranked, let's imagine, 8th, 9th or 10th. That means nearly all judges must rank it 1st, 2nd or 3rd among their 10 choices in order for it to be nominated after accountants mix the two forms of voting on a 50/50 basis.

That's unlikely because "FNL" producers submitted the pilot. It's good, but not the best episode of a series that most TV critics claim got better and even better as the season progressed.

Furthermore, let's be honest. "FNL" has lots of drawbacks. It's about sports. Do TV industry snobs care about high-school football in Texas? That's enemy territory to Hollywood liberals. George W. Bush country. It's possible that TV academy members don't even know "FNL" is on the tube. If so, we'll find out soon. No doubt lots of Emmy judges will tattle on what made the Top 10 this weekend in our message boards as they did last year.

We know that "Dexter" is definitely in the drama-series mix. Yep, somebody tattled already! We can safely assume that these shows made the cut, too: "The Sopranos," "House," "Grey's Anatomy," "Lost," "24," and "Heroes." That's seven. It's also quite likely that "Brothers and Sisters" and "Rescue Me" made the cut. That's nine. Close behind are "The Tudors," "Boston Legal" and, not far behind those, "The Closer" and "Law & Order: SVU."

Hmmmm . . . Did "FNL" even make it into the Top 10?

And remember to run and duck on July 19 when "Friday Night Lights" isn't among the five nominees for best drama. Nearly every top TV critic I've spoken to really expects that it will be. When they're disappointed, beware: they won't just hurl insults at ATAS this time. We're talkin' nuclear weapons.

But at least they won't be mad about "Lost" getting snubbed again. That's impossible. Not only is it assured a nom based upon its TV popularity (thank you, "Dancing with the Stars"!), but based upon its episode submission, too. Producers got smart this year and entered "Live Together, Die Alone." It's a two-parter. Those almost always get the most Emmy votes. Isn't that hilarious? Yes, size matters in Hollywood.

http://goldderby.latimes.com/awards_...cut-judge.html

Yesterday'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

Critic's Notes
Just a few of the women who make TV worth watching
From Maureen Ryan's Chicago Tribune blog The Watcher June 29, 2007

Now that the 2006-07 TV season is well and truly over, it's time to review the best performances of the past 12 months.

In the next week or two, I'll interrupt your regularly scheduled Watcher programming now and then to shine a light on actors whose work I found extraordinary and memorable in the last year. Today's list is of my favorite leading actresses in dramas.

Now is not the time or place for an anti-Emmy rant (though, trust me, that's coming), but the sad fact is, a good number of these performers will most likely be ignored by the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences when Emmy nominations come out July 19. Regardless the sigh-inducing Emmy snubs that are no doubt coming, let's make this about celebration -- heralding the work of just a few of the many women who gave great leading performances in the last year:

Connie Britton, Friday Night Lights (NBC): There are few television shows that depict the heartbreak and the joy of being a parent better than this richly fulfilling NBC drama, and in her role as Tami Taylor, the mother of a smart, headstrong teenage girl, Britton gave an enormously empathetic performance. The scene in which Taylor talked to her daughter about why the young woman should not have sex for the first time was a stunner. Even when she wasn't speaking, Britton was riveting. And the marriage of Tami and Eric Taylor the spats, the talks, the love was one of the best things about the most recent year of television.

Minnie Driver, The Riches (FX): How does a well-brought-up Brit such as Driver play a wily, complicated Southern grifter? By shedding every single shred of vanity and artifice and letting her passion and intensity take over. Driver has held nothing back in this role, and even when the writing wavered, she more than made up for that with her inventiveness and fearsome energy.

Edie Falco, The Sopranos (HBO): For eight years, Falco didn't just hold her own with James Gandolfini and his towering performance as Tony Soprano. She gave as good as she got, and in the course of doing so gave us one half of a twisted, complex yet somehow relatable marriage. The fierce Carmela Sopranos (and her ziti) will be missed.

Lauren Graham, Gilmore Girls (CW): Those who watched Gilmore Girls just refer to it as The Scene. In the series' waning days, Graham, as a semidrunk Lorelai Gilmore at a karaoke bar, sang a jaw-dropping rendition of I Will Always Love You, the memory of which can still bring a tear to the eye. All of Lorelai's devotion to her daughter Rory and all of her complicated feelings for diner owner Luke Danes were expressed in one weaving, silly, funny, heart-rending, perfectly calibrated performance. It was the perfect capper to seven seasons of great work from an actress capable of conveying subtle emotion while also talking really fast.

Sally Field, Brothers and Sisters (ABC): This enjoyable family drama was supposed to be a comeback vehicle for Calista Flockhart, but Field is one of the main reasons to tune in -- she is the most magnetic performer in this sprawling cast. As the head of the Walker family, Field has given a brave, deeply appealing heart to widow Nora Walker, whose journey from doting mom and worried widow to independent woman has been poignant and even hilarious at times.

Paula Malcomson, Molly Parker and Robin Weigert, Deadwood (HBO): Here are three more reasons to mourn the passing of Deadwood we won't be able to spend more time with these actresses, who made the roles of (respectively) Trixie, Alma Garret Ellsworth and the ferocious Calamity Jane so riveting (allegedly we'll get two Deadwood films in 2008, but that's not enough). No wonder all three actresses have been appearing regularly on other TV series in the last few months; they're all so incisive yet sympathetic that I can't take my eyes off them not that I wanted to.

Mary McDonnell, Battlestar Galactica (Sci Fi): Over the past few seasons, McDonnell has given a fearsome spine to Battlestar's President Laura Roslin, but the tender scenes of Roslin with Admiral William Adama (Edward James Olmos) are the ones that, for me, resonate the most. The sight of these two smart, complicated leaders letting their hair down, so to speak, and taking refuge in their friendship is one of the many joys of the show.

Helen Mirren, Prime Suspect: The Final Act (PBS): Mirren would be mesmerizing if she read the phone book, that much is clear. But in her last outing as London detective Jane Tennison, she laid bare the cop's alcoholism, her arrogance and her inability to find any lasting comfort in relationships. Yet for all that, Mirren made Tennison an understandable and even sympathetic figure. Is there a better actress working now? I think not.

Elizabeth Mitchell, Lost (ABC): In the hands of a lesser actress, Juliet on Lost could have been a hopeless muddle: Viewers are never sure whether they should trust her or despise her. But Mitchell has given Juliet a core of pain that makes her betrayals understandable and even forgivable. Juliet will do anything to get back to the only people in the world she loves but let's hope that doesn't mean this enigmatic woman will leave the Lost islands any time soon.

Samantha Morton, Longford (HBO): Most actresses would run screaming from the idea of portraying a child murderer (and who could blame them?). And in playing infamous English killer Myra Hindley, Morton wisely didn't try to make the woman sympathetic. She just gave a brave and honest performance of a woman who hates herself profoundly yet longs for redemption -- but doesn't know if she'll ever deserve it, even in the next life.

Kyra Sedgwick, The Closer (TNT): From Southern charm to steely resolve in the blink of an eye: That's L.A. Detective Brenda Leigh Johnson in a nutshell. The TV schedule is not lacking in cop shows, but Sedgwick's canny, surprising moves make The Closer a must-see.

I'm sure there are actresses I've forgotten, and I'm sure you have a few favorites to share with the class. Please leave your thoughts about your favorite leading actresses in dramas below (still to come: comedy actresses and actors, and leading actors in dramas as well).

http://tempo.typepad.com/entertainment_tv/

Friday'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

Overnight Nielsens in the 18-49 Demo
Warmer so-long for NBC's 'Studio 60'
Much touted, later doubted, drama pulls a 2.0
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Friday, June 29, 2007

NBC's Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip ended on a happier note last night. Along with bringing pleasant conclusions to the show's open plotlines, the program also saw a small ratings bounce for its series finale.

Strip averaged a 2.0 adults 18-49 rating, according to Nielsen overnights, up 11 percent over last week's 1.8 and its best rating since February.

Since returning from a three-month hiatus last month, Strip had averaged a 1.7 18-49 rating. It also won its timeslot for the first time since its summer run began.

It averaged 4.25 million total viewers.

Strip was canceled last month, after seeing its adults 18-49 rating drop by nearly half from its September debut to the February sweeps. Though it was last fall's most highly touted drama, it did not live up to NBC's expectations in terms of ratings, fumbling away too much of Heroes' lead-in in its original Monday 10 p.m. timeslot.

The show, from West Wing creator Aaron Sorkin, was criticized for delving too much into politics for a show that was billed as a backstage look at a fictional late-night variety program.

But the show did have a small, fiercely loyal cadre of viewers who supported Strip until the end, attempting save our show campaigns and dissecting the episodes on messageboards.

Meanwhile, Fox took first for a network-record sixth straight Thursday night among 18-49s with a 3.1 average overnight rating and a 10 share. NBC was second at 2.1/7, CBS third at 2.0/6, Univision fourth at 1.4/4, ABC fifth at 1.1/3 and CW sixth at 0.7/2.

At 8 p.m. Fox led with a 2.9 for Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader, followed by NBC with a 2.1 average for repeats of My Name is Earl and The Office. CBS was third with a 1.6 for Pirate Master, Univision fourth with a 1.1 for Yo Amo a Juan Querendon, ABC fifth with a 1.0 for a repeat of Ugly Betty and CW sixth with a 0.7 for a Smallville rerun.

Fox led again at 9 p.m., growing to a 3.4 for So You Think You Can Dance. CBS was second with a 2.5 for a repeat of CSI, with NBC third with a 2.2 for an hour of Office repeats, Univision fourth with a 1.6 for Destilando Amor, ABC fifth with a 1.2 for a repeat of Grey's Anatomy and CW sixth with a 0.7 for a repeat of Supernatural.

At 10 p.m. NBC was first with a 2.0 for Strip, while CBS was a close second with a 1.9 for a repeat of Shark. Univision was third with a 1.4 for Aqui y Ahora and ABC fourth with a 1.1 for a repeat of Men in Trees.

Among households, Fox led the night with a 5.7 average rating and a 10 share. CBS finished second at 5.1/9, NBC third at 2.9/5, ABC fourth at 2.6/5, Univision fifth at 1.6/3 and CW sixth at 1.2/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/art..._Studio_60.asp

Critic's Notes
A few good 'Wives'
With Kim Delaney, Catherine Bell and Sally Pressman, this soap drama is surging to a Lifetime series record
By Gail Shister Philadelphia Inquirer Staff Writer June 29, 2007

At ease, Kim Delaney.

After being dishonorably discharged from CSI: Miami in '02 - a year after her own show, Philly, was canceled - Roxborough's Delaney is back on active duty with a hot new show.

Thanks to Army Wives, the highest-rated series in Lifetime's 23-year history, Delaney is basking in the kind of success she hasn't enjoyed since her eight-season run on ABC's NYPD Blue ended in '03.

"You put all the effort in, and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't," she says from Charleston, S.C., where Wives is filmed. "When it works on this level, it's exciting."

Based on Tanya Biank's '06 book Under the Sabres: The Unwritten Code of Military Marriage, Wives revolves around a diverse group of women - and one man - living with their spouses and families on a bustling Army base.

Costars include sultry JAG alum Catherine Bell, Brigid Brannagh (CSI), and newcomer Sally Pressman, formerly a professional ballerina. Mark Gordon (Grey's Anatomy) is executive producer.

After four episodes, Wives (at 10 p.m. Sundays) averages 3.6 million total viewers, according to Nielsen Media Research. That's an increase of 173 percent over the time slot's previous occupant, Blood Ties.

Delaney, 47, plays matriarch Claudia Joy Holden, no-nonsense wife of Col. Michael Holden (Brian McNamara). Widely respected on the base, she is the show's moral center.

"There's a fine line between her morals and the Army's," Delaney says. "She stays steady, no matter what happens. I think I need my own Claudia Joy Holden."

No joke.

In '02, Delaney was arrested for DUI. Three years later, she lost custody of her only child, Jack, now 17, after he testified in a Santa Monica, Calif., court that her drinking endangered his life.

Also in '05, her brother John died from a massive heart attack while playing basketball with the Delaney clan at their parents' home in Ventnor, N.J. He was 47.

It seems that the actress' luck is finally turning.

Jack, now a high school senior and captain of the varsity basketball team, has toured Penn and Villanova and recently attended a Penn basketball camp.

And on the professional front, Wives is tearing up cable. Even Delaney says she's surprised.

"I knew it was good work, but you never know what people are going to watch. Everywhere I go - the shoe store, the eye doctor - everybody's talking about it. They're already hooked. Forget about it."

Timing is a big factor. With the country at war in Iraq, Wives hits many viewers where they live. (By comparison, Steven Bochco's Over There, about a mostly male combat unit in Iraq, lasted only one season on FX in '05.)

Wives gets tons of feedback, mostly positive, on the Lifetime Web site from real Army wives, and husbands, says a network rep.

After nine seasons on JAG as tough-as-titanium lawyer Lt. "Mac" MacKenzie, Catherine Bell jumped at the role of Denise Sherwood, a devoted homemaker being physically abused by her teenage son.

"I wanted something totally different," says Bell, 38, a motorcyclist, race-car driver and kickboxer. "I always play strong, badass women. I knew this would be a challenge."

Bell had one caveat. She insisted to the producers that her character eventually wake up and defend herself.

Playing a weak woman for a movie was OK with Bell, but doing it week after week, possibly for years, would send a bad message, she says.

"To me, it's always about the message. I can't play a woman who puts up with abuse forever and never changes. Ultimately, the message is that being weak and not standing up for yourself is OK."

Roxy LeBlanc, Wives' sexy breakout character, has no such handicap. Played by Pressman, she does what she wants, when she wants. A sassy, "white trash" mother of two, she marries a soldier (Drew Fuller) after knowing him four days.

In an early episode, Roxy struts out of a bathroom stall in nothing but a thong and high heels. (Relax, she needed to clean a wine stain off her dress.)

"She's more fun than being me," says Pressman. "She's got no edge, no negativity. She just goes with the flow. She doesn't really care what people think."

Pressman, 25, a native New Yorker and a dancer since age 2, was a member of the Manhattan Ballet Company. After graduating from Yale, she moved to L.A. to pursue acting. Wives is her first series.

"When I did ballet, I'd have five performances a year," she says. "At some point, I realized it was the performance I enjoyed, not the actual ballet, so I started exploring acting."

Speaking of exploring, Lifetime is not eager for Wives' cast to disclose personal feelings about the war. Like good Army wives, Delaney and Pressman won't get into it. Bell, however, will.

"I don't understand why we're there. It's a complicated situation and I don't think there's a simple answer. I'd like to see us out of there as soon as possible.

"Bottom line, I support our troops and their families 100 percent. I think everybody does."

http://www.philly.com/philly/enterta...ood_Wives.html

You might be right, I am just going from memory, but as I recall close to three million viewers defected after the very first half hour. The bell had started tolling.

Personally, I enjoyed the clever writing, but felt little connection with any of the cartoon-like characters -- until far later in the season.

Were "Studio 60" to win any Emmy nominations it would, in my opinion, be just another example of how the TV world is so woefully out of sync with the people it is trying to entertain.

Mr. Sorkin, despite his immense talent is the poster boy for that, Hollywood arrogance, by the way.

Critic's Notes
Goodbye, "Studio 60"
By Rich Heldenfels in his Akron Beacon Journal blog June 29, 2007

Are we done? Please, please, tell me that's it.

The burdensome, pompous, four-episode arc that ended the series told me two fundamental things.

One, that all concerned had decided that no one was watching and the show could say and do anything it wanted.

Two, that those episodes constitute Aaron Sorkin's admission that he wasn't very good at writing a show about television, so he might as well write about politics again until he was told to stop.

And while I still enormously liked some things, including Matthew Perry's performance, I was way past ready for it to be done.

http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/heldenfi...bye-studio-60/

Critic's Notes
If According to Jim's renewed, the terrorists win
By David Kronke Los Angeles Daily News Television Critic in his The Mayor Of Television blog June 29, 2007

An address by Your Mayor on the floor of the Senate, on Thursday, June 28, 2007:

Mr. President, I rise today to offer observations on ABC's recent, inexplicable renewal of the sitcom According to Jim. In my judgment, offering Jim Belushi further comedic employment has lost contact with our vital national security interests. Our continuing absorption with Mr. Belushi is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness amongst the great People of Television and elsewhere in the world to present material that can actually be considered amusing. The prospects that the current comedic surge strategy will succeed in the way originally envisioned by ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson are very limited within the short period framed by our own domestic comic debate. And the strident, polarized nature of that debate increases the risk that TV's involvement with Mr. Belushi will end in a poorly planned strategy for reinvigorating the genre of the situation comedy that undercuts our vital interests in American viewership. Unless we recalibrate our strategy regarding According to Jim to fit our domestic comedic conditions and the broader needs of U.S. national security, we risk entertainment policy failures that could greatly diminish our influence in the region and the world.

The current debate on According to Jim has not been conducive to a thoughtful revision of our TV-sitcom policy. Our debate is being driven by faulty, ratings-fueled calculations and understandable fatigue with bad news - including deaths and injuries to Americans who have been faithful to this program since its inception in the year 2000. We have been debating and voting on whether to fund American showrunners controlling Mr. Belushi's wacky antics and whether to place conditions on such funding. We have contemplated in great detail whether ABC's success in achieving certain comic benchmarks regarding Mr. Belushi's ostensibly amusing pratfalls should determine whether advertiser-supported funding is approved or whether a programming-oriented withdrawal should commence.

I would observe that none of this debate addresses our vital interests any more than they are addressed by an unquestioned devotion to an ill-defined strategy of staying the course where ABC is concerned, whether the network needs returning comedies to bolster the chances of success for new alleged sitcoms such as Cavemen and Carpoolers.

Commentators frequently suggest that ABC has no good options when it comes to programming sitcoms. That may be true from a certain perspective. But I believe that we do have viable options that could strengthen our position regarding primetime comedy programming that can reduce the prospect of further reality-TV-based terrorism and other calamities.

But seizing these opportunities will require Mr. McPherson to downsize Mr. Belushi's presence on the primetime schedule and place much more emphasis on diplomatic options that increase the number of sitcoms that include actual jokes in their episodes. Thank you, and God bless the People of Television.

http://www.insidesocal.com/tv/