or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 2581

post #77401 of 93803
I knew I'd forgotten to post something! BRB!
post #77402 of 93803
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

Nielsen Overnights (18-49)
ABC's 'GCB' sees lift in its second week
Averages a 2.3 among viewers 18-49, No. 1 in its timeslot
By Toni Fitzgerald, Media Life Magazine - Mar. 12, 2012

How much of that rating is coming from some parts of the U.S. that haven't realized ABC's 'GCB' is supposed to be comedy?

People who are saying that they finally have a show about their problems?
post #77403 of 93803
Critic's Notes
The Greatest TV Drama of the Past 25 Years, Round One: Twin Peaks Vs. Battlestar Galactica
By Willa Paskin, New York Magazine's 'Vulture' Blog - Mar. 13, 2012

For the next three weeks, Vulture is holding the ultimate Drama Derby to determine the greatest TV drama of the past 25 years. Each day a different notable writer will be charged with determining the winner of a round of the bracket, until New York Magazine TV critic Matt Zoller Seitz judges the finals on March 23. Today's first-round battle: Former Vulture editor Willa Paskin judges Twin Peaks versus Battlestar Galactica. You can place your own vote on Facebook or tweet your opinion with the #dramaderby hashtag.

Long before this Drama Derby paired off Twin Peaks and Battlestar Galactica in a TV death-match, the two were inextricably connected in my mind: These are the two shows that have most adversely affected my physical well-being. (To be fair, 24 also had me rummaging around for a Xanax, but giving its audience everything is a potential suitcase bomb anxiety attacks was basically that show's stated purpose.) Twin Peaks and BSG both gave me nightmares. While watching Peaks, I would wake up from eerie dreams and be convinced that BOB or Leland or Leo was standing at the foot of my bed, until a few seconds passed and my eyes resolved them into a shadow, a chair, a figment of my imagination. While watching BSG, I had weeks of very detailed, complex, plot-specific fever dreams, culminating in one particularly grisly incident where I cut open a suspected Cylon Olsen twin on the deck of the Galactica only to reveal the cell phone she had for a heart.

I tell you this both to make clear that choosing between Twin Peaks and BSG is difficult for me they were the two most intense, riveting, and all-consuming viewing experiences I've ever had but also because the ability to take over one's subconscious points to what they share: Despite the great distance between the Pacific Northwest and the far-flung corners of the universe, these are two of the most atmospheric shows in existence, both set in such distinct, fully realized fictional worlds that you can walk around in them while you sleep.

With Twin Peaks, it's all already there: Every serious fight and really big idea we have had about television in the 22 years since it first aired are all presaged, contained, and embodied by this oddball cultural phenomenon that premiered in 1990 to unexpectedly smash ratings, became perhaps the biggest water-cooler show of all time, and then, a year and two months later, was gone, done, over, somehow having faded away even though there would only seem to have been enough time for it to burn out.

The David Lynch-Mark Frost mystical mystery soap, which ran for just 30 episodes on ABC, is the ultimate auteurist series, a mass entertainment so patently the outgrowth of a singular mind-meld that it's got the dream sequence with a dwarf talking backwards to prove it, and yet it arrived almost a decade before The Sopranos, The West Wing, and Buffy made ambitious, idiosyncratic TV a trend. Twin Peaks was the canary in the coalmine for shows from Desperate Housewives to Lost, The X-Files to The Killing, auguring the tremendous difficulty of endings, of doling out secrets while maintaining pace, of spinning a story endlessly that still must, eventually, end. (Can you imagine what BOB would have done to Twitter? It's almost too inflammatory a possibility to stare directly at. Safer to squint.) It's to be blamed (or praised) for the proliferation of mythologies, those now ubiquitous long-term story arcs and conspiracies; it's to be praised (or blamed) for helping make the secret life of the American teen a viable, popular, scandalous TV subject. And, most of all, Twin Peaks made bull**** of any predictions about what audiences want give us your bizarre, your disturbing, your Zen FBI agents! while also making bull**** of the idea that audiences only want that which is easy and mediocre. (And it flayed the flip side as well, that mass audiences can't appreciate that which is good and difficult.)

Twin Peaks is a murder mystery, though not just a murder mystery. Teenage Laura Palmer washes ashore, ghostly, blue, and wrapped in plastic, a popular girl with a secret sideline in coke, pornography, and rough sex. FBI agent Dale B. Cooper described by then-New York TV critic John Leonard in his wonderful piece about the show as a boy scout from the dog star Sirius is called in to handle the case. Twin Peaks welded its weirdness onto an established genre: Peaks takes a form we know the detective story, as The Wire and The Sopranos would do with the cop show and the mob narrative and puts it in front of the fun-house mirror. The quirky, disturbing, surrealist Lynchian touches (that stuffed stag's head on the table in the bank!) are all grounded by the propulsive, baseline, conventional question: Who killed Laura Palmer?

The suspects the wacky, dry, hilarious, eye-patched, log-lugging residents of Twin Peaks seem very similar to the citizens of Northern Exposure, which started in 1991, until they don't. Comedic bits are followed by horrifying revelations: The zany shrink with the outré outfits and peccadilloes has been hearing clients confess to years of sexual molestation; a Myna bird bleeds all over a table full of donuts, but only after mimicking the voice of a girl begging for mercy. Twin Peaks' clean, Douglas Fir-fresh air covers up the stench of evil.

Though Laura Palmer's killer was revealed in episode 14, meaning essentially everything that's important about Twin Peaks happened in just two thirds of a standard-length TV season, its influence is everywhere: in all go-for-broke television with a difficult or complex point of view; in all series that incorporate the mystical and fantastical (Fringe, Alcatraz, The River, American Horror Story, Millennium among them, and if you're looking for one reason the Lost creators thought the spiritual mumbo jumbo would fly in the series finale, blame BOB); but also in such unexpected places as Parks and Rec's Chris Traeger, a light comic version of the earnest, peppy, perfect Dale Cooper, or 30 Rock's Kenneth the Page, a close relative of the dippy, innocent cop Andy.

And, of course, Twin Peaks' influence can also be seen in SyFy's grand space odyssey Battlestar Galactica. Premiering fourteen years after Peaks, BSG, a reboot of a trifling seventies series, is a case in point for Peaks' power, and also so much more than that. Both shows are far-out genre exercises with problematic endings and a rare, non-condescending curiosity about spirituality. And they both gifted us with heretofore unknown categories of people BOBS and Cylons that actually make categorizing the folk you walk around on this planet with every day easier to understand. (How to understand Angelina Jolie, except as a Cylon?)

But let's give Battlestar its due: On paper, there is no way that Battlestar should work, which is why people who love it are always having to swear to people who haven't seen it that they'll like it even if they don't usually like sci-fi. Twin Peaks is a ballsy show, but Battlestar is a Star Trek knockoff that had the guts to take on torture and Iraq, religion, and apocalypse, the nature of the soul and the ramifications of technology, and did all of this so captivatingly that forsaking showers and work are well-documented side-effects of watching it.

Plus, the acting is better. Peaks had some wonderful performances, most especially from Kyle MacLachlan as Cooper, but it also fetishized bad acting: The show constantly juxtaposed the melodramatic and the original, the striking plot twist coming right after, say, Laura's identical cousin arrives in town, and it did the same with the performances, pairing Lara Flynn Boyle with James I practiced at the Joey Tribbiani School of Smell Acting Marshall, or giving MacLachlan the wooden Michael Ontkean to play off of. Even BSG's weaker links (Helo, Hera, Dee) can act circles around much of the Peaks cast, and they had the harder job. If bad acting could be shoehorned into the Peaks aesthetic, it had no place in BSG, which had a premise that so inherently skews towards the silly, its cast could never even nod in the direction of camp.

Among Battlestar Galactica's stronger players are its actresses, blessed with some of the meatiest roles ever written for women on TV. BSG's gender politics are euphorically advanced, with Starbuck, Six, President Roslin, and Boomer, not to mention every other female pilot, mechanic, Cylon, and civilian, so fundamentally equal to the men around them that gender parity isn't something they even have to talk about. (Meanwhile on Twin Peaks, all the non-crazy fully grown women spend their time in abusive love triangles.) At a time when it is, somehow, still acceptable to call a woman a slut for taking birth control, one wishes more than ever that Starbuck were a real person, so she could swagger into Rush Limbaugh's office and ask him if he would like to try and put something, anything, between her knees. (It would be icing on the fantasy to imagine President Roslin following her in, doing that thing where she smiles out of fury, and then eviscerating him without ever raising her voice.)

And where BSG especially has Peaks beat is on the matter of endings: Before its disappointing series finale not a show-killer, just a letdown Battlestar had strung together what, to my mind, amounts to the greatest stretch of season finales and premieres ever assembled. The series was only four seasons long, but because seasons two through four were broken in half, with hiatuses in between, there were basically seven finales and premieres, each one more insane and breathtaking than the next. (They include the adventures on Kobul, the saga of the Battlestar Pegasus, and the ultimate high points, that breathtaking time jump between the finale and premieres set on New Caprica, parts of a story line that was one of the most nuanced treatments of the Iraq war that exist.)

Did BSG have its flaws? Of course it did: Gaius Baltar's weird religious ramblings became so annoying and far out by the end, they are best fast-forwarded through (authority-undermining confession: Gaius always annoyed the hell out of me); the middle of each season would often lag; and, no, no one had any idea all those characters were Cylons when the show began. A bit more damningly, compared to Peaks, BSG's spiritual searchings eventually shaded into Oprah territory. If Peaks was genuinely committed to the possibility that evil like the truth is really out there, over the course of its run BSG ultimately made the squishier, more comforting case that evil is all a matter of perspective. While in the early seasons this relativist position allowed the show to be daringly provocative humans are not just the tortured, but also the torturers come the finale, it turned out we're all descendants of loving human-Cylon miscegenation. (The upside of this gooeyness, however, is that there are maybe a dozen BSG episodes that made me cry let's not even talk about "The Passage" and not one episode of Peaks that ever did.)

But if the taut, gripping survival story that was early BSG eventually gave way to something a little flabbier, its decline in quality is nothing to that of Peaks, which fell so much faster, and so much further. Compared to Peaks, which ran aground at the end of its very first story arc, BSG is almost like a Cylon: stronger, tougher, and capable of infinite replication.

And yet, it can't be BSG. Twin Peaks and BSG have always been associated in my mind for a reason besides bad dreams and the others enumerated above: They are also the two shows I say the most hyperbolic things about when I'm drunk. The thing I say about BSG is, It is the most insightful, important allegory about the Iraq war ever made, which, on the one hand, I know, cut me off already, but, on the other, if someone knows of a more insightful, captivating, and thought-provoking portrayal of the dehumanization of occupation and the allure of insurgency, well, please, shout it out in the comments, because I need to see that.

But the embarrassing thing I say about Twin Peaks** the embarrassing thing I really mean is Twin Peaks makes me proud to be an American. For fourteen weeks two decades ago, we all got together in our living rooms and watched something that was unlike anything we had ever seen before. And that thing was really fun to watch, it had sex and it had drugs, it had handsome leading men and beautiful leading women, it had an addictive plot and delicious melodrama, but none of those things made it any less strange, or any less a piece of art. Twin Peaks was a weird show in 1990, and it is still a weird show now really, go watch it way shaggier and odder than anything on TV today. BSG and Twin Peaks are both great series, but only Peaks is a reminder that, on occasion, 23 million of your fellow citizens can be open and wild and brave enough to embrace something genuinely new even if it is only a television show.


Willa Paskin is the former Deputy Editor of Vulture, and the new TV Critic for Salon.

post #77404 of 93803
I'm just bummed they didn't include that talking car show - it would have cleaned up.
post #77405 of 93803
They might as well pit "Psych" against "Chuck" in one of those brackets. "BSG" runs circles around "Twin Peaks" so hard and fast it's not even funny.
post #77406 of 93803
Yeah, this whole thing is just a facebook engine to generate traffic I think.

TP is the accounting joke of TV shows, BG should be on anyone's short-list of great television dramas - and I'm not a rabid fan, my only rabid fan show already got beat
post #77407 of 93803
What the frack?!?!
post #77408 of 93803
Maybe its payback for all that intentionally added grainyuck.

& that also wouldnt be a good sign for when the walking dead shows up in a future bracket.
post #77409 of 93803
LOL@Twin Peaks beating BSG. As if Buffy beating Deadwood wasn't enough...

I'll just quote this...

Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

Even BSG’s weaker links (Helo, Hera, Dee) can act circles around much of the Peaks cast, and they had the harder job.

Hera? Hera?!?! The kid who had a total of like 2 lines? Seriously?
post #77410 of 93803
^^^ Hey, I didn't say that! The writer for NY Magazine/Slate.com said that, don't get me mixed-up with her insanity.

TV Notes
History Orders First Scripted Series — ‘Vikings’ From MGM TV And Michael Hirst
By Nellie Andreeva, Deadline.com - Mar. 13, 2012

History is making its first foray into scripted series with Vikings, a 10-episode drama from MGM TV and The Tudors and Camelot masterminds Michael Hirst and Morgan O’Sullivan. The series, which will chronicle the world of the mighty Norsemen who raided, traded and explored during medieval times, will premiere in 2013. It will be filmed in Ireland at O’Sullivan’s newly build Ashford Studios, with location shoots throughout Northern Europe. “This is an amazing crossroads for History embarking on our first scripted series,” said the channel’s general manager Nancy Dubuc. “People think they know about the Vikings – we see references to them all the time in our popular culture from TV commercials to football teams – but the reality is so much more fascinating and complex, more vivid, visceral and powerful than popular legend.”

This is the highest-profile TV project to come out of MGM since it was rebuilt post-bankruptcy. “There is no better way to introduce the world to the new MGM Television Studios than with a powerful and epic drama like Vikings,” said Roma Khanna, President of MGM’s TV Group and Digita. The project was put in development at MGM last spring with the goal to go straight-to-series on a 10-episode first-season order. Hirst, creator of Showtime’s The Tudors and co-creator of Starz’s Camelot, created Vikings and will executive produce with O’Sullivan, John Weber and and producers/managers Sherry Marsh and Alan Gasmer. It will be an Ireland-Canada co-production in the mold of O’Sullivan’s production model for The Tudors and Camelot, with his World 2000 Ireland-based production company re-teaming with Weber’s Canadian-based Take 5 Prods. In Canada, Vinkins will air on Shaw Media’s History Television. MGM will distribute internationally, outside of Ireland and Canada.

Vikings follows the adventures of Ragnar Lothbrok, an actual historical figure, and the greatest hero of his age. The series tells the sagas of Ragnar’s band of Viking brothers and his family, as he rises to become King of the Viking tribes. As well as being a fearless warrior, Ragnar embodies the Norse traditions of devotion to the gods – legend has it that he was a direct descendent of Odin, the god of war and warriors. According to History, the series “will boast a polished, stylized look that pushes the boundaries of television drama” and “will feature “imaginatively choreographed battles that emphasize individual points of view, strategies and ruses rather than mindless, graphic slaughter.”

post #77411 of 93803
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

^^^ Hey, I didn't say that! The writer for NY Magazine/Slate.com said that, don't get me mixed-up with her insanity.

LOL. I think everyone knows you're not that crazy.
post #77412 of 93803
TV Notes
'America's Most Wanted' Renewed for 20 More Episodes by Lifetime
By Tim Kenneally, TheWrap.com - Mar. 13, 2012

"America's Most Wanted" host John Walsh has been given 20 more chances to help put the nation's bad guys behind bars.

Lifetime, which picked the series up after it was canceled by Fox last May, has ordered 20 more episodes of the series, the network said Tuesday.

Since premiering on Lifetime on Dec. 2, "America's Most Wanted" has delivered a year-over-year boost in its Fridays at 9 p.m. timeslot, increasing in the time period by 63 percent among adults 25-54 and 35 percent among women 25-54.

"This is great news for the people I fight for and horrible news for the criminals we're working hard to capture," Walsh said of the renewal. "Lifetime and its viewers have been great partners of 'America's Most Wanted' and we're going to keep the heat on those who think they can run, but they certainly can't hide.

Rob Sharenow, executive VP programming for Lifetime, praised the show, saying that it "has made an immediate impact on Lifetime and, more importantly, John Walsh's courageous fight to raise much needed awareness of many overlooked crimes and bring justice to those who commit them.

"America's Most Wanted" began its relationship with Lifetime just in time for its 25th season.

post #77413 of 93803
Tech/Business Notes
After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses
By Julie Bosman, The New York Times' 'Media Decoder' Blog - Mar. 13, 2012

After 244 years, the Encyclopaedia Britannica is going out of print.

Those coolly authoritative, gold-lettered reference books that were once sold door-to-door by a fleet of traveling salesmen and displayed as proud fixtures in American homes will be discontinued, company executives said.

In an acknowledgment of the realities of the digital age — and of competition from the Web site Wikipedia — Encyclopaedia Britannica will focus primarily on its online encyclopedias and educational curriculum for schools. The last print version is the 32-volume 2010 edition, which weighs 129 pounds and includes new entries on global warming and the Human Genome Project.

“It’s a rite of passage in this new era,” Jorge Cauz, the president of Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., a company based in Chicago, said in an interview. “Some people will feel sad about it and nostalgic about it. But we have a better tool now. The Web site is continuously updated, it’s much more expansive and it has multimedia.”

In the 1950s, having the Encyclopaedia Britannica on the bookshelf was akin to a station wagon in the garage or a black-and-white Zenith in the den, a possession coveted for its usefulness and as a goalpost for an aspirational middle class. Buying a set was often a financial stretch, and many families had to pay for it in monthly installments.

But in recent years, print reference books have been almost completely overtaken by the Internet and its vast spread of resources, including specialized Web sites and the hugely popular — and free — online encyclopedia Wikipedia.

Since it was started 11 years ago, Wikipedia has moved a long way toward replacing the authority of experts with the wisdom of the crowds. The site is now written and edited by tens of thousands of contributors around the world, and it has been gradually accepted as a largely accurate and comprehensive source, even by many scholars and academics.

Wikipedia also regularly meets the 21st-century mandate of providing instantly updated material. And it has nearly four million articles in English, including some on pop culture topics that would not be considered worthy of a mention in the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Mr. Cauz said that he believed Britannica’s competitive advantage with Wikipedia came from its prestigious sources, its carefully edited entries and the trust that was tied to the brand.

“We have very different value propositions,” Mr. Cauz said. “Britannica is going to be smaller. We cannot deal with every single cartoon character, we cannot deal with every love life of every celebrity. But we need to have an alternative where facts really matter. Britannica won’t be able to be as large, but it will always be factually correct.”

But one widely publicized study, published in 2005 by Nature, called into question Britannica’s presumed accuracy advantage over Wikipedia. The study said that out of 42 competing entries, Wikipedia made an average of four errors in each article, and Britannica three. Britannica responded with a lengthy rebuttal saying the study was error-laden and “completely without merit.”

The Britannica, the oldest continuously published encyclopedia in the English language, has become a luxury item with a $1,395 price tag. It is frequently bought by embassies, libraries and research institutions, and by well-educated, upscale consumers who felt an attachment to the set of bound volumes. Only 8,000 sets of the 2010 edition have been sold, and the remaining 4,000 have been stored in a warehouse until they are bought.

The 2010 edition had more than 4,000 contributors, including Arnold Palmer (who wrote the entry on the Masters tournament) and Panthea Reid, professor emeritus at Louisiana State University and author of the biography “Art and Affection: A Life of Virginia Woolf” (who wrote about Virginia Woolf).

Sales of the Britannica peaked in 1990, when 120,000 sets were sold in the United States. But now print encyclopedias account for less than 1 percent of the Britannica’s revenue. About 85 percent of revenue comes from selling curriculum products in subjects like math, science and the English language; 15 percent comes from subscriptions to the Web site, the company said.

About half a million households pay a $70 annual fee for the online subscription, which includes access to the full database of articles, videos, original documents and to the company’s mobile applications. At least one other general-interest encyclopedia in the United States, the World Book, is still printing a 22-volume yearly edition, said Jennifer Parello, a spokeswoman for World Book Inc. She declined to provide sales figures but said the encyclopedia was bought primarily by schools and libraries.

Gary Marchionini, the dean of the School of Information and Library Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said the fading of print encyclopedias was “an inexorable trend that will continue.”

“There’s more comprehensive material available on the Web,” Mr. Marchionini said. “The thing that you get from an encyclopedia is one of the best scholars in the world writing a description of that phenomenon or that object, but you’re still getting just one point of view. Anything worth discussing in life is worth getting more than one point of view.”

Many librarians say that while they have rapidly shifted money and resources to digital materials, print still has a place. Academic libraries tend to keep many sets of specialized encyclopedias on their shelves, like volumes on Judaica, folklore, music or philosophy, or encyclopedias that are written in foreign languages and unavailable online.

At the Portland Public Library in Maine, there are still many encyclopedias that the library orders on a regular basis, sometimes every year, said Sonya Durney, a reference librarian. General-interest encyclopedias are often used by students whose teachers require them to occasionally cite print sources, just to practice using print.

“They’re used by anyone who’s learning, anyone who’s new to the country, older patrons, people who aren’t comfortable online,” Ms. Durney said. “There’s a whole demographic of people who are more comfortable with print.”

But many people are discovering that the books have outlived their usefulness. Used editions of encyclopedias are widely available on Craigslist and eBay: more than 1,400 listings for Britannica products were posted on eBay this week.

Charles Fuller, a geography professor who lives in the Chicago suburbs, put his 1992 edition on sale on Craigslist last Sunday. For years, he has neglected the print encyclopedias, he said in an interview, and now prefers to use his iPhone to look up facts quickly. He and his wife are downsizing and relocating to California, he said, and the Encyclopaedia Britannica will not be coming with them, a loss he acknowledges with a hint of wistfulness.

“They’re not obsolete,” Mr. Fuller said. “When I’m doing serious research, I still use the print books. And they look really beautiful on the bookshelves.”

post #77414 of 93803
TV Notes
On The Air Tonight
WEDNESDAY Network Primetime/Late Night Options
(All shows are in HD unless noted; start times are ET. Network late night shows are preceded by late local news)

8PM - The Middle
8:30PM - Suburgatory
9PM - Modern Family
9:31PM - Happy Endings
10PM - Revenge for Real
* * * *
11:35PM - Nightline (LIVE)
Midnight - Jimmy Kimmel Live! (Jonah Hill; The Crystal Method performs with Martha Reeves)

8PM - Survivor: One World
9PM - Criminal Minds
10PM - CSI: Crime Scene Investigation
* * * *
11:35PM - Late Show with David Letterman (Martin Short; The Ting Tings perform)
12:37AM - Late Show with Craig Ferguson (Regis Philbin)

8PM - Whitney
8:30PM - Are You There, Chelsea?
9PM - Law & Order: Special Victims Unit
(R - Feb. 15)
10PM - Rock Center with Brian Williams
* * * *
11:35PM - The Tonight Show with Jay Leno (Channing Tatum; NFL player Drew Brees; Meat Loaf performs)
12:37AM - Late Night with Jimmy Fallon (Tracy Morgan; NFL player Tim Tebow; All-American Rejects perform; announcer Deion Sanders)
(R - Feb. 1)
1:36AM - Last Call with Carson Daly (Boxing trainer Freddie Roach; rapper Danny Brown; Ed Sheeran performs) SD
(R - Feb. 8)

8PM - American Idol (LIVE, 120 min.)

(check your local listing for starting time/programming)
8PM - Nature: What Females Want and Males Will Do (R - Apr. 13, 2008)
9PM - NOVA: Dogs Decoded
(R - Nov. 9, 2010)
10PM - Niagara Falls
(R - Jul. 5, 2006)

8PM - Una Familia Con Suerte
9PM - Abismo de Pasión
10PM - La Que No PodÃ*a Amar

8PM - One Tree Hill
9PM - America's Next Top Model: British Invasion

8PM - Una Maid en Manhattan
9PM - Corazón Valiente
10PM - Relaciones Peligrosas

11PM - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (Rachel Weisz)
11:31PM - The Colbert Report (Political adviser Mark McKinnon)

11PM - Conan (Jon Hamm; Melissa Rauch; Kumail Nanjiani)

11PM - Chelsea Lately (Anne Hathaway; actor Jason Momoa; Sean O'Connor performs)
(R - Aug. 16)
post #77415 of 93803
TV Notes
Wednesday's Highlights: 'Monster Man' on Syfy
By Los Angeles Times' 'Show Tracker' Blog - Mar. 13, 2012


HOLLYWOOD SPECIAL EFFECTS are the focus of the new behind-the-scenes series Monster Man, at 11 p.m. on Syfy. With Roy Knyrim, Constance Hall and Cleve Hall.


The Middle:
Brick (Atticus Shaffer) takes a newspaper delivery job from the town's veteran newsman (Ed Asner) to earn money in this new episode (8 p.m. ABC).

American Idol: The finalists perform in this new episode (8 p.m. Fox).

Criminal Minds: Rossi (Joe Mantegna) and his colleagues are in Seattle to investigate the mysterious murders of married couples who were serving as foster parents, while Garcia (Kirsten Vangsness) thinks her boyfriend (Nicholas Brendon) is about to pop the question, and she's terrified. Teri Polo guest stars in this new episode (9 p.m. CBS).

America's Next Top Model: The models must create an ad campaign, which includes casting, styling and providing props. Cat Deeley takes a turn as a guest judge (9 p.m. KTLA).

Interior Therapy With Jeff Lewis: The seemingly obsessive-compulsive house flipper embraces a new role as home therapist in this new spinoff series premiering tonight (9 p.m. Bravo).

South Park: The raunchy animated comedy returns with a new episode (10 p.m. Comedy Central).

Face Off: In the season finale of the special effects/makeup series, the contestants must create three original characters from a specific genre that will perform in a dance (10 p.m. Syfy).

Psych: Shawn and Gus (James Roday, Dule Hill) investigate the attempted murder of a contestant on a dating show similar to The Bachelorette, in which men compete for the affections of a woman with whom they've crossed paths in the past. Greg Grunberg, Wayne Brady and Mike The Miz Mizanin guest star in this new episode (10 p.m. USA).


College basketball: NCAA first round play-in:
Lamar vs. Vermont (3:30 p.m. Tru); California vs. South Florida (6 p.m. Tru). NIT first round: (4 p.m. ESPN2; 6 p.m. ESPN2).

Pro basketball: The Lakers visit the New Orleans Hornets (5 p.m. KCAL); the Atlanta Hawks visit the Clippers (7:30 p.m. FSN).

Hockey: The Detroit Red Wings visit the Ducks (7 p.m. FS Prime).

post #77416 of 93803
TV Notes
Did NBC miss the boat on 'Downton Abbey'?
By Bob Fernandez, Philadelphia Enquirer

Comcast Corp.'s NBC television network desperately needs more prime-time hits. But did it let one slip away?

It seems like it.

NBC passed on current cultural favorite Downton Abbey, produced by NBCUniversal's Carnival Films studio in London, believing that American audiences wouldn't have the appetite for a very British historical drama set in a country manor in Edwardian England.

Instead, Downton Abbey found a grateful home on public television, as part of the Masterpiece lineup. Spoofed on Saturday Night Live this year and rated No. 2 nationally at 9 p.m. Feb. 5, the night of the Super Bowl (aired by NBC), Downton has been a stunning success for PBS.

On Feb. 19, 5.4 million viewers watched the season finale, capturing a 3.5 national Nielsen rating and making it the highest-rated PBS show since the premiere of Ken Burns' National Parks in September 2009, PBS says.

"They may have second thoughts about letting it go to PBS," Brad Adgate, senior vice president of research at Horizon Media, said of NBC. Downton Abbey probably never would have rated No. 1 in prime time for NBC, but it could have built a solid viewership and brought other benefits to the network's tarnished reputation.

In an era of reality shows and poorly staged TV dramas, Downton Abbey "gets a lot of critical acclaim, so it's a prestigious show," Adgate said, noting that the series appeals to a sophisticated and urban, though older, audience. Facing aging demographics, network television has been seeking shows that appeal to younger audiences.

NBC has improved its prime-time showing recently with Sunday Night Football, the Super Bowl, and The Voice, Adgate said. But the network still has big holes to patch. The 10 p.m. Thursday time slot is one of them. Between 1981 and 2009, NBC aired just three shows in that slot: Hill Street Blues, L.A. Law, and ER. By contrast, the network has carried three shows in that slot since September: Prime Suspect, The Firm, and Awake.

An NBC official said last week that the network had been delighted at the success of Downton Abbey for its sister company and that the decision not to air the show in the United States was made under a previous NBC administration.

Comcast acquired control of NBC Universal Inc. in early 2011 and vowed that it would revive the sagging fortunes of the NBC TV network, which suffered under former owner General Electric Co. The Philadelphia cable company replaced many top entertainment honchos, and now former Comcast executive Steve Burke heads the news and entertainment conglomerate. Comcast officials have said that if they can fix NBC TV, there is potential to earn hundreds of millions of dollars in profit.

But even current NBC executives could have overlooked Downton Abbey's potential, NBC acknowledged. The official said it was hard to imagine any network - including PBS - thinking Downton would become a hit.

As a practical consideration, there seems to be doubt that Downton Abbey could sustain 22 episodes over a TV season, which is necessary for a U.S. network. Seven Downton episodes aired on PBS this year.

That said, NBC seems to be reconsidering the accepted network-TV wisdom. Bob Greenblatt, the new head of entertainment for NBC, developed the period dramas The Tudors and The Borgias at the cable channel Showtime. While at Showtime, Greenblatt also developed a series about the Vanderbilts with the writer Julian Fellowes, creator of Downton Abbey.

NBC is experimenting with pilots for a western, an epic pirate tale about Blackbeard, and a Dracula story set in 19th-century England. Greenblatt, the NBC official said, knows the virtues of such shows - they just have to be broad enough to work for broadcast TV.

Downton Abbey executive producer Gareth Neame said in a phone interview last month that he was filming a third season, and that though the series is a historic drama, it's fast-paced and told in a modern way. One model for the series was The West Wing, he said.

Though a Brit, Neame boasts a Hollywood pedigree. His grandfather, Ronald Neame, had a four-decade career as a cinematographer, producer, screenwriter, and director. His most acclaimed credit was as director of The Poseidon Adventure, released in 1972.

Gareth Neame believes the success of Downton Abbey could lead to a more receptive audience for the historic-drama genre among U.S. TV executives.

As for PBS, he said, "they have always been there for British producers. They don't have the biggest checkbook, but they are consistent."

post #77417 of 93803
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

TV Notes
Did NBC miss the boat on 'Downton Abbey'?
By Bob Fernandez, Philadelphia Enquirer

Comcast Corp.'s NBC television network desperately needs more prime-time hits. But did it let one slip away?

It seems like it.

Not really. We've seen plenty of examples of how just being on a different network changes the viewers numbers.

On PBS Abbey instantly hit plenty of the stuffy, literary types that the show appeals too. Place it on NBC where that demo rarely treads and it would have bombed.

Apparently changing three letters in a network name is enough to confuse or repulse an audience.
post #77418 of 93803
TV Notes
Move over, Kardashians: The Eastwoods are heading to E!
By Michelle Profis, EW.com's 'Inside TV' Blog - Mar. 13, 2012

Looks like the Eastwoods are the next celebrity family to land their own reality show: E! announced today that the new series, Mrs. Eastwood & Company will debut in May.

But rather than a deeper look into the life of esteemed actor and director Clint Eastwood, the series will focus on his wife Dina, their teenage daughters Francesca and Morgan, and Overtone': the all-male, six member South African vocal group that Dina manages (hence the Company.)

Nothing is more important to me than family - no matter how you define that, Dina Eastwood said in a statement. People might be surprised by how we live our lives and our unconventional approach, and I also believe that it's hard not to fall in love with my band, Overtone.'

I'm really proud of my family, Clint Eastwood said. They are a constant source of inspiration and entertainment.

post #77419 of 93803
TV Notes
William Petersen Plots TV Return with GK-TV
By Lesley Goldberg, The Hollywood Reporter's 'Live Feed' Blog - Mar. 13, 2012

More than two years after departing CBS' CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, William Petersen is plotting his return to the small screen.

Petersen has teamed with GK-TV to develop an hourlong crime drama series titled Hurt People, in which he would star and executive produce, GK-TV said Tuesday.

Based on an original script by Peter Macmanus (Hollywoodland), the series revolves around Hollis Brown (Petersen), a longtime hitman employed by the crime family who killed his wife. Brown has been brought in to hunt down his estranged daughter, who is intent on destroying those responsible for her mother's death.

Petersen and Macmanus would exec produce alongside CSI EP Cynthia Chvatal as well as GK-TV's Graham King, Tim Headington and Craig Cegielski. Beth Stine is on board as a supervising producer.

Hurt People would mark Petersen's first starring gig since he departed his role as Gil Grissom on CSI. The series has featured a number of high-profile actors -- Laurence Fishburne, Ted Danson, Elisabeth Sue -- in its bid to fill the void left by his departure from the series.

Petersen and Macmanus are repped by UTA.

In addition to Hurt People, GK-TV is also developing Port Royal from The Walking Dead EP Gale Anne Hurd for FX. Its Camelot effort for Starz was canceled after one season despite record ratings for the cable network.

post #77420 of 93803
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

TV Notes
Did NBC miss the boat on 'Downton Abbey'?
By Bob Fernandez, Philadelphia Enquirer

Comcast Corp.'s NBC television network desperately needs more prime-time hits. But did it let one slip away?

It seems like it.

NBC passed on current cultural favorite Downton Abbey, produced by NBCUniversal's Carnival Films studio in London, believing that American audiences wouldn't have the appetite for a very British historical drama set in a country manor in Edwardian England.

They're joking, right? Intelligent, sophisticated programming succeeding on any American network outside of PBS? Yeah right!

I'm sure Downtown Abbey would have worked out great being trimmed down to 42 minutes an episode with atmosphere breaking commercials jammed in there with an episode of Fear Factor aired directly afterwards.
post #77421 of 93803
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

TV Notes
Did NBC miss the boat on 'Downton Abbey'?
By Bob Fernandez, Philadelphia Enquirer

Comcast Corp.'s NBC television network desperately needs more prime-time hits. But did it let one slip away?

It seems like it.

Well NBC may not be the only one to miss this boat. Anyone else who has NEVER seen this show besides me? Sounds like I am too far behind to catch up now.
post #77422 of 93803
Originally Posted by VisionOn View Post

Not really. We've seen plenty of examples of how just being on a different network changes the viewers numbers.

On PBS Abbey instantly hit plenty of the stuffy, literary types that the show appeals too. Place it on NBC where that demo rarely treads and it would have bombed.

Apparently changing three letters in a network name is enough to confuse or repulse an audience.

The Big Four passed on "The Soprano's" too. Think we would be waxing poetic about it as we do had it aired on FOX?
post #77423 of 93803
Originally Posted by scorpiontail60 View Post

I'm sure Downtown Abbey would have worked out great being trimmed down to 42 minutes an episode with atmosphere breaking commercials jammed in there with an episode of Fear Factor aired directly afterwards.

You forgot to mention the English English subtitles they would have added :P

post #77424 of 93803
Nielsen Notes (Broadcast)
Telemundo's got a heartthrob: 'Corazon'
New telenovela sets a record with 1.02 million 18-49s
By Toni Fitzgerald, Media Life Magazine - Mar. 14, 2012

Univision long ago passed the CW to become the No. 5 broadcast network.

It looks as though Telemundo, the No. 2 Spanish-language network behind Univision, expects to do the same some day.

Telemundo has positioned itself as a rival to the young-skewing CW as its ratings grow, and it's occasionally even beating its English-language competitor.

Last week was one of those occasions.

With the CW largely, though not completely, in repeats, Telemundo's new telenovela "Corazon Valiente" logged a considerable advantage over the CW in younger viewers in the 9 p.m. timeslot.

The first four episodes of "Corazon," which bowed March 6, a Tuesday, averaged 1.02 million adults 18-49, up 57 percent over the network's February average in that slot, and 1.7 million total viewers.

It marked the first time that a Telemundo novela has averaged at least 1 million 18-49s in that timeslot since the network first began using Nielsen's national people meter service six years ago.

It also gave Telemundo a sizeable advantage over the CW, which "Corazon" outdrew by an average of 80 percent each night in 18-49s and 101 percent in 18-34s, the CW's target demo.

"Corazon," about childhood friends who reunite as grown women, had the third-best premiere week of any Telemundo novela, and the network even beat ABC and CBS (which aired mostly reruns) in several local markets in 18-34s and 18-49s.

The victories say almost as much about the competition as they do about Telemundo. The latter is having a good year, and the CW is having a tough one.

The CW's viewership is off across virtually all demographics versus last year, and its highly touted new dramas, "Hart of Dixie" and "Ringer," which both got decent reviews, have earned mediocre ratings.

The network remains well ahead for the season with an average 1.76 million viewers and a 0.8 18-49 rating to Telemundo's 1.34 million and 0.5

But while it's still unusual for Telemundo to finish ahead of the CW for the night in the younger demographics, it's no longer unheard of.

Even before "Corazon's" premiere, Telemundo was seeing ratings gains. The network had its best-ever February sweeps among total viewers, due in part to the success of another telenovela, "Una Maid en Manhattan."

An adaptation of the 2002 Jennifer Lopez movie, "Maid" improved Telemundo's 8 p.m. average by 51 percent last month.

Year to date, Telemundo is up double-digit percentages in total viewers and 18-49s.

* * * *

In broadcast ratings for the week ended March 11:

Among adults 18-49, Fox was first for the week with a 2.4 average rating and a 7 share, followed by CBS at 2.0/6, NBC at 1.8/5, ABC at 1.6/5, Univision at 1.3/4, Telemundo at 0.6/2, CW at 0.4/1, ION and TeleFutura at 0.3/1 and Estrella and Azteca at 0.1/0.

Top five English-language Big Five shows (18-49s): 1. NBC's "The Voice" 6.2; 2. Fox's "American Idol-Wednesday" 5.7; 3. CBS's "The Big Bang Theory" 5.1; 4. Fox's American Idol-Thursday" 4.9; 5. CBS's "The Big Bang Theory" 3.9.

Top five English-language Big Five shows (total viewers): 1. Fox's American Idol-Wednesday" 18.69 million; 2. Fox's American Idol-Thursday" 17.27 million; 3. NBC's "The Voice" 16.85 million; 4. CBS's "Person of Interest" 15.67 million; 5. CBS's "The Big Bang Theory" 15.05 million.

Top five time-shifted English-language Big Five shows (18-49s, by Live+SD versus Live+7 playback, week ended Feb. 26): 1. ABC's "Modern Family" 2.8 increase (up 58.3 percent); 2. CBS's "The Big Bang Theory" 1.7 increase (up 32.1 percent); 3. ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" 1.6 increase (up 51.6 percent); 4. Fox's "New Girl" 1.5 increase (up 50.0 percent); 5. NBC's "The Office" 1.5 increase (up 5.7.7 percent).

Show on the rise: NBC's "Smash," Monday 10 p.m. The new drama surged against ABC and CBS reruns, rising 17 percent week-to-week among 18-49s from a 2.3 rating to a 2.7.

Show on the decline: CBS's "The Good Wife," Sunday 9 p.m. The third-year drama posted a 1.7 among 18-49s, off 11 percent from a 1.9 the previous week.

post #77425 of 93803
Nielsen Notes (Cable)
Once so hot, 'Jersey Shore' is now fading
MTV hit slides to a season-low 4.84 million total viewers
By Toni Fitzgerald, Media Life Magazine - Mar. 14, 2012

Two weeks from tomorrow MTV will launch its first "Jersey Shore" spinoff, "The Pauly D Project," to be followed later this year by a show starring Nicole "Snooki" Polizzi and fellow boozer Jenni "JWoww" Farley.

Perhaps MTV, which announced the shows last year, should have rushed into production a bit faster, because "Shore" has lost its momentum, and it's unclear what that will mean for the spinoffs.

Season five of "Shore" hit a season low last week with 4.84 million total viewers, according to Nielsen.

That's still a big audience for any cable show, but it's down 36 percent from the season premiere in January, which drew 7.6 million viewers.

"Shore" has lost nearly half its audience since last August, when it drew a record 8.8 million viewers for the season four premiere.

All this is to say that while "Shore" is still a hit, its best days are behind it, which may not be the best time to launch one, let alone two, spinoffs.

The problem with "Shore" is its repetitive nature. In every episode Snooki will drink, Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino will say something stupid, the gang will tan and work out, and two cast members will get into a fight (that is the variable; different people fight each week).

Five seasons in, that gets dull, no matter how unintentionally funny and clueless the "Jersey" crew may be.

MTV's idea for the spinoffs was to provide a deeper character portrait of the reality stars, but alas what you see seems to be all you get from these twentysomethings.

A full hour focused on Pauly, Snooki or JWoww may prove too much for people already tuning them out in smaller doses.

Perhaps a better approach for MTV would have been to stick to its original idea of finding a new group of "Shore" castmates to follow.

That could still happen, but probably not until MTV has played out all of its spinoff scenarios, and it still has a program in development for Sorrentino.

* * * *

In cable ratings for the week ended March 11:

Top five networks in primetime (18-49s): TBS, USA, History, A&E, TNT.

Top five networks in primetime (total viewers): USA, Disney Channel, History, TBS, Fox News Channel.

Top five cable news networks in primetime (25-54): Fox News Channel, MSNBC, CNN, HLN, CNBC.

Top five cable news programs (total viewers): 1 Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor" (Monday, 8 p.m.); 2. Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor" (Wednesday, 8 p.m.); 3. Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor" (Thursday, 8 p.m.); 4. Fox News Channel's "AEHQ: Super Tuesday" (Tuesday, 9 p.m.); 5. Fox News Channel's "AEHQ: Super Tuesday" (Tuesday, 8 p.m.)

Top movie (18-49s): TBS's "The Hangover" (Saturday, 8 p.m.) 1.39 million.

Top sporting event (total viewers): ESPN2's "NASCAR Nationwide Series" (Saturday, 4:56 p.m.) 2.51 million.

Shows making the top 10 among 18-34s, 18-49s and 25-54s: USA's "WWE Entertainment" (Monday, 9 p.m.); AMC's "The Walking Dead' (Sunday, 9 p.m.); MTV's "Jersey Shore" (Thursday, 10 p.m.); History's "Pawn Stars" (Monday, 10 and 10:30 p.m.);

Show on the rise: History's "Pawn Stars," Monday, 10 p.m. The 10 p.m. episode of the reality hit averaged 2.79 million viewers 18-49, up 21 percent from 2.30 million the previous week.

Show on the decline: Discovery Channel's "Gold Rush" Friday, 9 p.m. A special episode of the show, which took a deeper look at the miners, averaged 1.41 million viewers 25-54, off 38 percent from the previous week's 2.29 million.

post #77426 of 93803
Critic's Notes
Sweet (and sublimely sick) 16 for 'South Park'
Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone head into 'South Park's' 16th season with plenty of life left in mining wisdom from crude laughs.
By Robert Lloyd, Los Angeles Times - Mar. 13, 2012

"South Park" begins its 16th season Wednesday on Comedy Central.
(Picture: Comedy Central)

"South Park," a cartoon that is and isn't about four little boys in a Rocky Mountain hamlet, begins its 16th season Wednesday on Comedy Central.

Sixteen years of "South Park it began so long ago that Patrick Duffy was the subject of a joke in its second episode sounds even more amazing than 23 years of "The Simpsons," given the younger show's habitual profanity, vulgarity and violence. But that is also obviously part of its appeal and, indeed, often its very point.

What's kept both these small-town allegorical comedies valuable and viable over their long runs are qualities they share: a disregard for empty authority, skepticism regarding beliefs not based in fact, an impatience with hypocrisy and cant, and the happy realization that the worst aspects of humans both as individuals and (especially) as institutions can be played for big laughs. And if "The Simpsons" is the warmer of the two series, that is all right with "South Park."

Eric Cartman (perennially enraged sociopathic conniver) speaks with a character clearly meant to be Bart Simpson (in "Cartoon Wars, Part II" Season 10):

Bart-like boy: "I'm a pretty bad kid."

Cartman: "What's the worst thing you've ever done?

"I stole the head off a statue once."

"Wow. That's pretty hard-core, jeez. That's like this one time, I didn't like this kid, so I ground his parents up into chili and fed it to him." (So he did, in "Scott Tenorman Must Die," from Season 5.)

With its famous six-day production process, "South Park" is also the more topical cartoon in 2008, it aired an election-themed episode that quoted from President Obama's victory speech the day after he won. Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone like to name names, of both people and the corporations who are now people too, the specificity of their targets prompting the disclaimer that opens every episode: "All characters and events in this show even those based on real people are entirely fictional."

Although it takes an army, running at a sprint, to bring "South Park" to life, to an extent rare for television it remains very much the work of its creators, who script, direct and produce the episodes and provide the voices for all the male main characters. It lends the show a consistent, which is not to say unevolving, vision.

And though its semi-homemade look a computerized interpretation of the construction-paper/felt-board look of the pilot has grown somewhat more refined in order to keep pace with (if always several steps behind) advances in TV technology, a kind of garage-rock/uncle's barn homeliness maintains. It is certainly not a show that feels worked over or which appears to suffer from second thoughts.

I was not a fan to begin with. It seemed to me at first that Parker and Stone were merely showing off, like children pulling down their pants or saying bad words at a grown-up party. (The pilot episode concerned alien anal probes and was full of bad words so, really, that was not too far off the mark.)

But eventually I began to see a method in its crudeness, and its excesses as the road to a palace of wisdom that is, when it was not just pulling down its pants and saying bad words. (Comedy Central bleeps the conventionally most objectionable language, but almost every episode is available uncensored at the show's home page, http://www.southparkstudios.com.)

If "South Park" is vulgar partly to make a point about vulgarity, and provocative to make a point about the right to be provocative, it is also vulgar and provocative for the sake of being vulgar and provocative. At times, it's simply mean calling Sarah Jessica Parker a "transvestite donkey witch," for example.

Anything less would be, in a way, disingenuous. The series' deep and shallow streams run side by side, as in the fifth-season episode "It Hits the Fan," in which a common slang word for feces is pronounced 162 times (an onscreen counter keeps track). There are myriad interlacing points made about language and society and media; but it's funny because they keep using that word.

The theme was revisited and elaborated upon last season in a pair of dark and moving episodes in which Stan, having turned 10, begins to lose his taste for life he is diagnosed as suffering from "cynicism" and, in a metaphor made brilliantly concrete, has begun to see the world and its products literally as excrement. "When all the things that made you laugh just make you sick, how do you go on when nothing makes you happy?" he wonders.

There is something quite breathtaking, and I mean this seriously, about the poignancy Parker and Stone achieve by filling the screen with pictures and sounds of defecation. Oddly, it feels like ... maturity.

The episodes that followed suggest that, like the death that used to regularly come to Kenny, Stan's affliction is not permanent. But it's clear that "South Park," which has been renewed through 2016, has territory left to explore and has not lost its capacity to $%@#$ with us.

post #77427 of 93803
TP over BSG what a frakkin joke. please quit posting that thing
post #77428 of 93803
^^^ Sorry, I'm just the messenger.

Critic's Notes
Why Raising Hope Is Fox’s Parks and Rec
By Margaret Lyons, New York Magazine's 'Vulture' Blog - Mar. 13, 2012

A charismatic petite blonde woman, a gruff gentleman prone to dispensing hardscrabble wisdom, a sarcastic brunette who falls for a doofy guy, a steady influx of weirdo lovable townies — they all make for an ensemble of earnest oddballs trying to do the right thing on their low-rated single-camera comedy. But it's not Parks and Rec. It's Raising Hope. And it's just as good.

A summary for the uninitiated or wrongfully resistant: Lucas Neff stars as Jimmy, a high-school dropout single dad who lives with his parents (Martha Plimpton and Garrett Dillahunt) and grandmother (Cloris Leachman) and recently, after two seasons of pining, got together with his dream girl Sabrina (Shannon Woodward), whom he works with at the grocery store. The show's cartoonishness balances out its abiding sincerity: Yes, everyone is sleeping with pantyhose on their heads to prevent spiders from crawling into their ears, but that's only as a demonstration of their love and devotion to one another, and Jimmy's attempt to make Sabrina feel understood. The show is a lot like creator Greg Garcia's previous series, the massively underrated My Name Is Earl, but Hope is more family-centric and ensemble-driven.

Much like Parks or Happy Endings, but also in the tradition of, say, Roseanne or Malcolm in the Middle, Hope finds its humor in goofy spins on relative mundanity. Taking a GED course is not particularly hilarious, but what if the course is taught by a vindictive former teacher who rephrases every word problem to be about your poor life choices, and the only reason you're taking the class is because your family is enmeshed in a contest to prove who's the smartest? Well, maybe then.

So why doesn't the show enjoy the same buzz or fandom? Where are the Raising Hope fan art Tumblrs, the dozens of .gifs recounting the show's best moments, the Trader Joe's employees using Hope jokes in their store placards? Why isn't Raising Hope cool?

A couple of factors probably contribute: It's a family-set show, it's on Fox, and it's about poor people, so it doesn't seem trendy. And yet, Hope has all the markers of comedy hipness: irreverence, a fascination with quirkiness, running in-jokes that reward eagle-eyed fans, good guest stars, a darling romance, and quotable bon mots. It's not cynical, and the characters seem to care for each other. There's even a cute baby. Like the buzzier Parks, Hope had a good first season but is really finding its footing in its second, backing off on some of its overdone bits (like Maw Maw being salty) and finding a more comfortable rhythm.

And in the trendiest move of all, Hope is a bubble show that's been bounced around the schedule and is nearing the end of its season without a renewal. Which makes now the perfect time to get onboard, because as Party Down fans can tell you, there's nothing cooler than a canceled show.

post #77429 of 93803
Originally Posted by jamieva View Post

TP over BSG what a frakkin joke. please quit posting that thing

I agree. Flush it; it's ridiculous. The guy is just using this thing to generate web traffic and has no idea what he's talking about. Kind of like the Emmy voters being comprised mostly of old white guys who don't actually watch much TV (true).
post #77430 of 93803
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

Kind of like the Emmy voters being comprised mostly of old white guys who don't actually watch much TV (true).

Are you saying that white people (or old people) aren't good judges of quality television? If you're not, then I'm not sure why you brought up the race (or age) of Emmy voters.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information