Sort Of Self Explanatory

Merv Griffin – 1925-2007

Merv Griffin was a giant of the Television industry. The former big band singer parlayed his talent and entrepreneurial skills into a multi-million dollar empire, and he seemed to have fun doing it.

Born Mervyn Edward Griffin in San Mateo California he first came to public attention as a 19-year old singer on KFRC radio in San Francisco. This in turn led to a job touring with Freddy Martin's big band. Following his time with Martin he started a successful solo career in night clubs which allowed him to start an independent record label, Panda Records. His album "Songs by Merv Griffin" was the first to be recorded on magnetic tape and his recording of "I've Got a Lovely Bunch of Coconuts" sold over 3 million copies and was number one on the hit parade. Doris Day "discovered" him during one of his nightclub appearances and arranged a screen test for him at Warner Brothers. He appeared in a number of relatively minor roles in films in the early to mid-1950s the most famous of which was So This Is Love in which he and Kathryn Grayson (in her first film role) shared the first "open mouth kiss" in American movies.

During the '50s he was also a popular guest on various TV shows as a singer. In 1958 he was selected by Mark Goodson and Bill Toddman to host their game show Play Your Hunch, which he did for four years (1958-1962). During a live broadcast of Play Your Hunch, Griffin was able to manage an impromptu interview with Tonight Show host Jack Paar after Paar wandered onto the set of the show (Paar was superstitious and was trying to avoid the elevators at Rockefeller Center for some reason). This led to him guest hosting the Tonight Show, which in turn led to NBC offering him an afternoon talk show in 1962. The NBC version of The Merv Griffin Show failed but NBC gave him the opportunity to host and produce a new game show called Word For Word. This too lasted a single season. Griffin then revived the afternoon Merv Griffin Show this time as a syndicates show produced by Griffin and distributed by Group W (Westinghouse broadcasting which also distributed the Mike Douglas Show. Griffin's affiliation with Group W ended in 1969 when he made an ill-advised move to CBS to challenge Johnny Carson in late night (interestingly, one of Griffin's directors – the only one credited by IMDB - was Dick Carson, Johnny's brother). Network interference led to numerous conflicts even as the show wallowed in the ratings – sometimes even losing out to Dick Cavett on ABC. Eventually CBS cut Griffin loose but realizing the end was near at CBS he had already set up a distribution deal with Metromedia for a renewed version of the daytime Merv Griffin Show which ran from 1972 to 1986.

During this time Griffin was also busy as a game show producer. In 1964 he created Jeopardy for NBC, based on an idea that his then wife Julann who had the idea of turning the old quiz show staple of asking questions and giving answers on its head by giving the players answers and having them formulate questions. In addition to producing the show Griffin also wrote the music including the "Final Jeopardy" theme. This first version of Jeopardy hosted by Art Fleming ran until 1975. NBC allowed Griffin the opportunity to create the replacement for Jeopardy and came up with a word puzzle based on "Hangman" called Wheel Of Fortune hosted by Chuck Woolery (later replaced by Pat Sajak) and Susan Stafford (replaced by Vanna White) as hostess and "letter turner." The show was a modest success for NBC – it featured a shopping round after each game finished where players had to spend their winnings, frequently on some of the most tasteless kitsch you've ever seen (lots of brass) – but really took off in 1983 when Griffin syndicated the series. Jeopardy was also revived in 1984 with Alex Trebek replacing Fleming (who had hosted a short-lived revival of the show on NBC in 1978-79).

In 1986 Griffin ended his syndicated talk show – he decided that it was the right time based on changes in the marketplace – and sold his production company (and Jeopardy and Wheel Of Fortune) to Columbia Pictures Television – then owned by Coca-Cola – for $250 million. He soon became involved in real estate development. One of his first purchases was the Beverly Hilton Hotel which he bought for $100 million and spent $25 million refurbishing. He also became involved in a feud with Donald Trump over control of Resorts International, which ended with Trump gaining control of the Taj Mahal Casino project – then under construction – and Griffin wining the Resorts Atlantic City (the former Chalfonte-Haddon Hall Hotel) and the Paradise Island resort. Griffin was also involved in residential real estate and horse racing. Most recently he returned to his roots as a TV producer producing the psychic readings show Lisa Williams: Life Among the Dead for the Lifetime Network, and a new syndicated game show called Merv Griffin's Crosswords which will debut in September. In 2001 he also returned to the recording studio with the album It's Like a Dream

Griffin's last TV appearance (not counting an appearance on Entertainment Tonight) was as a guest on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson in November 2006. Griffin had been diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1996 but had apparently successfully beaten the disease. He was admitted to Cedars-Sinai Hospital last month with a recurrence of the disease. According to doctors at the hospital the cancer had spread to other organs in an "unexpected and immediate'' manner.

As a game show producer Merv Griffin had a genius for taking a simple idea – a trivia quiz where the contestant gives the question instead of the answer; the kids' game "Hangman" – and make it a challenging and, more importantly, entertaining concept. It is as a talk show host that he truly shone, at least for me. While NBC cancelled the original version of the Merv Griffin Show as "being 'too sophisticated' for the housewife audience," he seemed to know that he had the right formula. While never as intellectual as Dick Cavett's various shows, Griffin didn't avoid intellectually challenging guests. Amongst his guests were Bertrand Russel, Pablo Cassals and Will & Ariel Durant. Other guests included at least four US Presidents, Robert Kennedy, John Lennon (when he was still with The Beatles) and Martin Luther King. His shows encouraged new talent including Jerry Seinfeld and Richard Pryor. The DVD set The Merv Griffin Show: 40 of the Most Interesting People of Our Time includes such guests as Richard Nixon, Ingrid Bergman, David Niven, Roger Vadim and then wife Jane Fonda, Grace Kelly, Laurence Olivier, John Wayne and Jack Benny. Orson Welles was a frequent guest – usually doing a magic trick during his each of his fifty or so appearances. In fact the DVD set includes Welles's last appearance with Griffin, recorded just hours before Welles died. And virtually all of this was done for an audience of "housewives" who according to NBC were too unsophisticated or this sort of material. Merv Griffin understood his audience better than the network weasels and built an empire out of it. If for nothing else he should be remembered for that.

Following is an excerpt from an episode of the Merv Griffin Show featuring a song by Howard Keel (before Dallas) followed by an interview.

New Poll - Who Should Win The Emmy For Outstanding Actor In A Comedy?

Usual disclaimers apply, please vote for the Actor that you think should win, not necessarily who you think will win. Sometimes (usually) there's a difference. This poll runs until August 14^th. Feel free to comment on your vote in this post.

Poll Results - Who Should Win The Emmy For Outstanding Supporting Actress In A Drama?

I seem to see a bit of a pattern emerging in the polling numbers this year – you like women better than you do men. In the four categories that I've done polls for so far this year, votes for Supporting Actress in Comedies and dramas have exceeded votes for Supporting Actor by more than 2 to 1 (30 for the Actress categories, 14 for the Actors). I don't know what to make of it; I'm just noting the trend.

Let's get down to the actual numbers. There were 12 votes cast. Tied for fifth with no votes were Katherine Heigl from Grey's Anatomy and Aida Turturro from The Sopranos. In fourth, with one vote (8%) is Lorraine Bracco from The Sopranos. In third place, with three votes is Chandra Wilson from Grey's Anatomy. And in the first tie of the year the winners with four votes each (33%) are Rachel Griffiths from Brothers & Sisters, and Sandra Oh from Grey's Anatomy.

As I did with the Supporting Actors in a Drama, I'm going to come right out and say that I expect the Academy to vote for one of the two actresses from The Sopranos, and I will editorialize enough to say that if they do vote for an actress from the Sopranos it should be Aida Turturro for playing the shrewish Janice. She is a thoroughly dislikable character who basically turned into this generation's lesser version of the poisonous Livia Soprano (Livia of course was named for the wife of Augustus who has traditionally been portrayed as the power behind the throne who was not above using murder – frequently with poison – to further her objectives).

I'm not surprised by the lack of support for Turturro or Bracco in the poll. For whatever reason people who vote in my polls seem to support broadcast series more than they do cable shows. Again, I'm not judging, just noting the trend which is replicated in previous year's polling results. Nor am I surprised with Katherine Heigl's poor performance. The plot arc that her character of Izzie Stevens has followed has been showy but dare I say that it has also frequently seemed absurd even for Grey's Anatomy, from her extended mourning for Denny (she spent the first episode of the season lying on the floor in a pink prom dress) through her continual indecision about what to do with the $8 million that he left her in his will, to her drunken night of adulterous sex with George and sudden realization that she loves him. I blame the lack of strong supporting roles for women in most TV series for her nomination.

Chandra Wilson in Grey's Anatomy on the other hand is a worthy nomination. Miranda Bailey is one of the best characters on Grey's Anatomy and that includes Ellen Pompeo's Meredith. She's a joy to watch, at turns funny and serious, a no nonsense woman who is willing to kick butt or to comfort people as needed. As my mother puts it, "she makes the show."

Sandra Oh, on the other hand is another example of the "co-lead" syndrome that frequently shows up in the supporting categories. Christina is at least as much the focus of the show as Pompeo's Meredith and she stand out from the rest of the cast, male and female in this regard. In this season she has had the more compelling story arc as her relationship with Burke moved towards marriage despite all of her personal internal conflicts about the idea. One can only wonder what would have happened in her character's life if Isaiah Washington had been retained by the producers. As for Rachel Griffith's, I have to confess that I've never watched an episode of Brothers & Sisters. My fellow blogger Toby wrote in the comments "This is a category which could fit your description of the supporting player being the second lead – at least for Heigl and Griffiths. Wilson, Turturro, and Bracco were the real supporting players." As I said, I would add Sandra Oh to the list of second leads. I find it interesting that Toby regards Rachel Griffiths as the second lead in this series when you consider that it is nominally at least built around Calista Flockhart's character, Kitty Walker, and that Sally Field (who plays Nora Walker) is nominated for Outstanding Actress in a Drama. Because I haven't seen the show I can't really judge it; I do however know and respect Rachel Griffith's work and abilities as an actress from her work on Six Feet Under. Still, if I were to mention a likely winner other than the two actresses from The Sopranos my vote would probably go to Sandra Oh.

Feel free to comment about this evaluation. New poll up in a few minutes.

The Power Of Carey

I have a theory about game shows, specifically game shows with an escalating prize fund – they shouldn't be too easy. Being easy is what seems to have killed Identity, the show which featured Penn Jillette as host. In a total of twelve episodes, three people won the top prize of $500,000, and one came close by winning $250,000. The first person to win $500,000 on Identity did it on the first night. Considering how long it took for someone to win $1,000,000 on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. The hope and expectation that someone would win the show's big prize helped to build tensions and make the show a big success – at least for a time. The same can probably be said for Deal Or No Deal. People are watching, in the hopes of being able to say that they saw someone win a million on the show. After watching the first episode of The Power Of Ten I have to wonder if the game is too easy.

Certainly the premise of the show is fairly simple. To start, two contestants face off in an elimination round. They are asked up to five questions based on a survey of Americans. The person to guess the closest percentage of Americans who gave the answer that host Drew Carey asked about wins that question. For example, the first question asked was "What percentage of Americans said they have a better relationship with their parents as an adult than they did as a child?" Jamie answered 74% while Maureen answered 56%. Jamie won because the correct answer was 89%. In fact Jamie won the first three questions asked and won the elimination round.

Once the elimination round was complete, the winner of the round gets five questions, again based on surveys of Americans. The first question is worth $1,000 with the prize value increasing by 10 times the previous prize. The question wrong their prize drops by a power of 10. I believe that the reduction is from the prize level that the player currently has rather than the level he is trying to win – in other words if the player has won at the $100,000 and answers incorrectly at the $1 million level the prize received will be $10,000 rather than $100,000. The player can walk away with what they have at any time before they lock in their answer for the next level. The questions are of relatively equal difficulty the modifier for each level is the range in which the correct answer has to fall – the range for the $1,000 question is 40% and it drops by 10% so the million dollar question has a range of 10%. But a million dollars isn't the highest level. The show's biggest prize is $10 million. It is also the toughest level to win. Instead of being asked a survey question at that level the player has to state the exact percentage of Americans who answered the million dollar question from the 10% range. In other words if the answer is 32% and the player correctly guessed that the answer fell between 25% and 35% at the million dollar level, the player has to answer 32% to win $10 million.

There are some nice bits of what we used to call "chrome" in the wargaming community. Instead of a number pad for players to enter percentages they use a handle to adjust their predictions. There are no "helps" but the player has a friend or family member sitting nearby who can give them suggestions of what they feel the answer should be. They also show the contestant what the audience thinks is the correct answer. The audience poll results are presented as a rather nifty combined Column and Line chart – well it's nifty if you're into charts and I sort of am. I also like the way that the graphic showing the actual percentage moves up and down the range before finally settling at the actual answer. Okay, so it really doesn't take much to impress me, but it is fun to watch the contestants in the elimination round grow elated when the "bouncing ball" is closer to their answer than the other players and become crestfallen when it moves the other way. It's a simple pleasure, but it's mine.

The math in this game is rather interesting. In Poker there is an idea known as "pot odds." Essentially you compare the amount of money you have to wager with the odds of you winning the hand based on what you know about the cards you have and the "outs" that will allow you to improve your hand to a winning hand. If the return on your bet is greater than the odds of you winning the hand you should call the bet. In virtually all of the situations in The Power Of Ten the odds favour the player continuing. At the $1,000 level (where of course the player has literally nothing to lose) the 40 point margin of error means that the odds are 1.5-1 (or 3-2) against the player winning, but then the answer to the question is usually so obvious that player is virtually guaranteed to win. At the $10,000 level and a 30 point range, the odds are 3.33-1 (or 10-3) against, while at the $100,000 level and a 20 point range the odds are 4-1 against. Now I'm not sure what happens if a player loses at the $10,000 dollar level but at the $100,000 level, where a wrong answer drops the player down to a $1,000 prize, the player is wagering $9,000 (the difference between what the person "has" and what they'd walk away with if they lose) so the return on the bet would either be 11.1-1 (because the $100,000 is the pot before you put in your wager) or 10.1-10, which makes it a good bet. This also holds true at the $1 million level, where you're risking $90,000 to win a million. The pot odds remain the same, but because the range is now 10 points the odds of winning have slipped to 9-1 against. Even then it is still a good bet. The $10 million level is the really tricky one because I think the producers are playing a trick here. It seems as though there are actually eleven possible answers meaning that the odds are so close to the expected return as to make no real difference. The producers add pressure of course by emphasising that the answer had to be exactly right but in fact it isn't that much different from choosing the correct 10% range from 100 – the odds of getting the right range are exactly the same.

Of course, no one outside of the contestants' families was really watching the show for the actual game, and certainly they weren't watching for the whole business of odds and expectation of return on bets. Virtually everyone watched hoping to figure out just how good Drew Carey would be as a game show host and whether he was the right person to take up Bob Barker's skinny microphone. I'm not great expert, but I'd say that he's likely to do reasonably well. He works well with the contestants and obviously has a good sense of humour. More to the point he seems to be on the player's side. He'll even say when he thinks the player's guess might be a bit high or a bit low – fortunately he doesn't know the actual polling results so he cna only give his opinions. There are a few week points. Carey sometimes seems a bit dependent on the teleprompter, and I find his laugh more than a little annoying. Still, based on his performance on Power Of Ten he shouldn't do to badly when he goes on the big show.

I held off on completing this review until the second episode of Power Of Ten aired so that I could see a bigger sample of the game. In the first episode the first contestant on the show, Jamie Sadler a student at Florida University, won a million dollars. Drew Carey actually joked that the producers never expected anyone to get that high. The two contestants on the second episode seemed to bear this out. Both contestants busted out at either the $10,000 or $100,000 levels (CBS is doing a poor job of updating the show's website so I don't have details that I can refer to). The show is a good platform for Carey to reintroduce himself to the public as a game show host prior to taking over at The Price Is Right. As for the game itstelf I think that you will continue to see people taking the risk to go for the million dollar prize. The odds are not outrageous as far as what you're putting up to potential return. It also wouldn't surprise me to see one or more people trying for the $10 million prize and actually locking in an answer. I am concerned that the fact that it may be too easy to reach that level might hurt viewership. People might get bored if it is too easy for someone to win a million dollar prize.

Get The Hell Out Of The Kitchen

Like a lot of people, I have come to a conclusion about this season of Hell’s Kitchen, which entered its final phase – probably spread over a couple of episodes – last Monday. And that conclusion is that neither of these people should be entrusted with their own restaurant at place as classy as Las Vegas’s Green Valley Ranch. Actually, none of the contestants this year should have been despite one of the contestants having a raw talent that might have made her a winner.

(Not that they’ll actually get their own restaurant of course. Heather West, who won last season, actually received a job at a level "suitable to her experience" at Green Valley Ranch's sister resort Red Rocks. This was determined to be senior chef under Executive Chef Renato DePirro at the already established Terra Rosa, rather than being executive chef at a restaurant built to her own specifications. Season One winner, Michael Wray, was offered his own restaurant, but this was apparently superceded by an offer by Gordon Ramsay to work for a year in one of his London restaurants. Wray accepted but then his wife refused to go. After this, according to Wray, he was given "a chunk of cash and US$75,000 in restaurant equipment" for winning. Hardly the prize promised.)

Not that this season hasn't been entertaining. In fact the cast seems to have been selected for its entertainment quality, with culinary ability seeming to be a secondary concern. That's the only way that I can explain Aaron, the overweight retirement home chef, Eddie, the diminutive grill cook (he suffered for Kidney disease as a child which stunted his growth agave him an almost childlike appearance), or Bonnie, the bubbly blonde nanny/personal chef. There were also experienced cooks. If titles mean anything then Rock had the biggest – Executive Chef – and there were a couple of sous-chefs and line cooks. One of these was Jen, who when talking to the others later in the competition revealed that she had worked as a pastry chef in a number of restaurants including Morimoto in Philadelphia (the first American restaurant of Iron Chef Masaharu Morimoto). And then there was Julia, the short order cook from Atlanta who worked in a Waffle House (apparently a southern chain of "low-rent roadside cafe[s] featuring waffles" – like IHOP only worse).

Entertainment-wise the show got off to a great start when candidate Aaron (the retirement home chef) broke into tears when Chef Ramsay mentioned his name. I didn't say "yelled at him," or "swore at him," I said mentioned his name. And this is a man in his forties! As someone (was it Jed Clampett) once said, there's something wrong with that boy. Then during service on that same night, Ramsay coined what would be the tagline for this season – "Hell's Bitches." The Women's team spent so much time arguing that it was amazing that they got any food out. Even more amazing was that they relegated Julia to peeling potatoes or apples or something while three of them tried and failed to fry an egg properly. And then they had the utter gall to try to get her removed because she didn't have the "necessary" fine cuisine credentials. Their chemistry didn't get much better as the weeks went on either. A major problem was Melissa, who decided that the team needed a leader and that would be her. The only trouble was that not only wasn't she good at it, the quality of her performance as a chef went downhill rapidly. So did her appearance – her hair became wilder looking and there was a strange blemish on her chin that almost seemed to resemble a "soul patch" beard

Of course things weren't entirely rosy over on the men's side. Not only was Aaron a weeper, he was also not well. He fainted on a couple of occasions and on the last he hit his head and had to be removed from the show for serious health reasons. Meanwhile Rock emerged as a star. And Rock would tell you that Rock was a star because Rock started talking about Rock in the third person. It's a good thing that Rock emerged as a star even though he was never acknowledged as the leader (because for the most part the men rejected his leadership) because they tended to be a bunch without much in the way of personality let alone skills. With Aaron and Eddie gone they were a pretty dull bunch compared to the fiery and argumentative women.

Later episodes maintained the entertainment factor once the two teams merged into one. In a reward challenge to serve "trendsetters" (which Jen thought meant people like "Mariah, or the Rock", which she said would make her pee her pants!) which turned out to be 100 high school students, Julia won with a grilled chicken and cheese sandwich while the others were trying to adapt gourmet food for high school palates. The prize was a trip to the Green Valley ranch with Jen and Julia being confronted with a bidet – or as she insisted on calling it, a booty washer – for the first time in her life. In the same episode we saw Ramsay quite literally chasing Josh (the only other man left on the show) out of the kitchen and not quite out onto the street; cutlery – well okay, a spoon – was thrown. In the next episode, when they were down to three chefs Ramsay let them run the pass, but first gave them an opportunity for some assertiveness training, which consisted of each one yelling at Ramsay and him giving them tips on how to motivate by yelling. As it turned out blonde cheerful and slightly ditzy Bonnie nailed Ramsay on the first attempt, earning a "bloody hell" from him. This was in stark contrast to Rock, who had exhibited a fiery temper on several occasions – notably when with his team he was ordered to go through the restaurant's garbage to find recyclables – who turned positively meek when given the chance to yell at Ramsay.

So it's clear that Hell's Kitchen has been entertaining this year. The problem is that in a reality/competition where the grand prize is "a restaurant of your own" at the Green Valley Ranch resort, there wasn't one person I'd want cooking for me – well maybe Julia but even she had her inconsistent times. And really that's what it's all about – consistency. I'm not talking here about the woman who tried to serve rancid crab, or the one who pulled pasta out of the trash and tried to serve it on the grounds that the heat from cooking it again will kill the bacteria. That sort of thing happens every season on Hell's Kitchen and usually a one-time mistake – admittedly that's usually because Ramsay finds out about the perpetrator and runs them out of the restaurant on a rail but still it almost never happens a second time. Indeed, Bonnie threw out an entire tray of Monkfish before service because she believed them to be bad – Sous-Chef Marianne caught her and with Scott informed her that the Monkfish smelled like Monkfish. Admittedly she should have asked someone about it, but at least she was concerned about the possibility of sending out bad food. No, it's the little things that they apparently didn't think were important. It's the fact that over the course of the entire series they seemed thoroughly incapable of producing a consistently edible risotto. It's that they tried to cover up their mistakes, like scraping the burned pastry off a Beef Wellington on more than one occasion, or tried to make a Wellington looks as if it was at required level of doneness by putting it in a flash oven. Josh was run out of the restaurant for making too many risottos before they were ordered (none actually edible) and for trying to precook far too much spaghetti and making a mess of it. Most importantly it was the fact that they felt it was good enough to serve the public. This sense that something that doesn't measure up to standards is "good enough" is anathema to fine dining – and indeed should be to a chain like Waffle House. It is anathema to Ramsay. If you've ever seen his British series Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares – an American version of which will be appearing on FOX in the Fall – you will have observed Ramsay's mantra; consistent quality food served in a timely manner. All of the other problems that were seen on the show feed into this problem of consistency. The teams this season have been amazingly unable to communicate amongst themselves while doing service. Some of it was game-playing – the game being the show – by Rock that left Brad floundering while Rock and Josh looked on, but some of it was simple refusal to listen to what the others were saying that led to main courses and side dishes not being ready at the same time, which happened a lot with the women.

This season of Hell's Kitchen delivered on entertainment value, but I think it fell flat with regards to finding a chef worthy of the prize. I am not one of those people who complains because Hell's Kitchen isn't Top Chef; who wonder why they're always serving Beef Wellington and risotto. Top Chef is about finding the "best" chef from the pool of contestants. That show's challenges naturally require them to produce different, innovative dishes every week. Hell's Kitchen is about working in and eventually running a restaurant, and who ever heard of a restaurant that totally changed the menu every week? The qualities that Top Chef is trying to find are not necessarily the ones that are essential to running a great restaurant. But I'm not totally convinced that Rock and Bonnie have those qualities either. Certainly I don't feel it in the way I felt that Heather did last season when I knew she was going to win practically from the first service, and I don't feel it in the way that I did in Season One with both Ralph (the runner-up who later appeared on Iron Chef America) or Mike, who actually won. Either Bonnie or Rock is going to "win" a restaurant. They just shouldn't expect to see my name on the reservation list any time in the foreseeable future – or longer.

Lucy’s Birthday

Okay children, its August 6^th and you know what that means. Pictures of TV's favourite redhead. Warning to certain people (you know who you are): that picture is at the end of the post.

Here's a fairly standard PR shot.

And here's one from the episode of I Love Lucy where she meets William Holden after previously making herself look like an idiot. So she disguises herself wearing a wax nose, which she proceeds to set on fire.


And finally, what celebration of Lucy's birthday would be complete without a visit from "naked Lucy" which is an art photo that she did sometime in the early 1930s when she was establishing herself as a model and a showgirl. Avert your eyes Sam and Ivan!

Five Blogs That Make Me Think

So I was having a perfectly nice Saturday evening contemplating a world without The Simple Life and the way that the PTC will spin things to make it look as though decent honest basic cable subscribers are still subsidizing this horrible show when I decided to check my comments and discovered that I have been tagged by Captain Incredible with another meme (apparently, my dear Captain, it's pronounce "meem" – I had always been pronouncing it (in my head) as "mem-ay", as though there was an accent aigu over the final "e" that had been dropped by the foolish Americans, but that's the influence of living in a bilingual country). This one though comes with a cute logo type thingie and the word "Award". And you know, I a sucker for awards – probably has to do with me not winning any as a kid.

Okay, so the rules:

1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think.
   
2. Link to this post so that people can find the exact origin of the meme.
   
3. Optional: Proudly display the Thinking Blogger Award on your site with a link to the post that you wrote.

Well, I've done #2, so that leaves me with #1 and a minor conundrum. There are a number of blogs that make me think but with several of them I'm likely to get absolutely no response. I mean let's face it, if I tag Lydia Cornell or, Mark Evanier, or Alan Sepinwall at best I'm going to get a "huh, what?" and almost certainly I'll be ignored. And let's face it, what's the point of doing something like this and taking it seriously if you don't want to see what works for other people. Fortunately there are blogs that make me think that I know – or sincerely have a hope – of getting a response from.

1. Ivan at Thrilling Days Of Yesterday. His recent departure from the employ of the La Quinta hotel chain has sadly deprived us of some of his great stories about working as a night auditor, and dealings with such people as Slappy the "Security" Guard, but even without that, his long form ramblings on nostalgia are a joy. His reviews of old radio shows, movies and TV series that fly under the radar of the people at TVShowsonDVD.com make me want to buy them, though I never will. His recent post on a listing of the top 100 films (in which he participated) has some great commentary on such lists. Here's just one of Ivan's six points (and I agree totally): "Unless you can absolutely, positively convince me that Steven Spielberg is as underappreciated today as was Alfred Hitchcock at the peak of his powers, stop putting films like Jaws, E.T. and Raiders of the Lost Ark on these lists. You're embarrassing everyone.
   
2. if charlie parker was a gunslinger, there'd be a whole lot of dead copycats. Tom Sutpen was so upset with me the last time I did a meme and said that I wasn't going to bother tagging him because I knew he wouldn't reply that I figured I'd better include him on this one. And besides, the blog, which tom does with Stephen Cooke and Richard Gibson does make me think. The use of large form images with usually sparse text (usually no more than a title and a brief caption) has a significant impact.
   
3. Bill Crider of Bill Crider's Pop Culture Magazine. Bill has an incredibly eclectic mind and this blog shows it off. Whether it's his fascination with alligators and crocodiles, books, "she who must not be blogged about" (Paris Hilton), Big Foot, books (the ones he has written and the ones he has read), and basically whatever the hell interests him, Bill's aggregation of assorted news stories is a joy. Where else would you find a link to a story with the headline "Killer hippo poo is enemy number one"?
   
4. Sam Johnson of Yours Truly Sam-A-Rama. Sadly, lack of filthy lucre means that Sam doesn't post as often as he used to but when he does it's good. It may be a memory of Tom Snyder working in Savannah, or highlights from ComicCon – despite the fact that he didn't attend (too bad about the Iron Man preview clip) – or a rather heart-felt obituary for Tammy-Fay ("Throughout her entire life, from The PTL Club to the scandals to becoming a sort of cult hero, Tammy Faye faced it, mascara and all. When it came down to over a ten year battle with cancer, she kept on living with the grace she was given.") Sam almost always produces good stuff.
   
5. Ronniecat and her blog Hearing/loss. I've known her from rec.arts.comics.strips, since before we both discovered blogs. What was originally a blog dealing with her adult loss of hearing and the cochlear implant that has restored it, it has mutated into her personal blog with posts about her work with recent immigrants to Canada as an employee of an NGO, her cats, her family, her politics and plenty of other subjects. Currently Ronniecat is experiencing a bit of a computer problem but she'll work it out. Still, I sort of hate to do this too her.
   
   

New Poll – Who Should Win The Emmy For Outstanding Supporting Actress In A Drama?

Another six performer category, though surprisingly (or maybe not surprisingly given the quality of parts for actresses on television currently) the nominees come from just three different shows. As usual vote for who you think should win rather than who you think will win and feel free to give your reasons for thinking that in the comments section. Polling ends on August 9.

Poll Results - Who Should Win The Emmy For Outstanding Supporting Actor In A Drama?

Turnout wasn't as good for this poll as it was for the Supporting Actress in a Comedy poll. I don't know what that says about anything but only nine votes were cast for the six nominees – remember that in the Emmys additional performers will be added to the list of nominees if their total vote is within a certain percentage of votes of the fifth nominee.

Tied for fifth place with no votes are Masi Oka from Heroes and Michael Imperioli from The Sopranos. In a tie for second place, with two votes each (22%) are TR Knight from Grey's Anatomy, Terry O'Quinn from Lost, and William Shatner from Boston Legal. But the winner is Michael Emerson from Lost.

Let me get this out of the way first: I think that the Academy is going to give the Emmy to Michael Imperioli for The Sopranos. Not necessarily on the merit of his performance of course although Imperioli's performance as the drug addicted mobster and wannabe film writer Christopher Molasanti is usually riveting. No, I think he'll win because it's The Sopranos' final season and they're going to reward just about anyone associated with the show. Just my opinion of course.

Okay, so having said why I think the Emmy is going to go to Imperioli, let's look at the other nominees. I'm going to suggest that Masi Oka's nomination has a lot to do with Heroes being one of the few real successes of the 2006-07 crop of new series. It doesn't hurt that the show is Science Fiction, a genre that tends to regard itself as being under-represented. Nor does it hurt that Oka stands out in the ensemble cast but he is part of an ensemble cast. That said, his nomination is probably his Emmy moment. Sad to say, the same goes for Terry O'Quinn, the difference being that he's been here before. O'Quinn is a solid supporting actor though and sad to say the Outstanding Supporting Actor nomination usually goes to an actor who is usually closer to being the second lead in a show, and even more this year than in previous years Locke is more of a supporting character. William Shatner falls into that position of being second lead. Denny Crane has a lot more prominence in Boston Legal than most of the other actors on the series. A problem for Shatner is that while Boston Legal is labelled – rightly or wrongly – as a Drama, a lot of what makes Shatner stand out in the role of Denny Crane is comedic.

Which leads us to Michael Emerson. Playing Ben, the leader of "The Others" on Lost, he is in a role that is a supporting actor's dream. He plays a villain, which gives him a lot more prominence within an ensemble show than one of the protagonists. It helps considerably that Emerson isn't the usual type of villain. He's a small man which means that he leads with his intelligence and wits. Best of all is Emerson's theatrical training. It lets him position Ben as a calm but dangerous psychotic, almost like a cult leader who reigns by sheer force of will and calmly expressed and twisted "reason". It is deserving of an award, and I think he'd get it if he weren't up against a cast member from The Sopranos.

TV On DVD – July 31, 2007

Here we are again (and late again) with the new TV-related DVD releases for July 31, 2007. The list is courtesy of TVShowsonDVD.com of course.

I want to try an idea here though I'm not entirely sure how I'll finally implement it. What I want to do is list one DVD as my personal pick of the week. The trouble is that I'm not entirely sure how to make this "pop" since I'm using Amazon.ca product links. For now I think I'll probably make my Pick of the Week the first DVD on the list (in the belief that you may not read all the way to the bottom so I can't put it last) and give an explanation. So without further ado (except to remind you that this is the last day to vote in the current poll) let's get started.

My Pick Of The Week:
Popeye the Sailor: 1933-1938, Vol. 1
I know why this is included in the whole TV on DVD listing – the Popeye cartoons were a standby for local TV kid's shows throughout the world – but in all honesty the cartoons in this set were probably rarely seen on TV because most were in Black & White. These were the Fleischer Brothers cartoons and date from a time when they were one of the two big, innovative, animation studios that everyone else tried to catch, and that includes Warner Brothers and MGM. Popeye with his spinach – which was never a big factor in the Segar comic strip – were almost as big as Mickey Mouse. Part of the charm is Jack Mercer's under-the-breath adlibs as Popeye something that would never happen in Disney cartoons – or indeed work from any other animation studio. As with last week's Woody Woodpecker set, a must have for the animation fan.

So why is this my pick of the week? Well I'm an unabashed animation nut, and as I mentioned the Fleischer Brothers were, at this stage of their careers were at the top of their game. The Fleischer cartoons had an urban grittiness and the studio was doing a considerable amount of innovation – their turntable system was an attempt to give depth to the image was a fascinating, if in the end impractical process – and usually on a smaller budget than Disney was spending. At times, Popeye cartoons were more popular than Mickey Mouse. As for the DVDs people more knowledgeable than I who were involved with the production of the sets absolutely rave about the quality – the set is from Warner Home Video so no real surprise there. According to Amazon site there are something like five hours of extras on the four disk set including commentaries from Jerry Beck and Mark Evanier. I'd be very happy if someone would buy this for me (Greg).

The Archie Show: The Complete Original Series
It must have seen natural to bring the character of Archie from the comic strips to animated cartoons. And it worked, introducing the musical group "The Archies" which had a real life hit in 1969 with Sugar Sugar. For the most part the show was a conventional cartoon effort of the period, with two stories separated by bumpers per episode. The series actually only lasted for on 39 episode series. It just seemed longer, given the efforts that were made to repackage the original elements.

Babylon 5: The Lost Tales
Say what you want about Babylon 5 fans and series creator J. Michael Straczynski, they won't let the series die. Babylon 5: The Lost Tales is an effort to carry the series on in a direct to DVD format. It is questionable whether the experiment is a success. The DVD features two separate stories, each about 35 minutes long. One features Tracy Scoggins's character Captain Lockley in a story of demonic possession and exorcism. The other features Bruce Boxleitner facing a dilemma when a technomage (Peter Woodward, who introduced the character in the ill-fated B-5 continuation Crusade) gives him a glimpse of the destruction of Earth in thirty years and a course of action to prevent it which is based on killing a seemingly innocent Centauri nobleman now. I don't know that this is what fans want from the Babylon 5 franchise but following the deaths of Andreas Katsulas and Richard Biggs it is apparently what Straczynski seems comfortable in giving us.

Dallas: The Complete Seventh Season
The thing about a good soap opera is that events reach conclusions even as other plots are evolving and new storylines are developing and it all blends together seamlessly. Dallas was a great soap opera. The stories were always different from season to season but they all focussed on Bobby being the good brother and JR being a thoroughgoing scoundrel on every possible level. The season starts with the aftermath of a fire at Southfork and Pam filing for divorce from Bobby, and it ends with Miss Elly being rescued from the clutches of Clayton Farlow's mentally unbalanced sister and Bobby being shot. Along the way, JR plots to ruin Cliff Barnes (as usual) and opposing with all his might Miss Elly's relationship with Clayton Farlow as well as the usual sex swearing, violence and excess drinking of the sort that would have the PTC screaming "Will no one think of the children!" if the show were on today. And all things considered it was still great entertainment.

Hawaii Five-O: Season 2
What can you say about the second season of a show like Hawaii Five-O? Coming – as the show did – from an era where writers and producers left continuity to soap operas – there's not much in the way of character development, nor did people expect it. Most episodes were self-contained so that it was a major event when any show from this period aired a two parter and no one even considered something as absurd as a cliff-hanger finale for a season. What you get in any season of Hawaii Five-0 is taut, well written action in an exotic locale. The second season features two episodes with the show's greatest recurring villain Wo Fat (Kigh Diegh). Jack Lord might even stretch his emotional range from A to B on rare occassions (C of course was too big of a step for him, at least in this series). Still, for all of its shortcomings, a truly legendary show.

The Kids of Degrassi Street: The Complete Series
If you're familiar with Degrassi Junior High and Degrassi High School (not to mention Degrassi: The Next Generation), you might find The Kids of Degrassi Street a bit surprising. For one thing, while a few of the actors appeared in the later shows, none of the characters are the same. The show is more of a classic "juvenile" aimed at older pre-teens and teenagers but with appeal to their parents as well. They have the "after school special" feel about them – not surprisingly really since they aired on the CBC at 4:30 on Wednesdays – but with strong writing. There were only 26 episodes – surprising to me since it seemed to be talked about so much when it was on – spread over a period of about five years. It led the way for Kit Hood and Linda Schuyler to develop Degrassi Junior High and Degrassi High School as prime time series with longer seasons.

The Rhinemann Exchange
Back in the 1976-77 TV season NBC had a concept called The Big Event, which followed the Sunday Mystery Movie. The Big Event was sort of an umbrella for movies and variety specials but a major component of this show was Bestsellers. What they really were of course were miniseries – usually two 2-hour episodes – based on popular novels. For me at least they represented a degeneration of the concept of the mini-series that had debuted so promisingly with Roots. One of the novels adapted in the first season was Robert Ludlum's The Rhinemann Exchange. I think it can safely be described as less than memorable since I saw it (or at least part of it) at the time and only have very vague memories of it. The casting could probably be described as the usual suspects – including Stephen Colins (in the lead role), Lauren Hutton, Claude Akins, Vince Edwards, Roddy McDowell and Larry Hagman – with a couple of major figures added on for prestige; in this case Jose Ferrer and John Huston. Not really recommended, but then I don't think I could recommend most of the mini-series that appeared under the umbrella of The Big Event.

Sabrina the Teenage Witch: Season 2
I have to say, I was never a fan of Sabrina the Teenage Witch when it debuted, you know what with being a guy and an adult. I became something of a fan thanks to the rec.arts.tv newsgroup where some people I really respected expressed a big interest in it, and because there wasn't anything on at the time that I really wanted to see. It was better than I had expected. Season Two featured the usual trials and tribulations of high school (well except the smoking, the sex, and the drugs) played with a comedic twist. The witch side of the show features Sabrina having to earn her "witch license" under the tutelage of "the Quizmaster" (played by Alimi Barrett, who is now playing deadly serious in Numb3rs). There's some pretty funny stuff here and Melissa Joan Hart has a winning personality (personally I also liked to ogle Beth Broderick).

Sons of Hollywood S1
Remember Princes of Malibu? That show where the spoiled sons of Bruce Jenner and Linda Thompson were forced by their wicked stepfather David Foster to stop sponging off him and find their way in the world but their attempts at working (or entrepreneurship) only served to tick him off even worse? Well this is kind of the same thing, featuring Randy Spelling – son and heir (thanks to his mother) of Aaron Spelling – and Sean Stewart – son of Rod and Alana Stewart – plus agent David Weintraub. The producers prefer to describe this as the "real" Entourage but I like the comparison to Princes of Malibu better. It's the story of two Hollywood 20-somethings sharing a house and trying to make a life for themselves outside the shadows of their famous fathers...but not too far outside. Of interest, I suppose, is that the show was shot around the time of Aaron Spelling's death and his illness and death are part of the storyline for several episodes. This is sort of undercut by the fact that the show aired some episodes where Aaron Spelling was still alive after the episodes where he died.

The Complete Space 1999 Megaset: 30th Anniversary
Gerry and Sylvia Anderson are among my least favourite producers. Of adult TV shows that is. And that's an important caveat. I loved their kids shows – and this would have been a slightly different review if the Thunderbirds 40th Anniversary Edition had been released this week. Space 1999 was a show that I anticipated because of its cast, which included Martin Landau, Barbara Bain and in the first season Barry Morse. They were all favourites of mine. I liked the ships, I liked Moonbase Alpha, and to a certain extent I liked the characters. The problem was that I could never really manage the willing suspension of disbelief that was required to believe that the moon, having left its orbit was travelling to other stars and doing so in a matter weeks or months. It's one thing to accept a family run rescue operation complete with privately built stealth space station, and its own rocket ship when you're a kid but in a show aimed at an adult I was sort of hoping for more in the way of explanation. And of course the mass cast changes – most notably the departure of Barry Morse over a salary dispute (and his desire to "play with the adults") – in the second season made the show even harder to accept. This DVD set contains all 48 episodes produced plus a fan produced finale and a lot of special features including some commentaries, interviews with cast and crew, trailers and photo galleries, on 17(!) disks.

Tom Snyder – 1936-2007

I wanted to write this and get it posted sooner, but I've been having difficulty connecting to the Web courtesy of my McAfee Security Center. For reasons known only to it, it suddenly wouldn't let me connect with the Web: email? – fine, newsgroups? – great, online poker? – perfect, World Wide Web – verboten, ils ne pass pas, no frakkin' way.

This was unfortunate as I wanted to pay tribute to one of my favourite talk show hosts, Tom Snyder, who passed away of Leukemia. Others, notably Mark Evanier have mentioned Tom Snyder's facility as a TV News anchor, one of the last great "single" anchors in the business. Not living in Los Angeles, where Snyder did a lot of his local anchor work, I never saw that side of him. My blogging buddy Sam Johnson does mention him as an anchor in Savannah, although these seem to be second hand. I did hear stories about his adventures in local news after his Tomorrow show was cancelled by NBC, and one gets the impression that he didn't adjust well to working as part of an "anchor team." Or maybe it was just the jealousy of others that had them saying less than complimentary things about his abilities as a newscaster.

Snyder the newscaster wasn't my Tom Snyder. My Tom Snyder was the guy who hosted Tomorrow between 1973 and 1982, the guy who was given the timeslot after Letterman (by Letterman, who had a great appreciation for him) from 1995 to 1999. And my Tom Snyder was the guy who had a pioneering blog called Colortini.com (now long gone). My earliest Blogroll included a link to the site and it was there that we learned of the chronic lymphocytic leukemia that eventually took his life. This Snyder was a smart and savvy interviewer with a booming laugh and a willingness to talk to just about anyone.

Snyder was perfect for a University student working late into the night, which was how I first encountered him. This was late in the era of the original Tomorrow show when it was usually Tom and one or two guests – and of course Tom's then nearly ubiquitous cigarette – sitting opposite each other and talking. Snyder wasn't afraid to ask the hard hitting questions when they were called for, but most of the time Snyder maintained a conversational style without things degenerating into "puff-piece" questions. Probably his most famous interview was a prison interview with Charles Manson after which Snyder said that Manson was playing mind-games in prison, and knew exactly what he had done to be there. Tom didn't have a co-host, although author Nancy Friday was a frequent guest and at one point was a semi-regular contributor. He rarely had a studio audience during the original version of Tomorrow. It was intimate, and even when he had a comedian on it was seriously good TV.

The beginning of the end for Tomorrow came when Johnny Carson's show dropped from 90 minutes to an hour, at Carson's demand. For some reason NBC decided to expand Tomorrow to 90 minutes, add a studio audience as well as a co-host – gossip columnist Rona Barrett, who had been lured over to NBC with the promise of a big contract – whom he detested and engaged in a legendary feud with. The new show was dubbed Tomorrow Coast To Coast, and died a merciful death after just under two years. Watching the clip of Tom with Howard Cosell – with Frank Gifford trying very to stay out of the way – it's not hard to see why. He doesn't seem comfortable in the format.

I didn't see Tom's CNBC show or listen to his ABC Radio show that he did with Elliott Forrest but I was a total devotee of The Late Late Show which he did on CBS. It was different from the Tomorrow Show; more in the style of what Larry King (with whom Snyder had a celebrated feud, although the reasons were never totally clear) used to do. There were callers, although they weren't the dominant part of the format. What dominated was what David Letterman called in the clip that follows "the simple art of reasonable conversation." I loved The Late Late Show and watched virtually every episode. Tom was my first exposure to Molly Ivins and the first time I heard anyone call George W. Bush "Shrub" – as Ivins put it "because he's a little Bush." Harlan Ellison was another frequent guest. It was my first exposure to Jon Stewart as a "talking head" – I'd previously seen him as an actor/comedian but he was also an occasional guest and frequent replacement for Tom when he was ill or on vacation, as was Bonnie Hunt. Annual features included a display of Lionel Trains on set at Christmas (Tom was a collector and once had Neil Young on to talk about Young's ownership of the company) and a live broadcast after the Oscars that usually featured Gene Siskel & Roger Ebert, and Bonnie Hunt. In the last year or two of the show that was

A frequent guest was Robert Blake. Tom would bring Blake on and frequently he'd do the entire hour, talking about whatever he felt like. One night Blake spent the entire hour begging a woman with whom he had been in a relationship to come back to him – she didn't. Watching Blake on The Late Late Show, sitting on the edge of his chair waving a (usually) unlit cigarette was often a study in bipolar behaviour played out on our TV screen. Years later, after Blake had been accused and found not guilty of killing his wife Bonnie Lee Bakley (who Blake met after Tom stopped doing The Late Late Show) Snyder wrote in his blog that having known and experienced Robert Blake, he believed that Blake was a killer.

I think I speak for a lot of Tom's fans when I say that I was sad to see Tom Snyder leave The Late Late Show and even sadder to see him replaced, not with Bonnie Hunt or Jon Stewart in a continuation of what Tom had done, but by Craig Kilborn doing a pale imitation of Letterman and Leno, which – with due respect – is really an imitation of Johnny Carson (and in Leno's case in particular, a pretty poor one). When Tom Snyder left the air for good, an era epitomized by Jack Paar, Dick Cavett, and Tom Snyder on major network TV came to a close.

Following are a couple of YouTube videos. First is a tribute that Conan O'Brien did, featuring clips from some of Tom's most famous interviews from the Tomorrow Show, including Manson, Elton John, Johnny Rotten, Bono (and The Edge though he doesn't say a word), Muhamed Ali, and finally Howard Cosell. The second clip is the final portion of an interview that Tom did with his replacement at NBC and his boss at CBS, David Letterman. So as Tom would say, "Fire up the colortinis and watch the pictures as they fly through the air." And when you do, spare a few moments to remember our friend who we never met, Tom Snyder.

New Poll – Who Should Win The Emmy For Outstanding Supporting Actor In A Drama?

I assume you know the drill by now. Vote for the actor you think should win in this category rather than the one that you expect that the Television Academy will give the Emmy to. And of course feel free to add comments on this category in this post.

The poll will end on August 4^th.

Poll Results - Who Should Win The Emmy For Outstanding Supporting Actress In A Comedy?

We had a very good turnout this time around. Eighteen votes were cast and the voting was quite close between first and second place. In a tie for fifth place with no votes were Elizabeth Perkins (Weeds) and Holland Taylor (Two And A Half Men). In fourth place with two votes (11%) was Jaime Pressly, who plays Joy on My Name Is Earl. In third place, with three votes is Vanessa Williams as the deliciously devious Wilhelmina Slater on Ugly Betty. However the big point getters were Conchata Ferrell as Berta on Two And A Half Men with six votes (33%) in second, and Jenna Fischer, who plays Pam on The Office with seven votes (39%).

While I'm not surprised that Jenna Fischer won this poll, I am more than a little surprised by the strength of support for Conchata Ferrell. Don't get me wrong, I've like Ferrell as an actress since I first noticed her on George Clooney's first series called ER (or rather E/R and okay it wasn't really his show, but those are mere details). In fact, about the only show that I haven't liked Ferrell in was Hearts Afire and that was primarily because of the way that the producers screwed up the series after the first season by "reimagining" it. It's fair to say that Ferrell plays a fairly stock sitcom character in Two And A Half Men, the outspoken housekeeper, but just because the character is a stock type doesn't mean that the right actor or actress can't make it memorable. As Toby OB, pointed out in the comments section, "When I do watch an episode, (and although that's rare, I always enjoy the show), I find it's her quick shots in a scene that are the funniest. She has a great sense of delivery and the writers give her great material to work with."

As far as Jenna Fischer goes, it's fairly obvious why her character is extremely popular as well. She is as close as The Office comes to a true female lead. Her character, Pam Beesly, is involved in the major on-going subplot – the complicated Pam and Jim situation which is full of that old debil "unresolved sexual tension." Fischer's role isn't as showing as Ferrell's – she's not firing off quick shots and one liners – and indeed it's almost a straight role when compared with Rainn Wilson's Dwight or even John Kasinski's Jim, but it is a crucial role if for no other reason than that it humanizes Jim while at the same time emphasizing the sense of quiet desperation that is a major factor in the humour of the series. You get the sense that Pam is capable of doing something better but that she, like most of the show's characters, is trapped. Pam has that look of someone trapped at a dead end in her career (and trust me when I say that it took a lot of self -restraint not to post the picture Jenna Fischer did for Jane magazine - it's in "naked Lucy" territory).

Who do I think will win the Emmy in this category? It's a pretty talented field that makes it hard to eliminate people, however I have difficulty seeing either Perkins or, sadly, Ferrell winning. In the case of Ferrell it is the general critical scorn that is directed at Two And A Half Men in particular and the outspoken housekeeper role in general. Holland Taylor has a slightly better chance than Ferrell if only because the Academy and the critics tend to like the theatrically trained Taylor (I tried in vain to find the quote from a critic who said that Two And A Half Men was undeserving of any nominations...except of course for Holland Taylor). In the end I think it will come down to Fischer, Jaime Pressly and newcomer (in this Emmy category at least) Vanessa Williams. What Fischer has going for her is that The Office is an established show and a critical darling. The same is true of My Name Is Earl and Pressly is in an extremely showy role. Williams on the other hand is in a new show that is a critical and commercial success. And she's playing a villain which is always an asset – villains are freed of the restrictions that are imposed on "ordinary" people. While I fully expect Jenna Fischer to win the Emmy, I will not be at all surprised if Pressly or Williams (in particular) win.

New poll up in a few minutes.

Short Takes – July 30, 2007

Well this at least I'll be able to get out on time – or at least right now it looks like I'll be able to get it out on time – which means I can finally get back onto something like a schedule. Writing to deadline was never a strong suit of mine, even at the University of Saskatchewan. Now let's get on with the week's news and my opinions.

This is News?: All of the network news divisions seem to be out to redefine their prime time News shows and their News divisions. NBC is devoting a considerable portion of their Dateline NBC shows to the To Catch A Predator shows (a concept that I truly abhor – see below), while CBS long since converted their show 48 Hours (which I liked) into 48 Hours Mysteries (which I don't). However the News division which has adopted the most "flexible" definition of "News" is undoubtedly ABC. A couple of years ago (IMDB says 2004 but my records say the summer of 2005) ABC had a "documentary" called Hooking Up that was supposed to be a documentary about women looking for love and finding dates/relationships online. This pseudo-documentary came from ABC News. Now, ABC News is producing a "documentary" called 6 Degrees of Martina McBride in which aspiring country music singers who can prove some sort of "connection" to Country superstar Martina McBride in six moves or less – a la the 6 Degrees Of Kevin Bacon game – will get a studio session with McBride and the best will get a recording deal. The special airs on July 30, and it's a vaguely interesting subject (but I'll be watching Hell's Kitchen. According to an article in the Chicago Tribune ABC News Division executive producer David Sloane said that the show is "a serious examination of business school management theory." It's all part of Sloan's philosophy about News: "My definition [of news] is limitless. I think we constantly have to explore different places at the table for news. Just like you guys [in newspapers]. You have a front page. You have a [features] section. You have an entertainment section. You have a page 47. You have page 3. I think we're looking for new ways of engaging the viewer. I'm really all about that." In my book, while 48 Hours Mysteries and To Catch A Predator at least have the patina of news, Sloan's advocacy of shows like 6 Degrees of Martina McBride blurs the lines between News and Entertainment to virtual non-existence, and from a network that lauded the legacy of Peter Jennings this is disappointing to say the least.

Musical showrunners: Well not quite – that assumes that the people involved are swapping jobs in some sort of bizarre daisy chain which isn't what's happening here. What has happened is that Rob Thomas, who was creator and showrunner for Veronica Mars became showrunner for ABC's Miss/Guided when Veronica Mars was cancelled, left his new show after a month. The reason given was "creative differences." Apparently Thomas wasn't entirely happy with the decision to make the show "more of a straight-ahead comedy." The other departure is former Angel co-creator David Greenwalt, who left the CBS show Moonlight after two months in which every role except the lead had been recast. According to the Hollywood Reporter Greenwalt's departure is due to "personal, health reasons."

Comebacks, of sorts: Three shows and an actor to be exact, although the nature of the returns are not necessarily in the form that they previously held.

• ReBoot was a groundbreaking computer animated series from Mainframe Entertainment which ran from 1994 to 2001 (and was one of my favourite series). The series had trouble finding an American network and when it did occasionally ran into censorship problems. Mainframe, now known as Rainmaker Entertainment after being acquired by Rainmaker Income Fund, will be producing three feature length films to relaunch the franchise. One thing that I find vaguely worrying is that Rainmaker will be working with the website Zeros2Heroes to allow fans of the show to choose between five "completely new takes on the ReBoot world" as created by five previously unknown writers.
  
• Another show that will be returning as films will be Futurama. It was announced at ComicCon that the show will return as a full-length high-def movie called Bender's Big Score that will be sold on DVD. This will be followed by a further three films. The four movies will then be split into four half-hour episodes each (16 in total) to be aired on Comedy Central.
  
• Also at ComicCon, Joss Whedon revealed that Anthony Stewart Head will be returning to the role of Rupert Giles in a movie for the BBC called Ripper. The project had actually been planned as a miniseries during the latter period of Buffy The Vampire Slayer's run but it was apparently difficult for the parties involved to come to an agreement. In 2005 Whedon had said of the project, "it's something I really want to get off the ground, but the ground is kinda sticky."
  
• Finally (and this is a strange one) Rory Cochrane will be returning to the cast of CSI: Miami playing his original character of Tim Speedle. You may recall that Speedle died in an episode of the show's second season, at Cochrane's request because he disliked the "daily grind" and wanted to do more film work. However he later expressed his displeasure in the way that Speedle was written out of the show; his pistol misfired because he hadn't been diligent in cleaning it. A CBS spokesman confirmed to E! News that Cochrane will be returning to the show. There was no explanation of how the character will return except in this remark from the CBS spokesman: "He will be reprising the role of Tim Speedle and it's not a flashback. He will be interacting with his old partner and friend, Eric Delko (Adam Rodriguez)." This has led to a lot of speculation of how the character can return after having his brains spilled over a jewelry store floor; one popular theory is a faked death and witness protection. However there may be a clue in the CBS spokesman's statement – "He will be interacting with his old partner and friend, Eric Delko." It doesn't say that he'll be interacting with any of the other characters on the show. This lead me to think that seeing Speedle will be a symptom of Delko own brain injury, suffered when the character was shot in the season which ended this past May. It makes as much sense as any other theory.
  

To Catch A Predator sued – twice: NBC's Dateline NBC has a major sensation with their To Catch A Predator episodes, but they may have gone too far. The show and NBC have been sued by the family of Louis Conradt who committed suicide after being confronted by police and NBC journalists at his home in Terell Texas. According to a Reuters report on the suit, Conradt had been targeted after he arranged to meet a "13 year-old boy" at a house in Marshall Texas. However Conradt did not actually go to the house. The "13 year-old boy" was in fact a member of the private vigilante group Perverted Justice posing as a child. When Conradt did not appear at the house, police and members of the NBC team travelled to his home, Conradt admitted them and then shot himself. The lawsuit, brought by his sister Patricia Conradt on behalf of his estate claims that the NBC team "steamrolled" local authorities to arrest the retired district attorney. To quote from the article, "The lawsuit said police and members of the Dateline crew traveled to Conradt's house 'with neither a search warrant nor an arrest warrant' that met legal standards. Both police officers and other members of the party were wearing cameras ... very large cameras, on the cutting edge of technology, that normally are worn only by television reporters,' the lawsuit said. 'They were met by (Conradt). He told them "I'm not gonna hurt anyone" and shot himself. Then a police officer said to a Dateline producer, "That'll make good TV." Death was an hour later,' it said."

This is not the first suit faced by NBC in connection with the To Catch A Predator series. According to The Smoking Gun former NBC producer Marsha Bartel has sued for wrongful dismissal after she was fired by NBC News less than six months after she became sole producer of the series. Bartel's firing came after she complained that the show violated journalistic ethics in a number of ways and many of NBC's own journalistic guidelines. These included the financial relationship between NBC and Perverted Justice that represents a "financial incentive to lie to trick targets of its sting", and that "Perverted Justice does not provide 'complete transcripts from its trolling operations,' so network officials 'cannot independently verify the accuracy' of the group's transcripts." She further stated in her suit that NBC has covered up various things about the To Catch A Predator stings including leading sting targets "into additional acts of humiliation (such as being encouraged to remove their clothes) in order to enhance the comedic effect of the public exposure of these persons", and police officers acting improperly when working with the NBC crew including "goofing off by waving rubber chickens in the faces of sting targets while forcing them to the ground and handcuffing them." When Bartel complained about controversial statements made by Perverted Justice founder David Corvo she was told by higher ups at Dateline NBC and NBC News, "We all know they're nuts." Bartel is seeking at least $1 million in her suit.

I may be alone in this but I find this whole To Catch A Predator concept to be a dangerous step down an incredibly dangerous slope. This is dangerous in so many ways. Start with this one – by partnering with Perverted Justice, NBC isn't reporting the news they are creating the news and doing it in such a way that violates virtually every journalistic standard. This isn't like the FOX series Cops which has documentary crews riding along with police officers, this is NBC subsidizing a private organization using potentially unethical means to target people. Does NBC's involvement taint the court process for the people that are caught – you know the ones who actually expect to have an untainted jury pool and a fair trial. The details of the Conradt case are even more egregious. The fact that he did not visit the "sting house", regardless of the reason – he apparently intended to go but his sister came to visit before he was going to leave – makes it questionable whether the police could have obtained either an arrest warrant or even a search warrant. In the normal course of events – like if this were a police sting rather than one set up by a private organization at the behest of a TV network – the procedure would probably have been to set up another meeting at a different time and location. But because of the involvement of the TV show and its limited time in the region – and no doubt because Conradt was a prominent member of the community that NBC and Perverted Justice wanted to out as a pedophile because of his prominence – little niceties like warrants and burden of proof were set aside. Based on comments in other forums, a lot of people don't find this particularly troubling, and a lot of people seem disappointed that more of the alleged pedophiles caught by Dateline don't take the route Conradt did (and some seem to think that they should be given some "help" with the process). For myself, between the questionable legal situation, the violation of journalistic ethics, the apparent targeting of some people because of their prominence in the community (the way they went after Conradt), and the financial relationship between NBC and Perverted Justice, I find this whole concept smarmy and more than a little disgusting. The sooner it is driven off the air the better.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Well, certainly not the FCC. The PTC has a press release making a very big deal of their appointment to the FCC's Consumer Advisory Committee. The fact that the release is dated July 26, 2007 is a bit misleading given that they were appointed to the committee when it was rechartered in early June (link is to a PDF file). The purposes of the committee – stated in the recharter document – are (1) Consumer protection and education (e.g., cramming, slamming, consumer friendly billing, detariffing, bundling of services, Lifeline/Linkup programs, customer service, privacy, telemarketing abuses, and outreach to underserved populations, such as Native Americans and persons living in rural areas), (2) Access by people with disabilities (e.g., telecommunications relay services, video description, closed captioning, accessible billing and access to telecommunications products and services), and (3) Impact upon consumers of new and emerging technologies (e.g., availability of broadband, digital television, cable, satellite, low power FM, and the convergence of these and emerging technologies). The committee has 28 members including the PTC including groups as diverse as the AARP, Appalachian Regional Commission, Communication Service for the Deaf, Communication Service for the Deaf, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, League of United Latin America Citizens, National Association of Broadcasters, and The Seeing Eye, Inc. Of course you won`t find any of this out in the PTC press release. It stresses items that the Consumer Advisory Committee isn`t even involved in: "The Parents Television Council represents 1.2 million parents, grandparents, and citizens who are concerned about the content on television and in other entertainment media. The PTC's voice will result in a positive impact for all Americans as we are distinctively positioned to provide opinion and insight into how consumers think about a wide range of communication issues facing our country."

Speaking of content, the PTC has added new content to their weekly best and worsts: Misrated! In this section they go after shows that they feel have been inaccurately rated by the networks in an effort to get innocent children and adult to see and hear smut and violence. This time around they have decided that the ABC summer series Greeks (which normally airs on ABC Family on cable) is misrated. Despite the fact that the series is rated PG-14 the PTC feels that "Parents relying on the TV Ratings or the V-Chip to protect their children from graphic sexual content would have been let down, because this TV-14 episode did not carry either the "S" or "D" descriptors." Their complaint focuses first on a scene where on character (Casey) confronts another character (Rebecca) about sleeping with her boyfriend (Evan). I won't reprint the dialog that the PTC shows in their release, not because it is "smutty" but because it is extensive. There is also a scene in which Casey receives a video message on her cell phone which shows Evan and Rebecca apparently having sex. This is how the PTC describes the scene: "Although the screen that Casey is viewing the video on is small, it is clear what is going on and the clip is rather intense. The video depicts Rebecca on top of Evan, without a shirt, with a clear instance of Rebecca thrusting while kissing Evan." This does not sound too unlike some scenes in mainstream movies or even some TV shows. However the PTC insists that this show is mislabelled: "Though the rating is TV-14 indicating that it is not intended for viewers under the age of 14, parents of teens would have been caught off guard by the intense sex scene between Rebecca and Evan which was not signaled by the presence of an "S" descriptor. Parents would have also been unprepared for the heavy sexual dialogue (with no discussion of risk, responsibility or consequences) because the episode carried no "D" descriptor. The TV-14 rating alone did not give parents adequate information to judge the appropriateness of this episode for their teen." The problem with this argument is that the "intense sex scene" is not seen clearly but is only visible on the screen of the cell phone. As for the dialogue, the bit that the PTC quoted was downright innocuous, with the most explicit statement coming after Casey accuses Rebecca of having sex with Evan but before knowing that he is Rebecca's boyfriend: "I did. Rush night, and it was amazing..." That's it. If there was more intense dialogue, the PTC certainly didn't record it for posterity.

I will pass over this week's Broadcast Worst of the Week only because the PTC, apparently having no new targets to overanalyse, has chosen to declare a rerun of My Name Is Earl to be the worst of the week. Instead, let us look at the Cable Worst of the Week which is the MTV series Scarred. According to Wikipedia "On each episode of Scarred, several real-life risk-takers share the stories of how they were scarred or injured while attempting dangerous stunts on, primarily skateboards (but, occasionally, in-line skates, skis, snowboards, and bikes). The show features a segment called "Scar Stories", which broadcasts videos caught on the scene of individuals dramatically injuring themselves to a great extent, (the wound often leaving a scar), hence the show's name." The Wikipedia article also notes that the show, "like many shows in the same genre, such as Jackass, provides a warning to audiences that they should not attempt the stunts or send in home videos." The PTC takes the opportunity of the return of the show for its second season to go through the five video sequences in the episode in aggressively describing each of the accidents in gory detail. This is one of the shorter descriptions: "Jared gruesomely cuts his face after his skateboard pops up into his eye. His eye is bloodied and bruised and his face is shown with blood pouring out, as Jared's friend exclaims enthusiastically, "Holy [bleeped 'f*ck'] dude, your whole face is a bloody [bleeped 'f*cking'] mess! Holy [bleeped 'sh*t'] dude! Your [bleeped 'f*cking'] eye is [bleeped 'f*cked'], dude…your eye is, like, popping out of your head!" The PTC sums up its review by stating "It is difficult to know which element of Scarred is most repugnant: that MTV considers such programming entertainment; that by showing it, MTV is actually encouraging other teens to mutilate themselves in hopes of getting on TV; or that every cable subscriber in America is forced to support this show through their cable fees."

Setting aside my personal view on shows like Scarred and Jackass, neither of which is to my taste and indeed Scarred sounds like an incredibly stupid show, I would like to tackle the whole assertion that a show like this is "encouraging other teens to mutilate themselves in hopes of getting on TV." Certainly it's a common accusation about this show and Jackass but how is this different from someone setting up a situation in which he gets injured in order to appear on America's Funniest Home Videos – assuming of course that such things occur on either show. In my opinion it seems to be a matter of degrees. The truth of course is that in this era of relatively inexpensive video equipment, and the usually exhibitionistic nature extreme sports types their accidents are likely to be recorded for posterity. A quick and by no means extensive search on Youtube for "Skateboarding Accidents" produced a listing of 1,440 videos. And it's not as if kids have ever needed the possibility of appearing on a TV show to do stupid things – when he was about 9 my brother Greg did a pretty good job of abrading his face when he tried ramp jumping something on his bicycle. So yes, a show like Scarred sounds quite repugnant to me and if it were to be taken off the air tomorrow I probably wouldn't shed a tear, but I am not the intended audience. And, not only does MTV "considers such programming entertainment" but so does that intended audience, an audience that also watches professional Wrestling and Ultimate Fighting. And yet again, people need to be reminded that this is a show that has advertisers. "Every cable subscriber in America" is not supporting this show with their cable fees, advertisers are, and if the show was not attracting an audience those advertisers would take their money and go elsewhere and hte show would be cancelled. But of course that wouldn't "prove" the PTC's point.