Archive for category Commentary
Rejoice, Human Beings! “Community” Has a Return Date
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Live Coverage, Tune In Info, TV News on February 21st, 2012
Allaying any remaining fears that “Community” might be off the air permanently, executive producer and creator Dan Harmon surprised his Twitter followers on Tuesday afternoon by revealing the fiercely beloved but frustratingly low-rated comedy’s return date.
“What you call 8:00, we call home,” Harmon tweeted, revealing that the show will return to NBC’s primetime schedule on Thursday, March 15th.
“Community” has not aired an original episode since December 8, 2011. Fans rebelled when NBC left the comedy off of its midseason schedule, in favor of promoting freshmen sitcoms “Whitney” and “Are You There, Chelsea?“ While those series moved to Wednesday nights, NBC bumped another first-year sitcom, “Up All Night,” to Thursdays. To make room for the return of “30 Rock,” “Community” was temporarily shelved.
As of March 15, according to a network press release, NBC’s Thursday night comedy line up will lead off with “Community,” followed by “30 Rock” at 8:30pm, “The Office” at 9pm and “Up All Night” at 9:30pm. “Parks and Recreation” will return on Thursday, April 19 at 9:30pm once “Up All Night” has ended its first season.
“Community’s” return to 8pm Thursday nights may come as a bit of a surprise to those who have been closely following news updates during its absence from the airwaves. Only last month, NBC entertainment president Robert Greenblatt told reporters that he doubted it would return in the kick-off timeslot for NBC’s valuable comedy block.
“I don’t know if it makes sense to ask it to start off the night again,” Greenblatt said then, “but, you know, we have a really tight schedule with comedies, and there’s not a lot of places to put comedies.”
Given that “Community’s” main comedy competition, “The Big Bang Theory,” has been besting even ratings juggernaut “American Idol” in the show’s target demo, however, the powers that be must have concluded that the Greendale study group certainly could not perform any worse at 8pm than “30 Rock” has.
To which one imagines our beloved Dean Pelton would say, “Here’s to lowered but attainable expectations!”
We’re just happy to have Jeff, Abed, Britta, Shirley, Annie, Troy, Pierce, Chang, and the rest of Greendale’s student body back on our televisions. Pop POP!
Return of “The Walking Dead”: A Chat with Showrunner Glen Mazzara
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Q&A, Talking TV, Tune In Info on February 12th, 2012
AMC’s “The Walking Dead” returns tonight at 9 pm with a lot more on the line than the simple question of whether Rick and his group will be able to stay on Hershel’s farm.
There’s the question of how much of a ratings hit the show might take, considering its long midwinter hiatus. AMC split the second season into two parts, and tonight’s episode, “Nebraska,” will be the first new hour that has aired since November 27. The show’s extended absence from the schedule may be less of a concern than the deep divide among fans about the first half of the second season’s storyline. Read a few critical analyses and fan posts about the survivors’ extended camp-out on a farm run by a veterinarian with a no-kill policy towards his zombified kin, and it becomes apparent that people are either loving season two or loathing it.
Maintaining a high level of fan loyalty through the six remaining episodes won’t just be a test for AMC. It’s also a trial for Glen Mazzara, the executive producer who assumed showrunner duties on the series after executive producer Frank Darabont was fired. From the moment he took the reins, Mazzara has been in a tough spot, made tougher recently when details about Darabont’s scrapped Black Hawk Down-inspired prequel episode (starring “Being Human‘s” Sam Witwer) was revealed in various media reports.
Mazzara, whose previous producer credits include FX’s widely-acclaimed drama “The Shield” as well as lower-rated titles such as “Hawthorne” and “Crash,” seems to be taking it all in stride. “I was just telling someone, this is the first time I’m working on a show that people are actually watching,” Mazzara joked. “So I feel very lucky.”
During the recent Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour, IMDb’s TV Editor had a conversation with Mazzara about where the second half of “The Walking Dead” is headed creatively, during which he revealed some details about upcoming episodes and discussed how a lesson that he learned in the writer’s room for “The Shield” will influence the show’s pacing from this point on.
My first question is a point of clarification: How much creative input did you have in the first seven episodes of the second season?
A tremendous amount of creative input. This is a Darabont question, I guess? I wrote an episode during the first season, and I was brought on before any of the other writers. I helped hire them. I was Frank’s number two. But we broke these stories, we were locked in a room for weeks and developed these stories.
When things went down with Frank and I was asked to become the showrunner, we were shooting… I think it was our fourth episode. Our fifth episode came out. Our sixth episode I made changes to — just things where, you know, that script needed a pass. The (midseason) finale was written while Frank was there, but he had never given notes on that. That was a script that I polished and put into production. And then these episodes that are coming out are episodes that I broke with the writers. So I think that’s pretty clean.
But I will say, I went back and I had to re-cut these episodes. I cut these episodes, I’m responsible for all of the editing, post-work, music, I was responsible for all of the usual showrunner duties. So that was a tremendous amount of influence.
… Listen, I respect Frank and I’m happy that he wanted me as his number two. …I wouldn’t say we were partners, but it was a collaborative effort. Frank collaborated with us. But there came a point where the material was drying up in the pipeline, so I had to get in and do some polishing. That’s just normal business. But I will say that the overall arc of, a girl goes missing and then she’s in the barn, that was developed under Frank. The overall arc of the back half of the season, that’s all mine.
I will say that, (regarding) the script for the midseason finale, I think I was lucky that we had a great writer and a great director on that episode. That was sort of me coming out of the gate. Does that make sense?
It makes perfect sense.
What I didn’t want to do was my version of a Frank Darabont show. I wanted to follow, and I wanted to honor the world that he’s created because that’s a world that I love. But I didn’t feel an obligation to try to become Frank Darabont. That isn’t fair to Frank and it isn’t fair to me.
…The voice of the show became different with the midseason premiere. Did you see it yet? That’s my voice.
There are a number of articles and blog posts that have voiced strong opinions about this season. There are people who are kind to it, and there are a number of people who haven’t been so kind.
Well, what are your thoughts?
I enjoy the show. There was never a week that I wasn’t looking forward to a new episode. But I do think there were a number of issues that just seemed to be endlessly cycling and never quite resolved, so that the characters couldn’t move on. I don’t think the issue was being at the farm – that, for me, was not a problem. I know for some people it felt like a bottle episode and their thoughts were along the lines of, “Obviously, it was because the budget was cut.”
That is not accurate.
Yes… for me, there were some characters that were developed quite a bit. I enjoyed Daryl’s character development. But the love triangle between Lori, Rick and Shane… there became a point at which the characters seemed very static, there was very little development or evidence that they were moving forward.
Fine. Okay. So how did you feel after watching the midseason premiere?
The thought that went through my head was, “OK, Rick has put his hat back on. Things are going to change now. Let’s go.”
That’s right. I think Rick got a little lost in the first few episodes. Since I have become showrunner, I have pushed Rick front and center. You can see that in the midseason finale. Rick is the guy who steps forward and puts the bullet into Sophia. Rick’s humanity is his flaw. And Rick is now very much the central character, as he should be, of “The Walking Dead.” And he’s a more compelling character, I think.
There’s a very, very interesting scene, written by Evan Reilly, coming up.
The scene in the bar? There’s a lot of tension there.
Yes. I’m very proud of that scene. Evan Reilly wrote that scene, and Clark Johnson directed it. I think that we are doing a much better job in the second half of the season of progressing the story. There’s a very, very interesting scene in the next episode, at the end of the next episode, between Rick and Lori. All of a sudden you are seeing new sides of characters that you weren’t seeing before, and that’s something that’s coming out in the back half of this season.
I do agree that we can push deeper into our characters, and that’s what we do. But we also amp up the tension. We amp up the action. We amp up the zombies. Everything is on full boil. Again, it’s the back half of the season. So over the course of 13 episodes, you’re going to mark things out. I’m lucky in that I’ve got all the characters established, so we can push things a little bit. I have a good example. You want an example?
Please.
There’s a scene in an episode that you already saw, where Lori confesses the affair (with Shane) to Rick. That is something Frank did not want to do. He did not want that to come out. I felt that that was important to progress the personal stories as well as the plot of finding Sophia.
One of my early jobs was “The Shield.” I did “The Shield” for a long time. We had a rule on “The Shield”: “Move it up. Move it up, burn the bridge right now, we’ll figure out how to get across the river later.” That is very much the motto I am using for “The Walking Dead” from now on. So if people felt like we were stalling, I’ll give it to you. But no more stalls.
In the midseason premiere, I think it’s denser storytelling. And yet, there’s not a lot of zombie stuff. It’s all character stuff.
But people do want the zombies, you know.
I love the zombie stuff! You know what? If you think about it, it’s only been a few hours after the barn…
And there are other survivors to contend with, too.
Yes. Couple of things. One is, the farm is no longer safe. The outside world will come crashing in. Two, the midseason premiere is taking place in a few hours after a HUGE zombie massacre. If we have another HUGE zombie massacre right then and there, it’s not going to feel real. It’s not going to feel plausible. It’s going to feel like a video game.
What’s interesting about this show is, if we do zombie attacks, some people say, “Ugh, it’s just the zombie attack of the week.” When we don’t do zombies, people say, “Where are the zombies?!” You can’t win!
(laughs)
But we’re trying. I’m very proud of the (midseason premiere). That episode is indicative of the type of storytelling I want to do in the back half of the season, and I really think our best material is in these next six episodes.
Looking forward to it. Please develop T-Dog more.
You know what? I’ll tell you the truth: T-Dog is a character that has suffered because there are so many other characters. He has some great stuff coming up, some really great scenes. I think IronE Singleton did a terrific job, and it’s a matter of making room for him. That’s a character, if you really look at him, that character’s on borrowed time because he’s not tied into any major story. And yet, he keeps earning his place. T-Dog just gets through it, he’s becoming very interesting.
Sometimes those minor characters are on a slow burn. The Ronnie character was like that in “The Shield.” …We’re learning how to write for that character.
Goodbye, Mr. Carmichael: “Chuck” Airs Its Finale
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Cancellations, Commentary, Nostalgia, Review, TV News on January 27th, 2012
Even the most beloved TV series must come to an end. But it’s nearly impossible for a series to end in a way that is universally satisfying. In fact, a number of shows widely considered to be among the best the medium had to offer ended quite badly.
Not “Chuck.”
So what if, quality-wise, “Chuck” isn’t in the same league as the “Losts” and “The Sopranos” of the world? It’s a show about a nerd who gets superpowers overnight, courtesy of a software program known as the Intersect. Only the silly would expect much in the way of profundity here.
But even when “Chuck” wasn’t great, it was usually a good time. By the end of its final two episodes, “Chuck Versus Sarah” and “Chuck Versus the Goodbye,” fans are just as likely to be smiling as crying – or smiling while they cry. It might not please everybody — nothing in life does — but it should come close.
As series creators and executive producers Chris Fedak and Josh Schwartz reminded TV writers in a farewell letter, this is actually the fourth series finale that was written for “Chuck.” With that kind of practice, they had no excuse to do anything but end it well.
The sendoff for Chuck Bartowski (Zachary Levi), his beloved wife Sarah Walker (Yvonne Strahovski), best friend Morgan Grimes (Joshua Gomez), and fellow agent John Casey (Adam Baldwin), ends their story with precisely the right balance of bittersweetness, heartbreak, giggles and optimism. And yes, there’s a lot jammed into that last episode. It’s essentially the show’s greatest hits parade, delivering a goodbye kiss (with a lot of tongue-in-cheek humor) to all of the elements that made “Chuck” perennially charming.
In the end, the beating heart of the show is still the love story between a beauty and a geek. “Chuck” was far from a perfect show, but Chuck and Sarah’s romance was never one of its questionable qualities. We rooted for Chuck to get the girl as much as we cheered him on when he got his fighting upgrades.
At the start of that penultimate episode, however, it’s no longer clear that he has either of these things. To say any more than that would ruin the experience of watching the finale, which airs across two back-to-back episodes tonight, starting at 8pm ET/PT on NBC.
Except for this — don’t be surprised if you are seized by the urge to review the series from the beginning as the final credits roll. The Intersect doesn’t actually exist, but this show’s uncanny ability to flip your nostalgia switch to the “on” position is very real.
Review: A Strong Start for “Touch”
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Tune In Info, TV Review on January 25th, 2012
The “Work Its” of the world notwithstanding, sometimes midseason is the perfect launching territory for a series too unique to fit on a fall schedule, and too full of potential to be submerged in a sea of September competition. “Touch,” a new drama starring Kiefer Sutherland, represents a perfect example of this idea. While we’ll never know if “Touch” would have pulled away from fall’s freshman pack, its preview airing tonight at 9pm ET/PT on Fox ensures this latest series from “Heroes” creator Tim Kring has a better-than-decent chance of getting the attention it deserves.
Certainly a portion of “24‘s” faithful will tune in to see Sutherland’s return to series television… and as it turns out, 9/11 has a significant role in “Touch’s” pilot. But viewers searching for shades of Jack Bauer won’t find much of him in Martin Bohm, a widower and single father struggling to raise his 11-year-old son Jake (David Mazouz) while still mourning a wife who died in the collapse of the Twin Towers. Bohm is stubborn and driven, but Sutherland’s portrayal grants him a level of fatigue and frailty his action hero rarely (if ever) displayed.
What has Bohm so emotionally frayed is Jake’s condition, which we discover has been incorrectly diagnosed as autism. Jake has an obsession with numeric sequences and mobile phones, and even touching him makes him react with such force that people will have to “peel him off the ceiling,” his father explains. The kid also has a habit of scampering up cell phone towers, and one climb too many draws the attention of well-meaning social worker Clea Hopkins (Guga Mbatha-Raw). Like his father, Hopkins is concerned that Jake’s condition has closed him off from the world as we know it.
Naturally Jake is anything but disconnected from humanity, and viewers witness this through Jake’s internal narration and other perspectives, including the stories of people around the world that the boy will never meet but nevertheless are affected by his actions. Jake’s role as a hub of universal interconnectedness – vaguely explained by a somewhat kooky expert on the phenomenon (Danny Glover) – is fascinating to watch as the quilt of plotlines reveal themselves, and ever more inspiring when each disparate story comes together in end. Rare is the pilot that manages to be uplifting without getting caught in a sticky bog of maudlin sentiment, but the first episode of “Touch” pulls off that feat.
This in no way guarantees that the series will maintain all the strengths of its pilot, or that audiences will care enough to return each week to witness Bohm and son weave ever more wondrous webs of human connection around the globe. Even if one accepts the theories and possibilities that Jake’s gift grants those around him, there comes a point at which the ripple effect of his actions must be subject to constrictions and boundaries. Lacking a concrete definition of Jake’s condition means the writers can be free to explain away all kinds of twists and U-turns in the story without rooting them in absolute plausibility.
Those who remember what “Heroes” devolved into about, oh, one and a half seasons into its four-year run know what a huge problem that could be. To borrow from Jake’s way of seeing the universe, this is a series that demands there be a distinct pattern leading us to a specific end point. From what we have seen of Kring’s previous work, he has not demonstrated great success in mapping out his various endgames.
For the time being, it’s enough that “Touch” gets off to a a strong start, and to hope that everything that works so well in the premiere consistently connects through future episodes.
A Chat with “Justified’s” Neal McDonough
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Q&A, Talking TV, Tune In Info, TV News on January 17th, 2012
As FX’s critically-acclaimed drama “Justified” returns for a third season, it will be very difficult for some fans to imagine the world of Harlan County, Kentucky, without its beloved and feared crime matriarch Mags Bennett. Margo Martindale‘s Emmy-winning role was so emotionally affecting that to call Mags a tough act to follow is beyond an understatement.
To meet that challenge this season, “Justified’s” executive producer Graham Yost is serving up not one, but two new crime bosses. Neal McDonough plays one of those heavies, a smooth-talking Detroit criminal named Robert Quarles. Quarles wears expensive suits and has a glaring white smile, and between that and his go-getter attitude, he is utterly frightening.
But he’s also a very different kind of villain than the ones we’re used to seeing Raylan Givens (Timothy Olyphant) face on his home turf. Raylan knew Mags, just as he knows the reputation of the third season’s other great antagonist Ellstin Limehouse (Mykelti Williamson, who previously co-starred with McDonough in Yost’s “Boomtown“).
Limehouse, who lords over an African-American community known as Nobles Holler, has a long history in Harlan and is a hospitable man, offering barbecue to his visitors before he doles out threats. Quarles, on the other hand, is unerringly polite but uninterested in pleasantries.
We sat down with McDonough at the recent Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour to get more details about his work on this season of “Justified,”* which kicks off tonight at 10pm ET/PT on FX, and to find out about his upcoming appearances as Timothy “Dum Dum” Dugan, one of the Marvel Universe’s better-known good guys.
(WARNING: This interview contains a minor spoiler about a subplot in an upcoming episode of “Justified.”)
IMDbTV: Your character is amazingly creepy.
McDonough: Yes, and I didn’t realize how creepy he was until I saw the first episode the other night. But it’s not so much that he’s creepy as much as he’s… I keep on saying this with the “Ds”: He’s despicable, he’s delectable, he’s delightful, he’s dastardly, he’s everything you would want as a character to play as a villain.
But I’m playing him as a hero. And in his mind, all of these other people are villains in the show, and I have to get rid of these bad guys.
Interesting.
The first time I introduce myself to these other actors in the show, I’ll just start giggling at them for no apparent reason. I can see, in their minds, that it puts them off, and it kind of stays with the character throughout the piece. It’s a lot of fun playing this guy.
The other thing that’s interesting about “Justified” is that, even though the story has protagonists and antagonists going at each other, in the preface to any conflict, there’s almost a Southern politeness about it. Your character is also very polite, but in a specific Northern way. Can you talk about the “carpetbagger” aspect of Quarles?
It’s great because I think that I’m the king. I graduated summa cum laude from Michigan, enjoy all of the great things – fine wines, foods – I’ve been bred really well. But I just have this horrible anger inside me, this temper and this rage that builds inside me and once in a while, it comes out. And when it does come out, it’s just deplorable.
It’s tough playing a guy like this, because I always want to infuse so much emotion into it. Before I do this horrible thing, my eyes just start to well up. There’s this really tight close-up of my face where I look really remorseful about what I’m about to do.
On that note, can you give any hints as to what’s to come for your character? (WARNING: Minor spoiler ahead!)
The things I do to this one boy in the series… I read the script and it says, “Quarles opens the door and sees pretty boy handcuffed to the head post.” So I called (executive producer Graham Yost) immediately and I asked, “So how pretty does this boy have to be?” And he starts laughing. Then I asked, “Are you going to answer why this boy is here?” And he goes, “I’m not sure yet. I might not.” I said, “OK, great.”
Well, he actually did answer it and… it’s just awful.
(END SPOILER ALERT.)
Wow. You look like you feel awful about it right now.
I do! You know, when I do this I can always just say, “Well, it’s just fun, it’s entertainment.” But when I want to do it right, I really have to do it right. If you don’t have that remorse in a villain, it doesn’t work. You can’t play it like an android and not have any emotions. I think that’s what makes this role so chilling to play.
Is that something that Graham and (executive producer and author Elmore Leonard) inspired in you to do?
Graham doesn’t say boo. He’s come by the set once, maybe twice this year. He lets me just play… “In Graham I trust” has basically been my slogan for years. The stuff he wrote for me in “Boomtown” was just phenomenal, and the stuff he’s writing here is fantastic. I would love to see Graham write me another David McNorris, because I miss playing that guy…When you get to see the insides of a man’s soul, then you’ve got great television.
It seems that the villains from the first couple of seasons on this series, um, don’t come back.
Oh, I’m going end up in a slaughterhouse, or whatever, at the end of the season. I just heard, what is it called, “American Horror Story”? What a genius approach to have the whole cast gone after the first year and recast it for the second year. That’s genius, because you get to watch a whole new story. Like Graham has alluded to, if you have the same villain and he keeps staying around, he loses his shine. Even if they wanted to keep me around for another year or so, it wouldn’t make sense for the show. I don’t think they will. I think Graham is figuring out a beautiful way for my demise as we speak.
I understand that you’re going to reprise your Captain America role.
Yeah, they’re planning (to go into production for) Captain America 2 for the end of this year, because Marvel does one film at a time. So they’re going to do Thor 2 and as soon as Thor has wrapped, they’ll do Cap 2. Hopefully right after that, we’ll jump into Nick Fury because that’s the one I’m looking forward to more than anything.
Why is that?
Because it’ll be me and Sam Jackson. In the real Marvel universe, Dum Dum Dugan is Nick Fury’s right hand man.
…And I just pray that they have a 1970s setting, because I want to see Sam Jackson with lambchops kicking people’s asses for Marvel universe. It would just be awesome. And to work with Sam would be a treat. We’ve become friendly over the years.
It sounds like you were a fan of the comic beforehand.
Absolutely. I’m very well aware of the Marvel universe, and to be part of it is such a blessing. To go back to London and shoot there for four months, that was just a great year.
Third Time’s a Bomb: Ricky Gervais & The 69th Annual Golden Globe Awards Telecast
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Golden Globes, Live Coverage, Review, TV News, Uncategorized on January 15th, 2012
In his opening monologue as host of The 69th Annual Golden Globe Awards, Ricky Gervais joked that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association had warned him that if he insults or offends anyone, “I’ll definitely be invited back next year!”
After tonight, we can’t say he won’t be asked to host again (he was back for his third go-round this year, wasn’t he?) but it became fairly obvious early on in the awards telecast that Gervais would rather be doing something else. Anything else.
Rather than shocking his way out of a return invitation, Gervais took the route of safety and boredom. Where he landed memorable stinging jabs across the egos of Mel Gibson and Robert Downey Jr. in past Globes shows, Gervais threw slow haymakers wrapped in velveteen cliches at targets including Kim Kardashian (“The Globes are to the Oscars what Kim Kardashian is to Kate Middleton: A bit louder, bit trashier, bit drunker, and more easily bought!”); Justin Bieber (“The only way he could have impregnated a woman was by borrowing one of Martha Stewart‘s old turkey basters!”) Eddie Murphy, Ashton and Demi. Everyone’s done jokes about those celebrities, and from what we could see, none of them were in the audience.
If Gervais wanted to show us what he would be like without fangs, then mission accomplished. We vastly prefer you to be rude and unflinching. (See you on HBO in a few weeks!)
The bright spot to a Globes telecast helmed by a harmless and largely absent Gervais, however, was that it inspired a few stars to take up the entertainment banner in his stead. Thus, Seth Rogen did his best to liven up the night by kicking off his Globes presenting gig with, “Hello, I am Seth Rogen and I am currently trying to conceal a massive erection” before referring to Globe-nominated “My Week with Marilyn” as “a hilarious comedy.”
Madonna smelled weakness and took a (self-serving) swipe at her lame introduction by Gervais, which tried to spin comedy out of her song “Like a Virgin,” her hit dating back to the Pleistocene epoch.
“If I’m still ‘Like a Virgin,’ Ricky,” Madge cooed, “then why don’t you come over here and do something about it? I haven’t kissed a girl in a few years. On TV.” The audience applauded, and the blonde braid of sinew and haute couture that gave us W.E. smiled proudly.
In case that didn’t do it for you, George Clooney gamely attempted to entertain the folks at home by calling attention to the size of Michael Fassbender’s member while accepting his Best Actor Golden Globe for his work in the Golden Globe winner for Best Drama, The Descendants. It was a swing, and a… well.
Despite all of that, there were a few magical moments during The 69th Annual Golden Globe Awards that stood out from the boredom and weirdness.
– It was touching to watch Sidney Poitier present Morgan Freeman with the Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award. Dame Helen Mirren co-presented, and flailed a bit as she attempted to sprinkle her dedication with a touch of comedy. No harm, though; she’s Dame Helen Mirren. But the most winning moment of that presentation was the “this-is-your-life-in-movies” clip reel that included a snippet of Freeman singing “I love to take a bath in a casket” from his stint on “The Electric Company.” It was a nice nostalgic touch, and Twitter went wild for it.
–”Downton Abbey“‘s Golden Globe proves HFPA voters actually do pay attention to quality miniseries and TV movies that aren’t being made by HBO. Even nicer was the acceptance speech by creator Julian Fellowes, who could be experiencing a massive explosion of ego right now but clearly is still grateful, humble and in awe at the culture’s fervent adoration for his work.
–Great to see “Homeland‘s” wins in the categories of Best TV Drama and Best Actress in a TV Drama, for Claire Danes‘s performance. Also nice to see Kelsey Grammer get a Globe for his work in “Boss.” We have nothing bad to say about Laura Dern and Matt LeBlanc‘s wins for “Enlightened” and “Episodes,” but only because it’s a waste of energy to complain about the insanity of the Globes’s notoriously odd choices in individual comedy winners. (Except to say that Amy Poehler was robbed. Again.)
–The same holds truly for the wacky practice of lumping comedy, TV miniseries and movie supporting actors and actresses together in the same categories. However, we commend Peter Dinklage‘s classy mention of assault victim Martin Henderson at the podium. “Google him,” Dinklage advised, subtly using his platform to remind a worldwide audience that as much as he’s achieved, most little people are still struggling for equal treatment.
–Felicity Huffman and William H. Macy singing a duet while presenting the award for Best Supporting Actress in a Series, Miniseries or TV Movie? Adorable.
We invite you to share your thoughts on the Globes telecast in the comments section. As always, you can view the full list of winners, as well as see red carpet photos and read the blow-by-blow recap of the show by visiting our Road to the Oscars section.
The Golden Globes: Ricky Gervais Hosts, and We’re Covering Every Moment!
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Golden Globes, Live Coverage, TCA Winter Press Tour 2012, Tune In Info, TV News on January 13th, 2012
Celebrities plus alcohol often equals loose speeches and wacky behavior. Garnish that cocktail with the brash, unmuzzled comic sensibility of Ricky Gervais, and what do you get?
Another Golden Globes telecast destined to have tongues wagging on Monday morning.
The British comedian is back for a third round of hosting The 69th Annual Golden Globes, airing live on NBC starting at 8pmET/5pm PT, and he’s already locked, loaded and ready to take aim at certain, um, subjects.
“What’s the worst that can happen?” Gervais joked to TV reporters on Friday, during his appearance on behalf of his new HBO series “Life’s Too Short.” “You know, I end my career once a week if you read the press. Everyone says that’s the end. I only do things that could end my career now. That’s the fun. That’s my extreme sport.”
Here’s ours: IMDb will once again have live coverage of the event, including instantaneous updates of the winners, photos from the red carpet, and commentary on all of the fun. Starting at 5pm PT, keep the homepage open to see the list of winners from the moment they’re announced. (Or, if you don’t want to know, avert your gaze.)
Smartphone users can view the list of winners on our mobile site, Android, and iPhone, and check out the Road to the Oscars section for the photos from the red carpet.
We’ll also be posting photos and award results on Facebook and @IMDb Twitter. And as usual, @IMDbTV will be the place for TV results and snark… which should be plentiful, based on what Gervais had to say on Friday.
“I’m not one of these people who thinks comedy is your conscience taking a day off. My conscience never takes a day off. I know what I’m going to say outside the odd ad lib. I can justify it and I stand by it, as I do every joke I did last year,” He said. “And I don’t care. I don’t care what people think.”
We can’t wait.
In the meantime, check out our Road to the Oscars section to view photos of the nominees, trailers and clips from all of your favorite nominated films. You’ll also find photo galleries and lists from past awards seasons.
TCA: “Cougar Town” Takes the Fun to the Fans
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Live Coverage, Talking TV, TCA Winter Press Tour 2012, The Pick-Up Game, TV News on January 10th, 2012
On Tuesday, ABC is hosting a comedy showrunner’s panel for reporters attending the Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour. Conspicuously missing from the list of names on that panel is Bill Lawrence, creator and executive producer of “Cougar Town.” Makes sense, considering that his show also is missing from the midseason line-up. Paul Lee, president of ABC Entertainment Group, still has not assigned a premiere date to the third season premiere beyond saying it would likely return in March. (He told reporters that he expects to announce a specific date within the next few weeks.)
Meanwhile, Lee did announce dates for the midseason comedy “Don’t Trust the B—- in Apartment 23” (9:30 Wednesday, April 11) and the new Shonda Rhimes drama “Scandal” (10 pm Thursdays, starting April 5) and explained that “Private Practice” is moving to Tuesdays at 10 from April 24 through May 15.
Needless to say, the continued delay of “Cougar Town’s” season premiere is making fans very nervous.
Having navigated the TV industry, and ABC in particular, for most of two decades, Lawrence decided to take matters into his own hands. On Monday night he hosted a cocktail party for TCA members to answer all of their questions about “Cougar Town’s” fate and get news (and spoilers) straight, no chaser, from the man himself.
Lawrence made it clear that his party-crashing party was not meant in any way to snub his employer ABC, saying that if he wanted to be on the showrunners panel he only had to call Lee and ask.
“But, why would I want to do that, and be up there acting like, ‘Hey, I’m so psyched to be here, with a giant question a mark!’? It also puts me in the position of being disrespectful to the ABC execs,” Lawrence said. “So I’m doing this event, and I’m footing the bill.”
We can only imagine what the final total was. A large crowd of critics showed up to drink and chat with Lawrence and the “Cougar Town” cast, including Courteney Cox, Busy Philipps, Ian Gomez, Dan Byrd, and Christa Miller, all of whom were excited to talk about season three’s developments. The “Cougar Town” folks believe in their show so much that they’re flying to cities all over the country to host watching parties with fans and stoke excitement for the new season. (Upcoming dates include Seattle, San Francisco and Las Vegas; follow @vdoozer on Twitter for details.)
Asked how he felt about the continued lack of a specific premiere date, Lawrence says he’s not worried. Besides, he understands ABC’s reasoning for keeping mum.
“I expect they had a date for the premiere,” Lawrence says, “but they’re not going to announce it because they expect the show will come on sooner.”
That is a veiled reference to “Cougar” possibly being called upon to replace the low-rated and critically reviled midseason comedy “Work It,” which debuted to soft ratings and is expected to shed even more viewers with the airing of its second episode. Lawrence didn’t refer to “Work It” by name — that’s not his style — but he knows where the next gap is likely to show up.
Besides, the real battle isn’t getting the show back on. That’s going to happen, and Lee confirmed it. At this point, the question is whether “Cougar Town” will be picked up for a fourth season. Hence, the Cul-de-Sac crew’s viewing party tour.
Lawrence feels the difference between the show being picked up for another season and, well, a fate we’d rather not mention, is not insurmountable. “When I did ‘Spin City,’ the difference between being on and not, in the demo, was 4 or 5 million people. Now the difference is about 600,000,” he explained. “For us, it’s about turning the old core audience back on to the show by giving them good content.”
The cast and crew considers these events to be part of an unspoken contract with fans. In exchange for buying them free drinks, handing out “Cougar Town” swag and showing them a few episodes from the new season, they’re asking fans to 1.) watch it on the air when it returns; 2.) remind other fans that its coming back and urge them to watch it; and 3.) persuade five to ten new people to give it a shot as well.
He would not be paying for these grassroots promotions if he didn’t think it could work. And he truly believes it makes good business sense for ABC to pick up another season of “Cougar Town,” even though the network reduced this season’s order from the full 22 episode commitment to 15. In a word, syndication. Lawrence frequently pointed to the fact that ABC owns the show, and stands to make more money if they make enough episodes to syndicate it.
“The bar is not very high on what number we have to do to be back,” Lawrence said. “I’d be truly bummed out and shocked if we didn’t make it.”
Lawrence also revealed details about what’s in store for the Cul-de-Sac crew in the upcoming season, so if you don’t want to know any specifics, stop reading now.
Last chance: SPOILERS AHEAD.
“Once we knew we were going to be a midseason show, which was early on, we shifted gears really quickly and made the first episode essentially like a third year pilot so that new people weren’t excluded,” Lawrence explained. “It’s a big spoiler to tell you what happens in it, but it certainly eliminates all elements of any cougars. This is one show called ‘Cougar Town’ without any cougars in it.”
He followed this up by revealing specifics as to what happens:
– Jules (Cox) and Grayson (Josh Hopkins) are headed for the altar.
– Travis (Byrd) is going to spend a significant amount of time with a helmet on his head. Lawrence says that’s payback for Byrd refusing to cut his hair last season.
–Laurie (Philipps) is attempting to behave more like an adult, and is opening a bakery that specializes in whimsical cakes. It will be called Krazy Kakes by Keller. Note the unfortunate acronym.
–Andy (Gomez) is running for political office.
–Lastly, the romantic tension between Laurie and Travis will be resolved this season.
Bottom line? Watch “Cougar Town” already, and keep a very funny comedy alive.
TCA: ABC Family Considers “Nine Lives of Chloe King” Movie
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Live Coverage, TCA Winter Press Tour 2012, The Pick-Up Game, Tune In Info, TV News on January 9th, 2012
ABC Family president Michael Riley tossed a bone to fans of the late and underappreciated drama “The Nine Lives of Chloe King” on Monday morning, hinting that the cable channel is thinking about developing a TV movie based on the series.
“The Nine Lives of Chloe King” followed the adventures of a teenage girl who developed superpowers upon turning 16, forcing her to come to terms with her new abilities and use them to protect the people around her. It aired 10 episodes during the summer of 2011, capping off its initial arc with a number of key characters appearing to be dead, dying, imperiled, or slammed with game-changing revelations. (To read the synopsis of the series finale, click here.)
ABC Family reacted to that cliffhanger by canceling the show.
“Chloe King’s” cancellation may not have been all that surprising to anyone who took a look at its ratings. Fellow dramas “The Lying Game” and “Switched at Birth” became breakout successes during their first seasons, while “Chloe” struggled to grow its viewership. But there’s also the matter of fit: “Chloe” was a genre series joining a network buoyed to pop cultural significance by the soapy thriller “Pretty Little Liars,” premiering alongside other series about fashionable teenagers facing various intrigues and twists.
Citing “Chloe’s” dedicated if small fan base, Riley told reporters that “we’re always looking at the intellectual property that we’re capitalizing on, and making sure that there’s opportunities for even more storytelling.” (Perhaps leaving viewers hanging was a good move, then.)
In a subsequent one-on-one conversation with Riley, he elaborated on his earlier announcement by explaining, “Obviously we know that the ‘Chloe King’ audience is very passionate…and knowing ‘Chloe King’ is still on the horizon is fantastic.”
It’s only fair to warn ‘Chloe King’ fans that the entertainment industry is full of tales of long-forgotten “in development” projects that never made it beyond the idea stage.
When we asked Riley if this announcement was akin to HBO assuring us that those “Deadwood” movies were definitely going to happen (and yes, we realize “Deadwood” is on a completely different level than “Chloe”… give us some credit ) Riley replied with, “I cannot honestly speak to that… All I can say today is that it’s in development, because that’s where it is: in development.”
All 10 full episodes of “The Nine Lives of Chloe King” can be viewed on IMDb. Click here to watch.
Time to Submit to “Spartacus”!
Posted by Melanie McFarland in Commentary, Review, Tune In Info, TV News on February 24th, 2012
One great episode.
That’s really all it takes for a veteran TV series to convert a non-believer — one solidly constructed, brilliantly executed episode that illuminates everything that makes it extraordinary. Every television lover has such a TV chapter in his or her back pocket, ready to share with anyone who questions whether the show they adore is worth watching.
This week’s episode of “Spartacus: Vengeance,” titled “Libertus,” may be one of those hours. At the very least, it’s great Friday night viewing for a series that most people still have a very hard time taking seriously. Yes, it is action heavy… bordering on bonkers, even. Everything that made people initially roll their eyes at the period action drama is in full effect, including slo-mo CG-animated blood spurts and gore, fairly explicit soft-core sex, and nudity. Oh, the nudity. (As if we were expecting anything different. The show is in its second season. No reason to pull back on the reins now!)
But dedicated viewers are much more passionate about the engine that makes “Vengeance” so entrancing: poetic dialogue as grimy and sharp as the edge of a fighter’s blade, multi-layered political machinations and scheming, operatic romance, and of course, brutally acrobatic fight sequences. Tonight’s episode puts a shine on all of that, making it one of the most interesting hours of the series thus far.
The centerpiece of “Libertus” marries the two “Spartacus” series (“Spartacus” and its prequel, “Gods of the Arena“) in one gruesome nail-biter of a battle, one fans likely figured was coming since the prequel’s end: a face-off between Oenomaus (Peter Mensah) and Gannicus (Dustin Clare). The two characters have an agonizing back story, but have earned the viewer’s sympathy…meaning regardless of which gladiator comes out victorious, anyone emotionally tied to this series loses.
That brings us to a point worth acknowledging – “Spartacus” is highly serialized, which means that there will be subplots that new viewers won’t fully understand, and characters whose actions only become clearer upon viewing previous episodes. But that’s the point: “Libertus” make your want to see more episodes in order to understand all of the implications of what happen within its hour, which is what a great slice of television should do.
Should you find yourself hungry for more “Spartacus: Vengeance” after “Libertus” premieres at 10pm, don’t worry. Starz is airing a marathon of the first five season two episodes starting at 9pm ET/PT on Saturday, February 25. Episodic stills can be viewed here. And for a fantastic distillation of why “Spartacus” is like “Downton Abbey” (you’d be surprised!) read this excellent piece by Maureen Ryan.
No Comments