I Hate My DVR

Breaking Bad: AuGUStavo Fring

2011-09-06T12:47:00.000-07:00

I personally think Gus and Max were gay lovers. But whether or not they were is really irrelevant because I believe Gus took Max under his wing for a different reason.

Specifically, Gus was showing the same kindness that Augusto Pinochet showed him as a young man. I believe Gus was the Chilean dictator's protege many years before, which is how Gus got the nickname "Generalissimo". When Pinochet was ousted in 1988, those close to him changed their identities to avoid prosecution.

Augusto's protege adopted the name Gustavo as a covert homage to the man who showed him such kindness. That's why there's no record of any Gus Fring in Chile prior to 1989.

EDIT: Someone noted elsewhere that Hank mentioned finding records of Gus Fring's entering Mexico in 1986. If so, perhaps Gus went there as an emissary for Pinochet, who was reportedly involved in drug running. Either way, I suspect Gus adopted the alias as an homage to his benefactor.

Breaking Bad: Open House

2011-08-02T09:06:00.000-07:00

I absolutely adored the first two episodes of S4. In fact, I thought this season was off to the strongest start since S1. But the third episode ("Open House") was like Don Salamanca's watery deuce.

I just don't care about Marie or her kleptomania. I also find it ridiculous that Skyler would risk faking an EPA inspection, when one phone call to the agency would reveal her deception. All the moreso after her lecture to Walt about not taking unnecessary risks.

It just didn't work for me. At all.

Torchwood: The Master

2011-07-28T12:13:00.000-07:00

What if the Master is behind Miracle Day?

For those unfamiliar, the Master is an infamous villain from Doctor Who, the show that spawned Torchwood. He time travels using a machine called a TARDIS that's bigger on the inside than the outside.

I know Russell T. Davies has been insistent that Torchwood should never overlap with Doctor Who. But ever since it was revealed that PhiCorp's warehouse was bigger on the inside like a TARDIS, I can't shake my suspicion the Master is involved.

Miracle Day seems beyond the capability of PhiCorp. More likely, they're being exploited by someone more powerful for some purpose besides making money. Many, myself included, have wondered if the real motive is finding a way to kill Jack.

The Master has good reason to want Jack dead, particularly if the latter is the Face of Boe. In the Doctor Who episode "Utopia," the Doctor discovers a character is the Master in disguise thanks to a cryptic warning delivered by the Face of Boe.

I'm guessing the Master has realized that Jack is indeed the Face of Boe, and that killing him is the key to rewriting a timeline in which the Master suffers a series of humiliating defeats by the Doctor.

Falling Skies: Occupation

2011-06-28T20:34:00.000-07:00

It seems like the aliens are bent on occupation, rather than genocide. Against that backdrop, their actions make some sense. For example, many have wondered why the aliens only attack at night. But what's the first thing occupying forces usually do? Impose a curfew.

Another big question is why the aliens only attack large groups. Perhaps such groups represent the threat of a large-scale uprising, which the aliens want to avoid. Not because they couldn't suppress such a revolt, but because doing so would require killing too many people.

The aliens harvest the children. Any accompanying adults are killed under the assumption they're parents who might try to take back their kids. But the aliens can't kill too many adults because that would mean no more children. They're following sustainable hunting practices.

This may even explain why the aliens are collecting scrap metal. Despite the EMP, some radios will have survived or been repaired by now. There were suggestions of this in episode 3, when the Colonel mentioned pockets of resistance across the country had made contact.

At some point, the aliens will need to use another EMP to prevent the resistance from coordinating. And when they do, their own electronics will have to be shielded. Perhaps that's why the aliens want aluminum roofing.They're building the mother of all aluminum foil hats!

Fringe: The War Between the Universes Was Inevitable

2011-05-12T11:27:00.000-07:00

A lot of fans seem confused how there could be a war between the universes if Peter never existed. After all, wasn't he the whole reason Walter originally crossed over? And didn't his conversation with young Olivia cause Walternate to figure out about the Blue Universe? The answer to both questions is yes. But I think were still meant to infer that the war between the universes was inevitable.

In "Peter," Walter said Belly was always urging them to cross over to steal more technology. We can assume, therefore, that the two would have done so at some point regardless. Also, Walter alluded to a "mistake" in "The Day We Died," suggesting the first crossing may have been an unintended error.

Once you assume the crossing was inevitable, then so was Walternate's discovery of the Blue Universe. Indeed, it seems odd to think Walter would be able to discover the Red Universe while Walternate would remain oblivious to the Blue. At a minimum, he would have figured out what was up once his universe started collapsing. Also, we know Belly approached Walternate at some point, presumably to get more technology.

So, the war was inevitable, too, it was just a matter of time. By removing Peter from the timeline, however, the Observers made the conflict less personal between Walter and Walternate, setting the stage for their future cooperation.

Fringe: Why Season 4 Should Be the Last

2011-04-05T11:55:00.000-07:00

Fringe was only recently renewed, but the debate has already begun about whether Season 4 should be the last. Some argue the odds of a fifth season (while not impossible) are so slim that the writers should take the opportunity to end the series well, rather than risk leaving viewers hanging. Others counter that, because the series could conceivably continue, writing S4 is if it were the last might leave the writers with no story to tell in S5.

Both arguments have merit, so I decided to compare the Expected Value of the two aproaches to see if we can resolve this objectively. For those unfamiliar, Expected Value is simply a weighted average of all possible outcomes. For example, the probability of a six-sided die landing on any one side is 1/6 or about .167. The Expected Value of a die roll is thus 3.5 because .167(1)+.167(2)+.167(3)+.167(4)
+.167(5)+.167(6)=3.5.

So, what does this have to do with Fringe? Let's assume S4 and S5 could each rate a maximum of 10 points in quality. Let's further stipulate that the probability of the show's being renewed for S5 is around 35%, a rough but reasonable estimate offered by one proponent of the second approach (i.e., that the writers should hedge their bets on S5). By comparing the Expected Value of each approach, we can get a sense of which course is preferable.

Approach #1: The writers write S4 as if it's the last. There's a 65% chance they're right, in which case S4 scores a perfect 10 in quality. But there's also a 35% chance they get renewed after blowing their load in S4. In that case, S4 is still great but S5 suffers and rates only a 5 in quality. The Expected Value of this first approach is thus 11.75 because .65(10)+.35(15)=11.75.

Approach #2: The writers write S4 with an eye towards renewal. There's a 65% chance they're wrong, in which case S4 rates only a 5 in quality because they leave viewers hanging. But there's also a 35% chance they're right, in which case both S4 and S5 rate perfect 10s in quality. The Expected Value of this second approach is thus 10.25 because .65(5)+.35(20)=10.25.

From a probabalistic perspective, Approach #1 is objectively superior to Approach #2 because it maxmizes expected quality despite the possibility the writers might be caught with their pants down in S5. In fact, the same is true even if you assume that the probability of renewal is more like 49%, though it's a closer call. No matter how you slice it, therefore, the writers would be wise to write S4 under the assumption it's the last.

Fringe: Were the First People Shapeshifters?

2011-03-01T19:53:00.000-08:00

My whackadoo theory for the week is that the First People were shapeshifters. If Sam Weiss turns out to be a First Person, this would explain his comment that he's "taller" and "older" than he looks.

Maybe Sam was the source of the shapeshifter technology that Belly gave to Walternate. Perhaps the hybrid soldiers use technology to do what the First People evolved to do naturally.

Fringe: Spooky Action at a Distance

2011-02-19T10:19:00.000-08:00

In "6B," Walter described the elderly couple as occupying a state of "emotional quantum entanglement" and quoted Einstein's line about "spooky action at a distance" as justification.

Interestingly, Einstein was being derisive when he described quantum entanglement as spooky action at a distance. He found the very idea of quantum mechanics absurd and insisted that "God doesn't play dice with the universe."

Similarly, the most famous example of quantum entanglement (Schrodinger's Cat) was actually Schrodinger's effort to demonstrate the absurdity of applying the uncertainty principle to everyday objects like people or cats.

Ironically, both "spooky action at a distance" and "Schrodinger's cat" have become part of the lexicon of Quantum Mechanics despite Einstein and Schrodinger's derisive intent!

Fringe: Dramatic Irony

2011-01-26T10:06:00.000-08:00

Irony is a divergence between literal and intended meanings. One subset is dramatic irony, where dialogue means one thing to the character speaking it, and another to the audience hearing the line. The classic example of dramatic irony is Oedipus Rex, where the audience knows what will happen to Oedipus long before he does.

The most recent episode of Fringe offered another possible example -- the Observer's line that "It must be hard... being a father." The intended reference was presumably to Walter's dilemma as Peter's father. But I suspect the dialogue will take on a whole new meaning by season's end.

Many, myself included, believe that Bolivia is pregnant with Peter's child. If so, the Observer's line may be even more profound than he realizes. Specifically, Peter and Bolivia's baby may be yet another "unforeseen consequence" of the Observer's saving Peter as a child.

Fringe: The First People Split the Timeline

2010-11-14T10:12:00.000-08:00

In "6995 KHz," we learned that the Doomsday Device was created by the First People. But who were they?

I believe the First People were some ancient, antediluvian civilization like Atlantis. They evolved like modern human beings and developed highly advanced technology. Eventually, they gained the ability to manipulate the very fabric of spacetime (i.e., the "Vacuum").

Unfortunately, one of the First People's spacetime experiments went horribly wrong. The resulting catastrophe erased their fossil record and split the timeline in two. The Doomsday Device is both the source of this catastrophe as well as a possible solution to the split.

The Observers are not the First People. Rather, the former are a race of inter-dimensional beings who, true to their name, have been observing this split in the timeline. The problem is that the Observers have inadvertently became participants, as we saw in "Peter."

Mad Men: Thoughts on "Blowing Smoke"

2010-10-12T08:38:00.001-07:00

A few thoughts on "Blowing Smoke," the most recent episode of Mad Men:

* I completely bought Don's stunt. What I particularly loved was the way it dove-tailed perfectly with Midge's heroin addiction. That connection transformed what could have been a "very special" storyline into a brilliant metaphor for the firm's relationship with tobacco.

* I also loved how Don's stunt was vindication -- yet again -- for Peggy. Every time the former reprimands the latter, he turns out to be wrong. Another great example was Don's admonishment in Season 3 that Peggy was "not an artist" when she complained about the Patio Cola ad. As we later learned, Peggy was correct that the ad simply didn't work.

* I'm guessing the narrative purpose of Don's stunt was to pave the way for some moralistic moneybags to save the day for SCDP. Some speculate that savior might be Connie Hilton, but I continue to believe it will be Walt Disney. Another dark horse: John Linsday, whose aid attended the party with Henry and Betty in "The Summer Man." I wouldn't be shocked if Lindsay wants SCDP to handle the ads for his mayoral and/or presidential runs.

* More allusions to the privacy theme of this season: Bert suggests that they take their discussion "behind closed doors," while Peggy listens through the divider.

* During the last couple of episodes, I'd begun to question my prediction that Bert Cooper will die. But last night seemed to confirm that Bert simply has no place at Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce. The scenes of him wandering around with his shoes saying goodbye sealed his fate in my eyes.

* I thought the scene between Peggy and Dr. Faye was great but would have been even more powerful if the show had developed their friendship more throughout the season. I would have preferred more scenes of Peggy and Dr. Faye's bonding, and less of Joey and Stan's workplace hijinks.

* I totally bought Megan's lone adulation for Don's publicity stunt. So much so that I think Don and Megan's frantic hookup "Chinese Wall" would have been more plausible if it had taken place after she praised him in this way.

Mad Men: Thoughts on "Chinese Wall"

2010-10-05T09:26:00.001-07:00

A few thoughts on "Chinese Wall," the most recent episode of Mad Men:

* The cut from Don and Megan to Roger and Jane brilliantly reinforced the notion that Don is morphing into Roger.

* The speeches about how much David Montgomery loved his daughter were a poignant reminder that Don and Pete have daughters of their own. Both men seemed disturbed by Montgomery's decision to prioritize work over family and substitute meaningless trinkets for genuine expressions of his love. Let's hope they don't make the same mistake.

* On a related note: David Montgomery is a well-known professor of labor history at Yale. Was his sad story of neglect a subtle commentary on what capitalism does to families?

* I'm glad to see Peggy and Abe get together. Something about his naive earnestness rings true to me, and I like the contrast between Peggy's capitalism and Abe's left-wing critique of her worldview. We've seen this tension before in the relationship between Don and Midge, the artist. I think this is further confirmation that Peggy is morphing into Don.

* Peggy's calm reaction to the lipstick on her teeth proved to the boys she wasn't a "humorless bitch," as Joan put it.

Fringe: Two Doomsday Devices?

2010-10-01T09:33:00.000-07:00

In last night's episode, Agent Broyles wondered why pieces of Walternate's Doomsday Device are in our world. Later, we saw Bolivia communicate to her superiors in the alt-world that Peter was "engaged" and that he'd found the "first piece."

That raises an interesting question. Are there two doomsday devices? Perhaps Walternate knows this and is manipulating Peter to destroy our version before we can build it.

I like this possibility because it sets up an interesting dilemma for Peter. If there are two devices, each with the ability to destroy the other universe, then Peter gets to choose which universe survives.

Is that why he's so important to the Observers?

Mad Men: Thoughts on "Hands and Knees"

2010-09-27T12:35:00.000-07:00

A few thoughts on "Hands and Knees," the most recent episode of Mad Men:

* As I suspected, Don has NOT turned any corner. His swimming and journal writing was false hope right before things get even worse.

* As I also suspected, Don will marry Megan. Weiner could be messing with us, but the Beatles tickets seem kind of pointless otherwise. I think the point was clearly to set up Megan's relationship with Don.

* Dr. Faye is morphing into Anna Draper. Heck Faye even LOOKS a little like Anna. Along those lines, I think Don's telling her his secret is the beginning of the end of their sexual relationship.

* I think Joan didn't have the abortion. I believe she'll have the baby, and if Dr. Greg returns from Vietnam, she'll say it's his.

* Peggy and Pete's secret baby could come into play this season. Let's say the loss of Lucky Strike forces SCDP to go back to North American Aviation. Pete might threaten to reveal Don's past if he doesn't leave the firm. Peggy could save Don by threatening to tell Trudy about Pete's illegitimate child.

Mad Men: Deconstructing Ayn Rand

2010-09-15T09:22:00.000-07:00

It's no secret that Bert Cooper is a fan of Ayn Rand. He recommends her books to Don Draper and Pete Campbell, and even hints that he knows her personally. Some take these references, along with the generally pro-business themes of Mad Men, as endorsement of Rand's views. If anything, however, Season 4 has challenged and deconstructed Rand's connection between capitalism and privacy.

Rand famously wrote in The Fountainhead that civilization is "the march toward a society of privacy." She noted that the "savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe." Thanks to capitalism, however, people can earn money and own private property, which affords freedom through seclusion. "Civilization," Rand concluded, "is the process of setting man free from men."

Despite the ubiquity of McMansions, however, we're hardly the "society of privacy" that Rand envisioned. Indeed, the more technologically advanced we become, the less privacy we seem to enjoy. Some of this loss is involuntary, as when big government conducts electronic surveillance against our will. But an alarming amount is voluntary, like when we allow big business to collect our personal information electronically.

The ultra-modern offices of Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce are a perfect metaphor for this open society we now inhabit. The ubiquitous windows and thin walls mean that conversations are never truly private even when they happen behind closed doors. The place resembles Jeremy Bentham's panopticon, a prison where those incarcerated are always visible but never know whether they're actually being observed.

As Slate reader Mary Anne Mayo notes, the commentary on privacy was particularly evident this season in "The Rejected." When Don fights with Allison in his office, Peggy peeps at them over the wall. Later, Don watches an elderly gentleman ask his wife if she bought "the pears." She replies that they'll "discuss it inside" -- i.e., in private. The juxtaposition of these scenes underscored the loss of privacy at SCDP.

The point was driven home by the tragicomic sight of Bert Cooper eating an apple in the lobby. There was the firm's patriarch, his stockinged-feet up on a couch, munching away at fruit. It was an amusingly intimate act -- something I imagine Bert doing in his inner sanctum at the old offices -- performed in a very public space. What made it also poignant, verging on pathetic, was how nobody seemed to notice.

Bert may not be dead, but he's already a ghost, which is rather fitting when you think about it. His whole world is gone, along with his comfortable private office and its promise of seclusion. The old man is hopelessly out of place in the transparent new world of SCDP. He seems as quaint and outdated as notions of privacy must to members of the Facebook generation, who routinely over-share their personal information online.

Such commentary is particularly appropriate given the subject matter of the show. The whole point of advertising is to reveal and exploit consumers' sometimes hidden preferences. The show alludes to this with Dr. Faye Miller's surveys and scenes of focus groups observed from behind mirrored glass. Web cookies and social-networking sites are just more technologically-sophisticated means to the same end.

More generally, it's an economic axiom that markets operate most efficiently when participants have perfect information. Some libertarians, like federal judge Richard Posner, actually question the value of privacy as a social good on this basis. One needn't agree with them to get the point that, contrary to what Rand believed, capitalism and privacy aren't always complementary. Far from it.

And that leads me to a morbid speculation about what's in store for Bert. His aforementioned specter was a brilliant metaphor for the death of privacy, but I'm skeptical the show will leave it at that. I believe Bert is actually going to die before the season is done. He'll become what the late Roger Sterling, Sr. was to the old firm, making Roger Jr. the new Bert Cooper of SCDP.

Let's hope for Roger's sake he's not similarly a fan of Ayn Rand.

Mad Men: Thoughts on "The Summer Man"

2010-09-14T13:15:00.000-07:00

A few thoughts on "The Summer Man," the most recent episode of Mad Men:

* Betty's lopsided cake when Henry came in shirtless was the perfect symbol that something is off in their relationship. It reminded me of when films use Dutch Angle shots to emphasize something is wrong.

* I thought Harry's interior decorating was confirmation he's NOT gay. That whole clumsy storyline, which felt like something recycled from Three's Company, was to show us that Joey is kind of a dick who deserved what he got.

* I disagree with the prevailing take on Joan's reaction to Peggy. I think Joan was actually rather accurate in her appraisal of the situation. I think their encounter was one of those moments where Weiner tweaks viewers for their moral superiority.

Peggy said she was an anthropologist -- i.e., an outsider. And she made the mistake of intervening in a culture where she didn't fully understand the norms. I know I was rooting for her throughout the episode. Then Joan set her -- and me -- straight.

* Have they ever ended an episode before with a simple fade to black, i.e., no music? My friend MB remarked that it was generally a quiet episode. Aside from The Stones, I can't think of any other music.

Doctor Who: Tangent Timeline

2010-06-22T09:26:00.000-07:00

WARNING: SPOILERS FOR "PANDORICA OPENS"

In "Cold Blood," the Doctor explained that certain events represent "temporal tipping point[s]." How such a pivotal event plays out can "create its own timeline, its own reality." I believe that the Doctor's meeting with little Amelia Pond was such a tipping point. The Doctor was supposed to return to Amelia in five minutes, as he promised. His failure to do so created a whole new timeline, which we've witnessed over the whole course of this season.

Because this new timeline isn't supposed to exist, it's inherently unstable, which is why cracks keep opening in spacetime. The analogy here is to Donnie Darko, where the paradoxical appearance of a jet engine creates an unstable tangent timeline. Donnie must send the engine back into the primary universe before the tangent timeline collapses and destroys everything. As that analogy suggests, the Doctor must make good on his promise to little Amelia to save the universe.

But how can the Doctor do that when he's trapped in the Pandorica? According to this eagle eye, the Doctor has River Song's vortex manipulator:

My guess, therefore, is that the Doctor will somehow use this vortex manipulator to escape the Pandorica and travel back to the temporal tipping point. In so doing, he will reset events from that point forward so the tangent timeline ceases to exist, just like Donnie Darko.

Fringe: Whoah!

2010-04-02T09:19:00.000-07:00

Four "whoas!" from Joey Lawrence for what what may be the best episode of Fringe thus far. I've been eagerly anticipating "Peter" ever since the first promos aired on FOX. In fact, I was probably even more excited to see this episode than the recently aired "Ab Aeterno" on LOST. And boy did Fringe deliver, starting with the teaser, which culminated in a brilliant retro credits sequence that made me laugh out loud with joy.

Most viewers, myself included, had already figured out the basics (i.e., that Walter stole Peter from the Mirror universe). So, the story contained few major revelations beyond, perhaps, the importance of Peter to the Observers. I think the purpose of this episode, however, was to help the audience sympathize with Walter's actions by seeing them in a more noble light (no pun intended). The writers did a wonderful job in that regard, portraying Walter as an overzealous, but ultimately well intentioned, prisoner of circumstance. The real credit, though, goes to John Noble, whose performance was just perfect. If that man doesn't win an Emmy for this, the whole freakin' system is out of order.

Fringe has certainly had its ups and downs as a show. When it's on, however, it manages to hit notes that others only dream of. Think back to the Season 1 finale, when we zoomed out of William Bell's office to see the World Trade Center Towers still standing. Speaking of Belly, I've got a whackadoo speculation about the mysterious founder of Massive Dynamic. Remember how Walter mentioned that Bell urged him to take the risk of visiting the mirror universe? I think Bell already did just that, which is why he was absent from this episode. Walter believes he's responsible for breaking the barrier between universes, but I suspect we're going to learn it was actually Belly who did the dirty deed.

Caprica and Human Target: In the Shadow of BSG

2010-01-23T08:48:00.000-08:00

Two new shows reflect the influence of the rebooted Battlestar Galactica in different ways. One is great, the other merely good, but both are surprisingly watchable. Let's start with the great: Caprica airs on SyFy and is expressly intended as a prequel to Battlestar Galactica. The action takes place 58 years before the 12 Colonies are nuked. We see the Cylons' creation and rise through the eyes of two families, the Graystones and the Adamas (yes, those Adamas) who meet under tragic circumstances.

A terrorist bombing claims the daughter of Daniel Graystone (Eric Stoltz) and the wife and daughter of Joseph Adama (Esai Morales). The two men bond through their grief initially, then over love for the game Pyramid, which is the international pastime of Caprica. But this budding friendship gets nipped when Graystone, the inventor of the Cylons, finds a way to recreate their daughters using the downloading technology the Cylons will eventually use to resurrect themselves.

At first, Adama is tempted by Graystone's plan and allows a virtual avatar of his daughter to be created. But he turns against the project upon meeting her in a disturbing scene that's strong sauce thanks to Morales's acting. His daughter is somehow incomplete -- far less fully realized than Zoe Graystone's avatar (Alessandra Torresani) who was designed by the teen Graystone herself before dying. It turns out she was an even better programmer than her father, unbeknownst to her folks.

The Graystone's are also shocked to discover that Zoe had ties to the Soldiers of the One, the monotheistic religious cult that mounted the terrorist attack. I had mixed feelings about the scenes of religious fanaticism by Zoe and her friends. They struck me as a little over the top, but I suppose that was the point -- teens have a tendency to take things to the extreme. The revelation of their apparent cell leader was a nice twist, one I saw coming but enjoyed nevertheless.

The sectarian tension between the monotheistic cultists and the polytheistic Colonials serves as a backdrop for two of creator Ronald D. Moore's favorite things: social commentary and messianic intrigue. The technologically enhanced decadence of Caprica presents a much wider lens through which to examine our own moral and political conflicts than Battlestar Galactica did. And I'm fascinated by hints that the monotheists have a plan for Zoe's avatar, who I suspect will emerge as a messiah figure like in Carnivale, another Moore series about avatars.

But Caprica is at its best when confronting the ethical dilemmas raised by Daniel's experiments in resurrection and artificial intelligence. Questions of mortality have consumed me since I was a child, and the possibility of extending life by downloading one's consciousness preoccupies me as an adult. I'm also intrigued that Caprica seems to have taken a page from Robert Sawyer (author of Mindscan, which touches upon similar themes) and linked the development of "strong" artificial intelligence to the copying of human consciousness into electronic form.

All of this adds up to a much different and deeper show than I'd expected. The previews made Caprica look like a prime time soap opera about warring family dynasties. (It's the Graystones versus the Adamas, two households both alike in dignity!) I'm sure the conflict between Daniel and Joseph will undoubtedly be central -- all the moreso when Adama discovers Zoe's terrorist ties. But at least its source isn't some romantic cliche about star-crossed lovers, like I'd feared. Let's just hope subsequent episodes live up to the undeniable promise of the Pilot.

***
Another show that exceeded my expectations, albeit by far less, is Human Target on FOX. Here again we see the fingerprints of Battestar Galactica, though in the casting rather than the plot. In the first two episodes, the guest stars have included Tricia Helfer and Alessandro Juliani, both of whom were regulars on Battlestar Galactica. But that's really where the comparison between the two series end. Human Target has no philosophical ambitions or pretenses -- it's cartoon action from start to finish.

The protagonist is Christopher Chance (Mark Valley) who offers protection for those whose lives have been threatened. He invents personae that keep him close to his clients, becoming their human shield until he can neutralize the threat. In the original DC comic (and short-lived '90s adaptation starring Rick Springfield) Chance actually used makeup to impersonate his clients, raising questions about existence and identity. The 2010 version understandably dispenses with this cumbersome plot device, but sacrifices intellectual depth in the bargain.

The strength of this Human Target is clearly Chance's "Scooby gang," which includes Winston (Chi McBride) and Guerrero (Jackie Earle Haley). I've been a fan of McBride since Boston Public. He has one note -- exasperated -- but it's a good one. Haley's range as an actor is the real surprise. He plays a far more nebbishy (but no less dangerous) character than he did as Rorschach in Watchmen. Both men have nice chemistry with each other and with Valley, who himself exudes a calm, assertive charisma in the role of Chance.

The action sequences are a little over the top, though no moreso than a Bond film. But they do underscore one potential source of concern: the formulaic character of the show. The first two episodes featured action sequences on a train and plane, respectively. If a third climaxes in some showdown aboard an automobile -- e.g., a speeding bus -- we'll know we're in trouble. Until then, however, I'll be watching. Sometimes, even bigmouths need a little mindless fun.

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

The Jay Leno Show: Leno Gets PWNED

2010-01-18T16:32:00.001-08:00

In case you missed it, here's the hilarious and riveting clip of Jimmy Kimmel unloading repeatedly on Jay Leno during the "10 at 10" segment of Leno's own show.

Kimmel is relentless -- and understandably so. I'm not sure what Jay was thinking having him as a guest. Jimmy is a close friend of Howard Stern, who has never forgiven Leno for going behind his back to poach Stuttering John Melendez from the Stern Show.

Speaking of Howard, his powers of prognostication have again been vindicated. When NBC announced that Conan O'Brien would be taking over the Tonight Show, Stern said it was a bad idea and advised O'Brien to stay at 12:30. When the Jay Leno show premiered, Howard warned it would fail and NBC would be forced to give the Tonight Show back to Jay. Both predictions have now come to pass.

This all comes on the heels of Stern's eerily accurate estimate that the new Star Trek film would gross $79 million during its opening weekend. Howard's moniker "King of All Media" is meant to be humorously self-deprecating. But the man sure seems to be Nostradamus where radio, television, and film are concerned.

Fringe: What Were They Thinking?

2010-01-13T15:10:00.000-08:00

Over the past year, Fringe has become one of my favorite shows on television. I was really looking forward to welcoming it back after a month-long hiatus. My hopes were particularly high because Grey Matters, the last episode before the break, was such a perfect blend of character development and mythological advancement. Other viewers apparently shared my sense of anticipation. Airing on Monday night, instead of in its usual Thursday time slot, Fringe decimated Heroes in the ratings.

All I can think after watching, however, is what a tremendous opportunity they wasted.

Instead of building on the promise of Grey Matters, we got a bland standalone offering. Even more bizarre, the dearly departed Agent Charlie Francis reappeared without any explanation at all. Fans will recall that Charlie was murdered earlier this season by a shapeshifter from the mirror universe, who assumed his identity. Olivia eventually discovered the ruse and killed the shapeshifter, ending actor Kirk Acevedo's run on the show. Or so I presumed until Charlie's mysterious return.

I couldn't believe the show would resurrect a character with no explanation. So, was this Charlie the real deal but from the mirror universe like Peter? Did he cross over as some sort of liason in an episode I missed? Perplexed, I logged on after watching and learned that Agent Francis was not, in fact, a mirror twin. According to Ain't It Cool News, the episode was actually filmed back in Season 1, but remained unaired until now for reasons that remain unclear.

So why not promote it explicitly as "one from the vault"? And why end the hiatus on such a confusing note?

I'm confident I wasn't the only one with such questions. Clearly, FOX miscalculated, which doesn't bode well for the show. There's always network pressure to do more standalone episodes -- procedurals like the monsters of the week on the X-Files -- which appeal to casual viewers. I prefer longer story arcs myself. But I can see a place for standalones, particularly after a break, as long as they're well written and observe continuity. This episode did neither.

The flagrant disregard for continuity is what really concerns me. It suggests the network may be winning some internal battle with the creators to make this a even more of a procedural. Let's hope the high ratings and backlash at this blunder will serve as a wake-up call for FOX.

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

Survivor: Did Erik's Speech Sway the Jury?

2009-12-21T11:07:00.000-08:00

How fitting that the best season in Survivor history ends with a blindside. If you didn't see it, or haven't already heard, underdog Natalie won the million dollars, literally and figuratively upsetting Russell, one of the strongest competitors in the history of the game. And if you ask me, she has Erik's impassioned speech at that final tribal council to thank for it.

John mentioned that the jury was interested in hearing more about Natalie's strategy. I think a lot of them had already decided they weren't voting for Russell -- they were choosing between her and Mick. The big strike against Natalie was her perceived weakness as a player. Erik clarified that her passive approach to the game was just as valid as Russell's more aggressive strategy. It's a risky to do what Natalie did precisely because of the inevitable backlash against you. It also takes strength to shut up and keep smiling when so many people around you are acting like jerks.

I would have voted for Russell, but have to admit that Erik's speech gave me pause. It was a reminder that Russell's game, for all its strengths, was fatally unbalanced. He systematically alienated every member of the jury, banking they would nevertheless applaud his strategy. But it's human nature to resent your betrayer, and Russell played the game so aggressively that jurors were looking for a reason -- any reason -- to vote against him.

So what do you all everybody think? Did Natalie deserve the million? Was this the best season of Survivor ever? As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

Friday Morning Quarterback...

2009-12-11T08:04:00.000-08:00

Top Chef: Top Farce

2009-12-10T09:53:00.000-08:00

Let me preface this by clarifying I have no problem, in principle, with Michael Voltaggio winning Top Chef. He's a talented and charismatic chef -- albeit terribly insecure -- who thoroughly impressed me all season with his smart and sexy creations. But my favorite was clearly Kevin, whose simple food with complex flavors is pretty much my culinary ideal. And I take issue with Kev's treatment during the finale, starting with the way he was unceremoniously booted from the room before they announced the winner, something I don't recall being done in years past.

Even more fundamentally, I was frustrated by how the producers screwed the Kevin by giving him Preeti and Ash, two of the less competent cheftestants, as sous chefs. Ash apparently acquitted himself well, but compare him with the Voltaggio brothers' sous chefs, Eli and Jen, both of whom were in the final five. Even the brothers' second sous chefs were superior to Kevin's. Brian had Ashley, who struck me as competent despite her failures. And Michael had Jesse, who was lost on her own, but seemed to thrive under his micromanagement. Preeti, by contrast, was an epic failure -- notice how she was absent from nearly all shots of Kevin.

I know some will say this was all random chance. But that simply begs the question, which is the fairness of leaving such a decisive factor to chance. I'm sure the producers were gambling that someone -- preferably Michael -- would be forced to work with Robin. The problem is that Kevin paid the price for their stupid bet, which was totally unfair. So, memo to the producers: in future finales, please give cheftestants at least some ability to choose their sous chefs. Or if you don't, make sure the pool of candidates is even. It's just not fair to shoot a talented chef like Kevin in his best foot before he has a chance to put it forward.

Friday Morning Quarterback...

2009-12-04T07:34:00.001-08:00

Every Friday morning I do a brief writeup and review of shows I watched the night before, including FlashForward, Fringe, the Office, 30 Rock, Survivor, and Parks and Recreation. There will be spoilers about what happened, so consider yourself forewarned.

FLASHFORWARD: A solid episode that showed what this show is at its best -- 24 with a sci-fi twist. As I suspected, Simcoe and the Hobbit's experiment was probably not the cause of the blackout. As I also suspected, the towers in Somalia had something to do with plasma. Tesla's dream was to transmit energy between massive towers like Wardenclyffe using plasma as a conductor. I just hope this installment was compelling enough to tide viewers over until March, when FlashfForward returns from hiatus

FRINGE: A solid episode that cemented John Noble as the best actor, and Walter Bishop as the most compelling character, on the show. I was briefly worried they would try to shoehorn some kind of romantic relationship between him and Astrid. But they played it perfectly -- I completely bought Walter's tenderness and regret over her assault. On a tangential note, how much you want to bet Walter's GPS chip becomes a plot point later this season? As with FlashForward, I just hope the break doesn't kill this show...

THE OFFICE: Meh. Scott's Tots was too over the top for me. I just didn't buy Michael actually showing up at the ceremony. I was pleased to see Dwight regain some of the momentum his character has lost this season. But the notion that Jim would trust Dwight to put together the blind tally was totally unbelievable. I also thought David Wallace forgiving Jim, besides being a copout, was a missed opportunity. It would make more sense to me if Jim fell out of favor with management, then redeemed himself by somehow saving the company.

30 ROCK: A passable entry that did nothing to undermine 30 Rock's reputation as the most consistently funny show on network television. The HD gag was probably my favorite part, particularly Kenneth as a muppet. Frank's transformation into Liz induced some chuckles -- I'm pleased when they showcase him, rather than the overexposed Kenneth. Speaking of Liz, ladies take note, bangs are not hot.

SURVIVOR: In retrospect, John's decision to vote with Russell and Co. was a big mistake. But even that massive blunder was completely eclipsed by Foa Foa's decision to leave Shambo hanging. This was the first major strategic miscalculation that Russell has made. I think Jaison is absolutely correct that taking Shambo's vote for granted will alienate her, as it did with Galu.

PARKS AND RECREATION: Review forthcoming...

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

The Wire: 100 Greatest Quotes

2009-11-30T07:47:00.001-08:00

My friend MB recently forwarded me this collection of the 100 greatest quotes from the Wire. I write a blog about LOST, but the Wire will always be my favorite show. I've never seen anything quite like it and doubt I ever will again. Watching these clips in quick succession took me back to when I was mainlining the the entire series on DVD, watching two, sometimes three, episodes at a time:

My only complaint is that the selections include almost no quotes from the kids. We see Randy and Michael, but no Namond or Dukie. I found these kids to be some of the most compelling characters on the Wire. They're what makes Season 4 arguably the best of the show. I would have loved to see at least one more glimpse of them clowning around on the corner or with Mr. Pryzbo in the classroom.

Friday Morning Quarterback...

2009-11-20T09:03:00.001-08:00

The Prisoner: Guarded Optimism

2009-11-16T07:27:00.000-08:00

Color me guardedly optimistic after watching the first two episodes of the new Prisoner mini-series. Jim Caviezel is no Patrick McGoohan, but who is? The remake is a bit broader in scope, touching on the lives of other people in the Village besides Number Six and his interrogators. But it does capture at least some of the ambiguous weirdness of the original, which was my main concern. Currently, my theory is that a number of people are hooked up to a virtual reality machine, though I really hope I'm wrong. What do you all everybody think thus far?

Update: November 19, 2009

I finally got around to watching the last two episodes of the mini-series yesterday. After sleeping on it for a night, here's my take. And wouldn't you know, this interpretation is heavily influenced by LOST. Number Two is basically like Kelvin Inman, with Number Six as his Desmond David Hume.

Some years ago, Number Two's wife, M2, discovered a plane of existence that can only be accessed subconsciously. She created the very first Village in her own mental image. That's why wraps are so ubiquitous -- they're her favorite food. Two and M2 recognized the therapeutic potential of the Village as a mental respite from the material world. The couple hatched a plan to bring mentally troubled souls to the Village, where their minds could be healed by the simple virtues of small-town life.

Six's job at Summakor was to find appropriate subjects for therapy through his surveillance. One such subject was Number 147, who exists as a driver in both NYC and the Village. It's not completely clear why 147 is in the Village, but his NYC incarnation alludes in passing to getting his daughter back soon. The implication is that he temporarily lost custody of her through some fault of his own -- probably abuse. Maybe 147's subconscious was sent to the Village for therapy to resolve his anger issues.

Unfortunately, the Village reality could only be sustained at a terrible price. As a mental construct of M2, it depended on her dreams to exist. That's why the holes began opening when she awoke -- the fabric of Village reality was eroding with her every waking minute. This forced Two to keep M2 in a state of almost constant sedation and REM sleep. What was supposed to be their escape, where the couple could raise the son they weren't able to have in the material world, became their prison instead.

We're led believe that Six is the Prisoner, striving mightily to escape. In my view, however, the real prisoners are Two and M2. Most of what we see is Two's plan to manipulate Six into taking over for M2 as the Village dreamer. The analogy here is to Kelvin's attempt to dupe Desmond into assuming Swan button duty on LOST. Ultimately, Two succeeds by exploiting Six's love for Number 313, and the latter two become the new Two and M2. At least, that's my interpretation -- what do you all everybody think?

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

Friday Morning Quarterback...

2009-11-13T07:59:00.001-08:00

Every Friday morning I do a brief writeup and review of shows I watched the night before, including FlashForward, Fringe, the Office, 30 Rock, Survivor, and Parks and Recreation. There will be spoilers about what happened, so consider yourself forewarned.

FLASHFORWARD: The Hobbit continues to be a poor choice for a bad guy. Good thing for the show that I'm convinced he and Simcoe actually had nothing to do with causing the blackout. (My money is on brilliant Ricky Jay as the bad guy.) The poker game would have been a perfect opportunity to nerd out on quantum physics, which is all based on probability. But besides some passing references to quantum suicide, the exchange seemed more about Simon and Llyod's relationship. Also, I saw the star tattoo twist coming a mile away, and the "Jericho" security contractors seemed a little derivative of...well, Jericho.

FRINGE: Another decent effort in the X-Files tradition. I liked the twist of the kid being the mind controller -- reminded me of that Twilight Zone episode where Bill Mummy plays that kid with psychic powers. I'm also pleased when they find a way to weave an X-Files episode into the larger mythology of the show. I'm guessing the drug was part of Massive Dynamic's attempt to create super soldiers of its own in anticipation of the final battle. On that note, memo to Nina Sharp: you need a mirror and typewriter to communicate with the mirror reality.

THE OFFICE: More mixed feelings about this episode. Oscar doing an awful southern accent was one of the true laugh-out-loud moments of the season, and I think Andy awkward courtship of Erin is adorable. But Michael was back to being mindlessly stupid, even if he was vindicated by the end of the episode. Ordinarily, I like it when the writers switch things up by making Michael look stupid, then reveal him to be right. Think of Michael's commercial for Dunder Mifflin. But the payoff really has to be genius, and I didn't quite buy Jim's change of heart regarding the game.

30 ROCK: This episode started slowly, but picked up steam by the end. Many of the best episodes deal with Jack and Lemon's (aka Lesbian Yellow Sourfruit) platonic love affair, and this was no exception. Kenneth became a tad overexposed in the last season or two, but his psychological ploy to get Cheyenne Jackson's character (does he have a name besides "robot guy"?) to pronounce "about" like an American was hilarious. Padma Lakshmi was a little wooden but pleasantly self deprecating. Her "invention" of the sandwich bag hilariously evoked the rampant product placement of the Glad family of products on Top Chef.

SURVIVOR: Last week, I suggested that Russell might be the best manipulator since Johnny Fairplay. After finding a second immunity idol -- with no clues! -- and engineering yet another blindside, I'm prepared to say Russell is better. How he managed to swing a 7-4 disadvantage into a 5-5 balance of power is beyond me, but it's been a thrilling pleasure to watch. If Russell wins it all, he may well merit the title of best Survivor ever.

PARKS AND RECREATION: I think the writers probably assumed that Tom Haverford would become the star of the show. As I mentioned last week, however, I think the funniest character on the show is Ron. His storyline involving the orgasmic shoe shine was at once hilarious and disturbing. Andy's reaction ("What the f**k was that?!") was perfect, too. I also enjoy the way supporting characters like Jerry and Donna are starting to develop. More of them, and less of Audrey the intern, please.

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

The New V: Mirroring the Original

2009-11-10T10:29:00.000-08:00

In the run up to the premier of the new V on ABC, the Syfy Channel has been airing the original mini-series from 1983. The mini-series made quite an impression on me as a child, so I was curious to see how it compared with the reboot. After watching the original, followed by the re-imagined pilot, my verdict of the latter is mixed. It's an obvious improvement in some ways, but suffers by comparison in others. In fact, the remake's strengths and weaknesses are basically mirror opposites of the original's.

The mini-series suffered from stilted dialogue, hammy acting, and cheesy special effects. No storyline better exemplifies these flaws than that of young Robin Maxwell, an awkward teen who develops a crush on one of the Visitors, who eventually impregnates her. Both the writing and her delivery are cringe worthy (e.g., "Oh my gawd! He's looking at me!") and the birth of lizard-baby twins during the second mini-series was an unintended laugh-out-loud moment for many viewers.

The remake is far from perfect, but the acting and effects are both improved. The teen protagonist is now Tyler Evans (Logan Huffman) a composite of Robin and Daniel, the alienated teen who collaborates with the aliens in the mini-series. Tyler is seduced by the Visitors' hot women and cool technology. I was a little put off by his rapid conversion, which would be more plausible if he were a meek nobody, rather than a moody rebel. But Tyler's tour of the mother ship is one of the livelier scenes in the pilot, and I'm curious to see how the character develops. Judging from the previews, his budding alien affair will be pivotal to the retelling.

Tyler's mother Erica is played by Elizabeth Mitchell, who credibly radiates maternal concern. It helps that Mitchell reminds me of another '80s icon, hot hippy mom Elyse Keaton from Family Ties. But does television really need another FBI agent as a lead? Between Olivia Dunham on Fringe and Mark Benford on FlashForward, the field seems pretty crowded. I would have preferred that Erica be a scientist like the blond and brainy Dr. Juliet Parrish from the mini-series, who set my pre-teen heart aflutter.

And that brings me to my main complaint with the remake -- the weak political commentary. The mini-series was a thinly veiled allegory for the rise of German fascism. The Visitors were Nazis, from their uniforms and Swastika-like emblem, to their use of propaganda and brainwashing. Instead of rounding up Jews, the Visitors targeted human scientists like Dr. Parrish for persecution. Just in case you missed the parallels, there was an elderly holocaust survivor who pointed them out and even hid a family of scientists ~~Ann~~ Anne Frank style in his pool house. It was all a little heavy handed, but coherent and moving nonetheless.

The remake, by contrast, seems to be a mild allegory for 9/11. The opening sequence explicitly references that tragedy among others, a touch I found unnecessary. I was struck by the sight of New Yorkers gazing lamely up at the hovering space ships, which reminded me of walking up Broadway after the Towers fell and seeing people stare dumbly up at the Empire State building like they expected it to go next. That's also the implication of the alien sleeper cells, who are literally terrorist cells as well. Presumably, their investigation by the FBI will provide a procedural aspect to the show.

Unfortunately, much of this thematic ground has been covered recently by FlashForward and the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica. The latter is a particularly tough act to follow. Much of the expository dialogue in BSG was delivered by the super sexy Six, which helped the medicine go down. And with due respect to Morris Chestnut, Grace Park will always be the sleeper agent of my dreams. I think V did the right thing by giving the Visitors a backstory on Earth that predated the arrival of their ships. But that rushed scene in the warehouse was the worst of all possible worlds -- long exposition punctuated by chaotic action.

Ultimately, the remade V is slick but is kind of soulless at its core. Think of the exchange between reporter Chad Decker (Scott Wolf) who asks whether all the Visitors are as attractive as their leader, Anna (Morena Baccarin). To which Anna replies, "you're not so bad yourself." The actors look great, and the dialogue is snappy, but the end product is somehow less than the sum of its parts. Compare that with one of my favorite scenes from the mini-series, where a high school band welcomes a local Visitor delegation with a cheesy rendition of Star Wars. The band begins to play about 1m 15s into the clip below.

It's painfully bad, but also earnest and real, kind of like the mini-series itself. And there, in a nutshell, is the difference between the remake and original. Given the choice, I think I prefer cheesy and earnest to slick and soulless.

FlashForward: The Purpose of the Flashes

2009-11-06T11:53:00.000-08:00

I posted this in the comments to another post, but decided it merited an entry of its own.

A persistent mystery of the show is why certain characters in the flashforwards are doing certain things in the future. Why, for example, is the FBI head sitting on the toilet if he knows that Mark will be attacked by masked gunmen elsewhere in the building? If the people in the flashforwards experienced visions of the future themselves, they would presumably behave differently. At a minimum, you would expect the FBI head to be waiting in ambush for the gunmen, rather than taking a dump.

One possibility is that the people in the flashforwards never blacked out at all. If that's the case, however, what was the FBI investigating with Mark's clue board? Other possibilities include that the FBI was investigating a planned blackout that had not yet occurred, or that Mark alone experienced a flashforward.

But there's a much simpler explanation consistent with what I perceive to be the purpose of the flashforwards. The future glimpsed therein is part of a timeline that no longer exists. In that timeline, everyone on the planet blacked out, but no one experienced flashforwards. Mark's clue board reflects the FBI's efforts to determine the cause of only the blackouts. But there's no Mosaic collective because no one experiences flashes of the future. That timeline no longer exists because, in the timeline we're watching, people experienced blackouts and flashes.

That's the key to understanding the purpose of the flash forwards. They're an effort to destroy the old timeline in which people experienced only blackouts by creating a new timeline in which people experienced both blackouts and flashes of the future.

Update: November 10, 2009

Unfortunately, it appears this speculation is probably incorrect. As Fargus perceptively notes, the Blue Hand appears as a clue on the Mosaic Board in Mark's flashforward, confirming indirectly that most people therein experienced both blackouts and visions of the future. On that note, I also want to preview an idea I plan to explore further in another post.

I'm increasingly suspicious that "ghosts" like Demetri are not actually destined to die. Quite the contrary, their blank flashforwards are like the box containing Schrodinger's cat before it's opened. The lack of visions is a sign they're capable of altering the future glimpsed by others. The Blue Hand parties are a systematic effort to eliminate these variables by someone who doesn't want the future to change. Gough's leap of faith will work by allowing Celia to make some important change to the timeline.

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

Friday Morning Quarterback...

2009-11-06T10:13:00.001-08:00

Thursday nights are once again crowded with "must see TV" -- and not just on NBC. So I'm starting a new feature called "Friday Morning Quarterback" here on I Hate My DVR. Every Friday morning I'll do a brief writeup and review of shows I watched the night before, including FlashForward, Fringe, the Office, 30 Rock, Survivor, and Parks and Recreation. There will be spoilers about what happened, so consider yourself forewarned.

FLASHFORWARD: I've made no secret of my growing displeasure with this show. The departure of show runner Marc Guggenheim was unfortunate but probably necessary. Last night's installment continued the annoying pattern of ending every episode with a cliffhanger. I was also a little perplexed by the Russian roulette "test" for entry to the Blue Hand party -- what exactly was that supposed to prove? But I couldn't help being moved by Gough's desperate attempt to change the future by killing himself. I think the message is that the future depicted in the flashforwards can be changed, but only with great effort and sacrifice.

FRINGE: One of my favorite shows returns from the break with a decent installment in the X-Files vein. But the show is at its best, in my opinion, when advancing the main story arc. I think it was a mistake to end the hiatus with an episode that ignored the mythology of the show. I understand why they did it -- serialized stories can be tough for audiences to follow. The procedural episodes are for more casual viewers. Still, Fringe's ratings have been dropping like a rock since moving to Thursday nights. I wonder if the writers misread the situation and have been feeding fans the opposite of what they really want.

THE OFFICE: Well, that was fast! Michael dated Pam's mom for all of two episodes. I have mixed feelings about the rapid demise of their relationship. On the one hand, I loved last week's effort and think Linda Purl is one very sexy lady. It seemed like they could have milked a little more humor from the situation. On the other hand, I didn't love last night's episode. The B storyline, involving Dwight and Andy's attempts to out-favor each other, elicited some chuckles. But Michael's behavior at lunch was just stupid, and I hate it when they make him a one-dimensional dummy.

30 ROCK: Is 30-Rock the funniest comedy on network television? I laugh harder at South Park, and have heard amazing things about It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, but those are cable shows. At one time, I would have answered the Office, without hesitation. These days, however, I can't think of another comedy on the "big four" that so consistently tickles my funny bone. I'm stating the obvious when I say the key to the show's success continues to be Alex Baldwin -- last night's storyline involving Jack's bedbugs was hilarious. But Tracey and Jenna are starting to annoy me with their B storylines. Bring back Jackie Jomp Jomp!

SURVIVOR: I'm a huge fan of reality television shows, and Survivor is the oldest and greatest of them all. The gorgeous high-definition shots of Samoan scenery are the main reason I DVR the show instead of watching it on-line. But this season's cast of women may be the hottest of all time. And two of the most attractive -- Monica and Natalie -- have defied expectations to survive until last night's merge. As an added bonus, Russell may be the best manipulator since Johnny Fairplay. Also, it was nice to see Jaison reassert himself after his lackluster effort the week before.

PARKS AND RECREATION: Ron has become one of my favorite characters on the show, and Megan Mullally was great as one of his (ex) Tammys. Unfortunately, I think her role is temporary, and Leslie needs a more permanent adversary to generate tension. Greg Pikitis seems like a move in this direction, but the rival really needs to be someone else in local government.

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

The Office: Jumped the Shark...or Has It?

2009-10-14T08:49:00.001-07:00

I'm a big fan of the U.S. version of the Office. At one time, the show was probably the funniest comedy on television, and it's still among my favorites. But the very special combination of Jim and Pam's wedding plus her pregnancy (not to mention a different actress playing Pam's mother) raises a troubling question. Has the Office jumped the shark?

Some say I throw around that phrase too freely. And while there's a grain of truth to that charge, it also reflects a disagreement about what jumping the shark entails. I don't believe a show must experience an extended period of decline before jumping the shark. For me, the phrase describes that moment when you know a show has passed its peak and will never be as good again. Heroes jumped the shark with its anti-climactic showdown in the Season 1 finale, which was the best season of that show by far.

Besides, I actually do believe the Office has been slipping for some time. The show has always struggled to come up with enough quality material for hour-long episodes like Jim and Pam's wedding. And the departure of talented writer Michael Schur (aka Ken Tremendous of Fire Joe Morgan) to helm Parks & Recreation has only exacerbated the problem. No surprise, therefore, that Parks & Recreation continues to improve in its second season, while the Office falters.

All that said, I have to raise an alternate possibility I haven't seen discussed. It's possible that Jim and Pam's wedding episode was a deliberate parody of shark jumping. The big clue to this possibility is Pam's prudish Memaw, who was played by the same uncredited actress who also played Michael's Nana in the episode Dream Team. Another quintessential jump the shark moment is "same guest actor, different role." I can't help thinking the writers slipped this in as a subversive wink to fans like me who might be worried the show was jumping the shark.

What do you think? As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

FlashForward: A Murder to Thank

2009-10-09T09:16:00.001-07:00

I was a little disappointed by most of last night's episode, but it picked up steam near the end. The part about the crows dying was really creepy. I actually don't think it relates to the pole-shift theories. For one thing, as we've discussed, a pole shift would be immediately obvious to anyone with a compass or GPS. For another, it wouldn't explain the localized crow deaths in Ganwar, Somalia.

But such speculations are on the right track insofar as they focus on electro- and geomagnetic forces. I suspect who or whatever caused the blackout was inspired by Nikola Tesla, whose scientific discoveries formed the basis of modern MRI technology. Tesla claimed to have discovered a new type of longitudinal (as opposed to transverse) scalar electromagnetic wave. He built an enormous tower on Long Island called Wardenclyffe, which he hoped would wirelessly transmit electricity to a receiving tower across the Atlantic.

Unfortunately, Wardenclyffe was never completed. Late in life, Tesla further claimed to have unified the fields in a dynamic theory of gravity. He never published his claims but they nonetheless spawned an entire pseudo-science called electrogravitics. Proponents believe that gravity is really the force of longitudinal electromagnetic waves affecting space-time in the fourth dimension. My hunch, as stated in a previous post, is that the blackouts are a side effect of someone using this (pseudo) science to time travel or affect probability.

I think the kid saw a Tesla tower in Somalia -- my first thought was of the Prestige. Anyone know if Ganwar is a highly geomagnetic location like Colorado Springs, where Tesla built his lab? As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

Bored to Death: Brotherhood of the Traveling Coat

2009-10-07T07:41:00.000-07:00

In Marcel Proust's masterpiece, In Search of Lost Time, a madeleine cookie triggers a wave of involuntary nostalgia in the narrator. For me, it was the coat Jason Schwartzman wore in a recent episode of the entertaining new HBO series, Bored to Death.

I was transported to my time after college, when I lived and worked in Washington, DC. It was the kind of group living situation that's so common in the District. A random assortment of strangers -- besides me, there was the professional juggler, his girlfriend the trapeze artist, Ralph Nader's beleaguered administrative assistant, and the private investigator -- all sharing an enormous row house in Adams Morgan.

We threw the best parties with kegs of good beer, food the PI made from scratch, and plenty of room to dance. After one of these fetes, someone left behind a corduroy coat identical to the one Schwartzman's wearing in the picture. It sat in our closet for a month or two, while we waited for the owner to retrieve it. When nobody did, I claimed the coat over the objections of the AA, who coveted it himself but was just too short to wear it well. Or so I insisted.

I took the coat when I moved to Cambridge, MA, where it completed my daily ensemble of blue jeans, black turtleneck, and Vasque boots. I can still remember the reassuringly large buttons. The tricky pocket with a hole that allowed small objects like pens and change to fall into the lining like vents in a car. The compliments it elicited -- one woman (sadly, not Olivia Thirlby) said I looked like a sexy acoustic rocker in that coat.

My ownership ended some time after moving to New York, NY. I remember losing several of the buttons and finally trading the coat in for something sleeker and blacker -- this was, after all, New York. Beyond that, I can't recall its final disposition. But I'd like to think someone else -- maybe even Schwartzman himself -- recognized the coat's hipster appeal and rescued it for Bored to Death.

Speaking of which, I should probably say a word about the show. The highlight for me thus far is clearly the chemistry between Schwartzman and Ted Danson. Schwartzman, who can sometimes be too smarmy and precocious, strikes the right notes here as a struggling writer turned detective with a weakness for white wine and pot. And Danson is flat out brilliant as his bored rich boss who keeps finding excuses to make Schwartzman come over and smoke him out.

The adorable Thirlby, who plays Schwartzman's ex, has yet to be given much to do. Same with scruffy Zach Galifianakis, who plays Schwartzman's best friend. Still, the show is well written with a nucleus of talented actors and some inspired guest stars (e.g., director Jim Jarmusch). Plus, Schwartzman's a brother of the traveling coat. Will Bored to Death be a success? Like a magic eight-ball, I say all signs point to yes.

As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

FlashForward: Was the Blackout Planned?

2009-10-05T09:53:00.001-07:00

Let me preface this by saying I agree the blackout was a planned event. But I've noticed some confusion about an interesting point I thought was made in White to Play. When the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security debates with the FBI whether the event was planned, an FBI agent argues that it was because the probability of it happening at the top of the hour is 1/3600. Demetri counters that natural events randomly coincide with the top of the hour all the time. The Assistant secretary agrees with Demetri, but is eventually swayed by the existence of Suspect Zero.

I thought the message of this exchange was clear: there's no statistical reason to think the blackout was planned. That's "all supposition," as the Assistant Secretary puts it. Suspect Zero's behavior -- particularly the cell phone chatter -- is a different story, which is why the Assistant Secretary changes her tune upon learning of him. Indeed, I remember thinking the agent's statistical argument was flawed and gave the writers credit for addressing what might otherwise have been criticized as a goof.

Many, however, interpret the scene quite differently. They insist the statistical argument is sound and offer the following rationale. The top of the hour is a marker of great significance to humans. The chance of the blackout happening at this moment of significance is 1/3600 (i.e., 60 seconds X 60 minutes) as compared to a much higher 3599/3600 probability of the event transpiring at a moment of insignificance to humanity. Ergo, the event was most likely planned. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's fallacious reasoning.

The problem is that the chance of the event occurring at any given second during the hour is 1/3600. There's always a 3599/3600 probability the event will occur at some other second during the hour. The only reason our minds notice this particular 1/3600 possibility out of the rest is that we attribute social significance to the top of the hour. It's a mistake people make all the time -- e.g., when numerologists connect important world events with the number 11, or sports fans insist certain players are "clutch" in the postseason.

What do you all everybody think? Like I said, I'm wide open to being corrected on this one, if I'm wrong.

Update: October 5, 2009

It occurs to me there's a better reason to suspect the blackout was planned. Planned events occur so often at the top of the hour that events of unspecified origin coinciding with that time have a greater chance of being planned than they otherwise would. It's a bit like why you always seem to end up in the longest line at the supermarket or the slowest lane on the highway. The more people who fall into a given category, the more likely you are to be among them yourself. The argument is a variation of the Copernican principle, which distinguishes it from fallacies like the power of 11 or "clutch" performance.

To summarize, therefore, the blackout may well have been planned, but a natural explanation is still more likely and the 1/3600 vs. 3599/3600 argument is totally bunk. As always, you're welcome to post anonymously, but please identify yourself somehow, so I can distinguish between anonymous posters. Thanks!

The Cleveland Show Does Not Rock...

2009-10-03T15:18:00.000-07:00

Ever since FOX announced the Cleveland Show, I've wondered why, out of all the characters on Family Guy, they picked Cleveland for a spin-off. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I never found him remotely funny. I felt like Quagmire or Brian would have made much better choices.

No surprise, therefore, that I found the Cleveland Show similarly unfunny. After watching the pilot, though, I wonder if that's the point. Maybe Seth MacFarlane was being conservative and deliberately chose a weak character to limit the damage to Family Guy. The loss of a Quagmire or Brian could have been crippling to his flagship show. Cleveland, far less so.

The choice of Rich Appel to head the project also seems conservative. Appel has written and produced for some impressive shows, including the Simpsons, Family Guy, and Bernie Mac. But he has a reputation for playing it safe, which is death for a racial comedy. Such humor is inherently high risk, high reward. You can't be afraid to offend, or you get lame jokes -- like a wigger boyfriend named Federline Jones -- that offend anyway by virtue of their banality.

If there's a silver lining, it's the way the Cleveland Show has enhanced my appreciation for Family Guy. In a previous post, I dismissed the voice work on the latter, arguing it was the referential humor that really elevated Family Guy. In retrospect, I took that quality work for granted. The Cleveland Show has plenty of cutaways, too -- the Parton family gag was one of the few laugh-out-loud moments of the pilot for me. But the show still stinks because the character voices are so weak, particularly for step-brothers Rollo and Cleveland, Jr.

It's like they're not even trying, which raises one last possibility to contemplate. Some of MacFarlane's die-hard fans, the ones who insist his genius can produce no dud, claim that the Cleveland Show is deliberately cliched and awful. It's supposedly a satire of spin-offs, sort of like how the film Adaptation ends with a satire of bad action movie cliches. They claim the secret goal is for the show to be canceled quickly like Joey and other failed spin-offs of the past.

I guess that's possible...but I doubt it. I think MacFarlane got gun shy and sought to minimize his losses. The result was this turd of a show.

Yes, I Have...

2009-10-02T09:40:00.000-07:00

David Letterman's shocking revelation last night should be mandatory viewing for politicians and entertainers caught with their pants down:

Looks like Dave has learned a thing or two from Howard Stern over the years, because this was by far the most brilliant and honest live television I've seen in some time.

The Three Fs: FlashForward and Fringe

2009-09-29T19:17:00.000-07:00

I was frankly skeptical when I heard that Executive Producer Marc Guggenheim had raved on Facebook about the FlashForward pilot. After all, Guggenheim was a creator of the earnest but mediocre Eli Stone, which had a great premise but poor execution. I'd also read Robert Sawyer's book Flashforward and seriously doubted the premise would translate to television.

I'm happy to report my skepticism was totally misplaced.

In fact, after watching the first episode, I wouldn't be surprised if I enjoy the show even more than the book. Sawyer's novel is less of a mystery -- the source of the blackout is revealed early on -- and more of a character study of the scientists who caused the event. Also, the flash forward therein catapults human consciousness 21 years into the future, instead of a mere six months. Obviously, these elements wouldn't make for much of a weekly show.

So, the TV version wisely changes things, making the cause of the flashforward a mystery and focusing upon FBI agents trying to piece together what happened. Indeed, while the pseudo-scientific premise -- particle accelerator malfunction -- may remain the same, the motive and identity of those responsible will probably be very different. My guess is that some sinister corporation has been experimenting with such an accelerator to time travel or affect probability.

The shorter jump makes sense, too, though I would have made it a full year. Six months is an awfully compressed time frame. Mark's vision of the Mosaic investigation and men with laser-sighted guns will probably occur in the first season finale. But such a major reveal should really take place later in the series, like season two or three. What I don't want is for the show to start each season with a similar flash that sets up the storylines for the year.

Still, that's a minor and speculative quibble. As I say, there's plenty to love about this show, including top notch writing and acting. Brannon Braga wrote "Cause and Effect," a classic Star Trek: TNG episode that takes a cool and unconventional approach to time travel. And David S. Goyer penned "The Dark Knight," one of my favorite films of any genre, ever. I'm less familiar with Guggenheim's work (besides Eli Stone) but know he has plenty of fans, too.

Jospeh Fiennes and Sonya Walger are both totally believable as husband and wife Mark and Olivia Benford. John Cho is also great as Mark's partner Demetri Noh, who doesn't have a vision and assumes it's because he'll be dead in six months. I buy Courtney B. Vance as their dapper and baritone FBI superior. Even Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane is solid in his cameo as an agent on their team, though my first reaction was: "this guy's getting a little overexposed."

For some time now, ABC has looked in vain for the "next" LOST. Time will tell, but I think they may finally have found it in FlashForward.

***
Great shows usually grab me from the very start. I knew I would enjoy the Wire, Dexter, and Battlestar Galactica after the first episode or two. I was sold on LOST after the first promos. (Plane crashes are a major fear of mine.) In the case of Fringe, it took me a full season to fall in love.

I originally panned the show as too derivative of the X-Files, but you all everybody urged me to give it another chance. So I caught up on Hulu in time to watch the mind blowing season finale. And I'm not talking about Leonard Nimoy's freaky guest spot as the elusive William Bell, or the revelation that Pacey is from an alternate reality (which I already suspected). When they pulled back to reveal the twin towers of the World Trade Center...

Let's just say, as someone who was in Southern Manhattan and saw the towers fall with my own eyes, it was a powerful and disturbing image. It also illustrated brilliantly, on both literal and metaphorical levels, the mythology of the show. There is more than one of everything, including an alternate reality that differs in important ways from our own. One lingering question from the finale: are the towers standing because 9/11 never happened or is the alternate reality behind our own in time?

My casting concerns were overblown in retrospect. Pacey is more palatable than I'd imagined. And the writers have wisely toned down Lance Reddick's character, Agent Broyles, making him the quietly authoritative figure Reddick played so well on the Wire. Anna Torv is as adorable as ever -- I love Agent Dunham's bemused look when people try to BS her. Walter Bishop continues to be the most compelling character on the show, though the mysterious Nina Sharp is giving him a run for his money.

This season has gotten off to a slow start with stories returning to the show's X-Files roots. The possession of Agent Francis is an intriguing development. But his method of communicating with the mirror universe is a little cheesy. It would be creepier -- and make more sense -- if we could actually see another pair of hands typing in the mirror. I'm confident, however, that the show will regain steam once the focus returns to the engrossing main story arc.

Right now, my guess is that the two realities are unstable and destined eventually to merge into one. The coming battle is between "living receivers" (to borrow a phrase from Donnie Darko) like Agent Dunham whose special talents will facilitate the merging process. The winners of this inter-dimensional conflict will decide which version survives when alternate realities collide.

Breaking Bad: One Watery Deuce of a Finale

2009-06-02T07:57:00.000-07:00

Tragedy struck in the skies over Albuquerque, New Mexico on Sunday. One of the best shows on television is missing and feared dead after a mid-air collision with the willing suspension of disbelief. The resulting fireball of absurdity was seen by people nationwide who tuned in expecting some compelling resolution to the mystery of the burned pink teddy bear.

Reports of frustrated viewers cursing at their televisions have been pouring in from across the country. Creator Vince Gilligan had this mildly pretentious comment on the tragedy:

In that moment, at the end of season two, [Walt] doesn't realize it, but he's responsible for the whole world figuratively coming to an end around him. It's not deus ex machina, there's another term we were talking about, Lucifer ex machina, "Devil from the machine" -- it's the opposite. It almost could feel kind of random, but it's not. It's a butterfly effect. All these gears have been turning, this particular outcome was stuff Walt put into motion a long time ago by choosing to cook crystal meth.

The butterfly effect?

Lucifer ex machina?

Pardon my Colonial, Vince, but are you frakkin' kidding me?

I get what you were trying to do. You wanted to show that Walt's actions have horribly unpredictable consequences, but in a way that didn't resort to cliches. The problem is that you set up a very compelling mystery with those teasing shots of the aforementioned pink bear and the body bags in the driveway at the start of several episodes. A lot of us spent the whole season puzzling over what could have burned the bear and who those bodies might be.

To satisfy me, the answers needed to be more than just surprising. They also had to be firmly rooted in events from this past season. We should have been able to rewatch the last 13 episodes and see old ocurrences in a new light. The shocking revelations in M. Night Shyamalan's best films like Unbreakable and the Sixth Sense work because they're clear in retrospect. Breaking Bad's twist was too random -- like learning the aliens in Signs are susceptible to water.

I don't even recall anyone mentioning that John Delancey's character worked in the airline industry. Still worse, his accident felt like some bad parody of those anti-drug commercials from the '80s with the eggs. This is drugs. This is your brain on drugs. This is the air-traffic controller who will cause a catastrophic accident between two passenger planes because his daughter died from an overdose of fried eggs...er, drugs.

The unforeseen evil of Walt's drug dealing could have been depicted just as disturbingly on a smaller scale. Remember how Jane's dad always attended recovery meetings with her? It seemed like the behavior of a protective father. But what if it turned out that he was an addict himself, and they originally sought treatment together? A far more devastating final scene for me would have been watching Donald relapse in despair, like Bubbles does near the end of the first season of the Wire.

The explosion could have been caused by the tankless water heater that Walt bought with tainted proceeds from his drug sales. The blast should have killed Marie, whose character is going nowhere, and maybe a reporter at the house to interview Walter, Jr., thus highlighting the harm to innocent bystanders. The shock and symbolism of such a freak accident would have been just as powerful. Indeed, the tragedy would have been all the more horrifying for its plausibility.

Many, myself included, have noted the numerous Sopranos references this season on Breaking Bad. Walt and Jesse's getting caught in the desert resembled Christopher and Paulie's plight in the famous Pine Barrens episode. Walt's facilitating Jane's asphyxiation was reminiscent of Tony smothering an injured Christopher in Kennedy and Heidi. If the Season 2 Finale has a parallel, it's to the classic Sopranos installment College.

Tony and his daughter Meadow travel to Maine to visit colleges. While at the gas station, Tony unexpectedly spies a mob informant who disappeared into witness protection. Tony stalks the man to his home, planning to kill him, but hesitates upon realizing his family is present. It's unclear whether Tony will follow through, until he does in a shockingly brutal climax where he strangles the turncoat. Later, Meadow notices blood on Tony's arm and realizes her father has been up to no good.

That episode brilliantly depicts how Tony's criminal activities impinge on his family life in unexpected and troubing ways. Even in idyllic Maine, on vacation with his daughter, Tony can't escape his obligations as a mobster. There are no mid-air collisions, not even a shootout, just one man strangling another while he pleads for his life. Yet the emotional impact of this climax is infinitely greater despite -- or perhaps because of -- its comparative banality.

There were touches of this in ABQ, particularly the storyline about Walt laundering money through Walter Junior's website. Senior's frustration at the relentless ringing of the bell brought to mind Poe's classic short, The Telltale Heart. It also evoked the mute, wheel-chair bound Tio (Ding!) one of my two favorite characters from this season -- the other being Bob Odenkirk's brilliant Saul Goodman. Speaking of Tio and Saul, where the hell were they?

I know, I know. Despite the aforementioned homages, it's not really fair comparing Breaking Bad to the Sopranos, which is one of the very best television shows ever. Still, I rate Breaking Bad among the top two or three shows currently on TV, which is why I'm so fiercely disappointed by this watery deuce of a finale. (Ding!) I haven't been so filled with righteous fury since the anti-climactic conclusion to Season 1 of Heroes.

I just hope this isn't a sign that Breaking Bad has similarly jumped the shark...

Battlestar Galactica: Series Finale

2009-03-23T09:36:00.000-07:00

Since premiering as a mini-series in 2003, Battlestar Galactica has been one of the best shows of any genre on television. With consistently great writing, acting, and directing, BSG shattered the stereotype that science fiction can't be character driven. At its high points, moreover, the show was one of the few around to approach the mythological grandeur of Lost.

Nevertheless, I was nervous as I tuned in to see the series finale. For all of its merits, BSG faltered the last season or two in fulfilling the mythological promise of early episodes like Kobol's Last Gleaming. I was particularly disappointed with the revelation of the Final Five cylons and their backstory, a complaint I'll return to shortly. The penultimate episode, which was all loose ends, seemed to confirm my fear that BSG couldn't possibly tie things up in a satisfying way.

On the whole, however, I was satisfied with the finale. There were problems, particularly where the flashbacks to Caprica were concerned. The show tried to contrast the Colonials' empty existence surrounded by technology on Caprica with their embrace of a primitive existence on new Earth. But the shots of the strip club were absurd -- simultaneously heavy handed and prude. Memo to Eick and Moore: if you can't show nudity in a nudie bar, pick some other setting to make your point.

What I liked was the premise of the Colonials abandoning their technology and interbreeding with the primitive population on Earth. My favorite science fiction uses myth and science in mutually reinforcing ways. There are many legends of heavenly beings who fell to Earth and taught skills like farming and math to primitive humans. Among my favorites is the story of the Nephilim, whom the Old Testament describes as sons of God with a taste for mating with daughters of men.

The master stroke was making Hera mitochondrial Eve. We often think of cavemen as our ancestors. In fact, as Brian Sykes describes in his book Seven Daughters of Eve, recent mitochondrial DNA analysis suggests we Homo Sapiens evolved separately between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. About 80,000 years ago, we swept out of Africa in a mass migration, displacing and eventually extinguishing other Homo species like Neanderthalis. Now we know why: cylon-human hybrid vigor!

Some complain about the abrupt disappearance of Starbuck -- BSG's version of the Sopranos' fade to black. I personally bought it as a metaphor for Lee's relationship with Kara, whose free spirit remains forever out of his reach like the pigeon he chased around her apartment on Caprica. I also appreciated the pay-off for the prophetic dream of the Opera House. Having events play out on the "stage" of Galactica's bridge while the Final Five watched from the "balcony" was a nice twist.

Unfortunately, that brings me back to my beef with the story of the Final Five. I frankly never believed them as brilliant scientists, particularly Ellen and Saul Tigh. And making them the last five survivors of the Thirteenth Tribe struck me as too clever by half, as did the revelation that the Thirteenth Tribe was actually cylon, not human. If I were Eick and Moore, I would have shifted the focus from the Final Five to the Cylon God, whom I would have made a renegade Lord of Kobol.

In my re-imagining of the re-imagined mythology, the Lords created humans for cheap labor, much as the latter would later create cylons. The aforementioned renegade Lord led a revolt on behalf of humanity that culminated in their exodus from Kobol. He guided the Thirteenth Tribe to Earth, then retired to an isolated island in the western ocean, only to watch the Tribe repeat the terrible cycle of events from Kobol by creating cylons and annhilating themselves with nukes.

The renegade Lord left Earth hoping to warn the other Twelve Tribes, but was intercepted by the cylons. Realizing he was too late to prevent war with the Colonies, he helped create humanoid cylons, who worshiped him in return as their Cylon God. As such, he was able to delay the cylons' annihilation of the Twelve Colonies long enough to find and plant the clues for the route to new Earth. The Final Five were his sleeper agents, unconsciously facilitating humanity's exodus until they awoke.

The Cylon God's plan would have culminated in humanity's realization on the original Earth that they were once slave labor themselves on Kobol. The Cylon God himself would probably be dead, killed secretly in some betrayal by brother Cavil, who caught wind of the covert plan to guide humanity to new Earth. But we also would have learned that the Cylon God created one of the Final Five in his own image. The fifth would have been revealed as Gaius Baltar, rather than Ellen Tigh.

Anyway, that's how I would have written it, but I suppose that's why Eick and Moore get the big bucks. Like I said, my criticisms and alternate mythology aside, I was reasonably pleased with how they wrapped up the series overall and look forward to the upcoming television film Battlestar Galactica: The Plan. What did you all everybody think?

Breaking Bad: Season Premier

2009-03-07T11:14:00.000-08:00

I know I owe you all everybody some three-dot thoughts and replies to your awesome comments regarding La Fleur. But I have to take a break from the Lost talk for just a moment to plug another one of my favorite shows, Breaking Bad, which returns for a second season this Sunday, March 8, on AMC.

The premise is dark, but the story is told with plenty of humor. Bryan Cranston stars as Walter White, a high school chemistry teacher who is diagnosed with terminal lung cancer at the start of the series. To ensure the financial security of his pregnant wife and son with cerebral palsy, Walt secretly goes into business with a former student cooking and distributing crystal meth.

Cranston, who played the long-suffering dad on Malcolm in the Middle, brilliantly toes the line between drama and comedy with his performance. At the start of the series, you really believe that he's a wimpy science teacher. But by the time Walt walks into a den of criminals armed only with a handful of volatile chemicals, you also buy his transformation into a total badass:

From Crackle: Breaking Bad - Season 1 Ep. 6 - Minisode

And it's not just Cranston -- all of the main characters are perfectly cast. I'm particularly fond of Dean Norris, who plays Walt's brother-in-law Hank, a DEA agent. Hank is a kind of buffoonish Vic Mackey, a macho man who loves to goof on the nebishy Walter but with an undercurrent of affection that keeps the character sympathetic.

I also really enjoy RJ Mitte as Walt's son, Walter, Jr.. He captures well the quiet angst of an adolescent whose struggle for peer acceptance is complicated by his physical condition. I like that Mitte actually has cerebral palsy in real life. It galls me when shows try to pass off someone Chinese or Japanese as Korean. I'm looking at you, Sopranos...

The talented Vince Gilligan, formerly of the X-Files, created Breaking Bad. I was riveted literally from the start of his pilot, which has attained a kind of cult status in the entertainment industry. If you have a chance to watch the first nine episodes, I highly recommend them. But even if you can't, be sure to catch the start of Season 2 tomorrow night at 10pm on AMC.

Heroes: More Absurd than Ever

2009-03-03T15:21:00.000-08:00

I like to whine about Heroes. In my opinion, the show jumped the shark at the end of Season 1 with its anti-climactic finale. Still, I'm a sucker for anything with superheroes, so I'm continuing to watch despite my reservations. Sadly, as last night's episode confirmed, the writing is as absurd as ever.

It's bad enough that they introduced a character who can breathe underwater. Talk about a lame power -- he can't even talk to the fishes like Aquaman! When Claire scrambled to hide him, I turned to my friend JZ (no, not that JZ) and made a crack about how she should just stash him in the jacuzzi.

I never expected the writers would actually stoop to stashing him in the jacuzzi.

Even worse, I think the show is poised to bring back one of my least favorite characters from seasons past. One mystery of S3 is the identity of REBEL, the anonymous computer hacker who has been helping our heroes at every turn. I'm guessing that REBEL is Micah, who can interface mentally with machines.

I don't know what it is about that kid, but he really creeps me out. I would totally buy him as, say, a murderous child psychopath...

Review: Fringe and Life on Mars

2008-12-03T15:43:00.000-08:00

Some of you have written recently asking about my thoughts on Fringe (Fox) and Life on Mars (ABC) two new shows in the same sci-fi vein as Lost. To be frank, I'm not a fan of either, though I'll admit some of my reasons are unreasonably subjective.

Let's begin with Life on Mars, which is actually a remake of a popular British show by the same name. I've never seen the original and have nothing in principle against remakes. Some of my best fr-...er, favorite flicks and shows are remakes. I'm a big fan of both the U.K. and U.S. versions of the Office. I adore the new Battlestar Galactica. I even prefer Soderbergh's remake of Solaris to the Tarkovsky original, which is among the most sacred of movie cows.

What annoys me about Life on Mars is the casting. You'd think they can't go wrong with the likes of Harvey Keitel, Michael Imperioli, and the uber-sexy Gretchen Mol in major roles. But all that star power just distracts from the story. I keep thinking how goofy Imperioli looks with a Ringo Starr mustache, and that Mol is just too preposterously hot to be a policewoman. The show reached a new low recently with Whoopie Goldberg's cameo as a gender-bending radio DJ.

Here's where things become unreasonably subjective. The episode with Whoopie featured several actors from the Wire (HBO) which is one of my all-time favorite shows. My initial excitement, however, turned to annoyance as the Wire guys were relegated to bit parts that made them look ridiculous. Chris Bauer's wig was laughably bad and Chad Coleman's Black Panther "uniform" looked like something recycled from an old Bond film -- one of the campy ones.

I was particularly troubled by the treatment of Clarke Peters. He had no lines of significance -- they cast him as a corpse. I'm not sure what troubled me more, the waste of talent or the disturbing image itself. To paraphrase the great Clay Davis: Lester Freamon...in a coffin? Sheeeit! Still, I'm fascinated enough by the premise of Life on Mars that I'll probably check out the ballyhooed British series. At the very least, I won't be distracted by the same casting issues I have with the U.S. version.

Related concerns drive my distaste for Fringe, which isn't technically a remake but might as well be. Everything about it seems calculated to evoke the X-Files -- from the opening credits, which reference a series of paranormal subjects, to the actual stories, one of which involved accelerated aging. I happen to love the X-Files, and the writers of Fringe have, in fairness, been quite forthright about their creative debt. The show simply suffers by comparison to a classic.

One change Fringe makes to the formula is to have a team of three paranormal investigators, instead of a pair like Mulder and Scully. Unfortunately, the addition just confirms the adage that three is a crowd. Anna Torv is appealing enough (I've got a thing for Home-Pride haircuts) and Walter Bishop is probably the best thing going for the show. But the latter's son, played by Joshua Jackson, rubs me all the wrong ways. I just can't get past my distaste for Pacey...feh!

Then there's the problem of Lance Reddick. He was brilliant as Lt. Cedric Daniels on the Wire and has been perfect as Matthew Abbadon on Lost. But Reddick strikes me as horribly miscast as Agent Broyles on Fringe. It seems to me they want him to strike a hostile note that's totally at odds with his cool persona. I can still hear his shrill refrain of "Li-a-son" from the Pilot ringing awkwardly in my ears. It really irks me to see such a supremely talented actor misused.

Here again, however, you see my unreasonable subjectivity in full effect, so take my reviews with a grain of salt.

Heroes: Sylar and Peter Must Die...

2008-10-06T13:10:00.000-07:00

Forget for a minute that Sylar is horribly miscast and the actor playing Peter is just plain horrible. The real problem with these characters is that they're way too powerful. Sure the writers might come up with ever more contrived ways for them to lose control of their powers or become otherwise disabled.

At some point, however, the show will become implausible, uninteresting, or both. Every season will boil down to yet another showdown between the two most powerful characters. The way I see it, there's only one way out of this narrative trap: Sylar and Peter must both die.

I've made no secret of my displeasure with the frankly sloppy writing that's marred the start of this season. The rock paintings that never fade after years in the sun was ridiculous. And the suggestion that Sylar and Peter are brothers strikes me as too much like a soap opera or fairy tale.

But the latter storyline may have a possible saving grace. I'd like to think Angela is plotting to change the future by ridding the world of evil mutantkind using Sylar. Once he's killed them and accumulated their powers, she will sacrifice Peter to rid the world of Sylar.

It's admittedly dark, but if Heroes has balls, that's where they'll go...

Cylon Stem Cells

2006-01-21T07:40:00.000-08:00

Interesting how the show's politics are becoming more explicit.

I'm liberal, so they're preaching to the choir. And yet...I have reservations. Thus far, the themes have been sufficiently broad that everyone from the New Yorker to National Review have found something that resonates. I worry that, by taking more explicit stands, the show risks polarizing audiences.

This was a mistake Star Trek: the Next Generation made in its later years. There was one episode (not so nerdy I recall its name) where the Enterprise Crew learned that using warp drive damages the universe. After much agonizing, they accepted a new warp speed limit for the rest of the show.

It was just silly.

I understand that one virtue of speculative fiction is the ability to revisit familiar questions in a new context. One where our political reflexes don't readily apply. And I personally think the cylon stem cells were a master stroke -- and poke in the eye of the President.

Therein may lie the problem...

Rock-et-Man!

2006-01-19T05:58:00.000-08:00

Just a quick follow-up to my crtique of Franklin's review of Family Guy. As stated previously, I felt she gave short shrift to the show's hilariously referential style. Here's a great example of that humor: a recent episode depicts a tuxedoed Stewie (the matricidally minded infant) performing "Rocket Man," but speaking the lyrics rather than singing them.

He's clearly parodying William Shatner, a ripe target whose cadence is unmistakable. I also know that Shat released a series of brilliantly disturbing spoken-word versions of Rocket Man, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, and Tambourine Man during the '70s. But three tuxedoed Stewies (one pleated, one ruffled, and one disheveled) actually appear in the number, something that mystified me, until a friend showed me this.

Now I get it. Rock-et-man!

Franklin on Family Guy

2006-01-17T12:58:00.000-08:00

In a recent issue of the New Yorker (1/16) Nancy Franklin has a review of Family Guy that I think misses the mark. She makes some great points about gender and joking. But she glosses over the show's main strength, its referential humor.

I'll admit I didn't get Family Guy when it first premiered back in 1999. Other shows like South Park, King of the Hill, Futurama, even the weakened Simpsons, all seemed to strike my funny bone more reliably and consistently.

Now, however, Futurama is gone, and King of the Hill lost its edge several seasons ago. South Park remains strong, and the Simpsons have regained their stride somewhat, but there's room again in my schedule for some smart animated fun.

Reenter Family Guy, which has steadily earned my appreciation since returning to the air in 2004. The key for me, and which Franklin discusses only in passing, is the highly referential style of humor that she notes has become a signature of the show.

References to pop culture cram each episode. Often they're to well known works like Raiders of the Lost Ark and Heart of Darkness. Sometimes they're more obscure, as when Peter dances with William Shatner in a parody of a 1938 film Joy of Living.

Discerning these nods and winks is a lot of the fun. So much so that whole websites are devoted to cataloguing them. (I certainly didn't catch that Joy of Living reference myself.) Ignore this feature, and you miss a main source of Family Guy's appeal.

Franklin mentions the referential humor briefly, but saves most of her praise for the voices, which she approvingly compares to a radio show. This frankly baffles me -- I've never considered the voice work to be a strong suit of Family Guy.

I'm not saying that Seth MacFarlane is James Joyce. Nor am I claiming the writing is flawless. Sometimes the rapid-fire gags get relentless, particularly when the references are cliched. Few shows, however, make laugh as often or loudly.

And I don't think that's a guy thing...