Random Thoughts - Television

Do you like PBS' Antique Roadshow?

ERTorre — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:37:27 GMT

The show features a bunch of people bringing in their (usually) old items and seeing if they're worth anything. While many of them, at least those that are displayed on TV, wind up being worth a few hundred, even a couple of thousand dollars, many of the items that do not make it to the actual TV show fall on the lower side. But there are exceptions.

Are there ever!

Have you ever wondered what were the most expensive items they have appraised? Wonder no more! Click on the link below and see them for yourself...

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/media/the-antiques-roadshows-five-most-valuable-finds/19609763/

Enough with the good...15 TV Classics You Just Don't Get...

ERTorre — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 13:08:31 GMT

...at least according to Entertainment Weekly:

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20417046,00.html

But I have to say, after looking over the list, that this could well have been a list of a 100 shows as easily as 15. The fact of the matter is that not everything "works" for everyone. What to you is a fun/serious/interesting/engaging "classic" TV show might be, to someone else, a bore. Or worse.

And that's what is, at its heart, "wrong" with doing a list like this. Nonetheless, there are some fun observations. I loved the person who wrote something to the effect that Bonanza was a show "about a 50 year old father and his three 47 year old sons".

Of the shows listed, I find some better than others, but only one would fit my list of "TV Classics You Just Don't Get": M.A.S.H.

I really loved the original movie, but I just never could get into the TV series, despite giving it several tries. I think the main problem wasn't so much the writing or production. The fact of the matter is that several of the cast members (but not all) just rubbed me the wrong way. I simply couldn't justify devoting my spare time to them.

But that's just me.

50 year old father and his three 47 year old sons.

Heh.

Almost as interesting as alternate movie castings...

ERTorre — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:15:36 GMT

...are examples of various stars' "first gigs". It's always interesting, to me anyway, seeing a now familiar face in a very small role in TV or the movies or commercials. Click on this link and you'll see 9 examples of comedians that are quite well known today in (for the most part) commercials during their early, lean days:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/29/comedians-first-gigs_n_698698.html

One of the more memorable "early" turns for me was Bruce Willis as villainous Tony Amato in "No Exit", the seventh aired episode of Miami Vice (1984). I thought his performance as a wife-beating villain was truly memorable. I suspect others did as well, as he soon landed several other gigs. (BTW, if you click on the "No Exit" above, you're directed to IMDB.com and the full episode is there, available to be seen).

> > >

Burn Notice: The 2010 Summer Episodes, a look back

ERTorre — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:44:57 GMT

Haven't written too much about this show recently, and since last night they aired "Guilty as Charged", the 12th, and last, episode of the "summer" season. The series resumes in November, whereupon they'll play six more episodes before calling an end to season 4 of this show.

I am a big fan of the series, but I have to admit that some familiarity is starting to creep into the show, and I suspect the people behind the cameras feared this might be the case as well. To "stir things up", they added fellow burned agent Jesse Porter (played by actor Coby Bell) to the cast. The catch? It was protagonist Michael Weston who "burned" Porter, and Porter, not knowing this is the case, has openly sworn he would put a bullet in the head of the person who burned him.

Michael (being the white knight and all), of course works toward getting Porter of the burn list and back in the agency's good graces, but he must do so, obviously, by lying to and using the burned agent. Weston and his pals' goals are good, but (and here creeps in the familiarity) I felt it was obvious we would eventually reach a point where Porter stumbles onto the truth and all hell (maybe) breaks loose. This happened, alas, pretty far down the line, in the second to last episode of the summer season. A resolution -of sorts- to all this drama was thus initiated in the summer finale and will likely be further resolved in the episodes to come.

Now, don't get me wrong here: I still enjoy Burn Notice. I would recommend it to anyone interested in watching a breezy, exciting, and quite humorous TV show. But the facts are the facts: After four seasons, the formula behind the show has become rather clear. We have the "meta" story which pokes its way into each episode (in this season, its the people who burned Michael, a code bearing bible, and Jesse Porter and his situation), and then we have the "A-Team" meets "Mission: Impossible" part of the show, wherein some citizen encounters trouble and Weston and his pals solve their difficulties.

It's not a bad formula, but it is a formula nonetheless. Perhaps its time to switch it around a little...

> > >

Rubicon, episodes 1 & 2

ERTorre — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:38:31 GMT

About a month ago AMC premiered the first two hours of their new series Rubicon. The reviews were good, so I put it on the DVR to record but, alas, haven't had a chance to catch the show until now.

The reviews for the show were good, noting that it delivered an uneasy mix of paranoia and government conspiracy. It sounded right up my alley, but I was worried. AMC botched the remake of The Prisoner, a show that originally had a good deal of both elements. While the first couple of episodes were OK, the mini-series spiraled downward, ultimately ending with a thud. How would Rubicon fare?

Pretty well, at least so far.

Granted, I've so far only seen those original two hours (the other three hours are patiently waiting in the recorder), but so far so good. While the show does feature intriguing paranoia and (thus far) an implied massive conspiracy, Rubicon isn't so much The Prisoner as a variation on the 1975 Robert Redford film The Three Days of the Condor. In that film, Redford plays a member of a team of very intelligent government information gatherers, and so too does our protagonist in Rubicon. In Condor, Redford's office and staff are wiped out, assassinated for something they have uncovered, something Redford's character needs to uncover before he too is killed (this is hardly SPOILER material as it happens in the movie's opening minutes). In Rubicon, similar devious plots are at work, leading to the suicide of one character (this too is hardly spoiler material as it is also presented in the show's opening minutes) and a possible governmental plot.

While I'm a bit uncomfortable about the similarities in style and subject between Rubicon and Condor, the show is intriguing enough to give it a look. But if Max Van Sydow shows up in Rubicon as an assassin, I might just check out...;-)

Worth a look.

The children of X-Files...

ERTorre — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 13:13:13 GMT

When you voraciously consume entertainment in its various forms for as many years as I have (and will for many more years to come, one hopes!), certain patterns start to emerge.

From 1993-2002 there existed a very popular TV show called The X-Files. If you haven't seen it, it featured the exploits of two FBI agents, male and female, who encountered paranormal or super-scientific threats to humanity. It was a damn fun show, at least for a good chunk of its run (don't get me started on how it eventually ended) and was a strong favorite of mine.

A few years later, I'm finding those patterns emerge.

First up there's Warehouse 13. In its second season on the Sy-Fy network, the show focuses on finding and storing away paranormal or cursed or super-scientific items littering the world which may cause great harm to humanity at large. The principle protagonists of the show are a male/female duo (both federal agents) who do the dirty work of finding these items (and, no, I'm not forgetting the various other characters in the show). Male/Female duo. Searching for oddball, paranormal/cursed/super-scientific items...Hmmm...

There's also Fringe, a show that features three principle characters: A female FBI agent and a father/son duo. Their job is to look into odd, paranormal, or super-scientific stuff that may cause great harm to humanity at large.

Then there's Haven, a show that is really, really, really tenuously tied in to Stephen King's mystery novel The Colorado Kid. It features a female FBI agent teaming up with a male police officer in the small northeast coastal town of Haven. There, they look into odd, paranormal, or super-scientific...

Echo?

Ok, so its obvious these three shows share a certain commonality, both in plot/theme and the buddy cop (male/female) characterizations/interactions, both of which were prominently displayed in (ta da!) The X-Files. Heck, Fringe went so far as to give a very clear shout out to that show (see below).

The three mentioned shows also share one other commonality: They're all quite enjoyable and, yes, I watch all three.

In a way I'm torn. On the one hand, as a viewer I couldn't be happier. I've rarely been disappointed whenever I sit down to see either of these three shows. On the other hand, a part of me is uncomfortable with the ease with which idea appropriation (or theft, if one wants to be blunt) is performed. Of course, this is nothing new. Matt Groening, if memory serves, expressed a certain annoyance with Seth McFarlane's entire oveure. As I mentioned before (you can read about that here), what was then DC Comics frowned on any superheroes that held any similarities to Superman. And if you check around, you'll see a whole industry -both on TV and in the movies- built in particular during the 1960's around variations on the James Bond theme.

So I guess there's nothing new under the sun. What ultimately matters is that the similarities from product to product don't stray, at least too belligerently, into outright theft. And, of course, that the shows remain entertaining. To not be so would be the ultimate sin.

19 TV Shows You Discovered Too Late To Save...

ERTorre — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:04:04 GMT

Another interesting list from Entertainment Weekly (two in a row!), this time focusing on TV shows that people might have discovered, and enjoyed immensely, when/after their fate was sealed:

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20413581,00.html

As is the case with just about every TV show every made, the length of its run depends purely on the amount of audience it pulls in. Thus, there are some shows that in retrospect receive plenty of love, but during their actual lifetime never paid the bills enough to last very long. Firefly, on this list is one of the shows that pulls in a lot of positive fan word of mouth but barely limped through a single season (I think the show was OK, but never really found it as amazing as some others...Serenity, the movie/conclusion to the series, similarly fared poorly at the theaters. It was an intriguing conclusion, although too many storylines were compressed -by necessity- into its relatively short run time. That was a case where I would have liked to see the story given more room to flow).

A show not included on the list is Starz' channel's Head Case. A hilarious romp involving a self-absorbed psychologist and her "star" clients (played by the actors playing alternate reality versions -I hope!- of themselves). Then again, I caught the show from the very beginning so I guess I can't say I "discovered it too late". Too bad more people didn't discover it.

> > >

Free the Black Looney Toons!

ERTorre — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:26:14 GMT

Interesting article from The Root regarding the "censored eleven" Looney Toon cartoon which remain thus far hidden away in the vaults because of their subject matter:

http://www.theroot.com/views/free-black-looney-tunes

I'm intrigued, although I can't help but wonder if author John McWhorter is somewhat overexaggerating the quality of these animated shorts. To be more specific, is Coal Black and the Sebbin Dwarfs really "one of the 10 best Looney Tunes ever made" (his words)? Considering all the fantastic cartoons the studio produced over the years, I wonder.

Then again, that's the beauty of the internet. With minimal looking around, chances are you can see for yourself. All you need to do is click the link below (Beware, however, the print quality. It isn't all that good):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aSw5qDBn-o

I guess one can add these cartoons along with the still hidden away Disney film Song of the South.

Matthew Vaughn agreed to direct X-Men: First Class because...

ERTorre — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:29:47 GMT

...he thinks the Superhero movie genre is just about done:

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/08/07/matthew-vaughn-agreed-to-direct-x-men-first-class-because-he-believes-superhero-movies-will-be-dead-soon/

I can't find fault in his opinion. Like all things, people's taste/interest in things has a certain threshold. Once they grow bored of a certain genre, it tends to fade away.

Superheroes first appeared in film, I believe, in the Fleischer Superman cartoons. Pulp adventure serials featuring the likes of Superman, Batman, Captain America, Spy Smasher, Captain Marvel (my personal favorite of the pulps), etc. etc. soon followed and, with the dawn of television, the well received George Reeves Superman TV series appeared. A little later we had the campy Adam West starring Batman series. There were cartoons featuring both Marvel and DC heroes of varying qualities, but the next really big superhero to movie appearance had to be the Christopher Reeve starring/Richard Donner directed Superman (him again!). That film took the superhero genre to a place it had never quite been: Richard Donner's Superman featured heavy doses of mythology, sentimentality, seriousness, and yet often hilarious (and, yes, campy) humor.

To me, this film remains the high point of the superhero genre in movies.

But what immediately followed in the wake of that very successful movie was decidedly hit and miss. Some more TV shows, some pretty dreadful movies (including the pretty good Superman II and the incredibly bad Superman III and, even worse, Superman IV), until Tim Burton's Batman, a decade later, really seemed to kick off the more "recent" superhero releases. What happened? Two things: 1) I suspect many folks currently in Hollywood were avid comic book readers when they were younger, and many of them were/are only too eager to take a shot at the heroes they enjoyed in their youth. Equally important is 2) the fact that the technology is finally here to make all those amazing comic book scenes come to life.

When Richard Donner made Superman in 1978, the promotion for the film stated "You will believe a man can fly". Back then, seeing Christopher Reeve apparently fly was an incredible, even mind-blowing effect. Today, its as simple as digitally erasing the wires (they had to somehow hide them back then!). And those equally mind-blowing scenes you found on the comic book page? The ones that were limited only to the artist's imagination? You can do them now.

But, as I said before, like all things people's taste/interest can reach a threshold and fade. As I said before, I can't fault Mr. Vaughn's opinion. We are, I suspect, on the verge of seeing too much/too many superhero to the screen works, and one day the return on the studio's investment will no longer be worth the trouble.

That day may be coming sooner than later...

> > >

For those eager for an update on the fourth season of Torchwood...

ERTorre — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:05:16 GMT

...there's a pretty good one here:

http://l.wbx.me/l/?p=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.comicmix.com%2Fnews%2F2010%2F08%2F06%2Ftorchwood-season-four-begins-labor%2F

I'm a really big fan of the series and can't wait to see more of it. There's something cool about a science fictional series that's aimed to a more "mature" audience yet delivers on the "thrills".

Anyway, if you haven't caught any of Torchwood before, I recommend you check it out. The first two seasons in particular were, to me anyway, incredibly entertaining. The third (short) season Children of Earth was pretty good, but disappointed mainly because it was so short.

Still worth seeing, however!

L.A. Times Overrated/Underrated list

ERTorre — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:19:29 GMT

It wasn't all that terribly long ago I posted the somewhat controversial list of author Mark Juddery's "overrated" items and, subsequently, 8 underrated things that should take the place of the 8 overrated items (check it out here).

Anyway, in a somewhat similar vein, the L.A. Times offers their list of overrated/underrated things, for what its worth...

http://www.latimes.com/theguide/la-overrated-underrated2010-pg,0,4281951.photogallery

Can't say I find much fault in their opinions, at least on the items I'm familiar with/have an opinion about. Am curious about the music of Josh Clayton-Felt, item #13.

End of an era...

ERTorre — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:18:55 GMT

After 30 years (thirty!?!) Mary Hart is exiting Entertainment Tonight:

http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/05/mary-hart-to-exit-entertainment-tonight/?hpt=T2

Wow. I recall watching early episodes of the show back in the early 1980's. It has been many, many, many years since I've seen the show, but its amazing that Ms. Hart has lasted on it as long as she has.

Thirty years?!?!

Wow.

The 8 Underrated Things That Should Knock Out the 8 Overrated Things

ERTorre — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:35:44 GMT

A while back Mark Juddery, in promoting his new book regarding "overrated" things, offered a taste of said items in a column for Huffington Post. I had issues with his article, mostly because while he presented several things he felt were "overrated", his reasons for calling them out as being overrated was, at times and to me, rather weak.

So he's come back with another (new) column, this time justifying some of his more controversial "overrated" items with alternative "underrated" things that deserve to be better known:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-juddery/overrated-the-8-underrate_b_664243.html

While I faulted Mr. Juddery's comments before, I have to acknowledge agreement with some of his choices of things that are "underrated" and could/should be considered more highly than his choice for "overrated". But having said that, he still falls into an argumentative trap.

Three of the eight items he offers, The Prisoner (underrated) versus Star Trek (overrated), Doc Savage (underrated) versus Superman (overrated), and The Velvet Underground and Nico (underrated) versus Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (overrated) would receive little argument with me. I think the "underrated" things he mentions deserve to be better known and/or appreciated.

The Prisoner, the original BBC series, is a terrific show. I would go so far as to say it is my all time favorite television series. However, that doesn't necessarily mean, therefore, that the original Star Trek television series is somehow "overrated". The fact is that both presented startling science fictional possibilities and far more mature story lines than the standard TV fare of the time. Just because one of these series isn't as well known as the other, however, doesn't mean that somehow the more popular one is "overrated."

The same goes with Doc Savage. Again, I agree with Mr. Juddery's main points: Doc Savage was the real first Superhero, not Superman. And the creators of Superman were rather shameless in "borrowing" elements from the pulp novels of Doc Savage and integrating them into the Superman mythos (a less charitable soul might accuse them of outright theft). However, once again I say: Sure, Doc Savage should be better known. But how does that make Superman overrated? That character, even with the "borrowed" concepts, had enough unique elements present within him (the dual identity, the Moses mythos, the flying, the superhero suit, etc. etc.) to create a virtual industry of superhero comics that exist to this day. So, yeah, Doc Savage is criminally underrated but I feel that has little to nothing to do with the merits of Superman's popularity.

Finally, I once again agree with Mr. Juddery that The Velvet Underground and Nico may well be a more influential album, in the end, over the vastly more popular Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. I would even agree with him that, given the choice, I'd prefer to listen to the Velvet Underground over Sgt. Pepper. But for the third time: Just because one album is better known and better appreciated by the "general public" over the other doesn't make the more popular one "overappreciated".

But that's just me.

> > >

Dr. Who: The Pandorica Opens and The Big Bang

ERTorre — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:48:13 GMT

I suspect one of the reasons that the TV show Dr. Who has lasted as long as it has is because it is one of the very rare shows that allows its writers to go pretty much anywhere they want, both physically (stories can take place anywhere), temporally (the main character rides around in a time machine), and thematically (episodes can focus on horror or comedy or action or drama or all the above at the same time!).

The Pandorica Opens and The Big Bang episodes #12 and 13 of the 2010 season of Dr. Who, presents viewers with almost too much stuff. There's action, there's adventure, there's drama, there's tears...toward the end, I was feeling exhausted, and not necessarily in a good way. But this is a relatively minor quibble: For most of the two hour season finale I was enjoying the hell out of myself and, in the end, what more do you want?

Plot threads woven throughout the first season are addressed head on in this episode, from what the mysterious (and the Doctor believed mythic) Pandorica is to what the crack in time signified, to what exactly the deal is with the Doctor's companion, Amy Pond (he noted previously that there were things about her life that made no sense). However, if you're looking for a locked down, tightly woven plot, you're in for a bit of a let down. The conceit of time travel has always presented certain problems in storytelling. For example: In the original Terminator, why didn't the Terminator go back in time a little farther and mowed down Sarah Connor when she was being born? Or when she was a child (It's a grim reality, but she would most certainly have been an easier target at that point)? For that matter, he's a robot...why not strap a nuke within his body and detonate it the moment he's close enough to her?

The Pandorica Opens puts the Doctor in an almost impossible trap...one he's unlikely, it seems, to be able to escape from. How he does stretches the bounds of time travel storytelling, presenting an almost impossible chicken/egg scenario that, while humorous, is patently absurd (I don't want to give more away as I don't want to spoil things too much). But, while absurd, it was fun, and I'm willing to let plenty go while enjoying a good chuckle (loved the fez).

Where the episode stumbled was in its protracted ending after the Doctor finds a solution to the whole "crack in time" business. It felt like the writers realized -belatedly- that they had more time left to fill than they wanted. While they provided an intriguing element previously seen in the "Weeping Angels" episode (very clever guys! My hat's off to you!), they also got a little too maudlin. When the final resolution was revealed, my reaction was more like "about time" (no pun intended) rather than the emotional high I was expecting.

But the finale left a few questions on the table, no doubt to be dealt with in the following season. Who set up the events that lead to this finale? That villain (I'm betting on the Master) was never revealed. Also, what is up with Amy Pond and her "universe"? Much of the mystery regarding what happened to her is revealed, but we still didn't get an answer as to why she never before heard of the Daleks or the Cybermen...it's almost like the Doctor, without realizing it, is in some alternate universe. Either that or many of the previous stories were somehow wiped out. But by who?

One last question: What is up with River Song? Her final line in the finale was an echo of a line made more famous by Captain Jack Harkness at Torchwood. And she is carrying around a time traveling bracelet like he wore...hmmmm...

All in all, good stuff, if a bit overlong. I'll be curious to see where they go next season.

And here, something completely different...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM

Burn Notice: Past and Future Tense

ERTorre — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 11:20:54 GMT

While I was inclined to go in depth with the Dr. Who episodes, this season I haven't felt the same urge to do so with Burn Notice.

Not that the show isn't worth it, it remains a breezy, fun favorite, but I just didn't feel any episode moved me enough to go out of my way to either praise or bash it. I suppose that, in a way, is a negative comment on the show. Perhaps the show has reached a point where it no longer feels as fresh as before. It is, after all, in its 4th season, and most shows are bound to eventually develop something of a pattern. While Burn Notice enjoys a good pattern, it is a pattern nonetheless.

This past week's episode, Past and Future Tense, was another breezy affair involving our heroes becoming involved with an older spy (Burt Reynolds) and the Spetsnaz team out to exterminate him. The episode gave us (and our protagonist Mike Weston) a somewhat chilling look into "the ghost of future Christmas". To that character, it couldn't have been a terribly encouraging sight.

This elderly spy is on his own, without friends or family or any support. He's "old fashioned", living with a cold warrior mentality and seeing enemies behind shadows. Only reluctantly does he allow Weston and his pals to help him out.

Alas, with such a rich, potentially interesting character to face, it is most unfortunate that the episode proved such a missed opportunity.

To begin with, I know Burt Reynolds had some very serious medical issues recently. Unfortunately, this is all too apparent while watching him in this episode. It hurts to say this, but Mr. Reynolds, an actor who exuded considerable charm and vigor in his heyday, looks too frail for the role he's thrust into here. His character is tasked to be stealthy and able to sneak up on people, use firearms, and swing a mean fist.

It just doesn't work.

Seeing Mr. Reynolds in this role reminded me of the 1970'a Barnaby Jones show. Back then, there were a great deal of detective shows. So many that, to stand out from the rest, they used unusual "hooks" regarding their main characters. Cannon, for example, presented a "fat" detective. Kojak featured a "bald" police officer. McCloud had the "cowboy" detective. Barnaby Jones, thus, featured the elderly detective. While veteran actor Buddy Ebsen was good in the role, whenever there was gun play or foot chases and he was involved, it was hard to believe the often much younger prey could be out-muscled and caught (sometimes in a footrace!) by this older detective. Sadly, the same happened with Mr. Reynolds in this episode.

Even worse, Mr. Reynolds' character -and his relationship with Michael Weston- is, in the end, underdeveloped. This could, and probably should, have been a far more cerebral episode, one that has Michael Weston mentally looking himself in the mirror every time he sees Mr. Reynolds and thinking "do I want to end up like this?" On the other side, we could have had more of Mr. Reynolds' character looking at Weston and wondering where things went so wrong. Yeah, the notion is there, drifting in the air, but not as strongly as one would have liked.

Still, the episode was far from a disaster. It is unfortunate that it was only "ok" when it could have been so much more.

Dr. Who: Vincent and the Doctor and The Lodger

ERTorre — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 20:39:32 GMT

Just a little while ago I offered, for what it's worth, my opinions on episodes 1-9 of the fifth season of Dr. Who. Tonight airs the final episode of the season, entitled The Big Bang, and I plan to see it along with the second to last episode, The Pandorica Opens, as I believe they form two parts of one story.

Which leaves us with episodes #10 and 11 to review...

I came into Vincent and the Doctor, episode #10, frankly, with considerable dread. The season of Dr. Who, if anything, has been decidedly up and down, and I worried that a meeting between the good Doctor and artist Vincent Van Gogh and their struggle against some kind of monster would be cheesy at best.

It was.

But while the episode itself wasn't terrible (or terribly good for most of the running time as well) it featured a coda that struck an emotion I've felt for years regarding artists who were unappreciated during their lifetime. If you have a cursory knowledge of Vincent Van Gogh, then you know that during his lifetime his artwork was essentially ignored. It was only after he died, the victim of a suicide, that his work was finally appreciated. Van Gogh, of course, isn't the only artist to suffer that fate. Authors such as Edgar Allan Poe, H. P. Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, and, the most recent example, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo's Stieg Larsson have all lived and died without the knowledge that their works would become popular to the world at large.

And I think that's a crying shame.

As an author, there is nothing harder than sitting before a blank page and working out details of your story. It takes time and effort to make something you like, and when you're done, there is no assurance -none at all- that anyone will like it. But writing is in your blood, and you can't simply switch that desire off and move on to something else. I see in people like Van Gogh and Lovecraft the desire to make art, all while facing an indifferent, perhaps even hostile public. In a perfect world, the result of your struggles merits, demands, that you live to see the day your works are finally appreciated.

But we don't live in a perfect world, and there are those who went to their graves never realizing their works would become successful. While I've made my feelings regarding The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo perfectly clear (I think the book, alas, isn't as great as many others apparently do), I am saddened that author Stieg Larsson never saw his work become a worldwide phenomena. I'm saddened he never had the chance to see the book translated into all those languages. I'm saddened he never had the ability to sit in a theater and see the movie version of his work.

All this, in a roundabout way, leads us back to Vincent and the Doctor. At least the end of that episode. For there, the producers of the show, who probably share this feeling I've outlined above, allow themselves a little wish fulfillment on Vincent Van Gogh's part, and while the episode itself may not be one of the top Dr. Who's out there, the ending is both sad and uplifting, a great case of justice for someone who never experienced the accolades he should have had...in his lifetime.

The Lodge, episode #11, is a decidedly lighter episode that feels like it was missing some minutes here and there. The Doctor arrives in present day England and, as he steps off the Tardis, it flies off with Amy Pond. What is inhibiting the Tardis from landing? What does it have to do with the disappearance of several people? What is the deadly secret of the flat's second floor?

Those questions prove to be secondary to the show's real plot: The Doctor playing cupid and getting two people to finally admit their love for each other...while engaging in more than his usual amount of hijinks. A fun episode...nothing earth shattering or stunning, but sly and cool.

Next up...the season finale(s)...

Details on The Six Million Dollar Man/Bionic Woman DVDs...

ERTorre — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:33:48 GMT

For quite some time I've been eager to get my hands on the first season of The Six Million Dollar Man TV show. Not that the other seasons were horrible, but to me the show started to go downhill not long after. Regardless, I wanted that first season of the show, and was thrilled to read a while back that it, and the original Bionic Woman, would soon be released to DVD.

Unfortunately, it appears that simply buying the first season of the show is not an option:

http://popculturesafari.blogspot.com/2010/07/six-million-dollar-man-finally-coming.html

The Six Million Dollar Man collection is going to have 40 discs?!?

Just how much is this going to cost? I suppose the best way to make an educated guess is to look at "complete" collections of other, similar, series and see what they cost...

The Twilight Zone complete collection originally retailed for a whopping $299.99, but is now available for a more reasonable $135.99 at Amazon.com (I suspect the price drop is due to the fact that the show is about to be released on Blu ray). However, that set featured "only" 28 discs, compared to the 40 discs for TSMDM.

The Man From Uncle complete collection, spread out on 41 discs, originally retailed for $199.92 but is now available for $140.49 at Amazon.com.

Finally, the Mission: Impossible complete collection (46 discs) retails for $279.98 and is available at Amazon.com for $188.99.

So I'm guessing TSMDM complete collection will be retailing in the $200+ range, at least at the beginning. Much as I'm curious to revisit that first season of the show, I don't know if I want to spend quite that much money to get all the rest of the stuff, intriguing though it may be. We'll just have to wait and see what the actual price of the series is...

A little over halfway there...Doctor Who Season 5

ERTorre — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:36:50 GMT

Have I mentioned DVR is the greatest invention since the wheel? How else do you stockpile shows for later viewing, fast forwarding with impunity through mindless commercials, so that you can focus on every single second of all those mindless shows you just have to see?!

So I'm a little over the halfway mark with this season's Doctor Who, featuring Matt Smith as your latest iteration of the Doctor and the way-too-adorable-for-words Karen Gillan as his latest companion. And I'm enjoying myself...for the most part.

The series started off well with The Eleventh Hour, wherein the Doctor and Ms. Gillan's Amy Pond first meet...over time of course. The episode was a good launching point for what is the series' overarching plot, a "crack in time" that threatens the universe. A couple of laugh out loud moments add to the breezy tone.

Episode 2, The Beast Below, wasn't great, but neither was it terribly bad. In this episode, we have the Doctor and his companion aboard an enormous spacecraft that mysteriously moves without any apparent active machinery.

Episode 3, Victory of the Daleks, was, frankly, a disappointment. Whenever you have the Doctor facing off against Daleks, you should have a pretty good time. This episode, however, was rather blah. The Doctor and his companion venture to London during WWII, where they find that Winston Churchill's new secret weapon is...a Dalek! The overarching season mystery is given a few more bits and pieces: Amy Pond does not know what the Daleks are and is unaware of many of the events the Doctor has participated in during the previous few years (bringing one to think that perhaps Ms. Pond, and indeed the universe the Doctor is currently flying around in) is some kind of alternate dimension...or somesuch. However, the episode was a little to frantic (and silly) for my taste. It was also more of a "let's set up the Daleks for a later story" type...story.

Episode 4, Time of Angels and Episode 5, Flesh and Stone, on the other hand, were simply terrific. The Doctor faces off against the Weeping Angels, and the two-parter is filled with tension and intrigue. As a welcome bonus, we're given even more hints of things to come. The so-called "crack in time" makes its biggest re-appearance of the season since episode 1, and the implications of what it is, and what it can do, are frightening. Catch this two parter if you can.

Episode 6, The Vampires of Venice, is something of a step backwards. Although not as disappointing as the Victory of the Daleks, the episode isn't all that consequential...except for one thing: It was great to see Amy Pond's interaction with her husband-to-be, who makes a full(er) appearance here. Not bad, but not among the best Doctor Who's.

Episode 7, Amy's Choice, is another season highlight. The Doctor and his companions are stuck between reality and dreams. It is up to Amy Pond to determine which of their two divergent (and deadly) situations is real and which is fantasy. Great stuff.

Episode 8, The Hungry Earth, and Episode 9, Cold Blood are another two-parter. However, this one really tried my patience. Yes, I found Victory of the Daleks a disappointment, mostly because I expected much better things. With this two parter, I didn't expect much of anything, but found the episode, with the exception of its last ten minutes, an almost complete waste of time. The plot: In the near future (2020, if memory serves), The Doctor, Amy, and her husband-to-be mistakenly land outside a small British town that is engaged in some very deep mining. But the machine the miners use for their deep drilling has unintentionally awoken a menace from below, and the end result could be an all out war between humans and some distant Earth ancestors. This episode was, alas, a bore. The moral messages were delivered like a sledgehammer, and for once the overambitious plot was derailed by the obvious limits of the show's budget.

It just wasn't all that good. On the other hand, those last ten or so minutes of the show were great. Once again the crack in the universe reappears. This time, the Doctor collects some "shrapnel" from it, and what the shrapnel is...is intriguing as hell. I won't give much else away, but that and the sudden heart-wrenching exit by a character make the previous hour and forty five or so minutes almost worth enduring. Almost, but not quite. This two parter was easily the worst of this season's Doctor Who's. If you can, watch the first few minutes (to get a sense of things) then fast forward to the end and watch the concluding minutes. You won't miss much.

Coming soon...The final episodes of the fifth season!

11 Most Overrated Things Ever...

ERTorre — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:16:07 GMT

...at least according to Mark Juddery:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-juddery/11-most-overrated-things_b_649671.html#s114727

Have to go with many of the comments, however, below the article.

#1: Who exactly is Mr. Juddery to make this list? Seriously?

#2: If you're going to list things you feel are overrated, then present a strong argument as to why you think such things are indeed overrated. For example, he notes that Star Trek is overrated because the first interratial kiss presented on this show was the product of...alien influence. Ok...but that's it?! What about the fact that this was one of the first truly intelligent sci-fi space operas (third season excluded)? The fact that it presented characters and situations that were a little beyond the cookie cutter standards found on TV during that time? Also, like it or not, the show spawned millions and millions of dollars in sequels, movies, merchandise, etc. Good, bad, or indifferent, someone was buying into all that stuff, and not just for a few years...we're talking generations!

But it goes beyond Star Trek. While Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band is not my favorite Beatles album (I'm more inclined to give that honor to either the White Album or Abbey Road) how can you argue that it is "overrated"? The album was a BIG hit when released and defined a generation while showing the Beatles were truly willing to push the boundaries of music...both as product and as art. How does that make it "overrated"?

For that matter (and crossing genres here) how is Superman overrated? Because he wasn't "real"? That seems a pretty weak argument. I suppose all fictional characters, from Sherlock Holmes to James Bond to Sam Spade to Harry Bosch are therefore overrated as well?!

I could go on, but I'm beginning to agree with one of the posters: This is more of a list of things Mr. Juddery thinks are overrated. Your mileage may vary.

25 TV Shows that Missed their Cue to Exit...

ERTorre — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:36:43 GMT

It's one of those things in life: You love love love a TV show and then, quite suddenly, it no longer works. The magic is gone, the show is dreary, predictable, boring and/or all the above. Entertainment Weekly looks in on several TV shows that they feel reached a high point...and should have finished then and there:

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20402674,00.html

Allow me to add some shows to the list:

Star Trek (the original series): In many ways, this show was fortunate it ended when it did. It was still relatively young and the original two seasons were strong enough that when they reached syndication people forgot or were unaware of just how mediocre the third season was. True, there were some gems among the third season lemons, but too few. I suspect if the show had made it to a fourth season, we might not have had the Trek franchise that followed.

The Wild Wild West: Easily one of my favorite action/adventure series of all times. Like Star Trek, I never saw it on first run, and only got to see the shows in sequence once I purchased the seasons on DVD (there were four in total). If you watch the show in sequence you realize that by the third season the show was essentially operating on auto-pilot. The characters were well defined, the pace was set, and the show offered few surprises. Now, granted, TWWW faced many obstacles, both internal (Ross Martin suffering a heart attack and being absent for most of the fourth season, the show's creator's death) and external (there was considerable pressure to tone down the show's violence). But despite some very, very good episodes in those final two years, I felt the show's best years were its first two.

Miami Vice: Perhaps the prototypical show that outlived itself very quickly. Loved the first season, but found subsequent seasons repetitious. As with the two previous series mentioned, there were exceptions, but they proved fewer and fewer as the series went along.

Twin Peaks: Great show...until the murder of Laura Palmer was solved. As much as I like David Lynch and this work, it felt like the balloon had deflated afterwards, and the show never did, IMHO, recover.

Anyway, just a few that weren't mentioned in the Entertainment Weekly list. Have to agree very strongly with their inclusion of X-Files (how I loved that show...until the first theatrical movie came out. From that point on, it wasn't the same), Heroes (liked -did not love- the first season until that terrible season finale...the one that didn't solve anything. From that point on, why bother?), and the granddaddy of "jumping the shark", Happy Days.

Ah well, enjoy them while they're good...

> > >

FCC Swearing Policy Tossed...

ERTorre — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:16:11 GMT

In these blah summer days, its great to read a story like this, at least to me:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/13/fcc-swear-word-censorship_n_644837.html

When I was young, my family traveled. A lot. So much so that as an adult, I found my tolerance for travel was quite limited. For many years now (and to the frustration of my family) I prefer to stay home, not leave the confines of the city/state I'm in.

But when I have traveled, I've been struck by the differences in cultures. I've always felt that the U.S. has, to put it in Freudian terms, a childhood fixation. "What about the children?!" is often a rallying cry for those who want to police morality, as if children should be the center of the universe when it comes to what happens around us. Thus, in my youth appeared the PMRC and its attempts to label albums that had foul language. The aim, like that of the Hayes Office before, appeared to be to shield the public at large from anything that could be deemed...filthy.

The problem, of course, comes in the definition of said filth.

On the first night while traveling in Canada, I had a sinus blockage that prevented me from getting sleep. While everyone else was enjoying their shuteye, I was miserable, stalking the living room and hoping that some medication would finally take effect. I put on the TV and, to my great surprise, the local public channel was showing, uncut and unedited, the film American Psycho. I didn't like the film very much, but I saw it as the makers intended it to be. Later, while traveling in Europe, I found similar adult fare shown in the later hours. Now, to those outside the U.S.A., this might not seem like such a big thing. Adult themed movies shown during the later hours? Big deal!

But in the U.S., as you can see from the article above, this is indeed a big deal. There have been heavy fines levied for "inadvertent" nudity and attempts to fine stations for broadcasting "foul language". The issue got sticky enough that TV stations refused to air Saving Private Ryan, which they had previously shown uncut, on Memorial Day.

Which brings me back to the whole issue of children. On the one hand, I can understand parents wanting to shield their kids from adult material. On the other hand, as an adult, I find it increasingly infuriating to have others attempt to restrict my entertainment options. While I'm free to buy whatever film or album I want, should I stumble upon an "R" rated film playing on a local (and many cable) channels here in the U.S., one that I don't have on DVD or Blu Ray and I've been curious to see, chances are that its been edited. Chances are high, unless you've got HBO or Starz or Showtime or any of the other premium movie channels, that the language in said film has been scrubbed (sometimes to hilarious effect) and any nudity either cut completely or "fuzzed out" digitally. The end result, of course, is that we're not really seeing a film as it was originally conceived and created, but some kind of homogenized scrub.

"What about the children?"

Yes, we should care for them. But by the same token, I'm increasingly wondering "what about the adults?" Can't we see entertainment -good, bad, or horrible- that is aimed at our level? Perhaps this ruling is the first step toward that possibility...in the United States.

Olivia Munn interview

ERTorre — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:26:13 GMT

There has been something of a mini-controversy regarding G4's Olivia Munn's appearance on The Daily Show. Apparently some thought she was there only because she was "eye candy". She most certainly is a very beautiful woman, but she's also very funny, as evidenced by her Attack of the Show hosting. She is moving on and up, and its fascinating to read this interview with her.

Please note, however, that she can be pretty blunt in some of her commentary...

http://www.salon.com/books/int/2010/07/07/olivia_munn_interview/index.html

> > >

Ads we hate

ERTorre — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 12:57:58 GMT

An amusing article from Slate Magazine about, you guessed it, ads that these people hate, for a variety of reasons:

http://www.slate.com/id/2258134/pagenum/all

To me, the worst commercials are those that run over and over and over again. Part of the delight in having a DVR is the fact that you can record your shows and zip through the commercials and therefore not be bothered by them.

But, out of curiosity, I can't help but wonder which commercials have been particularly effective. Usually, they tend to be humorous in nature, and more than a little off the wall. The Little Ceasar's commercials of a few years back fit the bill...for the most part.

10 Disappointing TV remakes

ERTorre — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:51:02 GMT

Been a while...a list!

Entertainment Weekly presents a list of 10 Disappointing TV remakes:

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20394876,00.html

Of the ones listed (and I don't debate any of the choices), the one that was the most disappointing to me had to be The Bionic Woman remake. Katee Sackhoff, as the "first" bionic woman, was easily the best element of the show, and made one wonder why rather than a supporting character (and sometime villain) the show wasn't about her alone. Worse, actress Michelle Ryan, playing the central role of Jamie Summers, was horribly underwritten and disappeared in her own series. Sadly, the actress has proven more than capable of holding her own (I mentioned this before, but check out her role as a top notch cat thief in Doctor Who's Planet of the Dead. She was delightful in the role, and made one realize just how woefully underutilized she was in the Bionic Woman).

> > >

Justified: Bulletville

ERTorre — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 11:26:29 GMT

The season one finale of Justified, entitled Bulletville, aired a few days back and, eager though I was to see it, it wasn't until yesterday night I finally got a chance to do so.

Wow.

They better renew the show for another season.

I'm not the biggest TV fan out there. I don't claim to see a wealth of new shows each year, and many of the "hot" shows I don't even see (whether it be because they're on cable or because they just don't appeal all that much to me). But for my money, Justified has to be one of the better shows out there.

What sets it apart from lesser fare are the terrific scripts and dialogue present in each episode, as well as the beautiful balance each show maintains between the horror of crime (the show doesn't pull many punches...when violence occurs, it is very, very bloody) and the razor sharp humor.

In the season finale, the Crowder family saga, something that has been a recurrent theme throughout the first season, is effectively played out to its end. I won't get into many spoilers, but the saga of father versus son, both for the Crowders and between Raylon and his no good father, came to a delicious end. Further, the resolution between Raylon and his one-time friend, Boyd, is also resolved beautifully.

Boyd started as almost a caricature of criminality, a meth head Neo-Nazi thug who had, thanks to a bullet from Raylon, had a religious conversion. But was it real, or was he playing a game? The second to the last episode of this season dispelled any notion that his religious conversion wasn't real, but this powerhouse finale added another layer to his character, beautifully summed up by Boyd himself when he stated (and I'm paraphrasing here) "Have I been talking to myself all this time?"

Wonderful, wonderful stuff.

They better renew the show for another season!

Torchwood coming to...Starz?!

ERTorre — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:00:48 GMT

Thank goodness!

http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/06/07/starz-acquires-torchwood/

Why do I say this? Because originally Fox was interested in acquiring the show, and I had severe doubts a "family" network would air some of the more...er...risque elements involved in the show. That's not to say that Torchwood was/is some hard "R" rated series. While it did feature some nudity and some salty language (hardly in the leagues of most "R" rated features, however), what most impressed me about the show was that this was rarity: A science fiction show presented with a decidedly adult perspective. It was this more adult element that I feared would disappear if the show moved to Fox.

Now, however, the show is headed to Starz, the cable network that airs Spartacus: Blood and Sand, which is certainly intended for adult audiences. My hope is that Torchwood continues just as it is, although presenting a larger canvas (as mentioned in the article).

Burn Notice: Friends and Enemies

ERTorre — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:21:21 GMT

A couple of days ago the first episode of Burn Notice's fourth season aired. Titled Friends and Enemies, it takes off where the season finale from last year left off, and was yet again a fun watch, albeit with a few darker, more serious undertones than before.

This time around, we're seeing that the pressure of all the intrigues that have lead to this moment finally getting to Michael Weston (Jeffrey Donovan). For those new to the show, the series is usually a fairly light action/adventure series, an unlikely mix of Mission: Impossible, The A-Team, and James Bond. It involves the already mentioned Michael Weston, one time very high level U.S. spy, who was given a "burn notice", a black mark that effectively strips him of all his power/funding/freedom and is effectively shipwrecked and isolated to Miami. He is not allowed to leave the city and he is not allowed to do any covert work. He does not have access to his previous accounts and contacts until (and if) his higher ups decide to lift the burn notice.

The series originally focused on Mr. Weston trying to find out who "burned" him. Of course, he is the hero of the show and therefore is innocent of the burn notice placed on him. He wasn't even aware, originally, of why the burn notice was placed on him. But now, we're past that. The charges against him were bogus, the motivation for doing this, however, appears to be to get him to work for his higher ups, on jobs that maybe he would have been hesitant to do before.

The question Weston has at the end of this episode, in one of the more powerful moments of the series thus far, is whether he will ultimately succumb and indeed become what he fears: A killing machine without any humanity.

All in all, a pretty good start to the fourth season. Mind you, despite some of the heavier themes in this episode (and a notable greater use of shadows), this series still remains pretty light, with a good sense of humor about itself.

I certainly look forward to the rest of the season!

The Simpsons Did It...Twice

ERTorre — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:48:27 GMT

Someone who has obviously seen waaaay too many Simpson's episodes has come to the startling realization that some plot points in individual shows have been used (gulp) more than once...

http://www.collegehumor.com/article:1792830?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+collegehumor%2Farticles+%28CollegeHumor+Articles%29

Now me, I don't litter my mind with such nonsense.

No sir. Instead, let me point out that I'm quite aware the plot/script of The Six Million Dollar Man's episode Survival of the Fittest and the Bionic Woman's Fly Jaime were one and the same, with very few changes.

Blew my childhood mind, it did.

Promo for Syfy's Haven

ERTorre — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:36:23 GMT

I mentioned the new series quite a while back (You can read about it here), and now, the promo is available.

My comments from before still stand. Allegedly based on the Stephen King novella The Colorado Kid, this new TV series appears to be about as far from its source material as you can get...stretching the meaning of being "based" on something only to, I'm guessing, tie the magical name "Stephen King" with this series. (For those too lazy to read my previous post: The Colorado Kid was a murder mystery without any supernatural elements, despite the fact that it was written by Mr. King. The novella was, however, a strange, borderline pointless exercise in creating a murder mystery -SPOILER- without offering any solution to said mystery. The TV show, if one is to believe some of the comments from SyFy, involves an FBI agent coming into a town filled with odd goings on, including possibly superpowered beings).

As for the promo...it looks ok. Not much is give much away, plot wise, but neither does it make me particularly eager to catch the show's premiere...

Justified: Fathers and Sons

ERTorre — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 12:40:52 GMT

It's been a while since mentioning this great show on FX, so here goes: It remains pretty damn great.

What is most curious, however, is the slow relegation of Timothy Olyphant's Raylon Givens to the background. You see, there is so much happening to other characters in this week's episode, Fathers and Sons, that Givens is almost a secondary character in his own show. And its been going on that way for a little while now.

Not that that's a bad thing.

At first, Givens was the focus, but after quickly, and deftly, sketching out his character, the producers of the show have wisely begun giving the other characters around Givens more wrinkles and personality. There's his ex-wife, who makes a rather startling (even shocking) appearance in this episode, there's the recently released from jail father/son Crowders, there's Givens' girlfriend, there's Givens' boss, there's...

I don't want to spoil things, despite how tempting it may be to do so.

Suffice to say, this is a pretty damn good show. At first the episodes were individual, and one could simply jump into the series at any point. That's still achievable, but if you're interested in seeing what you're missing, I recommend you pick it up from the beginning.

You won't be disappointed.

Personally, I can't wait to see how it all comes to a head next week, in season one's finale...

...they did renew the show, didn't they?!

Gary Coleman: Damned by a catchphrase

ERTorre — Sun, 30 May 2010 16:24:55 GMT

Those who know about Gary Coleman and his one, and biggest, role, instantly know what the phrase is. Salon.com TV critic Heather Havrilesky offers some sobering thoughts about the passing of Mr. Coleman, and the fact that for his adult life he had to live under the shadow of his childhood fame, and a catchphrase that no doubt haunted him through his life and, now that he's died, is haunting him in death:

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/heather_havrilesky/2010/05/28/gary_coleman_dies/index.html

I suppose the moral of the story can be summed up in the cliche of the danger of fame. On the one hand, fame can bring you riches and recognition...on the other hand, it can and may follow you through life as Ms. Havrilesky astutely points out, and possibly make you bitter and angry.

Is Hawaii Five-O the most enduring theme song?

ERTorre — Fri, 28 May 2010 14:06:22 GMT

At least that's what Entertainment Weekly speculates...

http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/05/28/hawaii-five-o-theme-song/

I gotta say...I think they may well be right. That's not to say there aren't other very, VERY memorable TV show theme songs out there, and I've popped a few of them below. However, if I had to pick one and only one, I'd probably give Hawaii Five-O the edge (even if just barely) over Star Trek and Mission: Impossible (my co-number 2's). But there are others, as well, worth recalling, even if they don't quite make it to my top 3...

> > >

Lost: Alternate endings

ERTorre — Mon, 24 May 2010 13:02:29 GMT

For those (like me) who couldn't stay up for Jimmy Kimmel's post-Lost finale show, here we have the supposed "thoughts" that went into designing the series finale...

> > >

Lost: The End

ERTorre — Mon, 24 May 2010 12:13:29 GMT

There must be a HUGE amount of people heading out to work today quite tired from having stayed up later than usual to see the finale of Lost. You can certainly count me among them. Not only did I have to see the show to its end, it took quite a while for my mind to slow itself down enough to finally settle down to sleep, so exhaustion certainly rules me this day.

For those wiser than me, who recorded the show and intend to see it today or sometime in the near future, be forewarned...I'm going pretty heavily into

SPOILERS!!!!!

You've been warned!

So we reach the end of the journey, and Lost steers itself into the realm of mythology. Not just "Lost" mythology, but mythology in general.

A couple of random thoughts:

1) Way back when episode four, Lighthouse, aired, I made the following guess regarding the "parallel" or "sideways" universe: the parallel world, at least as depicted so far, is a better place, a place where all the character's demons are resolved. What better (and sneakier) way of offering us a happy ending than by doing so right under our very noses?

Two weeks later, in my musings on the episode Dr. Linus, my theory was refined to where I thought: ...what we're seeing in this last season of Lost is, simultaneously, the conclusion and the epilogue. The conclusion to the story is what is happening on the island. The epilogue (or, if you want, the "happy ending") is what we're seeing unfold in that parallel world.

(To read both columns in full, click here for Lighthouse, here for Dr. Linus)

Not to pat myself on the back too much (or scream out told you so!!! ;-) ), I'm pleased that indeed things worked their way as I foresaw. I think it might have proven too radical to suddenly show that the "happy ending" on the "sideways" universe was in actuality something sinister, and that the smoke monster/anti-Locke was still around. They had mentioned far too many times that his release from the island would be the end of everything, and they stuck with that concept to the end.

2) The show was jam packed with so many great things that its hard to point out the best of the best. But I have to say the Sawyer/Juliet meeting was one of the episode's absolute high points. I get choked up thinking about their meeting...

3) On the other hand, I kinda wish the whole Jack/Kate finale, both on the island when they said goodbye and off in the "sideways" universe, would have had more power. Perhaps we were treated to an overabundance of riches, and after a while I was dulled by all the revelations and emotions. Still, their on/off relationship had the ring of myth as well...the lovers made for each other who, in the end (and only the very end) finally do come together.

4) It was great that almost right off the bat the smoke moster/anti-Locke clarified the whole "I'm going to destroy the island" line, which seemed so paradoxical in the penultimate episode.

5) The scene at the church was also an emotional high. The cast, together as if taking a class picture before they leave us forever...all happy, all satisfied that they've done good in the end. All marching off toward Valhalla or Heaven or their final, well deserved, rest. But then we close the show as it began, roughly, with mortally wounded Jack, alone in the bamboo forest, falling to the ground and looking up at the sky, effectively reproducing the opening sequences of the show in its premiere season...only this time he doesn't get up again, but he knows he has succeeded and his life mission is fulfilled.

Now, I know there are those who were unhappy with the way the show didn't seem to bother with answering questions that were originally posed. To them, I repeat what I said before: The show became like a dream. You follow the players and you react to them and the adversities they face. In my case, I eventually ignored the rest...it became unimportant. What was important was seeing the characters through...hoping that the end of their respective stories would be worth the trip.

For me, it was very much worthwhile.

Lost wasn't a "perfect" show. It had its lulls, certainly, but when taken as a whole, the show was one of TV's best, in my opinion. An almost perfectly executed mind game/soap opera/adventure saga with characters I genuinely enjoyed following, not matter what mistakes they made or good/evil they displayed in their actions.

I already miss it.

The Lost finale...

ERTorre — Sun, 23 May 2010 13:12:15 GMT

Count Salon.com critic Heather Havrilesky as one of those not terribly impressed with the final season of Lost and someone who doesn't expect a particularly great finale (airing tonight):

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/heather_havrilesky/2010/05/21/how_will_lost_finale_not_suck/index.html

I find myself in a very curious -and conflicted- position. Just as I mentioned with the Pop Culture Safari posting (you can read about it here), I can't disagree with all the points both make while disagreeing with their ultimate assessments.

My disagreement lies, perhaps, in the level of attention paid to the various mysteries presented and their (at times) lame answers. Lost is a fever dream of a show, and things in dreams don't always make a lot of sense (or any sense, for that matter). But you get a rush out of what you witness, it touches you, it frightens you, it entertains you despite the obvious problems.

Then again, if tonight's finale really, really sucks...I may just join the critics over on the dark side! ;-)

Pop Culture Safari on the unanswered questions (and some astute observations) regarding the final season of Lost

ERTorre — Fri, 21 May 2010 12:47:47 GMT

LOVE checking out Pop Culture Safari, and especially loved this column, pointing out the various unanswered questions and general screw ups in this season's Lost:

http://popculturesafari.blogspot.com/2010/05/still-unanswered-questions-on-lost-or.html

I happen to agree with just about everything mentioned in this column, although these observations in particular, regarding the penultimate episode, struck me as terrifically spot on:

Smokey gets Ben to do his bidding by promising Ben that, once everybody is dead and gone, Ben will have control of the island. But at episode's end, Smokey tell Ben that he's going to destroy the island. And Ben seems ok with that.

Wow, that one completely escaped me when I watched the episode, but he pretty much nailed that script inconsistency.

Now, lest you think I'm going after J. J. Abrams and his shows (I did just lambaste the season finale of Fringe), let me say this about Lost: I know that many of the "questions" aren't going to be answered, and many of the answers to some of the "big questions" have been kinda lame. Another example from Pop Culture:

Why did Jacob exclude Kate from being a candidate because she's a mother? Wasn't Sun a mother also? Wasn't Jin a dad? Aren't Jack and Sawyer also dads? Is Jacob a sexist pig?

HOWEVER, I find myself looking past the screw ups and "lazy" writing, of which Pop Culture Safari more than clearly points out, and enjoying the show for what it is: an exciting, bewildering, yet ultimately very satisfying (at least to me) pulp adventure/soap opera staffed to the brim with very charismatic actors playing wildly interesting characters.

Now, having said that, I hope the finale on Sunday wraps things up in a way that we are satisfied with as viewers, even if all the answers to all those questions may not come to be. I'm hoping for the best, even while an intellectual part of me realizes that there are some big scripting screw ups present throughout the show's seasons.

Fringe: Over There Parts 1 & 2

ERTorre — Fri, 21 May 2010 12:14:50 GMT

The short of it: Part 1, intriguing, interesting. Part 2: Not so much.

I figured there was little use in reviewing one episode of Fringe's two part season finale, so I bunched them together. Good thing I did, because the first part and the second were almost mirror opposites in terms of drama and storytelling success.

Part 1 focused on "getting" over there, ie the parallel Earth-like universe wherein Peter Bishop originally came from and went to. There is urgency in getting to the other side because there are hints that the "Earth 2" Walter, Peter's real father, was searching for him not because of love, but because he has a machine that when used by Peter will spell "Earth 1's" demise. Only Peter doesn't know that. The episode had strong echoes, at least to me, to DC comic books featuring the "multiverse" as well as the original Star Trek's classic episode Mirror Mirror. We're offered an alternate world where familiar characters are somewhat more scary...darker in their motivations and characterizations.

Overall, Part 1 was a very enjoyable, if somewhat derivative, episode, and I was eagerly awaiting part two.

Unfortunately, the payoff was pretty weak. Olivia meets and confronts her doppleganger, and that's about the only good sequence in the otherwise tired Part 2. Peter Bishop wanders around this episode as if the show's producers decided to play a trick on actor Joshua Jackson and kept the script away from him. Leonard Nimoy, in what could be his final screen appearance (he stated he was retiring from acting and that this would be his last work), is given the dubious task of somehow holding off an army of police toward the show's climax. I'm sorry to say this, but the man is in his late 70's and he looks it. It's simply too much to swallow that he can somehow shoot it out -successfully for the most part- with a squad of police, regardless of the sophisticated weaponry he carries.

And that ending.

Ugh.

Predictable and, ultimately, supremely silly.

Let me get this straight: The Walter Bishop of Earth 2's master plan was to have fearsome, pretty much undetectable human chameleons come to Earth 1 in clumsy, obvious ways so that the Fringe division would be just this close to getting them. After doing this several times, the Earth 2 Walter arrives on Earth 1 and convinces his son to come back with him back to his "real" world. He does this so that Peter can activate some murky weapon that can destroy Earth 1 and its universe and that, for a reason never explained, ONLY Peter can activate it.

However, IN REALITY, Earth 2 Walter's plan was to allow the people from Earth 1 to come over so that when they take Peter back, Earth 1 Olivia is unknowingly replaced by the Earth 2 (more sinister) Olivia.

HUH?!

I can't decide what was worse, the completely nonsensical "plan" Earth 2 Walter has or the painfully obvious fact that Olivia was replaced (I guessed that one pretty much the moment Earth 1 Olivia changed her hair color to look more like the Earth 2 version).

A severe disappointment.

An added note: Some have indicated that perhaps the Earth 1-2 Olivia switch was a last minute reworking of Earth 2 Walter's plans when he knew his son and the others were going to leave. That's as may be, but it still doesn't explain why E2 Walter didn't just use those chameleons more effectively to get closer to Peter before (some have tried to excuse this by saying E2 Walter wasn't "in control" of those beings, but I don't think so). It also makes no sense that he would send all those police to STOP them when he ultimately wanted E2 Olivia to infiltrate the group and go to Earth 1.

There is one other thing that I believe we're going to find out in season 3 of Fringe: The machine Peter has to activate to destroy Earth 1 has to be SET OFF on the Earth it is to destroy. That's just a hunch on my part, which would indicate that E2 Olivia going to Earth 1 and infiltrating the Fringe division there was always "part of the plan".

Ask Ausiello: Spoilers on "Lost"

ERTorre — Thu, 20 May 2010 12:45:02 GMT

Michael Ausiello provides tidbits (usually mild spoilers and/or rumors) to those interested in upcoming TV shows. In his latest column, he posted this regarding Lost's finale:

Question: One final Lost scoop before Sunday. It’s my last chance! —Ben
Ausiello: You know that big gathering in the sideways world that everyone was heading off to at the end of Tuesday’s ep? Rumor has it something very *a* happens.

Hmmm...."something very *a* happens?" "Bad?" "Sad?" "Mad?" "Dad?" ;-)

Of course, its rumor, but if I had to guess, its between Bad and Sad, and I'm leaning toward "sad". Or perhaps we have a "Freddy" or "Jason"-type moment, and anti-Locke/smoke monster comes back from the grave and makes one final attempt to regain his freedom...

...We'll see!

For those interested in other things Mr. Ausiello talks about (and he talks about quite a few other shows), you can read the rest here:

http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/05/19/ask-ausiello-lost-greys-dexter/

Lost: What They Died For

ERTorre — Wed, 19 May 2010 12:48:15 GMT

The penultimate episode of Lost was like liquid whiplash...you're watching and suddenly, before you know it, the credits roll, the "Bad Robot" logo appears, and you get a preview of Sunday's "The End".

A lot happened in this episode, but in reality it was little more than a set up for what's to come. Sure, we have almost all the "sideways" universe people coming together (The dialogue within the prison transport truck was priceless), and on the island we have revealed, finally, what Jacob was up to, and (at least for now) who volunteered to take over. We also have the smoke monster/Anti-Locke gaining information which, at least we're led to assume, may allow him to destroy the island (which, should your memory fail you, we saw the destroyed and sunken island in the show's season premiere) while apparently regaining Ben as a duplicitous ally...

...but...

There's little that is very clear. I've continued to state my theory that the side-ways universe is the show's "happy ending" and what's going on in the island is the show's conclusion.

But I wonder.

Could the smoke monster have ultimately succeeded in destroying the island as he just stated he wanted to (and if he did and he's so evil-and-all, why are things essentially better in the non-island world after doing so?)? And what are Desmond and the group of Oceanic passengers about to do at the Widmore concert (I'm assuming that's where they'll all come together)? Other intriguing questions: Has island-Ben really turned to the "dark" side, or is he involved in a very high stakes gambit to deceive and ultimately destroy the smoke creature? Is Richard Alpert dead (I tend to think not...Didn't Jacob say he would be immortal on the island?)? We saw what happened to Widmore and his female companion, but where did Miles go? Why wasn't he with them?

Oddball, intriguing stuff.

For more details, far, far more details and examination, check out the link below:

http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/05/18/lost-what-they-died-for-doc-jensen/

Regardless of where we're going, I know I'll be there on Sunday!

> > >

Fringe: Brown Betty

ERTorre — Sun, 16 May 2010 14:48:05 GMT

I'm a few weeks behind but diligently trying to catch up here...

I've joked before about Fox TV's Fringe having a title similar to my own (and created several years before the TV show) The Dark Fringe. I never thought this to be anything more than a coincidence, even while noting that the creators and writers of the show have borrowed certain ideas from comic books.

The whole concept of a "multiverse", at least as depicted on Fringe, bears a similarity to DC Comic's multiverse. In and of itself, the idea of a "multiverse" isn't something one can tie into DC Comics alone, and therefore one could excuse this similarity. But there are others. The "Watchers", the bald figures that, at least so far, watch over what happens within the show and are present at "big" or "strange" events recall Jack Kirby's Watcher character(s) for Marvel Comics and Metron for DC Comics. And then there was the Fringe episode Earthling, which featured a bad guy that was really, really similar to Negative Man in DC Comic's The Doom Patrol.

So I get around to finally watching Brown Betty, which aired back on April 29 (yes, I'm two episodes behind) and, after watching a few minutes, I was struck with the fact that this episode sure does recall, at least visually, my concept for The Dark Fringe, ie a retro-futuristic setting wherein people drive and dress as if in old-time hard boiled detective movies yet have "modern" artifacts, such as computers, at their disposal. The plot of Brown Betty, however, had absolutely NOTHING in common with the plot of my The Dark Fringe, but those visuals...

I'd like to think that perhaps someone over there, behind the scenes of that TV show, has read my book.

If so, and if indeed Brown Betty was inspired, if only by its visuals and the old/new juxtapositions, to my book, then let me say...I'm deeply honored.

If (BIG if) that is the case! ;-)

News of the not-too-surprising: FlashForward cancelled

ERTorre — Fri, 14 May 2010 12:31:59 GMT

That show and a few others, actually:

http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/05/13/abc-cancels-romantically-challenged-scrubs-ted-flashforward/

Ever since FlashForward went on hiatus, I've been recording but haven't watched any of the episodes. It's incredible that, as I get older and older, I seem to have less and less free time.

FlashForward started out decently enough, and I enjoyed it in spite of the fact that it tried so hard to be another Lost (even appropriating two of that show's actors). The pilot was pretty good, as was the initial setup. But...but...it was one of those shows that seemed to start well and then quietly recede, bit by bit. It also featured some downright laughable things (like the autistic boy that the hospital kept WAY longer than any hospital would have realistically kept him) that made me wonder just what the writers were doing. There was this vague feeling that came over me after a while that the show was moving in slow motion...like the story that was being explored was simply not large enough, in spite of the big cast, to justify a continuing series.

It was like the people behind the cameras were holding things back as much as they could because there wasn't much more to show.

I plan to watch the final episodes of the show in spite of this news, but I'm not surprised by this news, nor will I miss this show like some others (hello, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Reno 911, and Head Case).

Justified: Hatless

ERTorre — Fri, 14 May 2010 12:21:25 GMT

When the show premiered many weeks ago, I noted that it was very enjoyable but worried if it could "last". Were there enough story lines to follow? Could the show keep up its clever banter/characterization?

On all counts: Yes.

Hatless, the show's latest episode (there are four more to come before the first season is done) was another quirky, funny, yet at times scary/violent episode of the show. What's intriguing about Justified is that we have essentially stand alone stories that nonetheless carry items over from one show to the next. Unlike Lost, which pretty much requires you know the characters and general situation, I suspect anyone can watch pretty much any episode of Justified and, even if you're not up to speed on certain information, you'll still be able to enjoy the show if you come into it "cold" (this, by the way, is not a knock against either show...I'm only pointing out the differences).

The latest episode focused on and resolved one plot line that had been brewing for a while: Our protagonist's ex-wife and her husband's dealings with some shady characters. As mentioned, we get plenty of humor, both situational and character, and a stronger than usual amount of violence. The show can make you squirm and worry for the characters, and this episode did this quite effectively.

If you haven't seen the show, its worth a look. It may not be for everyone, but it certainly is incredibly enjoyable to me.

Lost: Across The Sea...

ERTorre — Wed, 12 May 2010 11:55:16 GMT

...aka What the Hell?!?

In reading some of the postings on various websites, it appears this episode, more than any other, has split fans. There are those, of course, who like it. Several bits and pieces were finally revealed. But there are those who felt the episode was horrible, even going so far as to say the show has "jumped the shark".

Sadly, I'm leaning toward the later camp.

No, the show hasn't "jumped the shark" for me, but this episode came perilously close to undoing much of what I enjoyed of Lost.

However, discussing Across the Sea inevitably leads into heavy duty

SPOILERS!!!!

To begin with, the producers of the show stated that last week's episode, The Candidate, which featured the deaths of three of the show's "main" characters (and a fourth, lesser character in pilot Frank Lapidus), was intended to reveal, once and for all, the fact that the smoke moster/anti-Locke was indeed evil. EEEVVVIL!!!

So what do they do with this episode? Show us that in reality he wasn't such a bad guy after all.

Huh?!

To begin, he and Jacob are fraternal twin brothers. Their mother was, like almost everyone else, brought to the island via disaster, in her case a shipwreck. The mother reaches shore and is found by a mysterious woman. She gives birth to the two kids and is then brutally killed by the island's mysterious woman. This woman raises the two children as if they were her own, and the kids were nice and pliant enough for her purposes, which seems to be grooming them to be her replacement (which one will it be?!). She also shows them her secret, a light source she claims is some kind of big power source, the key (or some such) of the island. All is well...

...That is, until Jacob's brother (he is never given a formal name) starts seeing his dead (real) mother and, realizes that island-pseudo mother has been lying to the boys about a great many things and may be batshit insane.

So suddenly he's the good one while Jacob appears to be the gullible, deluded one. But even Jacob comes to realize his pseudo-mother has been holding back. The years pass and an adult unnamed one has found the power sources in the island. He shows them to pseudo mother and notes he will use them to get off the island.

Big no-no.

Pseudo-mom assaults him and knocks him unconscious. She then kills the people he's living with and all but offers him a pleasant flower embossed invitation to come on down and kill her. It was, it appears, her plan all along. She knows her time guarding the island is up and has found a substitute in Jacob. All that's left is for her unnamed son to kill her, which he does.

Jacob sees his dead mother and brutally beats his unnamed brother, then throws his unconscious (dead?) body into the light source, whereupon dead brother officially becomes smoke monster (or, conversely, is Smoke Monster freed?!).

The big reveal, in the post-script, is that "Adam and Eve", the two skeletons discovered in the early days of Lost, are those of the pseudo mother and Jacob's brother.

Yet again: Huh?!?!

I thought one of the island's rules was that Jacob couldn't kill his brother and vice versa (granted, Smoke Monster may not be Jacob's unnamed brother, so maybe its he who can't kill Jacob or the candidates)? Still, how is Jacob able to kill his brother? And for what purpose? Why throw him into the light source? If doing so "released" the smoke monster (assuming it isn't pseudo mother), must there be a "smoke monster"? For that matter, why must this island have a guardian at all?

Strange stuff, and frustrating. Especially given that we're only three and a half hours away from the finale and there remain so many more interesting questions I hope will get answered than who those two skeletons from way back when were.

Based on this episode, I'm suddenly worried about where we're going. As I said before, one of my all time favorite TV shows is the original Prisoner. But as great as that show was, its final episode, in my opinion, was bizarre and ultimately seriously out of control.

With Across the Sea, I don't believe Lost has...lost itself, but I worry that so many -too many!- ambiguities that may never be answered may wind up damaging our ultimate impression of the overall product.

Jesse Stone: No Remorse and Pandorum...last night's double feature

ERTorre — Tue, 11 May 2010 22:08:26 GMT

For the first time in a long time there was free time...and I took full advantage of it to watch some stuff I recorded over the weekend.

Afterwards, I wasn't sure if my time was well spent...

Jesse Stone: No Remorse is the sixth "Jesse Stone" TV film featuring Tom Selleck as the late author Robert B. Parker's moody, most often introspectively silent, and emotionally hurting, character. The film proved surprisingly entertaining, despite some very big problems. For one thing, the movie's main mystery is solved via...wait for it...a dream. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, our hero, while sleeping at night, has a dream in which he envisions the perpetrator of the central crime and, once awake, KNOWS this person is indeed the criminal. That's some awesome police work, Jesse!

Dumb.

Secondly, our hero spends an awful lot of time looking/acting dour. And drinking coffee. If this movie wasn't funded at least in part by Starbucks or Folgers or some other coffee company, they're really missing out...

...but enough of the bad: The good is that this film proves surprisingly watchable, despite the problems. Tom Selleck, at 65, continues to prove himself a highly watchable actor. He remains perhaps one of the greatest "near misses" for major stardom, if only because he was the actor Steven Spielberg wanted to play Indiana Jones in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Unfortunately for Mr. Selleck, he was locked into Magnum P.I. and couldn't leave his work on that show to film the movie.

Ouch.

Anyway, I was pleasantly entertained by the film despite its flaws, and found myself curious to look up some of the other six features (I saw 1/2 of the last Jesse Stone film, Thin Ice).

And then there's Pandorum.

Yeah, the reviews were brutal, but you had a sci-fi/horror hybrid featuring astronauts waking up from hyper sleep with no memory of their past on a creepy, very dark -and enormous- spacecraft.

There had to be something good here, right?

Sadly, very little. To be fair, the film starts well enough, mostly because it featured what I've described above, ie the bit about the astronauts waking up with no memory and on a creepy spacecraft. So for a little while I was thinking...maybe this isn't so bad.

Then came the first major "action" sequence. It involved our lead hiding from these strange, bloodthirsty mutants. The sequence was incredibly clumsy and...confusing. As if the director didn't have a good grasp on how to do an action sequence. From there, things got progressively worse. The story, what there is of it, isn't all that intriguing, and the idea of bloodthirsty mutants chasing the heroes...it was such a bland, "safe" thing to do.

The movie briefly picks up with its ending, which was kinda/sorta clever, although the elation one was supposed to feel with its conclusion is tempered by the knowledge that (and I'll try not to be too spoilery here) those on the bottom of the ship...well, let's just say they didn't get the "happy ending" the ones on the top did.

Skip it.

Heather Havrilesky on Lost

ERTorre — Sun, 09 May 2010 12:24:11 GMT

I've always found Salon's Heather Havrilesky's TV reviews humorous and thoughtful, even if/when I disagree with her opinions (hey, such things can certainly happen!).

Here, she takes on the final season and upcoming conclusion to Lost. Her opinion isn't terribly positive:

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/heather_havrilesky/2010/05/08/trapped_on_lost_island/index.html

I can't really argue about almost everything she points out, even while saying that I find this, the last season of the show, still quite entertaining.

But having said that, I think many of her more...biting...comments are dead on target. For example, I know we were supposed to be very sad about the deaths of Jin, Sun, and Sayid in last week's episode. However, like Ms. Havrilesky, I found myself curiously detached. Unlike her, I suspect my feelings were more related to where I believe the show is going and, yes, I'm once again referring to my theory as to what the whole "side universe" is.

For if I'm right, and the side universe is indeed the show's "happy ending" post island adventure (effectively a complete "reboot" following whatever it is that happens on the island itself), then we already know that all the island characters come out alive and, perhaps with time, well.

Despite their island death, Jin and Sun survive on the sideways universe. Even better, they're happily together, despite some tense times. Hurley, likewise, lives happily ever after. Locke, the "real" Locke, similarly appears to be heading toward there.

Yet getting back to Ms. Havrilesky, I have to admit some of the apocalyptic/religious "good vs. evil" stuff seems a little out of left field. It's like the people behind the show realized they had to have a "big" ending and went for something bigger than they perhaps needed.

Recall that some of the shows early mysteries were very simple: A metal door in the island floor...a light within it that comes on. Strange people with strange relationships to each other. Untrustworthy alliances.

But I'm still hooked, and I will still see this through...even if I think I've figured the ending out.

20 Most Shocking (TV) Deaths...

ERTorre — Thu, 06 May 2010 13:42:02 GMT

Given the shocking events of Lost two nights before I suspect prompted Entertainment Weekly to offer the following, a list of Top 20 Deaths of characters on television...

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20366760,00.html

I have to praise them for recalling #4's entry, Rosalind Shays. I suspect most modern readers won't remember the character, or for that matter the TV series L.A. Law, but starting in the mid-1980's and continuing until it was canceled in the mid 1990's it was quite hot, and the abrasive character of Rosalind Shays (played by veteran actress Diana Muldaur) was a HUGE draw. I recall hating and, paradoxically, loving her character in the span of seconds.

To my memory, her death was the first time I had ever seen something quite so abrupt...one thought for sure this was some kind of joke, that she was probably fine and would return.

Nope.

I suspect her death scene was one of the big inspirations for the "coming out of left field" deaths that followed, many of which are presented in this top 20 list.

I took a quick look around YouTube and wasn't surprised to find the clip there...

A QUICK UPDATE/NOTE: Seeing this clip alone, without any real awareness or understanding of this character on the show, will inevitably lead some to think something along the lines of "what's the big deal?" But realize that Shays' character was one of the BIG characters on that show at the time, and she was certainly a big draw...both because she was so despised and loved, almost at the same time. Also realize that this may well be the great granddaddy, the ground zero if you will, of the "suddenly, very surprisingly dead" sequences in television. In fact, without going into the list again, I'm almost certain this is the oldest of the entries.

Lost: The Candidate

ERTorre — Wed, 05 May 2010 12:03:50 GMT

Perhaps they should have called the episode "Massive Casualties".

The end game is truly in the air, although despite what happened here, I noted there were a few things left unsaid...for example, where was Charles Widmore after the smoke creature attacked? Is he gone? What about Richard Alpert, who split with the castaways a few episodes ago?

But the big issue, of course, are those "massive" casualties. This episode...

SPOILERS!!!!!

...featured some pretty big ones.

However, I'm not terribly saddened by them...provided where I think this show is going vis a vis the "parallel" or "sideways" universe turns out to be what I think it is.

Indeed, I'm more convinced than ever that that universe is indeed the shows epilogue and "happy" ending for the cast. In that sideways universe we saw Jack Shepherd make the first moves to break through the (real) Locke's defenses. They've all but said that Jack could cure Locke's paralysis and, as mentioned before, we've already had pretty happy endings for Hurley and (despite what happened in this episode) Sun and Jin.

But getting back to the island, in the "real" universe, it is clear now that Sayid and Desmond had some kind of talk. This occurred, of course, after the evil/fake-Locke threw Desmond into the well and then had Sayid go kill him.

Of course he didn't.

And, assuming my prediction that the parallel universe is the happy ending, we've already seen evidence that Desmond recalls/knows what happened "before" (ie, on the island) and is also seemingly aware of what needs to happen in the parallel universe to make everyone's ending a happy one (although in the case of "real" Locke, that involved running him over!).

Therefore, whatever conversation Desmond had with Sayid likely involved telling him about that potential happy ending, and clearly the story was good enough for Sayid that he was willing to sacrifice himself for all the others. One clever poster online noted that Sayid, an ex-Iraqi torturer, is cleverly put into a position of sacrificing himself, via a bomb of all things, to save people instead of spread terror.

As for Sun and Jin, their deaths were sad yet uplifting at the same time...they went together. But, as I said before, they won't be dead for long...

...provided my idea of what the parallel universe is pans out. For that, we'll just have to wait and see.

Lost finale notes...

ERTorre — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:21:39 GMT

Interesting link to an article and interviews with Lost co-creator Damon Lindelof regarding just how "definate" the ending of the show will be:

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/04/29/lost-finale-will-generate-a-tremendous-amount-of-theorizing/

I found the following quote interesting:

Lindelof also addresses criticism of the sixth season’s “Flash-sideways” by explaining that “people don’t know what it is, they don’t know how it connects back to the show.”

As I've said before, my theory is that the "flash-sideways" or "parallel world" is really the story's epilogue/happy ending. This is where all the castaways find their new, better life. So far, and with the possible exception of Locke (though I'm betting this will prove to be a happy ending as well), my theory has proven right.

So what the heck is happening on the island?

The conclusion of the story is happening there, and it will then result/lead to the "flash-sideways," ie, the epilogue and happy ending.

We'll see.

So long 24...

ERTorre — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 13:00:56 GMT

So I'm looking at what I've got on the DVR waiting to be seen. And staring right back at me, and taking up a LARGE amount of memory, are the first 15 installments (I don't know how many hours in total as there were a couple of 2 hour blocks) of this season's 24. Since its premiere, I haven't watched a second (ouch) of it, and as the time has passed, it seemed less and less likely I would.

The fact of the matter is that 24 episodes of a show is a LARGE commitment, especially when you don't have that much free time to begin with. Especially when the last season of the show was far, far less than stellar (I've mentioned it before, but it bears repeating: Last season terrorists infiltrated the White House by SCUBA DIVING their way into it. Yes, you read that right).

And even more especially when most of the comments regarding this season have painted the show as being tired, worn out, and in need of cancellation. One critic even went so far to say the show was the TV equivalent of Old Yeller and needed to be shot.

So I decided to delete the whole thing. Despite a lame season last season, 24 was for quite a while one of my favorite shows. True, the constant cliff hangers and at times over the top torture sequences gave me pause, but this show was escapism with a hard edge, and at times it was daring enough to have beloved characters knocked off (this started, pretty much, with the startling conclusion of season 1).

Anyway, I can't say I'll miss you, 24. I think your best years were behind you. Even if I couldn't stick around for the end, I do appreciate the hours of entertainment you provided in the past.

> > >

Justified, a follow up

ERTorre — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:21:19 GMT

Haven't written much about FX's Justified in a bit, but figured it was worth doing so. I enjoyed the show's premiere, but wondered if this was the type of show that could sustain itself in the long run.

It can.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that this show is very much worthy of your time, although I would recommend if you're new to it you see the episodes in order from the beginning. Please note, unlike Lost or 24, the show isn't "continuity" intensive and just about all the episodes feature "stand alone" stories. However, there are bits and pieces here and there that hint at a bigger story, and its delightful to see the evolution of Timothy Olyphant's Raylon Givens. Givens is a fascinating character, at first appearing as one of those law and order Clint Eastwoodesq-Superman types. But over time, and in particular in the last couple of episodes, he's displayed a delightful sense of humor.

Highly recommended.