 Things are looking pretty poor for the possibility of Bullz-Eye getting another shot at the bi-annual TCA Press Tour. Thanks to the still-unresolved WGA writer’s strike, the Television Critics Association is drawing a line in the sand: if the strike isn’t over by Dec. 13th, the January tour - currently slated to begin on Jan. 8th - will be canceled. Ugh. I’m all for the writers continuing their strike until they can get what they want, but I’m not gonna tell you that I’ll enjoy sucking up the $100 change fee for my flight. Oh, well, them’s the breaks… Filed under: TV and News and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 Whether you’re a casual TV viewer or a full-fledged couch potato, you probably know about the WGA writer’s strike that’s currently gripping the entertainment industry. Even at the risk of having both my livelihood and my viewing habits upset, as a writer myself (albeit not of scripts, although I do have a few projects I’ve been working on), I’m unequivocally on the side of the Writer’s Guild members in this battle; I’d prefer that it come to a conclusion sooner than later, of course, but when it comes right down to it, I want it to last until the writers get a decent share of the profits from the material they’ve worked so hard on. Besides, like I don’t have enough TV-DVD sets to hold me over ’til it reaches an agreeable conclusion…? If you don’t really know what’s going on, there are plenty of places to get the scoop from a journalistic perspective, but I think you’ll get much more insight if you take info straight from the horse’s mouth, i.e. from some of the individuals who are actually doing the striking, and the best place to start is at at Mark Evanier’s blog. I don’t think I’ve seen a more succinct explanation anywhere as to why the striking writers are, well, in the right. Other perspectives: * Ken Levine Alas, however, “The Office” has gone dark. For the latest and greatest (or most depressing) updates on how things are going, check out DeadlineHollywoodDaily.com, where Nikki Finke provides about the best coverage that the ‘net has to offer. For alternate blog coverage, there’s also “Scribe Vibe” (Variety) and The Huffington Post. Oh, and I wasn’t going to offer up this info first-hand, but since someone at Variety has broken the news, I’ll go ahead and link to it: I might not have much of a TCA Press Tour to attend in January. Damn. But if that’s the way it’s gotta be, then that’s the way it’s gotta be. Go, WGA! Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and TV Comedies and TV Dramas and TV Action and The Office and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and TV Sci-Fi Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 If there’s one thing Bullz-Eye and Premium Hollywood readers alike know about me by now, it’s that I’m way too polite for my own good…but even *I* couldn’t find anything more polite to say about “Cavemen” in my Fall TV preview than lines like this… “Given how people reacted to the mere idea of transforming a series of Geico commercials into a 30-minute sitcom, you’d think that the producers would’ve set their sights on being the best damned comedy of the new season. Instead, they’ve got a heavy-handed and horribly-failed attempt at poking fun at the foolishness of racism, one which will almost certainly have the NCAAP foaming at the mouth.” …and this: “Any series which falls back on a parody of ‘Baby Got Back’ in 2007 deserves whatever horrific fate may befall it. If ‘Cavemen’ lasts more than a few episodes, it’ll either be because the writers have figured out what went so horribly, horribly wrong, or, more likely, because people are perversely fascinated by how incredibly bad it is.”
Do I feel bad about making these statements? No, because, hand on heart, the pilot really was that bad. But after having the opportunity to speak to Joe Lawson, who wrote and created the original GEICO commercials that inspired “Cavemen,” I was surprised to find that I was actually kind of looking forward to seeing more of the series…and, honestly, I didn’t necessarily expect that. I’ve got a pretty open mind, and I was planning to keep it open while watching the premiere episode (which, you may have heard, will not be the pilot episode that most of us critics ripped to shreds), but was I actually looking forward to watching it? Not so much. But as you’ll see from this conversation between Lawson and myself, he manages to explain away the pilot without actually defending it, which is a pretty impressive accomplishment in and of itself, while also coming across as a guy who really does think he’s got a good sitcom on his hands. We’ve only got one thing left to mention in the preface, and that’s that a few quotes from this piece have already appeared in an article for The Virginian-Pilot, since the only reason Lawson and I came to chat in the first place was because of his connection to the Hampton Roads area of Virginia…but The Pilot only wanted 300 words, and since I had just much good stuff left over, it seemed like a shame to waste it! Okay, read on…! Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Comedies and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview and Pilots Comments: 4 Comments Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
I swear, it’s just coincidence that the last several postings have been sci-fi related, but even with that being the case, I’d still like to talk for a few moments about ABC’s new summer replacement series, an anthology called “Masters of Science Fiction.” I’d heard a little bit about it from the show’s publicist before I headed out to the TCA Press Tour in July; it sounded interesting (although, obviously, tempting me with a science-fiction concept is akin to shooting fish in a barrel), and it had a phenomenal list of contributing actors (Malcolm McDowell, Anne Heche, Sam Waterston, Judy Davis, Terry O’Quinn, Elizabeth Rohm, Brian Dennehy, and John Hurt are just some of the folks involved), so, naturally, when the publicist offered up a review copy, I was ready to roll. Unfortunately, it didn’t arrive before my departure to L.A. for the tour, so I didn’t get to check it out until my return…and even more unfortunately, by the time I returned, I was already a bit iffy on checking it out, thanks to the words of no less than ABC’s president of entertainment, Stephen McPherson. During ABC’s executive panel, someone asked McPherson about the origin of the series, he responded, “It was a low-cost initiative that we tried. We did this series of movies to see if there was a way to spark something different at a really low cost point. You know, I think there is some good work done there, but it’s very unseen. So it’s just been…it’s been a little bit problematic.” Okay, now, to be fair, he’s acknowledging the “good work” inherent somewhere in the series, but his suggestion that it’s “very unseen” is a little disingenuous; after all, there were six episodes made for “Masters of Science Fiction,” and as the network’s president of entertainment, I have to think he might’ve had something to do with the fact that ABC is opting to only show four of them. Also, come on, he’s saying this stuff to critics before the series has even aired…? Way to get behind it, man! From my perspective, however, I can now tell that you that I’ve seen the four episodes that will be airing on Saturday nights at 10 PM for the next few weeks…and, wow, if that timeslot of death doesn’t instill you with ABC’s definitive opinion of the show, I don’t know what does…and it’s nothing but a stone cold shame that they’re burying this thing. “Masters of Science Fiction” harks back to classic dramatic anthologies like “The Twilight Zone,” “The Outer Limits,” and the like. The budget might not be through the roof, but the performances are top-notch, and that goes beyond the acting; the show brings in directors like Mark Rydell (”On Golden Pond”), Michael Tolkin (”The Player”), and Jonathan Frakes (”Star Trek: First Contact”), and features adaptations of stories by Robert Heinlein (”I, Robot”), Howard Fast (”Spartacus”), and legendary sci-fi writer Harlan Ellison, who adapts his own story, collaborating with Josh Olson (”A History of Violence”). Some folks have been dismissive of the fact that the show was done in connection with Starz, but don’t lump “Masters of Science Fiction” in with “Masters of Horror”; the latter is more about blood, guts, and cheap scares, while this is intelligent and thought-provoking drama, done with the occasional - but far from constant - wink at the viewer. Take, for instance, “The Awakening,” which stars O’Quinn (you know him as John Locke from “Lost”) as a former military man who’s called back into service when it’s suspected that aliens may be landing on Earth. The situation is sufficiently grim that the President of the United States is brought into the loop…and who plays the President? William B. Davis, a.k.a. the Cigarette Smoking Man from “The X-Files.” There’s something darkly funny about that, and you can bet that the producers were completely in on the joke. It’s also mildly amusing that the show is narrated by Professor Stephen Hawking…and, yes, I know, there’s really no way to know that it was actually Hawking doing the narration, but let’s give him the benefit of the doubt, shall we? “Masters of Science Fiction” is quality stuff, and, honestly, I don’t see anything here that couldn’t, if given the opportunity, draw an audience, especially given the amount of familiar faces involved. Why bury it on Saturday nights at 10 PM…? I mean, I’m not telling you to blow off any existing plans you may have, but if you’re home, it’s well worth watching…and if you’re not home but you’ve got TiVo, I do recommend that you grab it and check it out later. Oh, and if you like it as much as I did, don’t be afraid to send a nasty E-mail to Stephen McPherson and ask him why he couldn’t be bothered to set aside one of ABC’s reality show for a few weeks and give this series a halfway-decent chance at success… Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 After making an appearance at the TCA Press Tour in late July to promote “Moonlight,” the new CBS drama about a vampire turned detective, the show’s executive producer, David Greenwalt, has bailed out of the series, citing “health concerns.” Greenwalt was one of the few remaining people on “Moonlight” who’d been there since its pick-up by CBS; the series has recast several roles since then and, for its TCA panel, had little to offer by way of a preview except for a newly-filmed sequence with the show’s lead, Alex O’Loughlin, being interviewed as his character, Mick St. John. (An interview with a vampire…geddit?!?) Still, Greenwalt seemed excited about the series during the panel, and given his track record, it’s a shame that we won’t get to see the series under his leadership. The only possible good news? The latest rumor has Rob Thomas, creator of “Veronica Mars,” taking over the reigns of command for “Moonlight.” Yeah, I’ll believe it when I read the actual CBS press release… UPDATE: Never mind. The bad news is that it’s not Rob Thomas. The good news - maybe - is that the show’s new executive producer / showrunner, according to The Hollywood Reporter, is Chip Johannessen, who did a lot of work on “Millennium” and “Dark Angel.” Filed under: TV and Actors and News and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
…this is my last night in L.A. for the TCA Press Tour, and I just wanted to say that, despite the fact that I can’t adequately describe quite how much I miss my wife and daughter, this has been a tremendous experience thus far. The phrase “death march with cocktails” has been bandied about throughout my time here - and it’s not far off; I mean, Hell, I’m drunk right now! - but it’s impossible to complain about the unparalleled access I’m getting to the various stars while I’m out here. I mean, tonight alone has resulted in my having one-on-one conversations with Christina Applegate, Kyle McLachlan, Swoozie Kurtz, Christopher Titus, and others. How can you argue with that…? Stay tuned for my coverage of ABC’s new shows, as well as my other set visits, but since I’m departing bright and early tomorrow morning, let me just say that this has been a blast for me, and I sincerely hope that my readers - however many there may be out there - have enjoyed the opportunity I’ve had out here as much as I have…and, fingers crossed, Bullz-Eye will continue to send me out here in the future! Filed under: TV and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: 1 Comment Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
Maybe some of the other TCA members are just jaded old hands, but one of the most shocking things I heard during the course of the entire 2+ weeks of the press tour came on the day that we were invited to tour the sets of various TV shows. We’d just finished being given a tour of the “Heroes” set by the stars of the show - mine was mostly hosted by Greg Grunberg, but Ali Larter, James Kyson Lee (Ando), Noah Gray-Cabey (Micah), and series creator Tim Kring were all along for the ride - and were provided the opportunity to have access to the entire cast for several minutes worth of Q&A, and we were sitting on the bus, and, suddenly, I hear someone say, “Well, I don’t know why we had to waste time with that set tour; I’d much rather have had more opportunities for one-on-one interviews.” Are you kidding me? I’m sorry, but, to be perfectly blunt about it, that shit was awesome! Even if I’d been given the opportunity to do so, I’d totally have passed on more one-on-one time in favor of the set tour! I mean, I stood in Isaac’s studio, right on top of the painting of the apocalypse that’s on the floor. I was in Mohinder’s pad and saw the actual string-laden map on the chalkboard. Are you telling me that’s worth trading away? RIDICULOUS! Ahem. So, anyway, yeah, we went on a bunch of set visits. First up was TNT’s “The Closer,” and…well, look, I don’t know about any of ya’ll, but I’ve never been on the set of a TV show, and, personally, I was astounded at the level of detail. Yeah, I know, you see the stuff on the screen when you’re watching the show, but, somehow, I just didn’t think it would look so…I dunno…real. I got a few minutes with J.K. Simmons and G.W. Bailey; the former talked about he’d been pitched the idea of playing J. Jonah Jameson by Sam Raimi while they were working on “The Gift” together, while the latter was in the midst of reminiscing about a guest shot he did on “Benson” when he kiddingly reprimanded another writer for tapping the bobblehead - one of himself, as it happens - on his desk. (That event, by the way, led him into a lengthy discussion about the evolution of his character’s ongoing quirk of despising anyone putting anything on his desk.) Kyra Sedwick was definitely in the house, but she was so swarmed by writers that I didn’t get to talk to her solo; I did, however, lean in and get a few quotes as she responded to other people’s questions. Accordingly, she was in her character’s office as she fielded their questions, and, as I walked out the office door, I walked right into Raymond Cruz, who plays Detective Sanchez. I introduced myself, and we chatted for a couple of minutes…and when I referred to Bullz-Eye as “the guys’ portal to the web,” he immediately decided that, with a title like that, he was going to have to check it out. I continued to wander ’round the set, walking past Corey Reynolds (Sgt. Gabriel), Robert Gossett (Commander Taylor), Jon Tenney (Agent Fritz Howard), Anthony John Denison (Det. Andy Flynn), and Michael Paul Chan (Detective Mike Tao), all in conversations with various writers, but before I could really get into conversation with anyone else, we got the call-up to head out. On our way out the door, we were provided with…well, I’ll hold off on discussing the swag I scored, mostly because I’m planning to do a whole piece about the stuff I scored during the course of the tour. But, still, it was nice stuff. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and Heroes and TCA Press Tour and TV Sci-Fi and Fall TV Preview Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
I’ve always liked Julianna Margulies. She was great on “E.R.,” of course, but she’s also done brief guest-starring turns on shows from “Scrubs” to “The Sopranos” where she managed to make an impact in only a very few episodes. And, of course, let us not forget her role as spunky stewardess…sorry, flight attendant…Claire Miller in “Snakes on a Plane.” But, at least on the surface, I’m not getting a whole lot off “Canterbury’s Law” that makes me think, “This will be Margulies’ triumphant return to television!” I mean, it’s a lawyer show. There are already a lot of lawyer shows. Will this really stand out? I mean, Marguilies’ character - Elizabeth Canterbury - is described as “a rebellious female defense attorney who puts her career on the line to take on risky and unpopular cases,” and it was also mentioned during the panel that Canterbury has a tortured past. So, what, it’s “House” as a female lawyer rather than a male doctor…? Because you know I won’t be the only critic who makes that comparison… The one thing that’s particularly eye-catching…beyond Juliana herself, of course…is the fact that Denis Leary is one of the show’s producers. Given his success with the critically-acclaimed “Rescue Me,” it’s fair to say that he has a certain amount of experience with blending humor and drama, so maybe I’m being too hard on the show. Producer Jim Serpico says on Leary’s involvement that “he’s not involved day-to-day on set or looking at the sets and locations, but he’s involved in the stories and big-picture casting decisions.” So that’s uplifting news, at least. Beyond that, I call it wait-and-see…as in, “I’ll have to wait and see the pilot.” I will, however, close by throwing out a few revelations dropped by Marguilies during the panel:
* She never, ever had any intention of going back to “E.R.,” not in any capacity. “I’m not one to retrace my steps,” she says. * She would, however, love to work with George Clooney again. “We’ve been talking about that from the day we left ‘ER,’ she admits. “We both said one day, we’ll do a movie together. We needed enough time away so there has to be at least 10 years in between Doug and Carole for anyone to see us other than that. So I trust him. He’s going to find something. Hopefully, he’ll direct it, and we’ll, you know, do something funny together.” * She was a little surprised that the producers of “The Sopranos” didn’t bring her character back for the last season. “After the last episode from last season, the one with me and Michael Imperioli, they said, ‘We want her back,’” she revealed. “So they put me on hold for awhile. So we thought it would be a sort of a bigger storyline, but I totally understand. I was actually really impressed how they used me. It was so brief, but it was an important moment, I think, for James Gandolfini’s character just to, you know, have part of that whole storyline come to an end. I wish…please, I wish I had been on every episode. That was one of the best jobs I’ve ever had.” You know how you can tell how tired we’re getting? No-one asked her what she thought of the last episode of the show. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
Here’s how they introduced Fox’s new docu-soap, “Nashville”: “A high-stakes drama, it features an attractive cast of dreamers and dream makers in Nashville, Tennessee. The unique new series follows a vibrant group of young people as their hopes, lives, and loves unfold in a town that can make or break you.” Wow. I don’t care. Okay, no, sorry, I guess I do. Or, at least, as a music fan, I guess I’m supposed to, anyway. The thing is…and I think the man referenced in the subject line of this posting would agree…that no matter how this series pans out, it’s not gonna be anywhere close to the reality of what it’s like to be a struggling musician. I mean, just about everyone on the panel for this show was pretty. And by that, I mean that you know someone at Fox determined at some point how unattractive was too unattractive, and that the music you’re gonna hear is gonna be about as mainstream as humanly possible. And because of these factors, I just don’t see what this show is going to offer me that I can’t experience vicariously by talking to, say, Mike Farley. Or, for that matter, about 3/4 of the bands who are my friends on MySpace.
Still, I’ll give credit to contestant (or whatever they’re calling them) Jamey Johnson, who, when the panel was asked if they’d seen the film “The Thing Called Love” and how accurate it was, replied, “That movie was pretty authentic. I think it had a great plot to it, but by and large, you just don’t move to Nashville and get everything handed to you. You’ve got to work for it, you know. I think that movie kind of depicted that, but it didn’t really show how long it takes. I know guys that have been in town for seven or eight years and they’re just now getting their first song cut.” Yeah, but why do I suspect that this show won’t take nearly that long before every member of its cast ends up with a record deal? Sorry, I don’t really have a lot to say about this show that’s particularly complimentary, I realize. I mean, I’ll check it out and see how the first episode plays, but I’m going in with the reasonable presumption that it will in no way live up to the actual reality of the life of struggling musicians in Nashville…and I’m betting I’ll be right. Filed under: TV and News and Interviews and Documentaries and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 Top 3 reasons that make “The Return of Jezebel James” sound like it’s worth watching before you’ve even seen a single moment of the show: 1. It stars indie film goddess Parkey Posey. The premise of the series involves Parker’s character, an editor of childrens’ books at Harper-Collins, deciding that she wants to have a baby…but when she finds out that she can’t carry the child herself, she decides to kill two birds with one stone by renewing her relationship with her younger sister and asking her to carry the baby for her, offering her free room and board at her apartment while she’s pregnant. The writer sitting next to me said that the premise struck her as vaguely creepy, like the younger sister was basically trading the use of her womb for access to free cable, but, hey, my wife and I did in vitro, so I know what it’s like to desperately want a kid of your own…and I know full well that if it’d reached a point where we needed someone to step up and carry our child for us, my sister would’ve been ready to roll. Okay, possibly too much information. But my point is that, ultimately, this is a show about family…which, of course, is an area in which the Palladinos have considerable experience.
“I like family dynamics,” says Amy, “because I can’t figure out mine. I really just enjoy it. ‘Gilmore,’ to me, was — yes, it was a mother and daughter, but I also looked at it like Emily was sort of the third Gilmore. It was a multi-generational, sort of three women and their trials together, but the relationship was very different. You know, that was a relationship about two people who were instantly vested — they were so bonded, they finished each other’s sentences. They absolutely knew who they were. This relationship to me is so interesting a departure because it’s two women who just don’t know each other at all. They’ve never formed any sort of bond. It’s weird because they’re adults, but they’re just now starting to figure out who they are, how they react, what they like, what they don’t like, how they’re going to make each other crazy, how they’re not going to make each other crazy. And it’s just a wonderful dynamic. “I think that there’s not always the best parts on television for women,” she continued, “and I feel like maybe if you can throw a couple of great woman parts out there, why not? There’s a lot of “the bullet entered here” going on out there, but these are real, you know? It’s just really multi-dimensional characters, and that I like. I would like it in men. I would like it in chipmunks, two nice squirrels talking to each other, I’d be fine with that, too. Just as long as the dynamic is interesting and there’s places to go.” Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Comedies and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 It’s a little surprising that there hasn’t been a “Terminator” TV series before now, given how popular the franchise has been over the years, but here’s my theory as to why it finally happened: once Ahnuld took over as Governor of California, the producers decided, “Oh, well, if he’s not gonna be available to do more movies, we might as well hit the small screen.” Hey, I’m psyched. Yeah, I know, I say that a lot…but, seriously, the special effects in the pilot look sweet. Plus, what red-blooded American male can’t get into a cast which stars Lena Headey (”300″) as Sarah Connor and Summer Glau (”Serenity”) as the latest, sexiest model of Terminator? And in case you fall into a different male demographic - there, how’s that for a politically correct turn of phrase? - it’s worth noting that the shoes of John Connor are being filled by former “Heroes” star Thomas Dekker.
But if you’re a real sci-fi geek, you probably only have one question: where exactly does this series fall into the chronology of the three “Terminator” films? Producer Josh Friedman attempts to sort out the confusion. “When we first started this,” he explains, “people said, “This takes place between ‘T2′ and ‘T3,'’ and I think that was incorrect. As far as I’m concerned, this is ‘T3.’ I mean, this is a continuation of what I would call the Sarah Connor trilogy. So I think anything that happens after ‘T2′ is fair game for us. And I think the ending of ‘T2,’ the exploding killing Cyberdine, killing Miles Dyson, sort of changes the timeline for anything in the future.” Friedman went on to clarify that the ultimate fate of Sarah Connor as referenced in “T3″ - she succumbed to leukemia, of all things - is no longer to be considered to be a given; fellow producer James Middleton added, “We’re taking a phrase that is very important in ‘T2′: ‘No fate, but what we make.’ And this is a new fate for Sarah Connor, so we are creating an entirely new timeline.” Of course, it will probably not surprise you to learn that, of our number, at least one person was simply unwilling to accept this answer at face value. “At the end of ‘Terminator 2,’” began a reporter, “it looked as though they had saved the future. And in ‘Terminator 3,’ basically they were stuck with the future that ‘Terminator 1′ came from. Does your show believe that that loop is inevitable, or are they still trying to change the future to the point where it never gets to the rise of the machines?” Rather than simply saying, “I’m sorry, but answering your question would wreak havoc on the space-time continuum,” Middleton actually responded thoughtfully: “Our characters operate and fight a battle every episode based on faith that they can prevent Judgment Day. Now they’re going to do everything that they can to do that. But the odds against them are formidable. They have a formidable enemy. So how they operate every day is to fight the fight the best they can in each episode.” (Perhaps more amazingly, the reporter accepted this answer!) With all these references to the films, you’re probably wondering the same thing we were: what are the odds of us actually managing to see that aforementioned Governor of California on the show? Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Action and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
I’m not sure if Dr. House is actually an anti-hero, given that, even with his terribly irascible manner, he still manages to save the day far more often that not. Still, he’s a drug addict with a nasty temper who makes decisions based less on a will-the-patient-live-or-die mindset and more of a I-just-want-to-know-if-I’m-right mindset, and that’s not exactly the kind of guy who find yourself rooting for, per se. In fact, it’s a minor miracle that it took a full three seasons for his team of doctors to abandon him out of sheer frustration with his methods. As the show enters its fourth season with a few Emmy nominations in hand, it sounds as though things are going to continue to go great guns. At the very least, it looks like everyone’s back in tow to some extent: although their characters had all tendered their resignations by the end of Season 3, Omar Epps, Jennifer Morrison, and Jesse Spencer were all on the panel. Producer Katie Jacobs admitted, “We struggled with how to sort of do exactly this. The truth is, everybody is back eventually, and everybody is back having changed and in different capacities. And, you know, it’s also sort of organic, so we only know where it’s going to a point. For us, for me, it’s the most exciting season we’ve started off so far because it feels very organic. You know, the last two seasons we’ve done an arc — season 2, season 3 we started out with arcs that involved other characters as a way to explore more deeply House’s character. But I think that their three-year fellowship, and all in different ways, has sort of naturally come to an end. “In the first episode,” she explains, “House is alone, and House is trying to solve cases by himself. Of course, Cuddy is pissed and Wilson thinks he’s losing his mind. And Cuddy will insist that he hire a new team…but he will do it in a very House-ian way. Over the first bunch of episodes. he’s going to call in all the candidates, all the resumes on his desk — 40, I think it is, a large number — and we’re going to see who survives. We’re going to play a ‘House’ version of “Survivor” and see what candidates really will make the best part of House’s team. And House is going to give all the candidates numbers; because he can’t remember their names, they’re actually going to wear running numbers!” Meanwhile, the trio of actors formerly known as House’s team remained pleased to be on the show, even if they really have no idea where they stand at the moment. Morrison says that they found out about their characters shuffling off the show when “they told us all that they wanted to talk to us over lunch one day, which does feel a little bit like being called into the principal’s office. But they were fantastic and let us know what they were planning on doing. Spencer corrected her. “Well, they didn’t actually know, though, did they? Well, I mean, they told us that we were coming back, but they didn’t know at that time in what capacity we were actually going to come back. And we are still not entirely sure. (But) we know we are back.” Jacobs hinted, however, that just because we see them doesn’t mean they’re actually there. “(House) thinks he sees them. And Wilson is saying, ‘You know, you’re just feeling guilty, and you’re out of your mind.’ And Chase is working in Arizona in a hospital and Cameron’s with him. And Foreman is at Mercy Hospital running his own diagnostic Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
One of the cooler panels during the course of the TCA Press Tour was unquestionably the “dinner theater” provided by the cast of “Family Guy,” who did a table read of their upcoming 100th episode for the assembled critics as they ate lunch. We were warned ahead of time that, yes, it was the unedited version of the script, and that several bits had been removed from the upcoming air version, but I didn’t hear any complaints after the fact, so I guess those of us with delicate constitutions managed to survive. I won’t give away any of the jokes - I mean, the show isn’t even scheduled to air until October - but I will say that it’s called “Stewie Kills Lois,” that there are jokes involving The Beatles, Barbra Streisand, and “The Lake House,” that there are tentative plans for guest appearances by James Woods and Rob Lowe, and that it’s a two-parter, so even we don’t know what happens in the second half. Oh, and I’m guessing that Peter’s bit where he reminisces about he and Lois going to an abortionist is almost certainly not going to be in the version that you see on Fox. After the read, the cast remained on stage and took a few questions from the crowd…the first of which, unsurprisingly, was, “Seth, what exactly did you cut out of that script?”
“Oh, I think the abortion one was about eight times as long,” MacFarlane laughed. “Some of this stuff, actually, you will only see on the DVD. There’s some stuff that was, you know, judiciously edited with our approval. And some stuff — for example, the swearing you’ll only see on the DVD. Since that’s become such a big part of “Family Guy,” there are — occasionally if we bleep something for TV, we’ll let it slide on the DVD.” Most surprising admission from MacFarlane: that they’re never out to shock for the sake of shocking. “The thing that I try to do with ‘Family Guy,’” he explained, “is to kind of have this balance between the classic and the edgy. You know, we do a lot of poop jokes, but at the same time, we use a 45-piece orchestra every week with a full string section. If something is just shocking and not funny, then we’ll cut it out. And we have these table reads every week, which we do for each episode, in which we have a very good cross section of artists and people from the outside and writers, and, you know, the studio network is there. And no one is shy about gasping in horror if we have crossed the line, and so it’s a very good barometer.” Best bit of gossip from MacFarlane: “Certain members of the Brolin family were amused by the (Barbra Streisand) gag that we did. That’s all I’ll say.” Most surprising anecdote: the FCC responded to the show’s FCC-themed episode…and thought it was funny! MacFarlane admitted that it “surprised the hell out of me…and gives me a little bit of hope!” Least surprising question: let’s just say it involved a reference to manatees. (I’m as guilty as anyone; I did the same thing when I talked to him…but I like to think that my comedic timing was better.) Of course, MacFarlane offered up his now-stock response about how he’s actually a big fan of “South Park,” but what he also provided was a surprisingly solid explanation as to why they enjoy doing the cutaways that Parker and Stone busted their balls about. “The cutaways they sort of see as a deviation from the story,” MacFarlane explained, “(but) we sort of see them as, in a weird way, kind of these animated versions of, like, one-frame ‘Far Side’ cartoons that are sort of, you know, something you can only do really, I think, effectively in the animation medium. And, you know, they’re just kind of laughs for laughs’ sake. You don’t have to know what’s going on with the plot. You don’t have to know what’s going on with character drive. They’re just pure comedy…we hope!” Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Comedies and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again to give credit where credit is due: if it wasn’t for my wife, I wouldn’t watch nearly as much “Bones” as I do. As a diehard David Boreanaz fan, she was there from Episode 1 of the series to watch her boy in his new gig…and, not surprisingly, that meant that I was there a fair amount of time as well. It’s come quite a long ways over the past few years, with Emily Deschanel growing into her character…or maybe it’s her character doing the evolving; I can’t always tell…and the rapport between Deschanel and Boreanaz getting stronger all the time. Additionally, the ensemble cast has continued to gel, which only adds to the success of the show. * The character of Zach Addy - played by Eric Millegan - went off to Iraq at the end of last season, but since Millegan was on the panel, it was reasonable for us to presume that he’d be back for Season 3. Before Millegan could answer, however, creator Hart Hanson interrupted, “Don’t verify it, Eric! Waffle! Just because you’re here on the panel doesn’t mean you’re back!” Millegan looked for a moment as though he thought Hanson might be serious, but when Hanson admitted that he was kidding, Millegan revealed, “Yeah, I’m back. And, gosh, I don’t want to give too much away, but he was sent home early. He was supposed to be in Iraq longer, and he was sent home early, and in the show we’re going to explore why he was sent home early and how he feels about that.” * As far as Fox’s repeated threats to move the show to an invariably-deadly Friday night timeslot, Hanson stated with conviction, “We’re not going.” Would that he had the power to make that decision. “We’ll do what we can,” he finally said. “You know, FOX does what they can. They’re fair. They have a good plan. We’d just like to perform well enough that we don’t have to move to Fridays.” * Speaking on the subject of the definite sexual tension between Booth and Bones, Deschanel offered a titillating revelation. “I think this season we’re growing deeper as friends and other things,” she says, “just deeper as a relationship, pretty soon. I mean, we investigate a certain kind of fetish that comes up in a crime that we’re investigating and that kind of brings up a lot of sexual tension and stuff between us.” (”Pony play,” cracked Boreanaz.) Going on, Deschanel said, “And you can see how we have been affected by being left at the altar after Angela and Hodgins left their wedding and how that kind of affected us and how we’re forced in some way to face what we feel for each other. And you’ll see that at the beginning of the season, how we’re dealing with that.” Boreanaz added, “You’ll see us very separate and apart and not kind of clicking, I think, in the beginning. Then you’ll see how that kind of gets back and working and how it sparks up again and the reasons why it works, the reasons why it doesn’t. Again, we can possibly throw in a therapist maybe to help us with our relationship in order to deal with the workplace, which I think is — I don’t think you’ve ever seen that on television, so I think that’s a really unique insight into how these two characters will grow with each other as the show grows.” Hanson, however, got the last word on the subject…as is only appropriate for the show’s creator. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: 1 Comment Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
I know, you think this is going to be a facetious posting, but, honestly, it’s not. Foxworthy hosted the “Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?”-themed lunch during Fox’s TCA days…an event which found us critics receiving school kits, bags of Foxworthy’s beef jerky, school lunch trays bearing the show’s logo, and an inflatable globe…and I don’t think it would’ve been humanly possible for him to come off as a nicer, more genuine guy.
One of the writers asked Foxworthy what he thought about teachers utilizing the show as almost an instructional aid of sorts, and you could tell his answer was based not on what anyone else had suggested he should say if the question came up, but, rather, straight from the heart. “You know what?” he began. “I think (teaching) is probably one of the most difficult jobs in the country and probably one of the most underpaid and appreciated. I expected, when I started doing this show, to get more mail from kids. I mean, there were kids who obviously didn’t know me as a comedian or know the ‘Blue Collar’ stuff. I have been amazed — and I see it in the mail every week that I get from teachers, over and over again - at teachers saying, ‘You have made it cool to be smart again.’ And they record the show and they take it into the classroom and they show the show and the kids are interested in it and they use it as a learning tool. So that was a byproduct of it that I didn’t even foresee when I started it. But to me, that’s one of the coolest elements, personally, away from the stage, that it has made it cool to be smart. You’re not made fun of for being a nerd. It shows kids going on TV and beating adults at something, and it’s with their brains. So, you know, hopefully, maybe this elevates education and how we deal with it as a priority in this country.” Foxworthy is also very, very aware of the fact that the kids on his show are, indeed, kids first and foremost, and that something as inevitable as having them provide a wrong answer to a contestant on the show might well really upset them. “There’s always the risk of that,” he admits. “They’re not only kids, they’re humans, so they’re fallible. We were filming two days ago, and Cody was at the podium, and the guy decided to copy Cody’s paper, and Cody was wrong. And I looked over, and I thought Cody was going to cry. Well, if I had been standing where Cody was, I would have felt the same way that he did. But it’s like, I went back over to the classroom, I took Cody, and I said, ‘All right, come over here and look at the rest of the answers. Two of your classmates didn’t know the answer to that, too. So you shouldn’t feel bad about that.’ “It’s more important for me to be a good dad than it is to be a good comedian or a good actor or a good game show host,” continued Foxworthy, “and I have proven (it). I’ve turned down movies for the past three summers because I don’t want to give a summer away with my kids. I’ve always been very concerned about having kids on TV. It’s always made me feel very weird. When I did (’The Jeff Foxworthy Show’), Haley Joel Osment’s dad came and spent the day with me, and he said, ‘I really want to know what you’re about before I even allow my kid to come to work here.” So it’s always been a little bit of a weird thing for me with kids doing this. I love the fact that these kids this year, none of them have aspirations to be an actor. They’re just there because they like being smart and being funny. We have strict guidelines about how long they can work, when they have to take a break. If I have to err on one side of this, it’s always in their favor because, more than anything else, I want them to be kids. And the great thing about this, it’s not strung out over nine months like a sitcom or a drama is. We’ve shot two and a half weeks, we’ll shoot another week in August, and we’re done, so they get to have the rest of their year to go to their regular school and to grow up and be regular kids.” Okay, sorry, those were big quotes, and it’s probably just because I’m really feeling my inner dad-ness today, but I just walked away from this panel thinking that Jeff Foxworthy is the kind of guy you wish every single celebrity could be, and I wanted to share that. Filed under: TV and Actors and News and Interviews and Stand-Up Comics and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
There’s so much that’s right about “Back to You” that it’s almost a little too easy to suggest that it could singlehandedly revive the traditional multi-camera before-a-live-studio-audience sitcom. And, yet, how can you not feel like that may well prove to be the case when its stars include a comedy trifecta in Kelsey Grammer (”Cheers,” “Frasier”), Patricia Heaton (”Everybody Loves Raymond”), and Fred Willard (just about every comedy ever) and its executive producers are Steven Levitan (”Greg the Bunny,” “The Larry Sanders Show”), Christopher Lloyd (”Frasier,” “The Golden Girls”), and James Burrows (just about every comedy ever)? You see my point, I think.
Heaton said that it was her manager who originally pitched the idea that she and Grammer would make a good onscreen duo, but the idea appealed to her immediately. “It just seemed right,” she said. “I thought, ‘Oh God, me and Kelsey together would be a lot of fun.’ And what can we do? We’re thinking maybe college professors, maybe that should be it. He’ll be the old, dead, white male writers professor, and I’ll be the women’s lib professor, and we’ll do something like that. And it just kind of didn’t hear anything about it. And then I was doing this play in New York for 600 bucks a week, and they said there’s this sitcom, and I said, ‘Yes, whatever it is.’” “That’s very flattering, Patty,” said Levitan. “That college professors pilot sounds interesting, too,” nudged Willard. “Don’t forget that.” Despite having played the character of Frasier Crane for decades, Grammer stands ready to dive headlong into another role. “I’m an actor. That’s what we do. I played (Frasier) as long as I did only because he remained interesting to play. This guy has a whole new set of difficulties that are equally interesting.” Grammer also mused, “I like to think that based upon my knowledge of most television newscasting now, it has nothing do with the news, anyway. So I’m very happy to just be another performer pretending to be a performer.” As far as the difficulties for Lloyd in seeing Grammer in a different light than the one he viewed him in as a producer of “Frasier” for so many years, Lloyd says there was a certain amount struggle in finding a new character for him. “We wanted someone that was obviously not Frasier again,” he explained, “but not so far away from Frasier that people would say, ‘Well, what, he’s a sheriff in Alaska?’ It had to be close enough to him that people could accept him, but also to utilize some of his great strengths. He plays big attitudes well, and pomposity. We wanted sort of a public forum for him, which is how we wound up on the news and using Steve’s background there.” I’ll close with a great anecdote from Levitan, one which, by itself, is pretty much what has kept him considering a TV-news-based sitcom for all these years: “There was an anchorman in Madison, Wisconsin, (and) when we were trying to come up with, ‘Well, what’s a good idea for Kelsey?,’ this guy sort of popped into my head. It was the night that John Lennon was shot, and it was very sad. They went to the footage around The Dakota and people crying. It was very sad. You know it was a very big moment for him. They came back to him, and he went, very dramatically, ‘Lennon is survived by his wife, Topo Gigio.’ That has always stayed with me. What’s so funny to me about local news is there’s this great narcissism pretending to be altruism. It’s just a wonderful place for a larger-than-life character to be a big fish in a small pond.” Sold! Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Comedies and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: 2 Comments Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
That’s right, CW: rub it in. Be sure we completely and totally remember that you cancelled “Veronica Mars” by starting a new show called “Gossip Girl” (based on the popular series of teen novels) and, for the voiceovers provided by the never-seen title character, hiring the former Ms. Mars herself, Kristen Bell. (Frankly, I was surprised that there wasn’t more of an uproar about that during the course of the panel, but, no, the big question people wanted answered was whether or not Bell’s voiceover was a one-off for the pilot…and, if you’re wondering that, too, the answer is, no, she’s supposedly here for the long haul.) So the good news about “Gossip Girl” is that one of its executive producers is Josh Schwartz, late of “The O.C.” and also currently an executive producer on NBC’s “Chuck.” Schwartz has always had a wit about him, as well as a seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of pop culture, so that would appear to bode well. Unfortunately, from what I saw of the series, it really didn’t offer much in the way of that usual wit; it basically seemed to be yet another series about rich kids suffering through teen angst and shitty morals, despite (or possibly because of) having a buttload of money. “Well, we’ll try to get funnier in the future,” replied Schwartz.
As to the despicable actions of some of these kids, from underage drinking to date rape, Schwartz says, “These are flawed characters, and they’re trying to do good, (but) in the environment that they grow up in, they don’t always have the best role models. They don’t always have an example set for them. But I think as long as we understand that they’re searching to do the right thing and that we see conquences for their actions, the world isn’t nearly as depraved as it appears to be. In fact, the Humphrey family (the main characters of the series) is an incredibly important component of that. I think they’re our audience surrogate. They’re our proxy, our way into that world, and they have a great perspective on that world. “The sort of the money that those kids in Orange County grew up with was nice,” Schwartz continues, unabashedly referencing his former gig, “but compared to the these kids and these families, it’s chump change. This is really royalty, or the closest thing we have to it, these sort of young socialites-to-be. You have to be born into this level of wealth. So that’s a big difference. And these kids — you know, in Orange County, it was very suburban. It was very sort of protective. It was very safe. And those kids weren’t necessarily as well-traveled. And I think education is incredibly important to this crowd, and these kids are really worldly and very well-traveled as well.” There is at least one moment within the plot that does seem to lend itsself toward amusing possibilities: Mr. Humphrey was apparently a member of a band that has been declared one of the Best Forgotten Bands of the 1990s. The name of the band? Lincoln Hawk, named after Sylvester Stallone’s character in “Over the Top.” Okay, now that’s funny… Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Gossip and Interviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
* Your obligatory non-answer about “Lost”: “(The creators) would need to address where the show will head,” said ABC President Stephen McPherson. “They have not released whether it will take place with flash-forwards or flashbacks. They pitched where they’re going this year and where the next two years will take us, and I honestly think that, now that we have this specific end date, it allows them to craft that story in the next 48 episodes they want they want, and I think that running the episodes straight through will be best way to (display) that.” * “Dance Acts” is a spin-off in the works from “Dancing with the Stars,” based on a similar spin-off in the UK. The judges have teams of dancers, competing against each other. * Dana Delaney is joining the cast of “Desperate Housewives,” along with the already-announced Nathan Fillion. * Harold Perrineau will be returning to “Lost” as Michael…and, on that note, let me tell you about a moment during this panel which really, really grated on my nerves: When McPherson acknowledged that the creators of “Lost” would be making an announcement tomorrow at Comic-Con, in San Diego, several writers just went apeshit about the utter ridiculousness that they would dare to bypass the Television Critics Association gathering in favor of a “fan convention.” Um…how about the fact that the shows are about their fans and not their critics? I mean, I didn’t even blink when they said that was going to be the case. Of course the fans should hear the info first, if it’s do-able…and if that’s what the creators want to do, then what’s the big honking deal? But, no, people kept pressing and pressing, throwing out statements about the state of the newspaper industry and how their editors would be upset if they found out that breaking news was available but wasn’t going to be given to them, and so on. Finally, it reached the point where someone actually called Damon Lindelof to get his permission for McPherson to give us the news, which was that nugget about Michael coming back.
As God as my witness, I hope Lindelof has more super secret info up his sleeve for the fans. If I was a fan, and it’d been built up to me that I was going to get exclusive info when I showed up for that panel, I would be pissed if I found out that, oh, sorry, the critics strong-armed us and made us give it to them first. I’m just sayin’, is all. UPDATE, 12:03 PM: I spoke to McPherson in the lobby a few minutes ago, revealed myself to be as much of a fanboy as a critic, and asked if indeed Lindelof had saved some exclusive information for the Comic-Con panel. He didn’t really confirm or deny - which I’d kind of expected, since he knows full well that my peers would probably pummel him if he they read such a thing - but he did acknowledge that the Comic-Con crowd would be getting far more access to Lindelof than the TCA is, since there’s no “Lost” panel at our press tour. Therefore, I think it’s reasonable to infer - if not an ironclad guarantee by any means - that, logically, the chances of the fans getting more information than the critics are pretty good. Which makes me happy. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and News and Interviews and TV Dramas and Desperate Housewives and Lost and External Entertainment and External TV and TCA Press Tour and Fall TV Preview Comments: 1 Comment Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
