Shame on you, J.J. Abrams. The sight of Sydney Bristow – in the third term of her pregnancy – running around conducting CIA field ops is absolutely absurd. First, Jennifer Garner gets her former beau (Michael Vartan) kicked off the show because he wasn’t friendly with her new guy, then she gets knocked up and the producers are forced to work her pregnancy into the show’s storyline. They should have waited to start filming until after she gave birth – I can’t believe I’m typing this – so the show would at least have some of its credibility after killing off its best character. Hear that? It’s the sound of “Alias” being deleted from TiVo season passes across the country.
Category: Gossip (Page 50 of 50)
We’ve all had our gripes about network doofus Fox in the past, whether it was the cancellation of our favorite shows (i.e. “Family Guy,” “Firefly”) or the mistreatment of others (i.e. “Arrested Development”). Still, Fox has done a few things right, hasn’t it? “24” is a blockbuster hit. So much so, apparently, that the network is willing to bump the final nine episodes of the equally successful “Prison Break” in order to begin the fifth season of “24” in timely fashion. Are these guys complete idiots or what? “Prison Break” premieres with great ratings, only to disappear for a month in order to make room for the MLB playoffs. It then returns in late October for about five more weeks before taking another break – this time for Christmas/New Year’s Eve.
Why does Fox choose to continually shoot itself in the foot every season? And why can’t the remaining episodes of “Prison Break” air either before or after “24”? There can’t be anything better to vie for the spot, and “Prison Break” represents the most similar programming the network has to fans of “24.” It all makes sense. Then again, that’s what got Fox into all this trouble in the first place. Note to the Fox executives: fire yourselves and hire people that know a thing or two about running a television station. Sigh.
Recently, Entertainment Weekly ran an article comparing the big screen introduction of “Serenity” star Nathan Fillion to that of Harrison Ford during his “Star Wars” days. What’s upsetting about the piece is that the magazine is merely theorizing that the characters of Han Solo and Malcolm Reynolds are similar, and not the two actors. While Nathan Fillion is certainly a good enough actor to reach star status (he’s even got a new horror film with Universal coming out in March 2006), he probably won’t make it for a few more years, and most certainly not playing his old “Firefly” character since the poor box office numbers have likely killed any chance of a sequel to “Serenity” or a TV rebirth. Still, since when has gauging an actor’s future by one role ever worked? Solo and Reynolds are nothing alike, and neither is Fillion and Ford, so just drop it EW, okay?
FOLLOW US!
CATEGORIES
© 2026 Premium Hollywood
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑