Adrian Hodges: Wow, look at your recorder. I used to do a bit of journalism when I first started out, but my tape recorder was… (Holds his hands several inches apart, then laughs) That’s technology for you!

Bullz-Eye: Hey, mine’s shrunk by two or three times in size just in the past few years! (Laughs) Well, first off, I just want to say that I’m a big “Primeval” fan.

AH: Thank you! Cool!

BE: I was not familiar with the original 1970s version of “Survivors,” but I take it that you were at least somewhat of a fan of it.

AH: Yeah, I was, in that kind of general way we are when we’re kids and we watch TV. I was maybe 15 or 16, something like that, and I remember very clearly the impact of the first episode. If I’m honest, I’m hazy about some of the other, later episodes, but I do remember the extraordinary shock of the imagery of a husband dying, of things that were stand-out images in my head, and you carry that through the years. It was something I remembered very well, so it was really kind of great to be asked to have another look at it, you know?

BE: So they pitched it to you, then?

AH: They did. What happened was that I’d done “Primeval,” as you know, and I was very actively looking for a genre show that I could do in a slightly…well, in Britain, it’s in a later timeslot. Something that was a bit more…I don’t want to say more adult, because I think that “Primeval” is adult, but not a family show in the same way. However you define “family.” (Laughs) So “Survivors” was perfect. BBC had had this great success with reviving “Doctor Who,” so they were looking at some of their old shows and saying, “Well, that one wouldn’t work, but maybe this one would.” And “Survivors” was one they thought might work again, so they basically came to me and said, “What do you think?” And I thought it was great, not so much because of the set-up, not just because of the post-apocalyptic thing, which is fascinating, but it’s kind of not the point. The point is what happens afterwards, and that’s the fun of it for me as a writer, ‘cause you don’t often get a chance to write about people in the most extreme situation. So that’s why I wanted to do it.

BE: What was the profile of the original show? Was it semi-high? I ask because I’m a kind of an Anglophile, so I was surprised that I hadn’t heard of it.

AH: I don’t think it was, really. In terms of being a success at the time, it was, but it wasn’t, like, a thing like with “Doctor Who,” where you carry that memory with you, and so that when it was revived, there was this huge desire to like it. It was one of those shows where…people didn’t want to not like “Doctor Who.” They wanted to like it. It was a nice thing to happen, and it doesn’t often happen. There aren’t many shows that people are so fond of that they can go with that attitude to them. Usually, as you know, when you remake or re-imagine a show, you get the opposite reaction, which is that people don’t really want you to do it, because they liked it the first time. And, now, there’s been such an acceleration of remaking of formats. It’s a very dangerous area. I thought “Survivors” was a good one because it was a success at the time, which proved that it was a strong idea, but it wasn’t so well known that it would be something that everybody would be saying, “Oh, but you didn’t do that scene, you didn’t do it like this, you didn’t do that.” The truth is, it was the best part of 40 years ago, and it’s not a classic. It’s a very good show. The first episode of the original is a model of brilliant series set-up writing, and, indeed, much of the rest of it. But it is fundamentally a show which was well-liked but probably not as well-remembered as some. Not everything can be a classic, you know. That’s the way it is. I couldn’t believe that “Edge of Darkness” was being remade. It’s amazing, after all these years, to suddenly see it. So stuff comes around.

BE: So did you revisit that first episode of “Survivors” before you made this new version, or did you just kind of go from memory and dive into the new version?

AH: I watched the whole of the first series before I started writing, and I don’t usually do that with things where there’s existing material. I mean, in a completely different genre, I’ve just done a new version of a film called “The Go Between.” I’ve adapted the L.P. Hartley novel, and I didn’t look at the film of that, because I deliberately didn’t want to be influenced by it. I’ve only looked at it relatively recently, and it’s interesting to see what they did and what I did, and that’s fine. But with “Survivors,” I thought that it was…well, because I was basing some of my material on that original material, it seemed respectful and sensible to look at the way they’d done it, and also to remind myself what they’d done well and maybe what they hadn’t done quite so well, just to see how it would go. I always knew I was going to move away from that version quite quickly, but I wanted to make sure that whatever was good…I mean, I’m not crazy: if it’s good, I’m going to do it again. (Laughs)

BE: How did you go about selecting your cast? Was it a case of finding folks you’d worked with in the past, or was it more of a standard audition process?

AH: There’s a little bit of that. I mean, because of the way television works, as you know, there’s a certain pressure to use a certain profile of actor in certain roles. We knew we needed a leading lady that meant something to the British audience, and that’s, in truth, not that big a pool of people. It’s tough to find exactly the right person, particularly a woman who’s grown up, a woman with children who’s believable as an ordinary woman. So Julie (Graham) was actually pretty straightforward, because she was one of only one or two who really fit the bill…and, luckily, she wanted to do it! So at that point, we closed that. That was done. The other guys…it’s an interest process. Paterson (Joseph), funnily enough, was a very early choice, and then we went ‘round the houses looking at other people and then came all the way back to Paterson. And that sometimes happens, ‘cause it’s a bit like when you get something right first time, and you think, “Have I really got it right?” And you go and try prove it sixteen other different ways, but you still come back to the right answer, so that was Paterson. The others…it’s just a question of trying to find the right faces for the roles, the right talent and the right look, and that’s hopefully what we did.

(SPOILER ALERT: If you haven’t watched the first episode of “Survivors” yet, then you’ll want to head off for a bit and pop back ‘round after you’ve had a chance to see it.)

BE: Freema Agyeman, I would think, would be considered high profile, especially here, given her time on “Doctor Who.”

AH: Well, Freema was…you’ve seen the first episode?

BE: I have, yes.

AH: As you know, we do something with Freema where…I was very keen that we make it clear to people that nobody was safe, and that was the thinking behind that. The decision to actually approach Freema wasn’t mine. That was the BBC who thought that would be a cool thing to do. I wanted to do something both to the original fan base and to the people watching the show now, and…the character that Freema plays – Jenny – was one of the ones who did survive in the original. I wanted to make sure that people didn’t think they knew where it was all going. In the original, Jenny goes to see the doctor, and the next morning, the doctor’s dead and Jenny goes off to London. But in this, the doctor survives and Jenny dies. So, y’know, it’s kind of funny, that. (Smiles)

BE: Speaking of that aspect, where nobody is safe, one of the things I liked best about the first episode is that with Julie’s character, Abby, you constantly believe that her son could very well be dead. That made it extremely gripping.

AH: I hope so.

BE: Obviously, that’s a thread that continues throughout the series…

AH: And he may well be dead. We’ll just have to see! It’s very important that you believe it, I think. And I think the thing there that I find so moving is tha,t if you knew he was dead, you could either commit suicide or begin living again. If you don’t know, you’re in a state of suspended animation. You are forced to hope. As I say more than once in the show, and it’s a phrase that other people have used, it’s not despair that kills you, it’s hope.

BE: You mentioned during the panel that you have high hopes for a third series of “Survivors.” Do you have an end game in mind? Not necessarily how long you’d want it to run, but whenever it does end, do you know how you’d like it to end?

AH: Yes, pretty much, I do. I have a very clear idea of where I want the characters to be…if I keep the same group of characters. And some of that depends on actors wanting to do it. I really would like to get three years of the show, so if I could do that, I would think that it’s up to me to give a satisfying ending. If we then found that people wanted more, then we’d regenerate it and keep doing different things. There’s plenty of options. It’s just that I think, for this group of characters, three years would be about right. At that point, you’d probably begin to see where they were going. And you want to settle them. I don’t like stories where you’re left in mid-air at the end of a season.

BE: If you can answer this without giving anything away for people who haven’t seen the show yet, which character would you say will surprise viewers the most insofar as how they change from the beginning to the end?

AH: I think that’s an easy one, in some ways. I think that Tom Price, played by Max Beasley, is a constant source of surprise even to himself.

BE: Now, he’s also someone who was pretty high profile…at least from my point of view, anyway, as I was a big “Hotel Babylon” fan. He seems like a pretty decent “get.”

AH: He was great, and he was the only actor we approached for that role. I should’ve mentioned that at the beginning. He was literally the only one that we saw, and he liked it, so that was easy.

BE: He’s certainly a complex character, at least based on the first episode, where you’re thinking, “Surely he’s going to change, given the current circumstances.” But, uh, no. Not really. (Laughs)

AH: No, not really. (Laughs) And he’s…I was kind of anxious to avoid the word “redemption,” but…there is a journey to go on, but it’s a complicated one, and it’s certainly one towards levels of feeling that he didn’t know he had. But whether that makes him a good man, I kind of doubt.

BE: Did any of the characters develop as a result of the people you cast in the roles? In other words, were they originally going a different way, but you realized it was easier to play to the actor a bit more?

AH: Yeah, there is a process that goes on there. I think one of the things about writing a series that’s such a wonderful challenge all the time is that you keep on developing the series right up to the point where you shoot a scene. There was a quality, for example, about Philip Rhys as Aal that I found…there’s a kind of sweetness about him, a softness, a gentleness, that’s very appealing, and as soon as he was in that role, Aal’s character became clearer and clearer to me. I mean, I had a starting point for Aal, but writing is sometimes a bit of a mystery. You don’t always know why you go somewhere with a character. It just seems like a good idea. And I think that the interaction between Philip and Aal was just so interesting that…with another actor, it might’ve gone in a different way, but Philip’s a really masculine man who, at the same time, seems soft and gentle as well. He found something in himself that I really liked. So Aal’s journey towards a kind of uneasy but paternal relationship with Najid is very touching, I think. That could’ve gone in a different way, but as soon as I saw Phil, it began to make sense.

BE: Are there any other series that you’d consider tackling a reboot of?

AH: I’d consider it, but…is there any one thing in particular? No. That’s tricky. There are books that I’d like to do that I don’t think I’ll ever get the chance to do. There’s a book called “The Magus,” by John Fowles, which is a massive obsession of mine, but the rights are held by United Artists or something, and it’s impossible to get them. Um…are there any other series? Let me think about that. (Considers the question) In this genre, possibly not, because there aren’t that many that have the ability to be of their time and also timeless, which I think is the appeal of “Survivors.” “Blake’s 7” is the other one that people often talk about redoing, and I know that somebody’s trying to do that. That seems to me to be…in a way, other shows have come along and done the same thing and done it well, and in a way, what would you be adding if you went back to “Blake’s 7”? You have to see where the changes are that make it interesting. So off the top of my head, no. But that isn’t to say that I wouldn’t if the right thing came along.

BE: I’ve never actually seen it, but there’s a British series I’ve read about on Wikipedia that sounds like it’s ripe for revival. Have you ever heard of “Timeslip”?

AH: Hmmm. Okay, I’m trying to place that one…

BE: It was a kid’s show, I believe.

AH: It’s funny, somebody mentioned another show to me today, and I’m struggling to remember that one as well. When I was kid, time travel was absolutely my #1 fun thing, and I still love it. There’s no time travel in “Survivors,” obviously, but there’s lot of it in “Primeval”…and even more of it in the next series! (Laughs) It’s just something so endlessly appealing about the notion of time and history being rearranged, you know? It’s just very attractive.

BE: Speaking of “Primeval,” I wanted to ask you a few questions about that series as well.

AH: Sure!

BE: I was actually here when you guys kickstarted the series at the TCA tour.

AH: Two years ago, yeah.

BE: It’s a great concept and great use of special effects.

AH: Oh, thank you.

BE: Now if I remember correctly…and I may not…the person who helped to design the show’s creatures actually based them in some way on scientific fact or, at least, scientific speculation.

AH: Well, what happened was…Tim (Haines) is really a scientist, anyway. That’s his background. He comes from a science background and a journalism background. Before he was a drama guy, he was a documentary guy, so the expertise that he brings to the show, apart from his storytelling ability, is in that area. And because he did “Walking with Dinosaurs,” he really made himself an expert in the special effects area. I think Tim is probably ahead of anybody in England in terms of appreciation of what special effects and CGI can do. I mean, he knows about animatronics, too, but those are slightly out of fashion because of cost, and CGI is obviously in, and Tim is brilliant with CGI. I’ll be the first to admit that that’s his thing…and it’s not mine! (Laughs) So we…yeah, obviously, we kind of muck about with the creatures and things, but their starting premise is always more or less true.

BE: To talk again about the whole nobody-is-safe thing, man, Douglas Henshall’s departure from the series…? Talk about startling!

AH: Yeah, well, it was meant to be! (Laughs) One of the things that can happen with a show like “Primeval” is that, because you’re dancing with death every week and being saved by the skin of your teeth, the audience begins to get lazy about thinking that there’s no real danger, that it won’t actually be real. And it was particularly kind of shocking to me that he would die at the end of a gun, because…it’s not a dinosaur in the end, it’s his crazy ex-wife with a gun. And that worked. That was always the ending I imagined for him. I always knew that Helen would be the end of him. It was not intended to be so early in that season, however, but unfortunately that was how it worked out with Douglas, because he wanted to go on and do different things, so we brought it in early in the series.

BE: How thrilled was he about his demise?

AH: He was great about it. He wanted the character to die. He didn’t want to just step through the anomaly and maybe reappear one day. He wanted it, so he was fully behind it and was okay with that. When he told us that he was going to move on, it was a big shock, because I thought that he was going to do the whole series, and it was very late in the day and we’d done a lot of storylining at that point, so we had to really reconsider everything pretty sharpish. But he was cool, and I said, “Look, you know, I think Cutter’s going to have to die, because it’s better from a storytelling point of view. I’ve got to give him that, because I can use that legacy in the drama for the rest of the series.” And he was absolutely on the side of that. He was cool about it.

BE: So what’s the status of the series? Is there going to be another series? And is there going to be a movie? Because I know there’s been talk about it for awhile.

AH: I hope there’ll be both! There will be another series, yeah. There’s going to be 13 more episodes, which we start shooting in March, so I’m right in the middle of that when I get home. We’ll start…I imagine they’ll start transmitting in the UK early next year, so it’s probably right about the same in America. It’s a longer gap than I would’ve wanted, but unfortunately there was a problem with ITV, and it took us awhile to get it sorted out. The film, I’m afraid, is just endless. It’s… (Sighs) Man, you know, my whole life is ticking by during these negotiations! (Laughs) There is still every intention of doing it, but we are still not completely finished with the deal with Warner Brothers, and the guy who’s writing it…oh, now it’s gone out of my head for a second, but…oh, Akiva Goldsman! He’s absolutely cool, he wants to do it, he’s very, very keen. We talk to him on a fairly regular basis. But it has been a living nightmare trying to get a deal sorted out. But I think we’re nearly there.

BE: When you do that, is that going to be moving on from the series, or will it be a different tale altogether?

AH: Yeah, it will be a different tale, but that’s going to be an interesting question, because what we have to do with Akiva when the deal is finally signed is sort out the parameters of where he can go with it and where we can’t let him go because it would ruin the franchise. So, clearly, we don’t expect him to follow the storyline of the TV show particularly, but we do expect him to make it possible for us to come back to the TV show intact. He can’t do something with the big-screen version that would make ours completely wrong, you know? So we have a three-month option with him at the outset whereby he comes to us with his story ideas, and Tim and I have the right to say “no” if that doesn’t fit with what we want to do with the show. I mean, I hope we won’t have to say “no,” but Akiva understands that, and he’s known that from the beginning, so it would be pretty silly if he came and said, “Oh, we’re going to do it completely differently.”

BE: A minute ago, you talked about a book you’d like to adapt. You actually adapted “Metroland” a few years ago.

AH: I did, yeah!

BE: How did that come about? Was it something you’d wanted to do?

AH: No, that was a weird one. It’s a long time ago now, so I’ll have to stop and think about it… (Laughs) …but the guy who produced it, Andrew Bendel, absolutely was crazy about the book. I think he really identified with it – he was kind of from that part of London – and he just kept showing it to me and kept saying, “Look, we should do this.” And I hadn’t been writing very long at that point, and I wasn’t sure of it, because it was a pretty hard book to adapt. It was in three separate parts, and it’s very hard to make that work in a movie. But he kept on saying, “Come on, come on, come on, there’s something good in it, we can do it,” so in the end, I did. And I’m glad I did.

BE: What’s the project you’ve worked on that didn’t get the love you thought it deserved?

AH: (Laughs) From the critics? Or from the audience?

BE: All of the above. Whichever one you think just deserved more appreciation.

AH: Let me think about that for just a minute. I’ve been very lucky, to tell you the truth. Things find their own level. But let me think about my CV for just a minute. (Considers the question) I did a two-part thriller a couple of years…no, more than that, more like seven or eight years ago…called “Heaven on Earth,” which probably hasn’t been seen here, but it’s about a young couple who end up in a religious community because she came from one of those communities. It’s not exactly Amish, but that kind of community, of which there are more in England than people realize. That was sort of a thriller, because basically the guy’s crazy when he goes in, and he takes it over. It did okay, but it never quite clicked, you know? And I kind of wish something had clicked for that show. I don’t know why it didn’t. So that’s one that I kind of regret not doing better. In America…not in Britain, where it won the BAFTA…I did a show called “Charles II: The Power and the Passion,” which was called “The Last King” over here for reasons that I still don’t know. That didn’t really click over here particularly, and that is a real shame. The reason that A&E showed was much shorter than the one that I wrote and the one that was seen here. It was an hour shorter than the one that was shown in the UK, and that was a horrible thing to do to it. They wanted to show it as one three-hour show, and…that was the worst of both worlds, because it was too long at three hours for anyone in their right mind to watch in one go, but it was too short for the story to make any sense, because it had lost an hour! That was a source of great upset to me, and to this day, I won’t watch the three-hour version. It’s…it’s crazy. So in this country, that would be a source of real regret, because it’s a show I’m hugely proud of. It was Joe Wright’s first big television series, and he went on to do “Pride and Predjudice” afterwards. And it’s brilliantly directed. So I remain very passionate about “Charles II” and I kind of regret that no one in America has seen the proper version.

BE: You should check with Acorn Media. They’re putting out a lot of the BBC material that Warner Brothers isn’t putting out.

AH: Oh, really? I’d like to think that they’d do it. I think that A&E obviously still owns the DVD rights, but it would be nice to think that it could be seen properly.

BE: Last question, just to bring it back to “Survivors.” I don’t know how American television you watch, but is there a point of comparison at all to one of our programs? Because to me, it certainly reminded me of “Jericho.”

AH: Yes, I did watch “Jericho,” and to me, that’s a compliment, because I think “Jericho” is a very good show, particularly in its first season. I was aware of “Jericho,” as I say, but…it’s not so much a similarity to that show in particular, although the premise is obviously not all that different. But there’s been such a kind of confident upsurge in really good American sci-fi, fantasy, or whatever you want to call it shows in the last few years. It was more a general appreciation on my part of the incredible surge of creativity in that area in recent years. There is no point of comparison between “Survivors” and “Battlestar Galactica,” but I was very inspired by “Battlestar” because it showed what you can do when you look at an older series in a fresh way. Just like “Primeval” is in no way like “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” but was very inspired by it. So it’s that kind of thing. The great work that’s being done in America, the really good stuff, is very inspiring.

BE: Excellent. Well, I think that’ll do it, Adrian. Thank you very much for your time!

AH: It’s been a pleasure.

Join us now as we embark upon…

Bullz-Eye: So when you guys were pitched the series…I mean, I’m sure you get this all the time, but on the surface, it sounds almost like it could be a Saturday morning cartoon.

Aidan Turner: That’s what I thought it was, actually. I thought I was going to do a voice over for a cartoon.

BE: Really?

AT: No. (Laughs) But I hear you.

BE: Were you familiar with Toby (Whithouse’s) work beforehand?

Russell Tovey: I was, personally. When it was pitched to me, I thought it sounded terrible, so I said yeah. (Laughs) There’s a few shows in England that are actually kind of not very good. They’re fun for students, but they’re not, like, credible, really. I thought this could be something like that show, just with a bit of sci-fi put in. In my head, it didn’t really compute, but in reading it, you realize it’s more than that.

AT: I mean, I hadn’t heard of Toby at all. I was aware there was a pilot when my agent pitched it to me…which was a funny phone call, because I kind of couldn’t believe what I was hearing. It was, like, the most obvious idea in the world, but you think, “This just can’t work.” But then the brilliant thing…and Toby’s such a brilliant writer…is that you read it and suddenly, almost from the get go, it’s original and it’s real and it’s steeped in this sort of truth, this beautiful world of realism. It just seems to work. Russell was part of the (original) pilot, but I made a decision not to watch the pilot. I don’t know why, really. I just…well, it didn’t work, first of all, and I thought, “Maybe that’s a sign I shouldn’t do it.” Yeah, so…I don’t know. Then it just turned over, and it just all worked. And then I met these guys, and they were cool, and we got on so well. And the whole team just works together so well, the crew and everybody. It’s just a joy, it’s an absolute joy.

Lenora Crichlow: Same story, really. Even now, when people who haven’t seen the show come across the show and I’m explaining it to them, I find myself halfway through going through what it’s about, and…it actually sounds quite off-putting. (Laughs) I’m looking at their faces, and I can read that they just think it’s not their cup of tea. I can totally understand, because when it was pitched to me, I thought a bit like the boys: “Oh, this just sounds ridiculous.” It’s only when you get into the meat and bones of the story and the characters that you realize there is something there for everybody, everyone. I suppose that’s what gives it the difference. The sci-fi element…it can only happen as a result of these very human issues and traits and relationships. That’s what makes the difference.

AT: I think that, with the show, people are surprised because the idea does sound ridiculous, but that’s the beauty of being a part of something like this. It’s that, immediately, when people see it, they go, “Oh, okay, I get it now. It’s not what I thought it was going to be.” So I think we’re lucky we have that element, because it gets people from the beginning, you know?

RT: The themes to me sounded American in its concept and scale. I think that’s why our first impression is, “Yeah, if this was America, it would be okay, but in England, we can’t compete.” There hasn’t been a massive track record of hit shows that have got something so kind of “out there.” My first instinct was that it sounds brilliant but it will never, ever come to fruition of what you really aspire it to be. But, however, it has and it can compete with your American shows, which is such a great thing for us. Respectfully to your shows, they are like the top of the pyramid. They are the icon that we look to, to get inspired. People are saying this show is kind of comparable to that and can be put in the brackets with that. What an honor. We’re just absolutely over the moon.

BE: I think there’s almost a “Buffy” feel to it at times.

RT: Yeah, great. And “True Blood,” people are saying. I mean, none of us have seen “True Blood.” Have you seen it?

LC: No.

AT: No, I haven’t seen it.

RT: But we know that has gotten massive reception, a massive audience, and we’re being compared to that and compared to “Buffy.” That’s great for us, we’re just so chapped.

BE: Well, I’m sure the phrase “British ‘True Blood’” is going to be thrown around a lot, because on that show there’s a shape shifter, there’s vampires, and other sordid types of characters.

(At this point, my wife – who had been traveling from Virginia to meet me at the press tour – arrived at the hotel after a highly extended ride on an airport shuttle van and joined us in the courtyard. Fortunately, I had forewarned the trio that her arrival was imminent, and as proper gentleman, Messrs. Turner and Tovey immediately leapt to their feet.)

RT: This is Mrs. Harris?

BE: This is Mrs. Harris.

RT: Hi, Mrs. Harris. How are you doing?

AT: Hello. Hi, Mrs. Harris.

LC: Hi, Mrs. Harris. Welcome. Pull up a chair.

Jenn Harris: I was the last drop off.

RT: Oh, my goodness.

AT: Well, you made it.

LC: You’re here now, that’s the important thing.

BE: And for the record, she has seen the first episode, and she loved it, too.

AT: Oh, fabulous.

JH: It’s awesome.

LC: Oh, great.

RT: Cool.

BE: Yeah, it’s funny that you say that about the British and the American shows, though, because between “Dr. Who,” “Torchwood,” and “Primeval” recently, British sci-fi is actually on a real roll at the moment.

RT: Do you like “Primeval”? Did that do well?

BE: I do like it, yeah. I don’t know how well it’s really done here, but it was pitched to us at TCA last year, and I was a fan right out of the gate.

JH: We enjoyed it.

BE: So did either of you guys approach your iconic monster roles with any particular forethought as far as other vampires or werewolves from the past?

AT: Yeah, I don’t know. It’s weird: you can do all this research, you can watch the movies and read the books, but at the end of the day…it’s not even a choice you make to be original, it’s just sort of something that happens. I don’t know if you can play up to any sort of idea of what people have of a character. I think that’s where you’re going to make a mistake. What you really do…and maybe it’s a cliché to say, but, you know, the writing is so good that it sort of does it itself. It does, the character…it’s an easy transition, you know? You just kind of slide in and, yeah, the script does do it for you, and the characters just evolve through Toby’s writing, which is just sensational.

RT: Your only research would be basically what other people have created, because these aren’t real life things. I mean, a ghost possibly exists, but vampires and werewolves don’t exist. You’re basing what you think your performance should be on what people have done before, based on something that doesn’t exist. What you do is treat it like a human being, like with the writing, and then that’s…

AT: It’s the essence of the show, isn’t it? Which is so lovely. That’s what makes it really deep, is that these guys want to be human, they want to be…

RT: It’s fresh, and we’re rewriting the rules.

LC: I think the biggest research for…well, not the biggest research, but a huge part of the research for us is just on our characters. Essentially, that’s what they are. The werewolf, the ghost, and the vampire side of each of our characters is quite…it’s something that we are quite objective about at times. For me, anyway, my biggest research was, who is Annie? Before I dealt with Annie as a ghost, it was more, “What is she like?” And then the ghost element is just as beguiling to me as it is to her. Do you know what I mean? So that journey is something that you can just play with. Because, I mean, there’s only so much research you can do to play a ghost or a vampire, really. Essentially, Russell had to play George.

AT: It’s great we don’t have to play the supernatural. It’s by proxy that these people happen to be yadda, yadda, yadda. But we don’t have to play it, which is great, you know? It’s just the people, the real people.

BE: So, Lenora, does Toby have a rules and regulations guide for your character? As far as, like, the clothes, which I’m sure you’ve heard about more than once.

LC: Oh, yeah, the clothes… (Laughs) Annie can’t change. Her clothes do kind of adjust slightly with her, but I’m not quite sure where that rule came from. It came from his mind, I think.

AT: I think budget. We didn’t have enough money for your costume change.

LC: I think it was the budget. It was BBC Three we started on, let’s don’t forget that. So one, the budget, but two, it kind of actually makes sense and it all adds to Annie’s frustration, or adds to her sort of being trapped. The house is completely like a prison, almost, and that’s like her uniform. Her costume actually becomes very much a part of her character, and that is when we see it morphing and stuff like that, is when she’s feeling differently.

JH: And it keeps coming back. Like, there’s one episode where she’s fixing her hair and she’s totally changed, she looks totally different, but then she walks out and she looks the same.

LC: Exactly the same. Or she gets a bit more confident, and maybe she will shift a layer, but then it’s very soon back and she’s wrapped up again. And it’s an aid. It’s become sort of a thing that even though, yes, I’ve got one costume, it’s something that the costume designer has been able to help me use and play with, to kind of just sort of all add to her ghostliness.

BE: Well, I guess along the same lines, but for all of you, what’s your favorite aspect of your character to play?

LC: I love Annie’s energy. I think she’s always looking for the bright side, and she’s positive. And for a ghost and someone who’s dead, she’s really, really optimistic. And I like that energy about her. She’s always able to…

JH: And a little sneaky.

LC: A little bit. (Laughs)

JH: But in a cute way.

LC: In a very cute way, yeah.

AT: Well, I think with Mitchell, he’s just…he’s flawed, you know? He’s a troubled soul, and he’s an addict, you know? He wants to be a good person and he wants to live a life that he considers, you know, moral. And he wants to address those issues, as opposed to someone like Herrick, who just doesn’t care anymore, you know? He wants to completely embody what he represents, and he’s happy with that journey, too. But I think Mitchell just wants to get on a positive road. So, essentially, you’re dealing with someone who’s incredibly flawed that wants to take the right road. So I guess it’s his courage and his bravery and his…yeah, yeah, it’s interesting, you know? It wouldn’t be as interesting if I was playing a vampire that was just after the blood lust all the time. That would get incredibly boring, you know. This is a huge journey for Mitchell, and it will always be a struggle. You know, if we go to Series Three, I can bet he’d still be struggling with it. I don’t think it’s ever anything that he is going to completely overcome. So that’s interesting, and it’s cool to kind of play somebody that’s always teetering on possibly falling back off the wagon again and stuff. You know, it’s exciting.

BE: There’s a Britishness about it, too, in that he’s kind of going, “I really feel bad about this, but…”

AT: Yeah, yeah. “Let me apologize, I’m a vampire.” But that’s what makes him real. We all know people like that, you know, that have those kinds of problems and issues, and they deal with them. So we have to feel different about it, and it’s just complex. There’s so much there to play with Mitchell, you know?

RT: I like George’s neurosis. I think it’s fun to play, and I like the fact that they allow me to just go up and down the scale tonally in my voice. He’s just a great stuttery, nervous character, and as an actor, to play somebody who’s kind of a bit twitchy is…it’s rewarding.

JH: You want to help him, but you don’t know how.

RT: Yeah, he needs help, completely.

BE: You had a great spotlight in the second episode with one of your fellow werewolves. Was that fun to play against somebody who was going through the same kind of things and yet knew more about it than yourself?

RT: Yeah, yeah, it’s great. I mean, every script we read is just…before we get it, like, you start and we don’t know what’s happened at the end of the show. Like, we’ve only read one and two and three. You just get so excited about what’s coming up, and that’s fresh. Yeah, it was brilliant, and Dean Lennox Kelly is a wicked actor. This story line…it’s just great dialogue that you don’t really get as an actor a lot. It’s a rarity when you’re given something and you’re getting these words to say, which you love saying. And the scenes, which you completely go, “Oh, I love this.” I really like the dynamic, and you work with people you love. It’s just a gift. This show is a complete gift, basically.

BE: Are the transformations a pain?

RT: Are they a pain? Sometimes.

AT: Quite literally, sometimes.

RT: Yeah, I have to wear contacts, and I’ll have the makeup put on. I’ve got very sensitive skin, so it flares up every now and then. And my teeth…yeah, it’s a long process, and I’m screaming my head off. But, again, that’s rewarding. The compliments I have had on them, the transformation stuff, has been great. And also Philip, who did the animatronics and puppetry of it all, is brilliant. So that again…I think that’s such an important aspect of the show, is the transformations. You don’t really see…you see Annie sort of disappearing towards the end, but…Annie is constantly there, Mitchell has teeth, and your eyes are done on CGI.

AT: Yeah, but it’s so rarely. We’ve only done it a couple of times, which is great, too, because we don’t rely on it. We don’t play on it. Again, it’s just something that you sort of feel as you watch the show, it just has to happen. It’s not something like you get bored of seeing or you feel like the show is trying to show off. Essentially, it comes down to the characters. That’s what’s so beautiful about it.

RT: The way our transformation is, is like completely exposing, and they wrote it as that. So if I went half-heartedly, if I was, like, going “ahhhhh” while doing it, I think it could really shift the balance of the piece. Do you know what I mean? You have to commit to it and go for it, because every bone in your body is breaking and all your insides are changing. And it’s the most immense pain you will ever feel. If the audience doesn’t believe that, then I think that’s failure.

JH: Was it crazy watching it?

RT: Was it what?

JH: Was it crazy watching the transformation onscreen?

RT: It’s weird when you watch it back on the monitor because we have…you can have playback there, and I like doing that. (To the others) Do you like doing that? Yeah, I like watching back afterwards to judge and say, “Oh, yeah, I got away with that.” But they have these two heads, these animatronics heads. So there’s me and there’s one that’s more like me, but they can push bits out. And then there’s another one which is like me, the final wolf. So when you watch it back on the monitor, you’re, like, “God, yeah,” and then you’re, like, “Oh, that isn’t me I’m watching.” That was really weird. Yeah, it is strange. I think my mum finds it strange, doesn’t like it. There’s a scene where I get…probably a spoiler, but I get beaten up, and Mitchell rescues me. That’s how he and George met. George has been attacked by a load of other vampires, and Mitchell broke it up, and they became, like, this codependent friendship/relationship, like “The Odd Couple.” I get beaten up in this scene, and my mum said, “I can’t watch you, I’m almost really upset.” Because, basically, she sees…you know, I’m in character, and I think, “Mum, it’s not me, it’s George.” But she sees her son getting the shit kicked out of him, and she doesn’t like it.

BE: In the first episode, the vampire attack out in the alleyway was pretty gory. Did you hear back from viewers or BBC Three about the goriness?

AT: Well, this is what you were just talking about. It’s that scene, isn’t it?

LC: No, no.

RT: That was a different one.

AT: Oh, right, yeah. Well, yeah, that was pretty gruesome, yeah. Yeah, (Annabel Scholey) did an amazing job. I remember that.

RT: She was great.

AT: She was amazing. No, we didn’t hear back whether anything was too gory. I think that they are the boundaries we can push on the show. I mean, naked bodies as well. And, Lenora, you get naked a bit too. I don’t know if there are any boundaries for this show. Maybe next season will get completely crazy with that.

RT: It’s suspected, I suppose. The audience would expect to see blood and guts.

AT: And loads of it, and that kind of thing. But I remember watching that on the playback and being quite moved, actually. She was amazing in that scene. It was actually a tough day to shoot that one as well, we were pushed for time and stuff.

RT: Yeah, we shot that scene in like 15 minutes.

AT: That’s right. But it’s fine because the blood tastes really good. It’s minty. Treacley and sweet.

BE: And, lastly, who is the coolest person you’ve heard from that’s a “Being Human” fan?

RT: Alan Bennett liked it.

LC: Stephen Fry.

AT: Stephen Fry! I’m a huge fan of Stephen Fry. I love him. He’s a man of incredibly high intellect, and if he likes our show, I think that’s a huge thumbs-up for us. So, yeah, I think that was a big one for me.

LC: Absolutely.

RT: Russell T. Davies is right here.

LC: Oh, gosh, yeah Russell.

RT: He loves it, so that’s always good. A lot of writers have said they’re fans. You don’t really realize who’s seen it because you just do these shows and they go out and you don’t realize who’s watching it. But if someone I run into like that goes, “Oh, I’ve seen it and it’s great,” you’re, like, “Wow, I really respect you, and that’s really lovely. Thank you.”

LC: We’ve had an incredible response from people within the industry, which is always, I think for actors, where you really start to feel, you know, touched by those compliments.

1. “The Big Bang Theory,” CBS

No other sophomore series came roaring out of the gate like this one. Fears that the show had already jumped the shark by getting Leonard and Penny together were dismissing before the end of the second-season premiere, the addition of Sara Gilbert to the cast was an added bonus, and the suggestion that Sheldon is a sex object to physics geeks is almost too funny for words. Mark my words: this is the year that Jim Parsons earns his first Emmy nomination.

2. “30 Rock,” NBC
There’s no truth to the rumor that you can’t be a member of the Television Critics Association if you don’t like “30 Rock,” but, really, what’s not to like? Tina Fey is both gorgeous and hilarious, Alec Baldwin can’t open his mouth without getting a laugh, and, come to think of it, there’s really no-one in this ensemble who isn’t funny. So why do they keep bringing on all of these guest stars? Beats me. But since they incorporate them so well into the episodes, it’s hard to complain.

3. “Life on Mars,” ABC
When I did my 2008 Fall TV Preview, I hadn’t yet seen the pilot for this series, but if I had, it would’ve beaten out “Fringe” for the top spot on my list of new shows I was most excited about. Rising above its “based on a British series” origins, “Life on Mars” has one of the strongest casts on television (Jason O’Mara, Harvey Keitel, Michael Imperioli, Gretchen Mol, and Jonathan Murphy), a great premise (a police detective gets knocked unconscious in 2008 and wakes up in 1973), and – perhaps most impressively – managed to survive its network’s recent purge of quality dramas. For God’s sake, don’t let it go the way of “Pushing Daisies.” If you haven’t watched it yet, it’s not too late.

“John Adams,” HBO
I’m not just saying this because I had the chance to meet many of the major players involved in this production, nor because one of my good friends from high school appeared as an extra. The truth of the matter is that “John Adams” is fantastic on multiple levels: great cast, great script, and incredible attention to detail in its reproduction of a bygone era. What matters most in the end, however, is that it truly does make history come alive and proves enthralling whether you’re a history buff or not. By the end of the production (if not long before then), it will succeed in something that hasn’t always been that easy to accomplish in recent years by making you proud to be an American.

“90210,” The CW
I can’t really explain this. I didn’t watch the original “90210,” so it’s not like I owed any particular allegiance to the series, but as a card-carrying TV geek, there’s always been something fascinating about the concept of reviving a show several years after its original run. Besides, just because I didn’t actually watch the original doesn’t mean that I didn’t know that I was supposed to be excited about seeing Jennie Garth and Shannen Doherty together again. It’s cool for critics to like “Gossip Girl,” but I somehow feel like I’m not supposed to admit that I kinda dig this series, but I do. Granted, the adults feel like they’re way better written than the teens, but maybe it only seems that way because I’m old and out of touch. Wow, I’m feeling even guiltier about this now that I was when I started. Wait, maybe I should’ve just pretended that I’m watching it because my wife wants to watch it. Yeah, actually, let’s pretend I said that instead and just scratch all of that other stuff.

“Farmer Wants a Wife,” The CW
It’s hard enough for someone who loves scripted television to admit that they watch any reality shows, but then maybe that’s why, when I finally decide to watch one, I make it the most perverse choice possible. At the tail end of 2007 and the very, very beginning of 2008, I watched every single episode of “Crowned: The Mother of All Pageants,” but it feels wrong to give that series the award, since it began its run last year. Instead, I’ll give it to an equally ridiculous reality-show entry that ran on the same network. “Farmer Wants A Wife,” where an upstanding young gentleman from Missouri went hunting for a suitable spouse, was car-wreck television at its finest. Particular kudos to the producers for waiting until two episodes before the finale – a point when no-one caught up in the show would ever bail out – to offer up an elimination challenge where each of the farmer’s future fiancées had to reach inside a cow’s rectum to see if the bovine was pregnant…and bonus points for airing it while I was eating a late dinner. Every moment was painful, but damned if I wasn’t there from premiere to finale.

“The Soup,” E!
I used to stop by “Talk Soup” whenever it was on, and no matter who the host was, I always enjoyed it, but for whatever reason, it just never ended up as part of my customary viewing schedule. This summer, I attended a panel for “The Soup,” where Joel McHale held court, and…well, something just clicked. I’ve since added it to my TiVo season pass list, and I’ve laughed heartily week after week. I still don’t know what the hell that cat-eating-spaghetti bit was about on “The Morning Show with Mike and Juliet,” but it never fails to make me laugh when Joel brings that kitty out. Or when he offers up a clip of the ever-angry Steve Edwards berating one of his co-anchors. Or when he makes up new meanings for the acronym in “Paris Hilton’s My New B.F.F.” Or…well, basically, I laugh a lot. Long live “The Soup”!

“Code Monkeys,” G4
Maybe it’s because I grew up in the ’80s and can appreciate old-school video-game animation or maybe it’s because I have an occasionally twisted sense of humor, but when I stumbled upon G4’s “Code Monkeys” upon the release of its first season on DVD, I fell in love and immediately added the series to my TiVo Season Pass list, so as to catch Season 2. Mind you, it’s a twisted little show that’s not for all tastes. As I wrote in my review of the Season 1 set, if your sense of humor veers toward the dark side and you immediately thought of “Star Wars” when I used the phrase “the dark side,” then you’ll love it…but you don’t see anything funny about the revelation that Adolf Hitler didn’t actually die in 1945 but was instead frozen in carbonite, then this isn’t the cartoon you’re looking for, so move along.

“Sid the Science Kid,” PBS
Given that it’s a production of Henson Studios, it shouldn’t be any surprise that Sid looks suspiciously Muppet-like, but it’s that vague familiarity that draws kids into this educational show. Blending a certain amount of repetition per episode, such as the song when Sid arrives at school (“I’m looking for my friends / I’m looking for you!”) with Sid’s question of the week (“Why does my banana get mushy?”) is the perfect combination to keep your son or daughter coming back day after day. Plus, Teacher Susie’s songs are often catchy enough to rival the best work of “Schoolhouse Rock.” Don’t believe me? Check out “Checking Out Charts” for proof:

“Gavin & Stacey” and “Primeval,” BBC America
No need to revisit my repeated comments about “Primeval,” except to say that it’s lots and lots of dinosaur-laden awesomeness, but if you’re a fan of shows that blend raucous comedy with unabashed sentimentality without ever falling into the Schmaltz Zone, then you’ll want to check out “Gavin & Stacey” post-haste.

“Aliens in America,” The CW
The network finally found the perfect pairing for the forever-underrated “Everybody Hates Chris” with this excellent sitcom, which blended tales of teen angst with some highly valuable lessons about defeating racial intolerance, but rather than giving either series a prime spot of real estate, they first threw them up against CBS’s Monday night sitcom line-up, then moved them to Sunday night against Fox’s Animation Domination. “Chris” survived through its dedicated fanbase, but “Aliens” never had the chance to build a following. Have these people never heard of the concept of counter-programming? Fingers crossed someone gives the show a DVD release; it’s more than worthy of being replayed. And if that happens, let’s hope someone has the sense to include this show-connected video of PJ Olsson & Salmon Ahmad covering Nick Lowe’s “What’s So Funny ‘Bout Peace, Love and Understanding” as a special feature:

“The Return of Jezebel James,” Fox
There was so much right about this show that I still don’t understand how it could have gone so horribly wrong. It was created by Amy Sherman-Palladino, who brought us the inestimably wonderful “Gilmore Girls,” it starred Parker Posey and Lauren Ambrose, and the premise involved a children’s book editor asking her estranged sister to act as a surrogate mother for her. The problem, as near as I could figure, was that while Posey and Ambrose delivered the dialogue well enough, the timing required to make Sherman-Palladino’s writing really crackle is horribly unsuited for a sitcom with a laugh track. I had high hopes for “Jezebel James” until I actually watched it, but when it left the airwaves after a mere three episodes, I was neither shocked nor in mourning…and based on most reports, neither was anyone else.

“Do Not Disturb,” Fox
The first episode provided to critics inspired me to write, “Sweet Jiminy Christmas, this thing sucked so much that it might as well have been sponsored by Oreck,” and I was not the only one to express such an opinion. Not coincidentally, Fox decided to go with a different episode as the premiere. It didn’t help. The highest praise I could muster for this episode was, “It was in no way as painfully unfunny as the original pilot, but it definitely serves to secure my belief that ‘Do Not Disturb’ will in no way be appointment television for me.” Clearly, the majority of America shared my opinion.

“My Boys,” TBS
Between “The Bill Engvall Show” and “House of Payne,” you can see why people wouldn’t think that TBS would be a place to find a truly hilarious sitcom, but if you dare to venture into the waters of the network, then keep an eye out for “My Boys.” It was one of those series that I didn’t get the chance to investigate until the release of Season 1 on DVD, but once I did, I found myself daring to make a comparison to “Friends,” a point of reference I hadn’t made since “How I Met Your Mother.” It’s true, though: the interaction between the guys and gals on the show really does feel like a bunch of friends hanging out. The writing is hilarious, and if don’t believe me, sit yourself down and watch the first-season episode entitled “Douchebag in the City,” where Brendan gets called out for having turned into a complete and total douche. Season 2 was equally successful, with its storylines involving Stephanie becoming a best-selling author, P.J. letting Bobby inch closer and closer to the altar, and Andy having a “work wife.” When the show returns for Season 3 in 2009, be there.

Too many to count
It’s been really rough going for fans of the hour-long drama this year, especially those which take a step outside of the mainstream with their premises. ABC’s recent cancellation trifecta of “Dirty Sexy Money,” “Eli Stone,” and “Pushing Daisies” was enough to send many TV critics into apoplexy, but the other networks were just as bad. By killing off both “Jericho” and “Moonlight,” a pair of series with some of the most diehard fans this side of “Star Trek,” it’s a wonder CBS is even still standing. NBC’s “Journeyman” stopped airing in ’07 but didn’t formally get the axe ‘til ’08, and when it did, it really pissed off a lot of the Bullz-Eye staff. And while we’ve probably come to expect Fox dramas to get yanked, it never felt like “Canterbury’s Law” got a fair shake, and…am I the only one who really liked “New Amsterdam”? Well, anyway, as you can see, I needed my Xanax prescription more than ever this year…but if you really, really need a definitive one-show answer, then let’s go with “Jericho.” (Side note: can you believe that it’s now being re-run on Sunday nights by The CW? Dare we hope for a comeback…?!?)

“Knight Rider,” NBC
I’ve already admitted that my interest in this series came from my nostalgic feelings toward the Hoff-happy original version, but I just can’t believe there wasn’t some way to do “Knight Rider” without making it feel so God-awful cheesy, especially not when Doug Liman (“The Bourne Identity,” “Mr. & Mrs. Smith”) was one of the executive producers. Unfortunately, the first episode…which the network wisely waited until nearly the last minute to get to critics…offered only the faintest glimmer of hope, and that was quickly extinguished when it became evident that the episode titles were the most clever thing about the series. (Example: “I Wanna Rock and Roll All Knight.”) But NBC still tried to recoup their investment and, instead of canceling it at mid-season, renewed it but got rid of half the cast – including Bruce Davison, who’d given the show its own touch of class that wasn’t vehicular – in a desperate attempt at retooling. Word on the street is that it’s finally being put out of its misery. Good riddance, but let us all remember the moral of the story: “Knight Rider” just ain’t “Knight Rider” without the Hoff.

“The Ex List,” CBS
I’m sure the network thinks they did the right thing by arguing with creator Diane Ruggiero over the direction of the series until she had no choice but to quit. Anyone who watched her hold court during the TCA Press Tour, however, knows what a talented and hilarious woman she is, so I just can’t imagine that her vision for the series wouldn’t have been the right vision for the series. Don’t let the bastards get you down, Diane; I’m already ready to see what you’re working on next.

Square Pegs: The Complete Series
For the longest time, I viewed the release of this show as a gimme, since I figured, hey, it’s Sarah Jessica Parker, she’s the star of “Sex and the City.” As time passed with no release, however, it occurred to me that Sony probably figured that the average “S&TC” fan wouldn’t have any interest in seeing their beloved Carrie Bradshaw playing someone who was…gasp!…uncool. Thankfully, wiser heads prevailed, and “Square Pegs” emerged on DVD this year. Even better, it’s aged remarkably well, offering a look at teen life in the ’80s. It may not resemble present-day high school on the surface, but the existence of cliques will continue until the sun explodes (and possibly beyond), so the inherent message of the show still holds up: not everybody is as pretty as the cast of “Gossip Girl,” “Beverly Hills, 90210,” or “Dawson’s Creek,” and not everyone is out to be tremendously popular. Putting the spotlight on socially-stunted teenagers was always going to be a risk, but Anne Beatts and her crew did a remarkable job of showing a side of high school that was and still is viewed as a dirty little secret. If you liked “Freaks & Geeks,” you should definitely give “Square Pegs” a try.

1. The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour: The Best of Season 3
Well, it’s about time. You can thank the people at Time-Life for fulfilling the dream of many a ’60s rebel who’s been chomping at the bit to revisit this series and see just how controversial it really was. The truth…? Just as Tommy Smothers has been claiming, it really isn’t all that controversial. Most of it is your standard ’60s variety show, albeit with performances from cooler-than-average artists, such as the Doors or Ike & Tina Turner. But as you watch, you’ll find bits and pieces of each episode inspiring raised eyebrows as you wonder how they got away with this or that. This is a fantastic historical document of how a network’s censorship killed a show, and with the combined efforts of the Smothers Brothers and Time-Life, the special features and bonus material paint as full a picture as you could hope for. Need more proof? Well, I just happen to have this commercial handy…

2. M Squad: The Complete Series
What’s the matter, you never knew Lee Marvin did TV? Actually, neither did I until relatively recently. I always thought of him as one of those iconic movie actors, so well-known to me for a particular film…in this case, “The Dirty Dozen”…that it never occurred to me that he did anything but film. As it turns out, however, he starred in the entire 117-episode run of “M Squad,” a gritty black-and-white cop show that’s almost the antithesis of “Dragnet.” Not that Jack Webb didn’t have a menacing way about him at times, but you viewed him as tough only because he was an authority figure. With Lee Marvin, you view him as tough because you know with 100% certainty that he could kick your ass. As you watch “M Squad,” you’ll probably notice that “Police Squad” targeted a lot of this series’ elements, but Marvin is such an imposing figure that, although it’s unquestionably ripe for parody at times, you’ll be gripped throughout every single episode.

3. Mannix: Season 1
When you think “super cool private eye,” you think Jim Rockford, and there’s not necessarily anything wrong with that, but thanks to CBS’s DVD wing, you can see that Joe Mannix was pretty damned awesome in his own right. Mike Connors’ tough-as-nails P.I. changed a bit over the course of his eight-season run, but never more than he did after this first season, where he was working for a huge Los Angeles detective agency called Intertect and reporting to Lew Wickersham (Joseph Campanella). Even those pop culture fans who are aware of the existence of “Mannix” may be surprised to discover just how cool the series was. For one thing, Mannix is an old-school tough guy, generally wearing a suit and tie, smoking a cigarette as often as not, and ending conversations with pulling a gun or delivering a sharp right hook. (Like the split-screen opening credits aren’t awesome enough with the Lalo Schifrin theme, they’re made all the more fab by having a punch thrown in the bottom left corner square and connecting in the upper right square!) Not every cop show or detective drama from the ‘60s survives intact when held up to the harsh light of today’s TV standards, but “Mannix” manages to do so handily.

4. Burke’s Law: Season 1
Amos Burke is not only the Chief of Detectives for the city of Los Angeles but also a suave millionaire playboy who arrives at homicide scenes in a Rolls Royce driven by his Filipino manservant, Henry. Yes, I know it sounds laughable, but, damn, it’s good! Gene Barry strolls through the show with a wink and a smirk, constantly firing off quips and flirtatious remarks like he’s the James Bond of Southern California. Sure, it’s all a bit campy, but Barry never quite winks at the camera, always managing to indicate that, for all his flirtatious ways, he’s still on the job and dedicated to bringing the murderer to justice. And, hey, if he manages to shake some action in the process, more power to him, y’know? Plus, the show had the greatest line-up of guest stars this side of…well, this next show, actually.

5. The Love Boat: Season 1
Love is indeed life’s sweetest reward, but for fans of kitschy ’70s TV and guest stars of varying degrees of celebrity, there was no greatest gift this year than the arrival of Season 1 of on “The Love Boat” on DVD. Granted, it was split into two volumes, which was a little bit annoying, but just to have it all was enough to bring a smile to this critic’s face. It’s so light and fluffy that it might just blow off your shelf, but where else can you find a cast that includes Jimmie Walker, John Ritter, Charo, Bill Bixby, Scott Baio, Milton Berle, Jim Nabors, Tab Hunter, Ray Bolger, Steve Allen, Gary Burghoff, Leslie Nielsen, Pat Morita…oh, I could go on and on. No, seriously, I could. This show was awesome. Not necessarily good, but definitely awesome.

The Biography Channel’s stirring episode about the life and times of Mr. Scott Baio. As we thrilled to his career, tackling everything from “Bugsy Malone” to “Scott Baio is 46…and Pregnant,” with stops on the life and times of Chachi Arcola, “Charles in Charge,” and, of course, “Zapped!”, we heard not only from family and friends but also from noted experts on the man’s career.

And, then, we also heard from this jackass:

Hey, to my way of thinking, I could’ve come off looking a hell of a lot worse than I did. At the very least, the experience of having a film crew fly to my house and film me as I waxed ridiculous about Baio’s lack of rock cred in “Joanie Loves Chachi” was one that I won’t soon forget.

“Scrubs” is coming back…but for what will probably be its final season
But, hey, chin up, buckeroo. Instead of being stuck on NBC, the series is finally getting the respect it deserves – albeit in the twilight of its run – by moving over to ABC. It might seem weird for the show to make such a move so late in the game, but as it happens, “Scrubs” has actually been a production of ABC Studios (formerly Touchstone) since it first went on the air, so it actually does make sense that they’d be the ones who’d want to see it go out with glory. And, indeed, the first two episodes of the season are a glorious return to the blend of humor and drama that has been the hallmark of the best “Scrubs” episodes over the years. If this is finally the end, at least it looks like Bill Lawrence and the cast will be bringing the show to a solid conclusion.