July 2007 Archives
New Study Shows Pervasive Inaccuracies in Television Storylines Cost Lives
Well, the mind reels.
One wonders how seeing a fat lout with a hot wife on “According to Jim” actually leads to innocents dying, or how the fact that no one can really bend the time-space continuum like they do on “Heroes” takes a toll on precious human beings, or how the mismatched-buddy comedy “Hannity & Colmes” turns Hilary Clinton into a flesh-eating chupacabra results in mass graves in remote desert regions.
But you know what? It’s even stranger than that:
“(O)rgan donation appeared as a primary storyline on entertainment television in more than 80 television episodes. … (N)one of these appearances presented organ donation in an accurate or positive light. The most commonly portrayed inaccuracies are black markets for organs, doctors not saving a potential donor's life, organs being stolen from people and people with money receive higher priority on waiting lists. … (I)naccurate storylines about organ and tissue donation stop people from registering as organ donors. … Thousands of people are waiting for a life-saving organ and we have to assure they are not waiting longer and dying at higher rates because of inaccuracies on television.”
Here are the shows included in the study: ER, Law and Order, Grey’s Anatomy, House, CSI, Crossing Jordan, Lost, Medium, As the World Turns, All My Children, One Life to Live, Malcolm in the Middle, The Simpsons, Yes Dear, Will & Grace, and Just Shoot Me.
All of which, coincidentally, are personal sources for consultation when making my own organ-donor decisions.
“Don’t Forget the Lyrics” will look at and listen to you Thursday between 4 and 8 pm. at Jillians, 1000 Universal Studios Blvd., Universal City. If you’re enough of a train wreck, they might even put you on the TeeVee.
If humiliating yourself isn’t the way you want to go to achieve international stardom, you might want to direct a short horror film and send it to chillertv.com. Contest starts tomorrow; entries will be online from Sept. 5-21; voting thereafter; winners announced on Halloween. Winners in the categories of Best Picture, Creepiest Character and Scariest Special Effects will win $5,000 each. But don’t bother with Creepiest Character: I’m submitting C-Span footage of Alberto Gonzalez testifying – or whatever it is he was doing – before the Senate. Surefire winner.
“You should remember all that talk earlier this week about the terrorist dry runs at airports here in the U.S. Well, just kidding.”
-- CNN anchor T.J. Holmes
Yes, turns out having cheese on airliners is not, as CNN reported last week, part of a terrorist plot to destroy America. Kudos to CNN for taking their alarmist B.S. in stride. Because, you know, reports on terrorist plots are the new NewsLite.
Some Reuters guy was absolutely devastated to discover that reality TV isn’t really real.
Bear Grylls, star of Discovery Channel’s “Man Vs. Wild,” apparently doesn’t drink his own urine as frequently as the show might suggest:
“This British adventurer is now the subject of an investigation by U.K.'s Channel 4, which already has confirmed that Grylls checked into motels on a few occasions when he was depicted on TV having slept under the stars. Other allegations have been made suggesting that the crew that records Grylls in action isn't as hands-off as it might appear to viewers.
“Knowing what we now know, it will be a challenge to watch 'Wild' with the same zeal again.”
Look, if you have a camera crew trailing you, the most danger you're gonna get in is getting bonked on the head by a boom mike, and even that has a foam filter on it so it won't hurt that much. And anyway, how much "zeal" did this guy watch "Man Vs. Wild" with in the first place?
Will someone kindly break it to this guy that there’s no Santa Claus, either? Because I personally couldn’t stand to see his heart broken yet again.
Here’s all you need to know about what HBO thinks about David Milch’s new series, “John from Cincinnati:”
It’s not sending out screeners of episodes, beyond the initial three, to critics.
What this means: HBO sends pretty much everything out. Every episode of every series. The last time they bailed on a show, if memory serves, it was on “Lucky Louie,” which died after its initial season under the oppressive weight of incessant critical excrement.
I was one of the very few critics who liked, for all its artful obfuscations, “John from Cincinnati.” Clearly, I might've been able to more convincingly convey to viewers the show's positives had I access to whatever it Milch was smoking when he created the show. (An aside to David: Got Milch? Just sayin’.)
The more pressing issue for Milch fans, of course, is what will become of those proposed “Deadwood” films should HBO ignominiously cancel “John From Cincinnati,” as well. HBO’s conundrum is: They want to hold on to Milch, but they don’t want to air the kind of recherché material he’s become keen on. (Arcane material only going so far, yet jettisoning “John,” to suits’ minds, automatically means no “Deadwood,” and they know they can’t boast about that.)
This sort of became apparent during HBO’s recent TV Press Tour executive session, when recently installed co-Presidents, Michael Lombardo and Richard Plepler, circumnavigated the issue of a “Deadwood” reunion:
Plepler: “We’re just finishing ‘John from Cincinnati.’ David [Milch] is, needless to say, exhausted. We haven’t had a conversation with him. It’s always been our intention to do them, but it’s complicated. We don’t have a hold on the actors anymore. But we’ll know more after we know what the future of ‘John’ is. It’s definitely something we’re interested in doing.”
Lombaro: “We have to bring back an array of actors, many of who have gone on to a variety of projects. … It’s doable. But it’s daunting.
“We haven’t talked to David since ‘John’ has wrapped. If David’s game for this and we can figure it out, we’ll figure it out. … If we pick up ‘John,’ David will have to go back to working on that immediately for next summer. … We’re in business with David Milch and we intend to be in business with David Milch for the foreseeable future.”
Pleppler: “It depends on whether or not the actors can be pulled together and whether David is fully committed to the project. … You could probably put it at 50/50.”
They actually let Stephen Colbert into the White House.
Colbert, whose injury to his wrist last week escaped the notice of this blog due to the blur that was TV Press Tour, declared that he came to the White House to raise "wrist awareness." Colbert wanted his wrist cast signed by Tony Snow so that "the nation will be healed." Snow obliged, as did Tim Russert and Nancy Pelosi.
We previously discussed ABC Entertainment president Stephen McPherson’s thrilling dust-up, dissing NBC co-chairman Ben Silverman as “clueless or stupid” (it’s only either one or the other?), but somehow managed to egregiously neglect the money quote, in which McPherson challenged his peacock counterpart to “Be a man.”
Problem is, McPherson didn’t specify which kind of man he thought Silverman should be. Two new shows provide bookends in defining the male experience: “Mad Men,” AMC’s series on ’60s Madison Avenue advertising executives who define their existence via booze, cigarettes and banging their secretaries (have we mentioned that you should be watching this series just enough times that you get the point but not enough times that we sound like religious nuts? because you should be), and ABC’s “Big Shots,” about four befuddled guys pretty much in full wussy mode as they bemoan their woes and their women (its thesis is neatly summed up when Dylan McDermott, one of the guys, sighs, “Men - we're the new women”).
McPherson, it’s safe to say, probably aligns himself more with the guys in “Mad Men” (even though he’s airing “Big Shots”): He’s the most straight-shooting of the broadcast network executives and earned stud credentials by performing, at ABC’s 2006 upfront, a credible tango with the sultry Edyta Sliwinska, one of the dancers from the network's “Dancing with the Stars.” (Later, he recalled, “Right after that happened, my wife had obviously knew I was rehearsing for that. Never had met the dancer, never seen the dancer, was in the audience and came backstage and said, ‘Honey, you were fantastic. You've never been sexier. You will never dance with her again.’”) (Note: We're not implying that McPherson indulges in the sundry bad behaviors that the characters in "Mad Men" do, just that his XY chromosomes are more old-school than New-Age.)
Silverman, on the other hand, dissembled like a madman (his only tie to “Mad Men”) during his Press Tour session and “brings a small set of chimes along with him to meetings so he can play the three-note N-B-C jingle whenever a happy moment occurs,” so we’ll put him at the other end of the spectrum.
Interestingly, those working on both shows seem to have similar takes on the evolution of the Contemporary Male:
“Mad Men’s” creator Matthew Weiner: I wonder how adrift it is, you know, how adrift this concept of what being a man is. It's so crude right now. It's not like it's so much better then, but I look at that and say, “Okay. I was in my 20's. I remember not knowing who to emulate or anything like that.” I wanted to be like my dad to some degree, but not really, or I wanted to be like some actor or something like that.
“Mad Men” star Vincent Kartheiser: The roles were just more defined back then. I don't know if that's for positive or for negative, but the man kind of -- I don't know if you would say it was less wussy. You just knew – you just kind of knew where you fit more. I think, for both sexes, the line has been crossed a little bit.
“Mad Men” star Jon Hamm: You look now at what it means to be a man in 2007. Matt talked about who are your role models. I mean, it is virtually impossible to say what the definition of being a man in today's society is. … What we had in the era that the show is depicting, some sense of -- formality might be the wrong word, but just a sense of propriety and feeling like -- yes, Matt talked about it a little bit before, but yes, these people were objectifying and taking advantage in a lot of ways. But, then, there were rules. There was a sense of, you can't just be a bore and be this horrible douchebag, for lack of a better word. You have to kind of have a little style. You have to kind of have a little grace about you. You have to have a little bit of formality, or you are going to fail.
“Mad Men” star John Slattery: I heard someone say, "A man is only as faithful as his options," which can be true. And certainly, in 1960, the options for a man in regards to drinking and fidelity and race relations and interoffice politics, I mean, although there were these strictures, the world was a man's oyster, and some took more oysters than others.
“Big Shots” creator Jon Harmon Feldman: I think men have taken on a mantle of sensitivity in my understanding of how the sexes have evolved. I think women have succeeded in the workplace to a great degree. I think the genders have evolved. I think men are far more sensitive than people give us credit for, although we're also the guys who don't want to admit that we are. And I think that's sort of the paradox of being a guy. We have these feelings, but we don't want to let anyone know we have them. And I think that's what the show explores.
“Big Shots” star Christopher Titus: In today's society, there's a constant fighting the old guy. The first James Bond movies, those guys, the real men, the men that took no prisoners guys -- women really liked them. And now in society it's become very politically incorrect to be those guys, and yet every guy really is that guy. And you know, the John Waynes. I think it's kind of hard for men right now to be men because if you try to be a guy and you're too much of a guy, then you're an A-hole. If you try to be too sensitive, then, you know, you're metrosexual.
Why wait for fall? TV Week is reporting that you can find “highly anticipated broadcast network fall pilots” online now:
“Copies of NBC’s ‘Bionic Woman,’ ABC’s ‘Pushing Daisies,’ The CW’s ‘Reaper’ and several other shows were available Friday for illegal download via sites such as Torrent Spy, The Pirate Bay and Mininova.
“Most of the titles appear to have been uploaded within the past week. The first copy of ‘Bionic’ was listed as uploaded two days ago, while the earliest ‘Reaper’ file was date-marked seven days ago. Other leaked shows include Fox’s midseason ‘The Terminator’ spin-off ‘The Sarah Connor Chronicles,’ ABC’s ‘Cavemen,’ and NBC’s ‘Chuck’ and ‘Lipstick Jungle.’”
“Cavemen?” “Highly anticipated?” That’s funnier than anything in the show.
NBC created this predicament a while back when Conan’s contract was about to expire and, in order to keep him at the network, they promised him the 11:35 timeslot, with a whopping $40-million payout if the network were somehow to renege on the offer. Meanwhile, Jay Leno continues to garner extremely strong ratings in the timeslot, meaning NBC can do one of two things come 2009:
* Stick with Leno and pay Conan handsomely to go away to another network (Fox or maybe ABC – fare thee well, “Nightline”) and ply his trade there.
* Let Leno move to another network, where he’ll probably still pull better numbers than Conan.
Either way, NBC has shot itself in the foot.
Well, there’s another scenario, explicated by NBC co-chairmen Ben Silverman and Marc Graboff, but even after they explained it during their Press Tour press conference, no one seemed to be sure what it was:
BEN SILVERMAN: We love Jay Leno, and we're very interested in -- we're beyond interested. We want him to stay at NBC for life. And we're talking to Jay all the time about what does he want to do, and what opportunities are there for him. And Marc and I are aggressively trying to come up with ideas that would make Jay happy.
QUESTION: But if you can follow my logic here, he's not going to be on "Tonight." He's probably not going to go later.
MARC GRABOFF: Sure.
QUESTION: Is bringing him to primetime something you're already talking to him about?
MARC GRABOFF: Primetime is a definite alternative, clearly, I mean, because you're absolutely right. In a scheduled world, where you have distinct dayparts, like primetime and late night, and people that tune into their shows at set times, yes, that is something that we're talking about. Now, again, Conan doesn't do his show every week, 52 weeks a year. There's a whole number of ideas -- I think, as Ben said, the point is we want Jay Leno to be with NBC for as long as -- forever, if possible. And I think Jay would want to do that.
QUESTION: Marc, you left the door open by mentioning that Conan doesn't work 52 weeks a year. Are you suggesting that there would be some sort of job-share with Jay Leno?
MARC GRABOFF: No, no. "The Tonight Show" will be the Conan O'Brien "Tonight Show" with Conan O'Brien.
QUESTION: Would Jay be available for some of those weeks that he wouldn't be working? Is that what you're suggesting?
MARC GRABOFF: No, I'm not. We haven't had any of those conversations, nor, most likely, will we because when Conan takes over "The Tonight Show," he will take over "The Tonight Show."
Hope that’s clear.
We’re back where we were when Johnny Carson was preparing to retire – two guys want one timeslot; nothing else will suffice for either and the loser will take a chunk out of NBC’s audience when he moves to another network. The biggest loser, of course, will be anyone who tunes into Fallon’s show. Somewhere, Tom Snyder is having a good, robust laugh.
Leave it to People Magazine to soften the blow for Lindsay Lohan. The thoroughgoing boobs at the magazine’s website suggest her latest bomb, “I Know Who Killed Me,” “strongly divided the nation's movie critics,” while only being able to dredge up one favorable review amidst a plethora of pans.
In fact, the scorecard at rottentomatoes.com suggests the exact opposite – critics were united in a way they rarely are in excoriating what one review called a “sleazy, inept and worthless piece of torture porn.”
We must really be getting weak when the media not only has to filter coverage of the burning issues of the day, but a gossip rag has to sugar coat our celebrity news.
TV Press Tour rather thoughtlessly ate severely into my surfing-the-web-in-search-of-really-embarrassing-things time, so I’m a little late in catching up to this scorchingly penetrating interview with Holly Hunter by what might just be a manatee in a human costume, but if you haven’t seen it yet, by all means, you must.
This is an absolute clinic in what not to do in front of TeeVee cameras. In four short – or agonizingly long, if you’re Hunter – minutes, our hostess with the leastest manages to:
* Mispronounce the word “Academy” right out of the gate, visibly causing the confidence to drain from her face and initiating the first in a series of awkward pauses.
* Say with insincere jollity, “Holly, thanks so much for joining us,” pause awkwardly, returning with another “Holly, thanks so much for joining us,” followed by yet another awkward pause, at which point you can hear the director in her earpiece imploring her to ask a question already, fer chrissakes.
* Squint long and hard at that teleprompter (yes, that is the English language there, young lady).
* Gush incessantly about how much she loves “Saving Grace” to the point of gibberish.
* Say, erroneously, that production has wrapped on the series. (Hunter corrects her gently.)
* Pause awkwardly twice again as the interview concludes.
* Get the premiere date wrong.
* Promote nbc.com even though she’s with ABC, prompting a squeal (of dismay?) in the background. (In all, however, that’s probably not such a bad thing for ABC, since anyone sitting through this is no doubt making a mental note to never visit nbc.com.)
Next up for our hapless interrogator: A job with the White House Press Corps.
“I’m in the middle of a divorce right now. … I lost 20 pounds in my divorce – because that’s what a soul weighs.”
That’s Christopher Titus addressing those assembled for the “Big Shots” TV Press Tour session, the – mercifully – final press conference of the summer tour. Going into the session, critics were fairly skeptical of the show – ABC has a lot of wry soaps focusing on upscale characters (“Dirty Sexy Money,” “Private Practice,” “Cashmere Mafia”), and this one seemed the least of them. The pilot plays, and not just a little, like “Desperate Husbands.”
But Titus (a comic and former star of a fairly edgy Fox sitcom) – and co-star Josh Malina – were so funny during the session in their insults of one another, and they and their co-stars Dylan McDermott and Michael Vartan exuded such great chemistry amongst one another that a lot of the critics who had written “Big Shots” off were won over, or at least willing to give the show another chance. It’s fairly rare that a Press Tour session can resuscitate a show like that, particularly given how late it came in the game, when those who have endured three weeks of this nonsense are running on fumes and in need of resurrection themselves. What could’ve been a dead press conference was instead a spirited and lively affair; “Big Shots” would do quite well if it can capture that energy in each episode.
Later, Titus was extremely gratified to hear that his appearance had won over the room.
“We came in and they told us, ‘You’re the last session,’ and I thought, ‘Wait! You mean after three weeks of this B.S. we’re the last session?’” he told Your Mayor. “I knew we had to be funny, and then I saw (a scene of Malina shirtless in a love scene in the reel introducing the show), and I thought if I start ripping on him, and get him to start ripping on me, and if people see us all together, things would be OK.”
Herewith, some moments from the “Big Shots” press conference:
The first thing out of Titus’ mouth: “I want everyone to know that we are getting Joshua Malina a trainer.”
And later: “Obviously, just seeing Malina with his shirt off that many times just creeped me out.”
Later, Titus caught himself dissembling on something or other at length:
“Holy crap, can I please stop? Somebody stop me. (Gets up out of seat and faces the panel) You guys don't even stop me. Just stop me. You're sitting right there. Just go, ‘Stop, shut up, Titus!’”
A question arose about alternate titles suggested for the show (Titus had complained a little about the title earlier in the session).
JON HARMON FELDMAN (executive producer): "The Chris Titus Show" was one.
CHRISTOPHER TITUS: That was one. "Dylan Has Pretty Eyes." That was another one –
(Laughter.)
-- which I thought, a little too light for me. "Josh Needs to Do More Curls." That was one.
(Collective "Ohhh.")
I don't know. These questions are like -- I hate that everyone's blogging right now and people are hearing me say stupid crap right now across the country.
QUESTION: That happens a lot.
CHRISTOPHER TITUS: Yes, it does.
To a question about McDermott ripping Titus while shooting a scene in which the men play golf:
JOSHUA MALINA: Most of the early discussion was about -- he has a giant head.
CHRISTOPHER TITUS: I have a giant head.
JOSHUA MALINA: And if you don't block the scene correctly, none of the rest of us can be seen.
(Laughter.)
My memory is that most of the discussion the first day was, "Where are we all going to stand?"
CHRISTOPHER TITUS: Oh, Josh.
JOSHUA MALINA: Not an ego problem, mind you. The organ itself –
(Laughter.)
-- is very large. … Easter Island.
QUESTION: I really -- I was curious, on a more serious note --
JOSHUA MALINA: More serious than that?
(Laughter.)
And, apropos of nothing:
CHRISTOPHER TITUS: … We start talking about shows, and I go, "You know, we're like 'Happy Days.'" We all agreed that Dylan is Fonzie, and then Vartan is Richie Cunningham, because he’s the moral center. And then we had an argument over who was Potsie or Ralph Malph.
(Laughter.)
It turns out I'm Ralph Malph.
(Laughter.)
So, not happy about it.
JOSHUA MALINA: It is what it is. Then we started casting "The Godfather," and he was still Ralph Malph.
(Laughter.)
CHRISTOPHER TITUS: I was consigliore Ralph Malph.
Lindsay Lohan’s utterly convincing “It’s not my cocaine” excuse - despite the fact that the stuff was found in her pants (what, so celebrities carry for their assistants these days?) - reminds me of this anecdote from the press tour session for “K-Ville,” about New Orleans cops trying to rebuild and reclaim the city from rampant crime:
COLE HAUSER: We saw some unbelievable stuff as far as just how people are. I mean, this guy -- there was a guy who had pants on, who had drugs in his pocket. The cops said to him, "Why do you have, you know, what is this?" And he goes, "These are not my pants."
After his press session today, ABC Entertainment president Steve McPherson went after new NBC co-chairman Ben Silverman like Dick Cheney on Harry Whittington.
Speaking to reporters, McPherson implied Silverman knifed Kevin Reilly – former NBC Entertainment and current Fox Entertainment president and McPherson’s close friend – in the back.
“Kevin Reilly is the guy who stood up for ‘The Office’ (produced by Silverman's company Reveille) against all opposition,” McPherson said. “That made Reveille."
Silverman, when asked about Reilly’s firing 10 days ago, deflected the question. His colleague Marc Graboff said, “He wasn't fired. What happened was when Ben became available, about three months after we made Kevin's new deal, we jumped at the opportunity to bring Ben on board to the company. We thought he would be able to be the person that was going to take us to the next level. Kevin, when that happened, realized or determined, frankly, that there was just no role for him at the company and decided to move on.”
"I got as big a laugh out of that as you guys did,” McPherson said.
Silverman also deflected questions concerning the controversy surrounding his hiring Isaiah Washington. “He's a wonderful actor and a great performer, and he became available,” Silverman said before being interrupted by reporters’ derisive laughter. “I started talking to him before he was available -- to deal with the laughter,” he added, defensively. “And the idea when he told me he was available, I was like, ‘You are? Wait. They let -- I don't understand. What do you mean? You're a huge star on a star television show.’ I didn't quite understand what had gone on there.”
Again: McPherson: "If that's the case, he's either clueless or stupid."
As the esteemed and thoughtful members of the Television Critics Association prepare to discuss the sociological ramifications (and lack of humor) of ABC’s upcoming “Cavemen,” an event so earth-shattering in its cultural significance that Your Mayor felt the need to live-blog on it, some background:
Earlier today, ABC Entertainment president Stephen McPherson announced, “We’re doing lot of work” on retooling the show. “We recast one of leads,” he said. “The pilot will not be the pilot. We felt it jumps way too far in the development of the characters and into the frying pan. They tried to do way too much with that. It’ll end up being episode 5, episode 6 in the run. … We have to develop the characters and the dynamics so that we’re not diving into relationships you might not understand.” Oh, yeah, right – the relationships in “Cavemen” are so complex that maybe an Australopithecus may not quite get them.
And, in fact, someone noted that maybe the relationships weren’t the problem with the pilot and wondered why all the thinly veiled racial subtext was added. “The commercials are literally a one-joke thing,” McPherson said. “They’re about a group that’s not that bright. They decided to explore a group that’s a minority, with all the stereotypes. That was a decision made in development. If you do the commercials on a 30-minute basis, I don’t think they’d work.”
Memo to McPherson – reread your quote above very closely, particularly the “one-joke thing” part and “doing the commercials/don’t think they’d work” part. Now, think about it a little. Are you beginning to see the error of your ways?
Anyway, beyond just not being funny, “Cavemen” is anthropologically befuddled. Though the characters refer to themselves as Cro-Magnons, morphologically, they actually look a little more like Neanderthals. (For compleatists, here’s a look at an Australopithecus afarensis.)
And so, we're about to begin:
* The cast and executive producers were the only ones applauding the clip.
* First question: Where are the cavewomen? Honestly, someone asked that.
Episode five is the answer.
* Question: You had to know that making a show from a TV commercial would earn you all sorts of hell from us. How do face that you have to prove yourselves?
Answer: We knew we’d be under a lot of scrutiny, but it makes our job a little harder. … When making the commercials, we felt there were more stories to tell.
I never guessed we’d catch so much hell.
* Cro-Magnons existed between 40,000-10,000 years ago in the South of France. They vacationed in Italy, usually around Tuscany.
* By contrast, proto-Neanderthals first appeared in Europe 350,000 years ago. They became extinct 24,000 years ago in order to avoid being around once they became the butt of jokes.
* Fending off charges of implicit racial stereotyping on the show:
What’s sort of fun is we can create rules for this race that doesn’t really understand their place in this world, which gives us a flexibility to make that a broad experience that’s universal that everyone can relate to.
Could it be an issue? Yes. But that’s our job to make sure it doesn’t become one.
And now, the pseudo-pretentious take on the show: This is a show about acclimation, which is what we pitched it as. … If race relations leads to a story like that, that’s great. But this is about acclimation, which is something everyone deals with.
* Neanderthals had many adaptations to a cold climate, such as large braincase, short but robust builds, and large noses — traits selected by nature in cold climates. Their brain sizes have been estimated to be larger than modern humans, particularly the writers on this show, although such estimates have not been adjusted for their more robust builds.
* Another hard-hitting question: Why don’t they just shave and go to a decent barber?
* Blah blah blah on the makeup. “I was blown away,” says one of the actors.
* Cro-Magnons had a diet of meat, grain, wild carrots, beets, onion, turnip and other foods. Many of them were volunteers for PETA.
* “If the show works, it will work because people care about these three guys and can relate to their problems.”
* And more pseudo-pretentious ruminations: “We asked ourselves, ‘Is it authentic and is it reflective of authentic behavior?’”
* This is how you would read “Cro-Magnon” in another language: kʀomaɲõ and kɹəʊ'mægnən
* Question: Will the gecko be a guest star at some point?
Answer: Depends on what our ratings are.
* Yet more on how amazing the makeup is, which it isn’t.
* A disappointed panelist: “Someone told us there’d be a laugh track in this room, which there isn’t.”
* Question: I’m still wanting to know what the show is going to be. You say the show will be subtle, and the show we saw is anything but subtle. You say it won't just be dealing with racial stereotypes, but the episode we saw is nothing but that.
Answer: (long pause) Well, I mean, look. (Then lots of dissembling.)
Followed by more pseudo-pretentious rambling:
“Where we want to take the show is to make these distinctive stories about three friends in their 20s who happen to be cavemen and that grafts a filter onto their lives.”
* Question: “I don’t want to beat a dead horse…”
Answer: “That’s episode two.”
(More kvetching on the implicit racial stereotyping in the show.)
* Cro-Magnons are credited with killing off the Neanderthals and, now, comedy. A warrant is out for their arrest.
* UPDATE: After the session, a critic grumbled, "They have no f#&%ing idea what they're doing."
Your Mayor has been the go-to source for all things “Cavemen,” from the exclusive scoop that the series in fact would not be a comedy to the grim confirmation that comedy and “Cavemen” exist in mutually exclusive epochs.
Everyone covering TV Press Tour that I’ve spoken to shares my utter lack of enthusiasm for the show – one research project in which I participated for Johns Hopkins University (or USA Today Weekend; in the frenzied blur that is Press Tour, I forget which) declared it the worst show of the upcoming season.
And so, today should be fun: ABC’s portion of Press Tour begins, and the “Cavemen” session is scheduled for this afternoon at 2:15 p.m. Participants will include stars Bill English, Nick Kroll and Sam Huntington, executive producers Bill Martin & Mike Schiff, executive producers/directors Will Speck & Josh Gordon and co-executive producer and writer Joe Lawson.
I’ve already been offered $20 from one critic to ask, per my explosive breaking-news story, “When did you decide not to make this a comedy?” Were others to ratchet that figure up exponentially, I’d be tempted, but I figure that question will figure rather prominently in the proceedings this afternoon. Particularly in light of the cavemen break-dancing sequence.
Hence, I’ve decided to live-blog the “Cavemen” press conference. This will require a certain amount of wherewithal and discipline since, unlike the wonkette.com folks who live-blog Presidential debates and Bush press conferences or the defamer.com folks who live-blog awards shows, I’ll have to be doing this without the requisite 1.5-liter of Scotch necessitated by such soul-sapping events.
Nonetheless, tune in at 2:15 with your trigger finger poised on the “reload” icon. It should be fun. Or mortifying. Or both.
TV Guide, eschewing Us Magazine’s “Stars: They’re Just Like Us!” rhetorical horse dung, offers a “Stars: Their Outrageous Salaries May Be The Harbinger Of A Civilian Uprising That May Usher In An Era Of Socialism!” report revealing celebrity incomes.
Here’re the ones intended to scandalize you the most:
OPRAH WINFREY: $260 million per year (including other shows she produces) (That’s an awful lot of self-empowerment.)
SIMON COWELL: $45 million per year (for American Idol and other projects) (Being mean pays well.)
JUDGE JUDY: $30 million per year (Yes, being mean pays extremely well.)
KATIE COURIC: $15 million per year (Being beleaguered pays pretty well, too.)
ZACH BRAFF: $6.3 million (for 18 episodes of Scrubs next season) (Or, roughly, $1 per viewer for an average episode).
The most surprising of these, to my mind, is Judge Judy, because her show is the most throwaway of the bunch and all she does is bully the poor boobs who appear before her. And she blows it all on Dolce & Gabbana judicial robes.
And more:
NETWORK PRIME TIME (all salaries are per episode)
William Petersen (CSI): $500,000
Charlie Sheen (Two and a Half Men): $350,000
Mariska Hargitay (Law & Order: SVU): $350,000
Chris Meloni (Law & Order: SVU): $350,000
Hugh Laurie (House): $300,000
Julia Louis-Dreyfus (New Adventures of Old Christine): $225,000
Ellen Pompeo (Grey’s Anatomy): $200,000
Eva Longoria (Desperate Housewives): $200,000
Jeff Foxworthy (Are You Smarter Than…): $150,000
T.R. Knight (Grey’s Anatomy): $125,000
Chandra Wilson (Grey’s Anatomy): $125,000
Sally Field (Brothers & Sisters): $100,000
The shocker here: Ellen Pompeo’s paycheck, which is twice two-time Oscar-winner Sally Fields. At least the others on this list capably service their roles. A Johns Hopkins University study found that Pompeo’s watery simpering has provoked an alarming uptick in cutting and other forms of self-mutilation amongst “Grey’s Anatomy” viewers.
And more:
Apparently, appearing on “Dateline: To Catch a Predator” has its upside – not for the perp (OK: alleged perp), obviously, but for his aggrieved family: The sister of a man who killed himself while the police were knocking at his door to question him about his sexually explicit online chat with what the guy thought was a 13-year-old boy is suing NBC for $105 million.
Most critics have been giving “To Catch a Predator” a pass because no one in their right mind would defend the dirtbags the show humiliates and helps put behind bars. (Besides, watching these guys squirm while host Chris Hansen turns the thumbscrews on them is spectacularly quease-inducing TV, even though Hansen of late appears to have become more theatrical in his self-righteous cudgeling of his perverted dupes; it’s hard to shake the feeling that “To Catch a Predator” plays more like a reality show than a newsmagazine report.)
What places this case in a somewhat hazy area are the facts that the D.A. handling this round of cases didn’t prosecute any of them, feeling that the evidence was tainted (and that NBC didn’t obtain the permission of the local mayor or city council for the sting) and that the dead guy in fact didn’t show up at Sicko Central, the home to which the pervs are invited during the online chats. Granted, the content of the online chat itself constitutes a felony. And it’s impossible to imagine a jury that’d be sympathetic to a 57-year-old guy who was willfully flirting with underage kids, particularly if NBC’s attorneys can find others victimized by him.
But, really, it was only a matter of time before this happened. Those nabbed in these stings are obviously diseased, but might be sane enough to understand that being exposed on national television as a likely child molester is about as bad as it gets, and there’s not going to be a whole lot in life to look forward to afterwards.
And while it’s difficult to feel much remorse that there’s one less bad guy (OK, OK: alleged bad guy) walking amongst us, NBC and the folks at Perverted Justice who set up these stings (just a thought, but perhaps the group might want to come up with a new moniker) should’ve considered the potential residual blowback on the innocent bystanders in these creeps’ families. And perhaps installments of “To Catch a Predator” should expend some energy on encouraging those who feel such urges to get psychiatric help in addition to jazzing audiences with the depictions of debasing these demented deviants.
Dan Rather, post-CBS News, isn’t particularly bullish on the future of the network newscast. He backed off criticism of his replacement, Katie Couric – though he noted “the odds are longer now” as to whether she can succeed in the anchor’s chair – but offered a grim assessment of the network newscast in general.
“I think we’ll see the time when someone at the top (of a network) says, ‘We can give this (air) time back to affiliates,’” Rather declared.
With network news on the skids (except over at ABC) and newspapers gasping for air (key quote: “(C)apital markets (are) increasingly skeptical about the newspaper industry's ability to generate cash from operations”), are we looking at a future in which journalism – that solid, serious kind, with investigations into corporate and governmental corruption, not the kind tracking Victoria Beckham’s whereabouts – will be sporting a toe tag? Does our culture so devalue information that could save our lives, avert future crises and maintain a sense of fairness and justice in society that we’re simply --
So, during Fox’s Press Tour session for “Canterbury’s Law,” a midseason legal drama starring Julianna Marguilies, this curious question was posed:
QUESTION: Why are TV writers so fascinated with men's bathrooms? Virtually every drama, especially courtroom dramas, has a scene with men in the bathroom.
Your Mayor, not being as utterly obsessed with human elimination as the querying journalist, had not noticed this before, but upon reflection, entertainments focusing on the legal process – from “Ally McBeal” to “The Runaway Jury” – have, in fact, featured key expository scenes in restrooms. Not sure I’d really want to know the answer enough to posit it before a large group, but I respect the interrogator’s moxie.
Herewith, the response:
WALON GREEN (executive producer): Well, the urinal is actually an ideal place to shoot something, because it's not a stall. It's not enclosed. It's open.
(Laughter.)
It offers opportunities for different angles and good coverage, and there's also sound potential so --
(Laughter.)
JULIANNA MARGULIES (Clapping): Walon, you rock.
Indeed, Walon, you do rock. You have keenly explicated a once-unheralded genre cliché that no one probably really wanted to know about but now understands fully.
Plus, a lot of actors probably have prostate problems, so if their bladders ache in the middle of a scene, they’re good to go.
Amy Sherman-Palladino, on hand at the TV Press Tour to tout her midseason Fox sitcom “The Return of Jezebel James” and wearing a big white hat that looked as though it had been swiped from a Dr. Seuss book, had this to say about the roundly reviled series finale of “Gilmore Girls,” the show she created but left before the seventh season, thereby denying herself the chance to conclude it with the final line she had long said was gestating in her head:
“I didn’t watch it. I just got very drunk that night and sat in a corner. I couldn’t watch it because it wasn’t going to be my ending and had in my head forever. You know, go with God. I love all those people; I love that cast. I’m friends with Lauren (Graham).”
On the possibility of a TV movie bringing about more closure:
“We’ve talked about maybe sometimes doing a little song and dance together. I’m not ruling it out.”
And just what was that final line?
“You’re adopted.”
(Her joke, not mine.)
Smells like pre-teen spirit: The altruistic people of Disney, who have never turned down an opportunity to exploit the young citizens of America for cash, have created a market that probably doesn’t really need to exist: They’ve developed a series of “Pirates of the Caribbean” and Buzz Lightyear fragrances aimed at Latino boys ages 4-11.
“The market is driven by gift-giving, so we will target moms and grandmothers—the primary gift-givers,” says a Disney spokeswoman who apparently has absolutely no qualms about the fact that any boy who would open up a wrapped gift hoping for a PSP game and instead discovering a dinky bottle of cologne no doubt faces years of therapy in the future.
And does anyone, even a 4-year-old, want to smell like a pirate? Couldn’t a kid manage to stink like that simply by running around in 90-degree temperatures without any deodorant? A plastic toy astronaut isn’t the first thing one’d associate with aromatic pleasures, either. And why they haven't marketed a Mickey scent is beyond me: What little kid wouldn't want to smell like a rodent?
So allow me to suggest further Disney-inspired liquid odors for parents to douse on their unwitting progeny:
* Lady and the Tramp
* The Gnome-Mobile
* Operation Dumbo Drop
* Uncle Remus
* Bambi’s dead mom
* Darby O’Gill and the Little People
* Country Bear Jamboree
* Scrooge McDuck’s bank vault
* Flubber
* The Barefoot Executive
* Million Dollar Duck
* The Apple Dumpling Gang
* The toilet scene in “Trainspotting” (granted, that was a Miramax film, but Disney owns Miramas. So there.)
And, of course, feel free to add your own.
Peter Liguori and Kevin Reilly worked together before, elevating the cable network FX to its current acclaimed status. So it only seemed natural that when NBC booted Reilly in order for Ben Silverman to cheerlead that network to success, Fox chairman Liguori would bring his old friend aboard to serve as the network’s Entertainment president.
But few of the reporters attending the TCA Press Tour in Beverly Hills were prepared for the bald mutual admiration society that emerged during Fox’s executive session.
Oh, but first, a bit of news before proceeding: Tony-winner Cherry Jones will play the President next season on “24.”
OK, that out of the way, perhaps the best way to describe what happened is to get out of the way and allow the official transcript of Liguori and Reilly’s press conference tell the story:
ALL TCA PRESS TOUR TRANSCRIPTS ARE PREPARED IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING PRESS CONFERENCES. DUE TO THE SPEED WITH WHICH THESE TRANSCRIPTS ARE PREPARED, COMPLETE ACCURACY CANNOT BE GUARANTEED.
QUESTION: For both Kevin and Peter. You've worked together before, but this is kind of an odd situation. Can you shed a little bit of light on what the style is going to be? You walk into a situation -- how do you guys sit together and work out something that you're essentially adopting and something you created? And then going forward, how is that style?
PETER LIGUORI: We're all one team. Kevin doesn't come to the office today saying, "Okay. I'm ready to develop my shows. Peter, you take care of this season."
This relationship has worked very, very well because, first of all, we can laugh at each other. We have certainly healthy egos, but we can –
(Laughing.)
KEVIN REILLY: His has gotten much, much bigger since cable. I can tell you that.
PETER LIGUORI: Yes, and not stopping. We know who we are. We know how we complement each other. I think the single biggest thing that Kevin and I share, other than a specific creative DNA, is just kind of a bit of a life philosophy, which is, let's succeed and go home to our families. There is not any ego competition or "your shows versus my shows." They're FOX shows. Frankly, that's why I really enjoyed working with Kevin when we were at FX, which is a way smaller pond to be playing in.
I just have to tell you, over the course of the last three weeks, mostly my talking to Kevin, and then one week of really getting down to business, on a personal basis, I don't think I've ever been happier in the offices within FOX. It's comfortable. It's collaborative. The energy is raised up in the place. It's like an old love. We finish each other's sentences.
KEVIN REILLY: Kind of like -- wow.
(Laughter.)
PETER LIGUORI: Maybe that was a bit of a stretch.
KEVIN REILLY (referring to a small coffee table on stage between the executives’ chairs): Should we move the table out from between us?
PETER LIGUORI: Yes.
(The two men toss the table aside roughly, then fall into one another, each man’s arms frenziedly exploring the other man.)
KEVIN REILLY: Oh, Peter (gasping), I’ve missed you so!
PETER LIGUORI: And I, you!
KEVIN REILLY: Why did I ever leave you for Jeff Zucker? He’s brutish – all hands, clumsy and simian-like – and a lousy kisser!
PETER LIGUORI: Don’t ever leave me again, Kevin Reilly! Just don’t ever leave me again!
(As their embrace becomes ever more impassioned, a couple of stagehands wheel a large Jacuzzi onto the platform. Liguori and Reilly kick their chairs into the audience to make room for the giant tub, then, tearing one another’s jackets and shirts off, tumble headlong into the steaming, bubbling water.)
PETER LIGUORI: Let me see that “American Idol!”
KEVIN REILLY: It’s time for “Bones,” and I’m not talking about Emily Deschanel!
(Reporters sheepishly sneak out of the International Ballroom.)
(Honest -- about thee-quarters of this is true, which is pretty good as far as blogs go.)
There are the obvious trends you’ll see when the fall TV season rolls around in September – the Rise of the Geeks (“Chuck,” “Reaper,” “The Big Bang Theory”) and the Foreign Menace Invades Hollywood (honestly, if Lou Dobbs is so concerned about foreigners taking our jobs, all he need do is plant himself in Hollywood, where our hard-working American actors are being told "Come back when you're more talented" and getting beat out for roles by scads of actors from England, South Africa, Denmark, Australia, etc.
(Some of the shows featuring foreign-born actors in lead roles: “Viva Laughlin,” “Aliens in America,” “Chuck,” “Bionic Woman,” “New Amsterdam,” “Moonlight,” “Pushing Daisies,” “Life,” & so on & so forth.).
But there’s another trend afoot, less obvious but more significant when it comes to how TV will be made in the future: The emerging reliance on online promotion on network programming, to the point of dictating what actually may get on the air. Given two shows, with all other things being equal, the show with the more compelling online component will get on the air; the other probably won’t. Of late, the success of “Heroes” and the resurrection of “Jericho” has given this notion greater urgency.
This notion was first floated at the January TV Press Tour, with this exchange with then-NBC chief Kevin Reilly:
QUESTION: Kevin, in the future will how you can promote shows online and develop audiences online -- will that actually affect the way that you develop series, and will it have an effect on what actually gets on the air?
KEVIN REILLY: “Yes. I mean, you can't have the cart pull the horse, you know. If you're doing something because you think it's a good Web show and not a good television show, that's going to be a problem. But the -- our Web folks have a seat at the adults' table. They're not locked away in the back room.
“It is a daily conversation about how can we exploit, how can we further market, push the tentacles of exposure out in the public? How can we change our distribution methods to best benefit the shows, the product, the company? How can we make all of the above an asset for the company? How do we make money on all the above? It's an exciting but trying time. There are moving parts on every front. …
“You're going to see all sorts of experimentation, and we already have. So yes, and any -- the second we pick something up, even as we do it, we say, "Oh, this one" -- we're starting dialogue right now with our sales department to figure out some innovative ways to integrate and work with advertisers in a special way. We're talking to our Web people right now -- what are the Web extensions of this? What's the opportunity? – and identifying the ones that can really be the leaders, like "Heroes" was last year. We know almost at this time last year that "Heroes" was going to be a big Web play for us. And Tim Kring was completely embracing it. That's one of the reasons there's been so much success there.
Your Mayor was getting around to doing a story on this when three things happened:
* Kevin Reilly was too immersed in May upfronts to pursue the conversation further.
* Kevin Reilly got canned at NBC (he’s now at Fox).
* The computer with all the interviews previously conducted on the story went into a deep, Terry-Schiavo-type coma (and hasn’t yet been taken to a data retrieval service).
Seems like each network has a different strategy for doing this, but it’s clearly on their minds:
* NBC is continuing the sci-fi/fantasy theme (with “Bionic Woman,” “Chuck” and “Journeyman”), knowing fans of the genre have nothing better to do than troll the Internets all day long and these sorts of shows lend themselves to such online applications.
* CBS is trotting out some controversial or at least provocative programming (“Kid Nation,” “Viva Laughlin” (sort of) and the midseason show “Swingtown”) intended to stir online debate on message boards.
CBS Entertainment president Nina Tassler explained her thinking and strategy:
“It's one thing when you've got an audience communicating to someone at the network. But (with “Jericho”) you really had a chance to see the way they talked to each other, the way they communicated about characters, the way they talked about storylines. That gives you a very unique opportunity right now. So I think we are looking at a shift and a change. …
“Maybe it comes out of "Jericho." What I think is so amazing is being able to listen and learn and watch our audience really connect with a show and really talk to each other, and I think what I'm hoping from "Kid Nation," from some of the shows, from "Swingtown," you're finding that audiences are personalizing, they've got very strong opinions, and we at the network are, we're really listening. We're responding, and I think that -- it's that debate, and that public discussion is positive, and it allows us to gain greater insight into who is watching our shows and what do they have to say about our shows. So I'm finding that personally very, very rewarding.”
* The CW is keying into the blogging plot point in its new show “Gossip Girl” to invite fans to come to their site and start their own (as well as buy the crap that they wear and use on the show).
So, it’s a story that bears following, and one that we will indeed revisit later, if the Daily News ponies up to resuscitate my old computer.
CW Entertainment president Dawn Ostroff mentioned this morning during her TV Press Tour session that the network has an executive who does nothing all day but spend her time trolling the Internets for trends, etc.
Not that impressive: Every business has someone like that. Only difference is, they don’t call them “executives.” They call them temps, secretaries, sales personnel, comptrollers, TV critics, etc., etc.
In the wake of some of the head-scratching choices announced in the Emmy nominations yesterday, Howstuffworks.com attempts to explain the process for you.
It’s entitled “How the Emmy Awards Work.” Spoiler: They don’t.
CBS’s TV Press Tour session for “Viva Laughlin” seemed to be fairly evenly divided between two camps – those who had never seen the BBC’s “Viva Blackpool” and therefore didn’t get where the show was coming from, and those who had seen its inspiration and loved it, and were none too comforted by the blasé responses from the panel about their listless adaptation of that really kind of brilliant miniseries.
Honestly, in all Your Mayor's years of covering TV Press Tour, I’ve never emerged from a press conference for a show I wanted to like with such negative feelings (Quietus®, anyone?).
“Viva Blackpool” was a hilarious and energetic six-episode pseudo-musical British miniseries about a delusional dreamer (played with unbelievable charisma by David Morrissey) who thought opening a casino in a dying, seedy British port town would reverse that city’s fortunes, not to mention his own. Of course, many obstacles lay in his way, such as an inopportunely placed corpse and a lady-killing detective investigating that ostensible murder.
By contrast, “Viva Laughlin” boasts virtually no sense of humor. Hugh Jackman plays the evil casino owner with spectacular dash. But his appearances are being scheduled capriciously – what good is a drama if the antagonist rarely shows up?
And here are some more concerns, from the press conference:
THE MAYOR OF TELEVISION: In the BBC series, while the actors were singing, they were playing directly to the cameras, sort of winking at the audience as they were singing along, and that sort of gave the show a sort of cheekier sensibility. How much discussion went into deciding that the actors shouldn't eye the camera while they're singing, and why did you decide they shouldn't?
BOB LOWRY (EXECUTIVE PRODUCER): We didn't want to break the fourth wall. We didn't want the audience -- I don't think being in on the joke, because it's not a joke. We didn't want the audience to be taken away from the story. We wanted them to remain engaged, and we felt that breaking the fourth wall was -- sort of removing the viewer from the actual story that we were telling. ... In looking to the camera, it sort of removed the actors from the actual story.
Bad move. Because the BBC version understood that characters breaking into song was a kind of joke. Lowry spoke a lot about “teaching the audience how to watch the show,” until, at some point, he realized how condescending that sounded, and then he said, “I don't think it's so much teach them how to watch a drama with music as much as it is allowing them the opportunity to become engaged and still tell a good story.”
(Someone else at CBS suggested to Your Mayor that the consensus at the network was that American viewers were just too dumb to get the humor from characters winking at the camera. Well, in defense of that point of view, George W. Bush won the Presidency twice.)
And then, another question:
THE MAYOR OF TELEVISION: The BBC series was only six episodes, so how much of a challenge has it been to break stories and extend that? And how long can you extend the murder mystery or the preparation of the hotel before it opens?
BOB LOWRY: The challenge is enormous. … I needed to create characters that didn't exist in the BBC version. The phrase I often use is I had to crack it open for 22, so we had to create different characters to play off of each other and to be intertwined in each other's lives, and we hope to keep the -- I don't have an answer for you that the murder mystery will be resolved by 13 or by 22. But as a writer, I can tell you that the murder mystery will be resolved after we have exhausted every possibility of examining all of the suspects who could have killed the character.
… which sounds like more obfuscating on a level that most TV viewers won’t kindly accept. “Lost” dragged out storylines to the point of stretching them to death, much as Lowry seems to be vowing to do; viewers abandoned the show. Lowry sounds like he’s content with picking at a scab until the entire continent will be bored.
Too bad. “Viva Blackpool” moved with an effortless grace; “Viva Laughlin” sounds like it’ll proceed at a glacial pace without a smidgen of the wit of the original. It almost sounds as if “Viva Laughlin” will make viewers nostalgic for NBC’s remake of the British sitcom “Coupling.”
Understanding that TCA members have better things to do than fill space on this blog, I nonetheless throw out the question - has anyone else been soured on a show they liked after hearing the cast and creators discuss it during a press conference? If you blog on it, I'll offer links to your thoughts here.
On Saturday evening, winners of the Television Critics Associations awards will take the stage at the Beverly Hilton Hotel, smile profusely and thank the group graciously, noting that this award is really meaningful, coming as it does from people whose life’s work is given over to watching and championing quality television. They do all that, but in their hearts, they’ll be thinking one of two things:
* “I hope I can parlay this into an Emmy now.”
* “How meaningful is this award if it can’t even score me an Emmy nomination?”
Emmy nominations were announced this morning, and winners in the major categories will be announced Sept. 16. The Academy of Television Arts and Sciences announced today that after consultations with the Federal Trade Commission regarding reservations registered over trophy safety and to alleviate production costs of the televised ceremony, ATAS has entered into an agreement with Apple and, for the first time, the spiky-winged angel holding aloft an empty globe will be replaced with a large, gold-plated iPhone.
Anyway, it was the usual mixed bag of nominations announced today, with the requisite perennials, a couple of mildly surprising inclusions, some heartening fresh blood and the usual vexing snubs. (Memo to self: Save this paragraph for use next year.)
“Sopranos:” You know the drill: 15 nominations, including three in the writing category alone, most of any series; 111 overall; show to beat. Otherwise: HBO, 11 fewer nominations than last year.
“Ugly Betty” and “30 Rock:” first-time comedies do swell, with 11 and 10 nominations overall, including Outstanding Comedy Series. NBC is praying “30 Rock’s” strong showing will translate into actual viewers next season, but look how well winning the Emmy worked out for “Arrested Development.” Go ahead and hand America Ferrera the acting trophy right now, just on the sheer likability factor (Emmy voters know just how difficult it is to fake being that sweet and kind and lovable.)
“Boston Legal:” Emmy voters love this show more than any other demographic on the planet: Six nominations, including Outstanding Drama Series, a nomination that people who care enough about this sort of thing to fume over snubs charge could’ve and should’ve gone to either “The Wire” (boyoboy, when the history of Television is written, Emmy voters will look awfully stoopid for never giving this show its due) or “Friday Night Lights.”
No, really: I’d like to hear from someone who voted in this thing and watched “The Wire” and thought, “You know what? No. I’m voting for something else.” What do you want, for heaven’s sake?
A fairly reliable measure of what got snubbed in the Outstanding Series categories is to look at the writing and directing categories. Nominated in those categories: “Battlestar Galactica,” “Friday Night Lights,” “Extras,” “Scrubs” and “Lost.”
Ricky Gervais: Three nominations, for writing, directing and starring in “Extras.” Start polishing that “It’s an honor just to be nominated” speech now. Or, since he’s up against two scripts both from “The Office” and “30 Rock” in the comedy writing category, perhaps he’ll win as those cancel one another out.
An utter, jaw-dropping shocker: The two stars appearing this morning to announce the nominations – Kyra Sedgwick and Jon Cryer – went home with nominations themselves. Quite the gift bag.
“Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” got the most nominations of any production this year – 17 – and was also named “Worst TV movie or miniseries” in a critics’ poll in a trade publication. Both of which are wild over-reactions.
Three miniseries nominations – “Broken Trail,” “Prime Suspect” and “The Starter Wife.” What this means: Emmy voters couldn’t be bothered to pop their DVD screener of “The State Within” into their players for even five minutes, because otherwise it would’ve been on this list.
T.R. Knight got nominated for Best Supporting Actor/Drama for “Grey’s Anatomy.” Wonder if he’ll thank Isaiah Washington if he wins?
Funny how no one's talking about how Lauren Graham got snubbed this year.
“Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip” got 5 nominations!
And “Saturday Night Live’s” song “Dick in a Box,” an ode to Vice President Cheney and his undisclosed bunker, just might walk off with the highest honor the Television Arts has to offer.
“I'm starting to sense in the room what I'm going to call mild reservations about the show,” one reporter dryly observed near the end of a particularly contentious TV Press Tour session, for CBS’s upcoming reality show “Kid Nation.”
In it, 40 kids, aged 8-15, settle at a New Mexico “ghost town” and try to establish their own society. More we cannot say, because CBS has not made an episode available for preview. But we know what you’re thinking, and series creator/executive producer Tom Forman wishes to allay your fears:
“I don't think any of us were unaware of ‘Lord of the Flies.’ And to answer about how quickly did it come up, six seconds. The minute we started talking about it, we stopped and said, ‘Are we making a reality “Lord of the Flies?”’ and said, ‘Well, there will be elements.’ I'm not going to deny the comparison -- these are kids living on their own. That said, like every reality show, there are adults off-camera waiting to step in if kids got violent.”
The show has come under fire because it apparently exploited a loophole in New Mexico child-labor laws (the series passed itself off as a summer camp, which meant it could shoot the kids for as long as it wanted, as opposed to a TV production, which limits the hours kids can work and insists upon on-set tutors), a loophole the N.M. legislature has since reportedly sealed.
The Television Critics Association has been a world leader in decrying unfair child-labor practices since 1988, when the embarrassing Ritz-Carlton Shoeshine Scandal was brought to the public’s attention. Since then, the TCA has championed the cause of eradicating child labor – except, of course, for those critics who wear Gap clothing made in Cambodia.
Herewith, the transcript from the “Kid Nation” press conference, in which the intrepid men and women of the TCA seek the facts as to whether the children participating in the show were in any way exploited in order to produce low-budget programming to entertain an undemanding American viewing audience:
ALL TCA PRESS TOUR TRANSCRIPTS ARE PREPARED IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING PRESS CONFERENCES. DUE TO THE SPEED WITH WHICH THESE TRANSCRIPTS ARE PREPARED, COMPLETE ACCURACY CANNOT BE GUARANTEED.
QUESTION: Does it trouble you at all that, if I follow this correctly, that the way that you filmed "Kid Nation" would be illegal in a number of states? Does that give you pause in any way, like "Okay, we can do it in these certain states. It's legal”?
TOM FORMAN: First off, I'm not trying to dodge the question, but I'm not a lawyer, and I don't really know the answer to the legality of it -- of other states' laws. But speaking to the ethical part of it, does it give me pause? Is it something I think about? Of course. I think we made a decision early on that we were going to give these kids an incredible experience, that we were going to find kids who wanted this experience, kids that went to things like Scout camps and model U.N.’s. This was going to be a little higher energy, and it was going to be on television.
QUESTION: OK, then, let’s speak to some of the participants on the panel. How do you regard your experience on “Kid Nation?”
JACK: I thought it was great. I started out as the leader of my choir group, and from there, I amassed power, and finally, I was able to crush my chief foe, Ralph.
RALPH: Initially, it seemed kind of fun. I was trying to maintain a sense of order, but a lot of the kids ended up not really thinking that was necessary, and they sort of got behind Jack, and then there was that thing with Piggy, and Jack prevailed.
PIGGY: Ralph was nice to me. A lot of the other kids weren’t. Well, let me put it another way – none of the other kids were. I didn’t like it when they took my inhaler. That was mean. I mean, what good is adherence to social strictures established by adult a posteriori mores when you don’t have an inhaler?
ROGER: Exactly, lard-butt. A social structure based upon a priori theories works for those of us who like to cave in skulls with large rocks, and “Kid Nation” had lots of rocks.
JACK: Oh, and don't forget the entrail dance. That was cool.
SAMNERIC: We liked making waffles.
SIMON: I liked the waffles. Look, it wasn’t a perfect system, but it was a whole lot better than serving as an altar boy in Cardinal Mahoney’s Archdiocese.
QUESTION: Why this idea? Who's the audience for it?
TOM FORMAN: I think I'm the audience for it.
By the way, Forman added that if “Kid Nation” is successful, the sequel, which will be shot in Jakarta, will be entitled “Kid Shoe Factory.”
Matthew Weiner, former “Sopranos” writer now in charge of his own show, AMC’s new acclaimed “Mad Men,” which premieres tonight at 10 p.m., describes how he came upon the idea of exploring ’60s mores via slick, womanizing Madison Avenue advertising executives and their wives, mistresses and credulous and conniving secretaries:
“I love this period, and I was always interested in advertising. In a way it was like, to me, some of the greatest entertainment in my life. But what really happened is I reached a certain point in my life where I started thinking about myself as a man and where I was and what I was feeling, and it just intersecte