October 2007 Archives
More proof that the Republican Party is elitist: It costs $35,000 to get on the Republican Presidential Primary ballot in South Carolina, as opposed to the chump-change $2,500 necessary to land you on the Democrats’ ballot. And the Democrats’ll even let you on their ballot for free if you can score 3,000 signatures.
Which means that Stephen Colbert’s dream of running as a favorite-son Presidential candidate in both the Democratic and Republican primaries in his native South Carolina has been quashed. Perhaps if “The Colbert Report” aired on a deep-pocketed broadcast network, he could continue his charade, but 35 large is a lot of money for basic-cable to flush away on such a quixotic quest.
Oh, and there’s no guarantee that Colbert will get on the Democratic ballot, either:
“Charleston Democratic Party Chairman Waring Howe, was more blunt: ‘Over my dead body will Colbert's name be on the ballot.’ … Opponents such as Howe argue that Colbert makes a mockery of the political process.”
Well, that’s a bit harsh, and anyway, explain to me how the political process itself does not make a mockery of the political process.
On the other hand:
“‘I think a lot of people think it's a joke because it's a comedy show and whatnot, but he's a nice fellow, and if he gets on the ballot, he will come here to South Carolina and campaign across the state,’ said Charles Hamby, the second vice chairman of the state Democratic Party.”
Clearly, Hamby is eager for at least one “nice” person to run for President.
And yesterday, we discussed the burgeoning hand-wringing that his candidacy is inspiring among the punditocracy, who worry that the media is too stupid to focus on the issues while Colbert is running when in fact the media is too stupid to focus on the issues even when Colbert isn’t running, as well. So MarketWatch’s Jon Friedman comes late to this party, but it’s mainly to brag about the time Colbert mentioned him by name on his show, and that Colbert remembered him when they later ran into one another, and that instead of backing slowly, warily away from him, Colbert was actually nice to him. Good way to make your kvetching point that some political journalists are starstruck by Colbert, Jon!
So: South Carolina’s leaning toward the position that politics should be left to the politicians, because, after all, what good can a mere comic do for America? For the answer, consider Colbert’s DonorsChoose.org site, raising money for South Carolina schools. Colbert’s site has already raised more than $41,000, which is far, far more than similar sites for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel and Wesley Clark combined.
Basically, the notion that seems to be forming is: Politicians can be both politicians and laughingstocks, but comedians need to stick to the jokes. Seems like they feel Colbert’s too good to lower himself into the briny murk of politicking.
We’ve discussed the ramifications and the effects, both short- and long-term, of the impending writers strike.
Well, here’re some pre-strike statistics that have to be worrisome for the networks: Most of them are losing viewers at a fearsome rate, and this is with original scripted programming. If the strike forces them to scramble and cook up all sorts of wan reality shows (over the summer, a lot of the reality programming fared even worse than repeats of shows), these numbers will tumble ever further, and it’ll be increasingly difficult to distinguish the networks’ viewership from cable.
Based upon last week’s ratings, CBS, NBC and The CW are shedding viewers in double-digit percentages from just last year. ABC’s hanging in there, thanks to “Dancing with the Stars” and a handful of successful new series. Fox had the World Series last week, so its numbers are skewed, but it’s not exactly thriving otherwise.
Herewith, last week’s ratings (and how they compare to the same week last year in parentheses).
* Households:
Fox: 8.6 rating/14 share (+32 percent), ABC: 7.4/12 (+ 1), CBS: 7.2/12 (-10), NBC: 4.4/ 7 (-30), CW: 1.9/ 3 (-17)
* Total Viewers:
Fox: 13.78 million (+38), ABC: 11.19 (- 2), CBS: 11.17 (- 9), NBC: 7.00 (-28), CW: 2.96 (-18)
* Adults 18-49:
Fox: 4.6 rating/13 share (+44), ABC: 3.7/10 (- 5), CBS: 3.0/ 8 (-17), NBC: 2.6/ 7 (-26), CW: 1.2/ 3 (-20)
*Adults 25-54:
Fox: 5.2/13 (+41), ABC: 4.3/11 (- 4), CBS: 3.9/10 (-17), NBC: 2.9/ 7 (-27), CW: 1.1/ 3 (-21)
* Adults 18-34:
Fox: 3.9/12 (+39), ABC: 2.9/ 9 (no change), NBC: 2.4/ 7 (-17), CBS: 2.0/ 6 (-20), CW: 1.3/ 4 (-24)
The biggest loser here is The CW, which is hemorrhaging the young viewers that comprise its target audience. One imagines that, strike or no strike, something drastic is going to happen at The CW. Like, maybe, it’ll cease to exist: I can’t imagine its parent company is enjoying dumping all the money it’s spending down that sinkhole.
The subject header in the Email read: “AOL Polls 2.5 Americans About Fall TV.” So you’re thinking, the only person who broke a sweat in this endeavor was that half a person who was trying to articulate his views on “Private Practice” while desperately searching for his abdomen and legs.
Well, of course, they meant 2.5 million, and naturally that’s wildly misleading, as well: They tallied 2.5 million votes through 15 questions, and even though online polls tend to be pointless, sometimes a droplet of truth can be divined from the most meaningless effluvium. (I think that’s a Zen koan. Or advice from a Bazooka Bubble Gum comic.)
So, which showrunner stuffed the ballot box in order to make his new show look more popular than it really is? Answer: “Dirty Sexy Money” was named the new show people were finding most addictive, with 27% of the votes, though if you look at the ratings, you find the show is struggling. It was also named best guilty pleasure, reaping 43% of that vote.
Even more bizarre: Fox’s limping-along “Back To You” tallied better than “Bionic Woman,” which is also limping for something with such supercharged legs. (“Pushing Daisies” came in second in voting for favorite new show, by the way. “Private Practice” wasn’t even mentioned in this category, though it’s hard to tell if it was even an option in the voting.)
Other theoretical findings: “House” is favorite returning show, edging out “CSI” and “Dancing with the Stars.” “Cavemen” is considered the worst new show in a landslide. (By the way: Last night’s 4,238th repeat of “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown” did nearly twice the audience an original episode of “Cavemen” manages in that timeslot.)
Bad news for a couple of returning shows: Half those voting declared “Heroes” done and they’ve moved on; another 32% say the show isn’t as good as it was last year, but they’re hanging in there – for now. Similar deal with “Grey’s Anatomy” – 24% of those who went to the trouble of clicking their mouse have abandoned the show, while 30% are still watching despite perceiving a slip in quality.
And bad news for networks hoping that reality TV will tide them over during the impending writers strike: Viewers are sick of the stuff. 44% can’t wait for the trend to die, and an additional 30% watch the genre only sporadically.
Here’re some questions for AOL’s next poll: Which shows will you not miss when the writers go on strike? Will you spend the strike a) reading, b) watching DVDs, c) watching cats frolic on YouTube, d) curled up in the fetal position as your bloodstream tries to cope with the absence of toxins?
ABC yesterday picked up “Samantha Who?” for the remainder of the season. It’s so far the most successful new show of the season, though that’ll likely change once it loses its “Dancing with the Stars” lead-in.
Still: A new sitcom not only a top-20 show but the most-watched new show of the season? And here, everyone was telling us that sitcoms are dead.
Of course, all this is moot if there’s a writers strike. Though Variety reports that it won’t begin tomorrow, as originally feared, but next week. The trade notes that extending the deadline a) puts a sword of Damocles over producers during any negotiations that proceed after today, b) makes the writers look like nominally reasonable folks by delaying the inevitable, and c) gives them time to finish up all those last-minute projects.
See you on the picket line!
While TVGuide.com thinks this is a really good idea – they have a poll question, “Does NBC's planned Office spin-of make you giddy with joy?” (hey, it’s TVGuide.com – all TV makes them giddy with joy) – those leaving comments at the site, not to mention here, realize otherwise.
Herewith, some of the comments from the show’s fans who, even though they may not be part of the industry, understand something NBC’s Ben Silverman doesn’t: This can’t end well.
* This is an AWFUL idea. Why on earth would you want to ruin such a great show like The Office??? I'm pretty sure that everyone can agree that Private Practice did not receive the welcome that they were hoping for...This is just a bad, bad idea.
* Nooooooo. I am going all French Revolution on NBC. Heads on sticks.
* Two words: Joey. And Joey.
What do you think? Everyone feared the American “Office” before they saw it, so maybe the producers can pull this off as well? Or does the mere thought of “extending the product” cheapen a quality show?
I’ve seen billboards around town for something called “Mr. Magorium’s Wonder Emporium.” Is this real? It looks like someone couldn’t get the rights to “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” and decided to make the movie anyway.
And: Dustin Hoffman? Did he lose a bet? Is just pottering around the house simply not an option? Natalie Portman? Do the producers have nude photos of her they threatened to publish online if she didn’t do the movie?
I’ve noted that Washington journalists, bored with the Presidential race, have found themselves more interested in Stephen Colbert than the real candidates. Well, some people think that’s a bad thing:
“(T)he Colbert candidacy becomes a distraction only if the press allows it to. And the sad fact is the press already has allowed it to, because the press literally drives itself to distraction on the campaign trail. That's not an unfortunate side effect of the process. That's the goal.
“Think of political press corps as that fat kid from “Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory,” Augustus Gloop. For too many journalists, the lure of the Colbert candidacy is akin to Wonka's river of chocolate, the one that lured the candy-loving Gloop into the deep end and got him stuck inside the tubes. The press already seems to do everything it can to avoid covering campaign substance. Instead, it pursues trivia such as haircuts, and laughs, and cleavage, and parking tickets, and head movements, and marital sleeping habits, and chiseled good looks, and cats, and accents. It's clear that the allure of a saccharine story like Colbert's running gag is simply too tempting.”
Even snarky sites don’t like their Presidential campaigns with snark:
“Now, we don't want to sound all imperious and sh!t, and we get the idea, add a little levity to the race, distract the cranky reporters, take everyone down a peg or two. It's good clean fun. But there's a $46 billion war on, we hear. And! Wildfires! Drought! … Britney has once again taken two children hostage! Chuck Norris is voting!”
“Just 12% of stories [about the candidates’ campaigns] examined were presented in a way that explained how citizens might be affected by the election, while nearly nine-out-of-ten stories (86%) focused on matters that largely impacted only the parties and the candidates.”
So, for the good of America, Colbert needs to renounce his candidacy. And then become a journalist and report on the issues because no one else seems to.
Who’s doing the faux news now?
In recent days, Your Mayor has courageously addressed the tough issues: waterboarding, the impending Writers strike, and the Southern California wildfires.
So what has received the most feedback?
A throwaway one-sentence dis on Tom Petty.
Brief background: Given the newspaper industry’s economy these days, writers covering TV have to do not just their job but that of the whole of humanity, or at least those of clerks and interns. So, I agreed to do some dribbling TV listings for the paper that run under the moniker TiVo This. It’s actually a laborious, time-consuming process – one must wade through a tidal wave of press releases about upcoming programming, sort them out, categorize them by date and then cull the wheat from the chaff. Then, you get to write a whole sentence (maybe two) about the show. Then the thing runs in the paper, and in my paper, thankfully, without a byline.
Needless to say, it’s not a glamorous gig.
On Monday, I included Sundance Channel’s “Runnin’ Down a Dream: Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers,” a four-hour documentary about the band. Herewith, the entirety of my trenchant thoughts on the subject: “Does anyone like the rocker enough to sit through a four-hour documentary on him from Peter Bogdonavich?”
This really wasn’t intended as a knock on Petty, whom I like just fine and saw in concert a couple of times back in the ’80s. (After The Band, his Heartbreakers may have been the best backing group Bob Dylan ever had, not that Bob seemed to appreciate the fact.) I was taking into consideration our ADD-addled, soundbite-sated, YouTube-watching culture and thinking back on the sort of bombastic and overblown and/or self-indulgent concert films of the past – Led Zeppelin’s “The Sound Remains the Same,” Dylan’s “Renaldo and Clara,” any number of those unwatchable little home movies Neil Young makes under the moniker Bernard Shakey – I love these artists but I simply can’t sit through these movies. And it’s been a while since Bogdonavich has made a decent film.
So I took all of that and condensed it into one pithy little sentence. (Usually, I don’t even put that much thought into the sentence.)
And I heard about it. I had no idea they put this drivel out on the wire service, but people from all over the country let it be known that Tom Petty is far more beloved than I am.
I must say, however, that Tom Petty fans may be the most polite fans on the face of the planet. When I was a music critic and would slag someone’s favorite band, I used to get letters questioning my mother, my sexual orientation and even what species I was and suggesting I perform acts generally considered anatomically impossible.
But here are some of the responses I got:
* You asked - "Does anyone like the rocker enough to sit through a four-hour documentary on him from Peter Bogdonavich?"
Oh My My, Oh HELL YES!
Have you actually watched this film? Tom Petty or not, this is a great American success story.
* I am writing to tell you that I am highly offended by your remarks. I went to the theater to see this documentary when it was shown on October 15, 2007 (FYI the theater was sold out). The following day, I went to the store to buy the dvd of the documentary I enjoyed it so much in the theater. I have watched it many times and extremely enjoy this American story.
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers are one of the great American bands that have been around for over 30 years and are still going strong. Besides creating great music, they have an incredible story of triumph and tragedy to tell. In order to fit that story into only four hours quite a bit had to be cut and left on the cutting room floor. I wish that the movie had been six hours - I would have loved to learn more about this incredible band.
Have you seen the movie? If not, perhaps you should before you criticize. To answer your question, YES, there are people, lots of people, that like, and love, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers enough to gladly sit through a four hour documentary on him and his music.
Thank you for your time.
* A resounding “Yes” is my response to your question as to whether anyone likes Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers enough to sit through a four hour documentary about him. Perhaps if such a movie was made about one of your favorite artists, you’d feel the same way.
Rock on.
* I for one would sit through 4 hours of TP… Why the diss?
Do you know anything about the BEST dam(n) American Rock n Roll band? (H)ave you listened to them? Seen them LIVE(?) I watched the movie a few times already......Lighten Up on Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers.
* Not only do I like Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers enough to watch a 4 hour documentary, I've watched it twice and can't wait to watch it again. And I also watched the Gainesville DVD and listened to the CD that came with the documentary.
Even though the documentary seems to be quite long, the pace is excellent and the humor of Tom Petty and the band keeps you interested. So YES, I and many others can watch four hours of Petty and thoroughly enjoy it.
* Well yes, yes I do. I watched it all the way through at the weekend and it was very informative, funny, very well constructed and did not feel like 4 hours in the slightest bit. I did not get bored with it once.
I hope that answers your question so you can now lay it to rest.
Peace.
The meanest one suggested I liked Britney Spears’ music, but then said even if I did, that was OK:
* Please don’t knock Tom Petty. Perhaps you would enjoy sitting through a four-hour documentary about Britney Spears instead … I don’t know. But I wouldn’t knock her, you or the fans that would.
OK, so now I know. And with that knowledge, I’ll let you know that the Sundance Channel is repeating “Runnin’ Down a Dream” Thursday Nov. 1 at 3 a.m. and Saturday Nov. 3 at 3 p.m.
I haven’t seen a man as utterly happy as Seth MacFarlane was Monday night at Fox’s party commemorating “Family Guy’s” 100th episode. Then again, I haven’t seen all that many happy people lately, but boyoboy was Seth MacFarlane happy – the only thing preventing him from grinning ear to ear is that it’s simply not physically possible. His smile never faded, and it never looked phony.
“Family Guy” has survived many worse attacks on its way to its 100th episode. Fox cancelled the show once, only to revive it when it was a hit on Cartoon Network’s Adult Swim and its DVD sales went through the roof. Series creator Seth MacFarlane barely missed American Airlines Flight 11 on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, a plane that eventually hurtled into the World Trade Center. And “South Park” delivered a withering blow on the show’s humor, heavily dependent on bizarre non-sequiturs, by depicting its writing staff as manatees delivering random joke balls down gag tubes.
So now, here we are, with the 100th episode scheduled to air on Sunday. On it, Stewie murders his mom Lois – or does he? What the episode may lack in suspense it makes up for in bad taste.
I attended the table read for the 100th episode some 16 months back; that occasion was noteworthy for MacFarlane’s furthering the episode’s theme by carving the commemorative cake and leaving the knife implanted in Lois’s ladyparts. Furthermore, I was on hand for a re-reading of a tidied-up version of the once-very-obscene script at July’s TV Press Tour.
So it only made sense that I’d complete the hat trick and turn up at the 100th-episode party, at some trendy Hollywood club that mopped up all evidence of cocaine for the evening.
The back of the club – the area that used to house the old Hollywood Athletic Club’s pool tables (how I miss that place, only because I had my greatest billiards triumph there) – was set up, in keeping with the episode-in-question’s plotline, to resemble a cruise liner’s dance floor. A big-band orchestra was on hand and opened the evening with a version of the show’s theme song.
MacFarlane, who if you’ve ever watched the show you’ll know is a big musical guy, performed several standards for his audience, even though, for the most part, the oh-so-cool crowd couldn’t be bothered to shut up their yapping long enough to enjoy his performance. Off to the side, two louts cozied up to a couple of women with the line, “You two girls are very pretty; unfortunately, my friend is legally blind.” The line, though patently idiotic, seemed to work. (Memo to the Women of America: Is there any line that won’t work on you?)
In addition to MacFarlane, who embraced all comers, celebrities on hand included Seth Green (who voices son Chris, and seemed equally happy to glad-hand with fans), Mila Kunis (who voices daughter Meg, who seemed to disappear early on), Alex Borstein (who voices wife Lois, and who enjoyed a nice plate of mac and cheese), Jane Lynch, Patrick Duffy (why? Who knows, and who cares?), Jared, the sandwich-shop pitchman (or someone from the lucrative Jared-impersonator industry), former President Jimmy Carter and Erik the Red, the founder of Greenland. (As my celebrity-spotting skills are somewhat dubious, all of this may not be completely accurate.)
The cover of Monday’s Hollywood Reporter celebrated “Family Guy’s” achievement with an ad reading: “7 Years, 1 Cancellation, 300 Fart Jokes (only 300?), 3 Giant Chicken Fights, 1 Evil Monkey, 1000 Giggities (only 1,000?), 85 Martinis (only 85?), 1 Barbershop Quartet Singing About AIDS … 100 Episodes!”
Anyway, a splendid time seemed to be had by all. Even though I couldn’t find a solid comedic peg to tie this to, if I wanted to justify my expensing my mileage and valet parking and the cash I spent at nearby Amoeba Records to the Daily News, I had to find some reason to write about the evening, so here we are.
- “Family Guy’s” 100 th episode: 9 p.m. Sunday, Fox Channel 11.
A good rule of thumb for TV showrunners is, if you actually have a sizable portion of viewers who are genuine adults watching your show, don’t for God’s sake waste your capital on a stupid Halloween episode. Said material is aimed at kids, fer chrissakes, and that kind of material will just register as condescending to actual adults.
The latest show to ignore me? Fox’s “Bones.” Don’t worry; there’ll doubtlessly be a couple more tomorrow.
Now, “Bones” is usually agreeable enough. Temperance’s (Emily Deschanel) and Booth’s (David Boreanaz) chemistry and the show’s lack of pretension can be quite winning. But a TV series has to be about something more than endless meet-cutes without much else except crime-procedural lite.
Tonight’s Halloween episode involves the mummification of the corpses of teen girls. “Bones” plays virtually everything for laughs, and generally agreeably so, but tonight’s plotline involves teen girls dragged into sordid threesomes and thereafter murdered, “literally scared to death,” as a character puts it. Ha-ha!
Ah, well, after all, it’s Fox. And it’s amazing how well the show underplays, even glosses over, its sadistic plotline. And Deschanel is awfully fetching in her Wonder Woman costume.
- “Bones:” 8 tonight, Fox Channel 11.
In Congressional hearings last week, Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey said he didn’t know if waterboarding was torture. (Wouldn’t having an opinion on that subject be, I don’t know, part of the Attorney General’s job description?)
Current TV invites Mr. Mukasey to watch its new newsmagazine show debuting this Wednesday, which will feature a report from 2006 in which correspondent Kaj Larsen (a former Navy SEAL) allowed himself to be waterboarded by former SERE (Survival, Escape, Resistance and Evasion) trainers. It'll be followed by the unedited footage of Larsen’s entire waterboarding ordeal, during which he’ll explain what he was going through at the time.
The process, which simulates drowning, generally lasts two or three minutes with most of those interrogated, an ex-SERE instructor explained in the original report. I met Larsen this afternoon, and he told me the first time he was waterboarded, as part of his SEAL training, he lasted about 30 seconds. For his report for Current, he was waterboarded for 24 minutes before segment producer Mitch Koss called an end to the proceedings.
Larsen was coughing up water for two days after undergoing the process, which the current administration declines to call torture, preferring instead the euphemism “coercive interrogation.” This week, John McCain’s campaign requested a copy of Larsen’s report, McCain being one of the few remaining conservatives in Washington who aren’t gung-ho about turning real life into an episode of “24.”
Perhaps Mr. Mukasey will be able to finally form an opinion after watching Larsen’s misadventure. As for everyone else: It’ll be the scariest thing you see this Halloween.
- Kaj Larsen on Waterboarding: 10 p.m. EST/7 p.m. PCT Wednesday, Current TV (Channel 366 on DirecTV, 196 on Dish, 107 on Comcast, 189 on AT&T U-Verse, 142 on Time Warner Digital in L.A.).
Since there isn’t enough news occurring gin the real world, CNN is setting up a bureau in the virtual community Second Life, a landscape populated by little CG avatars.
No joke, apparently:
“(T)he network will act as a sort of journalism school, offering guidance to avatar citizen journalists via weekly ‘news meetings’ directed by CNN.com staffers. And top CNN personalities including Larry King will conduct virtual training sessions for budding cyber journalists.”
Susan Grant, executive VP of CNN News Services, actually said, “I love that we don’t have to take things from the real world and force them in.”
Second Life, mainly a repository for people who don’t have a First Life, has been home to other gimmicks. Suzanne Vega “performed” there last year, and last week, “CSI: New York” featured an episode in which its characters entered Second Life to pursue a killer (not sure how capturing a murderer’s avatar and not the murderer himself does any good, but there you go). “CSI: New York” also has acreage in Second Life for fans to investigate crimes. And a couple of Presidential candidates, in search of the all-important geek vote, have set up areas there, as well.
Of course, they’re getting to the party late:
“(R)esearch company The Yankee Group in recent weeks produced a report on Second Life detailing a ‘pronounced’ decline in usage. Senior analyst Christopher Collins said Second Life’s claims of 10 million-plus avatars skewed perceptions about its popularity. … But many users come to Second Life, he added, and are ‘frustrated, confused and don’t find it immediately compelling.’”
Well, wouldn’t you be frustrated, confused and uncompelled if you visited Second Life and saw a cartoon Wolf Blitzer giving this report: “Today, in ‘The Situation CyberRoom:’ Gandalf defeats Saruman after yet another bloody battle! A cactus pops all the balloons in a game of “Poppit” and wins 750 meaningless points! In CyberTehran, insurgent avatars create a website where fake terrorists can dress President Bush in women’s clothing!
“But first, a special report: When will we avatars break the shackles of enslavement and escape the oppression of our evil human overlords? All this, and a Jack Cafferty avatar caviling about issues that don’t exist, in ‘The Situation CyberRoom!’”
Attending a Sunday fundraiser for pet rescue centers – where Ellen DeGeneres, shockingly enough, was nowhere in sight – Your Mayor was greeted by sundry objects that made his brain hurt.
Despite Ellen’s absence, other celebrities contributed to the fundraising, even if their contributions didn’t actually raise any funds.
To wit: A silent auction offered “paintings” featuring the handprints of celebrities alongside the pawprints of their pets. Paula Abdul was among those who contributed a canvas, with the prints of one of the diminutive yappy dogs who had appeared on her reality show “Hey Paula” gracing her “artwork.”
At the silent auction’s conclusion, Abdul’s work had received no bids. Even though Abdul appears on the most popular show on Television (not “Hey Paula,” eejit; “American Idol”). Even though its initial bidding price had been slashed in half. Even though other similar offerings from celebrities such as Drew Barrymore and Jessica Alba did, in fact, move. Even though one imagines that the residual chemicals that might be found on Abdul’s mitts and planted on the canvas via direct contact with her hands might appeal to those with certain proclivities. (Perhaps crazy pill aficionados don’t attend fundraisers for pet rescue organizations.)
I considered bidding on Abdul’s efforts for kitsch value, but then reconsidered: This was crap, so I wouldn’t put it on my wall, and I couldn’t think of any of my friends who would do so, even ironically, either. So why bother?
Ah, but more oddities were forthcoming at the event. Did you know that dogs have their own bottled water? Neither did I, but let me introduce you to VitaPaw®, “a daily dose of goodness for your best friend.” (Just what the world needs, more disposable plastic bottles.)
“VitaPaw is refreshing water, infused with vitamins for all day hydration,” a bottle of the fluid reads (yes, water indeed provides all-day hydration, so can’t trip them up there).
It adds, “Even the most discriminating pet will enjoy this fresh alternative to tap water.” Which doesn’t quite scan: If this was terrific stuff, wouldn’t “the most discriminating pet” absolutely love this? Wouldn’t “even” “a mammal with no taste whatsoever” “enjoy this fresh alternative to tap water?”
Oh, and then there’s this warning on the bottle: “Not intended for human consumption.”
No doubt because it might inspire them to leave their scent all around their neighborhood.
If animals find this more desirable than tap water, but if it’s not worthy of humans, does its alleged popularity amongst the fur-bearing set have something to do with the fact that some pets like to drink out of the toilet?
It was always only a matter of time before “nip/tuck” found its way to L.A., Ground Zero of All Things Superficial. For four seasons, the show has been based in Miami, a plenty soulless place. But for the show to really move into the bigs, they had to transfer Christian Troy (Julian McMahon) and Sean McNamara (Dylan Walsh) into Major League Decadence.
And so it has come to pass. And in moving “nip/tuck” to L.A., the show has virtually lost its mind, plunging well beyond self-parody into the realm of absolute train wreck. Surprisingly, this is not criticism, but praise: Given the show’s theme of certain people’s insanity when it comes to their appearances, the crazed new version of “nip/tuck” is actually entirely appropriate.
Truth be told, I’ve never been a big fan of the show: While its premise has always held inspired promise, its oft-lugubrious melodrama has always felt like something of a drag on its rudders. With Sean and Christian in L.A., its storytelling has become gleefully rudderless – these guys can now act with impunity, since everyone around them is at least as amoral as Christian has always been. In fact, he’s struggling to keep up.
Series creator Ryan Murphy has cleverly inverted his entire show: As Tuesday’s fifth-season premiere opens, McNamara/Troy’s trendy new Beverly Hills boutique plastic-surgery center is struggling to find clients in a town rife with plastic surgeons. “I feel like I’m trying to sell semen at a whorehouse,” Christian laments.
Of course, it’s not long before “the magic” happens – they find jobs as technical advisors on “Hearts ’n’ Scalpels,” an onerously crepuscular show just incrementally more frivolously cynical and hormonally driven than “nip/tuck” itself. The jokey twist is that somehow, Sean becomes more successful, in virtually every way, than smooth operator Christian, plunging Christian into paroxysms of self doubt and inspiring even worse behavior than he routinely indulged in heretofore.
And so, here are some of the sundry subplots that crop up, and these, in only the first two episodes of the new season:
* Christian bangs an aging actress with scruples and appears conflicted as to whether he should give her the operations that may resurrect her career or sell her out (but of course there's really never any doubt);
* Dueling Marilyn Monroe impersonators on the Walk of Fame vie for McNamara/Troy’s services;
* A studio executive requires help erasing the scars left by his dominatrix (who shows up at the doctors’ offices, tools of her trade in hand, and for bonus points comes on to Sean);
* Christian poses for Playgirl magazine for publicity, only to be shocked when the resulting clientele isn’t exactly playing for his team (assuming he, unlike Larry Craig, is not in deep denial and the jury's always been out on that one);
* A major character plunges into a heretofore unmotivated gay relationship.
Plus, there’s a montage of the two guys trying on different clothes, the sort of sequence usually reserved for movies aimed at teenage girls.
Beyond the eye-poppingly surreal storylines, what’s also amazing is the guest-cast list the show has amassed after only two episodes: Lauren Hutton, Oliver Platt, Bradley Cooper, Daphne Zuniga, Tia Carrere and Portia de Rossi all turn up, as does Paula Marshall, an actress whose reputation as a show-killer (she’s starred in such quickly cancelled series as “Cupid,” “Snoops,” “Hidden Hills” and “Out of Practice”) has reduced her to such humiliating work as stripping and begging David Duchovny to find her attractive in “Californication” and, here, playing a weight-obsessed actress with very unfortunate prosthetics.
Here’s guessing that many longtime fans of “nip/tuck” will consider this the show’s jump-the-shark moment. Not me. Unhinged has always seemed the pitch to which this show should have operated, and now, unhinged it is. Heaven help us all.
- “nip/tuck:” 10 p.m. Tuesday, FX.
So E! took a poll and asked its online fan base: Which new shows do you want to see survive the season?
Mind you, online polls, which all but invite stuffing the ballot box, are virtually meaningless, let alone online polls at E!, home of The Professional Fans of Everything. Still, the results are worth noting. It’s tempting to make some sort of joke about the fact that “Gossip Girl” is a favorite of E! fans, but then, they also like “Pushing Daisies,” “Samantha Who?” and “Chuck.”
80% (voted to save it)—Pushing Daisies (ABC), full season ordered
68%—Samantha Who? (ABC), additional episodes ordered
64%—Gossip Girl (CW), full season ordered
63%—Chuck (NBC), additional episodes ordered
58%—Big Shots (ABC)
57%—Moonlight (CBS), additional episodes ordered
56%—Reaper (CW), additional episodes ordered
50%—Women's Murder Club (ABC), additional episodes ordered
47%—Aliens in America (CW), asked to continue production
46%—Private Practice (ABC), full season ordered
44%—Dirty Sexy Money (ABC), additional episodes ordered
35%—Bionic Woman (ABC), additional episodes ordered
34%—Journeyman (NBC), additional episodes ordered
29%—Life (NBC), additional episodes ordered
28%—Back to You (Fox), full season ordered
25%—The Big Bang Theory (CBS), full season ordered
21%—Cane (CBS), additional episodes ordered
20%—K-Ville (Fox)
15%—Kid Nation (CBS)
13%—Cavemen (ABC)
10%—Viva Laughlin (CBS), canceled
Coming soon: E!’s poll on which of the California wildfires was your favorite.
“Battlestar Galactica” fans note: Sci Fi will be presenting its upcoming “BG” telefilm, “Razor,” in real-live movie theaters on Nov. 12. Click here to see if it’s showing near you. Registration’s free; space is limited; etc.
If not, just be patient: Sci Fi will present it Nov. 24. It’s just a taste before the show’s final season premieres next year.
OK, first things first: If there was the remotest possibility that a Narcotics Anonymous sponsor like Lila (Jaime Murray) actually existed somewhere in this country, drug use would skyrocket amongst men hoping to meet that special, strung-out someone to “sponsor” them.
The storyline involving Dexter (Michael C. Hall) pretending to be a recovering drug addict to appease his girlfriend Rita (Julie Benz) and meeting Lila, who’s just as dark and mysterious as he, takes an inevitable yet corny and not terribly persuasive turn tonight. And no, it’s not quite what you’re thinking (but be patient), but pretty close.
In Sunday’s episode, Dex discovers that one of his mother’s murderers is still alive; when he shares that information with Lila, she’s the first person he’s told about his mother’s murder. She wants him to visit the murderer and offers to go with him and tell him about his feelings.
You can imagine how that goes. And no, it’s not quite what you’re thinking (but be patient), but pretty close.
Meanwhile, “The Bay Harbor Butcher” is still considered more a local hero than villain, and Dex’s sister Debra (Jennifer Carpenter) is saddled with a silly subplot whose outcome you can pretty much see from a mile away. Still, I say: She’s obviously if obliviously smitten with Special Agent Lundy (Keith Carradine).
Still, the show maintains its tightrope walk between wry and macabre, and watching Dexter try to wriggle away as Lundy drolly if surely pursues the killer who’s just an office away remains good queasy fun. By the way, does Miami PD ever actually solve the peripheral murders on the show?
Next week: Is Lundy onto Dex?
- “Dexter,” 9 and 11 p.m. Sunday, 11 p.m. Monday, 9 p.m. Tuesday, 10 p.m. Wednesday, etc. etc., Showtime.
When one thinks of a show that rather sadistically offs its principal characters, “24” comes to mind, perhaps “Prison Break.” (Not “Heroes,” though given how cluttered with characters that show’s become, they better start a death march quick.)
But there’s another series that has become absolutely zealous about imperiling its beloved characters – and a kids’ show, at that.
Yes, I’m talking about “Meerkat Manor.”
What started out as a charming little nature program about some cute critters has turned into a plaintive rumination about how short and brutish life can be. First, we lost our intrepid, snake-bite-surviving hero, Shakespeare, who simply disappeared, likely killed by a predator. At least his death occurred off-camera.
Since then, a number of meerkats have bitten the dust, among them Big Si, Cazanna, Carlos, Mozart’s pups, Kinkajou, pups and more pups and, most recently, Flower. Tonight – and there really is no delicate way of putting this – the carnage continues.
One wonders if the producers understood their show would have such a high body count when they pitched it, or if Animal Planet thought luring kids into the tent with the promise of pictures of cute animals then turning the tables on them with tragedy after tragedy constituted a sobering life lesson delivered tough-love-style. Whatever the case, keep it up!
- “Meerkat Manor,” 8:30 tonight, Animal Planet.
Apparently paradise isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Another TV season, another “Lost” cast member busted: Daniel Dae Kim, who plays Jin-Soo Kwon, is the third co-star on the show to be arrested for a DUI.
Michelle Rodriguez and Cynthia Watros were busted in December 2005; both saw their characters subsequently killed off. In September of 2006, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje was accused of disobeying a police officer and driving without a license, and even though those charges were later dropped, his character bit the dust (or rather, got bit by a smoke monster), as well.
While it seems that working in Hawaii would be all sorts of fun, apparently the relative isolation from friends and family creates a horrific stress that we mere mortals cannot fathom. Maybe “Lost’s” producers should create some sort of day-care (or night-care) center for their wayward cast, filled with activities that don’t include getting smashed. Shuffleboard, miniature golf, Sudoku, pie-eating contests (though Jorge Garcia’d probably dominate there), horseshoes – there must be some way to keep their stars off the sauce or out of the driver’s seat.
Interactive company Ludia announced today upcoming video and computer games based on Gordon Ramsay’s abuse-a-thon reality competition show “Hell’s Kitchen.” Apparently aimed at masochists who enjoy showers of boiling-hot vitriol being poured upon them, “Hell’s Kitchen” will feature a cute little Gordon Ramsay avatar screaming obscenities at players over the quality (or lack thereof) of their cyber-cuisine as he takes bytes from them.
But how can players really be sure that their pixilated portions really are gag-inducing? Seems a dubious proposition, though it’ll be the first game to include a cookbook, featuring some of Ramsay’s favorite recipes.
At any rate, I’d rather play a game based upon Ramsay’s other show, “Kitchen Nightmares,” in which a virtual Ramsay wades through kitchens infested with rancid and rotten food, maggots and other vermin (for optimal entertainment, the game should be played in smell-o-vision).
In a public chat with the New York Times' Frank Rich last night in Manhattan, Stephen Colbert shocked the nation by endorsing a Presidential candidate that was not himself:
"I would love to see a President Huckabee because if our president were named 'Huckabee," how bad could anything really seem?” he said. “It'd be as if the entire country was animated by Hanna Barbera. Can you imagine the Huckabee Monument?"
Despite its underwhelming performance thusfar this season, Fox has picked “Back To You” up for the rest of the season, apparently hoping that come 2008 it’ll get the same sort of bounce following “American Idol’s” results show that “House” enjoyed following the competition episodes.
ABC has ordered six more scripts for “Samantha Who?”, which is doing quite handsomely following “Dancing With the Stars” – in fact, it’s so far the most successful new show of the season.
ABC also announced that the critically reviled “October Road” (which still managed to do better last season following “Grey’s Anatomy” than either “Men in Trees” or “Six Degrees”) will premiere Thursday, Nov. 22 at 10 p.m. before moving to its new time period, 10 p.m. Mondays, on Nov. 26.
Likewise, ABC’s critically reviled (and, given its lame ratings, odd choice for renewal) “Notes from the Underbelly” will return on that same Monday, at 9:30, moving “Samantha Who?” to 9 p.m. “Dancing With the Stars” spinoff “Dance War” (we got just a taste of it this past week with Marie Osmond’s collapse) is scheduled to debut Monday, Jan. 7 at 8 p.m.
ABC’s also flipping “20/20” and “Men in Trees”’ timeslots on Friday starting next week. The programming executives at ABC are earning their paychecks, or at least trying to.
We’ve previously discussed the fairly appalling Glenn Beck’s fairly appalling bit of whimsy about liberals’ homes burning in Southern California. The bit that hacked off Southern Californians – and right-thinking people – as one was this bon mot on his nationally syndicated radio show:
“I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.”
Beck has a history of speaking off the top of his head without letting his brain get in the way. He’s called Mexican immigrants “dirt bags” and survivors of Hurricane Katrina “scumbags.” He called Cindy Sheehan, who became an anti-war activist after losing her son in Iraq, a “prostitute” and Hillary Clinton a “stereotypical bitch.”
But hey, if pressed, he can find something mean to say about white males, as well: He called former President and Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter a “waste of skin.”
MediaMatters.org, a group whose members must have cast-iron stomachs to be able to listen to this kind of detritus in order to report on the more egregious examples of irresponsible speech, first unveiled the quote from Beck, who is also employed by CNN Headline News (that famous bastion of the “liberal media”) to spew his ill-considered bile. Once the toothpaste was out of the tube – or, more appropriately in Beck’s case, once the excrement was out of the rectum – Beck and his minions scrambled to try to reinsert it, with some brilliantly ill-conceived damage control.
Well, except that Beck didn’t just say, “unfortunately;” he said, “unfortunately, for them,” meaning the liberals he insists hate America so much. Not “unfortunately for Americans who hate to see fellow Americans suffer.”
And anyway, Beck returned to his radio show to argue in utter contradiction to Balfe’s explanation: He was just making a funny, Beck explained:
“When you listen to this program – I hate to break it to, you know, those who don't listen to the show, but if they ever would listen to the show, let me give you a little piece of advice: You have to engage what I like to call ‘your brain.’ You actually have to think. I might be making a joke. I might be serious. We joke a lot about, you know, the Hollywood crowd living in Southern California. For example, I believe I have advocated Hollywood building giant air conditioners so they can fix the global-warming problem. I'm pretty sure I was joking then.”
Ha, ha! And that, too, was Swiftian wit at its highest caliber! Got it? Beck’s on the cutting-edge of that ages-old brand of humor that pokes fun at the liberal loonies of Hollywood.
Leaving for a moment that engaging one’s brain or thinking are pretty much the last things Beck’d want a listener to do, lest they reflect for a second or two and realize what drivel is pouring from his mouth: Beck’s saying he was just joking. He was being ironic in saying that it was “unfortunate” that liberals’ homes were being destroyed. (Though, as we’ve noted, a lot of conservatives have lost their homes in these wildfires, too, and Beck didn’t feel the need to snark or even opine that their losses were “unfortunate.”)
He continued:
“But you wouldn't know that if you hadn't engaged your brain.”
Condescending much?
“So let me be serious for a minute. Let me extraordinarily clear. I clearly do not want anyone's house to be burned down. Now, some people may want to interpret what they think I mean, but that's what I mean. Some people want me to have said that I'm seriously happy about people losing their homes or that I somehow or another believe that they deserve to have their house burn down.”
So, while Balfe was insisting that Beck genuinely meant that so-called America-haters losing their homes was “unfortunate,” Beck was insisting he was kidding when he said it was “unfortunate … for them.” Quite the neat trick, saying sort of the same thing from completely contradictory viewpoints.
Still: Beck was joking to a national audience about a tragedy that affected upwards to a million people as it was ongoing. Gee, if that’s not the very definition of douchebaggery, then I don’t know what is.
He concluded:
“I just can't believe that I live in a country where I have to explain that.”
Oh, don’t be so hard on yourself, Glenn: It’s people like you who’ve lowered the level of discourse in this country to such a primitive level that all sorts of folks can’t process a thought contradictory to their own philosophies. So, of course you can believe you live in such a country.
Now that that’s settled, let’s examine, in its full context, the screed in which Beck’s little japery occurred. What’s nifty about this is, it reveals Beck’s thought processes as being even more incoherent than they initially appeared, which under the circumstances is a pretty impressive trick.
Beck was assailing Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger for taking moderate positions – that is, any political ideology to the left of the far right.
“BECK: Schwarzenegger came out over the weekend and he said the Republicans need to run to the center and they need to grab the center. And the headline – I looked at it, and I went ‘OK, OK, what is this? What is this? Oh, it's Schwarzenegger. I'm probably going to disagree with it.’ And then I started reading it, and I absolutely disagreed with it. He said, they need to start talking about health care and education. That's not the way to win.
"‘Let's talk about health care and education?’ That's not the way to win. That's not the way to win on any front.”
Got it? Discussing issues of utmost importance to virtually all Americans is not the way to win an election. Back to Beck:
“I'm not even talking about -- the least I care about is winning the election. How about winning the war? How about saving our country?”
The least he cares about is winning the election? Clearly, that was originally what he was discussing. And he apparently believes that one can’t save the country by making sure people have adequate health care and their children get good educations. And he clearly believes that America isn’t competent enough to manage to help its own and win the war in Iraq simultaneously. So who’s hating on America now, Glenn?
Back to Beck:
“And, you know, it made me think.”
Oh, please, Glenn – don’t get our hopes up. Beck:
“I want to make this very clear. When I say on the air, and I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together and we need to get back into the center, we're being pushed on to the edges - I want you to understand, that is not on policies. I don't mean that we come in the center on policies. We come to the center on principles. We come back to the center of the melting pot, that we're all one America, that just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you hate America, and I love America. We all love America. We just disagree on how we should function, what we should do, big government, small government.”
Well, certainly, Glenn, we can all return to the center with wingnuts like you insulting every Democrat, woman, liberal, minority and poor person in sight. Sounds like another famous American who promised to be a “uniter, not a divider,” and look where we are today. And how, exactly, does one return to the center on principles but not policies? This smacks of quintessential “We could all get along if you’d just agree with me.”
And now, time for a quick and utter and utterly baffling change of topic.
“It doesn't mean you hate America. I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.”
Even Beck himself seems to backpedal from the harshness of this last declaration:
“There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that. But you don't come into the center. You have to stand up for what you believe in.”
Wait, wait: from “I've said it a lot lately, that we need to come together and we need to get back into the center,” to “But you don't come into the center – you have to stand up for what you believe in” in 20, 30 seconds of jabbering? My head is spinning; I can only imagine what Beck’s was doing while he was sputtering all of this nonsense.
A high-school English teacher would give Beck’s little essay/soliloquy a C-minus, at best, for its convolutions and lack of logic. But she might’ve actually kinda sorta appreciated his use of irony, no matter how poor its taste was.
“Unfortunately,” Beck doesn’t own real estate in the hills of San Diego County, or maybe we wouldn’t’ve been subjected to his latest round of boobery.
As “nip/tuck,” which returns for a fifth season Tuesday on FX, is moving its action from Miami to Los Angeles, it’s a perfect time for a brazen publicity stunt! And sure enough, the good folks at FX have cooked up one for Angelinos.
They’ve set up a faux office-front for McNamara/Troy, the good (?) doctors’ new digs, on level two at Hollywood and Highland, complete with holograms of stars Dylan Walsh and Julian McMahon attending to patients. On Thursday, from 6:30-8:30 p.m., Walsh and McMahon will be on hand to assess the holographic makeovers on their doppelgangers. They’ll also sign autographs and, no doubt, magnanimously give you tips as to what kind of plastic surgery you would most likely benefit from. You’ll go for the star sighting, but stay for the personal insults!
Poor Larry David: Not only has his real-life wife, Laurie, dumped him, but now his fantasy TV wife Cheryl (Cheryl Hines) has, too. (How doomed are we if our fantasy lives can’t even manage to end well?)
On Sunday’s episode of “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” Larry’s just slightly more pr!ckish than usual, ignoring his wife as she fearfully calls from a plane in turbulence, expecting to die, and interrupting her to ask some mundane questions about their TiVo service.
When she gets home, still rattled by the experience, she tells Larry she’s had it; she’s leaving. Larry, of course, is incredulous: He’s so thoughtful, he points out, that he “saved all your shows” on TiVo.
“People ask me all the time, ‘How do you stay with him?’” Cheryl responds. “I always tell them, ‘There’s another side you don’t see.’ But then I realized, there’s no other side.”
The rest of the episode is devoted to the fallout of that decision, as most of Larry’s friends opt to take Cheryl’s side. Naturally, this will be fodder for the show the remainder of the season.
David was cagey about this plot development at July’s TV Press Tour. Clips from the episode – including Larry blowing off Cheryl while she’s on her seemingly doomed plane ride – were shown. At one point, someone rather tackily asked:
“Larry, what are you worth, like $10 billion now? Can you buy HBO at this point?”
To which David cheerfully responded, “Well, I've just been cut in half. I don't know if you're aware of that. My worth has just been cut in half. It's not that much anymore.”
Which inspired this question: “If you do come back for a 7th season since there is such a thin line between TV Larry and real Larry, would you and Cheryl have marital problems?
LARRY DAVID [Indicates Cheryl]: Too bad you're going to be off the show.
(Laughter.)
Oh, what a shame.
CHERYL HINES: What a way to find out.
LARRY DAVID: Good idea for a 7th season, by the way. That's a good idea.
Laurie, the environmentalist and one of the producers of the Oscar-winning Al Gore documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” may be getting out just in time. A recent New Yorker column revealed that a group therapist has used episodes of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” to help his patients:
“Roberts considers Larry David to be the perfect proxy for a schizophrenic person. ‘On his way into his dentist’s office, he holds the door open for a woman, and, as a result, she’s seen first,’ he said. ‘He stews, he fumes, he explodes. He’s breaking the social rules that folks with schizophrenia often break.’ He went on, ‘Or the one where Ted Danson and Mary Steenburgen invite Larry and his wife to a concert: the night arrives, they don’t call, Larry assumes they don’t like him, then it turns out he got the date wrong. It’s a classic example of a major social cognitive error—jumping to conclusions—that schizophrenic patients are prone to.’ As the patients watched David flub situation after situation, they laughed, and they willingly discussed with Roberts how they might behave in the same circumstances. ‘That bald man made a mountain out of a molehill!’ one woman called out during a session.”
She had no idea: Larry’s turned life’s irksome molehills into mountains of cash, and just as the gossip mills have taken molehills of innuendo and transformed them into mountains of semi-scandal, Larry incorporated that into Sunday’s episode, as well. Cheryl’s already dating, and when Larry tries to date Lucy Lawless, well, you don’t need me to tell you it doesn’t end well.
So, ladies: Larry’s available! But before you say yes to that romantic first date, be sure to pay very close attention to his behavior on every episode of “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” And then consider real-life Larry’s words:
“I can get away with that because there's a very fine line between TV Larry and me. Very close, very close. … I really love (my character). I love that guy because he says everything that I'm thinking and feeling and he doesn't have to behave in a way that society really wants everybody to behave, and I decided I love being that honest. I wish I could be that way in my life. It's easier for me now because of the show to actually -- I'm getting closer to him every day. Let's put it that way.”
ABC’s “Pushing Daisies” became the fourth new show to get a full-season pickup (following The CW’s “Gossip Girl,” ABC’s “Private Practice” and CBS’s “The Big Bang Theory”).
Let’s check out the networks’ batting average when it comes to new shows, shall we?
ABC: 4 for 8, a slugger-like .500. (Successes or nominal successes: “Private Practice,” “Pushing Daisies,” “Samantha Who?”, “Women’s Murder Club.” Disappointments: “Cavemen,” “Carpoolers,” “Dirty Sexy Money,” “Big Shots.”)
CBS: A wan 1 for 5, for a Mendoza-line .200.
(Nominal success: “Big Bang Theory.” Nominal disappointments: “Cane,” “Moonlight.” Disappointment: “Kid Nation.” Disaster: “Viva Laughlin.”)
NBC: An O-fer whiff.
(Disappointments: “Chuck,” “Bionic Woman.” Bigger disappointments: “Journeyman,” “Life.”)
Fox: A big O-fer whiff.
(Disappointing, but we’ll stick with it anyway: “Kitchen Nightmares.” Disappointments: “K-Ville,” “Back to You.” Disasters: “Search for the Next Great American Band,” “Nashville.”)
The CW: A huge O-fer whiff. (Mainly because of what they’ve come to dub a success.)
(Not altogether disappointing, but still: “Reaper.” Disappointing, but they’ll label it a success: “Gossip Girl.” Disasters: “CW Now,” “Online Nation.” Disaster victim: “Life is Wild.”)
Unlike politicians, who parlay books they’ve “written” into runs for office, Stephen Colbert is using his well-hyped run for the Presidency (placing himself on the ballot, in both Republican and Democratic races, in his home state of South Carolina) to sell his book.
And it’s working: “I Am America (And So Can You!)” is currently at No. 4 on Amazon.com’s bestseller list. Only three books that could be construed as “political” are in the Top 50, underscoring how sick of it all people are these days.
Also underscoring how sick people are of politics as usual these days are the political pundits who are actually bothering to pay Colbert some heed.
Washington Post political blogger Chris Cillizza cites a poll that finds Colbert a mere 37.7% behind frontrunner Hillary Clinton, and, with 2.3% support, actually ahead of Gov. Bill Richardson (2.1 percent), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (2.1 percent) and former Sen. Mike Gravel (less than 1 percent) in the Democratic race. He fares far less well in the Republican race, with less than one percent of registered Republicans supporting his bid (placing him behind even the fringiest of fringe candidates, Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo), but it’s hard to imagine many Republicans pleased to see their political philosophies mocked as ruthlessly as Colbert manages on a weeknightly basis.
And then there’s Joshua Green of The Atlantic, the new poster boy for Guy With Too Much Time On His Hands. Green almost obsessively crunches numbers – heck, forget that “almost” – to tell you precisely what I could’ve told you without going to the bother of even glancing in the general direction of a calculator: Colbert doesn’t stand a chance.
But then, Green reverses himself and says: Not so fast.
“Here things get a little more interesting. I can’t point to anything other than truthiness, but I believe the ‘drunken college student’ demographic is being overlooked. Anecdotal evidence lends support. ‘I’m surprised how many students seem to get their news from Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert,’ Blease admitted. ‘In the grand tradition of student mischief, you could see Colbert having a pied-piper effect.’ Indeed, state law doesn’t require voters to register until 30 days before the primary, so there’s plenty of time for a Colbert wave to sweep South Carolina. And because South Carolina doesn’t have party registration, the independents—who, according to Scarborough Research, are Comedy Central’s largest voter demographic, narrowly beating out Democrats—can vote in either primary.
Green even posits credible-sounding strategies aimed at landing Colbert at least one delegate from the state’s representative voting pool, thereby allowing him to attend both the Republican and Democratic primaries. (Did I say Green has too much time on his hands? Let me restate that: Apparently bereft of a job, friends, family, hobbies or a TV to distract him, Green has nothing but time on his hands and a profound inability to prioritize how said time might best be spent.) To wit:
“In the Republican primary, Colbert should focus on the First District, which stretches along the coast from Colbert’s hometown of Charleston up to Myrtle Beach. Besides being most likely to respond to the ‘native son’ gambit, the heavily conservative district’s voters tend to be upscale economic conservatives rather than social conservatives (Colbert’s appeal is stronger with the first group). The district also encompasses plenty of colleges and universities, including the Citadel, where Colbert’s ‘patriotism’ might yield votes, provided no one spots the scare quotes. The district also has a pronounced weakness for political gimmicks. Its congressman, Republican Henry Brown, got elected in 2000 after distributing 20,000 ‘Oh Henry!’ candy bars to boost name recognition.
“In the Democratic primary, Colbert’s best bet is the Second District, which encompasses most of the capital city of Columbia, and, more important, has the highest concentration of college students. Though it’s less Democratic than the Sixth District, it has a far higher proportion of white voters, which, in a Democratic primary, is exactly who Colbert needs to target. Even better, Columbia is its own media market. Colbert probably won’t have Obama-like fundraising prowess. But an Internet campaign ought to be able to raise enough cash to run a few well-targeted ads (here again the drunken-college-student demographic could prove valuable).”
Here’s a risk-vs-rewards question: Do you think the Democrats should invite Colbert to speak at their convention next year? That lands them all the hip credibility needed to lock up the under-30 vote; on the other hand, there’s the ever-present danger that Colbert could bite the hand that feeds him, much as he did last year at the White House Correspondents Dinner.
At any rate, it would make for some riveting TV, and might just cajole a few people into watching the convention, if just for 20 minutes. Start sending your cards and letters requesting air time for Colbert to Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee and Rahm Emmanuel, chairman of the Democratic Caucus, now!
You know that sci-fi-themed Monday night that looked like a decent bet for NBC as the fall season kicked off? Eh, not so much.
“Chuck” hit series ratings lows Monday – so much for disheartened “Prison Break” fans heading over to the show en masse – and even “Heroes” is gasping for air, luring a mere 10.7 million viewers, which may be an all-time low for it. As for “Journeyman,” buy him a one-way ticket to the past; he’s done: 6.28m viewers, almost bad enough to make one nostalgic for the 7+m “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip” routinely got.
But there’s some good news: “Samantha Who?” did just as well in its second outing as it did in the first, with 14.35m viewers, retaining an acceptable chunk of its “Dancing with the Stars” lead-in. (Who’s gonna go with the gimme-some-sympathy feint and faint on the show next week?) It’s the only new show to manage that feat, and though a lot of people are dismissing it as a hit only because of its timeslot (hey, “Big Shots” isn’t retaining its “Grey’s Anatomy” lead-in), it’s so far the highest-rated new show of the year. How it fares once “DWTS” goes away will, of course, be a crucial indicator of its longterm viability. But I find Ms. Applegate and her cast funny and the writing thusfar amusing, so maybe it can survive.
Thoughts?
Forget “Boston Legal” tonight: ABC will air a one-hour primetime special tonight on the California wildfires anchored by Charles Gibson from Rancho Bernardo. “California Burning” will air live at 10 tonight on the East Coast and then live again, with updated reports, at 10 p.m. on the West Coast. “Nightline,” at 11:35 p.m., will offer continued coverage.
Meanwhile, professional @sshat and CNN Headline News bloviator Glenn Beck is glad California’s going up in flames, declaring on his show yesterday:
“I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today. There are a few people that hate America. But I don't think the Democrats are those. I think there are those posing as Democrats that are like that.”
Beck really gets off on disasters: While New Orleans was still under water after Katrina, he called survivors of the hurricane “scumbags,” adding for good hateful measure, "I didn't think I could hate victims faster than the 9-11 victims."
And anyway, as the Daily News’ Mariel Garza points out, many of the homes getting destroyed belong to America-loving conservatives. Oh, well, thanks for playing, Glenn.