TV: "It's all skite!"

[tjaman]

She's much better in "Monk."

It's well worth a rental if there's an outlet where you are.

Otherwise, USA does "Monk" marathons every so often.

[GreatMuppetyNick]

Unfortunately, we don't get DVD rentals here.

I've seen the DVD for the first 2 seasons. I'll probably get those then.

[tjaman]

New teevee column, submitted for your enjoyment:


Great Expectations

One wonders, sometimes, if new shows are destroyed by expectations.

If a television network hears a pitch for a clever new drama, for example, scripts are written, production begins, actors are hired, pilots are filmed, network and critical commentary is solicited and all the while, the public is largely clueless.

Then, if the initial reactions are favorable, perhaps a limited run of episodes are ordered, and some promotion begins, some buzz is generated, and the public in general is made aware that a new show is coming.

The big premiere arrives and they tune in, and it's a huge hit, and more episodes are ordered and a new hit show is on the air.

Or the public doesn't tune in right away, the show scrapes along in the ratings, it gets pre-empted by any random side project and it languishes in its limited run with its episodes largely unaired.

That's if the show made it to the air in the first place.

For a reality show, a premise is formulated and accepted, and then filming begins. And there's a lot of filming because real people are oftentimes boring, so there's a lot of film taken in order to generate enough watchable content -- and that includes the canned reaction commentary and the artificially generated drama and the tacked-in music cues.

So once that's all cobbled together you've got a season in the can that was practically free and in which the main stars are in fact the long-suffering editing crew. Even if the public doesn't tune in with the kind of numbers they have in the past, all the ad revenue is above and beyond the cost of production. It's free money.

Recovery
With a drama or a comedy, you have to pay professional writers, actors, directors, filming, location and endless considerations. Scripted television has to have ad revenue flowing from the get-go because the network needs to recoup the development expenses invested in the program before anyone even knew about it.

And audience determines ad revenue. If the audience isn't there from the start, the network is more willing to cut its losses.

It logically takes a larger and more consistent audience to guarantee the longevity of a drama or a comedy than a reality program. Any audience at all providing any base for ad revenue at all will support cheap reality television.

Expectations for the "marry-a-bug" programs are far lower, and failure to meet them doesn't bring about the same consequences as those for scripted television.

Upshot
As a long-time fan of more and more shows that ended with unaired episodes and unfinished storylines, Iám concerned about the fall lineup.

There's some good buzz being generated for some long anticipated quality returning programs and some interesting series premieres, including an anti-social forensic archaeologist, a drama concerning a woman president, rumbings in the defense department and more.

My advice? Try to catch the premieres. It'll serve two purposes.

1) You will have done your part to limit the midseason replacement opportunities for reality nonsense, and

2) The way dramatic series get so quickly crowded out these days by high expectations, the premiere episodes may be the only chance you get to catch them.

[quantumcat]

well said!

people forget that the only reason we have
'marry a bug' instead of Playhouse 90 is that
live drama cost more than wrasslin' and game shows.

Variety died.

so can comedy and drama.

you'll be left with fake stunt shows,how to's,
talk shows,game shows and sports.

all reinterpreted for the highest revenue and the
lowest common denominator.

our only hope will be reruns....

[sistermt]

quantumcat said:

Variety died.
so can comedy and drama.

you'll be left with fake stunt shows,how to's,talk shows,game shows and sports.all reinterpreted for the highest revenue and the
lowest common denominator.

our only hope will be reruns....

Dont forget the horror that is REALITY TV.
Silent scream

Gone below the gutter with the above......

[quantumcat]

yikes!

i prefer surreality...

[tjaman]

New column. Enjoy.


"Fall season is upon us"

You'll want to rest up now.

In the waning days of summer, enjoy your walks, get your fresh air and complete any projects that need attending to, because starting Monday, the fall schedule is upon us.

FOX's escapist crime drama "Prison Break" opens Monday with a two-hour premiere. An architect specializing in prison design gets himself arrested so as to spring his brother from death row. His efforts uncover a plot of what looks like high-level government corruption, adding to the mystery and the urgency of the storyline.

The online buzz to a limited-market release of the pilot episode has fans gushing about it. Raves JMan0101 on TV.com, for one example, "The initial premise itself was a little unlikely, but I reckon that will be more than made up for by what I suspect will be strong writing, characterization and an action-packed and suspenseful narrative." Other fan reactions are similarily ecstatic and deeply excited to see what happens next. The pilot airs Monday night at 7 p.m. on FOX.

Piling on the crime drama docket, FOX is trying its hand at "dramedy" -- a format raised to virtuosi status by "Desperate Housewives" on ABC and "Rescue Me" on FX. Sept. 13 sees the premiere of "Bones."

Early fan reaction to "Bones" is mixed, but I think I can see why. The CSI crowd seems unsatisfied with the humor in the show, and the people tuning in because David Boreanaz (TV's "Angel") is in it basically want him to turn into a vampire. Also, people weren't immediately drawn in by the female lead, though it's loosely based on an actual person so there might be some creative qualms about casting, say, Pamela Anderson in the role.

The only thing that will save this show is superior writing -- finding the right balance of humor and comedy and ultimately telling a good story.

Less concerned with reality is CBS's Sept. 23 premiere of "Ghost Whisperer," in which Jennifer Love Hewitt as a beautiful newlywed brunette communicates with the dead in a effort to bring them rest and bring peace or justice to the living.

My first and only reaction to the show is that it's a knockoff of NBC's runaway smash hit "Medium," starring Patricia Arquette as a beautiful mother of three who communicates with the dead in an effort to bring them rest and bring peace or justice to the living. But naturally it's not. Arquette is, after all, a blonde, making "Ghost Whisperer" a completely different show.

Season 2 of "Medium," as it happens, is scheduled to premiere Sept. 19 on NBC.

And quite a large number of people are hanging on the edge of their seat for the third season premiere of "Nip/Tuck" Sept. 20 ­ not just to find out the identity of the compelling serial rapist known only as "The Carver," but to see how Dr. McNamara ­ last seen drugged and paralyzed beneath a very sharp-looking knife ­ escapes becoming his next victim.

Other scheduled premieres worthy of your attention include "Lost" Sept. 21 and "Desperate Housewives" and "Grey's Anatomy" Sept. 25 and "Commander-in-Chief" starring Geena Davis as the Leader of the Free World Sept. 27 on ABC. "Surface," a creepy undersea adventure, premieres Sept. 19 on NBC. CBS returns with "NUMB3RS" Sept. 23.

Yep -- better get that yardwork out of the way now.

Primetime is about to return with a vengeance.

[quantumcat]

That nice girl firefighter from RM joins Numb3rs.

Let's hope that was a good (or reversible) career move.

(gotta get back to watching t.v.)

[tjaman]

I completely forgot to mention that.

I'm thinking it's because I'm really hoping it's not happening (tho it is -- she got a "Jeer" for it).

Last laugh may be on them, tho.

My guess is that Farr can tape all the eppies she needs to for NUMB3RS and still be free for Leary's 13-shot project.

I'm naive enough to believe it works something like summer stock. ;D

'Course, Leary's character was leaving at the end of last season, so nothing's really permanent in this world.

And if she doesn't come back, network is network (even the Tiffany channel)

[quantumcat]

too true.

(caught my husband reading Joss stuff today.
He's more hooked than he pretends to be.)

[tjaman]

Long one this week; settle in, pop some popcorn ...


Line between promotion, storytelling continues to blur

Americans prefer commercial television.

Most regional markets have only one public television outlet, despite ongoing efforts to restructure public television into multiple channels in anticipation for digital delivery.

Put that up against hundreds of national and regional cable outlets -- not to mention NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, the WB and, somewhere, UPN -- all of which sell airtime. Clearly commercial television is vastly the preferred structure.

For now.

Before TiVo became more prevalent, people were tossing blank tapes into their VCRs to record a night of programming and watch it later, fast-forwarding through the commercials. Before that, people just left the room and did something else while the ads were on.

It's the American way, after all. When you can watch an hour's worth of broadcast in 42 minutes, what time- and efficiency-conscious American wouldn't do it? Our leisure time is limited from all directions, and our objective is to see the programs. The advertising which supports those programs is incidental.

Some current digital technologies boast -- in their own commercials -- that they can record programs and skip commercial breaks automatically.

So, if you bought this product, you might theoretically never hear about it again.

Impact

This has had several different impacts, most of them negative.

Cheaper programs: If the network can sell the same airtime to the same audience in support of a cheaper product, it seems like a win-win situation for the network, whose primary objective is, like all profit-driven businesses, to make a profit.

So rather than hire actors and actresses and a roomful of writers, they pay technicians and video editors (most with the demonstrated storytelling panache of a drunken monkey) to train the cameras on people acting foolish. Spark it up with some flashy graphics and over-the-top sound direction and it's done. You have "Americaás Funniest Home Videos," or any of a hundred marry-a-bug reality programs and that's just as good as "All in the Family" or "The Cosby Show" ever was, right?

Well -- so long as they deliver an audience, quality is really none of their concern.

Product placement: If you won't watch a 15-second spot about how wonderful Glad trash bags are, the camera, during the show, will linger on this most useful product in, say, any given episode of USA's "Monk" ("Monk Goes Home Again" was the worst offender thus far in this regard).

It's a reality. "Monk," as a scripted show, has more of a budget to meet, and along with the commercials everyone's skipping these days anyway, the advertisers still demand what bang they can get for their buck. This happens in lots of programming -- I'm just focusing on a show where it's almost embarrassingly and irrefutably obvious.

This is far from new, by the way. Along with product placement going back through the history of motion pictures, actors would take a break for a moment from time to time during the course of their productions ­ both in television and radio ­ to promote various products.

The concern about how intrusive the advertisers might get concerning how their products are used or in what scenes they will appear is real and it's a valid concern. Product placement is ultimately demeaning both to audiences and to actors, but they know that they've got to get paid somehow.

Better ads: Now, this is one impact of more and more widespread ad-skipping I do approve of. If you skip the commercials, you're likely to miss ads that are sometimes easily as entertaining as the programming they support. The Burger King mini rock videos supporting chicken fries is slick -- nothing short of brilliant. And the Dr Pepper and other cola ads on radio that sound at first like a perfectly straightforward pop song are, in general, well done and, I'll warrant, mostly bearable.

However, clever ads mean better writers and higher production values, which means more money and more expensive products. Beyond marketing, is there any good reason for a 12-ounce can of soda to cost 89 cents anywhere? Those "Coca Cola - 5¢" billboards of yesteryear are wonderfully nostalgic.

Probably because there was no way to fast-forward the billboard.

The upshot

There's no good way to avoid commercials. Making everything public television would certainly hamper creative storytelling. And better and better ways of skipping commercials simply means they'll pop up in some other, more insidious context -- or that the shows they support will just get cheaper and unwatchable. And making the commercials more acceptable just drives product prices up further and further.

So maybe -- just maybe -- we consumers simply can't support hundreds and hundreds of channels.

I'm ... fairly certain that the click you just heard was the remainder of this column being fast-forwarded through by marketers.

So much for the surprise twist ending.

[quantumcat]

I'm still hoping we'll go back to sponsored shows.

"Microsoft Mystery Theatre"
"The GM Comedy Hour"
"Pepsi's Night at the Movies"

I remember when soaps were underwritten by
Procter & Gamble and sports were supported
by Gillette.

We wouldn't have known about the newest
music,fashion or dances without Clearasil

I got to stay up late Tuesday nights to watch
"Alcoa Star Theatre" and the other neat anthology shows.

Yes,we had to endure the Saturday morning cartoons
with every Hanna-Barbera character pushing Kellog cereals.

Everyone from Rob Petrie to Fred Flintstone had to smoke
a sponsor's cigarette.

(Lassie got a new mom when Cloris Leachman refused to
gush over Campbell's soup.)

Most of that's gone from the re runs.

Who even notices Pebbles Flintstone asking for "woo-woo gape goo!"
now that the show's no longer affiliated with Welch's grape juice?

Maybe if they felt that people would hold the company responsible
if the show disappeared or was crap,they'd worry more about producing
a consistently worthy series.

Or maybe we'd have "Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom" updated
to feature Lindsay and Britney Simpson-Hilton hosting a bunch of
underdressed slackers in the new millenium's version of bread and circuses.

[tjaman]

"Lindsey Britney Simpson-Hilton" is hilarious.

I don't know. Massengill presents "The Closer" would be a far different show, I suspect.

And a Mountain Dew sponsorship would have Adrian Monk leaping from planes. "EXTREEEEEEEEM MONK!"

The difference in the old days was the sponsor would have some creative input. These days the sponsor would demand creative control.

And "Jell-O'tubbies." Just ... ick.

[quantumcat]

(shudder)

I fear you're right.

[tjaman]

"HEEEEERREEEE'SSS WHAAAAAAT HAAAAAAPPPEEENNNEEEEEEEEDD ... !"