March 2010 Archives

69th Annual Peabody Awards Announced: As Usual, Great Taste -- Honoring Great Shows

March 31, 2010 12:39 PM

The University of Georgia's Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication just revealed the winners of its Peabody Awards for the best electronic media efforts in 2009 -- and, as usual, the Peabody panel has demonstrated a jaw-dropping combination of taste, breadth and depth. Glee made the cut. So did Modern Family, and Craig Ferguson, and a lot, lot more...

I can't tell you how much I'm impressed by, and grateful for, the selections made each year by the Peabody folks. But I'll try -- by pointing out just a few of this year's winners, and what's so wonderful about their being honored.

From its inception, the Peabody panels haven't been afraid to bestow its coveted honor on brand-new TV series, often giving them a major public-relations and audience boost, if not an outright lifeline. This year, Fox's Glee gets such a nod, and so does ABC's equally delightful Modern Family sitcom. Two fabulous, fresh shows.

HBO's In Treatment, a daringly different, intimate drama, won a Peabody, too, recognizing not only superb performances, but the uniqueness of its serialized, conversational, subtle format. All three of these shows made my must-see weekly TiVo record list, and I'm glad they all got Peabodys.

Perhaps the year's most thrilling surprise is the Peabody given to The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson. This CBS talk show has been endlessly creative, reinventing itself constantly and cleverly -- but the installment for which it won the Peabody was a bold left turn even by its own shifting standards. It was Ferguson's one-hour, one-on-one conversation with Archbishop Desmond Tutu, an eloquent, intriguing dialogue that put the talk back into talk show.

But it's also cool that the Peabody panel recognized quality in the most narrowly focused of productions, and gave an award to the PBS Independent Lens installment called Between the Folds -- an hour on the history and practice of origami.

Also, the Peabodys aren't afraid to keep giving awards when veteran broadcasters keep earning them. 60 Minutes grabbed another few Peabodys for CBS, and Frontline and American Masters earned more for PBS. And how great is it that BBC America won one this year for its BBC World News America nightly newscast?

That goes, also, for one of ABC News' few prime-time hours worth honoring (which the Peabodys are doing), a documentary about needy Appalachian children that had echoes of Ed Murrow's Harvest of Shame.

It's not only that the Peabody people know quality when they see it... But they see it to begin with. The winners did great work. Once again, so did the Peabody people.

Comments (2) | Permalink

'Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution': Try It, You'll Like It

March 25, 2010 4:39 PM

There's something about Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution, the new ABC reality series launching Friday night at 8 ET, that comes as a total surprise. For a program about the dangers and proliferation of disgusting processed foods, it's shockingly easy to swallow. In fact, this has the makings of one tasty reality show...

Oliver, a British celebrity chef, hammered out the template for his new series in Food Revolution, a program produced and presented in his native England earlier this year. The idea was simple: try to reverse decades of bad habits, and bad food, by introducing healthier cuisine into a single school system. And it worked there, so why not transplant both the series concept, and the host, to the United States?

That emigration, after all, worked brilliantly for Gordon Ramsay and his Kitchen Nightmares, where his attack-and-revamp approach to failing restaurants has proven to work just as well on either side of the Atlantic. So why not Oliver? Why not OUR schools, and OUR kids?

Why not, indeed?

For the opening target of Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution, this ABC production descends upon Huntington, W. Va. -- a city hardly chosen at random. Statistically, based on disease and death rates and dietary information, Huntington is the least healthy city in the United States. So Oliver decides to start here, in the worst of the worst.

The added bonus, of course, is the backwoods vs. British, city vs. country conflicts that are set up automatically. But Oliver, unlike Ramsay, doesn't descend with snarly attitude and sharp insults. His targets aren't the parents, or the "lunch ladies," or even the administrators. It's the system, which he intends to change from the bottom up.

He's given one week to effect a measurable, positive change at one Huntington grade school, using the lunch ladies as both his assistants and his control group. Round one, for example, gives the elementary school kids an option: They can try Oliver's roast chicken and wild rice, made fresh, or they can go with the familiar, highly processed pepperoni pizza. Which meal do the kids prefer?

Elementary, my dear Watson. Both the school, and the result.

But this only makes Oliver more determined to make a change, this time by soliciting the input and cooperation of the students and parents. He attacks one on one -- making one mother's kitchen table groan under the weight of the junk she feeds her kids -- and also en masse, holding rallies that make the same disgusting point on a grand scale.

It's good television... and good FOR you, too. Do with the show what Oliver is asking the kids to do with their food: Take a taste.

Try it, you'll like it...

Comments (5) | Permalink

Fabulous, Fractured Females: "Nurse Jackie" and "United States of Tara" Return Tonight on Showtime

March 22, 2010 12:06 PM

On Showtime tonight from 10-11 p.m. ET, two engrossing TV characters return who are struggling to keep themselves together: Edie Falco as the pill-popping Nurse Jackie, and Toni Collette as the woman with several distinct personalities in The United States of Tara. Both shows are wonderful -- and if both Collette and Falco aren't competing this fall for Best Actress Emmys, something's awfully wrong somewhere...

In Nurse Jackie, Falco's nurse is 60 percent nasty attitude (for the young, stupid, chauvinist doctors), 30 percent empathy (for her patients), and 10 percent illegally obtained drugs. The drug use isn't condoned, but, at this point, Jackie is a functioning addict. Though sometimes functioning only barely, since her ex-lover is starting to hang out with her unsuspecting husband, some of her colleagues are lodging official complaints against her, and one of her daughters is exhibiting strong signs of acute anxiety.

Some of what Jackie says and does is biting and hilarious, like a female Larry David in scrubs. But there is pathos, too, and panic, and a lot of recognizable reality. As good as Falco was in The Sopranos, she's every bit as good, and believable, and sympathetic here, too. And the supporting cast, this season, is given more to do, and does it well, especially Eve Best as Jackie's best friend Dr. O'Hara, Peter Facinelli as the clueless Dr. Cooper, and Anna Deavere Smith as Glora Akalitus, who runs the hospital.

Over on season two of The United States of Tara, the supporting cast gets to spread its wings, too -- in one case literally, as Tara's daughter Kate (Brie Larson) begins earning extra money by posing as a pop-art mythical female avenger. Brother Marshall (Keir Gilchrist) is defining and redefining his sexuality, Tara's sister Charmaine (Rosemarie DeWitt) is about to change her marital status, and Tara's husband Max (John Corbett) looks for other fix-it projects to tackle now that his wife seems integrated as a single, healed personality.

Except that the death of a neighbor triggers a relapse, and things get really complicated, and really intriguing, from there. I'm not spoiling the fun, but there are other alter egos on the horizon, and other complications, and -- thanks to a rotary phone, a rain poncho and other visual clues -- a slowly unfolding mystery that would easily satisfy fans of Lost or Flashforward.

Falco, playing one role, is astounding. Collette, playing several, ARE astounding. Both -- all -- should be seen.

For my Fresh Air with Terry Gross review of these and other shows, click HERE.

Comments (2) | Permalink

AMC's "Breaking Bad" Comes Crawling Back -- And It's Terrific

March 19, 2010 6:38 PM

The opening, pre-credits sequence of Sunday's third-season premiere of AMC's Breaking Bad is a wordless marvel. It begins with a shot of a beautiful landscape, then pans down to reveal one man crawling. Then another, then many more, like human ants following some invisible, humbling trail. Where? Why?

What matters is that Breaking Bad is back -- and announcing once again, without saying a word, just how daringly different a TV series it is...

Season three of Breaking Bad begins Sunday night at 10 ET on AMC, and begins right where season two left off. Everyone is still reeling from the midair crash of two planes over Albuquerque, a crash caused, indirectly, by events traceable to science teacher Walter White (Bryan Cranston) and former student Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul).

When the series began two years ago, Walter was diagnosed as having terminal lung cancer, and decided to provide his pregnant wife, Skyler (Anna Gunn), with a nest egg by secretly manufacturing crystal meth, and deputizing Jesse to sell it. Now, at this point in the narrative, Walter's cancer is in remission, but nothing else is going well. His wife has thrown him out of the house. Jesse's girlfriend, a junkie, choked on her own vomit and died, sending Jesse into rehab. And drug dealers Walter crossed in the past have dispatched enforcers to find and kill him.

Welcome to season three.

At Walter's high school, where he's resumed his teaching duties, he attends a grief counseling rally, and tries to soothe the students by putting the airline disaster into statistical perspective -- but it's all figures, no feeling, and it's hardly a successful pep talk.

And around a rehab-house campfire, prodded by a counselor (guest star Jere Burns) to open up, Jesse has problems verbalizing his feelings, too. But when the counselor shares his own tale of addiction and grief, Jesse pays rapt attention.

So will viewers.

I've seen the first three episodes of this new season, and my excitement over their contents is matched only by my impatience at wanting to see more. Series creator Vince Gilligan and his writing and production staff have laid out the starting framework for another edge-of-the-seat thriller, and this season, every cast member gets to stretch and impress early and often.

Dean Norris as Walter's brother-in-law gets increasingly stressed -- and, at the same time, increasingly close to tracking down Walter as the mysterious local drug lord. RJ Mitte, as Walter and Skyler's son, gets to react, and act out, as his parents separate.

Also in the mix, in all this, are several attention-commanding recurring featured players, including Bob Odenkirk as shady lawyer Saul, Jonathan Banks as ruthless "cleaner" Mike, and Giancarlo Esposito as fast food franchise owner and secret drug kingpin Gus. Those three alone are from Mr. Show, Wiseguy and Homicide: Life on the Street, respectively -- quite a lineage.

And Breaking Bad, no less than ever, is quite a program. You can read and hear my NPR Fresh Air with Terry Gross review of Breaking Bad, along with several other new and returning cable series, by clicking HERE. And you can also listen to a replay of my 2008 interview with Bryan Cranston, which Fresh Air repeated Friday, by clicking HERE.

Meanwhile, and most important, mark your calendars and set your recorders for Sunday. Breaking Bad, one of TV's best current dramas, is back.

Comments (2) | Permalink

Discovery's Newest Nature Series: It's a Semi-Wonderful "Life"

March 18, 2010 10:24 AM

Discovery Channel's previous major co-production with the BBC, 2006's Planet Earth, was a fabulous nature miniseries, presenting astounding visuals and intelligent, illuminating narration in every installment. The networks' newest collaboration, a 10-part series called Life, is just as satisfying... but only in the visual sense...

Before I complain about what's not as impressive about this new nature miniseries, compared with its predecessor, let me stress what's right about it, and why, even with its flaws, it qualifies as must-see TV.

As with Planet Earth, this new Life serves up set pieces that are amazing on two different, equally impressive levels. You're amazed as the variety, ingenuity and especially the tenacity of these living creatures -- and no less amazed by the ability of the camera crews to photograph them successfully.

What sorts of things? For starters, there's the familiar old Kimodo dragon -- yet shown here doing something totally unfamiliar, and hunting in a pack to bring down a much larger water buffalo. And there's the capuchin monkeys, seen at top, who have figured out how to use rocks as tools to crack nuts, a process that can take eight years lo learn, but is passed down from generation to generation -- looking a bit like the early scenes in 2001: A Space Odyssey.

There are male humpback whales, following a single female and jockeying for position like Olympic athletes on a speed-skating track. There are tiny Brazilian frogs, making ridiculously long trips up tall trees to protect and feed their tadpoles. And so on, and so on... each image, and each creature, a joy to behold.

An overview episode, "Challenges of Life," launches the series Sunday night at 8 p.m. ET, on Discovery Channel, Animal Planet and all other Discovery sister networks. The first single-topic episode, "Reptiles and Amphibians," follows at 9 ET, and also is shown on all the affiliated networks. After that, episodes are televised in double helpings on subsequent Sundays, with a can't-miss capper, "Making of Life," closing with a behind-the-scenes look on April 18.

The sequences captured by the wildlife photographers are breathtaking -- some for their dramatic, life-and-death confrontations, others for their sheer intimacy and simplicity. Animal Planet already has made stars of meerkats on the Kalihari in Meerkat Manor, but the "Mammals" episode of Life trumps it a bit by catching a family of meerkats sunning themselves, some of them falling asleep standing up and collapsing backwards.

We also get to see clownfish, seemingly straight from Finding Nemo, hiding in the tentacles of a sea anemone that are poisonous to the clownfish's predators, but not to the colorful fish itself. And one of the coolest images in Life is an overhead shot of two humpback whales submerging to procreate -- something that has never been photographed. And still isn't: What we see instead is a calm ocean, and we're left with the poetic realization that beneath that calm surface are mysteries yet unsolved, activities still private.

That moment, in Life, is just right -- but too often, the poetry is missing from this telecast, especially when it's attempted in the narration. Life seems to be presented, except in its visuals, with less subtlety than Planet Earth was. The music is more obvious, the writing more simplistic, and the narration -- at least in this country - less authoritative.

Life is executive produced by Michael Gunton, who was a producer on Sir David Attenborough's excellent The Trials of Life, and is produced by Martha Holmes, one of several producers on another fine nature series, The Blue Planet.

But while Discovery Channel is promoting Life as being from the presenters of Planet Earth, that's misleading. That's true from the network sense, as this, too, is a BBC-Discovery co-production. But the primary producers and directors of Planet Earth, including director Alistair Fothergill and, as writer of many of the episodes, Attenborough, are not contributing to Life in those capacities.

Attenborough, the most authoritative figure in the history of TV nature documentaries, continues to provide his soothing voice to the narration of Life, but only in the British version. Last time, with Planet Earth, Discovery subbed Attenborough's voice with that of Sigourney Weaver. This time, we get Oprah Winfrey. Once again, the best advice is to wait for the DVD version, and make sure it has the original narration.

But it's not only the narrator in Discovery's Life that's irritating. It's the narration, which is so simplistic, it borders on the insulting. The approach has all the sophistication of those old Disney nature films -- fine for the whole family, but the lowest common denominator is much too low. Each episode ends with a summary so tidy and simple that, especially with Winfrey reading it, it sounds like the closing minute of an episode of Desperate Housewives.

For Discovery Channel to think that American audiences would prefer Oprah Winfrey or Sigourney Weaver to Sir David Attenborough is an insult to us all. To "dumb down" the beauty of Life with a grade-school script is an insult to all the filmmakers who toiled to capture those images and animals. And to link Life so directly to Planet Earth, when it's a distant relative at best, is tacky.

All that said, though, Life is beautiful, and you will learn from it, and, at times, you will be amazed. Just don't expect another Planet Earth, or David Attenborough, and you're not likely to be disappointed.

Comments (2) | Permalink

HBO's "The Pacific" Is a Superb Sibling to "Band of Brothers"

March 13, 2010 3:21 PM

Executive producers Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg and Gary Goetzman did a great job dramatizing the European battles of WWII in 2001's Band of Brothers. Now, nine years later, they've reteamed for another HBO miniseries, to do the same thing for The Pacific -- and it's just as good. Maybe even better...

Part one of the 10-part miniseries premieres Sunday, Mar. 14, at 9 p.m. ET, with subsequent installments premiering on consecutive Sundays. Hanks doesn't appear in it, and Spielberg didn't direct any of it, butmake no mistake: Their attention to detail and demand for quality and authenticity runs through every frame.

Directors and writers for the various hours come from Band of Brothers, but also from The Sopranos, The Wire, John Adams, Six Feet Under and others, a Best-of-Breed group of contributors. Filming took place in Australia, where the locations achieved the key trick of taking a lush, foreign world that looks like paradise and turning it into hell. By comparison, the European theater of operations looks positively civilized.

The drama focuses on three men -- actual Marines, whose stories are meticulously recorded for posterity, by themselves or others. Privates Robert Leckie and Eugene Sledge (played respectively by James Badge Dale and Joe Mazello), wrote memoirs.

John Basilone, who eventually made sergeant (played with aching sensitivity by Jon Seda from Homicide: Life on the Street), became a full-blown war hero, his exploits told far and wide -- often to his annoyance.

I've reviewed The Pacific in detail on NPR's Fresh Air with Terry Gross, and you can read and hear that review by clicking HERE.

What I'd like to do especially for TV WORTH WATCHING, though, is echo how the impetus for this companion miniseries -- basically, a series of complaints by veterans of the Pacific conflict who felt their contributions were overlooked and misunderstood -- can be traced to WWII itself.

Ernie Pyle, arguably that war's most famous and respected print reporter, had reported from North Africa and Normandy, from Italy and Germany. Like Band of Brothers and Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan decades later, his accounts as a war correspondent focused on soldiers, not officers, and witnessed the bloody battles from gory, ghastly ground level. He was a beloved figure among the fighting men -- but in the Pacific, Pyle began getting complaints that he was overlooking their side of the story.

"Now hear this, Ernie, we're not bitching, nor are we bitter," wrote one soldier. "But come, come, Ernie, how about visiting us sometime, and enjoying our rats' eye view of this Pacific paradise?" Another wrote Pyle that "six or 16 or 26 months on an island like Saipan or smaller than Saipan does something funny to you."

Pyle took the criticisms seriously, arrived in the Pacific in time to report from Iwo Jima in 1945, and, on a small island called Ie Shima, died there from sniper fire. Fittingly, and poignantly, a war photographer took a picture of Pyle's body as soon as it was safe to do so -- capturing, for all time, how the premier war reporter died on duty. (The grim picture is shown here.)

But months before that, according to James Tobin's excellent Ernie Pyle's War, Pyle had gotten a grateful letter from General Dwight D. Eisenhower, thanking Pyle for the honesty and realism of the war reporting in his book Brave Men. Pyle responded with humility, and with a sense that print accounts of war could go only so far.

"I've found," Pyle told the future President of the United States, "that no matter how much we talk, or write, or show pictures, people who have not actually been in war are incapable of having any real conception of it....

"As you know, I've spent two and a half years carrying the torch for the foot soldier, and I think I have helped make America conscious of, and sympathetic toward him, but haven't made them feel what he goes through. I believe it's impossible."

And I believe, through the you-are-there realism and overwhelming horridness depicted in such works as Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers and now The Pacific, the impossible has been made possible.

These works not only are demands for respect and gratitude for what we, as a country, asked these young men (and, sometimes, young women) to try to endure. They are, in their way, pleas for peace.

Do not miss The Pacific.

Comments (2) | Permalink

Diane Holloway, and Millions of Others, Get Their Wish: Betty White Will Host "SNL"

March 11, 2010 12:38 PM

How cool is this? (Answer: Very.) Fan and critic pressure, for once, has carried the day: NBC has announced that, due to popular demand, Betty White WILL host Saturday Night Live...

She's scheduled to appear May 8. Based on her performances on Boston Legal, The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and her Snickers Super Bowl ad, Betty White, 88, won't have any problem keeping up. Hell, with her decades of live TV experience, she's liable to run rings around her young costars.

But for her Saturday Night Live appearance, executive producer Lorne Michaels is hedging his bets, and upping his ante, by also making it a reunion of former SNL female players. Tine Fey has agreed to come aboard for the occasion, as have Amy Poehler, Molly Shannon, Maya Rudolph, Ana Gasteyer, and Fey's one-time 30 Rock costar, Rachel Dratch.

At age 88, Betty White is the most mature performer ever to host the show - though, in the past, Bob & Ray hosted one great episode, and Milton Berle hosted a terrible one.

Congratulations to everyone who lobbied hard for White to get her late-night SNL shot. That includes you, Diane -- and, thus, it includes TVWW.

So what's next, folks? A Deadwood reunion movie?

Comments (3) | Permalink

CBS "Early Show" Presents "Colon Cam," Billed as "First TV Anchor to Undergo Live TV Colonoscopy"

March 10, 2010 8:51 AM

It happened Wednesday morning on the CBS Early Show. Co-anchor Harry Smith, promoting prevention and treatment of colorectal cancer, underwent what CBS billed as "First TV Anchor to Undergo Live TV Colonoscopy."

Mabel, pass the doughnuts...

"Harry's colon is clean as a whistle," reported Katie Couric, who herself had undergone a colonoscopy on TV a decade before to promote the same cause.

Remind me never to blow on one of Katie's whistles.

This latest network medical showcase was performed at the medical center named for Katie's late husband, Jay Monahan, who died of colon cancer in 1998 at age 42. With Katie Couric at his side, and a high-resolution microscopic camera snaking through his intestines, Harry Smith peered at the TV monitor showing him, and us, images from what might be described as nature's most intimate luge run.

It was all for a good cause, and a serious one, yet not even Couric and Smith could avoid some obvious jokes. Couric even went out of her way to make one sphincter zinger, joking with CBS weather guy Dave Price, during a two-way exchange, that when he got his next colonoscopy, they might find his head.

The whole point of this live "Colon Cam" TV stunt (that's actually what CBS called it), and it's a good point, is to remind men of a certain age that they're due, or overdue, for this procedure.

I need to make another appointment myself -- but I definitely remember my last colonoscopy, in which the doctor asked me if I wanted to turn my head and watch the TV monitor as he snaked his camera the wrong way through my one-way inner street.

"No, thanks," the nurse later told me I replied. "I watch enough assholes on TV in my regular line of work."

Comments (6) | Permalink

My "Breaking Bad" Interview Breaks Today on NPR's "Fresh Air"

March 9, 2010 11:45 AM

Today on NPR's Fresh Air with Terry Gross, I interview Vince Gilligan, the creator of AMC's fabulous, and delightfully unpredictable, drama series Breaking Bad. It reminds me, all over again, why I love being associated with Fresh Air...

Breaking Bad stars Bryan Cranston as a high school science teacher who is told he has terminal lung cancer, and decides to leave a nest egg for his family -- his pregnant wife and their teen son, who has celebral palsy -- by doing something drastic. He uses his knowledge of chemistry to manufacture crystal meth, and teams with a former student, played by Aaron Paul, to sell it. It's a dark series, and a dark role, for which Cranston, the former sitcom star of Malcolm in the Middle, has won back-to-back Emmys.

Season two of Breaking Bad comes out on DVD next Tuesday, and season three begins on AMC March 21. To discuss the previous season, and get a preview of the coming one, today I interview series creator Vince Gilligan. His previous credits include being a writer and producer on The X-Files, but Gilligan isn't yet a household name.

Which is why I love Fresh Air so much. What matters isn't the popularity, but the quality. I was able to interview Bryan Cranston, when Breaking Bad first started, long before he won his first Emmy Award for the role. And just last week, I interviewed Ricky Gervais, whose TV shows are as original on the comedy side as Breaking Bad is on the dramatic side.

Terry Gross, of course, interviews fascinating people about fascinating subjects every day. Because of my day job as a college professor, I don't get many at-bats -- but when I do, I get to play ball with people whose work I truly respect. For me, it's as much fun as it is work, and I hope it comes off that way.

After 5 p.m. ET or so, you can hear or read my interview with Vince Gilligan by clicking HERE.

Meanwhile, you can hear or read my Ricky Gervais interview, about his new HBO series The Ricky Gervais Show and other things, by clicking HERE.

And just for fun, you can also hear my February 2008 interview with Bryan Cranston, seven months before he won his Emmy for Breaking Bad, by clicking HERE.

And meanwhile, as I type this, I'm teaching TV History and Appreciation II at Rowan University. I'm showing the premiere episode of 1971's Columbo, written by a young Steven Bochco, and directed by an even younger Steven Spielberg.

Work CAN be fun. Honest.

Comments (2) | Permalink

2010 ABC Oscar Telecast: Twice the Best Picture Nominees, Twice the Hosts, but Not Twice the Value

March 8, 2010 9:01 AM

The number of Best Picture nominees was doubled, from five to 10. The running time expanded, too, with ABC's telecast running more than 30 minutes over schedule. So with Monday's Oscar telecast, if less is more, is more less?

More or less...

There's always something to complain about with the Oscars, and this year there are two major complaints.

One is with, as always, the fat. Yes, they cut down on the original song performances -- but whatever time was gained by that exclusion, was lost by an interminable dance number. Or numbers. It went on so long, it must have been more than one. And that salute to horror movies? Even Freddy would have slashed that one in a heartbeat.

Another major complaint, but one for which the program producers can't be blamed, is the predictability. Until we got to the final major award, most of the prizes went to the predicted, favored winners: Mo'Nique in Precious, Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds, Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side, and certainly Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart.

But even with the Bullock and Bridges wins, their moments were preceded, and somewhat diluted, by a manner of presentation that brought out friends and colleagues for all five nominees, who took turns extolling the virtues of the actors. It was part celebration, part tribute - but also a bit creepy, like somewhat of a funeral.

And speaking of funerals, the In Memoriam section continues to be Hollywood's last, worst popularity contest. Even after you're dead, your peers get to pass judgment on you one more time, by applauding -- or withholding that applause -- as your name and image scroll by in a montage of artists who have died in the past year. I know it has to be done, and should be... but couldn't the black-tie audience be told to withhold applause until the end?

There were, however, some nice moments. Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin were affable as hosts, though their opening comedy bit seemed to single out everyone in the first five rows. It was nice when Barbra Streisand was able to present the award for Best Director, which went, for the first time, to a woman -- Kathryn Bigelow, for The Hurt Locker. But that, too, seemed predictable. Hence the pairing.

It was nice when Tom Hanks, announcing the winner of Best Picture, noted that the last time there were 10 nominees in that category was 1942, the year Casablanca won. Good bit of trivial. Yet much less trivial, but nonetheless ignored, were the names of the 10 films up for Best Picture in 2010.

They had been saluted individually throughout the evening -- but by the time their moment rolled around, around midnight, not even the movies' titles were read or displayed. Only the winner, Hurt Locker, was announced.

Something wrong there.

Two final notes, though peripheral to the telecast.

One: ABC's special Oscar promo for Modern Family was funnier than most sitcoms. They staged a quick game of Charades, in which Sofia Vergara's Gloria was trying to interpret clues thrown by her husband, Ed O'Neill's Jay.

To start, he held up one finger. "The finger!" she shouts. "The pointy finger in the sky!" Then she makes a connection:"Cloudy with the chance of the meatballs!"

Exasperated, Jay tooks at his upraised finger and says, "This means one word." Instantly, she screams, "Meatballs!"

Then, after the Oscars, there was Jimmy Kimmel Live, on which the host noted Bigelow's Best Director wn over former spouse James Cameron by calling her "the first woman ever that beat her ex-husband in front of a billion people."

Then he provided a lengthy, very funny video, in which he plays the unpopular president of the Handsome Men's Club. That one's so funny, you may as well see it for yourself. Watch it HERE.

Comments (7) | Permalink

After Leno's First Week In Late Night, What's Happening? Lots -- But Not in Late Night

March 5, 2010 6:42 PM

Jay Leno has had a week to reassert himself in late night, and NBC has had the same week to re-establish itself in prime time. So who's doing better in this first phase of reshuffling? In late night, Leno is dominating the ratings, but not doing anything impressive to earn his viewers. In prime time, on the other hand, NBC is trying an interesting thing or two. Or three...

On Fridays (tonight at 8 p.m. ET), NBC is launching Who Do You Think You Are, a genealogical series that takes our personal interest in discovering our roots -- an interest that helped 1977's Roots become the biggest miniseries in TV history -- and tapping them for a new feel-good reality series in which celebrities discover their family stories.

It's the same basic idea as the current PBS series Faces of America with Henry Louis Gates Jr., but tricked out with a bigger travel budget, incessant feel-good (or feel-SOMETHING) music, and annoying "moments" in which said celebrities are given air time, and "private" space, to absorb their familial discoveries.

But despite all that, and despite the obvious on-air plugs for an online family-tree-finding service, Who Do You Think You Are? is... interesting. In the opener, Sarah Jessica Parker eventually learns that one of her ancestors was part of the Salem Witch trials. But was she an accuser, or an accused? And, in either case, what happened to her?

In a future episode, Lisa Kudrow traces her past back to an even darker period of world history, with even more surprising results. Strip away the sappy veneer, and there are strong stories being told here. So I recommend you watch this show, to try it out for yourself.

The same goes for The Marriage Ref, another of this week's new NBC prime-time entries. The overly condensed Olympics-night preview wasn't that good, but Thursday's one-hour installment -- featuring Jerry Seinfeld, Eva Longoria-Parker and Tina Fey as panelists -- flowed much more naturally.

Yes, the "arguments" are meaningless. But so were the $50 grand prizes on What's My Line? and other long-running prime-time panel shows, where the real entertainment was in watching celebrities speak, unscripted, and goof around. That's less rare now than it used to be -- but when The Marriage Ref can assemble a panel, yet to be televised, featuring Larry David, Ricky Gervais and Madonna, there's no WAY I'm missing that.

As for Parenthood, the one scripted new entry from NBC this week, it's not great -- and, at times, it's grating. But at other times, most of them including Lauren Graham, it lives up to the potential of the original film, and is quite watchable.

And, like the other shows mentioned, it's infinitely better than The Jay Leno Show, which used to gobble up five weekly prime-time NBC hours.

As for Leno on The Tonight Show, more on that later. But when the best part of week one was a monologue by a guest -- Sarah Palin -- the host himself didn't come off as either reinvigorated or particularly impressive.

Comments (2) | Permalink

Jay Leno Returns to Late Night, Leaves Prime Time to "Parenthood"

March 2, 2010 11:57 AM

Jay Leno reclaimed his NBC Tonight Show throne Monday night, a month after vacating his prime-time slot. Filling that spot tonight? The premiere of NBC's new midseason drama entry, Parenthood. Reviews of both shows follow...

Jay Leno opened his comeback Tonight Show installment with a sepia-tinged taped sequence, in which, like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz, he awakens from a dream to find himself back home. Leaning over him, instead of the Cowardly Lion and Tin Man, was bandleader Kevin Eubanks and Ross the intern.

Dorothy, of course, had traveled to a vivid, imaginative world, where she had triumphed over the Wicked Witch and earned her way back home. For Jay, the world of The Jay Leno Show was dull and lifeless, and his return to late-night was prompted not by success, but by its polar opposite.

"I'm Jay Leno," he said to open his return-night monologue. "I'm your host -- at least for a while." Over on CBS, his once and future 11:35 p.m. ET rival opened HIS show by boasting, "Welcome to The Late Show. My name is David Letterman. Same time, same host."

A pretaped piece, in which Jay knocked on residences in neighboring Burbank in search of a desk he could use on The Tonight Show, was an early highlight. Unfortunately, it was the ONLY highlight. Jay may have gotten a desk back, but he didn't improve his interviewing skills any. His Jamie Foxx interview was unfocused and uncontrolled, and his interview with Olympic gold medalist Lindsey Vonn was worse.

Vonn was there, showing off her beauty while detailing her skiing achievements, while Jay merely waited to spring his pre-written punch line. After pointing out that Vonn's husband also was her skiing coach and trainer, Jay asked. "Does that work in all aspects of the bedroom?"

Even the audience sounded taken aback by the question, and Leno apologized. "I don't know how to answer that question," Vonn replied. So she didn't, and left with her dignity intact.

What sort of questions will Jay fire, or lob, at Sarah Palin tonight? It's anybody's guess -- but Palin's appearance tonight, and the Jersey Shore cast's Wednesday night, will draw in the crowds. It'll be next week, when the guest roster finds its normal level, before we know what audience slippage Leno will experience because of his temporary prime-time debacle.

But just as Conan O'Brien can claim to be a victim of Jay Leno's desire to reclaim his late-night spotlight, so can Jimmy Fallon. This week is the one-year anniversary of Fallon's arrival on Late Night, replacing O'Brien -- but with Jay's Tonight Show returning the same night, who noticed? And, on NBC, where were the promos?

There were, however, tons of promos, all during the Olympics, for Parenthood, the second TV remake of 1989's wonderful ensemble comedy-drama Ron Howard film. Premiering on NBC tonight at 10 ET, this version, though twice as long as the first TV attempt (back in 1990, starring Ed Begley Jr.), isn't twice as good. But it does show some promise -- especially when Lauren Graham, Craig T. Nelson or Erica Christensen are front and center.

There's a scene, in the second episode, when Graham's character is attempting to enter the workforce, after more than a decade off, and is winding up a job interview with a much younger man. "I really want this job," she tells him, with such convincing raw honesty that it breaks your heart a little. And Nelson's patriarch, when he shows little patience for the children and grandchildren around him, generates similar waves of sympathy. It's hard not to agree with him.

Some of the dramatic plot lines are hit too hard, some of the comic ones too softly. But there's a lot of heart and not a little promise here -- and if this isn't nearly as good a family drama as Friday Night Lights, it comes from the same producers. And right now, they're about the only games in town...

Comments (5) | Permalink

Post-Olympics Reprise: One More Look at Theresa Corigliano's On-the-Scene Olympics Report

March 1, 2010 10:56 AM

[Bianculli here: Our newest TV WORTH WATCHING contributor, Theresa Corigliano, filed her first report straight from the Olympic Games, where she compared a lifetime of Olympic TV viewing to her weeks of being there in Vancouver. Her piece was posted for a few days just before the Olympics ended -- but for those who didn't catch it, it deserves an instant reprise. So here it is...]

Watching Olympics With Help from TV Osmosis

By Theresa Corigliano

The first Olympics I clearly remember was Grenoble, 1968. Instead of pictures of Monkees or Beatles in my high school locker, I had pictures of Peggy Fleming and Jean-Claude Killy. I wanted to marry Killy.

I dreamed about bumping into him somewhere in the mountain town of Val d'Isere. I can still see the bright green of the skating costume that Peggy Fleming's mother sewed for her when she won her medal, and recently found the Life magazine I saved all these years with Peggy on the cover. I keep it because a friend told me Peggy and her husband own a winery in Northern California and sometimes host private dinner parties at their house to talk about their wine. If I ever get to go to one of these soirees, I am going to bring the Life magazine. I visited their wine shop in Los Gatos, CA. Framed, on the wall, is the skating costume, and her skates and her medal. I cried when I saw it.

That's how much the Olympics have always meant to me. For all these years, I have watched the Games obsessively. I always weep when they end, and think to myself: Four years. That's forever in human years. I always think with a chill, how will my life be different four years from now?

Of course, it is always different in ways I could not have imagined, some good, some bad. But the joy I feel when it is time for the Games to return is unparalleled, compared to anything else I anticipate watching. And I am a TV girl. I love TV. I work in TV. I watch TV. But the Games are the kind of drama you cannot make up.

The sacrifice these people make to participate moves me. I was always a sucker for ABC's "Up Close and Personal" peeks into the athletes' lives (though now that I know better, I sometimes wince at the clumsy reach of some of these stories, so the networks can build excitement where there is none: Lindsey Vonn's shin! Russian ice dancers' aboriginal costume controversy! Bode Miller, from disgrace to redemption! Please!)

To my mind, no one did the Olympics better than ABC. There was no better voice of the Games than Jim McKay. But maybe that's because you never forget your first. When I sometimes see clips from these long-ago games, they look like kinescopes compared to how they unspool in my head. In fact, the Innsbruck Games, which I dimly recall, were broadcast in black and white, but those memories of mine -- they are in Technicolor.

So when I had the opportunity this month to go to my first Olympics, as exciting as it was for me to realize I was finally in a position to make it work, I also was a little worried. Maybe that sounds ridiculous, but it occurred to me that it could feel like looking down the wrong end of a telescope, a much narrower perspective. Would I miss feeling that feeling, as a TV viewer, of being omniscient?

Having just returned from Vancouver, still glowing, I can honestly say, it was specific, and different, and challenging and exhausting -- and it also was the experience of a lifetime. It was one of the happiest weeks of my entire life.

I smiled constantly -- I don't know, maybe being Canadian is contagious -- and every event I got to participate in was a thrill.

The Opening Ceremony, where we were given drums to play, and ponchos to wear (to everyone who asked, yes, we were wearing pale blue paper ponchos, the better to make us into the background where the light spectacular could play), and two different torches to flash and swirl.

The normal hill ski jump: a three-hour journey to Whistler, where we sat with happy Poles and Germans and Norwegians, and saw only the thrill of victory moments. The short-track night: when the Koreans went down like bowling balls and Ohno found himself just one medal short of his new nickname -- Apolo 7. The pairs skating, the men's short. With no commentary to rely on, I made sure I read newspapers and magazines even more obsessively and more intently for information. Who was injured? Who was favored? With no expert in my ear, I had to be my own color guy.

The irony was that some of the venues were offering little radios with an in-house commentary network for $20, but it was so poorly publicized around the arenas, or I was so immune to whatever ads there were, I didn't hear about it until the last event I was at. But it turned out to be a good thing.

Here's what happened instead. I found myself talking to my friend Marie about the high jump, the body position of the athletes over their skis. I heard myself critiquing the pairs' teams and the men figure skaters for my friend. I talked about toes pointed in boots, finishing a jump, doubling a jump rather than tripling it, the speed and leg position in the spins.

I knew that when a speed skater is in last position it means nothing for the champions; it's a strategy. I remembered athletes of games past and what they had done up till Vancouver. I knew my Olympics history. Marie said, "How do you know all this?" -- and that's when the two-word answer came to mind: TV osmosis.

I realized I know what I know because I have been watching and listening closely for over 30 years, and it stuck. Everything Dick Button has ever said, or Peggy Fleming or Sandra Bezic, or Scott Hamilton, Keith Jackson, Curt Gowdy or Chris Schenkel has stuck with me, and it stuck because I loved it. I realized I didn't need TV to enjoy the Games, but having watched the Olympics on TV all these years made it possible for me to have had the wonderful experience I had last week. TV didn't rot my brain; it anchored me.

What I did miss most, of course, was the aforementioned overview.

When you are at the Olympics, you're lucky to fit in one event a day, and pretty much have no idea what else is going on or what the results are. The one day we tried to do two events (ski jumping at 9 a.m., over at noon, and speed skating at 5 p.m. -- sounds doable, right?), we barely made it to the second event. When you're at the Olympics in this post 9/11 world, the start time of the event has no bearing on when you have to get there. Factoring in travel and security checks, we were often at a venue three hours before it began. That can cut into your day.

You would hear things in passing about other competitions (food station lady to souvenir sales clerk: "We won the gold medal!"), or the horrible news about the Georgian athlete who died while training. So I still counted on the late night Olympic wrap-ups on NBC, or CTV's saturated coverage of the Games for a rundown of what else had happened that day.

In truth, I couldn't wait to see the Opening ceremony on TV, because sitting in BC Place, we not only had no idea how all the special effects looked, we also had no idea till we watched television that there was a fourth post to the Olympic cauldron that didn't rise when it was supposed to rise. We couldn't tell the difference. The replays of the skating performances showed nuances that the naked eye can't possibly see, which is why the judges and commentators rely on their screens at the venues.

And as far as soaking up the atmosphere of the Games, we asked everyone we met where we should go in Vancouver; with no Today show to tell us the must-sees, we found our own.

We were out in the world, with the world, and that is something that television cannot communicate. Turn around at an art gallery, there are the Czech hockey coaches. Who are those guys buying pins? It's the curling team, in their pop art golf pants. Is that Sacha Cohen sitting next to us, in worse seats? Yes, it is, right next to Evan Lysacek's combustible sisters.

The Russian lady sitting next to me at the men's short waves two flags, because her husband is Canadian -- and she tells me conspiratorially that Evgeni Pluschenko was persuaded to un-retire by a concerned Soviet Skating federation, who feared their skaters, for the first time in years, might be shut out of the medals.

We were truly LIVE at the Games, and I am here to tell you, that is the remarkable difference you don't truly understand until you are living it -- and I wouldn't trade the experience for anything. When London rolls around, and Sochi, I may be watching the Games on TV as I always have done, but Vancouver's Olympic flame will burn in a different way for me ... because I was there.

[Go to the original posting, GUEST BLOG #78, for previous comments -- then add your own here. -- David B.]

--

[Theresa Corigliano, our newest regular contributor at TV WORTH WATCHING, has an eclectic background in book publishing, sportswriting, and primarily, for the last 20 years, television -- as an executive, screenwriter and reporter.]

Comments (1) | Permalink