The TV Zone

This one'll come via the Sundance Channel ...

Here's the presser:

"Sundance Channel will pay tribute to Paul Newman tomorrow with the airing of “Iconoclasts: Redford and Newman” as well as “The Making of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” beginning at 6 p.m. ET/PT. These two programs will be airing throughout the week...

Robert Redford also had a quote to go with this:

"I have lost a real friend. My life — and this country — is better for his being in it."

Yup, that's the big important date to remember, when TCM will devote its full Sunday schedule to Paul Newman classics, including ...Cool Hand Luke (1967), Somebody up There Likes Me (1956), Torn Curtain (1966), Exodus (1960), Hud (1963), and his directorial debut Rachel, Rachel (1968), with Joanne Woodward. We've got the full line up on the jump...

Continue reading "Newman Tribute on TCM: Oct.12" »

As "Late Show" fans know, Letterman had a unique relationship with Paul Newman: Wheels, wheels, wheels, plus the simple fact that both guys liked each other, lived in Connecticut, drove too fast on the Merritt, lived not too far from one another, liked movies, enjoyed beer, were kinda loners, hated publicity, etcetera. Plus - as I noted below - Newman was the first guest on DL's show way back in August 1993. Letterman pays tribute on tonight's show, and it's a lovely tribute, and in DL's own way, about as personal as he gets. Anyway, if you can't wait until 11:35, here it is, right now. Or...

Guess what? That episode of "Big Idea with Donny Deutsch" that you just couldn't wait to see tonight? Wait ... It's been postponed along with whole rest of the prime-time sched on CNBC, which will now go wall-to-wall on the market crisis with " Street Crisis: Is Your Money Safe?" ( 7 p.m. till 11), followed by a real nice glass of warm milk before beddy-bye - a special edition of "Mad Money with Jim Cramer" at 11.

And -- wow! -- speaking of the Big C (CNBC, not Jim, who has some 'splaining to do), did you watch the network this afternoon? I broke out into a cold sweat, then started to hyperventilate, then broke down into uncontrollable sobbing. Finally, I realized - "what are you crying for, pal? You're already broke." Then, I broke into a big smile of schadenfreude.

CNBC at moments like this is a trip - a bracing cup of mushroom tea. It's just wild: I was watching the heart attack until closing bell and I'm fairly certain I began to detect a pattern -- the lower the Dow industrial number goes down, the louder the voices on camera become. Then, when the Dow starts to improve, and go up a bit, the voices start to get a little softer. Dow goes down ... voices go up. Dow goes up ... voices down. It's a fact. Check it out. Charlie Gasparino was on earlier, saying the panic was overblown -- his voice seemed kinda soft -- which appeared to directly contradict a few million traders who had just slit their wrists. But seriously folks ... woo, what a day for CNBC. These guys are juggling their own version of the Iraq invasion, and as a TV event, it's quite mesmerizing -- a gale of words and numbers and all of them verily indecipherable.

Jim Cramer. (Photo by Brad Trent)

Funny - or I should say, unintentionally funny - bit on "Today Show" this morning.

Matt L was interviewing Gov. Mitt Romney, and both were talking about that Katie Couric interview with Sarah Palin last week. Said Matt to Mitt, "Some have asked her to step aside - Gov. Palin, not Katie Couric..."

And this set me to thinking: What if Matt didn't add that little clarification? What if Romney thought Matt was in fact actually talking about Katie? Can you imagine the who's-on-first cross talk that would then take place? Here's the possibility:

Romney: "It's about time someone asked her to step down. I've had it with her."
Matt: "Really? Does that mean you wanted the job?"
Romney: "Well, I suppose I could have done it; I've got good hair after all."
Matt: "Honestly, governor, don't you think there are other more important qualifications than hair?"
Romney: "You're right. Ha ha. Just look at you!"
Matt: "With all due respect, governor. It's not a job I'm qualified to do, and I don't see what hair has to do with it."
Romney: "Did I touch a nerve?"
Matt: (Peering quizzically at the governor, who by this point is grinning idiotically): "Governor, let's go to the next question..."

And so on.

...
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band will play the half-time slot at the Super Bowl in Tampa, Florida, snagging the most-watched musical showcase of the year, according to the organizers.

This year, more than 148 million viewers in the U.S. watched Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers play at the championship game of American football, the National Football League said on Sunday....

"SNL" does owe Sarah Palin something - residual check? I don't know. But the show continues to pull gold out of this uniquely rich vein. Last night as you are probably aware by now, Tina Fey came back to reprise her pitch perfect Palin, and here it is below, in case you haven't yet seen.

. Next week - I think we can all pretty safely predict - she'll be back for "The Vice Presidential Debate..."

I've looked for Paul Newman web tributes and there are many, many, many. Enough to keep us engaged for the rest of the month. I offer a few here.

The first: This appearance on "Late Show" about three years ago. Letterman and Newman were pals and not because they were Connecticut neighbors (they weren't) but because they had a shared love of the race track. This is a wonderful clip on Dave TV that finds Paul Newman floating away...

And...as Letterman fans well know, Newman was the first guest on "Late Show" way back in 1993; Letterman had just checked into his new theater on B'way and needed a big splash, and the first splash was Newman. Here's a clip that some enterprising fans dug up and posted on Youtube; grainy and primitive, but you can still get the sense Letterman had started off on the right foot, and indeed he had...

Finally...these three videos are from a Brit documentary that aired - I'm guessing - in the UK about three or four years ago. It's not a critical overview of the career, but is good because it links the careers of both Newman and Joanne Woodward; doesn't get into much detail, but it feels like a reasonably intelligent chronology of this brilliant career; if you've got a half hour, go through all three. Please go to the jump to watch...

Continue reading "More Newman Tributes, and Letterman" »

Over the next few days, weeks, we'll all have and cherish our various memories of Paul Newman, who died in Westport last night at age 83. Mine are indelible, beyond the big and small screen (yes, he had numerous roles on TV in the early '50s, famously including Philco's "Death of Billy the Kid," and in few and sparse appearances, he was one of the greatest guests in "Late Show with David Letterman" history; both were good friends. Also, "Empire Falls," the Fred Schepesi-directed HBO two-parter with Ed Harris and Helen Hunt, in 2005, which was his last TV role, I believe.)

One memory: In a town meeting where I live, where a debate over a hard-fought housing development was underway, in which someone planned to bulldoze over a thousand acres and install a hundred or so 10,000 square foot mansions amidst a rolling green 18-hole golf course. Those who sought to save the land from this predation knew their fight was probably hopeless and that the developer was effectively pursuing the town meeting because he figured it was good for public relations and that he fully expected to secure his covenants anyway, so what was the harm?

The fight seemed lost, when...out of the corner of my eye someone walked by. I noticed only the boots - spectacular western things with wonderful filigree of some sort and badly scuffed; this was unusual and I glanced up. There, by my side, was Paul Newman. He looked at the stage. He looked at the developer. He squinted. He muttered under his breath. He took a seat. And he watched, in silence.

About an hour later, Newman went to the back of the stadium (it was being held in a school), and asked to speak to someone involved with the effort to preserve this land. She told him of the plight, of the fact that the land was probably doomed, of the fact that the state and town had done nothing to save it, of the fact that the only thing standing between a vast development and one of the most beautiful places in the northeast was a small group of people who cared deeply about its preservation.

Newman said, "would half a million help?"

In one short, sharp and perfectly timed moment, Newman donated $500,000 to the effort, headlines across the state and indeed nation were secured, and suddenly the small group without a hope and a prayer had as we say, "momentum." The state and Nature Conservancy ultimately got behind the effort and the land was saved. As you're well aware, this was just a tiny act among a countless number performed over the years - his work in Bridgeport, Hartford and inner cities throughout the state is legion, not to mention "Hole in the Wall."

So today, I too mourn Paul Newman. He was a wonderful actor. Of much more greater consequence, he was an extraordinary human being. One of my heroes in gone. No doubt, one of yours is too.

OK, we all watched the debate and forgot about the other momentous face-off of the night, Leno and Kimmel. But what I saw of it (thanks NBC.com!) was pretty funny, and I post forthwith Jimmy Kimmel's immediate warning to Jay about ABC. I won't kill the punchlines by re-stating them here, so go ahead and watch. Well worth it...

I suppose I COULD watch "Late Show with DL" again tonight and listen to him thunder for another hour about the perfidy of that false friend, John McCain (because, after all, there's nothing else in the world to talk about, and the fact that Dave was LIED TO BY A POLITCIAN is shocking to no one on this planet save Dave)...

But instead, I'm watching "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" because he's got on Jimmy Kimmel.

Here are some questions Jay will ask Jimmy:

"Will you mind when I come over there to ABC and start at 11:35, even if it pushes you back a half hour?"

"I like 'Nightline' but I guess they'll cancel it when I come over: Has Iger or McPherson told you any different?"

"You think Zucker minds me having you on tonight, seeing that you and I are gonna be late night partners in another couple years? He's in England - probably doesn't even know you're on tonight. Silverman? He's out at some party, chasing a leggy blonde, so nothing to worry about there..."

Seriously folks. This is a big show. I called Bill Zehme - the Chicago-based best-selling author and one of the world's leading authorities on late-night TV and Johnny Carson (he's writing the biography for Random House) to get his take on all this business.

He told me about the budding Kimmel-Leno bromance, "I do think those two boys talk a bit [outside of work]."

Bill also disagreed with my snark-assessment of Letterman's McCain rant.

Said he:

"I thought last night was even more of a spectacular follow-up [to Wednesday]....Last night was gold, and it shows you the importance of this guy. He's not just a show business figure; he's a barometer, and has an unbridled sense of outrage that can be triggered at any given moment. It's generally dead-on."

Well put indeed.

Katie?.

Yes, what does this mean for Katie, who only five or so months ago was buried by the Major Media Outlets like the Wall Street Journal and other members of the Let's Bury Katie Choir?

I've just crawled out from under my bed because I heard the sky was falling - Prez Bush said so after all - but looked up to see that it was only rain coming down, so I finally had a good look at the Palin-Couric interview, Part 2, that'll air tonight and has been posted on CBS already and has been widely derided ... err, dissected in places like Gawker.

Here's what it means: That Couric will be the anchor of "Evening News" for years to come, and that after two years of soaring arias from members of the Let's Bury Katie Choir, that the music will finally stop. She's turned a corner, the corner she needed to turn, whereby she is no longer a rival, and third place one at that, to Williams and Gibson, but a potential threat to them. Much has been said about Palin's performance, and because TV Zone studiously stays away from politics, you may draw your own conclusion. But we do have opinions about TV stars, and mine on Couric is that she was terrific - clean, sober, intelligent, solid, prepared and respectful. She allowed Palin to be hoisted by her own petard.

This is just what Couric needed right now - a big interview at an important time in history and in the body of a telecast, "The Evening News" that is consistently good. She's got her mojo, and mojo can lead to momentum ... and she's gotten it at exactly the right time.

You go girl.

Watch CBS Videos Online

(Pix: Peter Kramer / Paul J. Richards / Getty Images)

Old friends no more?

I love Dave Letterman - been great material for me for, like, decades. But now he's going off on this McCain feud every night, night after night after night (or at least Thursday night, too) ... and I'm wondering: Why? Or, would he rant and rave like this is Barack O did the same thing (and held an interview with Katie when he said he was actually gonna get the first flight outta town to save the world?)

And I'm thinking: No. He probably wouldn't, even though Dave is a self-styled equal-opportunity offender, who probably dumped more jokes on Bill Clinton ("...fat pantload"...) over more years than any politician ever got or deserved to get. (And did I mention Hill?) Letterman, like "SNL," doesn't seem to have a clue how to make fun of Obama, so McCain - only a slightly easier target - gave him the perfect opportunity the other night.

In any event, he goes after McCain again on Thursday's show, pretending - and it is all pretense - that the prez candidate did him wrong, and lied and weaseled his way out of Wednesday's interview (ironic, because McCain told Katie Couric in those "questions" segments with both candidates that aired the other night that he could think of NO reason to lie as president). Anyway, Dave's acting like he's the only one a politician ever lied to. Earth to Mister David Michael Letterman of Indianapolis, Ind.: That's what politicians do. It's encoded in their DNA. They can't help themselves.

Dave has every right to be annoyed - but this is all starting to smell like he's got another Oprah feud going; there's a ratings opportunity here, a vein of material to be mined, and he's not gonna miss his chance, now that "Nightline" is beating him far too often.

Here's the game Dave's playing: He gets all this press on the "feud," and then milks it and milks it and milks it ... Then, next week, he asks McCain to come on the show ... McCain agrees ... and the cover of the Post, the News and maybe even below-the-fold NYT devote splashes to the score.

Dave gets huge ratings for the show. McCain gets huge publicity.

So I'm thinking: Dave is actually a closet McCain supporter after all.

If you click on this link right now you can see do his "Don't-vote-for-this-fraud" routine in living color...

(Photo: John Paul Filo/CBS, via Reuters)

Here's the big talker of the morning, courtesy 1970Oaktree, whose clip of last night's "Late Show with Dave Letterman" has been roaring around the Internets all night...check out the total number of views? Nearly half a million...Watch before CBS pulls it down, which could be any minute now...

Why is this such a big deal? Because some bloggers would have you believe that Dave is on a wild tear...screaming...frothing...squealing...about the presumed duplicity of the Republican nom for canceling last minute and then doing an interview with Katie Couric instead.

But judge for yourself... It's not bad at all, and even pretty complimentary in places. Though Dave does question why 1) Sarah Palin didn't suspend campaigning when he did; 2) whether Mc will ever come on the show again, after last night's mini-drubbing.

My hunch: Mc will be on the show next week, or after the bailout package is announced.

That is, if Dave will have him...

Could "The Simpsons" go another three seasons beyond the one that starts this weekend? It's a possibility, and Al Jean, show czar who's been at the show since day one, suggested as much in a reporter call this ayem. "We signed the cast for four years, including this one, and the Emmy [that the show just got] was wonderful, and I really feel like creatively we're still doing terrific work,and I don't see an end..."

He added: "I'm optimisitc we'll go through that four-year contract..." If this happens, "that'd take me through season 23 and technically spillover into the 24th."

More "Simpsons" factoids, gratis Jean: "'Gunsmoke' had over 600 episodes and 'Lassie' over 500; we just recorded 445. We still have a little ways to go."

BTW, no plans for a new movie, he said, and I'm pretty certain he meant it. The last one took an enormous amount of work/time, and he said that the crew'll get to the next one only after the TV show wraps once and for all.

Whenever that fateful day may come.

(Above: Homer learns he will have job through the coming Great Depression)

Sorry I've been silent most of this day, but I've been recovering from Knightrideritis, a kind of perncious adult-onset disease caused by prolonged exposure to NBC's remake of "Knight Rider" -- prolonged, in this case, meaning about four minutes or so. In any event, the reviews are in, and I'm pretty certain we haven't seen a turnout like this since "Supertrain" derailed nearly 30 years ago. Critics love this type of program because it stretches their rhetorical muscles, atrophied after years of having to watch/review comparatively superior product like (say) "Las Vegas." But this onslaught -- pile-on? -- today is remarkable. Go to metacritic.com to get a sampling -- it's fun, and you might even think of things to say about your boss (behind his or her back, of course). Meanwhile, watch "Knight" tonight -- we all need a good laugh right about now, and this newcomer is tonic from the gods.

Above: The Hoff gives thumbs-up to new "Knight Rider."
(Getty Images Photo / Michael Buckner)

My vote counted! Cloris survived to another night, to another possible obscenity-laced invective against Len! This is getting good. I wasn't surprised - this is Cloris, Frau Blucher, the lady that told Len where to get off. She got more votes - I imagine - than Lance.

I stick with my prediction, and will do so until the day he goes - which will be the finale: Lance wins this. Brooke? Yeah, fine, good, talented, a surprise, etc. But this one's Lance's.

And you do know, right, that Jeff Ross got the boot last night? I hear Clay Aiken is out too. I'm shocked, shocked, shocked, shocked...

Normally don't get into the ratings game, but the first night of the new season is worth noting: "Dancing" came out strong, with 21.1 million viewers, but...that was still down 9 percent from a year ago (per Hollywood Reporter's wrap.) What means this? I'm not sure, other than the fact that the networks have been worried that viewers left network TV during the strike and it's gonna be hard as heck getting 'em back. This seems to indicate that, though "DWTS's" numbers (like most numbers) did soften last season. Much worse news for "Heroes" on Monday, which got only 9.9 million, or down 25 percent from a year ago, for its two hour opener, which I thought was pretty good overall. Of the big guns on Monday, it looks like only "Two and a Half Men" (almost 15 million) did well, up ten percent from last year's opener.

Remember that funky contest that "Mad Men" launched a couple months or so ago? To wit: Impersonate someone on staff and you too could land a walk-on role on TV's Best Drama...

We have a winner: Justin Zell and (are you ready for this one?) he does a pretty good Joan Holloway, though I imagine Christina Hendricks may be a little put off by his multi-day facial growth and rather large meaty arms. But use your imagination here...this COULD be Joan, with a lot of make-up and a very skillful photoshop editor...

Way to go, JZ...

Yes, that's why I love live TV, too - you never know, you just never know.

Because, if you can read lips, as 25 million people did last night, they know what Cloris Leachman called Len in the season premiere. And if that wasn't enough, she laid the "s&*%$!" word onto Carrie Ann, and then Bruno got pretty much the same. This in response to VERY generous scores of (I believe) 6s.

But the s-word - you know, in French, "merde" - did sneak in without getting beeped.

Said she, translated to French, "Merde, I can't even add up those numbers..."

(She probably shoulda gotten fours. Question: What expletive would come with a four? )

Amazing, and...a "Dancing with the Stars" first!

How WAS Frau Blucher, otherwise? As pretty much you would expect, she was perfectly OK... But my fearless prediction: She will not last much beyond this week, if that, and after last night's now-legendary outburst, I'm thinking the producers are hoping that she gets the hook by tonight. What a shame if she goes. Cloris is a fun gal! She's got MY vote.

This season's winner? I stick with my original prediction: Lance Bass will win this thing. There is no doubt. He is so good, so facile, so famous, and so perfect for all the requirements of this show - notwithstanding the fact that every 'N Sync fan will of course vote for him - that it's all over, right now. Turn out the lights - although we do have to come back tonight to see what other choice descriptors Cloris will lay on us.

You go girl.

Lance and Lacey Schwimmer? I was very impressed, and I'm NEVER impressed by the first episode of this show; it tends to be arduous, if not painful. Not this one: Bass/Schwimmer came out and tore it up, and only an hour into the seventh season. Pretty impressive.

Here's a repeat (and glad to see my old friend, Phillymac25630 back...)

It's 10 p.m. (and I don't know where my children are), but good news just can't be held back - "good" if your definition of "good" is a "full season pick-up" of "90210."

Just announced. It's official. "90210" has saved the CW Network. Dawn Ostroff is a happy camper.

Here's the key graph from the presser:

"The CW’s drama “90210,” quickly becoming one of the most popular series among young women, has been picked up for a full season of episodes, it was announced today by Dawn Ostroff, President, Entertainment, The CW.

“The successful addition of ‘90210’ has taken The CW another step forward in building a cohesive schedule that defines this network as a destination for young women with shows that get our audience talking -- and watching,” Ostroff said. “We’re very excited about the chance to watch this ensemble of newcomers and familiar faces coalesce and grow together as we move forward.”

I know - BORING. But...they should be excited. "90210" - which Yours Truly declared not half bad in his review - has legs, even if they're kinda skinny ones. Next year, an Emmy?

Now, about those children...

Yes, as suspected: No one cared much that "Mad Men" was the front-runner to take home the bacon last night.

The three-hour Emmy telecast was seen by a mere 12.2 million viewers.

You know you've got problems when "America's Got Talent" regularly scores considerably higher.

I don't know how this stacks up in the history of the awards telecasts, that once upon a time, easily drew more than twenty million viewers without breaking a sweat. But I'm going to stick my neck way out here and say: This was the lowest-viewed in history.

In fact, I'm told now that it IS the lowest ever by a HAIR. Last night's number was 12.241 million, and Fox's 1990 telecast was the previous record-holder at 12.303 million. Now this could all change, albeit slightly, when the nationals come in tomorrow, but right now, it looks like we've got a world record.

Meanwhile, ABC attached this modifier to the press release, which I submit for your own perusal. My only qualification to this: It's hard to imagine people rushing home tonight saying, "boy I gotta watch the Emmys! Heard the reality hosts were great!" In fact, the Live plus 7 number will be negligible, I imagine, also because this is premiere week.

"A note about increasing DVR penetration and year-to-year rating comparisons: Year-to-year rating comparisons based on the Live + Same Day data stream are distorted by the level of DVR penetration in the Nielsen sample, which has jumped up to 27% currently, from 19% at the same point in 2007. More viewers are watching shows on their own timetables, which may not be reflected in the overnight next day numbers. The only truly valid year-to-year comparison would be one based on the Live + 7 Day metric, once those stats are released by Nielsen."

Of course, what would a post-Emmys day be without a post-Emmys awards show on TV Zone - a scurrilous and unvarnished bestowing of that which is so richly deserved unto to those who so richly deserve it. Here goes:


The "What in God's Name Were We Thinking" Citation to...The five reality show hosts. An opening so bad as to defy description, so lame as to befuddle commentary, so long as to render the meaning of time meaningless.

The Why's SHE/HE Here Award: Oprah. Every year someone turns up and their only purpose is to stop people from reaching for the remote. Oprah was in the designated role, and the poor lady was handed a script that said something about how tough times were in the the poor underpaid world of television, while hastily adding that - yeah, in the rest of the world too. Good to know.

The Dumb, Dumb, and Dumber Decision Award: To, the Academy, for refusing to allow political commentary. You ask Tom Smothers to a show to receive a special writing award, and of course, Smothers is arguably the single biggest symbol of quashed political speech there is on TV, insofar as he and Dickie were fired forty years ago for getting Bill Paley in a raging knot over the subject? And one of the reasons you're giving this award is to sorta certify that long-ago ban? And yet you tell everyone they can't say anything political? I suspect the Academy feared it'd get a Palin reference, or GWB whack, every third or so acceptance speech, culminating with a frothy-mouthed denunciation of the last eight years from Alec Baldwin. But the Emmys also usually have a self-regulating mechanism in place, in which the first anti-GWB rip meets with polite applause and modest laughter, and the second, a little less so. The third? Stony silence, meaning, "shut the hell up and get off the stage so we can get outta here." Smothers still got in his veiled - and perfectly obvious - swipe, and the audience mostly just sat on their hands. And Colbert's prune gag? That too was obvious, but got actually some laughs.

The Uh-Oh-This-Could-be-a-Long-Night Award to Jeremy Piven: Not because he didn't deserve to win, but because he DID win, once again proving at Emmy time that there's no such thing as too much awarding. Go ahead! Give the guy another statue and forget all the other poor saps who did pretty good work too. Even James Spader musta been thinking, "God, please, anybody but ME AGAIN!!!" Bryan Cranston's victory was a very pleasing reminder that sometimes surprises actually break out at the Emmys.

The "It Seemed Like a Good Idea on Paper" Award to: Josh Groban. And indeed it did, until he got to the "South Park" song and was forced to go up a couple octaves, making the rest of the routine a parody, which I guess it pretty much was. Much better to have juggled a few classics, and leave it at that. Believe me - Matt and Trey wouldn't have minded being left out.

Bryan Cranston?

Are you telling me Hal - Hal!! - just won best actor in a drama, for "Breaking Bad," which is a series on AMC that I'm pretty certain is watched by fewer people than "Mad Men?"

Hal: Nice nerdy repressed Hal, of "Malcolm in the Middle," who went on to the manufacture or crystal meth and engaged in various murderous activities, in another show entirely?

Yes, strange the ways of primetime TV. I've watched "Breaking Bad" a few times, but wouldn't come close to describing myself as conversant on "BB" - far from it. I'm still thinking Bryan Cranston is in "Mac in the Middle," which was cancelled (like) five years ago, so you can see how far I have to go to catch up.

Personally, I'm happy for Hal. (The years of abuse on "Mac.") But enough of that: Cranston's a terrific journeyman actor, who finally got his due last night, and you don't see that happen often on the Emmys. Usually it's someone the critics have designated (or whom the Emmy voters then promptly ignore.) Cranston's so far out in left field, he's up in the stands (the upper levels.) He's been an actor on this medium for more than a quarter century, with his very first credited role - a bit part - on "CHiPS" (someone named "Billy Joe") and almost a hundred parts large and small since then. Cranston's one of those actors that everyone in the business knows and respects - but few viewers (other than "Mac" fans) can place.

Last night changed all that.

AMC - which had a pretty good night too - has a series of clips on "Breaking Bad," narrated by creator Vince Gilligan; a good place to catch up on the show and its star. I've posted a couple that are worth watching, below.

Plus go to the jump to read the review of this show by my colleague Diane Werts. She was the first to come out and say just how good this guy is, and was the first and perhaps only one to (in effect) make the right call last night.

Continue reading "The Emmys: Bryan Cranston (??!!)" »

That post below about "Boston Legal?" (Fine show, that, and I hear its last season is upon us...)

Forget about it.

I was wrong, but I was also playing devil's advocate, which is another way of saying: I didn't mean any of it.

Don't you just love bloggers who are full of it?

"Man Men" won best drama at the 60th annual Primetime Emmys. "Mad Men" should have won best drama. It would have been an Emmys crime - piled upon many over the past 60 years (notably and most egregiously, at least of recent vintage, the absolute kiss-off of "The Wire," which didn't even win its one, single, solitary, little nomination last night.)

But that's another rant for another day. "Man Men" shoulda won, and just to prove to you that I've been carrying the show's water for weeks, months...here's my most recent story in Newsday on the show, just last week.

If you can stand to read one more thing about "MM" go to the jump. If not - and believe me, I understand - then I have another post coming up with third thoughts, this time about Bryan Cranston.

Continue reading "The Emmys: On Second Thought" »

The Big winner?...Read on...

We have what you've been waiting for right here: My own predictions of who/what will win this year's 60th Annual Emmys.

But first, fair warning: Do not take this list to your local bookie and place a bet; this could be right, or this could very well be wrong. I'm playing devil's advocate in a few cases here (see if you can guess which ones.) Reason? These lists from critics every season confidently predict who they'd really LIKE to win, and not necessarily who they THINK should win. The result - a yawning disconnect come awards time, a gnashing of teeth about how the Academy voters screwed up again, and so forth. I oughta know - I'm guilty of it too.

So this time, a departure: I'm gonna try to get inside the heads of voters themselves. Do I think "Mad Men" will win Best Drama tonight? Probably, but it's not what I think that matters; it's how the voters vote. Here are some alternate theories:

DRAMA SERIES:

"Boston Legal," ABC
"Damages," FX
"Dexter," Showtime
"House," Fox
"Lost," ABC
"Mad Men," AMC

(Upset! Yes, I fear "Mad Men" may not win this, for a couple reasons. It's far too low-rated, and TV's biggest awards show likes to reward shows with big numbers; hence, there's an inherent bias against "MM," even though it is the best of the field. I think the Academy is filled with a bunch of sentimental softies, and they'll wanna reward David Kelley and his last big show as it enters its last half-season, plus they love Spader, and Shatner, and..."Lost?" A magnificent season, but I really am not sure it'll pull one out here. Another strike against "Mad Men:" Producers/distributors Lions Gate and AMC; I doubt they have a lot of voting members...)

COMEDY SERIES:
"Curb Your Enthusiasm," HBO
"Entourage," HBO
"The Office," NBC
"30 Rock," NBC
"Two and a Half Men," CBS

(The Academy loves repeats and threepeast in this category...)

ACTOR, DRAMA SERIES:
Gabriel Byrne, "In Treatment"
Bryan Cranston, "Breaking Bad"
Michael C. Hall, "Dexter"
Jon Hamm, "Mad Men"
Hugh Laurie, "House"
James Spader, "Boston Legal"

(They love four-peats too, but I honestly think Spader won't walk out with a fourth one - that WOULD be embarrassing.)

ACTRESS, DRAMA SERIES:
Glenn Close, "Damages"
Sally Field, "Brothers and Sisters"
Mariska Hargitay, "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit"
Holly Hunter, "Saving Grace"
Kyra Sedgwick, "The Closer"

(Certainly my own personal fave, but don't count out Mariska!)

ACTRESS, COMEDY SERIES:
Christina Applegate, "Samantha Who?"
America Ferrera, "Ugly Betty"
Tina Fey, "30 Rock"
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, "New Adventures of Old Christine"
Mary-Louise Parker, "Weeds"

(Medical issues gets the sympathy vote; plus, she was very good.)

ACTOR, COMEDY SERIES:
Alec Baldwin, "30 Rock"
Steve Carell, "The Office"
Lee Pace, "Pushing Daisies"
Tony Shalhoub, "Monk"
Charlie Sheen, "Two and a Half Men"

(I've given up trying to figure out this category, so I'll just go with the obvious choice; I suspect the voters did as well.)

SUPPORTING ACTOR, COMEDY SERIES:
Jon Cryer, "Two and a Half Men"
Kevin Dillon, "Entourage"
Neil Patrick Harris, "How I Met Your Mother"
Jeremy Piven, "Entourage"
Rainn Wilson, "The Office"

(A great category, and I'm just spit-balling here; any of these could/should get the win, and I actually like Harris's chances a lot; I just think that tie goes to the guy who's established a precedent...)

SUPPORTING ACTOR, DRAMA SERIES:
Ted Danson, "Damages"
Michael Emerson, "Lost"
Zeljko Ivanek, "Damages"
William Shatner, "Boston Legal"
John Slattery, "Mad Men"

(Another insanely competitive category, but Shat is so beloved, and "BL" is so over, and I can't imagine him not getting it...)

SUPPORTING ACTRESS, DRAMA SERIES:
Candice Bergen, "Boston Legal"
Rachel Griffiths, "Brothers and Sisters"
Sandra Oh, "Grey's Anatomy"
Dianne Wiest, "In Treatment"
Chandra Wilson, "Grey's Anatomy"

(Honestly, Chandra was only OK, it seems to me in an OK season, but the Academy probably feels it's gotta take care of "GA" in one of the major categories; Oh had a better season, but not quite the big emotional arc that Chandra did, so...)

SUPPORTING ACTRESS, COMEDY SERIES:
Kristin Chenoweth, "Pushing Daisies"
Amy Poehler, "Saturday Night Live"
Jean Smart, "Samantha Who?"
Holland Taylor, "Two and a Half Men"
Vanessa Williams, "Ugly Betty"

(Comedy series? The Academy bent ever so slightly the rules, I imagine, to get Amy into this cat.; she had a great season, and a memorable one. Plus...it's over!)

Paula Abdul, bless her, continues to make life interesting around "American Idol." She told the audience of some radio show she was on yesterday that SiCo will cast the deciding vote in the event of a tie next season. This is not hugely surprising - he IS an executive producer, after all. But it is intriguing, because it simply means that SiCo, more than ever, will shape the cast of the show. It became a relevant issue when Kara DioGuardi was added to the judging panel. Perez Hilton has the scoop, and I quote his brief in full. See if you can catch the typo - it's a fascinating one, and I'm not sure whether it's intentional, a Freudian slip, or our newest judge has gone ahead and changed her name to something that, ahh...

Well, enough ... herewith Perez:

"Paula Abdul revealed on the Johnjay & Rich radio show Wednesday morning that in the case of a tie, Simon Cowell would have the deciding vote on American Idol. This season, the show has added a fourth judge, Kaka DioGuardi. So if the judges are split 2 to 2 - Cowell's vote will determine whether or not a contestant will make it through or not! Paula also revealed that thus far, all the people auditioning have "been terrible."

"Sunny" premieres...

Sorry...Been a long day, and just now catching up on all the important news of this day, September Eighteenth Two Thousand and Eight.

So tonight, a special treat. We give you the headlines and then we give you our quickie analysis:

HBO Re-News "True Blood"

Q.A.: HBO has nothing else going, and will re-new, after a mere two episodes, one of the worst dramas in its history. Cancel your subscriptions posthaste.

Oprah Stars on "30 Rock"

Q.A.: The beginning of the end for one of TV's really smart shows, which is now believing its own press clips about how "brilliant" it is, and what a "genius" Tina Fey is, and how Alec Baldwin is the Sir Derek Jacobi of the sitcom world. Oprah's cameo means that the shark is not only about to jump "30" but eat the whole damned enterprise. I'm inconsolable.

"Everything's Sunny in Philadelphia" Begins New Season

Q.A. Oh...My...God. The sickest show in the history of the universe. And EEEvil. Oh,yes, this show is pure evil. Do not watch it tonight. No, I'm serious. Do not watch it. A bolt of lightning will come down and destroy your TV set, or something. This episode has to do with human flesh, and raccoons, and poor Cricket. Evil, I tell you. Evil. The sickest show on TV. But also one of the funniest. (The devil's work.) I see an Oprah cameo next season.

Microsoft Denies Pulling Seinfeld Ads Because They Stink

Q.A.: Microsoft pulls the Seinfeld ads because they stink.

Bill Clinton To Pay First Visit to "The View"

Q.A.:And he won't say anything. He'll just sit there mute. Not a word. Silence. For a full hour. It'll be like pulling teeth. (Have you noticed how the ex-prez NEVER has anything to say?) He has no opinions on anything. I sure hope Babs doesn't ask him about the economy, or Hill, or Obama, or AIDS in Africa, or the situation in Georgia, or the Republican Congress, or the weather outlook in Albuquerque, because he has absolutely no opinion on anything...at all...

Awright! That should about cover it. Did I miss anything? Tomorrow: My annual Emmys predictions, which I hope will contradict conventional wisdom, but probably won't. Thanks for tuning in.

(Above: These guys are sick. Do not watch their hilarious show. It's evil.)

David Costabile.

That's right: David Costabile.

He's the father in the Seinfeld "New Family" ad, and I know all of my readers - all fifteen of you - were tearing your hair out trying to figure out who he was.

So tear no more. You have your answer. He's actually kinda funny in "New Family," and you know him from a few shows, including...

"The Wire."

He was, of course, the sneaky beady-eyed managing editor at the Baltimore Sun, who was always screwing over Gus Haynes - Clark Johnson. He was also "Doug" in "Flight of the Conchords."

Okay, kids. That's it. No more TV Zone spot quizzes today.

Jerry Seinfeld...CANCELLED??!!

Umm....I'm not sure (sorry) but you will note that today, those ads featuring him and Bill Gates will end after just two weeks of saturation bombing on an unsuspecting and entirely blameless American viewing audience.

It seems abrupt. It seems sudden. It seems like a bad thing for Jerry - but not for a few million football fans who threw empty beer cans at their sets this past weekend when "Shoe Circus" came on for the 18th time.

It seems...like...gulp...the world's most...famous...and...richest...guys....just got the hook.

At least that's what the blogosphere is exploding over.

Of course, you know those ads - the "Shoe Circus" and the "New Family." They've been everywhere, and I do mean everywhere, though football fans have REALLY been swamped with 'em on Fox, CBS, NBC and ESPN. They're supposed to be humorous, and because I'm supposed to be a TV critic, I'll offer you my expert opinion on both. Here goes:

1.) "Shoe Circus:" It stinks. A true embarrassment for two of the most prominent guys on the planet. Rome is burning. Banks are imploding. Wall Street is sinking. And Jerry's joking about his fabulous wealth and explaining why he takes a shower in his shoes, while Bill is doing a peculiar little jig on the street. These two - Gates in particular - are symbols, not mere buffoons.
Grade: D -

2.) "New Family:" Considerably better and considerably odder. (And you be the judge - plus a special bonus, see if you can guess who plays the actor in this one. He's a real veteran...) There are a couple of funny lines here, even if the conceit - two household names living with the "average American family" - is a non-sequitur. Why would Gates live in a split-level in a suburban subdivision, and what would this fish outa water discover about the average American family? Yuk, yuk. That's the whole joke, but because there's a certain Munster quality to this clan, the director (who I believe is another world-beater, Michel Gondry) nearly pulls it off.
Grade: B -

In any event....I got off the phone with Elizabeth Clark-Zoia (Jerry's longtime spokeswoman) who insists that the blogosphere buzz - that the ads were yanked because they were embarrassing to Gates and one of the world's largest corporations - is wrong. The ads, she says, were NOT "canceled," and "Jerry was contracted for three commercials and that was it. In no way are they pulling them off the air. My understanding is that [they're going] into phase two, and that was always going to happen, and we were not involved [with that] in any way."

She adds, "Jerry was very happy with them and he had a great time. He thought they were really fun."

And...Tom Pilla, general manager of corporate communications for MS told me, "Jerry was fantastic and we appreciated the value he brought to the campaign...This was the plan the entire time...These are teaser ads to start a conversation and get the buzz going which they basically did [and] very shortly we'll transition into the next phase which will be more focused on the Windows brand."

That second phase, BTW, starts today. Eva Longoria will star in one of 'em...

It's official: Rosanna Scotto, one of NY TV's best known (and most veteran) anchors is off the "10 P.M. News" at Fox 5.

And...she'll be joining Greg Kelly, the commish's son, at "GDNY."

Reasons? The usual - numbers, and they must be pretty bad at 7 ayem to make this kind of move. Jodi Applegate - current and now former holder of the "GDNY" chair and one-time possible Katie Couric replacement - is gone. Such are the ways of the TV news biz. Dari Alexander will be paired up with Ernie Anastos at 5 and 10, for the time being.

Scotto? Good Lord, a New York TV fixture surpassed only Chuck 'n Sue for longevity. At Fox 5 in this specific gig since...ready for this?....1986.

Just got off the phone with RS, who insists she's happy and excited about the move, which - she adds - is part of a lifestyle change SHE wanted to make 'cuz she has two kids (daughter in college, son highschool frosh) that she wants to spend more time with, and have a normal family life int he process. ("Normal?" In this job you have to be at the station by at LEAST five ayem...)

Says Ro, "I'm happy. I flirted with this about five years ago and I actually went into the bosses and said I would llike to get off [ten] and try my hand at ['GDNY.'] At that point it looked like it would happen, and three days before it wsa supposed to start, [they said] no we're not going to do this.'"

Everything OK with Ernie A? "We're very very good friends and we will remain good friends; I hope to continue sharing the same office with him..."

The jump has the press release...

Continue reading "Scotto off the 10" »

At least they coulda waited until sweeps. At least they coulda waited until Luke Perry actually said he might reconsider a return. At least they shoulda given this a little bit more back story - like, what really did happen to Dylan McKay after that wedding (was it a wedding? I don't entirely remember.), and how is it that he fathered a baby (let's see) five years ago, when "Beverly Hills 90210" ended EIGHT years ago, and...

I'm losing you: Dylan's the father of Kelly's kid. That was the big reveal on last night's "90210," and it wasn't such a big reveal because everyone in the world, up to and possibly including Prez Bush and certainly Sarah Palin KNEW the father was Dylan.

I mean, really? Who else could it have been? Steve? David? Ummm, Nat? Not bloodly likely.

Jennie Garth had this to say to People Mag about whether this reveal will finally finally finally convince Luke to at least make an itsy bitsy cameo on the show:

"I would love to work with Luke [Perry] again. I love him dearly. And I also would love to work with Jason [Priestley] again. It’s a great question for the producers. I would be nothing but totally happy to have either of them there."

And the answer's still...no.

One 'o these days I'll get around to posting my entirely irrelevant and meaningless choices to win this Sunday's Emmys - hey, I'm not being self-critical, merely pragmatic insofar as once again no one called me from the Academy to ask me who should win but instead went ahead with dues-paying members' choices, and as we all know, the tyranny of the crowd is always wrong - but right now, I'll give you the just-announced Tubey's.

Tubey's? They're the awards given out by Televisionwithoutpity.com every year. They're interesting because they also select the LEAST favorite, LEAST talented, MOST awful, and so on. (Worth noting that TwoP is owned by Bravo, and also worth noting that none of Bravo's worthy crop made this worst of list, but none made the "best of" either, so it all evens out in the wash, I suppose.)

Before I get to the list, the headline: Katherine Heigl was given the award for "Least favorite actress."

Apparently she forgot to call the Tubey's board beforehand to ask that they take her out of contention...

In any event, it's an ecclectic list, and voters are obviously TVaholics whose tastes tend towards the fanboy side of the spectrum. A reasonably good list, though, but honestly, I think there are even worse reality show stars than Tila Tequila, though for the moment can't think of one...

· Best New Show: "Pushing Daisies"
· Best Returning Show: "Lost"
· Best Drama: "Battlestar Galactica"
· Best Comedy: "30 Rock"
· Favorite Actor: Neil Patrick Harris, "How I Met Your Mother"
· Favorite Actress: Tina Fey, 30 Rock
· Guiltiest Pleasure: "America's Next Top Model"
· Most Anticipated New Show of 2008-09 Season: "Dollhouse"
· Worst New Show: "Living Lohan"
· Least Favorite Actor: David Caruso, "CSI: Miami"
· Least Favorite Actress: Katherine Heigl, "Grey's Anatomy"
· Worst Crime Against Fashion: Jack's beard, "Lost"
· Most Egregiously Offensive Reality Show: "The Moment of Truth"
· Most Appalling Reality TV Star: Tila Tequila
· Most Unwelcome New Character: Maya, "Heroes"

(Above: "Ms. Tequila, where would you like us to send your award?")

If ... in the amazing off-chance you awoke this morning with a hankering for a story about NBCU entertainment boy-king, Ben Silverman, who parties by night, sleeps by day, and works at turning around NBC's besotted prime-time schedule between the hours of 2:45 and 4:45 p.m. (at which point he has to leave those nice tony NBCU offices to get to another party), then have I got the one for you.

It's by Meg James of the LA Times, who does in fact get to NBCU man-king Jeff Zucker, who in fact does NOT party by night because he has to keep an eye on the store while his appointed boy-king is out chasing a leggy blonde.

(And you're asking yourself by now, How do I get a gig like Ben's?)

Anyway, it's a good piece and seems to indicate that Silverman isn't totally to blame for NBC's impending collapse in prime-time because he was told to make these deals for international productions ("Crusoe") that'll probably score very well in Croatia but perhaps a little less well in the United States. It also mentions a development deal for a show called "Zip," about a down--on-his-luck con artist that Silverman greenlit because it was brought to him by the boyfriend of his prime-time overseer, Teri Weinberg. How will that one do in Croatia?

And you're still asking yourself, How do I get a gig like this?

Sheesh. What's bugging McCain campaign apparatchik Carly Fiorina? She's having a really bad day, and it just doesn't make much sense. You, me and the rest of the spit-ball-throwing blogoverse have been having a field day with her silly and poorly rehearsed denunciation of Tina Fey's pretty darn dead-on impersonation of Sarah Palin this past weekend. (And of course, this will somehow become part of some sketch on "SNL" or something on "Daily Show" later.) It's below if you've somehow missed it.

But THIS amazing story just crossed the wire. The Boston Globe and other media are reporting that Fiorina told a St. Louis radio station that Palin couldn't run a corporation - sorta like Carly did when she ran H-P (detractors would add, into the ground...) Then, Fiorina added inscrutable insult to idiosyncratic injury by saying McCain couldn't run a major corporation either. (And neither could Obama or Biden...)

Ya know, maybe Carly should just go back to talking about Tina Fey.

I have a thought. Maybe she's mad Mc didn't pick HER to be vice president. There was some speculation about that very subject last spring, and if you don't believe me, go here for further validation.

I wonder: How would Wiigie do Fiorina?

Here's a shocker: People, as it turns out, really ARE watching "Gossip Girl." Last night's episode was seen by 3.7 million viewers, which is far far far far and away the highest number ever for the show (if I read CW's presser correctly). "GG" has been one of the mysteries of the TV landscape - a bone fide hit that nonetheless barely causes the needle to flicker in Nielsen households. Why is this so? Speculation that fans are checking it out elsewhere, mobile, TiVo - whatever. Don't ask me. I still use the ol' tube in real time mostly. Call me old-fashioned, or ancient... More from CW: "GOSSIP GIRL improved dramatically over its previous series highs (second season premiere) in women 18-34 (+30%), adults 18-34 (+22%), women 18-49 (+25%) and adults 18-49 (+18%)."

Oprah? Are you listening? It's getting to look like you'll be the last one in this conga line. Sean Hannity has Sarah Palin this week. Charlie Gibson had her last week. And now ... Katie Couric will interview her in a week and a half.

(Oh, and Brian? Are you starting to feel like chopped liver? Blame the Bickerson Boys.)

The details - which, in fact, first got out via a Page Six item this morning: Katie'll spend a couple days with Tina Fey ... err, Palin on Sept. 28 and 29, then excerpts will air that Monday, the 29th.

Additional details from the presser: "Coverage of Couric’s travels and interview with the Republican Vice Presidential nominee will include behind-the-scenes access [with] Palin Senator McCain as they campaign in battleground states.

"The interview will take place just days before the Vice Presidential debate between Palin and Senator Joe Biden in St. Louis on Thursday, October 2. Portions of the interview and extended coverage of the trip will be available across all CBS News platforms..."

I guess we'll get the press release next week saying Wolf will have Sarah. Oh wait: The McCainers have a problem with Campbell Brown, so ...

(Getty Images Photo / Frederick M. Brown)

No! Don't worry...don't worry!!! (And thank God, someone invented the exclamation mark, because I honestly don't know HOW I'd convey faux excitement intended to get get you to read this post!)

Amy Poehler is not gone yet. And hopefully, Kristen Wiig will be on "SNL" for years to come (although this being "SNL..." ) There's suddenly this rumble about Poehler's departure - thanks to a Men's Vogue story that's making the WWW rounds today, but NBC did announce her departure months ago, or around the time she became a big-screen hot ticket and after she and her husband - equally brilliant comic, Will Arnett - announced they were expecting. Baby due this fall, and since Amy won't be around the show for that, I'm guessing her last show will be in a few weeks. "SNL" isn't saying...

Meanwhile, as show boss Lorne Michaels said last week, he's trying to get Maya Rudolph back for a Michelle Obama impression (and - all together now - what Lorne wants, Lorne gets.)

The loss of Poehler? Huge. But I guess the question is: Can Target Lady or Aunt Linda replace the world's greatest Hill impersonator? In time, yes. Kristen Wiig has got it all too. It's testament to Poehler's considerable talent that some casual observers seem to forget that there's another great talent hanging around Studio 8H - someone almost equally gifted and versatile and funny. (Almost...give her time.) Wiig's a wonder, and here are just two clips of somewhat ecent vintage that come to mind (and thanks to Hulu, they're easily accessible.) They're good 'cuz they show the great ladies of "SNL" together...

Has MTV turned this...

I don't know - maybe it's in the water or zeitgeist or whatever - but MTV seems to be very much on my mind at the moment, and thanks to ever-vigilant TVtattle.com, I've stumbled across this wonderful (and sad) post from Portfolio. It's about "Real World: The Island," and it's about how cast and crew turned an island off of Panama into the Fresh Kills landfill.

May prove that...

1.) MTV really doesn't care to much about greening the planet.

2.) The show was scripted, with dialogue (surprise!)

3.) Panamanian authorities will bar future reality shows from sullying their fair land after this disaster.

I print Andrea Chalupa's enterprising post here in full (so you don't go off-site...):

MTV's Reality Show: Real Dirty?

"Turns out the "remote" island where MTV filmed its latest reality show, Real World/Road Rules Challenge: The Island, isn't so remote after all.

The program was shot on Isla Colon in Panama, home to a bustling boating community and a small airport.

In return, according to a local newspaper and blogger, the MTV production crew left behind large amounts of trash -- and not the drunken, backbiting variety of most reality TV.

"I have seen the aftermath of a tornado and this was almost as bad," Joe Maher wrote on a tree-climbing enthusiasts' website.

Maher, who runs a program in Panama for the Institute for Tropical Ecology and Conservation has a station in Bocas del Drago. That's near Starfish Beach, near where most of the filming took place.

The area was tight with security that kept curious onlookers out during production. But once MTV left, Maher and a student surveyed the area. "The place looked like a trash dump," Maher said, with evidence of felled trees, wooden structures, and pages of scripts (revealing that the reality show is actually, well, scripted).

Allene Blaker, editor of the local newspaper Bocas Breeze, wrote a direct letter to MTV in her newspaper's August issue.

"By not revealing your whereabouts last month (those were my own photos of the [MTV] bungalows on the beach), I was respecting your privacy," she wrote. "You should have the decency to respect our property."

Blaker also pleaded for MTV to send someone to "pick up all these discarded, empty plastic water bottles, please."

A spokeswoman from Bunim/Murray -- the production company of the Real World and Road Rules shows for MTV -- said that no trees were cut down for the filming of The Island, and that the pictures were taken before crews had a chance to clean up the area.

Maybe MTV can do a little carbon offsetting through their very own International Global Climate Change Campaign, Switch, to offset trashing a beach.

The site calls for ideas to help save the planet. Anyone?"

...Into THIS??!!

Don't know about you but when the news broke late yesterday that "Total Request Live" was being canceled this November, my instant reax was: "Whaa? ... 'TRL'? ... Still on?"

That's not good - if only because I'm supposed to be covering TV for a living and "TRL" was so far outa my zone of consciousness that I figured it had been put to rest years ago, along with N'Sync.

"TRL": Now that's a blast from the distant past - a late-century institution that had the buzz that "Soul Train" or "American Bandstand" musta had a half century or so before that. It was a big deal, a very big deal (and especially for anyone who tried to circumnavigate the Times Square studios in the late afternoon). Those crazy kids would come home from high school and request some boy band, and before you know it, there they were, on-screen! And Carson Daly. Almost as famous as Brit. But something happened and I haven't a clue what - other than the obvious fact that MTV hasn't been an actual MUSIC destination for years, and the disconnect between this show and MTV viewer expectations widened and widened and widened to the point where to actually admit watching "TRL" was tantamount to flagging the fact that you weren't me-bowing, or facebooking, or rockstarring, or doing whatever the hell it is crazy kids are supposed to be doing these days when they come home from school - which isn't homework, by the way.

Yup, viewership declined dramatically (under 400,000 viewers per day, or half the audience when it ruled in the late '90s) but I suspect something else was and is going on too: "TRL," like the rest of the video-based programming from the old days, was a tool for performers to sell albums, and when they discovered other more cost-efficient ways to reach their audience, then they cut "TRL" out of the mix. Big names still appeared, and still do, but "TRL" (or MTV) is hardly the center of the musical solar system any longer, and more like Pluto.

Here are some telling quotes that I lifted from the AP dispatch. They have a last-century feel to them, don't you think?

"For the finale, [MTV boss Dave] Sirulnick said he hopes to celebrate with many of the "folks who helped make `TRL' what it is -- whether that's Justin (Timberlake) and his guys in N'Sync, the Backstreet Boys, Britney, Eminem -- I think we would love to see all of them here." That includes former host Carson Daly."

In a statement, Eminem said: "I'm going to miss `TRL.' ... Where else will I be able to start feuds, defend my honor vigorously and act like an angry teenager on national TV? Oh wait ... The VMAs!"

(Pix: Mario, who starred here as well as on "DWTS." Getty Images Photo)

I've posted a review of the "SNL" opener and it's on the site now (hint: It's a rave), but you shouldn't take my word for it. Take a look at Tina Fey's return to "SNL" as Sarah Palin, and then a look at another one of my lists, following.

Meanwhile, "Today" this morning noted that the show will do another nine live broadcasts until the election; does this then mean Tina will in fact be back nine more times this season, solving a major potential headache for the show? Dunno...

Now, next!

"SNL" has gotta figure this stuff out:

1.) What happens when Poehler leaves for the baby and new career sometime this fall (Lorne said a new female cast member will be added...)?

2.) How is Lorne - AKA "Senior Persuasion" - gonna convince Tina F to come back here week after week after week, and not just at 11:35, but on Monday ayem to start practicing the new sketches, when...

3.) She's gotta 'nother job to do, and...?

4.) Who's gonna play McCain - or play him well and memorably?

5.) And Obama - memorably...?

6.) And what about Kristin Wiig...am I the only one who thinks she's one of the potential greats in this cast (no, I think many believe this; another fine night on Saturday, as deranged mom...)

7.) Why do I love lists so much?

8.) Because it's easier than writing full blog posts.

9.) Until I run out of things to say when I really, really want to get to ten.

10.) And then - voila! - it occurs to me: Yes, Kristen Wiig is a present and future star. (I love lists. Don't you?)

Barring some sort of unforeseen something, Tina Fey will return to the show that made her famous tonight to pillory, parody and prod someone who has been famous for about a week or so. You know who that is.

An AP file a little while ago pretty much confirmed that Tina, gone now a couple years or so, will indeed be back, or to use the cautious word the wire service employed, it's "likely." Of course, this won't be a full time gig, and couldn't be - she's still got that other hit to produce for her boss, Lorne Michaels. And it's certainly not the first time she's been back either (remember the "bitch is back" during the primaries?)

Fey-as-Palin is the most logical casting move on the planet, and during the conference call the other day, Lorne said that talks with her were "on-going," but also noted somewhat dolefully that newcomer Casey Wilson had also read for the part, so she could do it as well. Michaels - being the great showman that he is - also knew that anyone besides Tina would be a massive let-down, for fans, viewers, and of course critics like moi who have been expecting it.

Here's the top of the AP dispatch, which also notes that Barack Obama has canceled (he was going to show up) - no surprise there considering the devastation from Ike.

"Fey is ''likely'' to return to her former show Saturday to play the Alaskan governor and Sen. John McCain's running mate, a person close to the show told The Associated Press on Friday night. The person requested anonymity because the decision has not been announced officially. No further details were available.

Since Palin's entry onto the national political stage, speculation had been rampant over who might play Palin on the program. Many have commented that Fey resembles her.

In an interview earlier this week with The AP, ''SNL'' executive producer and creator Lorne Michaels said, ''The whole world cast her in that role.''"

Indeed it did.

Did you see that extraordinary History Channel doc last night on Nine Eleven - "102 Minutes That Changed America?" If so, you helped set a record for the channel - it was the second-highest viewed program ever on the network, with a huge 5.2 million.

If you didn't see it, no problem: The network said it'll encore the program this Sunday at 8.

Here's the quote from HC boss, Nancy DuBuc: "We are proud and overwhelmed with the reaction to the special. At History, we believe it is our responsibility as archivists of history to create a lasting document, one that can be used in ten, twenty or fifty years to communicate what it was like to live through the morning of 9/11. By using original source material, we hope we have created a unique historical record that serves as a baseline for the future generations to understand the very human emotions that move history as well as the enormous changes that took place in its aftermath."

They should be proud. It was a really fine program.

Whassa matter with this interview? The buzzzz out there seems to be that McCain got whacked on "The View" this morning, and you'll note that this vid- post (below) does note that the candidate was "ambushed." Really? What am I missing? The questions are tough-but-fair, best I can tell - even if Whoops is asking about Zoroastrianism, seriously. And also the best I can tell, Mc handles himself well, too. In fact, they throw up a nice clip showing him when he returned from Vietnam. Babs gets a little pushy, when she wonders why he just didn't walk out when the NV said he could go - I'm not entirely sure I understood the question. But he answered it, and didn't seem flustered either. So...what's the big deal? You - my friends - be the judge. Let 'er roll...

As you're doubtless aware, the chatter of the network TV news biz beyond ABC the last few days has been the Sarah Palin/Charlie Gibson interview - much of it surfeited with envy, annoyance and a grudging admission that once again (dammit) "we've screwed over by a campaign that's decided Big Media - Us! - is a convenient whipping post." NBC didn't get Palin; CBS didn't get Palin; CNN didn't; and neither did Fox - though Fox couldn't very well argue that it was being punished for some real or imagined transgression by the McCain campaign (right?)

Instead, what we've got here is a very simple situation: An untested, marginally knowledgeable, arguably unsuited vice presidential nominee who hardly needs a battery of interviews that will pry and pry and pry at each of those issues - experience, knowledge, suitability - to find some chink, some deviation from one response to the next, which would then provide the next day's lead story. Too many interviews means too many opportunities for mistakes, and "mistakes" always - always - are the grist for more stories, more controversy. So McCain kept it to just one - Charlie Gibson.

Why Charlie? There's been endless chatter about that, too, though no one seems to accept the most obvious explanation - that he is fair, and that he is prepared, and that he doesn't betray a taste for a victim's blood. Yeah, you could say the same thing about Brian but Katie? 'Nother story altogether. Why NOT chose Williams (whose audience and various venues exceed ABC's?) The obvious answer is MSNBC, along with Chris and Keith Bickerson, now thankfully divorced. McCain is hardly going to reward that network.

But I'm also thinking cosmetic: Brian is a young, good-looking guy; Charlie's her elder, a father-figure as opposed to a brother figure. On-screen, it's the same visual composite as McCain-Palin - the old guy with the young attractive woman. That accentuates Palin's youth and vitality; with Brian, she'd be another youthful face; with Katie, another attractive woman. Visually - which is what campaigns think deeply about - the Charlie/Palin combo worked best.

The interview: As expected, Charlie was respectful, if not kind. He seemed at times the professor, prodding his student for the answer he knew she must know, but really didn't. The Bush doctrine? An unintentionally hilarious moment, when the student suddenly realized the prof tossed her a question she hadn't crammed for. It was almost a Ralph Kramden hum-a-na-hum-an-a-hum-a-na moment, but she smiled, recovered, and guessed at what she thought a "doctrine" might be. Charlie patiently explained what it was, but the cat was out of the bag - she didn't know. The other answers - Russia, Georgia, Iran, Israel? She did just fine, although you got the sense that she practiced hard to pronounce the name "Saakashvili" and this beaut - "nucular weapons... given to those hands of Ahmadinejad" - is a keeper. That line about most veeps never having met heads of state? Charlie blew that one - he should have known, as a longtime Capitol Hill reporter, that that was bogus - of course many, if not most, have. Her preparedness for the presidency? Obvious question and well-asked, and I thought her answer was certainly appropriate, and certainly expected (however, I would have loved if she had parroted Letterman's line the other night, that "George W. Bush had set the bar so low that of course I can!" Hey, humor never hurt a candidate, right?)

There's a lot more of this interview, and believe me, we'll see outtakes over and over and over. But so far, neither candidate nor interviewer have done anything they'll live to regret.

(Pix: Getty Images)

Here's the first look at Charlie Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin, which'll be all over ABC's air in just about half an hour. It is (of course) the big get of the week, and in this clip, Charlie asks her about her preparedness for the job, and what she means by the words "God's plan..." Worth a look...

Here's some mini-big news followed by biggish-mini news: "SNL's" new-comer, Casey Wilson, may play Sarah Palin on this weekend's premiere... And: Maya Rudolph may come back to the show to play Michelle Obama.

That's right: Maya.

Both possibilities were floated in the conference call that Lorne Michaels just concluded, with 2008 season opening guest star, Michael Phelps. Said Lorne, "I think Casey read the part of Sarah Palin [in this week's read-throughs] and I do have someone in mind to play Michelle Obama. [The reporter pressed, who might that be?] Who? My hope was that I'd get Maya Rudolph to do that..."

That's right: Maya. OK, that's actually biggish-big news.

What else did Lorne have to say about this Saturday? Well...he did confirm that discussions are "on-going" with Tina Fey to come back and do Palin, as has been widely - WIDELY - surmised. Now, no one needs to be told that Fey/Palin would be a huge huge coup for the show and for Lorne, and because Lorne almost always gets what he wants, I'd be shocked if we didn't see Fey on stage this weekend (instead of Casey, who is very good, but still, very unknown.)

Of Tina, Lorne said: "We're sort of moving around that. We had something on Sarah Palin yesterday at the read-through, and realized that with the Charlie Gibson interview tonight that things will change again. That's the way of the world for us. If you're going to do exactly what's happened and what everyone is thinking about and talking about [right now] then it's not going to work, so it's a shifting target..."

He then said discussions with Tina were "on-going."

Lorne also sounded sort of wistful about the impending departure of Amy Poehler, while noting that a new female cast member will join the show later in the fall "probably."

"For me [the departure] is a devastation. She is just brilliant and you know I've grown to count on her a great deal in the last few years. But I'm really happy what's happening to her. We've made these transitions before, but of the people who've done the show, she's one of the great ones."

Oh sorry, almost forgot Phelps. He sounds like he's having a grand time so far, and Lorne confirmed that the world's greatest swimmer "will do just fine."

Adding: "No matter what happens [Saturday], they can't take those medals away."

(Above: Casey for Palin or Tina? Decisions, decisions...)

On Nine Eleven we're supposed to remember the day, now seven years distant, which was the point of this morning's moving ceremonies. But to what extent should we re-live it? There have been many great 9/11 documentaries, but most seem more preoccupied with understanding, if that's possible, or a compilation of what we know, or should know, or still don't know. What's so incredibly unique - and uniquely powerful - about tonight's "102 Minutes that Changed America" on the History Channel (9 p.m.) is that it eschews all of that for something far more visceral and elemental. There is no moment over these 102 minutes that plows the mind any closer to comprehension, but instead, quite the opposite. To watch is to reverse some process that we've all gone through over these last seven years - a process of grudging and painful acceptance and even partial understanding. This program is a knife that scrapes living bone and tissue. It's a hot poker in the belly. So it's entirely up to you whether to watch or not, but to watch does mean re-living the morning. Sorry, but that's a difficult decision you'll have to make on your own.

How do the filmmakers, Greg Jacobs and Jon Siskel, accomplish this feat? They've collected raw video footage (much of it amateur) from over a hundred sources, and pieced it together in a way that tracks every second from 8:48 on; they've managed this, one assumes, with the aid of time clocks, but this real-time approach almost tricks the mind into NOT knowing will come next; this pastiche would also seem to promise some sort of Rashomon effect, with a blizzard of different perspectives all adding up to the same truth. But really, the opposite takes place: Yes, everyone had a different story or a different perspective that morning, but what Jacobs and Siskel have done here is to reveal that so many people had a shared perspective as well, where all seemed fused together nearly as one.

There are many many grace notes throughout, so powerful that they will be absorbed into your memory of Nine Eleven, as they have now been into mine: Soft urgent voices in the background...a camera left on the floor, revealing only a pair of dust-covered sneakers, shuffling away...a man saying "Monday Night Football saved my life..." Firemen walking toward the lone tower, grim determination on their faces, knowing that they are going to certain death...The cloud of rolling dust, in the brilliant sunshine, about to engulf the tiny figures fleeing before it...the pigeon that just drops out of the sky...the firemen, again, kicking through piles of paper, looking at the wreckage and you knowing what they know at that exact moment...the little girl pointing and saying, "it's not there any more."

In sum, "102" is a remarkable film. You should watch, really.

Barack Obama was in the house last night - the house of Ed Sullivan - and if you missed, click on the videos below. It was a good appearance, and one of at least two TV appearances yesterday (the other with Luke Russert) in which he explained the "lipstick/pig" controversy - now pretty much revealed to be a dirty tricks sleight of hand by the McCain camp (which even "Today," per my recollection, fell for yesterday ayem.) Part two follows.

Fox seems reasonably happy with the launch of "Fringe" - 9 million total viewers, or, per Fox "the network's highest-rated drama series debut in total viewers in two years..." (Nine mil? Yeah, it doesn't seem like much to me either, but you do have to compare with other time period performers and Fox says the comparison is favorable, so...) The show'll encore this Sunday (8 to 10 p.m.), but Fox promises a couple goodies to make this repeat a little more alluring. First, there'll be an extended scene preview from "The Day the Earth Stood Still," the Keanu Reeves remake set for mid-December, though Fox didn't say how more extended it would be than the trailer that's been playing on the "DTESS" Web site. Second: Fox is previewing "24: Redemption," which of course arrives in November. Finally: The first four minutes of "Fringe's" second episode. Per my calc, this could mean that both the "24" and "DTESS" teases could run about 10 minutes each. When will they air? My hunch: The 9:30 slot.

If I'm HBO, I'm worried. Much hyped "True Blood" pretty much tanked Sunday night - too early for me to think of any lame metaphors about vampires and blood and the dismal ratings state of this newcomer (so the headline will have to do). It was seen by only 1.4 million subs on Sunday, and while - I know, I know, this isn't TV, it's HBO, and they don't pay attention to ratings, etc. - it's still a pretty bad number. What happened? I have no idea, although this review in Newsday did indicate in no uncertain terms that it's probably a good idea to skip this one. As Denise Martin in the LA Times notes, "Big Love" bowed to a 4.56 million in March 2006, "Rome" to 3.8 million in August 2005 and "Deadwood" to 5.79 million in March 2004. "Entourage" also had a soft opening this past season - only 1.6 million. What's going on with HBO, which once not so very long ago could do no wrong? It's the oldest story in TV - inertia. Once you start to slide south, you continue to slide, and it takes something short of a programming miracle to reverse that. HBO needs a hit fast - before people start saying that Showtime is the New HBO. (Or are they already?)

(Photo: Gary Friedman, LAT)

You know this, I'm sure, but "60 Minutes" - the great warhorse of news magazines - turns 40 in just a couple weeks, on Sept. 28, when the big four-oh season begins. So, I figured it was time to call Andy Rooney to get his take on the current veepee situation (how's THAT for a nonsequitur?) As it turns out, AR's working on his first essay of the season, to air the 21st, about veepees. His thoughts on Sarah Palin? "She seems fine. It was a strange choice, but I think a very good [one.] It looks better and better. She just looks right and everything she said has been good." Plus, "she's good-looking." Andy a Palinista? Not sure he'd go that far: "I don't know how hard a job begin vice president is." And he dismisses the media preoccupation with age and experience - that septuagenarian McCain will not make it, like, past the first day in office. "You're asking someone who's 88. I don't think it's that much of an issue. He's got a long way to go." What's the essay about? "We've had forty-six presidents of the United States, and if I sat down I could name all of [them], but I doubt I could l name eight vice presidents ... I'm pleased to notice that I'm open-minded about the vice president myself," he adds while noting that Palin is only the second female veepee nominee, Joe Biden is genuinely precedent-setting - "We've never had a vice president named Joe."

(Getty Images Photo)

I'm puzzled over the new NBC-iTunes deal. I'm sure it's a good deal for someone - I'm just not entirely sure for WHOM. NBC and Apple, no doubt, or they wouldn't have secured a new agreement a year after the last one cratered over circumstances both strange and inscrutable; after all, by most (let's call them superficial) measures, the deal seemed to be a great one for both companies AND offered NBC a particularly valuable metric to measure show popularity that added an extra dimension to Nielsen's basically one-dimensional portrait. I honestly wonder whether shows - great shows - like "Heroes" or "The Office" would even still be on the air without the iTunes kick ("Office," as you're probably aware, was the "Friends" and "Seinfeld" all rolled into one of the iTunes TV universe.)

And then - kaput. NBC wanted more kickback, dollarwise, from Apple, which resisted. The plug was pulled. And now, the deal's back on track.

But here's why I am puzzled: Is it all a little too late? Hulu.com, after all, offers a pretty rich mix of NBC products right now, and of course it's all for free. The new iTunes deal still requires pay-for-play, and the key advantage (if I've got this right) is that you can buy an episode immediately and not wait days for the Hulu play-back; plus, you've got it on your hard drive forever. Whatever...but who really wants a TV show on their hard drive forever?

Here's the nut graph from the NBC presser, with pertinent details:

"Apple® and NBC Universal today announced the return of NBC programming to the iTunes® Store (www.iTunes.com) including NBC networks' top 10 series available immediately for purchase and download in both standard definition and stunning high definition. iTunes customers can choose programming from NBC, USA Network, SCI FI Channel, Bravo, Sleuth and NBC News including favorites such as the award-winning and critically acclaimed "Heroes,” and the Emmy award-winning programs "The Office,” "Battlestar Galactica” and "30 Rock.” NBCU standard definition television shows on the iTunes Store are $1.99 per episode and HD programs are available for just one dollar more at $2.99 per episode and select library content is available for $.99. Additional NBCU programming from Oxygen, Telemundo, Mun2 and NBC Sports will be available on iTunes soon. "

I can wait.

(Spooky pix courtesy AppleGazette.com)

No one ever has accused us here at TV Zone of being predictable - or rational, or logical, or... Here is where you get the news that matters - like the fact that "Yo Gabba Gabba!" will return to Nick Jr. on Sept. 22.

Huh? "Yo Gabbawa?" Good questions: This is a show for pre-schoolers about to enter its second season, but during the first season, the mainstream media discovered that some adults watched this show while inhaling cannabis. That's right - it's a head show. I can't begin to understand why, although if you watch the promo from last season (below), it may provide some clues...

Meanwhile, this list of guest stars could provide additional insight into why Cheech Marin has been TiVoing this show since inception: Jack Black, Melora Hardin (The Office), The Ting Tings (“Shut Up and Let Me Go”), The Roots, Andy Samberg (SNL), Jack McBrayer (30 Rock), Amy Sedaris (Strangers with Candy), MGMT, Rachel Dratch (SNL), Paul Scheer (30 Rock), Sal Masekela (E!’s Daily 10), Amare Stoudemire (Phoenix Suns), Jimmy Eat World (“The Middle”), Chromeo, Paul Williams (“Rainbow Connection”), Mates of State, Mix Master Mike (Beastie Boys), Ladytron, Datarock and Money Mark.

ABC News just released a few additional details on the big Charles Gibson/Sarah Palin debriefing - the only major network interview the McCain campaign's agreed to. The headlline: Outtakes of the interview will be EVERYWHERE on ABC Thursday and Friday.

Says ABC, "The first excerpts will air on Thursday’s 'World News with Charles Gibson' and 'Nightline,' followed by 'Good Morning America,' 'World News,' '20/20' and 'Nightline' on Friday. Additional portions will air across ABC News’ platforms, including ABC News Radio, ABC News NOW, ABCNEWS.com, and ABC NewsOne beginning Thursday."

The interview is, of course, a big deal and not for exclusivity reasons alone; Palin remains a cipher to most and Oprah's refusal to even have her on her show until after the election has even made the entire process a controversial one. Gibson - handed one of the biggest scoops of his career- has already been made out to be a patsy in some corners of the all-knowing-all-seeing blogosphere (Josh Marshall of "TPM" has declaimed that it will be "unwatchable.")

My sense: It'll be fine. Gibson's actually a pretty good interviewer - fair, down the middle, no tricky questions. He can be a softie, too - some of the interviews with Hillary during the campaign were marshmallows, but some were not. In any event, viewers'll know a lot more about the woman from Wasilla by Friday than they do now...

Another thing to keep in mind: This interview will fall on Sept. 11, and I'm sure the coincidence hasn't escaped the notice of the Mc Campaign, which perhaps even orchestrated the timing. Knowing Charlie's in Alaska through the middle of this week for the interview, they had to know that outtakes would air on Nine Eleven. Why important? Because Palin automatically now becomes allied with one of the most important dates in modern history in the eyes and minds of viewers.

As all you mediologists now know, MSNBC leaked to their partner, the New York Times, over the weekend that it was gonna remove its unintentionally hilarious anchor duo, Keith and Chris Bickerson, in favor of David Gregory for the balance of this election year. But I've now learned that the BEST way to get news about MS or CNN is via Fox News - which has never been accused of bias of any sort, and always gives the news straight up without any gloating whatsoever or any editorial asides that might betray how they feel about something.

Watch this clip from "Fox & Friends" and see how the fair-and-balanced pros do it...* I can hardly wait for "Talking Points" tonight...

( * Yes, there was one instance a couple months ago when "F&F;" photoshopped a couple of Timesmen into simians, but I like to think of that as an anomaly.)

We need more stars like Alec Baldwin around - stars that talk about their preference for Mahler (but don't understand Mozart), stars who ruminate obsessively on the meaning of their life, and what they should do next, etc.

But especially stars with Kateheiglitis - a brazen form of outspokenness in which the afflicted castigates the most unlikely of targets, namely those he or she works with on TV shows. Baldwin, of course, has a variation of this - he butt-kicked "30 Rock" lead-in "My Name is Earl" and NBC in that New Yorker profile, as opposed to his own show's writers. It's hard to cure this ailment, and even when you do sort of make amends for what you said earlier, a little bit of it still comes back to haunt you in the apology...

Take for example his apology in today's Huffpo, where he concludes with this "oh and by the way" aside:

"PS: My apologies to the cast and crews of My Name Is Earl and Scrubs. In my frustration with NBC's reprehensible promotion of 30 Rock, I took an unfortunate swipe at both of those shows and that was not cool.

But, for Earl's creator, Greg Garcia, who referred to me as a 'psychotic,' I have only one question. Why are you Scientologists always rendering these medical opinions you aren't qualified to give?"

Now Alec, you wouldn't be talking about one world-famous actor who's appeared in movies with the initials "M:I" and who is married to someone who used to be in a show with the initials "D.C." and who likes to jump on couches and tell Matt Lauer that he's a smug jerk who doesn't know anything about psychoanalysis?

Because if you ARE referring to this person, then you've picked a whole brand new fight and may need to issue another apology!

That's the problem with kateheiglitis. You never know how it's gonna break out...(But it IS a fun spectator sport...)

Meanwhile, Garcia - who actually seems like a pretty good guy, and down to earth, at least by California standards (he worked the cash register in a Burger King during the writers' strike) - is laughing the whole thing off. He says he isn't even a Scientologist. Oops.

(Photo: Nicole Rivelli/NBC)

We here at TV Zone have an old saying - when you get four hundred and eighty four comments on a single post (when we usually average around zero) it's time to do another post on the same subject. And so here I go again. Of course, last Friday I chided the Drudge Report for milking the Oprah/Palin controversy for all it was worth, and I stand here now accused of the same.

And guilty as charged.

But clearly this has "hit a nerve," to use the old cliche, and I'm left wondering: Why? Many of the comments on Friday's post seem to get close to the answer (and when I gotta minute, will address some in the jump, below): That this is about OPRAH, and a newcomer to our national political stage, and the power of media, and the resonance of long-standing and long-rancorous debates over women in the workplace, and the balancing act of motherhood, and race.

Of the latter I was particularity struck by some commentators who averred that Oprah's refusal to have Sarah Palin on her show was in fact "racist," and that the talk host was herself racist. It's almost beneath my dignity or anyone else's to address those, but I will try. I've written about Oprah Winfrey for twenty years, at least. I've known dozens - dozens - of people who know her, worked with her, and even one or two who once hired her. I've watched her show hundreds of times - hundreds - and sometimes, oftentimes, liked what I've seen, and occasionally think it can be silly twaddle too. I - and so have you - have seen her change her look, her style, her weight, her hair and her entire life in the process. I've read the wit and wisdom of Oprah (one of Bill Adler's many books.) I've seen many of her movies and TV productions. I've written about and reviewed some of them, too.

I think I know Oprah, and Oprah is no racist. She has her faults - who doesn't? - but she also has a superhuman empathy and a fundamental decency that has never, not once, cracked over all these years or made me regret my support. She is the antithesis of a racist, which is: A decent, good person with an open heart, who welcomes anyone of any race or creed on her show, and always has. She's a credit to American television and in fact American culture. We're lucky to have her.

I thought it important to say this just so you know exactly where I stand.

But I also think she's being foolish with her No Palin stand. Now to my ten reasons. You may see repeats here, or variations on the original five, but frankly my dears, I don't give a damn. I'm exploiting this topic for all it's worth, and if I have to repeat myself in the process, than so be it.

I stand by my original premise: Oprah should have Gov. Sarah Palin on her show, and the sooner the better.

Ten more reasons why:

1.) This could help Obama win. That's right, O. Since you've become the fifth wheel of the Obama campaign, this is something to consider. How? Simply because many long-time O supporters - including Hillary fans - have decided you're in the bag for him, and will therefore censor contrarian viewpoints on your show. By having Palin on demonstrates you're above this criticism - that you have nothing to hide, and that your show is indeed a big tent for many viewpoints. That only helps Obama.

2.) You're bigger than mere politics! You're Oprah! Not Judge Judy. You're bigger than the small and grubby concerns of everyday life of a TV show, which is a perishable commodity anyway. Rise above it. Lead your viewers to the promised land, if you really believe you know the way. Debriefing Palin reveals not only your inherent fairness, but inherent decency as well.

3.) This is the show to set the record straight. Yeah sure, Charlie Gibson will interview her later this week, but a news interview with Gibson is ultimately one dimensional (he'll ask the questions, with his glasses tipped on the bridge of his nose, and peer avuncularly at her), but the combination of Oprah, and the Tom-Cruise-damaged couch and a studio audience is intoxicating; it adds another dimension, a more human one.

4.) You won't feel like an ass when Barbara interviews her, and gets her to tear up when she's talking about Trigg or Bristol. Whether you realize it or not, O, or chose not to realize it, you're in direct competition with Babs for agenda-setting interviews like this.

5.) This is woman to woman, as only O can do it. Oprah at her best gets into the head of the interviewee - that's her empathy at work. O and the rest of the audience will go places that Gibson or Brian Williams could never possibly go. You, O, can talk about children and one of the most incendiary topics in American life - pro-life or pro-choice - because these are issues YOU'RE intimately familiar with; the big anchordudes are not.

6.) This is about your legacy, to some small degree - to establish that you're a serious person, and not just the lady who gives away her favorite things every Christmas. You're a world-beater, the woman who knows Nelson Mandela, the woman who HAS interviewed presidents, the woman who HAS had a massive and indelible impact on race relations in the United States.

7.) I mentioned that O had disenfranchised McCain supporters with her Obamapalooza tour. What about Hill supporters? I suspect THEY want to see you have the moxie and honesty to interview this lady, and maybe ask about Hill. Many of them may not vote for McCain, but they do vote with their remotes, and this may be a way to get them to watch your show again.

8.) No worries about equal time. You have, O, a cake-and-eat-it-too gig; you're not a news program that has to worry about the provision of equal time; you won't HAVE to get on crackpot candidates afterward just because they insist they deserve equal time. This is an entertainment enterprise, not a news one.

9.) Palin represents what so many of your viewers are interested in - women in charge, the compromises they make or fear they have to make to get power, motherhood, and (of course) she has a special needs child too.

10.) You're a newswoman at heart, O, and people really do need to know more about this woman - what DOES she think about the bailout of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? What ARE her feelings about race and gender equality? Sure, she could answer these questions in a news interview, but in a good Oprah interview, Palin'd also have to offer an emotional dimension to her answers, not just the rote answer that the McCain campaign has taught her to answer.

OK, those are my fifteen reasons. I believe this is an open-and-shut case. O, it's your move now.

Chicago Tribune photo by José M. Osorio

Well, I suppose the big flap of the moment has to do with Oprah and Drudge; she claims some report he filed today is bogus, and even went so far as to issue a denial; it's no big deal, really, though Drudge (as usual) is pumping this for all it's worth. The post claim: that Oprah's staff is divided on whether she should have Sarah Palin as a guest, with Oprah insisting that she shouldn't come on.

Plus, if you're coming to this post for the first time, I've now got ten more reasons for why this interview should take place - for a total of fifteen. Click this link to see what they are.

O went so far as to issue a denial, and she does that very very rarely - in fact, I can't even remember an instance when she has. "The item in today's Drudge Report is categorically untrue. There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over."

Now, let me just give you the benefit of my expertise on Oprah: There's no such thing as a "divided" staff out there in Chicago. She is the Queen. They are her subjects. There are no disputes with the Queen, and that is that.

But Oprah's also in the bag for Obama and has made no secret of that either; said she, for example of his recent speech, "What I saw with Barack Obama was something that was transcendent and I felt transformational for me as a human being and for this country. And I only pray in the deepest part of my being that America will rise to this moment. And I feel that what he was able to offer us as individual citizens and as a united country was something that we have never seen before. I really, I think it's the most powerful thing I've ever experienced."

Fine, now, here are five reasons why O should have Palin on:

1.) To talk about motherhood, her family and Bristol; if you're really hung up on politics, O, then this doesn't have to be a "political" debriefing at all, per se, but a larger look at even more important issues, which your show claims to care about.

2.) It'd get a huge number. Hell yeah! Perhaps one of the biggest numbers in "O" history. This is a mercenary business, O, in case you've forgotten.

3.) It'd get the show back to that sweet spot of "relevance" and "news-worthiness." Wonderful to have all 150-or-so Olympians on Monday's season premiere, but the Olympics are old news; Palin is fresh news.

4.) Of course, it's O's right to support Obama in whatever forum she chooses, but she's simply too transcendent - her word - a cultural figure to pretend she's lil' ol' objective and non-political Oprah on her show, and yet Obama's most important supporter in the WORLD when she's not on screen. That's a silly artifice, transparent to all. Why not get Palin on and say, "OK, lady, I happen to think this guy walks on water. Now you tell me why he doesn't, and let's go at this." That would be great TV, and far better than a dreary debate between Palin and Joe Biden.

5.) O helped secure at least a million additional votes for Obama but probably lost hundreds of thousands of McCain supporter-viewers - if not more - to her show in the process. Here's her chance to say to everyone, "I have a right to support whomever I choose, and now to prove to you just how open-minded I am, here's the gun-toting mama from Alaska on the show."

(Photo: Associated Press)

This just in: Nielsen says the Beijing Olympics were the most watched TV event ever ever ever - in the history of the planet ever. The number: 4.7 billion. (Which is 4 billion, 695 million more than watched the premiere of "90210.")

The presser: "From August 8 - 24, 4.7 billion viewers — or 70% of the world’s population — tuned in to watch the Games, according to Nielsen. In comparison, 3.9 billion watched the 2004 Athens Games, while 3.6 billion followed the 2000 Sydney Games on TV.

Host nation China led the viewing with 94% of Chinese viewers tuning in to the Olympics TV coverage, Nielsen reported. South Korea, though a much less populous nation [Nielsen added somewhat redundantly] also recorded 94% audience reach. Mexico followed closely with 93% of all viewers in that country following the Olympics on TV.

In the U.S., the Summer Games ranked as the most-viewed TV event ever, with a total audience of 211 million and an average daily audience of 27 million people."

In my on-going efforts to help promote this Sunday's VMAs, I've got a little bit more news (announced late yesterday) and speculation. You of course know who's opening the show, right? It's Britney...ummm, witch. And Kanye is back too - Kanye, who said he'd never return (but when he heard that Brit wasn't singing said, "hey, what the hell! I'm in!") Also, Christina Aguilera will do "Genie in a Bottle" (which is a pretty old song, I believe.) And let's see... Pete Wentz, Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt appear (no singing.) Katy Perry sings "Like a Virgin." The Jonas Brothers are here too.

What will Brit do? I'm assuming it must have something to do with an elephant. Watch if you haven't already this promo that she did with host and MC, Russell Brand. I think this pachyderm has promise...

With Alaska so much in the news these days, we thought we’d take a look at five TV series that have been set in the 49th state. (And we’re not yet counting “Terminator: The Sarah Palin Chronicles,” which undoubtedly will be proposed soon to the networks.)

THE ALASKANS (ABC, 1959-60) — A decade and a half before he played James Bond, Roger Moore starred in this drama set in 1890s Skagway as an adventurer/con man looking for action in the Klondike Gold Rush.

KLONDIKE (NBC, 1960-61) — Another Klondike Gold Rush adventure, this one starring James Coburn as a gambler and scoundrel.

NORTHERN EXPOSURE (CBS, 1990-95) — Classic fish-out-of-water story about a transplanted New York doctor (Rob Morrow) living in the fictional town of Cicely, Alaska.

DEADLIEST CATCH (Discovery, 2005--) — Popular reality series that documents events aboard fishing boats in the Bering Sea during the Alaskan king crab and Opilio crab fishing seasons.

MEN IN TREES (ABC, 2006-08) — Another fish-out-of-water tale, this one focusing on about a New York “relationship coach” (Ann Heche) living the fictional Elmo, Alaska.

BONUS: TOUGHER IN ALASKA (History, 2008) — Geo Beach hosted this reality show demonstrating how living in Alaska is just plain harder than it is in the Lower 48.

KODIAK (ABC, 1974) -- One-month series starring Clint Walker as a member of the Alaska State Patrol.

AP photo of Sarah Palin

Hmmm...let's see...Which names of the 2009 crew of "Celebrity Apprentice," bowing early next year, haven't yet leaked out?

Here are two more names - Jesse James of "Monster Garage" and...Clint Black...(Question: Isn't JJ married to Sandra Bullock? Maybe she'll...)

Here's a third name...

Tom Green.

Tom Green?

Yes, Tom Green.

Now, you're thinking. Why would Tom Green do this? (Or maybe you're thinking - who is Tom Green...) There must be many many reasons, all of them financial. But here's a small world alert. Did you know that TG was on the early iteration of "America's Got Talent" couple years ago and (of course you know that) Piers Morgan won the first season of "Celeb Apprentice?"

I dug up Green's performance on that edition - hey, I can google with the best of 'em - and let's just say it was one hot appearance...

What can I say about Bill Melendez that hasn't already been said in numerous and very good obits in the papers today? Melendez has died - he was 91 - and I'd like to think he died with a smile on his face. In the years I've covered this business, I don't think I ever met anyone who seemed to radiate happiness as effortlessly as Bill. He was a wonder - to this industry, and to the culture at large,and seemed to enjoy every moment spent on this planet. "Peanuts" fans of course know the name well, because Melendez did help author some of the treasures of American television, notably 1965's "A Charlie Brown Christmas." Melendez' first animation credit was in 1941 - 1941! - and his last was just two years ago. I was terrifically lucky to have met Melendez some years ago, and that meeting yielded a column which I have posted on the jump. A happy man who helped make the world a happier place...

Continue reading "Bill Melendez" »

Last time we heard from Anthony Edwards, he was heading out the door on a year-long trip with his family that would take him hither and yon, far from the madding crowds of TV or "ER," where he made his name and fame. Now he's back, for one episode only: NBC just announced - or I should say, confirmed an earlier TV Guide story - that Edwards will be back in some sort of flashback sequence on Nov. 13. Here's the presser details:

He'll "reprise his role as Dr. Mark Greene for one episode of NBC's long running show "ER" (Thursdays, 10-11 p.m. ET/PT). Edwards will return in the episode entitled "Heal Thyself," which was written and directed by executive producer David Zabel, and will air on November 13, 2008.

The installment will feature Dr. Greene in a series of newly shot scenes that will feature other characters from the show's past while also giving insight into Dr. Banfield's (Angela Bassett) past and her experiences within the walls of County General.

"We had hoped to bring back some of "ER's" stars for the final season and think that our loyal fans will enjoy seeing some of the shows most beloved and memorable characters," said executive producer John Wells. Edwards first appeared in the "ER" pilot and after nearly eight memorable seasons, completed his run in a highly rated episode at the end of the 2001-02 television season. "

I am struck by the phrase "had hoped..." by Wells. Clearly they wanted to get George Clooney back too, but Mister I'm Too Important for TV said no (so far.) Personally, I can't figure Clooney out...One quick shot! One little promotable cameo. SOMETHING. What's the harm in that? This show made him. Where's the gratitude? But Edwards - to my mind - was the life force of this show for many many years; he was brilliant during his run, and Greene effectively defined the show for almost six seasons.

But he's not the only one...who else should return? Here's just a partial list (and since "death" is no excuse, Dr. Romano - Paul McCrane - is on this list too...): Sherry Stringfield...Noah Wyle ...Eriq La Salle...William Macy...Michael Michelle....Ming-Na...and of course Laura Innes...

I'm sure I'm missing someone...Positive I am.

Now, since you've read this far, you are clearly an "ER" fan. So, here's TVZone's Very Special "ER" trivia quiz: Who's been on "ER" since day one, over a decade and a half ago...Go to the jump for the answer...

Continue reading "Edwards, Back to "ER" for One Day" »

What a month for Ed McMahon and it's - what? - only four days in. First (last month) he's saved from home eviction by Donald Trump who stepped forward to buy his LA mansion and keep him in it. Then, a mystery buyer stepped forward, bested DT's offer, and the bank, Countrywide, took that one instead.

Then, yesterday - poof! The mystery buyer's deal collapsed, and suddenly, just like that, Ed McMahon was facing the repo man again.

And now the update: I just got off the phone with Michael Cohen, executive veep of the Trump Organization and special counsel to Trumpster, who said that "Mr. Trump remains committed to acquiring the McMahon property and to permitting Ed McMahon to remain on the property for a period to be determined by the two of them. The difficult part is that there are a multiple number of lenders. We are currently working through the lenders through Mr. McMahon's broker...and feel confident that Mr. Trump will ultimately end up with the property."

He added that it's "Mr. Trump's fervent desire to acquire the property and ensure that Ed McMahon remains in his home." Asking price was $4.6 million.

Why is the Donald doing this? My own read? There's a generous side to the guy - remember the time he bought the mortgage of someone who helped him on the Garden State Parkway? (The limo had broken down...) Yeah, it's not bad PR either, but I don't think Trumpster needs good, bad or indifferent PR. He's doing just fine, (and so is "Celeb Apprentice.")

Ed? He's one of the good guys of TV - not to mention a legendary one. So good for Donald - and Ed too.

I guess this is the biggest deal of the entire year - Britney Spears back at the VMAs this Sunday. Give us more, Brit. Give us MORE MORE MORE!!!!!!

But, she's gonna give us something less...or something that doesn't come close to the performance art of 2007. Here's her statement, released earlier: "MTV has long played an important role in my career. How can I not be there to kick off their 25th VMAs? I'm excited to open the entire show, to say hi to my fans and to be nominated."

I'm excited too. Here's MTV's generous wrap of her many memorable appearances, going back to (like) the 20th century.

And here's the press release...

And...here's MTV boss Van Toffler to the AP, plus additional details from the AP wrap: "I think for Britney, people are rooting for her, and she's really on the road to recovery," Toffler said, noting that MTV had nominated her for three VMAs, including video of the year, for her clip "Piece of Me." "It feels like it's her year," he added. "It's our 25th anniversary of the VMAs, and she's been such a critical piece of MTV's history." Van told the AP that her opener will be "fun and unexpected."

And finally finally finally, what would any Brit/VMA post be without a clip of last year's performance...?

And speaking of Steven Bochco, and his sudden new TNT hit, "Raising the Bar" (see post below about "90210") - which was seen by nearly 8 MILLION viewers on its Monday debut - I'm suddenly reminded of a piece I did on him exactly a year ago, give or take a coupla weeks or so. Went out to see him at his Santa Barbara office just as he was ending a long, lucrative and suddenly - very bitter - relationship with ABC. He was also just in the middle of the umpteenth re-write of David Feige's drama about public defenders - based on Feige's own account - in the Bronx. He was loving the process and was energized, but he was also reflective, and I got the sense that if the Feige thing didn't fly, what the hell! He'd head off into the sunset and do something entirely different. He definitely had no plans to go back to the networks, and hadn't just dynamited the bridge back to ABC but dropped a 10-megaton bomb on it.

In any event, go to the jump if you wanna read the piece I did for Newsday on Bochco. Interesting guy...very interesting....

Continue reading "Bochco: Riding High Again" »

All that press! All that hype! All that EVERYTHING!!!

You'd think people would tune in just to see what all the hyperventilating was about, and they did.

A total of 4.9 million watched the two-hour premiere last night, which is a good number, but not a great number - and I wouldn't be shocked, shocked, if the launch of "Model" tonight hits four million plus too.

Another factoid to keep in mind: Nearly 8 MILLION tuned in to Steven Bochco's much much MUCH less hyped "Raising the Bar" on TNT. How un-hyped was that show? I do believe Your's Truly was the only one who wrote anything on it when Bochco was first working on it, and was also the only one who actually gave it a good review. (Pretty much the entire critical community held its nose.) But I digress,,,

Why didn't "90210" do better? Beats me. I've given up trying to figure this stuff out...

But "90210" did very well among the viewers CW wanted for this; here are the relevant quotes/numbers from the hot-off-the-presses release:

The show was "the highest rated telecast of any scripted show EVER for The CW among adults 18-34 (3.0/9), women 18-34 (4.3/12), adults 18-49 (2.6/7) and women 18-49 (3.6/9), according to preliminary live plus same day Nielsen ratings for Tuesday, Sept. 2, 2008. Encore of 90210 debut airs tomorrow, Sept. 4 (8:00-10:00p.m. ET)

"On the strength of the two-hour 90210, The CW was the #1 network on Tuesday night in all key demographics, including adults 18-34 (3.0/9), women 18-34 (4.3/12), men 18-34 (1.8/6), adults 18-49 (2.6/7), women 18-49 (3.6/9), persons 12-34 (2.7/8), females 12-34 (3.7/11), teens (1.7/6), female teens (2.1/7).

Remember that scene waaaaay back during the NH primaries, when Bill O got into some sort of shoving or shouting (or both! Hey, it's Bill!!) with someone while he was trying to get close to Barack Obama? Anyway, O'Reilly finally got to Obama, and asked him on the show; Obama said, sure, and that was that. Well, finally, the interview: Fox News Channel just now officially confirmed that this will happen this Thursday, a couple hours before John McCain speaks. Here's the presser from FNC:

"Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly will sit down for a one-on-one interview with Democratic Presidential nominee Senator Barack Obama on Thursday September 4th in York, Pennsylvania. Part one of the interview will be presented on The O’Reilly Factor at 8:00pm ET that evening with additional parts following in the days thereafter.

"O’Reilly will address a variety of topics including Obama’s political career, domestic issues and foreign policy in Iran and Iraq. The interview marks Senator Obama’s first appearance on The O’Reilly Factor..."

The Lettermanologists among us have already been hotly debating the meaning of those words dear old Dave uttered during a highly unusual interview with Rolling Stone, out this Friday. There's been a tsunami of press on it, so I'm not telling you anything new here (DL doesn't understand why NBC is pushing out Leno, or words to that effect; I've posted outtakes of the interview that I ripped off from RS's Web site on the jump...)

But here are the words that are most interesting, and I quote in full:

"The way I feel now, I would like to go beyond 2010, not much beyond, but you know, enough to go beyond. You always like to be able to excuse yourself on your own terms. If the network is happy with that, great. If they wanna make a change in 2010, you know, I'm fine with that, too."

What does all this mean? What would Herr Doctor Freud say? Hmmmm ...

Now, let's parse the meaning of "beyond." Dave'll be just 62 in 2010, but turn 63 in April of that year. No big deal. So I hardly think age is an issue, nor do I think show quality is. I can't say I watch every night (though I used to), but can say that when I do, "Late Show" is as good as ever, and same with Dave. So what could be the meaning of "beyond" in Dave's head. Here are some possible explanations:

1.) DL, CBS and everyone else rightfully assumes the game will change dramatically when JL leaves "Tonight;" DL, CBS and everyone else (perhaps) also rightfully assumes that Conan O won't have the same broad appeal of JL, which means the playing field could be evened. Why not stay longer and finally, finally, thank God Almighty, FINALLY, beat "Tonight Show" and teach those troglodytes who picked JL over DL a lesson once and for all?

2.) I'm assuming - and always do - that the Carson yardstick is embedded in Letterman's head. JC was 66 when he left "Tonight," so could that mean DL thinks - consciously or subconsciously - that he could go another three years?

3.) Dave is afraid of death! Aren't we all? But his father died at age 57, and mortality stalks Letterman. I'm not being melodramatic here, but I do believe DL worries about this a lot, and do believe he worries about his kid, and do believe he's one of those people who need to work to stay alive. DL's a workaholic, or was - I can't believe that age has mellowed this aspect of him. He's driven and he can't stop driving himself, and won't.

4.) Letterman has nothing to do beyond work. Does the guy have hobbies? Does he play golf or windsurf? Does he ride with the hounds? No, no and no. JC had tennis; DL has zippo. Honestly, I don't think there is a single thing Dave does beyond work. He sits and stares at a wall, waiting for Monday to roll around. Retirement for him would be hell.

5.) He worries about his staff. Like Leno, Letterman's fundamentally a decent guy. Oh yeah, he used to scream and abuse; he could be a nasty bastard when he wanted to be. But he's a good guy, all the same. He's unbelievably loyal to his staff, and vice versa. It's a cult over there at the Ed Sullivan, and they've followed Dave to the ends of the earth, and he will follow them. To quit now, or let's say two years from now, means abandoning THEM. That'd kill DL too.

6.) Symmetry! Like all workaholic obsessive-compulsives, DL loves the idea of symmetry, and balance. How jarring to leave in 2010, or after 17 years at CBS! "Twenty" has a much nicer feel to it; 20 years ... ahhh, 20 ... That'd be 2013, when Dave would be 66. Ah yes, the same age as Carson. Hmmm ...

Herr Doctor Freud says: Expect Dave to re-up for three more years after 2010.

Dave Letterman (Getty Images / Bryan Bedder)

Continue reading "Letterman: How Much "Beyond" is "Beyond"?" »

How's that for an endorsement? Really: Not a disaster. And it wasn't. Of course, there will be some critics out there, some viewers, too, who'll grouse that "it's not as good as the original," or "it's lame," or "it's cliched," or whatever. We have it in our genes: We are simply predisposed to hate that which is not what we want it to be or thought it would be or long ago decided what it should be. Me? I thought it would be utterly silly tripe, and when it displayed just the slightest heartbeat, the slightest sense of intelligence, and shrewdness, I figured: Hey, this'll actually work, and it did. Here's my review, if you care to read, and in the cold cruel light of morning, I wouldn't change it. I'm not entirely sure the adult storylines work - teens who watch will just be turned off, or see the Harry/Debbie Wilson story as a drag - little or big roadblocks en route to the stories they do care about. (Josh Schwartz somehow managed to fold the Sandy/Kirsten Cohen storylines into "The O.C." without too much trouble, but the Wilsons still don't feel quite right here; I'm not entirely sure why.)

In any event ... CW needed to do one thing last night. It needed to mount a show without destroying it in the process. I did just that. Will this thing last ten years? The larger question: Will the CW?

("Ari? Yeah, Ben. Lunch? Gotta talk about Vince...Drama too.")

Everybody has been, will be, should be talking about this incredible post on Deadlinehollywood.com this morning, via Nikki Finke who - I submit - really really doesn't like Ben Silverman, NBCU entertainment boss. It's amazing for what it says about stuff that everyone in this business always seems to be talking about but rarely seems to write because (perhaps) they don't want to pay a libel lawyer a thousand per hour. (Unless, of course, it's accurate, in which case, nothing to worry about.) Amazing...and this post predicts that Ben's remaining days at NBC can now be counted in double-digits, if not single-digits.

Coincidentally....Ben has a reasonably amusing cameo on this season's "Entourage." It's one of those blink-and-you'll-miss-it deals, where he utters just this one line - "A &*%$#@ waste of time." It's appropriate to the moment, and involves Drama's refusal to get photographed from his right side for a poster shot for "Five Towns" (and how he later stages a quick escape from his trailer before Silverman forces him to get photographed from the right side.) I don't know if Silverman can act, but if this NBC thing doesn't work out, as Nikki predicts, then why not a full-fledged role on "Entourage." Rather than FIRE Drama, he can PARTY with Drama. Per Nikki, he's already well-practiced in this role.

Did you watch last night's "Deal or No Deal?" If no, then history passed you by! Howie Mandel - after what seems like a decade of broken dreams and missed opportunities and concerted efforts by NBC to keep million dollar checks out of the hands of contestants for reasons that are pretty much self-evident - finally crowned a millionaire.

Finally.

And just in time for the start of the new season and the launch of the new daily syndicated series! Amazing the coincidence.

After 246 episodes, "Fifteen contestants have had the million dollars in their case but never had the guts to go all the way...until now." That's the line from NBC this morning. Our winner: Jessica Robinson. (Not everyone was thrilled with the news, and even earned a "jeers" from TV Guide, which accurately - and incredulously - noted that this "news" has been out there almost a week to boost excitement and newspaper story counts...)

The Salt Lake City Trib - courtesy reporter Vince Horiuchi - has a good wrap on all the details, portions of which I've posted on the jump if you want to skip the winning moment clip below (which is burdened with a Crest commercial...)

(Above, picture of other young mother-to-be-in-the-news, courtesy, Jim Urquhart of The Salt Lake Tribune)

Continue reading "Finally, "Deal or No Deal" Millionaire" »

Of that hurricane which dominated news coverage over the long weekend, sent a thousand TV reporters south, and an equal number of anchors, hair stylists, rain gear accessory experts (very nice Burberry outerwear, Brian!), and (of course) heavy-weather makeup specialists to New Orleans?

Nevermind.

Instead, the real "storm" was taking place a thousand or so miles north - I borrowed this tired and much-used weekend cliche from those wordsmiths at AOL, "Gustav Fades, A New Storm Looms."

What are ya gonna do? I actually thought the networks did a pretty good job last night, considering there was nothing to report on. Question: How do you fill an hour of hurricane specials when there's not even any wind kicking up to add some desperately requisite and much-absent drama? You go to pregnancy and teen experts who talk about the issue of teen pregnancy, and (of course) borrow some clips from "Juno" just to make it a little more "culturally relevant."

The networks - ABC, CBS and NBC - offered their dueling poly specialists - former party political consultants now masquerading as "objective political experts" - about the impact on Minneapolis of Hurricane Bristol, now churning from the west from stormy Alaska and expected to strike the Twin Cities tonight at around 8. These guys didn't say much that you couldn't have said, but I was struck by the fact that the Republican expert always seemed to have a very serious look on his/her face, while the Democrat seemed very pleased.

My only question: I didn't hear the two words uttered last night that I would have expected to have received instant and sudden currency...the words that would have the big league anchors googling from their Blackberries....

Thomas Eagleton. I don't even think Katie (and certainly not Brian) were even born when those were the most controversial words in the land. (Charlie reported the story...)

I await the Eagleton references tonight. Sure as hell will beat those tired Ellen Page shots.