It’s December 20th. Many prime time shows have already aired their “Christmas” themed episodes and are ready to take hiatuses until 2004. In the mean time, we, the loyal television watching audience, are “treated” to random repeats either from 1) random points in the last one or two seasons or 2) Christmas episodes from years past.
It’s a pretty dead time of year in the world of television. Thankfully, we have some of the following fun television events to keep us occupied in between present opening and running around a 100-mile radius spending “quality time” with assorted friends and family.
1. Disney’s Christmas parade I heard this was taped before Christmas, which should be illegal. Can anyone confirm this?
2. Blue/Gray college football All Star game “All Stars” from low level Division 1-A and 1-AA colleges and universities “do battle” in the first showcase for NFL scouts who will need the full five months to decide who will be a 6th round draft pick.
3. Christmas Day NBA basketball LeBron James plays at 2:30 PM (EST), the always entertaining Dallas Mavericks and Sacramento Kings play at 6:00 PM and the Los Angeles Lakers and Houston Rockets play at 8:30 in the ridiculously overhyped “Yao Ming vs. Shaquille O’Neal” match up. Couldn’t the NBA and ABC/ESPN put LeBron on prime time? I have a Master’s thesis to write here!
4. Other Christmas week college football bowl games Which “postseason” game will be less intriguing to watch? Utah vs. Southern Mississippi in the AXA Liberty Bowl? Or maybe Northwestern vs. Bowling Green in the Motor City Bowl? Maybe I’ll pick up a copy of that Webster’s Dictionary I’ve been meaning to read
5. 24 hours of A Christmas Story – Is this way too much of that movie? I think most would agree it’s not enough When is TNT going to revert to “48 hours of A Christmas Story?
6. Scrooged – I love that movie.
7. Hopefully, you enjoy this holiday tradition: my news updates from the world of television. The shows may be repeats, but thankfully, the news isn’t!
Opening Credits: Mena Suvari, ALF, Conan, “Brandon Walsh,” and Pregnancy
An American Beauty goes “Six Feet Under”
Whenever an actress more commonly known for her work in movies makes the switch to episodic television, (media) people tend to stand up and take notice. In this case, I am not so sure what the fuss is. Suvari has had some notable roles in blockbusters like American Pie and critically acclaimed blockbusters like American Beauty but her film history doesn’t exactly rival that of Julia Roberts both in terms of number of Academy Award nominations and box office numbers. (Admit it, did you see Nick Cage’s directorial debut, Sonny? Or perhaps The Musketeer?)
Besides, it’s not as if she’s taking over for Kathy Griffin in hosting “Average Joe” or something. She’s taking a role on one of the best episodic shows on television in the dark, dreary, but dramatically delightful HBO series, “Six Feet Under.” Those lucky enough to earn a good career as a film actor/actress wouldn’t make the jump to television unless the opportunity would help their careers instead of hurting it.
That comment isn’t supposed to disparage against television in the slightest, though it may seem like a sneaky rabbit punch to the industry. However, the movies offer one aspect that television has a hard time countering: freedom of choice. That isn’t to say people in television have no choice but to go into television, but it offers less flexibility than the movie industry. The “Friends” cast is an example of that. It’s been said (by the New York Post) that Jennifer Aniston wanted the final season of that show to end as soon as possible so she could focus more on making movies instead of the grind of television. All six cast members have done various movies in the last ten years, but their movie making schedule has been seriously limited because of the pressure of putting out 22-26 original episodes of the hit show every year. Now that “Friends” is done, it won’t be a problem for Aniston or any of the other cast members.
Movies offer the flexibility of choosing many different projects and in some cases acting in several per year depending on the production schedule. (Most) successful television series require actors to play the same characters for many years and while the character being played is likely to go through a substantial metamorphosis or growth, it still is the same character played year after year. Kelsey Grammer must REALLY love “Frasier Crane to be able to play that character for more than 20 years
The point is that many actors choose to leave television for movies (see about 25 former cast members of “Saturday Night Live” as the best example) instead of the other way around. So, considering the flexibility the movies, it can be a bit surprising that an actor would make the move to television. However, in Suvari’s, HBO’s and “Six Feet Under’s” case, is it that surprising? HBO records their series in abbreviated 13-episode seasons, so Suvari can get exposure on a critically acclaimed show like “Six Feet Under” and watch those movie scripts continue to come in to her agent.
That damn wedding
In regards to the ABC wedding between “The Bachelorette” star Trista Rehn and her “suitor” Ryan Sutter, the New York Post‘s Adam Buckman had this to say in his December 12th column/hate spewed series of paragraphs:
“If you’re somebody who was able to sit through all two hours of Trista Rehn and Ryan Sutter’s wedding Wednesday night on ABC, then you must have a stomach made of cast-iron.
I was so disgusted by the show’s wanton excess and appalling insincerity that I didn’t last two minutes. Not only do Trista and Ryan come across as the world’s biggest bubbleheads, but I have yet to hear Ryan string together enough words to make a sentence.”
When a television critic, someone who watches television FOR A LIVING (dare to dream Mr. Coogan ), says they couldn’t sit through two minutes of a network program, I believe that’s worth thinking about.
Ironically, as Buckman churned out words of hatred and disdain towards Trista and Ryan, the same newspaper reported that ABC garnered more than 17 million viewers to the wedding special giving the network a rare mid-week victory in the prime-time ratings.
While I certainly see where Buckman is coming from, I tuned in and kept it on for more than two minutes merely because I was fascinated to see the sheer shallowness of it all. It’s not every day people can see a $1 million wedding unfold in all its ridiculous and unnecessary glory. Besides, when they get divorced (probably within five years), won’t it be funny to see those ridiculous pictures of them smiling ear to ear?
ALF is BACK BABY!
In the last couple of years, there’s been some scuttlebutt going around about 80s TV sitcom legend, ALF (also known as “Alien Life Form” and Gordon Shumway) would be getting his own talk show on some channel in the wonderful world of television. Well, according to Zap2it, it looks like ole’ Gordon will be plopped into Nickelodeon’s “Nick at Nite” new original programming block starring in the new show: “Alf’s Hit Talk Show.”
No doubt in my mind, this is long LONG overdue. It’s always refreshing to see comedy material in regards to eating cats and strange customs not seen on this planet. I don’t know if I am being sarcastic about that or not
What I do know is that “ALF” was funny during its run on NBC in the late 1980s and seeing him hawk various phone services from 10-10-220 and 1-800-COLLECT makes me laugh out loud. So, I say “What the hell? Give it a shot. We all could be pleasantly surprised.” Sure the idea is stupid and no real celebrities will dare show up on set, but is really this any worse than Ryan and Trista’s wedding? I don’t think so
I refuse to use the obligatory “Conan is going to Toronto, eh?” joke
At first, when I heard that Conan O’Brien would be filming his NBC show, “Late Night with Conan O’Brien” in Toronto for four nights in Febrauary, 2004, I thought to myself: “That would be like Jay Leno deciding to do a week’s worth of shows in Cleveland, Phoenix, or Austin, TX. What’s the point?”
Then I read an AP news story with the following quote from O’Brien:
“I, personally, have been very influenced by Canadian comedy. I was a freak for ‘Second City TV’ and very influenced by it and so were the writers, especially the original (‘Late Night’) writers who started the show 10 years ago.”
Considering Conan has the best comedy writing on late night television (and maybe on television in general), I find it interesting that the “Late Night ” team would essentially pay tribute to the roots of their comedy stylings by going north of the border for four nights.
What I especially find interesting is that this is something that the other guys, whether it be Leno, Letterman, Kilborn or even Kimmel, would never do. Go on location to Toronto? Pay tribute to Canadian comedy? Never.
Bravo Conan .Bravo
The Fox Network, Kelsey Grammer, and the British are all sketchy
It’s been reported in multiple locations that Fox has ordered a pilot from Kelsey Grammer’s production company, Gramnet modeled after an award winning British comedy sketch show.
Tentatively titled “The Sketch Show,” this show will be American version of the British program, which takes its roots from the legendary “Laugh-In” in terms of speed and pacing. The show will be a half-hour long, but will contain more than 20 skits in it as each one will average a minute or less in time. In a Reuters/Hollywood Reporter report, Grammnet executive Steve Stark said of the existing British series. “It is very much like ‘Laugh-In’ in terms of speed — not a lot of time to get bored. It is just constant comedy.”
I guess we’ll find out if television really has decreased attention span as much as it supposedly has. If people no longer have an acceptable attention span, this show should be a hit, right?
Priestley prepares for his “Calling” (No, it’s not more auto racing )
For the first time since leaving his safe and comfy role as Brandon Walsh on Fox’s “Beverly Hills, 90210” in 1998, Jason Priestley will return to an extended role on episodic television. The actor has signed on for a seven-episode arc on the Fox drama, “Tru Calling” starring Eliza Dushku.
In a press release distributed by the Fox network, the following nebulous statement was included describing Priestley’s involvement in the show:
“He (Priestley) will play Jack Harper, a new forensic attendant who will work alongside Tru. Charismatic and affable on the surface, Jack carries a dark secret that may impede Tru’s ability to save those who die before their time.”
It certainly doesn’t allow the viewing audience to conclude much, but I would say this does allow two significant conclusions to be reached:
1. Instead of continuously reviving the same storyline in every episode where Tru (Dushku) sees a dead body, it talks to her, and then she is sent back in time 24 hours to relive the day and save the person who would be dead otherwise, this particular storyline will also examine the actual powers Tru has and how they might be in jeopardy. While the writers don’t want the premise of the show to go astray with other storylines, it is valuable to go in a different direction at some point. It helps keep the show fresh and interesting while also learning a little more about the characters instead of just making crazy assumptions.
2. It is true. Contrary to popular belief, Jason Priestley is alive, well, and working.
Amen brother
The “Carnivale” will be back in your town soon
HBO made an unusual move in deciding whether or not its new wacky period ensemble drama “Carnivale” would be back for a second season: they asked for the audience’s opinion.
HBO posted a survey on their website asking many closed-ended and several open-ended questions rating the characters of “Carnivale” and what the audience thought of the show in general. I found the show to be nothing short of fascinating and was very much in favor of it returning for a second season, especially since the we, the audience, never found out how Ben Hawkins and Brother Justin are related to one another in the series of dreams and hallucinations the two were having.
Well, despite the fact the show is likely very expensive to produce (considering the large cast and expensive sets) and ratings being below what “The Sopranos” and “Sex and the City” normally see, HBO has decided to go ahead and green light the second season of the drama.
If you haven’t had the pleasure of checking this new show out yet, it’s definitely worth it. Certainly, the themes of black magic that are not overly believable are present in show, but the cast of characters is eclectic and intriguing and the proverbial question “What will happen next?” is always present and the way the story is told, you want to tune in and want that question answered.
Making babies in reality but in fantasy too?
Separate news reports from the last week indicated that both Debra Messing from “Will & Grace” and Leah Remini from “King of Queens” are expecting new bundles of joy in the second half of 2004. It’s been established that Messing’s character, Grace Adler, won’t become pregnant in the show. It is not yet known whether Remini’s character, Carrie Hefferman, will become pregnant with this news, especially considering Carrie already experienced a miscarriage on the show.
In Zap2it’s report on the story, they note that Sarah Jessica Parker (Carrie Bradshaw on “Sex and the City”) and Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Elaine Benes on “Seinfeld”) both went through pregnancies on their shows without their characters being pregnant. I think Messing’s situation echoes that of Parker’s and Louis-Dreyfus’s in that a “new arrival” wouldn’t enhance the show, it would probably damage what the writers and producers have created. In the case of Parker’s character Carrie, the whole premise of the show is that she is a thirty-something woman living a chic, cosmopolitan, single life New York City complete with a revolving door of romantic relationships with various men. If one of these men accidentally got her pregnant and left her with a baby, it would create a completely different show. That wasn’t really the case with Cynthia Nixon’s character Miranda Hobbs whose life isn’t quite as dramatic as Carrie’s and her obsession to TiVo is a classic example of that.
In the case of Louis-Dreyfus and Messing, the two characters they play are similar in that they are both wildly selfish and largely immature and largely out for themselves or perhaps the close friends they associate with. If either of those characters had a baby, it would dramatically change the direction of the show as it would force them to consider a baby and while selfishness and immaturity normally are negative traits to have, in the case of these characters, in the world of situation comedy television, they are endearing traits and what make them unique, interesting, and fun. Babies would screw that up. (Of course, in the case of Elaine Benes and “Seinfeld” that show is no longer in production, but for the sake of argument and to avoid confusing grammar, I stated this argument in present tense ).
In the case of Remini’s character on “King of Queens,” it would make a lot more sense to work the pregnancy into the show considering it is more of a family show and the interaction between Carrie, Doug (Kevin James), and a new baby would be both refreshing and interesting. Not only that, but seeing the potential situations that would be created between a new baby and Jerry Stiller’s character, Arthur Spooner would also be fun to watch considering Stiller’s comedic chops.
The bottom line is that something as natural as “the miracle of childbirth” can be turned into a dramatic decision that could alter the entire direction of a show. When a cast member gets pregnant, it requires some in depth analysis of the creative process and how that pregnancy would affect the characters and the overall storytelling process.
And you thought it was just about having a baby
Quick Hits
• “Survivor” Scores Again – The seventh installment of “Survivor” struck a chord with the television viewing audience. New competitors, new scoundrels, new adventures, even new deceptions (one player lied about his grandmother’s death to gain sympathy votes in the tribal council vote) allowed people to really take to this new season. Unlike other reality shows like “Joe Millionaire” and, as we are seeing, “The Bachelor,” this show continues to live a healthy life and probably will for at least three to five more of these. As long as the producers get the right kind of people and make the right kind of changes, this show will continue to be successful. If you don’t believe me, keep in mind that more than 25 million people tuned into the most recent season finale when Sandra Diaz-Twine, a 29-year-old office assistant, won the $1 million cash and SUV prize for “surviving.” This show isn’t going away
• Definition of a manufactured media event – ESPN recently generated a huge marketing campaign for their 200th NFL telecast to get viewers to tune into the December 19th match-up between the New England Patriots and New York Jets. Am I the only one not impressed by this “feat?” It seems that as long as the NFL exists and ESPN keeps paying the big bucks to air it, they will have something to put on television for the fans of the league. Situation comedies or dramas lasting 200 episodes is MUCH more significant than the 200th NFL telecast C’mon ESPN
• Thank God for Saddam? – Well, not really. However, thanks to the historic capture of the former Iraqi dictator, Fox News channel and CNN saw ratings spike during the all day coverage on Sunday, December 14th. Rupert Murdoch is probably smiling a little bit anyway since the American public seemed to prefer his network (an average of 1.61 million viewers in primetime for the week) over CNN (1.05 million).
I’ve found two reasons to rerun my “Playmakers” column!
Back when “Playmakers” was establishing itself as a weird, controversial original show by ESPN, I wrote a column for Matthew Michaels’s Moodspins.com expressing my opinion on the show expressing pleasure with the apparent reality of life in a football locker room, while also questioning the reality of that much drama taking place on one professional football team.
Well, two recent events made me believe it would be a good time to revisit the issue:
1. The American Film Institute named little ole’ “Playmakers” as one of the Top 10 television shows of the year. This same list contains critically acclaimed and commercially successful shows, “Alias” and “Everybody Loves Raymond.” If this prestigious organization can see the value of a show like “Playmakers,” then it’s worth considering and definitely worth a look.
2. During Week 15 of the football season (taking place December 14-15), the NFL was forced to confront two blatant examples of obnoxious, premeditated touchdown celebrations with Chad Johnson and his sign and Joe Horn and his cell phone. In addition, Detroit Lions Executive Matt Millen unleashed a hateful remark disparaging of homosexuals towards a current player and it was caught my multiple people who allowed the incident to go public. The NFL despises “Playmakers” because of the portrayal of its’ players and has threatened to pull games from ESPN if the show continues. The popular response from media people this week (especially at ESPN): “Well, is the NFL really that much different from ‘Playmakers’?” Maybe this review can help us consider that issue.
My opinion of the show hasn’t changed dramatically except that I am much more willing to suspend reality to enjoy this show now than I was when I first wrote this review. It is compelling drama, many of the characters are worth investing the time to get to know, and the while the camera work can be a bit flashy at times, it also provides a good documentary style action that allows the viewers to follow the action from a more “voyeuristic” point of view.
I have intently viewed the first four episodes of the new ESPN football drama “Playmakers” and to be perfectly frank, I have no idea what to think – and that’s part of the reason this review has been delayed for so long. Part of my questioning derives from the subject of the show: it follows the trials and tribulations of several key players on and the head coach of an NFL-esque professional football team (generically named the “Cougars”). The program serves up some good dramatic scenes and some characters worth paying attention to, but it also provides scenarios that leave me scratching my head
While I acknowledge that reviewing a show four weeks into its initial run isn’t exactly timely, I hold that the potential questions that the show raises makes it so, as long as it remains on the air. But that isn’t the entire subject of this column. After all, the show deserves almost as much praise as it does ridicule.
Allow me to explain
Touching on the “praise” first, “Playmakers” was created and executive produced by John Eisendrath, who currently is deeply involved (as executive producer) with another hit show from the Disney family: action-drama extraordinaire “Alias.” The guy knows what he is doing and Disney obviously recognizes this since they worked with ESPN to get this new show off the ground. Taking away the “ridicule” that I will address later, the show’s storylines are compelling, interesting, and the storytellers gave the audience multiple reasons to care about the characters almost within several minutes of their first appearance on the screen.
One key example of this comes from one of the main characters, Eric Olczyk (played admirably by Jason Matthew Smith), a ferocious linebacker hell bent on hurting people, as all good well-bred linebackers should be. The audience is required to jump head first into the middle of the season with the team, its players and coach. Seeing as that is the case, we are first introduced to Olczyk immediately after he inflicted such serious damage on an opposing quarterback, he was left paralyzed from the neck down. The character is dealing with the fact that he has done this to another person and it forces him to question whether he should still be playing football. He is also dealing with his father, his former overbearing football coach, whose hard, intense workouts without adequate rest and hydration caused the death of his brother due to cardiac arrest resulting from heat stroke. To top it off, he’s dealing with this in therapy. This storyline begs several questions to be answered including “Will he quit football?”, “If he doesn’t, how will his future performances be affected?”, and “What’s the story with the relationship with his father?” All are valid questions, and the story is told in such a way that I want to tune into the next episode to see what happens. That’s pretty damn important
One other key component that makes “Playmakers” an intriguing and different type of program is the fact that show really does look at the characters’ lives through their eyes as football players, not just characters who happen to play football.
What do I mean?
Consider this
The cameras don’t just focus on the exploits of the players away from what happens outside of the game – many relevant scenes take place in the locker room before and after games, during practices, during potentially private meetings between the owner and players or the head coach and players. One such scene in Episode One centers around aging, former star running back Leon Taylor (played by accomplished stage actor, Russell Hornsby). During a pregame team breakfast, Taylor is bestowed with a large rocking chair as a birthday gift obviously signifying that he is an “elder statesman” or a “senior citizen.” Taylor was visibly shaken up by the experience, not wishing to be reminded of his “old age” (he is in his early 30s) and the losing battle he is fighting to get playing time with a hot, new young stud on the team. Not only was the scene relevant to the character, it introduced the audience to a setting they likely weren’t familiar with: a pregame team breakfast. It wasn’t a “make or break” scene, but it provided with the viewers with a unique perspective on what happens to a football team before and after the games.
Despite the strong aspects of ESPN’s “Playmakers”, there is one significant point that at least needs to be questioned if not ridiculed, as I mentioned before. That significant point can be defined in one word: reality. Actually, it’s more like: reality?
Through the first four episodes of the new show, these are the following storylines that have been introduced and, at least in part, addressed:
• Leon Taylor, the aging, former star running back, is convinced by a teammate to begin using steroids to get a “leg up” in his continuing competition for playing time with the hot shot young stud, Demetrius Harris.
• Taylor also is involved in a physical domestic dispute with his wife that leads to him pushing her down the a small set of stairs, after which she sustains injuries to her right wrist and bottom lip.
• Starting quarterback Derek McConnell (blandly played by the usually skilled actor, Christopher Wiehl) becomes addicted to painkiller medication that he’s taking in order to dull the writhing pain from a series of injuries he’s sustained. This obvious addiction leads to the beginning stages of a liver disorder.
• Head Coach Tony George (a poorly written character played by Tony Denison) is apparently pissing blood and really sick. This puts the likelihood of him getting a contract extension in serious peril.
• The mental instability of star defensive player, Eric Olczyk, caused in part by his father’s high demands, intensifies due to the paralyzing collision with an opposing player.
• My personal favorite: the exploits of Demetrius “DH” Harris (played by an all grown up Omar Gooding of “Hangin’ with Mr. Cooper” and “The Smart Guy”). Not only has this guy shown up late to a game high on crack (he still gains over 100 yards in the process), but he ends up as part of a criminal investigation when one of his “boys” commits a murder outside a club. In order to protect his boy, DH says he was with his friend when the player was really in the bathroom getting head from a bartender.
Wow that’s a lot going on. Basically, while the show provides a pretty realistic framework of what a football locker room and a conversation between a coach and a player looks like, it also portrays the players as prescription drug addicts, cocaine and crack users, cheaters, liars, mentally unstable freaks, wife beaters, and last, but certainly not least, accessories to murder.
Stepping back and looking at it, that is A LOT to swallow and it’s only been four episodes I am sure more is to come later on in this 11 episode run. I find it frustrating and bordering on disgusting that while some behind-the-scenes aspects are portrayed with style, grace, and thoughtfulness, the characters themselves are not treated with the same care at all (and this is coming from a guy who’s never been involved with professional football except as a fan. What are others saying?). Former player and current football analyst and radio talk show host, Chris Spielman was interviewed on a recent episode of Dan Patrick’s ESPN radio show and when asked about “Playmakers”, he pretty much shunned it off as unrealistic and something he wouldn’t watch anyway because he didn’t wish to watch shows like that. That may be expected from a more religious man, but when Patrick interviewed current NFL offensive lineman and resident “crazy guy” Kyle Turley, he, too, scoffed about how life in a professional locker room is butchered on the show, how completely unrealistic the show was, and how frustrating it was to see players portrayed in that light. I am inclined to agree with those sentiments.
Now that I have those thoughts off my chest, the obvious retort to that line of reasoning will likely be something along the lines of: “Well, of course the characters will be portrayed in that light, it makes for good TV.” Then I would think about it and say something like: “Yeah, but shows like ‘Law & Order’, ‘Third Watch’, ‘The Practice’, and ‘CSI: Crime Scene Investigation’ accurately portray the professionals being profiled, so why can’t ‘Playmakers’ do the same thing?”
Wait a minute I’ve never been a cop, lawyer or a forensics investigator, how the hell would I know those professions are being portrayed accurately?!?
Shit I have a good point.
Most critics reviewing the show have stayed away from the question about how “realistic” it is primarily because it isn’t terribly important. However, I do think two larger points need to be considered when looking at this show and its realism:
1. ESPN covers, scrutinizes, analyzes, interviews and talks about these types of athletes day in and day out, whether it’s on “Sportscenter”, ESPN News, ESPN Radio, ESPN: The Magazine or ESPN.com. It monitors these people’s every move, and does so much more closely than other media cover police officers, lawyers, or forensics investigators. Some may question it, but it’s reality. Considering that is the case, of course more people are going to consider how realistic the scenes and characters are. Fans and viewers of the show (at least to a degree) think they know what athletes are like and what is considered realistic and what isn’t.
2. All the major networks have “news” divisions that are concerned about journalism, getting fair, accurate, but good stories. In addition, they have “entertainment” divisions that are devoted to fun, interesting, programs that may or may not have anything to do with the news subjects. This is largely unavoidable. For obvious monetary reasons, networks need to succeed in both areas, but they do so separately. However, that is different than ESPN’s mission which is to provide sports fans with the most up to date news, best analysis, and most thought provoking topics to consider as they relate to the world of sports. They accomplish this through hard work, research, and most of all, being HONEST. Is “Playmakers” a real honest interpretation of what football players are like? The bottom line is that ESPN’s mission may appear to be a bit clouded when they produce and frequently air a program such as this one. Though, since we’re being honest here, I should probably say I am not sure I believe what I just said. While that may be true, I do firmly believe it is an issue to consider.
To bring this column to its overdue, but dramatic, conclusion, I will say that for those interested in mentally suspending reality in favor of a compelling drama that captures some good behind the scenes looks at life on a professional football team, “Playmakers” is just for you. However, if overbearing, largely unrealistic stereotypes about football players and modern athletes in general is hard for you to watch, maybe you should spend your Tuesday nights trying yoga, eating yogurt, or maybe watching that Yogi Bear marathon you recorded off the Cartoon Network
Closing Credits: The Golden Globes: TV Style
Being a writer for 411movies and a TV reviewer for 411black, I will be paying attention to the Golden Globes very carefully once they are aired. For now, I will hold off on the predictions and in depth analysis and just put forward a couple of “votes of confidence” that they deserve to be there and a couple of “votes of ‘What the hell are you doing being nominated for this award?'” in regards to the television category.
Votes of Confidence
• The Cast of “Sex in the City” It’s Sarah Jessica Parker’s show, but there’s no doubt that all four ladies deserve to be nominated for awards. The Golden Globes gave the four their chance as Parker was nominated in the “Lead Actress Comedy” category and Kim Cattrall, Kristin Davis, and Cynthia Nixon are all nominated in the “Supporting Actress Series, Miniseries or Movie” category. They are all play drastically different characters but intermingle beautifully generating a warm, loving relationship between all involved.
• Megan Mullally of “Will & Grace” While it’s nice to see the three supporting players in “Sex in the City” be recognized with nominations, I think they all have to take a back seat to Megan Mullally’s portrayal of Karen Walker on “Will & Grace.” James Lipton recently had the entire cast of the show on his interview show, “Inside the Actor’s Studio” and watching Mullally consistently go in and out of character between the strung out Karen and the laid back person she really is was nothing short of astonishing. Not only is her transformation amazing, the fact that she is funny too makes her head and shoulders above the other women in her category.
Votes of ‘What the hell are you doing being nominated for this award?
• “Arrested Development” Don’t get me wrong, I am THRILLED that this new FOX show starring Jason Bateman is being given a chance to succeed on Sunday night. However, this show is NOT better than “Friends,” “Scrubs,” “The Simpsons,” “Curb Your Enthusiasm” or even “Late Night with Conan O’Brien” if you want to put it in that category. I don’t think so
• William Petersen (“CSI: Crime Scene Investigation”) Petersen is up for the award as the best “Lead Actor Drama Series.” I think he benefits more from the good writing, interesting subject matter, and snazzy camera work as opposed to his acting chops. I don’t really enjoy watching him; I watch the show because I like the stories.
With that
“Now it’s time to say ‘good bye’
See you real soon “
Enjoy the show!
