Tuesday, March 31, 2009
TVTM: The forgotten podcast. Next time we count heads.
Most of you got this last week via iTunes or when super sub Justin put it up on the podcast page at SFGate.com. But when I was partaking in a very busy week, I pulled away from the curb and left this little guy sitting by his lonesome. Ah, cute little Thursday 'cast. Don't worry about it - a little therapy goes a long way.
Calls, MP3s, letters, inanities. You know the drill.
| Mar 31 at 08:40 AM
Sunday, March 29, 2009
"Damages" Spoiled Bastard. Ep. 12: "Look What He Dug Up This Time."
This is a Spoiled Bastard. It contains spoilers. That's the point.
Interestingly enough, the title is about a dog digging up a remote. If I could go back in time - you know, like five months or what has seemed like 10 months watching this season - I would bury my remote in the yard, too, and not use it to watch "Damages."
It was telling, for me personally, that I felt no passionate need to watch this episode immediately. True, I had a lot of other things going on and it fell victim to my need to catch up on those essential details. But I never wait on "BSG" or "Lost." Also, I found it interesting that I posted Ep. 11 on Friday morning of a very, very insane week. And it got five comments. And it sat there, untalked about, like it had done something embarrassing and people just wanted to pretend it didn't happen. In fact, almost 24 hours went by before anyone left the first comment. Eventually another five people left comments after the initial five, and that's where it ended. I think the allure of "Damages" is all but done - and in the final run to the end, no less. But maybe that's just me. Check that - it's definitely me.
I know, I'm going to get a lot of grief on this. And Hickcity, a very astute observer and regular commenter, is really into this season and believes the barbs directed at the show may be misplaced. Hickcity, you're not going to like this post. I have desperately held out for a big finish, but this penultimate episode didn't give it to viewers and now we've got 90 minutes left to have it all settled. Let me say this - even if it's the best finish in TV history, it will not salvage Season 2. Now, hear me out on this frustrating, long-simmering disappointment. I watched Season 1. Then I rewatched it when I hurt my back and had nothing to do but - busman's holiday alert! - watch television. As I rewatched Season 1, I saw the few places where it really tripped up, storytelling-wise, but I didn't care. It was a thrilling season. And I was going to teach that class to my CCA visual studies students (using the storytelling screw up and character wrangling as a way to teach them how it almost achieved complete greatness but slipped a few too many times). I was going to tell them that ambition is difficult and "Damages" deserved more credit for what it tried to achieve than for what it failed to achieve. Then, as Season 2 has unfolded, I changed my mind. It's a class about great television. "Damages" is not great television, period. Maybe next season - a comeback. But here's something I always keep in mind when evaluating the long-term merit of a series: that television is, in some ways, a living, breathing story. If you have two great seasons out of five, that's not achieving greatness. That's falling short of it - of potential unmet. All series will be judged on what they put in the books year in and year out. This year on "Damages"? Oy.
Hit the link for more: Read More »
| Mar 29 at 10:06 PM
Thursday, March 26, 2009
"Lost" Spoiled Bastard. Ep. 11: "He's Our You."
Oh yes he did.
This is a Spoiled Bastard. It contains spoilers (and right away, this week). That's the point.
In a comparatively weak episode of "Lost," the whole of it was given value by the shocking conclusion. The shock for me wasn't the fact that Sayid shot (we can't say killed just yet) Young Ben. I figured he was going to do that for some time now and last week's previews only reinforced my belief that it would happen (why, oh why, do I continue to watch the previews - rewind and slo-mo them, even?). As the events of the episode - mostly recounting Sayid's past and how it intertwined and got god-awfully muddled with Ben, post-island - I became more convinced that it was about to happen. We are led to believe that people come back to the island for a reason, though sometimes they don't know what that reason (or that destiny) really is. For Sayid, his was to kill Ben. When it happened, in the last scene, my immediate reaction was, "I knew that was going to happen." I'm sure others felt the same way. But my second reaction, right on the heels of it, was this: Damn. That's pretty daring television. You don't just shoot a child on TV without thinking about how viewers will be affected- even viewers who hate Ben. Shooting a kid point-blank dead in the heart is not something you see every day - and even if you know (or think you know) that Young Ben will somehow live to become The Ben You Hate, still, it's a very strong visual. It was disturbing to me not because the writers were making Young Ben sympathetic to us - he feeds Sayid, he gets smacked around by his dad (who already has accused Young Ben of killing his mother in birth), and he comes back with - oh the humanity - his glasses all taped up after his dad beat him. No, it was disturbing because just the act of pointing a gun at a child is unnerving. Pulling the trigger and showing the kid fall (though there wasn't much blood) is not a network TV staple. I've seen enough television to know my emotions were being played for Something Bigger as Young Ben was portrayed as a victum, so I began to get prepared for it. Knowing when it would happen - thanks promo people! - allowed me to count down to it. Then...whoa. Sayid had no hesitation. He reiterated what grown up Ben had told him - you're a killer, Sayid, and the decision to kill doesn't bother you - and then the confirmation: bang.
Now, what does it all mean? A few theories to come.
Hit the link for more: Read More »
| Mar 26 at 04:04 PM
Advertisement : Skip 
Has there ever been a funny family sitcom? Can parenting be funny on TV?
Best ever?
Tonight is the premiere of ABC's newest sitcom, "In the Motherhood." My review is here (I saw two episodes - one pretty funny, the other kind of a stretch, and came away hoping that future episodes would get the magic right). ABC is the network most likely to stick with a family/parenting/kids show - it kept "Notes From the Underbelly" on the air longer than anyone thought. "In the Motherhood" used to tout that it took actual stories from real moms but the Writers Guild of America just put up a stink about ABC soliciting ideas that way and now the sending in of anecdotes from the real world has been walled off (or so they say...but ABC is no longer soliciting ideas on its website).
Now, family series have been a staple on television forever. But there's a gigantic vagueness to "family show," is there not? Is it "All In the Family," or "Diff'rent Strokes" or "Cosby" or "Arrested Development" or "Malcolm In the Middle"? Obviously, I prefer the latter two. "AD" was one of the greatest sitcoms ever. "Malcolm," though it lost viewers (but not its creativity) in the latter years, successfully presented a live-action version of "The Simpsons" (perhaps the greatest "family" show ever). The success of "Malcolm" was that it made the difficult, hilarious and stressful nature of raising kids funny and in the process it gave us child actors that didn't make us wretch at their cuteness. Nothing worse than a 4 year old girl talking like she's 35.
I think the difficult part of evaluating "family" shows is understanding where the emphasis is, creatively. On the little ones? On the parents? On the kids who are tweeners or high schoolers or even college age? I think it's much, much harder to make a funny show about kids and focus on those little ones. But if you put the onus on the parents - "Roseanne" and pretty much every CBS sitcom that has come about, then it's a bit of a cheat. And for years the whole "TGIF" line-up defied critical analysis because they were cookie-cutter sitcoms about families that went down easy and cheesy and were never considered of critical merit.
What I'm looking for here is not just really good family shows. I mean, you can vote for "The Courtship of Eddie's Father" (classic!) or the animated "Wait Till Your Father Gets Home" - but I'm looking for funny. Really funny. Is there such a thing?
Hit the link for more: Read More »
| Mar 26 at 12:56 PM
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
"Breaking Bad" Spoiled Bastard. Ep. 3: "Bit By A Dead Bee."
Lost in the supermarket.
This is a Spoiled Bastard. It contains spoilers. That's the point.
One of the most enjoyable elements of this TV season is watching, episode after episode, how "Breaking Bad" embraces its greatness. There were so many tremendous scenes in this episode, so much fine acting and widespread nuance, it's readily apparent that "Breaking Bad" is now dominating the upper echelon of television with alarming ease. Bryan Cranston's fearless performance of Walt White continues at a level where it seems almost impossible to maintain and the fear here is that pretty soon we're all going to take for granted just what an incredible job he's doing. What's also fueling the series is how every single character has stepped up, how creator Vince Gilligan has fleshed out those characters and made them viable. This is the time when everybody should be out beating the drums to get their friends to watch this series.
There are some key elements to start with in this episode involving Cranston, that we need to get at right away. His desperation is reaching new depths but his mind is frantically keeping up with the demands of hiding the lie. Lost in the desert, naked in the food mart, alone on the bus mopping up loose ends, defiant in his desire to start cooking again, tortured at what's happening to his family - this was an episode that had Emmy-worthy performances throughout. I loved the lone bus ride for all of its pathetic shades and underlying anxiety. But even better was having him at the bus stop, looking up at the "missing" picture. It's here where he gets how the lie is turning his family into unintentional victims. There may not have been a more beautifully sad and evocative scene so far this year.
For all the wonderful lines in this episode - both funny and downbeat - did anything chill you more than Skyler saying to Walt in bed, at the end of it all: "Do you have a second cell phone?" It just made you feel gutted to hear it. Her husband is dying - but he's clearly hiding something and lying in the process. How to get at what Skyler must be feeling? Note-perfect from Anna Gunn as usual. It was a special scene, culminated in the cold-shoulder roll-over.
Now, before we get swallowed in melancholy, I give you this from Jesse: "You found my car? Awesome! DEA all the way!"
Hit the link for more: Read More »
| Mar 24 at 12:15 PM
TV Talk Machine podcast: TV related "news," an "SNL" rival?, a "Big Love" moment and a techno song about Benny.
TV related news, or "news," from "Battlestar Galactica" to "The Penguins of Madagascar," plus updates on Manny (Benny Evangelista) who's doing fine (we accuse him of just being lazy now, not injured); Question Boy (Chronicle media and politics writer Joe Garofoli) delves into a bunch of voices (and yes, fan favorite Existential French Woman); super sub producer Justin Beck messes up a whole bunch; we propose a rival series to "Saturday Night Live" that is actually funny; we address concerns about the future of the TVTM (um, can we record it at your house?); one of those plans involves monkey suits, YouTube and Amber from Canada; another involves copious amounts of red wine or "TVTM: Live At Budokan." There's a "Big Love" sister-wife thing brewing up with Megan from the 707; Joe conceives of a show about shoes - "I love it already" - and we laugh to keep from crying about our plight in the newspaper business. Finally, we think that Jeremy from Portland is the creator of what is the best song EVER about Benny. Well, actually, the final part is us making fun of old people and Angela Lansbury. All told, it's totally worth your time.
FYI: The TVTM is on Facebook.
| Mar 24 at 10:54 AM
Sunday, March 22, 2009
"Battlestar Galactica" Spoiled Bastard. Ep. 10: "Daybreak" Pt. 2. Series finale.
Into the sun(set).
This is a Spoiled Bastard. It contains spoilers. That's the point.
Although the merits of this "Battlestar Galactica" finale are likely to be debated by die hard fans for some time - specifically over loose ends, convenient turns, and unexplained motivations - what I liked most about it was how convincingly it opted for the finality of two key issues of the show: religion and technology. No matter what you take away from "BSG," what fueled your interest over four seasons, which characters or traits were the ones that sucked you in the most, creator Ronald D. Moore was decisive on these issues: 1. A god, or higher power, and angels of a divine nature, influence the world we live in. 2. Technology, particularly the technology of machines, is not the answer. While stopping short of preaching the "machines are bad" mantra, there was an overarching theme about allowing technology to bring mankind beyond an appreciation of life's inherent shortness, its flawed limitations. Any attempt to go beyond that, to erase human nature and seek perfection, power and limitless "life" was a bad idea that would lead to destruction and failure.
And all of that got wrapped up in a happy ending. You could say that none of that was expected. "BSG" could very well have ended darkly as a recitation on Humans vs. Cylons and, guess what - the toasters win. The finale could have been all about failed hopes, dreams, lives. But Moore chose a much sunnier - and arguably more overtly religious - ending. I found that somewhat surprising even though the religious overtones had always been there. Hell, you don't have something called Resurrection without Biblical overtones, much less references to "gods" and a "one true god." These issues were always in play - and "BSG" always got critical credit for tackling them when most writers wouldn't go near it, other than in some darkly metaphorical way. But to have many of the key final twists and explanations come down to what can best be described as divine intervention was, for me, very much unexpected. Stunning, even.
Now, before more on the deconstruction, I'll say this: I thought the finale was good, not great, as series-enders go. Maybe the best word is satisfying (for true-believing loyalists). We got a lot of answers. We got action. Most notably we got definitive closure on a number of characters. And we got two hours and 11 minutes of "BSG" wrap - enough to cover the aforementioned while also lingering on the resolution of beloved characters. That's what most fans wanted. I enjoyed it. I'm not sure the final three hours, taken together as a finale, achieved complete greatness in the same way that, say, "The Shield" did. But finales are trickier for critics than fans. I think as a fan, it served me well enough. As a critic, it was a little too pat.
Hit the link for more: Read More »
| Mar 22 at 09:30 AM
Friday, March 20, 2009
TV Talk Machine podcast: Sultry calls, sultry singing for Benny. Except the butt call from court. Plus: Things!
Oh, heck yes we have calls. And MP3s. We complained about the lack of them, and - voila - they arrived. Question Boy (Chronicle media and politics writer Joe Garofoli) details why Benny is out (we think he listened to an entire podcast for the first time, THEN had the heart attack) and the recent appearance of Voice of America in the podcave. Benny, by the way, told super sub producer Justin Beck where the MP3s were hiding. So we air those. Lots of stuff to air. Plus: Dark heart cackles. A child calls - no, not the butt call from court - and we think the little tyke threatened us. In related youth news, "the kids love Justin's potty mouth." Also, Justin's Corner taps into the slacker market: "I've just quit caring." A letter from Prague! (Cue: Porno Putin.) Taldar calls - and uses Wickedmachine to beat us down! Walter from Florida says he's grown "disturbingly fond of Porno Dick" and then stumps us with a question (I know, stunner). Worse, he prefaces the question by saying he probably should have just asked Amber. So maybe we'll Ask Amber next time. Andrew calls from Ireland - and then calls for TVTM's first gay Question Boy! It's a quick, "compelling" podcast with surprising turns and tons of "quality," so don't miss it.
Our toll-free hotline: 1-888-SFC-TVTM. International calls: 415-777-8821. MP3s: podcasts@sfgate.com. E-mails: tgoodman@sfchronicle.com.
| Mar 20 at 02:43 PM
"Damages" Spoiled Bastard. Ep. 11: "London. Of course."
This is a Spoiled Bastard. It contains spoilers. That's the point.
In this episode of "Damages" we learn that sex is bad. Or bad for your career. The Ellen-shoots-her-gun gambit takes a turn that's hardly believable and, with two episodes left, there should be a rallying cry among fans to see more of William Hurt and Ted Danson.
Better times.
I'm all for parallels in the plot, but unless the point here was to make the connection that Patty's just as evil as Kendrick - they both played the caught-you-having-sex-card for different reasons on two different people - I'm not sure the old career-ruiner two-fer was all that exciting. Let's start with Claire, first. We knew that her surreptitious affair with Purcell was being videotaped and it came back to haunt her in this episode, as her power play to remove Kendrick from his own company backfired. She set up the No. 2 guy to make a move on Kendrick, then set him up take the fall by alerting Kendrick of the plan (apparently every high powered person in the world has skeletons when it comes to money, which is certainly timely in this environment). Stepping into the void, Claire is then able to go after Kendrick - never mind that legal counsel isn't exactly the next stepping stone to CEO of the company. When Claire marches in for the big take-down, she finds that Kendrick has already had the board dump her for having sex with Purcell. Two things here: Who didn't see that coming? And I"m not convinced that the role worked at all, other than Marcia Gay Harden's boozy vamp thing, which nicely offsets her tightly wound lawyer mode. Her suddenly coming to the conclusion that Kendrick was a scoundrel just didn't ring true. Guys like that reveal themselves over a career, not late in the game. And there was never any real believability in that she'd oust Kendrick. What does work, a bit, is her ability to help Patty (but she'd better do it very much on the sly, or that lawsuit gets tossed before it's entered.)
Now, Phil's affair was an entirely other matter. And I also want to get back to Patty in the elevator and Ellen under arrest, and how neither seems completely convincing.
Hit the link for more:
Read More »| Mar 20 at 10:55 AM
Thursday, March 19, 2009
"Lost" Spoiled Bastard. Ep. 10: "Namaste."
Back in the saddle again...
This is a Spoiled Bastard. It contains spoilers. That's the point.
While watching "Lost" last night the feeling wasn't so much that "I really want tons of things to happen and questions to get answered," it was more "I really missed this show last week. Thank God it's back." Mrs. CrankyPants was quick to point out the giant allure of "Lost" - that it changes the playing field (and sometimes the rules) with swift creativity. It's what makes the series so intriguing - to create whole new scenarios and strange universes out of what's already familiar to us. And here I thought 1977 was big for the punk revolution ahead, on "Lost" it's cool because the writers basically say, "OK, we're back on the island. It's going to be 1977. Let's just mess around with what this means for those in the moment, those thinking ahead and those aware that not everybody is in the present. Let's just tread some water 30 years back in time and see how it all play out."
So, while you could argue this is a place holder episode, I wasn't bored for even a second. You can soak in this show, Madge. Whether it's Hurley's jokes, the '70s vibe (and clothing), Miles (we need more of Miles), Young Ben, the Muppets on the monitor, how quickly Juliet gave back Baby Ethan, or the idea that while the '70s are set in motion, a few of our strange new Ajira friends are on the beach, in 2008 (or is it 2007?), ready to explore. And I don't trust them at all. I think Caesar has plans. And they're dangerous plans.
But the two big threads here are Sawyer in charge, at the expense of Jack and what that means to Kate, Juliet, etc. While I have absolutely no interest in a two or three episode arc while they hash out the after effects of the weirdest key party fallout ever, I do think something's up with Sawyer's leadership role. Now, you could say that the title - "Namaste," is more than just the rote Dharma greeting and can be literally translated to "I bow to you," and that gives the Jack/Sawyer thing a little more kick. More on that in a moment.
I also want to know why Sun is in 2008 (2007?) and the other Oceanic 6 Players are not? Any theories on this? Also, why no Locke in this episode? Is he roaming the beach? Ben is a guy who - not to get a nosebleed here - can come and go and doesn't seem to be too worked up about what year it is. He'll figure a way out. But Sun? Not sure I follow.
Hit the link for more: Read More »
| Mar 19 at 02:44 PM
Tim Goodman is the Television Critic for the San Francisco Chronicle. In addition to criticism, he covers the industry and writes trend and analysis pieces, mostly about failure. 
