TV Time

Indeed, what is the appeal?

2009-02-06T16:53:00.005-05:00

Back when The Real Housewives of Orange County premiered in 2006, NPR's Andrew Wallenstein mused upon this same question. Why would people tune in for yet another show about Orange Country? The OC on Fox and MTV's Laguna Beach were extremely successful, so perhaps producers of Real Housewives decided they would go with the same location and a different age group. The show, now in its fourth season in Orange County, has also aired two seasons each of The Real Housewives of Atlanta and The Real Housewives of New York. Each season focuses on a group of catty friends with exorbitant sums of money and, apparently, free time. Wallenstein says the women are a lot like their mansions - - "impeccably maintained facades." But watching the show reveals that these women are flawed. He says this leaves viewers with feelings of "revulsion, fascination, and yes, envy."

I think this is why I watch the show. Isn't this the appeal of any show? Seinfeld, for example, though not a reality show, focused on the lives of a group of callous New Yorkers. I don't think I, or anyone really, aspired to be like them. Their disdain for pretty much every other person was enough to invoke revulsion in the audience - - how can live such a self-centered life - - as well as fascination and envy - - apparently the characters were at peace with doing whatever they liked, whatever the consequences for others.

Any successful show has a component people can relate to (Real Housewives' family matters, Seinfeld's everyday mundane storylines), as well as a component that is harder for audiences to identify with (Real Housewives' silly wealth, Jerry, George, Elaine and Kramer's self-centeredness and their obsession? with social norms. (Do the characters mock the norms or do they strive to uphold them, whatever the cost? They certainly discuss their ideas of the "norms" to a great extent.)) Thus Real Housewives remains on air, with a third season of The Real Housewives of New York premiering on February 17th, and audiences ashamedly addicted.

teeeeeeeveeeeeeee

2008-04-20T12:51:00.004-04:00

I've been reluctant to post on this blog, because I lack a consistent format. I've been trying to think of a good way to do it, but really, if I am posting about seasons of shows that are already over, it's kind of tricky. I don't think anyone wants to read posts about individual episodes (speculating on winners) when the shows are already over. It is not very likely that anyone is watching these things at the same time as me. However, I would still like to share my enjoyment of shows with people. And at the very least, collect my thoughts for myself. And now that new shows are actually airing weekly!!! maybe I can write about those!

Now, if I may tell you about my new favorite show: Top Chef!!!

I saw some of Season 3 when they were playing marathons last year, at my father's house. But my enjoyment of those few episodes was sort of disrupted by my father's and brother's vehement dislike of the show. I also didn't know any of the contestants, as I was entering it midseason, so I had no background.

But! I started watching Season 4 recently, and so enjoyed it that I began watching Season 2 when I had no new episodes of 4 to watch(which kind of confused things), and now I feel like I am a well-seasoned (no pun intended) viewer. I know what the judges are looking for, what molecular gastronomy is all about, the sins contestants must never commit... I feel like I could just jump right into the kitchen with them! But I will settle for my own kitchen and my own, pitifully basic, though very delicious, creations.

I think I am just excited for a different type of elimination reality show; after 9 cycles of ANTM, I am beginning to tire of the formulaic episodes and lack of surprising curve balls. Plus, I do love food, but these chefs and judges have so much knowledge of, and appreciation for, foods and cooking methods that I would never have known existed. Sadly, it seems that I could never be a Top Chef and a vegetarian, because there is so much meat involved in the chef world. Oh well.

Meanwhile, as I write this, I am also at Bravo's Top Chef website, and I accidentally saw who won Seasons 1 and 3!!! I just wanted to give some examples of my favorite recipes and some photos, but noooo. Way to ruin it for me, Bravo. Thanks.

2008-04-15T19:15:00.003-04:00

I'm down to one of four of my original ANTM favorites for this cycle: Katarzyna. Claire and Allison both got sent home. Allison very early on, for her unjustified ego, and Claire, just recently, for her lack of ability to be anything less than high fashion. Whatever. Fatima, one of my four favorites, became one of my least favorites as soon as she started talking. She is beautiful, but farrrrrr to arrogant (and too skinny), and believes herself to be above the other girls in every way possible. When she is, in my opinion, an inferior model to other contestants who just began their career.
I really don't care for any other girls left on the show, besides Katarzyna, and Whitney, the plus-sized model. And while she may get to the top three, I really doubt that she they would choose her as the next top model.
My realistic guesses for top three: Anya, Katarzyna, and maybe Lauren? As the awkward underdog. Or Whitney in her place, because no contest, she has a better walk. I really disliked Anya at first, because she just sounds obnoxious and says stupid things, and her alien-like makeover didn't improve the matter. But when she stood up to delusional (devoted to speaking in the 3rd person) Dominique, siding with (apparently CRAZY) Lauren, it made me her seem so much more bearable.
This show is full of crazies! Dominique lives in a delusional world where no one but Dominique exists in. Lauren goes from being a meek, awkward girl, to a manic lunatic who yells at her roommates. And Fatima lives in a world where her scowl is pretty, and she is the only educated girl in the house. (Which reminds me: I expected the editors to focus on clips of Katarzyna talking about her Ivy League educated and being all snobby like they did with Yaya in Cycle 3, but so far, no mention! Perhaps they're saving that for a time when they want the audience to hate her so we're okay with her getting voted off.)

"You took me by the hand, made me a man, that one night, you made everything alright..."

2008-04-14T12:06:00.009-04:00

At last! The first of 6 remaining new episodes of The Office aired last Thursday! I am a bit delayed in writing anything about it, I know, but better late than never, right?

"Dinner Party" focused on the office relationships, including Jim/Pam, Andy/Angela/Dwight, Michael/Dwight, and, most excruciatingly, Jan/Michael. Oh, and Pam/Michael. Hahaha, how amazing was it that Michael not only told Jan that he and Pam had any kind of relationship, and that Jan believed him? It was so ridiculous, and added so much more tension to the party. Many episodes of The Office have been extremely awkward, but they often provided some sort of relief in the form of a parallel storyline. "Dinner Party" held us captive in Michael's condo.

I loved all of the little details, like Pam's reaction when Dwight showed up ("Awesome!"), Jan's attempt to dance with Jim (was it maybe to make Pam jealous since Jan "knew" about Michael and Pam?), Jim's apartment being flooded, the St. Paul's girl beer light, the liberal use of "babe"... yeesh.

Some people I talked to felt that this was not the episode they had been waiting for after all this time, with the strike and all. That the episode should have been filled with outright hilarious moments, with alllll of The Office gang, rather than a select few. But it was the episode they had been planning to film right before the strike began, so why should they have changed the course of the show? I think it showed the genius of the whole cast and crew, to be able to pull off the awkwardness and still make it funny.

I wonder where Jan and Michael will go from here. We knew Michael was miserable, and Jan had gone crazy, but not quite this far. I hope something happens soon, because I can't imagine living in a condo filled with the smell of Serenity by Jan. Remember how excited Michael was, in "Office Olympics," to be a homeowner? How sad is it that he is now relegated to a bench at the foot of the bed, surrounded by eggshell colored walls and photos of Jan with other men?

PS: I read online that there may be a spin-off, also created by Greg Daniels, coming in 2009. This worries me, because spin-offs are generally... not so good. I wonder who and what the spin-off would be about, and where it would take place. I don't want to think about anyone leaving the show for a spin-off, because then the show would not be the same. What would make it a good new show? I don't know.
PPS: According to the writers of this episode, the song by Hunter, Jan's former assistant, is about Jan. Ew? (Office Tally q&a)

I really need new episodes of The Office

2008-03-14T22:51:00.003-04:00

I could use new episodes of any of my favorite shows, actually. These include, in this order: The Office, Dexter, Entourage, Weeds, and Flight of the Conchords. Plus The L Word, I think, and there are only two upcoming new episodes (the season started in January) due to the Writer's Strike. Bah. I also love The Wire, and have seen the first two seasons, but I watch it with my roommates, and we haven't had much shared downtime in the last month to watch it! So we still have several new (for us) seasons of that to watch.

But meanwhile, I have continued watching shows like Lipstick Jungle, which has improved only a little since the first episode. I still think there is something lacking in the show. And I still don't like Brooke Shields. But if I may compare the show to Cashmere Mafia again, I find that the link between the three main characters in LJ is just not based on something as strong as the link between the characters in CM. In CM, the four women went to college together and have been tight ever since. In LJ, they just happened to become friends... which is all well and good, but it seems to me that the college bond is just a little stronger, and even gives audiences a little more background on the characters.

Luckily, since I got a job, I don't have as much time for TV watching, so I haven't been going through seasons of shows as fast. Which is nice. You know, to live a little in the real world.

Gossip Girl in the New Yorker - Books vs. TV

2008-03-09T14:03:00.015-04:00

The most recent issue of The New Yorker reviewed Cecily von Zeigesar's Gossip Girl (series), which made me think to look back for a review of (the television show) (I found one written in November).
The reviewer of the books quite liked them, I think, for von Zeigesar's clever and witty writing, and the ease with which she connects to her intended audience.

Neither reviewer, however, was a big fan of the TV show. The reviewer of the books pinpoints her major problem with the show:

Among the many errors that the TV series makes, perhaps the most glaring is its promotion of the books’ parents from their status as emblems of parental inadequacy to that of characters in their own right. In the TV version, we are asked to follow the stories of the parents in tandem with the stories of their children... What makes classic children’s literature so appealing (to all ages) is its undeviating loyalty to the world of the child.

I certainly agree with her opinion on this. Watching the show, I was always ready to get up and get a glass of water, or whatever I needed to do, whenever the parents took to the screen.

The reviewer of the TV show discusses the circumstances that should have made Gossip Girl a hit CW show: the gossipy best-selling series, the over-privileged teenagers at the center of the stories - "Because this is a world open only to the few, it’s of great interest to the many." - and Josh Schwartz's part in creating, writing, and producing the show. After the success of The OC, obviously his next project would be popular.

But the writer dislikes the generic drama, the Abercrombie and Fitch-worthy actors, and the lack of center in the show:

(Hilariously, the Brooklyn of the TV show is so benign and “Dawson’s Creek”-y that a friend of the family habitually enters the apartment through an unlocked window.) Given these types of characters, there is a lot of soap opera, but there’s no center to the show, and no sense of life as it’s actually lived. There’s rarely a moment of quiet in “Gossip Girl”—perhaps because its content seems to be secondary to its primary purpose of marketing pop songs, which are heard throughout.

In my opinion, the pop music is often obnoxious, especially after the success The OC had with introducing its huge audiences to lesser known, small bands. That worked with the types of characters in The OC, but I think it would work equally well with Gossip Girl. The characters in Gossip Girl are the elite, fashionable, trend-setting, popular kids in their public spheres. So would they really be listening to Timbaland's "Way I Are" and Justin Timberlake's "What Goes Around/Comes Around" (both of which were played in the Pilot episode) months after it was new in the viewer's world? I doubt it. They ought to be trying to find the newest, coolest, music, and spreading that around.

This reviewer goes on to say that The OC
"was a much richer show than “Gossip Girl” seems to be so far — more serious and also more fun..." Her review was ritten for the November issue of The New Yorker, before the last 4, and I think the best 4, episodes aired. Perhaps she was pleased to see the show pick up its pace and become richer - more fun, and more dramatic.

Most Guilty Pleasure

2008-03-04T22:20:00.007-05:00

Last year, I was home over spring break, and found myself in front of the TV when nothing was on but The Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll. And I watched it. When I went back to school, I downloaded the next episode, because I was a little bit curious to see where the competition went... but then I got sucked in! THEN I found a friend who also watched it, so the two of us got together every week to watch it. But I wouldn't discuss it with her in front of people, or name the show in front of people, because I was embarrassed. I would be like, "Hey, do you want to watch... that show later today?" or, "You wanna hang out and find something... to watch?" Which I suppose is sketchier than simply saying what it was.
It is a guilty pleasure because:

I do not like the Pussycat Dolls, or appreciate their singing talent
I think it is bizarre that a musical group has a so-called "creator," as if it were a new software or car... or something
The show is predictable, and filled with so much... filler
Cheesy Mark McGrath is the host
I HATED the winner of last year's show... so I have little respect for the judges (including Lil Kim...)

And finally, I am most guilty because:

I am now watching the second season, which is called... The Pussycat Dolls Present: Girlicious

When they tell the unlucky girls who are voted off, "I am sorry... you will not be a member of Girlicious," I have to laugh. Because if I was a part of something called Girlicious, I would feel silly and ridiculous, and therefore relieved to be sent home

Anyway, it is fun because:

The girls can dance (though not necessarily in a way I would want to myself), and some can sing
And I like to see their progress
I guess... I like to see the funny girly fights? ("I'm just a better singer than her!" "How can she say that about me??? How dare she! When I am so much more experienced!!!) It is amusing. And filler.
They sing fun (pop) songs, from different decades...

I am not sure what it is that draws me to it every week. But I am still as ashamed as ever to admit that I watch it, and am currently downloading the most recent episode as I type this.

Hilarious? No? Note the creator's (Robin Antin's - the woman who is not Lil Kim) reactions. They do not seem... shall we say... deeply moved or real. IMO.
My roommate after seeing a bit of the show: "Do they all dance with their butts?"

Lipstick Jungle

2008-02-26T22:37:00.005-05:00

This weekend, as I was lying sick in bed, I gave Lipstick Jungle a try. As I suspected, it is very similar to Sex and the City, Cashmere Mafia, and Big Shots. Though this show is only three women, rather than a group of 4. Some of the very specific similarities between Cashmere Mafia and Lipstick Jungle are:

Nico Reilly of LJ and Mia Mason of CM are both executives of big, bold, fashion, magazines.
Victory Ford (LJ) and Caitlin Dowd (CM) are both in the fashion industry - Victory is a designer, and Caitlin works for a makeup company. Both have been in charge of runway shows in New York's fashion week.
Both shows are set in Manhattan.
Wendy Healy (Brooke Shields in LJ) and Zoe Burdon (CM) both struggle to be good, working, mothers. Their husbands often take up the slack, which makes the women feel guilty.
Victory Ford and Juliet Draper each date a billionaire.
Both groups of women have a frenemy who causes trouble out of some sort of jealousy.

... I'm sure I could go on. I'm not necessarily saying it's a bad thing that they share so many characteristics. However, I have to say that for some reason I was not all that impressed with Lipstick Jungle. Perhaps it was my fever, or the fact that I'm not a huge fan of Brooke Shields, or even that I had already satisfied my quota for this type of show. Or maybe it was just that the lines weren't as witty or believable from this cast, compared to Cashmere Mafia. I suppose I can watch the 4th episode this week and see if anything picks up. Otherwise, I'll be content forget about it.

Little did I know: Darren Star is the producer of both Sex and the City and Cashmere Mafia, and worked with Candace Bushnell, the author of Sex and the City, who is now the producer of Lipstick Jungle. I guess they couldn't think of a way to put their creative talents together again.

America's Next Top Model

2008-02-24T17:49:00.004-05:00

I've watched this show since it started, though some of the seasons I watched at the end, as marathons. That's really the best way, I think. Another good way is to watch it every week, and make predictions! Or choose favorites, anyway. Last season I looked at the website before the show started, and I decided Saleisha was my favorite. And look! She won! Which is actually very unusual. My favorites usually don't win: Elyse from Cycle 1, Mercedes from Cycle 2, Yaya from 3, Kim from Cycle 5. Some of the seasons, particularly 8, which Jaslene won, I was not too excited about anyone.
After watching last week's premiere of Cycle 10, my favorites are as follows: Allison, Claire, Katarzyna and Fatima. Though I can't say I am too hopeful about Claire staying in, because she is a new mother. In the past, this has always created a problem, as they start missing their baby/family a lot after a while. Which is understandable. As an Ivy League grad, I'd say Katarzyna is at a disadvantage, because all of the judges seem to find that being not only a college graduate, but an Ivy Leaguer, means that you believe yourself to be better than others. Though I believe the judges compared her to Paulina Porizkova, who is not only a big model, but the newest judge on the show (taking the place of Twiggy). So that is probably a good thing.

My least favorites, and I can't believe they got past the (ridiculous) "Top Model Prep!!!", are: Kimberly, Lauren, and Anya. As for Lauren, I know the show likes to be responsible for creating a model out of an awkward geeky girl (Shandi from Cycle 2), but at least put on a pair of heels before getting to the casting room. And why would it be a good idea to use makeup to give yourself a black eye for a photo shoot? And Kimberly is barely even cute, let alone beautiful, and neither she, nor Anya, have shown a great aptitude for speech.
Obviously the one episode I have seen so far didn't give me a great idea of either ability or character, so I'll just have to wait and see...

Project Runway 4

2008-02-19T13:03:00.003-05:00

Next week is the finale of this season of Project Runway. Go Team Fierce! Since the first episode, I have been rooting for Christian. I really like Jillian, too. Her designs are great, and she puts a lot of effort into making them. Actually, I wanted her to win the most recent challenge, which Christian ended up winning. Because it was so great when her model opened up the jacket and we saw the gold inside. And I think that it was an awesome transformation from painting to fashion. But her personality is so blank. I guess she doesn't feel the need to be outgoing and flamboyant, as others on the show do, but it's just so much fun to watch Christian. The best quote of the season has to be, "If I were a superhero, my name would be Ferosha Couture, and I'd spray my enemies in the eye with hairspray."
I like Chris fine, and I like him more than Rami. Because Rami is "passionate about drapery." I don't really understand why he thought it was a good idea, for his final challenge, to make yet another draped dress, when that is exactly what the judges would have been expecting from him. Sure, I would wear that dress... and most of his other dresses. But they were all one color, and did not seem very high fashion. So I would rather see Chris go to Fashion Week than Rami, whose line would probably just be more of what we've seen from him all season.
I seem to remember liking Jack, and was pretty bummed when he had to leave the show. I think he had some promise. As did Kit. They just needed a little more time. But as I said, I've been a fan of Christian from the first episode! No matter what, I think all of the collections they show at Fashion Week are going to be great.

Mad Men, Mad Times

2008-02-18T22:19:00.006-05:00

My most recent TV series has been AMC's Mad Men, which I just finished up last night, upon recommendations from my brother and a friend. I really enjoyed it, and I thought it was one of the more original shows around. Even though it's basically just about housewives and husbands (who work on Madison Avenue at an Advertising Agency), which is a common subject, setting the show in 1960 is unusual. It seemed really well done... I mean, obviously people put a lot of effort into getting details right.
I was very frustrated, early on, imagining what it would have been like to be a woman in the 60s. Specifically, the episode where a young divorced!, working! mother of two moves into the neighborhood. All the mothers are atwitter with the news, and they seem in horror that the woman could have a) let her husband go, b) done something to make her husband go and c) be a working mother, and still provide a good home for their children. Whereas these woman all have maids and/or nannies cleaning and watching their children for hours every week... Even though they are housewives. And most of them have cheating husbands. But this woman actually did something about it.
Another frustrating issue was when Betty's doctor suggested a psychiatrist, which was far less common at that time. Even though it was her own mind that was in question, it was clearly not her decision whether she should go or not. Not only did her husband decide whether it was acceptable or necessary, but then he was privy to all of the information she discussed with the psychiatrist, without Betty ever hearing any of the analyses herself. AAAAH.
As a graduate of an all-women's college, I was excited any time I heard the names of one of the Seven Sisters. Until I remembered that none of the Ivy Leagues were even open to women at the time, so it was less of a choice for them. And they were obviously not expected to do anything with the degrees they earned. Not that it makes the Seven Sisters any less cool, it was just another point of difference between the way things were and the way things are.
I had a hard time actually liking any characters, including the people I suppose are the "main" characters. Don Draper, Peggy Olsen, and, I guess, Betty Draper. Though there were some endearing traits in each of them, I found weaknesses in their character that offset the nice things. But then, I think they are each a product of the times... So are they to blame? Well, Don Draper and his buddies at Sterling Cooper are some of the people making the ads that make the times. If advertising isn't a manipulation of society, what is? He may have made himself from nothing, but I personally don't like who he made himself into. His secretary, Peggy Olsen, is a nice girl with great ideas, but her obsession over stupid Pete Campbell seemed related to her desire to climb up the working latter, and not in a smart, independent way. And Betty just seems so weak! I wanted to just shake some sense into her. And smokes all the time! Around her children! I can't imagine what it would smell like to hang around with these people. Or, what their lungs would look like. Or what my lungs would look like. Nearly every episode I wondered if they actually had to smoke that much for the filming of the show, or if they were some sort of fake cigarettes. Please.
I'm not sure if anyone was supposed to a very beloved character, because I really think the series is commenting on how despicable the situation was... when men seemed to actually feel they had a right, if not an obligation, to sleep with women other than their wives, and wives could not even letter an air-conditioning salesman into their homes. Because really, their homes belonged to their husband. (At least that's what it said to me.)

The Return of TV

2008-02-17T16:24:00.009-05:00

With the Writer's Strike over, shows can resume production. At last!!!
The New York Times and The LA Times (I can't link to it, but if you search for "Is Your Show Coming Back," you'll find it) combined provide information as to when our favorite shows will return to their primetime slots.
I was sad to see that some shows, like Ugly Betty won't return until the fall, but ecstatic to see that The Office will return on April 10!!! That's still quite a wait, but knowing that there will at least be a few more episodes to the season makes it well worth it. Oh, how I love The Office. It is my number one favorite series. FYI.
Meanwhile, folks will have to suffer through more of the same, lame, "reality" based shows that have taken over primetime, if they want to sit down and watch TV. Lie Detector? Dance War? Really? I have rarely had reason to turn on the TV in my apartment - it only gets ABC, NBC and Fox - but while watching reruns of Friends or some sports game, I have seen the commercials for the shows and been in disbelief that anyone could put the shows on air.

Gossip Girl: Guilty Pleasure?

2008-02-17T13:11:00.005-05:00

Honestly, I don't feel all that guilty about watching this show. It's so fun! More than watching it, I feel guilty about having read the books and watching the premiere of the show the night it premiered. In my defense, I worked at a library at the time, and I saw the books going in and out like crazy, so I tried one of them out on a break and I was hooked. It was during a winter break from college - what else did I have to do?
So when I learned that the creators of The OC were working on turning the series into a television show, I eagerly awaited its premiere. At first I was a tiny bit disappointed by changes made to characters (Dan and Rufus Humphrey) or storylines, as one always is when a book is translated into a show or movie, but then I let it slide, and figured the show would do its own thing. It's not like the book is super high-quality. (Sorry.) And at least foundations are still in tact.
What exactly is enjoyable about the show? I suppose it's the intrigue of seeing how the rich and glamorous live... however unrealistic it seems to me. The stories are full of great high school drama and romance, even without the sense that these kids are actually in school. Do they really have sufficient time to roam around Brooklyn and Manhattan every day after school, preparing for charity events and other parties, or cutting up hundreds of paper snowflakes? I rarely see them pretend to do homework - the only references to school are their uniforms and any kind of disciplinary action that may come as a consequence from bad behavior. But personally, I find that it's just as enjoyable to imagine the lives of these beautiful, spoiled Upper East Side brats as it was to imagine living in a mansion in the OC.

Sex and the Working Wo/Man

2008-02-16T14:02:00.001-05:00

I started watching Big Shots on ABC.com because I wanted to see Michael Vartan. I loved him on Alias, and when I saw commercials for the show, I figured I'd give it a shot. This is one of my guilty pleasures. Guilty because it's really not very good... the storylines go back and forth with no resolutions and no promise of actually moving forward. But I kept watching it until there were no more episodes because it's funny, and I do like seeing Michael Vartan.
This show, and the more recent Cashmere Mafia both remind me of Sex and the City. Both shows are centered around the lives of 4 best friends who each have different jobs and are in different places in their lives, but share their latest crises with one another over a drink or a round of golf. Cashmere Mafia is even set in the same city! This show seems to be better than Big Shots, at least, and the acting is a bit better. Lucy Liu is fun to watch and, like Carrie Bradshaw, has a taste for fashion. Now I need to watch an episode of the new Lipstick Jungle, which is based on the novel by Candace Bushnell, creator of Sex and the City. Based on commercials for the show, it too is similar.
However, can any of the shows have the same appeal as Sex and the City? It was one of the first television series that focused on the sex lives of women, as well as their roles in society and the workplace. Cashmere Mafia and Lipstick Jungle may have dramatic, comedic storylines that people want to see develop, but they won't be as original. Also, they're on major network channels, so they won't have the same opportunities to bare-all as Sex and the City did... or was that not part of the appeal?

Dexter

2008-02-15T12:24:00.000-05:00

During this period of extreme TV-watching, I decided to try out Dexter. My father watched the first season when it originally ran, but I had no time for it, and no Showtime. As I watched the first episode, I could tell that it was going to be fantastic, and I watched the first 8 episodes, which lead up to a most important revelation, in 2 days. Sadly, I had to fly to Paris the next day (for a week), and while I was gone, my roommates started watching it on their own. I had told them what a great show it was, so they gave it a chance. Luckily, I called from Paris and found out that they were up to episode 8 and I had to beg them to wait for me to watch the rest! On the flight home, I was excited not only to get back to my apartment, but to finish up the season before going home for Christmas festivities. When I walked in the door, though I was exhausted, I sat down and we watched the next two episodes, went to sleep, and finished the season before driving home.
What a great first season! Based on the book by Jeff Lindsey, the first season of Dexter runs 12 episodes. As the season moves through the episodes, the characters are established and developed very well, and the storylines are wonderfully suspenseful.
It's an interesting idea to base a show on a serial killer, and have viewers watch the show from his point of view. Did I want him to kill his victims? Usually, the answer was yes, both because they were horrible people, and because I wanted Dexter to have his satisfaction. Which is twisted. In some ways, it reminded me of The Sopranos, or any other gangster/mafia film in which the audience grows fond of the bad guy. But how often were those bad guys making a ritual out of slicing up bodies and becoming jealous of another killer's method?

"Power-Watching TV"

2008-02-10T21:57:00.000-05:00

This weekend the Boston Globe ran an article, Power-Watching TV, which gave a title to what I have been doing: powering through seasons of television in a matter of days. The article writes about this trend as an effect of the Writer's Strike (now 3 months long, but coming to an end this week? Dare I type it?). It seems people have chosen to take the chance provided by weeks of reruns to catch up on years of shows they didn't never had time for. Recommendations from both friends and strangers... including Netflix.
I am not exempt from this trend, it looks like. Although, I must say, I began power-watching TV as soon as shows were released on DVD, years ago. Being in college, I had no TV - only my computer's DVD drive. Free time did not usually include primetime television hours, and it became difficult to keep up with any programs from week to week, even if I decided to trek down to my dorm's common room. The convenience of watching shows at my own leisure, the absence of commercials, and the appeal of back-to-back episodes (what will happen next??) were all positives.
The Writer's Strike, and perhaps my post-college unemployment, merely gave me increased amounts of time and enthusiasm for shows of the past, and shows that might possibly return at the end of the Strike.

Number 1

2008-02-08T13:04:00.000-05:00

I read a lot of blogs about television shows, celebrities, Hollywood news, and the like. But I often find myself disagreeing with the bloggers' opinions on one show or another, and thus decided to write my own blog.
For the last few months (basically since the Writers' Strike began) I have been watching TV shows on my computer, consuming entire seasons in a week or less. Some of the shows are long-running and still being produced (though currently on hiatus), but I never had time to get into them until now. Other shows that I have been watching have only completed one season, or have halted production due to the strike.
I'm not very picky with the shows. I take recommendations from friends or from popularity ratings online. You name it, and I have probably seen at least one episode of it, if not every single episode ever made. There are some exceptions, however. You'll see when I post more.
I will admit that many shows I have taken on are what some may call "guilty pleasures." Certainly these shows are not on par with others which are lauded for their originality, or acting, directing, and writing. In my opinion. But they're no less enjoyable because of their predictability! They're possibly even more enjoyable because all of the nuances in the show stand out more.
Another thing that irks me about TV is that people, specifically my parents, look down upon it, and favor books. I love reading, especially when I have a good novel in front of me. But what can you learn from a novel that you can't learn from a quality television program? Considering they run week after week, they can develop characters and plots further than some books. You can pick up just as much vocabulary from television. Furthermore, you can learn a lot about the audiences the shows are intended for - which are more current than the audiences "classic" novels were intended for. I mean, I guess you don't learn a lot about history, but isn't there something to be said for learning about the culture you are living in, now?