duffy_99 just let me know that my favorite show, The Glades, starring the absolute hunky dreamboat, Matt Passmore, has been RENEWED!
I AM DELIRIOUS!
*does happy dance*
On another television note, I offer up my review of what I hope will be the winner of the 2012-2013 "War of the Talk Show Hosts" season. And who do I think will be the winner? Under the cut, natch!
The Jeff Probst Show, naturally!
But heck, even if I wasn't already crazy about him, I'd still vote it number one - so far. I'm guessing every network is trying to find the new Oprah or Ellen, and in an effort to do that, Jeff, Steve Harvey, Katie Couric and even Ricki Lake, are throwing down the glove to become the new talk show phenom. Originally, I thought Steve Harvey would be a shoe-in, but so far (after three episodes), it's not doing it for me. Partly because they're not allowing Steve to BE Steve. I keep expecting him to do an "Ellen" - meaning a few minutes of 'stand-up' before getting into the show, but he's not. :( The shows also seems to ramble and appears unfocused, which is ridiculous when all he has to do is make this the live version of "Act Like a Lady, but Think Like a Man".
Katie Couric's show is simply an extension of early morning television before she became an anchor and it doesn't hold me. I keep switching channels. Ricki Lake's show seems more female oriented and is pretty much her old show, which sorry, I was never into. She was the soft fuzzy TalkShock host and still is. *shrugs*
But Jeff's show is actually quite brilliant. For one thing, he figured out that Oprah's final season, with her "Behind-the-scenes" series on OWN, was exceptional and, when the viewers could find OWN, they tuned in for the behind-the-camera view of O's 25th year. So he wisely decided to try and do the same with his show; weave the action with a peek into producing the show - and it works. Well, I love it, anyway. :) I think he's managed to combine both seamlessly. The peeks are both fantastic and intricately woven in throughout the hour. I'm guessing he also figured he'd need a 'gimmick' - as all talk shows must have (some have more than one), so he drew on his Survivor show to provide us with something called an "Ambush Adventure". At the end of each show, someone in the audience is offered this "Ambush Adventure" where they're told they won't know what the adventure is before saying yes, but once they do say yes, they have to complete the adventure. It's totally awesome and the adventures, so far, have been fun, fantastic and tied into a previous part of that day's show.
Propst devised this show, tested it, has a hand in every part of it (including his wife's hand) and I think the show benefits greatly. When Survivor first aired in 2000, the winner was announced on location, but the next few seasons had Bryant Gumble (and even Rosie O'Donnell) host the reunion show - and yeah, I think fans were getting as angry as I was. Why wasn't the man in the middle of the action allowed to do the Reunion show? We finally got our wish during Survivor Thailand (2002) and Jeff was the Reunion host from then on, to, imho, the benefit of the show. He obviously had greater insight to each season since he was, you know, like, there - so could ask the meaty "What were you thinking?" questions. I think he brings that same ability to his talk show, which he clearly loves. He's really enjoying himself and he's certainly taking me with him! LOL! (actually, Jeff could take me anywhere - and if I could talk him into taking me to Matt's house - I'd be very happy)
Oh, White Collar 'review' and other stuff, under cut.
Grrrrrr. Didn't like. Nope, not at all. Okay, I'm shallow enough to love the fight (Matt B in fighting trunks? Ohyeah), but the rest? *rolls eyes* Isn't it time for even Peter's crew to start believing in Neal? I really hated it when Jones tells Peter (in the ring) to basically kick Neal's ass and he says it ... well, really MEAN. Sure, Peter is his boss, but part of the problems I'm having is that Neal, whether trustworthy or not, has CLOSED cases for them. For God's sake, we're on season FUCKING four!
Peter should know Neal by now - this is the man who caught Neal. He should know to listen, to hear the truth and the boundries Neal surrounds the truth with, like saying that he wouldn't show Sam the tape. Come ON, writers! Just saying that he wouldn't show Sam the tape should have told Peter two things: 1) Neal, in saying that, is being truthful and 2) in stating #1, he's also telling Peter the obvious: he'll see Sam. After all, if Neal had promised not to see Sam - he wouldn't need to promise not to SHOW Sam the tape. Somehow, Neal's innate honor seems to continually escape Peter. Yes, he's a con man, but an honorable one. You just have to listen.
If it sounds as if I'm on Neal's side, yeah, I am. But as usual, I blame the writers who have slipped the bonds of whatever this season. Peter is SMART - really SMART - and they're dumbing him down to add punch. Don't they realize we could have had all the same angst without the trust issues popping up again? Without Peter's team never letting Neal in? And until they do, well, it's just wrong.
And am I the only one who doesn't think Sam is Neal's dad? That he's actually a bad guy? At least-I hope the writers are that smart. Because I'd have written it with Sam trying to put a wedge between Neal and Peter - with that phone call to Neal, where he just happens to mention that Peter visited him, thus setting Neal off. Then the so-called junked apartment? Puleeze. I hope the writers are that clever, because otherwise, Neal's dad has to die - and the only way to make that work means jumping the shark - badly. So here's to Sam NOT being Neal's dad but a corrupt cop looking for that box with the names....
Off the top of my head, no other season finales (of the non-mainstream networks) really made an impact (except The Glades, with Jim asking Callie to marry him just when we thought he was going to break it up), so I'm hoping next week's WC surprises me. And maybe the finale of Perception will as well. *fingers crossed* I admit that Perception comes across as a self-indulgent show (on Eric's part), but I'm still enjoying it and look forward to discovering more about our 'crazy' doctor - which next week's finale promises. Rizzoli and Isles was...bleh.
Oh, and could someone tell me why in the HELL, as TNT tries to promote Major Crimes, they failed in every single snip of last week's epi, to TELL us that the co-star of the most popular show, NCIS, was their guest star? Namely Michael Weatherly? Some of the 'coming attractions' didn't even SHOW him. Hello? Have we forgotten the word PUBLICITY? *shakes head sadly* And Michael was GREAT - the only good thing in the episode.
Okay, tv talk over. Quick word on an old BBC series, Fortunes of War. I actually had to turn it off just as episode 4 started. For some reason, it was very...it made me very uncomfortable and I even started to have a small panic attack. Very weird. I don't know if I can return to it, which is saying something since I love both Emma and Kenneth (although Ken's ego is a bit too big). Maybe it's because of the books? I read them ages ago, but the description of Guy stands clear, and Kenneth is so far from it that the series became something else entirely (hey, Guy's wife isn't exactly Emma either). Anyway, it unsettled me. So many clues to what would happen, and so many refusing to see them even though they were living right in the middle of it all. I guess that's mostly true for all of us, which is...yeah, unsettling. But it did remind me of my favorite quote, which Guy shares with his students: From William Hazlitt (sp?):
"The love of liberty is the love the others; the love of power is the love of ourselves...."
Seems especially appropriate today - which might be why I found Fortunes of War so unsettling?
Okay, off to watch something to make me laugh. Is the Big Bang Theory on yet?