I don't spend nearly enough time watching public television. But Variety mentioned something to be on the lookout for next year.

 

David Tennant, who plays the latest incarnation of the Doctor on "Doctor Who," starred in a Royal Shakespeare Company prodcution of "Hamlet." Also in the cast was Patrick Stewart of "Star Trek: The Next Generation" fame.

 

"Great Performances" will air a taped version next year. Allons-y!

 

- posted by Raoul

So over the weekend we got the last ever episode of "Kings." And I was left wishing the show had gotten ratings equal to its quality

 

We got to see the show deepen and evolve over the course of a few episodes. And in the finale, we got to see God's power in a way that TV rarely shows so overtly.

 

Which makes me wonder if the show would have fared better if it had shown earlier that its God wasn't just something that people talked about, not just the manifestation of strange coincidence, but a real entity? I mean, early on, we had the crown of butterflies deal. But that's a little tame compared to someone being raised from the dead -- or at least from the gravely wounded.

 

I think just about every character managed to gain some layers to them, with the possible exception of David. I'm not sure if that was by design or by default.

 

The stage was set for a potentially epic turn, with Silas turning over every rock to find David, with Michelle having David's baby, with Jack doing his penance for his botched coup.

 

But alas, it was not meant to be.

 

- posted by Raoul

Last night, TNT debuted "Dark Blue," its new cop drama about officers who go undercover and the complications that leading double or triple lives has for them.

 

All in all, it was reasonably well done, even though it suffered from pilotitis, that dreaded disease where everyone's backstory has to be stuffed into 42 minutes. Also, you had to be willing to ignore people acting stupid for no purpose than to advance the plot. But it was a reasonably pleasant way to pass an hour, and I hope the show evolves into something more.

 

It features Dylan McDermott of "The Practice" fame as Lt. Carter Shaw, who heads up our heroes, who apparently are answerable to no one. Shaw was apparently somewhat of a wunderkind who we are told should have a prison named after him for all the bad guys he's put away. But then some unspecified tragedy cost him his wife. And he started up this deep undercover unit. He has stubble, which shows he's DARK and CONFLICTED. We are also told that he would do anything to protect his people and anything to get his man. And that he's "the Prince of Darkness." That's a lot to heap onto one guy's shoulders.

 

Other characters include Dean, a guy who is apparently so good at being a crook that his coworkers worry about him going over to the dark side; Ty, a husband who apparently hooked up with a woman while undercover and formed real feelings for her, and Jamie, a newbie who had a troubled past and lied about it to become a cop.

 

The thing about "Dark Blue" is that it just doesn't feel that dark. McDermott tries to be snarky, but he still seems just as white-knightish as he did on "The Practice." For all the concerns about whether the one co-worker has gone over to the dark side, there's not really anything on screen to justify them (at least, not as far as the characters are aware). I kept comparing this to the violence, vice, corruption on a show like "The Shield," and "Dark Blue" came up short in a big way. It's as if a Jerry Bruckheimer show is too glitzy to be as cynical as this show would need to be to live up to its premise.

 

- posted by Raoul

I really, really wanted to like "Hawthorne." Not only does it have Jada Pinkett Smith but it also has Michael Vartan of "Alias."

 

But really, the whole time I watched last night's pilot, it seemed like it was trying too darn hard and the titular character was too much of a Mary Sue for me to want to tune in regularly.

 

The premise is that Jada's Christina Hawthorne, nursing supervisor at Richmond Trinity. The pilot clunkily establishes she lost her husband about a year ago and is still grieving and still talking to him; she has a teen daughter who's a bit of a rebel; she befriends homeless women; she backs up her nurses against incompetent doctors; she's a tough lover; she has a mother-in-law who's affiliated with the hospital that she has a contentious relationship with and she will fight the system when need be.

 

And that's not to mention the show having to establish all the other characters, including a cute American-pie nurse, a male nurse who wanted to be a doctor but blew his MCATs, a nurse who has a prosthetic leg and so forth.

 

Maybe an episode that doesn't feel like it has to cram all these things about her and that can just be would be more watchable.

 

Are you going to give it a chance?

 

- posted by Raoul

Edie Falco is back in her new role, the lead character in "Nurse Jackie." The Showtime series essentially is the offspring of "House" and "Grey's Anatomy."

 

Like House, Jackie doesn't suffer fools gladly. She's often grumpy, she's a drug addict, and she's smarter than most of the people around her.

 

Like Meredith, she's got a complicated love life and web of relationships.

 

I wasn't so sold on the first episode, but am willing to give it a second shot.

 

Sound off on what you think.

 

- posted by Raoul

When "Prison Break" first premiered, I thought it was ludicrous. I never would have guessed how much it would grow on me -- in large part because it is so ludicrous.

 

Friday was the two-hour finale, and like the rest of the series before it, there were some big highs and big lows.

 

There were the usual sets of random coincidences, clueless cops, gunfire, mind games and so forth.

 

Of course, you had to love the return of Paul Kellerman. And the near-inevitable exoneration of most of our heroes. I liked most of their fates: Lincoln still running his surf shop, Mahone hooking up with Lang, Sucre and his kid (and presumably Maricruz, even though we didn't get to see her).

 

But man, it irks me that T-Bag was left breathing air, and the writers killed off Michael for no real good reason. Would it have killed the writers to give the happy ending?

 

It drives me a little crazy that we didn't even get one good Michael-Sarah kiss at the end, and that we had that long, creepy set of scenes where T-Bag was threatening to rape her. 

 

I know Robert Knepper is a good actor, but the T-Bag show grew pretty tiresome, and I'd rather have seen him killed in action than back in Fox River.

 

And I might have missed a few episodes, but was it ever explained exactly what the deal was with Scylla? Or are we not supposed to care beyond "It's a sophisticated computer thingamabob?"

 

What did you guys think?

 

- posted by Raoul

I have to admit I haven't been watching "Grey's Anatomy" all that much this season. In part, it's been a victim of programming: I generally preferred to watch "Hell's Kitchen" and "Supernatural," both on at the same time. In part, the show left me with somewhat of a distaste in my mouth, between Gizzie and Meredith's whining and Addison's leaving. I didn't feel much of a connection to the characters.

 

But I watched the last couple episodes, if for no reason than I was curious what would become of Izzie and George. It's been rumored that both Katherine Heigl and T.R. Knight wanted to leave to go on and have more opportunity to do other things. And so, it's good that the show apparently gave them the opportunity.

 

There's enough room to hope against hope that either character or both might return. But the ending -- showing George in the military uniform he never got to wear meeting Izzie wearing her prom dress -- seems to me to lean pretty heavily toward both characters being gone.

 

I'm going to miss George. I like that they brought him back to his roots of being a nice guy with an above-average set of morals. How many people would jump in front of a bus to save a perfect stranger? I don't feel too ashamed to admit I probably wouldn't. I wish they had developed George's desire to join the military a little further. Presumably he was swayed by the kid who wanted his leg amputated so he could return to his real family. It makes me a little sad that George didn't realize that he had a "real" family in the staff at Seattle Grace.

 

Izzie, I'm not so sure about. I think Alex was right about their shotgun marriage and her character, which started off so sweet, got pretty annoying. It seemed like there was a tug-of-war between Heigl and the writers going on behind the scenes, and we viewers had to pay the price. But hey, at least this time around, Heigl can't complain about not having Emmy-worthy material written for her, right?

 

But what was most interesting to me was all the stuff beyond the big goodbyes. Bailey giving up on her dream of being a pediatric surgery fellow because of Tucker's ultimatum and deciding she would divorce him. Meredith's "wedding" to Derek was surprisingly touching, given that I hate that pairing. McSteamy's turning into a puddle of goo over Little Grey and then trying to reclaim his manhood seemed cool. And then there was the thawing of Cristina, both in being able to hug Mere and in opening herself up to a relationship with Owen.

 

It all was enough to make me want to go back and see all the episodes I missed. I feel like the "Grey's Anatomy" that I loved is back.

 

- posted by Raoul  

The Crime Broadcasting System unveiled its latest drama last night in "Harper's Island." The premise is that there's a serial killer (or more, perhaps?) on the loose on the aforementioned island, taking out guests at a destination wedding as well as locals in gruesome fashion until only a few are left.

 

The novelty about the show is that it's designed to run a total of 13 episodes, which theoretically gives the show some freedom. In a typical slasher movie, everyone knows that the big-name star survives to the end, because that's just what happens. Here, the killer could suddenly take out any of the 25 characters from the bride and groom on down. Also, the writers presumably started the series with an idea of who the killer is instead of making things up as they go along as most shows typically do.

 

Still, in the pilot episode, I didn't see much to impress me, either in terms of characters or gore. It's sometimes unfair to judge things by a pilot but pretty much everyone seemed wooden, from the princess bride who may be harboring a desire to go back to her ex to the poor groom who was lucky enough to land a beautiful rich girl to his best friend who was scarred by a series of six murders on the island seven years earlier that included her mother and that estranged her from her father and then-boyfriend. And those are the main characters. I'll be surprised if any of them actually gets killed before week 10 of this. (Although the bride and groom had sex in the pilot, which any horror film viewer knows means they both have to die.) There's a host of other characters who are even more one note, like the groom's dorky friends, his formerly(?) suicidal brother, the groom's rich girl friends and so forth.

 

What's unfortunate is that there are a bunch of actors whose work I enjoyed in other context participating in "Harper's" and making me cringe a little, from Harry Hamlin (whose character had his upper torso ripped from his lower one in the pilot) to Christopher Gorham. Maybe things will improve once people start to realize that they're in danger. But I'm guessing not. The main amusement that "Harper's" seems to offer would be of the MST3K variety as you mock the decisionmaking of the characters before they get filleted, roasted and choked.

 

- posted by Raoul

Because NBC sure as heck won't.

 

The offbeat series about an alternate reality in which biblical-like rulers are given a modern-day setting as a backdrop has been getting pretty good reviews, but definitely less than regal ratings on Sundays.

 

So NBC is sending the show to Saturday.

 

In case you don't know, that's the ultimate death slot. Because even those few people who are home on Saturday to watch TV are ashamed about it.

 

So it seems not the least premature to say that we better enjoy the show before it comes to a sudden end.

 

Personally, I'll be sad when "Kings" gets cancelled. I think it would have had a better shot of succcess if it had been simply "King" and focused on Ian McShane's awesome King Silas.

 

- posted by Raoul

If you haven't seen Monday's "House," do yourself a favor and stop reading.

 

I am a little stunned at what happened. Not, of course, with the patients of the week. But the show killed off Lawrence Kutner. Worse, they had him commit suicide.

 

It's a little shocking both because it comes as something from out of the blue both inside the fictional world of "House," and in the real world of actors and producers.

 

Usually when there's a casting change, word leaks out well in advance. I don't remember seeing anything about Kal Penn leaving "House." I wonder how things stayed so mum, and if there were real-world factors that led to Penn's departure.

 

But in terms of the character, suicide doesn't make a ton of sense. In the often cynical world of "House," Kutner was the upbeat, silver-lining guy. We haven't yet gotten the reason why he committed suicide, so maybe the writers will be able to wring some logic from it.

As someone who has had friends attempt and commit suicide, I appreciate the inclusion of the hotline number. If the show gives even one person considering suicide pause, it will have done itself proud.

 

- posted by Raoul

One reason why I liked yesterday's "Damages" finale more than the season: Glenn Close played a bigger role. It seemed like she had more to do in that hour and a half than she did for most of the rest of the season.

 

She brought Patty Hewes at her calculating, manipulating best, as well as the highly emotional moments of her having been held at gunpoint by Ellen.

 

I liked how things got wrapped up -- Patty wins versus UNR, Ellen gets her admission that Patty tried to have her killed, David's killer is killed.

 

I don't know if "Damages" will come back for a much-deserved third season. But I think things were left in an alright place if this is turns out to be the series finale as well.

 

- posted by Raoul

Last night's finale of "Life on Mars" fit the bill, more or less. The show had a tall order: to come up with an explanation for why Sam Tyler was experiencing life in 1973 rather than life as a cop in 2008. Not only that, but it had to do so in a way that was different enough from the original British show.

 

We had Sam get a phone call from the mysterious man who offered him a way back to 2008 if he accomplished three tasks. First, he had to save himself. There was a plot in which his no-good father Victor had taken his younger self away. Sam tracks his father down and suffers a beatdown or two from him. Plus, when Sam reveals that he's Victor's son, Victor tells him he doesn't care. He's about to stab Sam when the cavalry arrives, courtesy of Annie's deducing that the dad had taken Sam to Hyde. Inspired by next-door neighbor Windy who tells him he's meant to be with Annie, Sam kisses Annie. He gets on good terms with Gene. At the end Sam is told he has just one more task to get back to 2008 (he'd earlier done the second task by ducking when told to). He tells the caller that he's fine with staying in 1973 and hangs up.

 

And soon we find out what's really going on. This has all been a virtual-reality program experienced by astronaut Sam Tyler as he and the others went to Mars in 2035. For reasons that are unclear, Sam wanted to be a cop in 2008. For technobabble reasons, the VR program glitched and sent him to 1973 instead. We get to meet the real counterparts to the officers from the 1-2-5. Carling is essentially the same sexist jerk, having experienced life on an island where all the women looked like Darryl Hannah or Michelle Pfeiffer from their prime and all the other men couldn't compete with him. Annie is a colonel with dark hair. And the last person to wake from their VR slumber is Major Tom, who is Sam's real dad. So even though the program glitched, it let him work out his unspoken feelings about Annie, his father and his inner demons.

 

In a sense, it ties things up in a neat little bow. Except, as I said, it seems like such a random VR to program for yourself. Why would an astronaut from 2035 want to be a cop from 2008? And wouldn't 1973 have seemed even more foreign to him, given that he didn't live through it? Indeed, no matter how much the system glitched, shouldn't Sam have known that he was 2035 Sam and not 2008 Sam?

 

I liked some of the little touches, like the quotes from David Bowie songs and the "Spaceman" nickname, which seemed like a stretch up till now, finally making sense. And now that we know the end, I'm sort of curious as to whether the clues were there leading to this particular ending or if it was just something that made for a quick resolution.

 

- posted by Raoul

"House" is one of my favorite shows, but I hardly ever blog about it, because it's often fairly formulaic.

 

But last night's episode went above and beyond the usual.

 

It featured rapper Mos Def as the patient of the week, who suffered from locked in syndrome. For much of the episode, instead of the usual storytelling, we got to see things from his character's perspective. What was especially cool was having his character think things about House and his minions that bear repeating.

 

Which is good. Because let's face it: At some point, "House" will have to expand its repertoire beyond the straightforward "one disease looks like another" plot, or at least find new variations on that theme. Last night's episode was a nice step in that direction.

 

- posted by Raoul

NBC today confirmed that we will have at least another 26 episodes of "Friday Night Lights" over the next two seasons in its share-the-expenses-with-DirecTV arrangement.

 

Which has me very, very psyched. "Friday Night Lights" is one of my favorite programs, and it deserves renewal.

 

But now that that battle's been won, I'm left wondering where things go from here.

 

If you haven't seen the entire current season, I'm going to discuss some spoilers.

 

When last we saw our Dillon Panthers, Coach Taylor had been forced to take a job with a startup school in East Dillon, as the up-and-coming young QB's controlling dad had friction with Taylor. And most of the major players were college-bound. So it would seem the upcoming season would have to usher in a whole bunch of new characters. Will it be as easy for us to love these rookies as we do the vets?

 

I have implicit faith in the powers that be that whatever's in store for Dillon (and East Dillon) will make for some interesting watching.

 

- posted by Raoul

Is it just me, or was last night's episode a little mellow a way to cap off what has been a tumultuous and interesting season?

I mean, the season had a cancer scare and excommunication for Barb, infiltration of the D.A.'s office, an emotional affair and various chickens coming home to roost for Nikki, the death of Margie's mother, the fizzling of an attempted fourth marriage, the continuing involvement of Roman Grant and various other things.

 

The upshot of last night's episode: The Hendricksons have finally decided to be their own religious authority, instead of looking to the LDS, Juniper Creek or anyone else for approval. Nikki has a teen daughter that I don't think we knew much about before. Margie has a potential career as a home-shopping pitchwoman. Sarah's going to get married.

 

What'd you think of the finale?

 

- posted by Raoul

 

Last night, NBC aired the two-hour premiere of "Kings." It's a show with sumptuous cinematography, and a great star in Ian McShane and a lot of potential.

 

It remains to be seen if it will get the chance to live up that potential. The ratings for last night, despite a ton of ads, were not so hot.

 

The basic premise involves tweaking the Biblical story of Saul and David and putting it in a quasi-modern setting.

 

Ian McShane, best known as brothel owner Al Swearengen from HBO's "Deadwood," plays King Silas, the Saul analogue. Much like Al, Silas is at turns charismatic, Machiavellian, humorous, deadly, commanding, manly and vulnerable.

 

He heads the kingdom of Gilboa, and of course, heavy is the head who wears the crown. He has a wife he married out of convenience, a son he feels unfit to follow in his footsteps, a do-gooder daughter who keeps bothering him with liberal social welfare programs, a mistress he truly loves, and a kingdom that's long been at war.

 

As the show began, we watch as David Shepherd (Get it? Because David was a shepherd!) enters the picture. Rev. Samuels (Get it? Like Samuel the prophet!) happens upon the farm where David and his brothers live and has car trouble. David fixes it with duct tape and Samuels wipes a grease smudge off his forehead (Get it? Samuels annointed David with oil!). Soon, David gets portrayed as capable of miracles, as when he brings about a rescue of the king's son and stands up to a type of tank called a Goliath. (Get it?)

 

It plays out better on screen, I think, then it does written out like that.

 

Even so, I think that the show has its obstacles to overcome. For one, it may not have a natural constituency. I don't know if Christian or Jewish viewers are going to appreciate a David who hangs out with skanks at dance clubs, for example. And I think sci-fi/alternate reality fans might get turned off by all the religious references.

 

Moreover, Ian McShane might just be too good. Because he outmatches just about everyone else. In particular, I feel bad for the David actor, Christopher Egan. I'm not sure if it's just the writing or his own abilities that have David as this innocent, naive guy who through no qualities of his own happens to be favored of God. But as we know, David is destined to replace Silas. And Christopher just can't hold his own against McShane. But who could?

 

ETA: I watched screeners, which included the next two episodes. I think the pace gets picked up a little, and we learn more about the secrets that various members of the royal family are hiding. I should also say that I love the palace guards. I want a whole episode following them around.

 

I think the show would have interesting things to say about God, society, hero worship, celebrity, love and all sorts of other themes. If only it gets the time to say them.

 

- posted by Raoul