Soapbox

Here's how much critics love The Wire: The show's Wikipedia page has has a running list of major publications, including Time and Entertainment Weekly, that have called it the best show on television. Yet the show, which kicks off its fifth and final season of exploring the darkest side of Baltimore on Sunday, has been mostly ignored by both awards shows and viewers.

As a relatively recent convert to the show myself, I can understand why it's had a tough time. The show doesn't hold your hand; it throws you headfirst into a world with dozens and dozens of characters, from drug dealers and their bosses to city government to dock workers to middle schoolers to the cops who step in when things go horribly wrong. I had to watch the pilot twice before I knew a single character's name, and it wasn't till the halfway point of the first season that I was confident I knew what was going on. The show is also unflinchingly realistic — which can make it seem brutally bleak. People are shot and killed, for any reason and no reason; sometimes good triumphs, but the picture is usually murkier than that.

Still, it's not all darkness and destruction, so read more

For most of my TV-watching life, I've defined myself as a fan of Marshall Herskovitz and Edward Zwick, the producing team behind Relativity, Once and Again, and, of course, My So-Called Life. I remember reading about their latest project, Quarterlife, several years ago, back when it was still an ABC pilot awkwardly titled 1/4life. I was bummed when it didn't make the network's schedule, and I was happy to hear the show was finally surfacing online.

So the news that NBC has picked up Quarterlife should thrill me. Instead, I'm confused and a little annoyed.

My problems have little to do with Quarterlife itself. I don't think the show is great — some of the stilted dialogue makes it clear that the show is written by folks who don't spend much time around twentysomethings — but it's good enough to keep me watching. What bugs me is Herskovitz and Zwick's attitude about the whole thing: promoting themselves as revolutionary and anti-TV, then running back as soon as TV called. There's more to my thinking — including a potentially good side to this arrangement — so just read more

Anyone want to get nice and riled up to start the week? Good. Then check out this alleged statement from a Warner Bros. executive that the studio will no longer do movies with women in the lead. According to LA Weekly reporter Nikki Finke, production president Jeff Robinov made the statement after The Brave One and The Invasion didn't meet expectations at the box office.

So let me get this straight: The reason these movies "failed" at the box office (despite the fact that The Brave One actually won its opening weekend) had nothing to do with their screenplays or premises, the way they were marketed, their supporting players, or any one of the zillions of other decisions that go into creating, producing and releasing a movie. Nope, it was the chicks. I mean, really: What's an Oscar-winning actress like Jodie Foster or Nicole Kidman good for if she can't deliver a box office smash every time?

What really disturbs me about this statement is the notion that actresses are basically expendable — and the related idea that actors are the solution to every problem. Make Daniel Craig's character the lead in The Invasion, and you'd erase all the troubles with the weak, confusing message and not-scary-enough horror elements, right? Except, you know, not.

Photos courtesy of Warner Bros.

I have never once had any inclination to see the latest "torture porn" movie Captivity, but after reading the most scathing review in the world, I'm even less interested. In fact, I'm nauseated, in a similar way to how I felt about Hostel: Part 2, but even more so.

Apparently, the "plot" of the movie consists of blond model Jennifer (Elisha Cuthbert) being tortured in a variety of ways by a sadistic man. Meanwhile, there's another guy in this dungeon who also appears to be getting tortured, so of course the two form an relationship and, unbelievably, have sex. Because I'd sure be up for some nooky after having ground up body parts forced down my throat. Sure. As you'll find out if you read that review, that's not even the worst part of the film, if you can possibly imagine it.

The worst thing about this whole thing — the movie, the ridiculous promotional posters — is the filmmakers' reaction to the outcry over it. For obvious reasons, women's groups have denounced the film (though they're not the only ones, the writer of the aforementioned review, for example, is a full-grown married man) and the response to that is, "Let's throw a torture porn party!" I wish I were kidding. You can see how not-kidding I am if you read more

Giddy from their record-breaking first weekend, the producers and studio execs behind Spider-Man 3 are falling over themselves with news and ideas for the next Spidey installments. Sony Pictures Entertainment co-chair Amy Pascal is claiming that "There'll be a fourth and a fifth and sixth and a seventh," and that "As many stories as Peter Parker has to tell, we'll do sequels." There are already rumors flying around about the villains that will be included in Spidey's fourth chapter: According to Cinematical, Spider-Man will have to face off with a man-sized lizard (called Lizard) along with Carnage the serial killer.

Sure, this sounds intriguing, but I'm still exhausted from this year's Spider-Man movie and the relentless onslaught of promotion that led up to its release. After this year they'll probably have to up the ante even more in that regard, which is virtually unfathomable. Also riding the sequel train is the Shrek series, the fourth of which may have just found a director. So, there's already buzz around a fourth movie when the third hasn't even hit theaters yet. Take a breather, guys!
For more of my sequels rant, read more

If you've been reading Buzz for a while, you know I adore "Friday Night Lights." It was easily my favorite new show this year; even now, three weeks since the show's season (and possibly series) finale, I get chills thinking about Coach Taylor's halftime speech.

Though the fate of the show is still up in the air (and will be until NBC announces its fall schedule May 14), signs have been looking good for its return. The cast believes the show will be back, its producers have talked about what a second season might hold, and NBC apparently has plans to put episodes back on the air this month.

So why am I not happy?

"Friday Night Lights" was an absolute gem in its first season, and it's exactly the kind of show NBC should keep on the air if it wants to promote a classy, quality-minded image. It won a Peabody Award, and — if there's any justice in the world — Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton will get Emmy nominations. NBC was incredibly patient with the show, giving it a full season even though it was one of the lowest-rated series on the air. But I don't think NBC would be as kind if things didn't pick up right away in a second season, so read more

We all have TV shows that we champion long after they've been canceled, and one of mine is "Significant Others." Just to be clear, I'm not talking about the Jennifer Garner series of the same name that Fox canceled in 1998. This show, which aired for two seasons on Bravo in 2004 and 2005, featured a cast of unknowns and an almost entirely improvised script about troubled couples in therapy. It's still one of the funniest things I've ever seen on TV.

I've been looking for an excuse to write about it, so I was thrilled to discover all six episodes of the show's first season on DotComedy, NBC's answer to YouTube.

In case you missed it the first time (don't worry, almost everyone did), "Significant Others" focuses on four couples: Ethan and Eleanor, the overgrown indie kids who don't know how to deal when Eleanor gets pregnant; James and Chelsea, who got married after a weekend fling and discover they just piss each other off; Bill and Connie, who are stuck in a passionless marriage and split when Bill starts having an affair with Connie's sister Ginny; and Alex and Devon, whose biggest issue is their belief that they have no issues. It's often awkward, occasionally poignant and totally hilarious, so read more

Recently I went on a rant about the TBS original series, "My Boys," which I find lame and annoying. It seems to want to be a kind of "Sex and the City" for tomboy-types, yet the writing is not very good, and the stereotypes that were so cliche in "Sex and the City" are simply reinforced in new ways. Clearly, I'm in the minority in my dislike, because TBS just picked up "My Boys" for nine more half-hour episodes. My theory is that the show could potentially appeal to both men and women—not just because of all the (countless) sports references but also because comedian Jim Gaffigan, who plays PJ's brother on the show, seems to have gathered a cult following. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of his Hot Pocket routine, and I think he's naturally funny to watch, but it's not enough to make me like the show.

It must be resonating with someone, though, if TBS is keeping it alive. Or perhaps the continuation has something to do with Match.com? To find out why, read more

Because I went to journalism school in Chicago and have lots of guy friends, I was excited to watch the new show "My Boys," which airs Tuesday nights at 10 on TBS. The show follows a sportwriter named PJ (played by Jordana Spiro), who lives in Chicago, writes for the Sun-Times, and has a pack of close guy friends. It sounded right up my alley.

But after seeing the first two episodes, I've mostly just been nothing but annoyed and frustrated by this show. Many reviewers have compared "My Boys" to "Sex and the City," since the protagonist is a writer who provides continuous narration about her love life. But in this case, the narration is in the form of relentless sports comparisons, i.e. "Love is like baseball". According to "My Boys" creator Betsy Thomas, the show is meant to be a kind of "Sex and the City" for women who don't always relate to the super-feminine characters on that show. In an interview on Zap2it.com, Thomas says

"I love sports and sort of begrudgingly wear makeup, and I have a weekly poker game, and I think when I first wrote this, I felt very alienated by a lot of the women portrayed on TV."

But in attempting to offer up a less cliched version of "Sex and the City," the writers for "My Boys" have just dug those cliches deeper and deeper. For the rest of my rant, read more