http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:05:36 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/03/18/070536.php teletartTen Big Design Flaws on American Inventor1. All that tedious backgrounding - sheesh! The audience doesn't care about the judges' qualifications. Trust me. We have short attention spans. We've only tuned in to see the wackos.2. Mind-numbing overuse of the word "dream". 3. The underlying structure of the show itself. On American Idol, when someone sings, it's a unique event. And not always in a good way. But the same contestant can sing again later, and they might improve, or they might struggle with, oh, say remembering the words to a Stevie Wonder song. Each time their performance will be a little different -- as it will whether they sing, dance, skate, design clothing, or model. (Not that I've watched the relevant reality shows where those things have taken place. Well, not much. Okay, I've seen all of them.) However, when someone reveals an invention... they reveal it. They pull the sheet off, and you see it, and you go 'ah, that's clever... yeah, great'. Ummm... (insert sound of crickets chirping...)Since seeing the invention blows the suspense, last night's two-hour American Inventor premiere used a lot of the following instead:a) shots of city skylines; b) shots of clouds going past city skylines; c) shots of line-ups of would-be inventors; d) sound bites of people talking about their dreams; e) discussion of the greatness of America and the American dream; f) montage sequences of people coming out of the judging room; g) did I mention dreams?4. Judge Mary Lou Quinlan (I had to look up her name) wore that cobalt blue that all redheads have been told really lifts their complexions and makes their eyes pop. That wasn't a flaw per se, I just thought I'd point it out. What was annoying was how she seemed constantly on the verge of tears.5. The bit when at-odds-with-everyone inventor and judge Doug Hall (yep, looked him up too) turned down that really adorable kid who invented the doggie-car-air-conditioner, then had one of those nauseatingly condescending 'encouraging adult' conversations with him later on. I'm sure the kid wanted to punch him, because I certainly did. Ref. #1 above, re: knowing your audience -- methinks that the show lost a chunk of viewers at this point. (Simple rule of reality TV: don't crap on engaging kids, or dogs. Never crap on both.)6. How we were told not once, but several times, that Doug Hall was responsible for approximately 18 inventions in the average American home. Ever hear what they were? No, me neither. Wanting to know would be intellectually curious, and we can't have that in a show like this.7. Excruciatingly bad incidental music.8. The ubiquitous British judge wasn't the mean one! Way to destabilise us!9. Constant hyperbole about the Great American Dream was undercut by the fact that real, honest creativity frequently lost out to marketable, televisually appealing, producer-approved inventions and inventors. An olive pit bowl? C'mon, guys... 10. Here's another handy tip! If your show is all about invention and creativity, how about using a format that isn't EXACTLY LIKE EVERY OTHER REALITY SHOW ON TELEVISION. With all those supposedly brilliant minds on board, could no one come up with a new way to run the competition? To package the show? To reel in viewers? It doesn't say much for an ENTIRE FRIGGIN' SERIES ABOUT INNOVATION when you can't get past the MOST TIRED FORMAT in all of TV. Hmm. Feel free to take that on board, American Inventor. I haven't patented the observation yet, but you just might get some use out of it. Video45160@blogcritics.org Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:05:36 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/18/202406.php teletartLet me just say that I'm no neophyte. No dummy. No rube.I've watched every season of American Idol. And so yeah, I know the deal in these first few weeks. The producers sort out a nice bunch of a) good singers; b) awful singers and c) freaks. We warm up to Mr Cowell's snark, to Paula's emoting, to Randy's dawging. We reminisce about days gone by, and cling to the incredible promise that this will be The Best Series Ever. We wonder if Paula will have any more mysterious lapses of health and/or grips on reality, and which contestant will be found to have a criminal record, and whether Randy looks like he's piled a bit on since last year. It's Seacrest-In, and all is right with the world.Still, something struck me last night. And I know it's par for the course in these audition episodes, and maybe I've been in denial about every other series, which is entirely possible - but when did the judges turn into the Extra Mean Kids At School? Seriously. I'm fine with them critiquing someone's singing - you gotta know if you turn up to audition that you risk humiliation and scorn. No problem there - insult away! But there's something disturbingly ideological about a lot of their other comments. They've turned into... well, bullies.They're the kids who stuck signs on your back. Who made fun of you for wearing the wrong label jeans. Who invited you to sit with them, then pulled your chair out from under you. Or was that just me? Paula's even got the Mean Girl Passive-Aggressive thing down - if Ringleader Simon is exceptionally cruel, she hits him in the arm and tells him he's terrible. But she's laughing while she does it. As for Randy - he's just the Gutless Kid Who Tags Along. To wit:1) White boy with supportive mother and grandmother shows up. Okay, so the family is a little trailer park-y. That's apparently why we're supposed to laugh at them. Sigh. But as the boy greets Simon et al. in a high-pitched voice, the judges start to smirk. The boy tells them where he's from, and then Paula asks 'what makes you different'? Simon cracks up. 'Can't you tell?' Simon sneers. Cue snickering judges. Ha ha ha - you see? He's a fairy! Get thee hence, homo trailer trash!2) Black boy, soft-spoken, brimming with sincerity, shows up. He's worked hard with his vocal coach for this moment, he's honed his image. Then he sings, and it's not great. Not awful - the kid can hold a tune - he just doesn't blow anyone away. More snickers. Simon offers his sage advice: shave your facial hair and put on a dress - you could be a great female impersonator. The kid's lip wobbles - what? They send him away in tears. Ha ha - geddit? He's so Not Talented, that he sings like a Woman! So why not completely emasculate yourself, little fella, and put the damn dress on! Get out!Oh, it's not just homophobia. Our little band of Cafeteria Thugs have plenty of other reasons to laugh at people. Fatness is one of Simon's pet peeves. The guy who showed up in Assyrian national costume was jeered at. 'Can I have your hat?' spluttered Paula. There was the Ukrainian girl whose English wasn't great - just for giggles, they toyed with her. 'That was extraordinary' Simon said, and the girl's face lit up. Ah, but sarcasm is hard to decipher in a foreign tongue, so she was doubly crushed when they sent her packing. And in a new development, the judges have started putting through talentless people for the sheer sport of it. Cos setting someone up to be bullied is even more fun! Ha ha!I don't know - maybe I've finally burned out on Idol. Maybe I've become hypersensitive and ridiculous in my dotage. Maybe Simon's squared-off haircut has finally pushed me over the edge - can't he see how it makes his head look funny? But there's just something about the Judging Triumvirate that's not so entertaining anymore. Simon, Paula and Randy have become the Ambassadors for an Ugly America, a creepy little privileged group that huddles behind its celebrity and hurls abuse at anyone who doesn't resemble them.Mocking the singing? Sure, that's part of the deal. But mocking the fairies, the fatties, the fey, the feeble, the foreign... That's disturbing._____________________________________Want to read more teletart? Come on over to her place. Video42465@blogcritics.org Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:24:06 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/10/133555.php teletartWe're currently in the first week of November sweeps. Did you know? This is a hallowed and special time, when the ad rates are set for the networks. Nielsen ratings are even more important than usual - ergo, networks can be expected to pull out their big guns. Hit us with their best episodes. Wow us with their prowess. Hey, that rhymed. Nifty.What's not nifty is what has actually been on television. And that would be... nothin'. A whole lotta nothin'.Last night's Lost... you gotta be kidding me. That was what I've been waiting for? And this is from someone who likes the show (they had me at the brace position). The Apprentices... Survivor... lordy, wake me up when something happens.Speaking of lordy... how about that Trading Spouses? Ah ha! At last, we have a show worthy of November. Not only was this the best Trading Spouses I've ever seen - and I've seen some goodies - but it was the best episode of any reality show this year. I know I don't need to tell you what I'm talking about. You've all seen the clips of Marguerite Perrin frothing at the mouth, rebuking dark-sided things, standing up as a God warrior, and frightening her children. She had pretty nice kids, actually. Not sure how that happened.Alas, poor Marguerite. Thrown into a pit of godless pagans, and forced to... um... let me think... well, I guess they did put her in the same room as a psychic. His name sounded like Tristan Rimbaud, which suggested to me that more than just his aura might have threatened Marguerite. Apart from that... oh yeah, she attended a solstice party. There were bongos, and... um... a little dancing. Satanic!Of course, big ole Marguerite is an easy mark. Truth be told, she's less God Warrior and more Oversized Drama Queen. And let's not forget that Trading Spouses is heavily edited, with one family always coming out as the villains. Still, portions of Louisiana are already rising up to defend their state and disassociate themselves from Marguerite's ambassadorship. Like The Amazing Race Weavers, she presents a distasteful picture of Christianity in a nation supposedly in its thrall. (Interestingly, both Marguerite and the Weavers mentioned how little they trust others. Hmmm. Coincidence? Symptom? Or disease?) As for all those decent, tolerant, loving Christians who feel persecuted by this misrepresentation - allow me to refer you to your Muslim brethren. Whaddaya know - being generalised about is no fun.So is it just good trash TV? Or are we secretly pleased to see an ugly face put on the religious right? Maybe a bit of both. And of course it's hard to go past an obese woman in a short-sleeved dress ranting hysterically and hatefully about the love of God. Hey, America - want to know how other countries sometimes see you? Take a good long look at Marguerite Perrin.I know. It's not pretty.Now pass me those bongos. I got some dancing to do._____________________________________There's plenty of rebuking to be found at teletart's place. Come on by! Video39339@blogcritics.org Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:35:55 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/02/171450.php teletartAh, families. So supportive, so caring. So... pathological.Last night's Amazing Race was a shining example of the chaos that DNA can cause. It's hard to know where to start... okay, the Weavers. We haven't been privy to such a hypocritical, sneering, bitchy, distasteful group of related human beings since... oh, I don't know, since some of the better episodes of Trading Spouses. Weavers, I heart you for bringing dysfunction back to where it belongs - the bosom of the family.Though that's not entirely fair. The Weavers actually function very well, in their own little universe. This is a world where in one breath they can pray to Jesus for directions, and talk about answering to God as "a higher authority", and in another, mock the Paolos for their line of honest work (Dad Paolo is a garbage man) and jeer at them as "retards". I don't want to put words in God's mouth - the Weavers already do that enough - but I wonder if He/She is itching to use some of that higher authority on the Weaver family. In the Weavers' world, God is a very large vending machine, doling out favours to the righteous few who put their spare change in. One needn't be kind, or charitable, or polite, or remotely Christian, in the purest sense of the word. As one of the girls put it, "we don't trust other people, we just trust each other, and God". Nice.Surprisingly, it's the Paolos who have emerged as the unlikely underdog heroes of this series. I always knew that their bickering would make entertaining TV, but I didn't expect to get caught up in the renaissance of their family unit. Sure, they still argue, but the Paolo boys are coming to see that their parents have intrinsic value, while Mother Paolo has toned down her incessant martyr-monologue. I never thought I'd be cheering for them, and yet here I am, clapping my hands like a fool - or possibly a retard - as Dad Paolo sweeps Phil into yet another jubilant embrace.The others? I can take 'em or leave 'em. The Linzs are fun, I like seeing them get ahead. The Gaghans - alas, I'd had high hopes. The Bransens - those girls blend into one, and also apparently don't know what a 'relic' is. The Godlewskis are also fairly interchangeable. It's the flaw in the family edition of the show: with four people per team, it's hard to get to know them as individuals. Quick - name all of the Linzs/Godlewskis/Bransens! Yeah, see what I mean?Still, I'll take a little character confusion, if it means we get to keep the Weavers. There's joy to be found in watching them, even if it is an impure joy: the gleeful disbelief that a family could have such a lack of self-awareness, the pleasure at watching them get their just desserts, and the relief in knowing that no matter my own family's failings - we're still not the Weavers.____________________Want more judgmental chitchat about TV? Come to teletart's place. Video38962@blogcritics.org Wed, 2 Nov 2005 17:14:50 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/24/160628.php teletartAs Season Three of Nip/Tuck progresses, it's becoming terribly, painfully obvious that the show is... well, it's not good. Not only has it jumped the shark, but it strapped its waterskis on some time ago. Possibly back in Season Two, when the Carver story was introduced. I'm pretty bummed about this, because I used to like Nip/Tuck. Such a heady mix of sex, scandal, soap, some substance and skillful special effects. All that, and Julian McMahon's bottom. Lovely.But alas! The time has come. We must now resort to that which indicates a faltering show: the drinking game. In the spirit of this season's Nip/Tuck, I suggest this game is played not with booze, but with a plastic cup of warm, watered-down fruit-flavoured beverage. And so, I give you:Sip/Suck: the Nip/Tuck Drinking GameTake one sip when: - Sean's eyes water while he looks earnest - the business is threatened by money or ethical woes - Liz gets the best line in a scene, but is never heard from again - Matt refers to Sean not being his real father - Matt resurfaces at home, only to sulk and leave again - Julia looks pained - Christian appears in his underwearTake two sips when: - Sean and Julia get back together, however briefly - the Carver strikes again - Annie, the forgotten second child of Sean and Julia, is seen and/or referred to - Christian brings up his traumatic childhood - Christian draws attention to his lack of a soul - Matt is tempted by a transsexual - someone has a threesome (note: need not be relevant to plot) - Christian appears out of his underwearEngage in copious vomiting when: - Christian and Sean reaffirm the unbreakable bond of their friendship - Julia and Sean admit they still love each other, but just can't make the marriage work - the central character in a surgery story has an insight that also resonates with Sean and Christian, and helps them to have an insight of their own - handy! Extra points - get out the funnel if: - a female character appears who is not one of the following: a porn star, a shrewish wife, a nymphomaniac police officer, a model, a sex addict, a vapid socialite._________________________________Less drinking, more snark at teletart's place: come on over! Video38437@blogcritics.org Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:06:28 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/18/151635.php teletartI've been resisting jumping on the Bashing Bandwagon over the new series of Desperate Housewives, but... well... a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do. Here's when I knew it was time to get tough: Mr Teletart and I were discussing what-had-gone-wrong with the show, while the show was actually on.And so, in the interests of television science, I now present my theories re the Demise of the Not-So-Domestic Divas.1. No one's keeping secrets anymore. Series One was brimming with delicious skeletons-in-closets and hidden pasts (who was Mike, really? why did Mary Alice die? what was under Paul Young's swimming pool? what was Mrs Huber hiding?) Series Two... well, there's that ridiculous prisoner-in-the-basement story. Oh, and no one yet knows that George killed Bree's husband. Except us, which kinda takes the fun out of it. Apart from that, not so many mysteries. The delightful twist in the soapy premise - that dark things lurk beneath the surface of even the most idyllic suburban neighbourhoods - is no more. Now we gotta lotta soap, and hardly any dirt to wash out.2. Stories are spinning their wheels. Watching Susan vacillate on whether to be with Mike... not so interesting. Watching Gabrielle clip clop her way in and out of the prison visiting room... yawn. Bree wants to keep George at arm's length... seen it before. Lynette has another family crisis that might take her away from work... zzzzzzzz.3. I just don't believe them anymore. If you invest a character with enough truth, they can do crazy things and you'll buy it. Bree, for instance, in one of the few great moments from this new season, changes the tie on the corpse of her husband - during the open-casket funeral. I laughed, and I believed it. But Susan, newly committed to Mike, finds the son he's desperately been looking for... and then lies to him about it? Fie on you, contrivance! Susan and Julie are actually regular churchgoers, who perform in 'family' concerts? Since when? Does Gabrielle actually do anything other than strut around feeling horny, acquisitive and/or angry? As for Gabrielle and Carlos's storyline - they've never had any real connection as a couple, so why are we supposed to care about them now? Don't even get me started on Betty Applewhite and her son.4. No more group hugs. This has been mentioned elsewhere, but what happened to seeing the girls together? They used to interact, support each other, and most significantly, gossip. I never really bought them as fast friends, but it was nice to feel the show had some cohesion beyond the individual stories. Maybe it's meant to be symbolic. Us girls start out as pals, but throw some fame and a few People covers our way and suddenly it's every beeyotch for herself.Come on Marc Cherry! I know you're tired. I know you've worked hard. I know you're singlehandedly responsible for every second of Desperate airtime we've enjoyed and you're almost burned out and you need a holiday. But now is not the time to rest. Now is when you must stand strong for your country, and shoulder the task before you. You must serve, so that we can once more laugh, and enjoy our Sunday evenings. You must be proud, and patriotic. You must save the Desperate Housewives.------------------------------More catty teletart analysis and tasty treats: Long Plastic Hallway Video38121@blogcritics.org Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:16:35 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/12/142802.php teletartWatch My Name is Earl. It's great.I say this as someone who:a) hated Chasing Amy and found Jason Lee teeth-achingly annoying; b) was prepared, in advance, to dislike most of this season's new comedies, particularly the over-hyped ones; c) was already put off by the fact that My Name is Earl was created by the Executive Producer of Yes Dear; d) was disinclined to watch something that clashed with The Amazing Race and House; e) is snarky, cynical and dismissive on a daily basis.It seems that up here in Canada, we've been spared the obnoxious My Name is Earl marketing campaign that those of you south of the border have been subjected to. From the sound of it, this is a good thing. (Of course, this isolation doesn't always work in our favour. When Superbowl rolls around, for instance, we Canadians hear a lot about those FABULOUS HILARIOUS SIDE-SPLITTING commercials which will air at half-time and become cultural reference points for weeks to come. That's right, I said "hear about". We don't get to see them. We've got local commercials, for companies like Tim Horton's (o! the Timbit) and Zellers (the lowest price is the law). Two years ago we did, however, get a good gander at Janet's Nipplegate. So all is not lost.)My point? Don't let the ad-campaign-which-I-can-only-imagine put you off. Paired with The Office, Earl rounds out a fabbo hour of Tuesday night television on NBC. You can always tape House. And they're replaying The Amazing Race on Sundays, aren't they? At least, they are here. In Canada. Where we do things differently. (Where the lowest price is the law.)For those of you who have been living in caves, My Name is Earl is about the white and trashy Earl Hickey. Left by his even whiter and trashier wife for her baby daddy, and adrift on a sea of petty crime, Earl's life changes when he wins the lottery and loses the ticket. The accident that precipitates the latter lands him in hospital, where a chance viewing of Carson Daly sees Earl turned on to the concept of karma. Good begets good, bad begets bad. Abraham begets Isaac, Katie Holmes begets a miracle. And so on. From his hospital bed, Earl decides that he's got to turn his life around and start righting wrongs. He makes a list of his trangressions and sets out to remedy them. His brother helps him. And a hotel maid. Oh yeah, and the lottery ticket makes it way back to him. Karma, you see?It's not just that the writing is sharp and the situations funny. It's that such a sharp, funny show has such a feel-good premise and a positive message. While staying reasonably politically incorrect. Over at CBS, home of all things feel-good and positive, they must be green with envy. Or not. After all, they've got ummm Still Standing. And Yes, Dear. The quality stuff.Pat Robertson? Pshaw! Doom and gloom and assassinations and creepy prayers for Supreme Court vacancies. I'll take Earl's version of a spiritual life any day. Do good things, and good will come to you. Do bad things, and... you get the idea. Much easier to grasp, and it makes the world a better place to boot. I urge you, gentle readers. Watch My Name is Earl. Tastes great, less filling, and it's part of a healthy diet.______________________________Plenty more tasty TV treats available at teletart's place! Video37829@blogcritics.org Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:28:02 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/07/142319.php teletart1. Does bringing back two former cast members really count as two twists?2. Does it even count as one?3. Anyone else tired of challenges that involve boat races, shooting clay targets, obstacle courses and/or putting puzzles together?4. Were they ever that interesting?5. Was it misleading advertising to use a dangerous, threatening crocodile in this week's promo?6. Especially when the croc was sighted, ignored and forgotten by the first ad break?7. Bobby Jon and Blake's strategy-talk-while-peeing: gratuitous? or ground-breaking?8. The teams get switched around: anyone else not care so much?9. And have trouble remembering who the original teams were anyway?10. Do Stephenie's eyebrows arch like that naturally?11. How many episodes until Gary's "deny deny deny" strategy comes back to haunt him?12. Will you still be watching then?13. Anyone still holding out hope re the twins thing?14. Doesn't Bobby Jon just look like he smells?15. Judd's use of the word "male-tosterone": heat-induced confusion? or stupidity?16. Judd's strategy: heat-induced confusion? or stupidity?17. Remember when they used to make them eat bugs in challenges?18. Ah, weren't those the good old days?19. Anyone else just tuning in out of habit?20. And actually contemplating leaving the house on Thursday nights?____________________________Survivor poems, celebrity snark and more, at long plastic hallway Video37575@blogcritics.org Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:23:19 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/05/151945.php teletartSo last night, The Biggest Loser went to Las Vegas. The idea, ostensibly, was to throw more distractions in the path of the contestants. In reality, the show was all about advertising for a) Planet Hollywood, b) the Las Vegas tourism board and c) gambling interests. Oh, sorry, did I say gambling? I mean gaming.Contestants were faced with two temptations:Number one was the menu at Planet Hollywood. I've eaten at a Planet Hollywood, and temptation isn't the word that springs to mind. Maybe for some people, scoffing mediocre cheeseburgers while staring at the motorcycle jacket Arnie wore in Terminator 2 is a thrill. For the rest of us, not so much.Number two was the chance to win big money - as long as the contestants agreed to forgo personal training for the rest of the week. The five who chose this option were dealt from a deck of special cards, with values ranging from $1 to $5000. Incredibly, not one of the five was dealt a card worth less than $1000. Wow. What are the chances?Later, another special moment: one of the contestants at a slot machine, down to her last dollars, explained that she just 'felt' this machine was about to hit. Oh, the tragic cry of the hardened gambler! How little she knew about the true odds of really winning! But yes, you guessed it - she was right. That little puppy paid out over $1600 for the cameras! Oddly enough, the winning combination was... drum roll... three Planet Hollywood symbols, which we got to see in close up. Hmmm.I love Vegas. Truly, I do. It's crazy, it's magical and it has an atmosphere like no other place on earth. But selling this relentless picture of winning - nay, of Big Losers winning - is just... grrrrr. Sometimes you win, sure. Mostly you don't. If you're okay with that and play what you can afford to lose, no problem. But on NBC, you get dealt in - bang! - a thousand dollars. You 'sense' a machine's potential - bang! - sixteen hundred. You feed in your very last dollars - bang! - you win big. Double or nothing? - bang! - it's double every time. What's more, you can use all this winning euphoria to help you forget other things - like the fact you weigh 350 lbs and will be eating carrots and steamed fish for dinner.You have to admire the show's gall. Take a bunch of people with impulse and control issues and set them loose in Las Vegas. Better yet, stack the deck in their favour. Show them - and us - how easy it is to win. Oh, Biggest Losers. You think food is addictive? You have no idea.__________________________Sublime snark about all things television at teletart's place. Video37462@blogcritics.org Wed, 5 Oct 2005 15:19:45 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/27/141443.php teletartWhen Mr Teletart and I have run out of the usual things to bicker about, we turn to our old favourite: Arrested Development. As I'm sure so many of you do. Why doesn't it rate? Why don't people watch it? When it's so damn fine? Why? WHY?Theories espoused so far:1. It's on the wrong channel. Neither of us is sure what the right channel is. HBO? Has it come to this - niche comedies on niche cable channels? What about the rest of us? Besides, Fox is still home to The Simpsons, Family Guy, Malcolm in the Middle, and American Dad. There's no reason that Arrested Development shouldn't work. Is there? (Then again, Fox also hosts American Idol, Stacked, The Swan and The War at Home.) Hmmm.2. Buster and Tobias double up on the dubious sexuality front, giving the show just slightly too much gayness for the Fox audience. Yeah, I'm not really buying this either.3. It's too fast. There's something in this theory - for new viewers, the dizzying pace of an Arrested Development ep can be challenging. Even with Ron Howard's deadpan voiceover, it's hard for people to keep up. I wasn't actually aware of this until we watched last night's hilarity fiesta with someone who had never seen the show. They laughed at the odd line, but you could see the cogs turning. Why were there so many characters? Who was the guy with the chicken beak? Why was there a cabin on a trailer? How come that guy got hair plugs?While I've always thought the joy of the show was in giving yourself over to the wild ride each week - even if you don't know what the hell is going on - the stories do run like soap plots on speed. This is exactly why they're great - but not everyone's ready to engage their minds and jump on board the rollercoaster, when the more sedate living room/kitchen carousels of The King of Queens and According to Jim await. (And thus endeth the amusement park analogies.)4. It's too cerebral. Yeah, I thought this was a ridiculous claim too. The show's full of slapstick! It's rude! It's crazy! Still, it does require a certain kind of attention. The dialogue is quick, the plot quicker. You can't just lie around, half-asleep, with a growing pile of pistachio shells on your chest. You know, the way you do when you watch Two and a Half Men.5. Audiences are prone to mass inertia. I've seen this. I used to live in a country that had three (3) free-to-air television channels. People had grown up with the first two, and the third was a relative newcomer. Despite an equally great schedule, that third channel languished for years. Viewers could just not get their heads around using another digit on the dial. Maybe Arrested Development has entered this kind of programming black hole, where it appears in the TV Guide but people have sudden selective blindness. What? It could happen.6. People are retarded.Let's face it - it's an enigma, wrapped up in a puzzle, wrapped up in a programming conundrum. And perhaps ours is not to reason why. Perhaps it's enough just to love good old Arrested Development, the way you'd love a struggling child who just doesn't do as well as your other kids. You know at heart that they're brilliant - they're just misunderstood. All you can do is be there for them - week after week. Support them, tell others of their virtues and wish like hell that you were a Nielsen family.In the meantime, I've come up with a few ideas for increasing viewership.a) Break the cycle of fear for nervous nelly new viewers. Direct them to the show website and have them read up a little on the characters. Offer cash for doing so.b) Generate interest by circulating Arrested Development 'purity' tests via interoffice emails. Use subject line 'this is hilarious'. Conclude email with 'send this to 10 amazing women you know'.c) Run a recap episode, a la Lost, to get everyone up to speed with the plot. Have it hosted by a 'safe' network star, like Paula Abdul.d) Appeal to the innate American sense of competitiveness. Hint in the media that Arrested Development is so fast, so difficult to keep pace with, that the average person needn't even bother. Organise viewing challenges at bars.e) Develop high-tech gamma-ray electromagnetic remote technology that allows you to manipulate Peoplemeter results, thereby giving the show the ever-helpful 'illusion of success'.f) Change title to "Warm Family Fun Times". Sell to CBS._________________________________More thrilling teletart television thoughts available here Video36911@blogcritics.org Tue, 27 Sep 2005 14:14:43 EDT