Toob Talk

On a lazy Sunday, I’ve been going back through some things on the good ol’ DVR.

One of them is a History Channel documentary about the lost pyramid in Egypt, about five miles outside of Giza. Interesting bit of detective work to piece things together. But that’s not what I’m going to talk about.

The documentary runs about two hours, with commercials. We all know that at least 20 minutes or so are eaten by said commercials. There’s something else that eats a lot of time out of this documentary, too–the utterly ridiculous number of re-hashes done after every commercial break. They’re basically truncated “The story so far” bits. But they seem to be done after every commercial break. That eats at least another 15 minutes.

Add to that the fact that they’re utterly inane–usually reviewing things that were just discussed right before the just ended commercial break–and you have something that frustrates me (and people like me) greatly.

I’ll (grudgingly) accept the fact that people have ridiculously short attention spans these days. I’ll readily accept the fact that people tune in to things at odd times (though not too terribly odd–most shows out there still only start on the half-hour). But I have to wonder if the History Channel should be quite so concerned with those with the goldfish-sized attention spans. After all, we are talking about history and people who can’t retain focus and memory over a commercial break can’t possibly grok the concept of history let alone be all that interested in watching something about history to begin with.

If this were a show targeted at children, maybe I’d be more accepting of the “repeat everything as often as possible” tactic being employed. This documentary is most definitely not targeted at children.

That means either the documentary makers or the network decided that either they didn’t have enough actual content to fill the time or don’t understand that, yes, some of us (those interested in what you’re trying to say, in fact) can remember what we just watched three or four minutes ago. In fact, some of us can even pause our recorded show for a couple of hours and not need to start from the beginning when we come back–even if we’ve been doing other things!

Sad thing is, this isn’t the first time I’ve noticed this. It isn’t isolated to the History Channel, either. Even worse, it seems to be a growing trend all around.

People’s brains work more like muscles than most realize. If you’re not using it, it goes soft and, eventually stops working all together. This sort of incessant repetition actually encourages people to not retain knowledge from one moment to the next. We are generally lazy creatures, after all, and if we get stuck in the habit of knowing we don’t have to remember things from a few minutes ago because, if they’re important, they’ll be repeated right before we need to know them, we’re not going to bother making an effort to pay attention.

That’s a slippery slope to not paying attention at all, leaving the job of telling us what’s important and what’s not to the person telling us what to do. Or, at least, to lazy thought patterns and a great deal of difficulty having enough in our heads to draw our own conclusions.

Hopefully, this is only a temporary thing and will pass.

I’m not going to hold my breath, though. TV could have been something great for education, but most of that potential has been squandered at this point.

Anyone who’s been paying attention to things showing up in the movies or on their television over the last few years has probably noticed that everything old is new again–either through a re-make (or re-boot, or re-visioning) or through a sequel. Well, it looks like the coming film and television season won’t change that much.

AMC is producing a six-hour remake of the classic surreal and intriguing series The Prisoner. I’m a little excited about this. The cast is solid and the time is right for some serious commentary on government secrecy and authority.

ABC is taking the BBC show Life on Mars and moving it to America… and, apparently, changing major plot points, like the entire base reason the 21st century cop has found himself in the 1970s. The best thing about this show may be that Harvey Keitel has joined the cast (though he’s not listed yet on the IMDB entry). I still think we may have gotten lucky with The Office, since so many other “ported” shows haven’t at all lived up to their foreign originals.

There are others, but TV shows come and go… chances are most people won’t even notice these or know that they were once (possibly better) shows from other places.

Movies are another story. While there may still be some general ignorance of originals that get remade and there is definitely a lack of understanding on how things change from the first iteration to sequel n, some movies have made their way into the cultural lexicon. Right now, we’re looking at remakes of some of those “modern classic” films. And quite frankly, I’m a little worried.

Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th and The Rocky Horror Picture Show are all currently getting ready to hit the big screen as completely new movies, unconnected to the already existing films.

In all fairness, Nightmare and Friday have both been so transformed through their lifetimes as series that the most recent editions have only the most vague echoes of what originally made the films stick. There’s little question that they’ve lost their original focus and relevance. But while that’s true of the series as a whole, it is not true of the original films that started the series. The first two iterations of both Nightmare and Friday still stand up today, thematically. Yes, the hair and sets and cars and clothing are horribly dated (thank you 1980s), but the cores of the films are solid. In fact, in some ways, those films are more relevant today than they were when they first hit the screen.

What I worry about–what I always worry about when remakes hit the deck–is that they’ll be over produced, over thought and tweaked to meet marketing agendas more than anything else. You know, just like most new mainstream films. (I’m going to have to do a whole separate post about the horror genre and how it’s changed over the years…)

I’m willing to give the remakes a chance. I was happy with the redone Amityville Horror and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. So it’s not hopeless. But the originals of those films, while groundbreaking, suffered many technical problems that reduced their overall effectiveness. Nightmare and Friday don’t have a lot of problems in those areas.

By far, the scariest remake news is that MTV is the force behind Rocky Horror. If there was ever a film that did not need to be remade, it’s RHPS. It was a unique blend of camp and creative forces that made the original an accidental cult classic. Trying to replicate that on purpose is a recipe for disaster. The only “good” thing that may come out of it is that we might get to hear some of the songs that didn’t make it into the original. (Just to put “cult classic” status into perspective: RHPS has grossed about $140 million since it premiered in 1974–that’s less than what The Dark Knight made in one weekend.)

Thankfully, it looks like the new RHPS will be a TV release. So maybe it’ll go by unnoticed.

All is not bad news, though. It seems Disney is finally putting together a sequel to one of the greatest computer-focused films of all time: Tron. Some of us have been waiting decades for this… and were quite annoyed back in 2004 when what looked like was going to be a fantastic follow-up turned out to be a video game. Here’s hoping they don’t pull that again.

Tonight, NBC premiers it’s new “reality” show, Celebrity Circus.

I, of course, won’t be watching it. (I’ll be watching a much more worthwhile “reality” show, Ghosthunters.)

Here’s the thing about what I’ve seen of this show just from the previews–I’ve already seen a better version of this a decade or three ago. It was called Circus of the Stars and it was an annual one shot that showcased the (often impressive) results of a lot of hard work by then-current celebrities.

Celebrity Circus, on the other hand, is an ongoing show that has the ever-popular (and often degrading) competition aspect added in. Viewers are encouraged to tune in not to see the “celebrities” (and I use that term loosely) succeed, but to watch the spectacular (and inevitable) failures. I’m guessing people will be voted off every week. I’m guessing there will be backstabbing, or at least implied backstabbing, as that gets people to talk about and watch the show.

No, I won’t be watching it because I hate what reality shows push on us. They create z-list faux-celebrities who get better known the more they screw up or screw over others. Our society is bad enough without actually encouraging, idolizing and rewarding behavior like that.

So you go and watch the first episode of Celebrity Circus. I’ll be here remembering the good old days when real celebrities like Lauren Bacall and Sammy Davis, Jr. showed up on TV to prove they were more than just pretty faces.

The annual up fronts were presented in New York City a couple weeks ago.

For those not in the know, that means that all of the networks have released their currently planned schedules for the Fall. Without a doubt, some things (like the days and times of shows) will change before September rolls around. Other things, though, won’t be changing at all.

One of those totally done deal things is what shows won’t be coming back.

As is often the case, in the graveyard are some shows I really kind of liked.

Here’s the rundown of what you won’t see anymore. (more…)

Right now there’s a documentary on the Sci Fi Channel called Mystery of the Crystal Skulls.

Obviously, it’s timed to coincide with the release of the new Indiana Jones movie that focuses on the mysterious and controversial crystal skulls. That movie has been mentioned a few times. Mostly, though, this has been a prime example of what passes for documentaries of strange and unusual things.

Some of what’s been presented is rehash of what is now ancient history and common knowledge–I remember a lot of it from Time-Life books back in the 80s. Much of that common knowledge has yet to be supported by more than hearsay and conjecture.

But here it gets presented without much counter. Definitely not enough to keep the average viewer questioning whether or not there actually was an ancient civilization of Atlantis.

There is music behind almost every bit of this documentary. Almost as if the filmmakers fear that any bits of silence will break the emotional flow of the viewer and let their more logical mind kick in, allowing them to realize just how outlandish a lot of these claims of “fact and science” are.

It wasn’t until early in the second hour of the documentary that they even brought up the fact that the Mitchell-Hedges skull (the one they talk about the most in the documentary) may not actually have been discovered in Mayan ruins. That’s kind of an important part of the investigation.

At least if you were planning on actually doing scientific investigation.

But that’s not at all what’s going on here.

What’s going on here is a presentation on myth, legend and wild speculation.

Most of that mess could be cleared up by some actual, honest, serious scientific inquiry. And it does look like some of that was done. Unfortunately for the filmmakers, the answers apparently didn’t fit with the story they wanted to tell.

So, instead, they fill the two-hours with so much pop-mystical-conspiracy-dross that even my head is spinning. Yes, these crystal skulls have been tied to just about every mythical bit of anything in the Western world, but it’s useless to just catalog and re-tell all of those connections. Pick one or two and stick with them.

Better yet, let’s just talk about the skulls themselves. Need more than that? Then let’s spend more time actually exploring the history of these things.

I don’t know why I always watch these things. I’m almost always disappointed. Mostly because I’ve been watching documentaries on these mysteries for so long, there’s very little new for me in anything produced in the past decade or so.

Here’s a rule of thumb for documentary makers out there: if you’re going to talk about an esoteric topic, do something new. Don’t throw together a hodge-podge of every hot topic you can think of. Focus. If you don’t cover everything (poorly) in one fell swoop, you’ll be able to make more (higher quality) documentaries about those topics later.

In other words, as much as I love Richard Hoagland, I don’t want to see him in a documentary about the crystal skulls–unless you’re focusing directly on the possible extra-terrestrial origins of the things.

(Also, right up front, one of Sci Fi’s own shows was misidentified… way to destroy any vestige of respectability right away!)

Since it first aired, I’ve been a fan of Beauty and the Geek.

I thought the concept was fantastic and the execution infinitely better than most “reality” shows. The contestants grew and learned. The show wasn’t as much about competition as it was about becoming a better person–the prize money was just an extra added bonus.

The current iteration of the show, though, has undone almost all of the respect I had for the show runners.

As of the last episode, it became nothing more than a hollow vehicle for cross-promotion and yet another place to make people feel awkward for no reason other than entertainment value. It has been trending that way all season, but now it has just gone too far. (more…)

Good news for everyone: The Writer’s Strike is Over!

Everyone gets to go back to work tomorrow and, if all goes well with the ratification of the contract (which I’d imagine it will), those of us sitting in front of out TVs can expect to see new episodes of old shows by April.

This has been a trying time, I’m sure, for all those writers. But I think they did the right thing and fought a good fight to ensure a comfortable spot for their profession in the world of New Media.

Maybe they’ve opened the eyes of the conglomerates, too. Maybe this outcry will inspire some innovation in the usage of new technologies and techniques. We’ve already got a show making the jump from online to the main screen. That’s something new.

So, now that things will be back to what passes for normal in the entertainment world, it will be interesting to see what really comes of all this. And, of course, how our favorite shows come back from their little break.

December always brings with it the traditional television season break.

Over the past decade, it’s served more as the mile-marker where half the shows pull off the road and a whole new set get ready to come on. This year, with the writer’s strike going on, there’s more chance than usual that everything on up to this point won’t be coming back.

So far, though, this season has been better than most I can remember. Here’s what I’ve been enjoying.

Kid Nation — Probably the best new reality show I’ve seen in a while. While I was at first worried it would be exploitive, it’s been downright inspirational. It wraps up next week and I really can’t wait to see what they have in store. Heck, I’m even looking forward to a reunion show a decade down the road, some of those kids are going to do amazing things.

Samantha Who? — Of all the new sitcoms, this one has a pedigree that actually paid off. Unlike Back to You (which should have been good, but wasn’t even close), the talents of the cast are utilized fully. Christina Applegate and Jean Smart play the perfect dysfunctional mother-daughter opposite one another and the rest of the cast adds more spice. Applegate is always a trip to watch and this show has given her a chance to actually play a range.

Dirty Sexy Money — I’m not fully caught up with all the episodes I’ve recorded, but this show just keeps getting better. It gets more twisted, more wild and just plain more fun every hour. The screwball family dynamics of the Darlings and the not quite Everyman portrayal by Peter Krause of lawyer Nick George is a near-endless source of entertainment. Granted, I don’t really see the show lasting more than two seasons (if it even gets through a full 22 episode run), but it’s going to be good while it lasts.

Pushing Daisies — I had hoped this show would be as creative, twisted and quirky as everything else Bryan Fuller has been involved in. Those hopes were more than met. The story of the pie-maker, the shady PI, the living dead girl and the cast of characters they encounter has been the most fantastical thing I’ve seen on network TV since Amazing Stories. Without question, the show is beautiful, but it’s fairy tale feel gives it a depth and timelessness few other shows could ever hope to touch.

The Big Bang Theory — When I watched the first episode, I hated this show. Needless to say, it got better. A lot better. As the writers and actors found the characters, Leonard, Sheldon and their gaggle of geeks and dorks (and Penny, the hot neighbor) have come to life and kept me laughing. Sure I’ve cringed a bit, too, but it was always because I started to think “Oh, crap… I’ve had that conversation and seen that happen.”

Journeyman — While the comparisons to Quantum Leap are inevitable, this show has come into its own quite well over the past weeks. While the main character may be jumping around time trying to put things right, he’s got a problem to deal with that Sam never did: he slips without warning and always comes back to his home time, often with odd consequences on both ends of the trip. Things get even more complicated as we meet more people who may be involved in manipulating events and slipping through time. This show got right everything that last season’s Daybreak got wrong.

Bionic Woman — Not quite as strong as I had hoped it would be, but Bionic Woman has still been a fun ride. The last couple of episodes seem to have finally hit their stride, making sharp the dark edge the show has been playing with and crystallizing the characters in more three-dimensional ways than before. Thankfully, they’ve avoided the temptation of camp and stuck to serious (or at least realistic) stories.

Reaper — Sure, it’s not a high-class show. What it is is just plain cotton-candy fun. Ray Wise as the devil, as expected, means you can’t go too wrong. The show is silly, the performances adequate for the stories. It’s low-impact, slightly above average, pure entertainment. Problems only flare up when they hint at darker and deeper sub-plots. Really, the show probably can’t handle that. Things should be OK if they don’t try too hard.

Life — It’s not very often that a truly different cop show comes along. Life is that rare bird. It’s got a hard-core revenge plot line the equal of any Dirty Harry film (though with a lot less shooting), but it’s also got humor and humanity in spades. The only thing it’s kind of light on is proper procedural details. Luckily, it doesn’t bill itself as a procedural—it’s a character driven drama that just happens to be full of cops and criminals. And it’s far from clear which is which most of the time.

Chuck — I still think this show has a limited shelf-life. They’ve only got one or two gags so far and, even though they just added a new (though expected) twist to the mix, I don’t know how they’d sustain it for multiple seasons and keep it as fun and interesting as it’s been. And it has been fun and interesting. The spy intrigue and relationship drama, along with the workplace humor, are all well above average.

As the remaining episodes of the current shows wind down, I’m looking forward to the replacements that are on their way. Until they show up, though, I’m going to keep enjoying what’s left of the good new ones. (And, of course, I’m also enjoying what’s left of all the returning shows I’ve been watching and recording.)

If you haven’t been watching Heroes, you’re missing out.

Yes, this season isn’t quite as tight as the first season was. There’s no “Save the Cheerleader, Save the World” type catch phrase (a failure on the part of the marketing department, in my opinion). But there has been a “Who am I?” theme running through the show.

A lot of that paid off tonight as we finally found out what happened to some of our heroes in the four months that passed between when the first season ended and when the current season started.

It was impressive stuff.

The best, though, is seeing Kristen Bell playing a distinctly non-Veronica Mars type character. In fact, Elle, here shocking (literally) sociopath, is much closer to the character she played (briefly) on Deadwood than her young, cute, smart and sarcastic PI on Veronica Mars.

With only a handful of episodes left before we may be done for the whole season, there’s a lot more loose ends and half-told stories to tie up in some way.

We already know one way it could go–we’ve been shown that, much like we were shown the destruction of NYC in the first season. But the question is how the prophecy will be twisted, misunderstood, used and sidestepped (if it is avoided).

I, for one, can’t wait to see.

On Monday, the members of the Writer’s Guild of America went on strike.

This has thrown the entire industry into a wee bit of chaos. Late night talkshows have already started running repeats. Many sitcoms only have a few episodes before they’re out of fresh stuff. Most hour long shows will be able to last until December or January.

Between now and then, most of the viewing public won’t notice much different aside from the mention on the news every now and then.

But a lot of other people will be noticing.

With no new shows being produced, the people that make production happen are left with nothing to do. The people and businesses who support those production crew members–everything from prop shops to caterers–are losing money. If the strike goes on as long as some predict, getting productions back up and running may be a problem as related support businesses, already facing higher costs for everything (just like the rest of us), may not be around.

I’m frequently very critical of the quality of the shows I watch on TV and the movies I pay way too much to watch. I’ll even complain (frequently) about the writing on shows. Don’t let that fool you into thinking I don’t sympathize with the writers.

Having worked as a professional writer (in the news business, not the entertainment biz), I know how difficult it is to put out quality. I can only imagine how much more difficult it is when you have to satisfy numerous commercial interests (studios, advertisers, “hands on” producers who don’t quite get it, etc.) and deal with drama and egos (from actors, directors, producers, executives, and what have you). Perhaps most of all, I know that the general public doesn’t understand how much work it actually is to create something that even vaguely holds together after all the other fingers poke at it.

Joss Whedon just recently wrote:

Writing is largely not considered work. Art in general is not considered work. Work is a thing you physically labor at, or at the very least, hate. Art is fun. (And Hollywood writers are overpaid, scarf-wearing dainties.) It’s an easy argument to make. And a hard one to dispute.

My son is almost five. He is just beginning to understand what I do as a concept. If I drove a construction crane he’d have understood it at birth. And he’d probably think I was King of all the Lands in my fine yellow crane. But writing – especially writing a movie or show, where people other than the writer are all saying things that they’re clearly (to an unschooled mind) making up right then – is something to get your head around.

Whedon is one of the writers and creators out there that rarely produces anything I can seriously complain about (especially since even he admit just how bad his bad stuff *cough*Buffymovie*cough* is). He and others like him–others who have put down their pens and closed their work laptops–keep me entertained. That’s no small task and I’d like to see them paid fairly for it.

The problem is, in the modern media business world, fair pay doesn’t exist. The top of the food chain gobbles up as much as they can and everyone else just gets the crumbs. Granted, those crumbs are still a whole lot bigger than what I ever expect to see from a job, but in that eco-system they are crumbs. This is how it has been for a long time and, probably and sadly, how it will continue to be for some time to come.

At issue (but only one of the issues) is how writers get paid when their work begins to appear in new media formats like DVD and webcasts. Thing is, “new” media isn’t that new any more. The studios have had more than a decade to work toward figuring it out.

But just like the RIAA, they’re slow to adapt and learn.

Television networks fought tooth and nail to keep their shows off of the web. Now every major network has it’s own webcasts set up for its shows. There’s revenue generated there. Not what they get from putting it up during prime time, but revenue none the less. The overhead to show stuff online is lower (or should be) than to broadcast it in traditional ways. The advent of digital production and storage should have cut the cost of warehousing film and editing and a slew of other production steps.

Yet, the consumer still pays through the nose for so much of that entertainment. The profit margin for the big companies must still be there. Bu the people at the bottom of the ladder–the writers, the actors, sometimes the directors–most certainly haven’t seen a comparable increase in their bottom paychecks. Especially when what you’re comparing them to is the network or production company executive’s pay grade.

I want to see the strike end soon–hopefully before we all notice that there’s nothing new on TV except sports shows and game shows. (It may already be too late for that, apparently.) But I hope it ends with the writers getting what they deserve. I hope that they don’t end up fighting a war of attrition.

Most of all, I hope that this really gets everyone in the entertainment business thinking more about making effective use of that new media they’ve been tinkering with for the past five years.

So, to all the writers out there, I support you and wish you the best. But, honestly, for once I’m really glad I’m not one of you. A strike like this is a difficult thing for everyone.

According to an article in Variety, there is serious talk of bringing back Knight Rider.

Now, Knight Rider was one of my favorite shows in the 80s. Since I got my driver’s license, it’s held even more appeal because, hey, who wouldn’t like to have a car that could drive itself–let alone one that is nigh invulnerable? Sure it didn’t stick the last two times they’ve tried to bring it back (first with the lame TV movie Knight Rider 2000 and then with the wildly unsuccessful syndicated Team Knight Rider–and I just found out about the travesty that was Knight Rider 2010, never even heard of that before). But with the right twist and team behind it, it could work now, right?

I think it could.

Except if you read the article what they’re actually talking about is kind of ridiculous. They want to do a “‘Transformers’-inspired re-working of the 1980s hit action-drama series.” That’s right, they want KITT to transform into a giant robot and fight other evil giant robots.

I’m not doubting that a series like that could work, but why bother calling it “Knight Rider” when it’s actually “Transformers” (or, maybe, “Go Bots”)? Aside from the supposedly cheaper licensing fees.

Look, if you’re going to do a new version of Knight Rider, do it right. It requires three things:

1. A slick car. Preferably one that has a lot in common with a sporty one you can buy, but with a few extra things–like an AI with a bit of a condescending attitude and combat-ready options.
2. A person with a shady past who’s turning over a new leaf. I’m open to it being a woman. Amnesia is optional, but always a good plot device.
3. A sponsoring organization that is well-funded and well-connected. Make it a bit ambiguous as to who’s interests it actually serves and you’ve got plot for at least a season.

That gives a production or creative team a whole lot of leeway. And it doesn’t even exclude giant robots. Just don’t start out with them. Build your own damn brand and don’t ride on the coat tails of the current hot film. By the time you actually get the show made, those coat tails will be dusty and the coat will be so over-worn no one will care any more.

The new season of Beauty and the Geek has hit the CW.

Anyone who knows me, knows that this is one of the few reality shows that I actually think is worth watching. It’s one of the few that doesn’t encourage every-man-for-himself backstabbing. The show is actually about personal development and learning about others.

You can pick out those shows. They’re the ones where the people who leave aren’t upset because they’re not going to get to split that quarter-million dollar prize, but because they’re actually going to miss the people they’ve been living with.

The previous three seasons of the show have never failed to hit close to home for me. Looking at the geeks in the show (infinitely better representations of that particular species than what you’ll find in shows like Chuck), I see a lot of myself–especially a lot of my younger self. And I look at the beauties and I see so many people I’ve had crushes on over the years.

By the end of a season, we see both the beauties and the geeks grow. The geeks become more socially sure of themselves, more aware of the world around them. The beauties discover a different kind of self-confidence–one based not on their outer appearance, but on their actual capabilities (reminding me, of course, of so many of the beautiful and intelligent women I know now).

The key to the show is putting people in a position where they learn just how true it is that you can’t judge a book by its cover. Even more importantly, they learn to better read themselves and those around them, helping them to understand the richer story each has.

Out here in the real world, we have no producers or $250,000 prize to encourage us to do that. No camera crew helping the world watch us, no chance to obtain instant fame or infamy. Here in the real world, it’s up to us to put ourselves in those situations. We have to take the time to look beyond the covers of those around us.

Most importantly, we have to learn to look beyond our own cover and learn how to find the Pulitzer Prize winning material in our own pages.

Luckily, for the next handful of weeks, you’ll be able to watch other people do that. There’s even a bit of an inclusive twist this season as they’ve added a male beauty and a female geek (a first for the show). Maybe you can pick up some tips on how to do it on your own.

This week’s episode of Heroes took us five years into the future of the show we’ve been watching all season.

As has always been the case with the show, it was done with style and punch. For those that are familiar with the super hero genre, though, none of what we saw was particularly new.

In the classic X-Men story Days of Future Past, we were shown a similar track of events and a future similarly dangerous to those who are special. That was back in 1981 and the image is still echoing in the genre. Heroes did a very good job of it.

The future we see in Heroes has half of New York in ruins, only barely better than it must have been in the days following the explosion the heroes have been trying to prevent from episode one. We see that Hiro isn’t the only one that has become darker in the five years since the explosion.

We also get some questions answered and are left asking some more. (more…)

I’ve been a bit remiss on commenting on recent TV.

And with the networks being as quick on the trigger as they are, I totally miss out on the chance to recommend things before they’re bounced all over the schedule and/or pulled completely.

Case in point: Drive.

The two-hour premiere left me feeling distinctly “eh” about the show. But I caught that third hour (of course, on a different night from the premiere) and found that the show had started to find its stride. The characters set in, enough of the plot was exposed to see the pleasing and vaguely creative curve it taking and the rhythm of the regular run-time started to kick in. Hour four was even better.

There will be no hour five. Fox has pulled the plug on it. They, of course, cited low ratings. (Which, for Fox could mean anything lower than what 24 pulls in.)

Here’s the thing, though… they’ve got another nine episodes (according to a Reuters article, at least) of the show already in the can.

This is not unlike what happened with ABC’s Daybreak which was brought in (and then quickly dropped) when Lost went on its break early in the current season. Daybreak got burned off online. And, as seems to often be the case with quickly canceled shows, the best episodes were the un-aired ones. (Not that Daybreak is the best example–the show had a good number of problems and should have been tweaked and tightened a lot more before it ever hit the air.)

The simple fact is that it sometimes takes a show some time to shake out the bugs. Actors get to know their characters better after a few shows. The show runners know better where the strengths and weaknesses of their staff writers fall. The producers get a better idea of who the key demographic actually is (as opposed to who they want it to be).

Over the years, there are very few shows I’ve seen that shouldn’t have made it past four on-air hours. Of those that are among those very few, most are game shows and reality TV shows. And of the oh-so-very-few that I firmly believe should have been axed right quick, some of them stayed on the air for a long, long time (Yes Dear and Life According to Jim come to mind).

While I may not be terribly picky about what I watch on TV, I am picky about what I watch regularly and even more picky about what I think is actually good TV. Las Vegas is entertaining, but it’s never been good TV. Every season, it seems there are fewer and fewer shows I feel compelled to keep watching. Of those that I do, I’ll bet dollars to donuts that half (or more) of them will be dropped from the schedule before mid-season.

I look at the current network TV line-up and I see a bit of a wasteland. Not that TV has ever been a place populated with kings and paragons of knowledge and virtue, but the landscape is most certainly different from what it was in the heyday of my original television watching days. I remember more shows taking chances and I remember more networks taking chances on shows.

Yes, shows have always been pulled–and some quite quickly–for as long as networks have looked at their bottom lines via ratings. But the ratings game has changed a lot more in the past two decades than the marketing babble has. The effectiveness of advertising as a whole has dropped (thanks in no small part to everyone who time-shifts their viewing with TiVO, watches their shows online or otherwise puts themselves in the position to skip that nearly twenty minutes per hour that isn’t show).

Networks today are so numbers-conscious that they lose sight of the bigger picture.

They forget that the numbers are only part of the story.

Or, maybe, the number are the story. Maybe it’s just not the story the networks think it is.

If nothing else, the Web has proven that there is a market out there for alternate distribution routes. I’ve watched all of Daybreak online. I probably would have watched it in real-time, too, but I’m not the typical viewer. Many viewers today are used to getting things when they want them–as can be easily seen by the popularity of TiVO.

Maybe the networks need to re-think how they run shows to begin with. They’ve certainly been trying half-heartedly to do that for years.

But that’s another story.

The point here is, a show has to be such a wiz-bang success right off the top these days that the more subtle fare rarely has a chance. Those more subtle shows (like Lost and Heroes) that do manage to hit it big are flukes.

I’m going to miss seeing Drive on TV. It was just getting fun… and looked like it could have gotten good. Maybe I’ll get to see the rest of it–on my own terms, of course–if they dump episodes to the Web. Or maybe it will go the way of shows like Push, Nevada and never be heard of again except in the bios of the people involved in it.