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.

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.

Am I still excited? Yes I am.

Of course, I won’t be watching it until I’m home from work Tuesday night, so I’m expecting to be scooped on everything.

But I’m still going to enjoy it. No matter what! (Unless, by some terrible catastrophe it sucks, in which case I will happily rip Joss a new one.)

Seriously. They could have had two good movies and, instead, they crammed it all into one kinda crappy one. Pretty, though. In fact, as long as you don’t care about semi-sensible plot, proper character development or actual working story arcs, it’s the perfect movie–a collection of clips and sound bites that vaguely hang together, mostly because they have the same characters in them.

The Sandman story could have been great… if it had had space to actually grow and, maybe, brood a little. Him and Parker could have been great dramatic point and counterpoint. Different men, different choices and all that. And the fights could have escalated wonderfully as Sandman learned more about his newly acquired powers and the Webhead slowly became more attached to his black suit.

The Green Goblin II story could have been fantastic… if Harry had a chance to grow more sinister at a more measured pace after his bump on the head. Parker’s life could have been real hell as people and things he loved were taken from him one by one. All the while his emotional turmoil feeding the black symbiotic suit and making it stronger… until it culminated in the awesome knock-down, drag-out between the Web slinger and the new Goblin. A real study in rise and fall of character that would have given all the actors (even Kirsten Dunst) a workout.

The Eddie Brock/Venom story would have been perfect for a fourth film. It was just kind of sandwiched in between everything else. What a waste of that character and Gwen Stacey. ‘Nuff said there.

So, yeah. That was almost a total waste of 2+ hours.

Anyone who’s a fan of sci-fi should be very excited about this. Fritz Lang’s vision of the future is one of the major roots for the sci-fi we see on the screen today. Without Metropolis and it’s far-reaching themes of empowerment and oppression, spectacular set-pieces and astounding special effects (for their time–and even by today’s standards, they’re not half bad), generations of writers, designers and artists would be wandering lost without inspiration.

I learned years ago that there are a number of different cuts of this film, each containing different bits of footage, spliced together in different ways. It wasn’t until 2002 when a “definitive” edition came out, using original script bits, set drawings and production stills to fill in some of the known holes. The newly discovered footage, according to the articles, adds nearly 100 minutes of previously unseen footage.

Now, for the first time in nearly 80 years, the full depth and scope of the story will be known.

Even as it has been, the story of abuse of power, worker uprisings and true love is as rich and character-filled as any modern epic. The extra footage now available will flesh out some of the more vague points that have often confused and frustrated fans of Metropolis.

I don’t expect a DVD of this to be out for at least another two years. Restoration of footage can take a while–and I’m guessing we’re not dealing with the most meticulously preserved stock, either. But when it does come  out, I can only imagine the batch of extras that will be available. Think of it–a half dozen different cuts of the movie from over the years, multiple scores, a documentary about the restoration process and detective work that had to go on to make the newest version happen, another about the impact the  movie has had on pop-culture and the film world. Heck, throw in a nice biography of Lang and you’ve got at least four disks worth of stuff.

And, without question or hesitation, when that DVD set becomes available (perhaps with a limited edition statue of the robot) it will quickly be on my shelf.

It’s a little ditty called Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog. And it looks like it’s going to be a tremendous amount of fun.

Of course, it’s a musical. Even better, though, it’s a musical with Nathan Fillion and Neil Patrick Harris as hero and wannabe villain (respectively). The whole thing was mostly put together on favors and friendship, coming together during the writers’ strike.

Matt Roush, over at TVGuide.com, has an exclusive review of this sure-to-be cult phenomena. Between that and the teaser that’s currently up on the main site, I know I’ll be eagerly watching the online-released version on July 15, 17 and 19. I’ll be even more eagerly awaiting it’s release on DVD at some undisclosed future date.

Again, this is one of those potentially ground breaking experiments in the realm of Web and Television entertainment. It’s not starting out as a full series, like Quarterlife, there’s not a whole lot of pressure to be picked up by a network or an ongoing cost. Dr. Horrible is, for now, a one-shot deal to see if the model works. We can only guess that, with Whedon’s built-in fan base, there will be at least some moderate amount of success when looking at site hits and video views. The real question is: Will he make enough to be able to pay the people who volunteered to help make the thing in the first place.

If that economic hurdle can be overcome, if a lean production schedule (six days of shooting) and talented team can turn in a professional level entertainment and get it out to people, we may finally see one of the shifts advocates of Web-based shows have been hoping for for a long time. (Anyone who’s ever seen or participated in a 48 Hour Film Challenge knows that high quality can be achieved in a time crunch and on a low budget–but that doesn’t always scale from those 7 minute films to 40+ minutes of show.)

The world will know for sure in just about two weeks when Dr. Horrible tries to take over the world–one computer at a time.

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.

Very quickly, that hesitation turned to elation. This show could be really good.

Yes, sex and swinging was a sizable part of this introductory episode. But it was done with style, some wonderful situational humor and with great effect for character development.

For those who didn’t catch it, the basic plot is this: Bruce and Susan Miller have come into some money, so they decide to move from their distinctly working-class neighborhood to a bigger house in a nicer part of town. The move may be just a couple of miles physically, but social and psychologically, it’s light-years different. Susan’s now former neighbor, Janet Thompson, and her husband Roger bid the Millers (Bruce, Susan, their son BJ and their daughter Laurie) good-bye during the neighborhood Fourth of July barbecue.

Everything that goes on in the old neighborhood and with the Thompsons is played beautifully. There’s an odd rapport between Susan and Roger, it wouldn’t surprise me if it comes out later in the series that they had an affair at some point. The relationship between Janet and Bruce is distinctly antagonistic–he obviously can’t stand her overly-emotional nervous ticks. The cast plays the subtlety of their characters perfectly. Anyone from a small town or close-knit neighborhood knows people like these.

Subtlety, however, is not the strong point of the neighbors at the new house. Tom and Trina Decker are hip and proud to flaunt it. Be it in their coordinated jogging outfits or the swinging (literally) party they invite the Millers to on their first night in the new place. Our first introduction to Tom tells us all we need to know right off the top: he’s an airline pilot, he’s shirtless and he’s flirting with a stewardess–who he brings home to share with his wife. And he’s got the ubiquitous 70s mustache.

The Deckers bring out the more adventurous side of the Millers, much to the horror of the Thompsons, who just happened to stop by as their old friends were on their way to the party across the street and accepted the invitation to tag along. There is much comedy in this sequence of events, but also a deal of poignancy.

We all know how easy it is to fall into a rut, and how different we feel when we suddenly get pulled out of it. That is the transition that is played out during the party.

And that’s just what the grown ups are up to.

There’s also the kids: Rick Thompson and BJ and Laurie Miller. They’ve all got plenty going on, too. Rick and BJ are young boys just discovering the joys, fears and consequences of being interested in girls. Laurie has a crush on her summer school teacher, who is a stark contrast to her (also older) stoner boyfriend.

Not as wholesome and outright family friendly as American Dreams and far from as nostalgic as The Wonder Years, Swingtown definitely has potential to be a great show. The talent is there on the screen and, if this first episode is any indication, there’s talent behind the camera, too.

If CBS gives the show a chance to find its legs, adjusts its marketing campaign appropriately and doesn’t bounce the thing all over the schedule, it may have another hit on its hands.

Of course, this is CBS. They don’t always thing things through very well. So, watch it while it lasts.

After a promising beginning, the first installment of the new anthology series, The Sacrifice, quickly degraded into a melange of same-old, same-old flat characters and sad excuses for plot twists. We won’t even talk about the total lack of scares in the show. I wonder if the people saying how terrifying it was on the official message board cringe when their shadow moves while they’re walking.

The only thing about The Sacrifice (kind of a misleading title once all is said and done) that is anywhere near above average is the makeup effect for the main critter. Everything else, well, if you’ve seen more than one vampire movie in your life, you’ll pretty much figure this one out right away.

Oops, did I spoil that for you by mentioning that this was a vampire story? You’ll thank me, really. Otherwise, like me, you’ll get really excited as four guys, one of them seriously injured in some way, sticking to back roads run into some car trouble and hoof it across the frozen lake to an odd little compound out in the middle of nowhere. Once there, the place seems empty until the very blond, very busty and (shortly) very friendly residents make themselves known.

Right there we have so many different directions this story could go in. Especially with a title like “The Sacrifice”. But either short story writer Del Howison or screenwriter (and series creator) Mick Garris or director Breck Eisner fail miserably at realizing any of those infinitely more terrifying directions. Nope, instead they go for the tried and true “We catch people to feed them to the vampire that lives here” route.

And, man, do we get to that plot point quickly.

Look, I understand there’s only about 42 minutes to work with. But there’s a lot a skilled writer (and a skilled cast) can do in less time than that. Just look at any half-hour episode of the original Twilight Zone and you’ll see. Heck, look at the more modern Tales from the Crypt, they only had half an hour, too. The new Outer Limits did amazing things with an hour time slot, as does the current scariest show on TV, Supernatural.

In fact, the people who put together this installment of Fear Itself could learn a lot from the cast and crew over at Supernatural.

Lesson 1: Let your quirky characters shine! This is especially true if we’re never going to see them again. In the case of The Sacrifice, that would be Lemon, the brother who’s just along for the ride and always screws stuff up. Not only do we only get to hear a handful of lines from him (most of which are the same thing repeated over and over), but he never gets the chance to do anything. OK, one thing, but we can all guess what that is (hint: it’s right out of From Dusk till Dawn, just like most of the rest of the plot). Sad thing is, he’s the most interesting character in the entire show.

Lesson 2: If you’re going to rush to get to the point, it better be a good one. There have been entire episodes of Supernatural where the viewer (and the characters) aren’t sure exactly what’s going on until the last minute. That builds tension, something this show just didn’t have any of after the first ten minutes.

Lesson 3: Give the characters a fighting chance before you take it away. Really, it’s scarier that way. If the characters think they have everything under control and then suddenly realize they missed something important, they have good reason to panic and the audience has good reason to cringe–in a good way.

Lesson 4: If you’re going to go with tried and true legends and done-it-all-before monsters, you sure as hell better come up with at least something new. Supernatural does it all the time. Yeah, we’ve all heard of Bloody Mary and that guy with a hook for a hand who kills people in their cars and every other urban legend they dredge up for the show. But there’s always some new twist they add to it that makes it worth watching. The Sacrifice just didn’t do that.

I could go on, but I’d most likely be wasting my breath.

The good news is, Fear Itself is an anthology show, so the team that made The Sacrifice won’t be back to bring us more crap. No, next week we’ll have a whole new team bringing us crap. Or not.

I really hope next week is better.

But I’m afraid I’ll be disappointed.

On NBC you have Fear Itself, a horror anthology series in the vein of Tales from the Crypt. Each week the hour will be dedicated to a single story. The show was created by Mick Garris, best known as the man who’s brought a bunch of Stephen King’s stuff to the small screen in mini-series format.

Lots of horror fans have very bad things to say about Garris, but I happen to like most of his stuff. At least enough to not immediately write him off. He won’t be directing or writing all the episodes, so things are already off to a good start. Also giving me hope for the show: the high-profile talent mentioned in the press kits and web site aren’t just in front of the camera (like the ill-fated and thankfully short lived revival of The Twilight Zone perpetrated on us a few years back that was full of pretty faces but lacked many stories of substance). John Landis is on deck for at least one of the planned 13 episodes.

As a horror fan, Fear Itself is automatically on my must watch list. Of course, it also has large shoes to fill: The Twilight Zone, Tales from the Crypt, Tales from the Darkside, and The Outer Limits have all done this before (with various levels of success–but success none the less). Will it be eye-rollingly bad or will it be as creepy as some episodes of Supernatural (which has proved more than once that you can be pretty damn scary following regular network rules–if you work at it)? Only time will tell.

While we may or may not being scared on NBC, CBS will be hitting us up with nostalgia in Swingtown. Advertised as a sex-filled swingers paradise, there’s apparently more to this show than just that. Good thing… because on CBS that would get old even faster than it would on a channel where you could actually show the sex. One of the most recent reviews described as kind of thirtysomething set in the 70s.

I’m really not sure there’s a market for this show. But it’s got a good pedigree behind it, so I’m willing to give it a chance. Among the six leads (three couples), there is a lot of experience with canceled TV shows. Luckily, there’s also a good bunch of talent. Of particular note are Molly Parker (Deadwood) and jack Davenport (Pirates of the Caribbean and the British version of Coupling), who will hopefully not be wasted.

At the head of the show are a handful of, well, not familiar names, but producers of familiar good shows, like Jericho and Six Feet Under. That leads me to believe that if the CBS marketing team can get their heads out of the gutter and stop focusing on the orgies and instead pitch the show to their normal demographic, they may have a hit.

Of course, I never expect network executives to do anything even vaguely sensible. So I expect the show to barely make it through the six episodes its scheduled for. Probably with at least one time slot change by week three.