Category: tv

Autoblog on Speed Channel’s WRC Coverage

Ashley Bischoff12 Comments

In a post last month about how Netflix tried to recommend a pregnancy workout disc to me after I had added an autocross driving disc to my queue, I made an attempt at describing WRC (World Rally Championship racing). However, I came across an entry at Autoblog (a car blog in the Weblogs Inc family) that painted a better picture:

I personally think that the WRC is the most exciting race to watch, and the more you guys care, the more chances they’ll show it live in the US. Here are the reasons to care: It has fast drifting turns, spectacular scenery, death-defying leaps over blind crests and some dude in the passenger seat reading out the turns to a guy driving at 100mph who hasn’t seen the road before. These guys have balls, real manly ones. Oh, did I mention awesome crashes into trees? Yeah, they got that too. For those of you who want to start watching, the WRC Magazine show airs on the Speed Channel.

After reading over that, I really began to ponder whether I should sign up for DirecTV sometime (or some other television service which includes Speed Channel). Really, I’m not even sure what my options are, Speed Channel-wise. I’m pretty sure that DirecTV carries it, but might Comcast Digital Cable or Echostar carry it as well? Oh, and just to clarify a minor thinko in Autoblog’s post — the drivers have seen the roads before, during the pre-race “recce” (however, in the midst of a race, the driver steers largely on the faith of the directions blurted to him by his navigator in the passenger seat).

So Much for Kojak

Ashley Bischoff3 Comments

USA Network has a new series “Kojak”, based on the 70s series starring Telly Savalas. This time, Ving Rhames plays the title role. It looked interesting from the teasers and so I set my TiVo to record the pilot. What a mistake that was.

The show opens with a set of two detectives interrogating a suspect. They’re asking him about the location of something and who hired him — you know, the usual clichéd detective-suspect chatter. One detective is apparently named Crocker and the suspect mocks him about this, including some crack about how he must have been called “Betty Crocker” as a child (or something). Obviously, these detectives aren’t having much luck and so they walk out of the room, warning the suspect that Kojak is on his way.

Instead of having Rhames walk in at that moment, the producers treat us to a drawn-out introduction to Ving-Rhames-as-Kojak as he walks down a hallway. He’s mostly shot from behind or in silhouette — <sarcasm>ooh, he’s mysterious!</sarcasm>. Finally, Kojak reaches the interrogation room with his trademark lollipop dangling from his lips. He walks in and places his lollipop on the interrogation table; he then proceeds to empty his revolver (revolver!) of its bullets. He inserts a single bullet and spins the chamber, wild-west style.

You'll never guess what came next. Oh, wait, you can see this coming from a mile away? Quelle surprise. Naturally, Kojak slams the suspect’s head onto the table and places his revolver against the perp’s right temple. At first, the suspect calls Kojak’s bluff and continues his jibber-jabbering,but Kojak pulls his trigger a few times as the gun clicks emptily. The suspect soon realizes that the single bullet is soon coming his way; Kojak demands the location of the event and who he’s working for and the suspects whimperingly mumbles the relevant bits to our hero. Triumphantly, Kojak removes his gun and strolls off.

The next scene features Kojak at the scene of the event with a cadre of policemen, thwarting whatever crime was to take place. This was at about the ten-minute mark into the show (out of an hour) and I just stopped watching; I deleted the episode and removed the Season Pass from my TiVo. Clichés aside, I was annoyed by Kojak’s methods in this series (and I speak only of this Ving Rhames version as I’ve never seen Savalas’ version). The best part of detective shows (and, yes, I mean you, Monk) is the lead character’s puzzle-solving abilities. Here it was just brute force, which doesn’t make it much of a detective show, now does it?

I try to keep an open mind about “new original series” on cable (as they like to call them) as many of them can be quite good. But, this time around, I just don’t know what they were thinking. Kojak didn’t hold up as a traditional detective show and it didn’t have enough action to fill that genre either (unless something miraculous happened after that eleventh minute). If you were on the fence about this new edition about Kojak, you needn’t bother.

It Takes a Thief

Ashley BischoffLeave a comment

I’ve recently been enjoying a new show, It Takes a Thief, on The Discovery Channel. And, to be honest, I wasn’t sure what channel it was on until I Googled for it — when I first heard about the show from a network spot while I was watching another show on my TiVo, I paused the show, added It Takes a Thief as a Season Pass and resumed watching the first show. And, since then, I’ve just been watching the series as recordings appeared on my TiVo.

Anyway, the basic premise is this: the show stars two former ex-burglars, Matt Johnston and Jon Douglas Rainey. Each episode, they scout out a house in the tri-state area which looks like it might have poor security. Then, Matt knocks on their door, explains that he's part of a tv show, and asks the homeowners if they would allow his ex-burglar parter to rob their house in exchange for a security revamp.

Sounds simple enough, right? Jon only gets 10 minutes to break in, “rob” the house and make out with the loot. Of course, it’s all pretend and the homeowners aren't really losing their stuff. After the robbery, the crew helps sweep, organize and generally clean up any messes. And, the homeowner’s house gets a full security update after that — new window or door locks, motion-sensors on any expensive paintings, thorny bushes planted below any tempting windows and the like.

“So, how bad could it be? Only 10 minutes? Ok, sure”, so says the homeowners.

You may already see where this is going, but the show may as well have been called The Schadenfreude Robbery Show. Here’s how it generally plays out, after the homeowners agree to the premise:

  • While Matt is talking with the homeowners (and getting a tour of their house and its security measures), Jon waits outside so as to give Jon no additional advantage (not that he needs any help, hehe).
  • A video production van is parked on the street outside the house to which wireless video cameras which are setup throughout the house send live video from the house.
  • The homeowners are instructed to completely lock their house and then meet host Matt in the van.
  • Once everyone is inside the van and the video monitors are cued up, Matt confirms with the homeowners that they're ready to go through with it.
  • After confirmation, Matt calls Jon’s cell phone and gives him the go-ahead. The clock starts and the homeowners view the break-in as it happens.
  • In the first minute or two, Jon tries the obvious entry points such as the front or side doors (in case they’re actually unlocked).
  • Shortly thereafter, Jon gets in and robs the place as if he were really robbing the place. Bookcases are cleared in a search for hidden trinkets. Cookie jars are smashed on the tile kitchen floor, just in case money is hidden inside. Mattresses are overturned on the chance that valuables may be hidden between the mattresses or under the bed.

Of course, the homeowners are horrified, not only at how easily Jon got in but of the complete destruction of their house. Surely they must have been made aware of what could happen, but they probably didn’t realize just how much damage a burglar can do in ten minutes. Generally horrified, they then walk back in their house and view the carnage. Matt consoles the homeowners as, even though it was a fake robbery, it’s still fairly traumatic for them.

A little while later, they get all their stuff back and begin to put their house back in order. And, in the days following, they get the security updates to their home. I wasn’t sure what to make of the show when I first saw the teaser for it (and set the Season Pass) as the spot was fairly vague, along the lines of “See what happens when a burglar is allowed to break into a home” However, I’m really enjoying the show and I think it comes down to two aspects of the show.

Firstly, I find the burglar’s entrance fascinating, as he tests the house’s weak points and manages his way in. And then there’s the denouement of the episode where Matt works with the contractors to close all the security loop holes which a burglar might use to get in to the house. And I’ve learned a few things that I’ll probably put to use whenever I buy a house (for instance, they recommend snipping the garage door opener release cords as a burglar could break a garage door window and then yank on that cord to release the garage door).

Go Baby!

Ashley Bischoff15 Comments

Ah, TiVo. It works in mysterious ways. For those of you sans TiVo, each TiVo can be set to record “Suggestions” — these shows are recorded based on ratings given to past shows. And, over the weekend, I had discovered that my TiVo had recorded Go Baby for me. Now, I have no kids, so I wasn’t sure why TiVo recorded it for me. But I then remembered that TiVo also records some suggestions based on aggregating the shows I like with the shows that other TiVo owners like (sort of like the “you might also like” feature at some online retailers).

So, I looked over the show’s details and discovered that it was only five minutes — so, suckish or otherwise, I figured that I had little to lose. Not having ever heard of the show, I had no idea what to expect (though I did have a hunch that it could be a children’s show). Well, the show starts up and it stars this live-action baby, animated South Park-style, via animating and rotating among a variety of photographs of the baby. Still confusing? Well, it turns out that the Disney Channel — the network which airs it — has the entire episode online (just click on “Farm” to see the episode which I’m writing about).

So, there’s this baby — who mostly just giggles and gurbles — and the narrator talks to the baby and the audience. And, it’s mostly just that silly dialect which adults adopt when conversing with babies:

Narrator: Look, Baby is on a farm. Baby is looking for a lost sheep today. Will you help Baby find the lost sheep?

[narrator points to a pig]

Narrator: Baby thinks that’s a sheep! Do you think that’s a sheep? [pause] You’re right — it’s not a sheep!

[…]

I was only slightly drunk at the time, but I found it hilarious. And, as I watched it a second and third time, I noticed that the narrator’ voice sounded awfully familiar but I just couldn’t think of who it was. Then it dawned on me that it was Richard Kind (yeah, “Paul Lassiter” from Spin City, among other roles). In any case, I now have a Season Pass for Go Baby :).

Bumpy vs Smooth Klingon Heads

Ashley Bischoff4 Comments

So, I suppose you've been wondering why TNG Klingons have bumpy heads while TOS Klingons have smooths heads? Or is that just me? Well, Sci Fi Wire is reporting that an upcoming episode of Enterprise will deal the subject. (For those unaware, Klingons in “Star Trek: The Next Generation” had alien-looking bumpy heads while the actors in “The Original Series” had no such prosthetics.)

In the episodes, the Enterprise heads back to Earth for the official launch of the Columbia NX-02, Starfleet's second warp ship, commanded by Erika Hernandez. Phlox is abducted by aliens and finds himself in the presence of Klingons who tell him the Empire is facing its gravest threat in centuries. Along the way, as Archer and company investigate and pursue, it’s revealed that one of our main characters has a secret past, which comes into play, the site reporte. […]

I did some additional investigation and discovered that the episode, Affliction is scheduled to air on February 18th. And, as I enjoy Enterprise, I’ll watch the episode when it airs. But I’ve never cared that much about this issue — I just figured that 60s television shows didn’t have those kind of makeup effects. (On the other hand, some Trekkers have completely over-analyzed the subject, to the point of hypothesizing scientific theories within the Star Trek universe which could have explained the discrepancy.)