Dear How I Met Your Mother,

Please don’t become Will & Grace v2.0 with the stunt casting. Your show becomes about that stunt casting and not about the actual content of the show. It’s distracting and if I didn’t love you so so much, I might not watch, just on principal. I’ll let it go this one time, but if you bring Britney Spears back one more time (ha! I wasn’t even trying for that joke) I may find something else to do on Monday nights.

I have to stop reading sites like Television Without Pity. I find myself continually influenced by the negative opinions of others that my own enjoyment of shows I usually love is affected. And TWoP is a site built around snark.

Don’t get me wrong - I don’t have a hate-on for TWoP. It’s a fun site with some great recappers and a big community of television lovers. It’s heavily moderated - probably one of the most moderated sites I’ve ever posted on. I mean, I started out a post with the word ‘Um’ once and got dinged by them, and that ding stayed on my record for a couple of years. For a site built on snark, they probably would like the snark directed at the shows themselves rather than other users.

But I digress.

The reason I bring all this up is that I’ve been following the “Bones” forum on TWoP and there are some deep thinkers there. Almost too deep. I love “Bones.” I have been critical of it lately, but I’m starting to wonder if that’s not a direct reflection of the posts I read in the “Bones” thread - many of the longtime viewers there are hyper-critical of the characters, the plots, the dialogue, the clothes worn, the directors, writers and man do some of them really hate Cam.

I worry that reading those opinions has lessened my enjoyment of “Bones” by forcing me to watch it with a hyper-critical eye. I’ve always been one to tout the entertainment aspect of the TV world and I avoid nitpickers and naysayers on shows I love. I’m finding that I avoided them because I let them influence me too much until I stop liking a show altogether.

I’m sure it’s a character flaw of mine because I know people who can read spoilers and nitpick with the best of them, yet they still tune in every week. But when does a show go from being purely entertaining to a show you watch just to nitpick and mock? I’m not denying the rights of the TWoPers to do what they do and feel what they feel about “Bones.” I wouldn’t keep reading the dang thread there if I didn’t somewhat care about what other people think of the show I love so much. But I think I have to be careful. I’m pretty good at fanwanking and in fact I prefer to just sit back and watch. Plotholes and mistakes in forensics or courtroom traditions don’t ever jump out at me. I can forgive it if it serves the overall story.

This week’s episode of “Bones” was wonderful. I loved the intensity, the emotion, the ethical dilemmas. But reading fan reaction and nitpicks has influenced how I feel about the episode. And if I rewatch it, I’ll only see the tiny mistakes and missteps the eagle-eyed viewers of TWoP caught. And that’s a shame.

And it’s different than reading a simple review of a show. A review is usually just an overall, “I liked it/hated it” thing without going into minute detail. A recap is pretty detailed. A TWoP recap is detailed and snarky as hell and that can be funny or it can wreck your enjoyment of a show. I had to quit reading the TWoP recaps of “24″ because I couldn’t stop referring to Tony Almeida as ‘Soulpatch’ which took me out of the moment.

Anyway, this rambling post doesn’t have much of a point so I’ll put it out of its misery

In my continuing effort to post regularly here, I’m going to steal an idea from a couple friends and make certain days of the week sort of theme-y. Henceforth, today shall be known around here as Wayback Wednesday wherein the TV Chick (the party of the first part) shall reminisce about shows gone by.

Theorizing that one could time travel within his own lifetime, Dr. Sam Beckett stepped into the Quantum Leap accelerator and vanished …. He woke to find himself trapped in the past, facing mirror images that were not his own and driven by an unknown force to change history for the better. His only guide on this journey is Al, an observer from his own time, who appears in the form of a hologram that only Sam can see and hear. And so Dr. Beckett finds himself leaping from life to life, striving to put right what once went wrong and hoping each time that his next leap will be the leap home.

This week’s focus will be “Quantum Leap.” If you don’t know anything about this show, I’d suggest proceeding to your nearest video store and renting it. Or better yet, buy it because if you like sci-fi mixed with a deep well of intriguing and different stories in every episode, then you’ll love QL.

It was a brilliant gimmick for a show - an accidental time-traveler leaps into different characters and must save someone in that character’s life before he can move on, and each time he leaps, he continually hopes the next one will get him back home to the woman he loves.

I think this provided a fantastic opportunity for the writers and actors - especially Sam (Scott Bakula) to show off their acting/writing chops. Bakula has to portray both Sam Beckett AND a different character he leaps into each episode. The writers have an almost never-ending fountain of story ideas they can write for Sam. It was such a unique show filled with colourful characters like Sam’s perpetually horny hologram guide Al. Just thinking about the wealth of ideas available to the show makes me giddy.

“Quantum Leap” is ranked #15 in TV Guide’s list of the “25 Top Cult Shows Ever!” and with good reason. It was compelling, it had anguish and drama, but also light moments, fun characters, mystery, and intrigue. The show lasted for five seasons and the grand finale is one of the best endings I’ve ever seen.

My favourite episode of “Quantum Leap” was what my sister and I call the ‘Evil Al’ episode. It was a Halloween episodes called “The Boogieman” in which “Sam leaps into horror novelist Joshua Rey and fails to prevent several suspicious deaths caused by the Devil himself, who resents Sam “putting right what I made wrong.” (Wikipedia) Along the way Sam runs into future horror novelist, Stephen King. This episode scared the snot out of my little sister when it aired. Brilliant

Finally, I think I’ll end these little trips down memory lane with a bit of trivia:

“Scott Bakula ad libbed the line “Oh boy!” at the end of an episode. The producer liked it so much that it became the signature final line of each episode, as Sam finds himself in a new body.” - (IMDb)

The website Redeye (an offshoot of the Chicago Trib) is holding it’s second annual Best Character on TV contest. My inner-Whedon is tickled that one “region” of voting is named after Buffy

Here are my votes:

In the George Costanza Region, I”m going to go with Samantha Newley (Christina Applegate, ‘Samantha Who?”) to show some love for Kelly Bundy, Olive Snook (Kristin Chenoweth, “Pushing Daisies”) because I enjoyed Pushing Daisies and I don’t know the other guy, Sir Guy of Gisborne (Richard Armitage, “Robin Hood”) based solely on hotness of the actor because I don’t know either show, and Larry David (”Curb Your Enthusiasm”) because my dad loves him so much.

This is much how I vote in the annual March Madness basketball tournaments btw. I always go with Gonzaga because I like saying ‘GONZAGA!’ very loudly.

In the Carmela Soprano Region, it’s Michael Scott (Steve Carell, “The Office”) because, well, it’s Steve Carell, Barney Stinson (Neil Patrick Harris, “How I Met Your Mother”) because Barney is a source of constant amusement in my household (hypothetical 5 - yeah!!), Joy Turner (Jaime Pressly, ‘My Name is Earl”) because I love her character, and I got nuthin’ for the last vote.

In The Smoking Man Region, I also have nada. I refuse to watch Desperate Housewives, Ben from “Lost” grates my nerves, and I am unfamiliar with the last two characters.

In the Buffy the Vampire Slayer Region though, I’ll go with The Devil (Ray Wise, “Reaper”) because he does smarmy oh so well, and he rocked on “24″, Dr. Miranda Bailey (Chandra Wilson, “Grey’s Anatomy”) because the image the site uses for her looks like she could knock you into next week, Captain Jack Harkness (John Barrowman, “Torchwood” - duh, eh?) because the Captain Jack is such an interesting character on a show that takes a lot of chances, and Dahlia Malloy (Minnie Driver, “The Riches”) because I *heart* Minnie Driver in anything she does.

So there you go, a seemingly random choosing of the best characters on TV by someone who has a bunch of shows she needs to check out.

With a new episode of the CBS show “Moonlight” airing tonight, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at it and compare it to two other shows about vampire detectives: “Angel” and “Forever Knight.”

In “Angel,” David Boreanaz played the title character, a broody vampire P.I. in Los Angeles who’s seeking redemption. Geraint Wyn Davies played Nick Knight, a hopeful but naive vampire detective in Toronto on “Forever Knight.” Alex O’Laughlin plays Mick St. John, a… well I haven’t got a bead on his disposition yet but I can tell you he’s a vampire P.I. in Los Angeles on CBS’ new show “Moonlight.”

As a fan of both “Forever Knight” and “Angel” I was chagrined when I heard about “Moonlight.” My gut reaction was, “Wow. Hollywood really has run out of ideas” and “Vampire detective? Again? Why couldn’t he be a vampire web designer or vampire accountant?”

I suppose police work is logical job for them to be in if they’re seeking redemption. They want to help the helpless so it stands to reason they’d put themselves in a position to help, such as detective work or taking cases as an investigator. So I guess I can talk myself past that roadblock.

Let’s look at some more similarities between the three shows:

Tortured Vamp falls in love with feisty blonde:

- Angel never really got over his love for Buffy.
- Nick’s loves weren’t blonde but they were plenty feisty.
- Mick St. John seems to be falling for a spunky blonde internet reporter.

Vamp feels overwhelming guilt for his past:
- Angel was cursed with a soul that forced him to face hundreds of years of slaughter and mayhem. For most of the show’s run, Angel holds on to a slight hope from a prophecy that says if he redeems himself fully, he will be rewarded by becoming human.
- Nick Knight refuses to drink human blood as he searches for a cure that will make him human.
- Mick also won’t drink ‘from the tap’ so to speak, preferring instead to drink bagged blood.

Vamp has an even older vampire, or ’sire’ that either guides them or tries to get them back to their old ways:
- Angel’s sire, Darla, did her best to make Angel lose his soul and return to his wicked ways.
- Nick’s sire, LaCroix was always looking for ways to manipulate Nick in an attempt to get Nick back in the killing fold.
- Mick’s comes in the guise of friend who’s centuries older than himself. So far his purpose has been to make Mick ensure the fact that vampires are amongst the cattle stays a secret.

When “Moonlight” was announced there was a lot of rumbling from fans of “Angel” who felt that it was ‘ripping off’ their beloved show. Tonight’s episode is a pretty good case-in-point: Mick has to be a bodyguard for a rising starlet. In the episode “Eternity” on Angel, he became a fading starlet’s bodyguard. I suppose the differences are the rising/fading aspect. And apparently Mick’s starlet gets murdered as opposed to nearly getting eaten by her bodyguard as shown on Angel. It’s dangerously similar but I can’t quite get my back up about it until I actually see the episode. - EDIT: Finally watched it this weekend, and I think the similarities were fairly minor between the two shows. I can forgive it.

“Angel” was deeply steeped in a carefully woven tapestry of vampire and demon lore that began as far back as the first season of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” It’s richly layered, well-written and had that as its base when “Angel” the spin-off began. I believe, despite the similarities seen in “Moonlight,” it will be very difficult to touch the brilliance of “Angel.” I don’t think “Moonlight” is even trying to do that.

I think perhaps “Moonlight” is striving to be a standout despite borrowing some themes from other shows in this genre. It’s beautifully shot. The sets are dramatic and lovely. The use of flashbacks has slowly unraveled a bit of Mick St. John’s brief vampiric life and created interest in it.

That’s one definite difference from the other shows: Mick St. John is a relative newbie to vampirism than his counterparts on “Angel” and “Forever Knight”. Angel was around 250 years old and Nick Knight was around 800.

I’ll continue to watch. There are some things I rather like about it such as the fight sequences and well, the vamps just look cool when they vamp out. I’m hoping for deeper layers on the show but I can make do with just having The Pretty.

 

 TV Babble's First Show - Let the Lameness Commence! [10:00m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

In this week’s episode of “How I Met Your Mother” (hereafter to be referred to as HIMYM because all the cool kids are using acronyms), Barney finds out what happens when you break the exalted Bro Code.

Last week he slept with Robin. The girl Ted was in love with and probably still is despite being apart for over a year. In typical Barney fashion, he recruits poor Marshall to go through the Bro Code bylaws with a lawyerly comb and find a loophole that will get him out of feeling guilty for sleeping with Robin. In explaning the origins of the Bro Code, we get an amusing flashback to the founding fathers of America who, along with the constitution, also set forth the rules of the Bro Code. Kind of silly I’ll admit, but seeing George Washington refer to D.C. as “Me D.C.” was enough to crack me up.

Marshall is unable to  find a loophole and tells Barney the only way to assuage the guilt is to just come clean. meanwhile, Robin already came clean to Robin and he forgave her right away. When Barney came clean, Ted ended their friendship. I don’t quite think that was fair but eh, it’s a silly sitcom and I didn’t spend all night fretting over it.

I really enjoy this show. It’s currently the only sitcom I’ve been watching. I’ve decided to come right out and admit I pretty much check out new shows based on the actors and actresses in them. I tried to deny it, but I cannot do so any longer.  I like Neil Patrick Harris (NPH for the cool kids) and so I netflixed HIMYM. I thought it was funny, thought NPH’s character was fantastic and became hooked on the show.

I love David Boreanaz. I checked out Bones via Netflix for that reason and that reason only. And was pleasantly surprised. That seems to be the way of it. So no more will I think that sampling a show or movie based on the hotness or coolness factor of a favoured actor/actress is wrong.

Bones was a pleasant surprise last night. Despite my last little rant about the show venturing off into sitcom land, last night’s episode, “The Baby in the Bough,” proved that they could pull it off if that is their intention.

Let me preface that by saying I am a master at the fanwank. Last night’s episode required a lot of fanwanking. The plotline that forced Booth and Brennan to take temporary custody of a baby was forced and contrived and basically served to show Brennan could eventually soften up and become attached and motherly. The whole whodunnit aspect of the episode was secondary and kind of sloppy. I know who killed the mother, but I don’t know how he did it. The forensics aspect of the show seems to be treated like it *has* to be there because the show is called “Bones” and she’s a forensic anthropologist.

But I have the wonderful ability to let all that go and just enjoy the character interactions and dynamics. I’ve never been a nitpicker when it comes to reviewing shows. I don’t care if there’s not supposed to be sound in space, or if the real senator of West Virginia wouldn’t let a bridge go unrepaired in real life because, well, the show isn’t real life. People seem to forget the e-n-t-e-r-t-a-i-n-m-e-n-t aspect of television. I’ve never been able to understand the need to nitpick.

And so I laughed giant belly laughs when Brennan told the baby that the pink stuffed elephant was “wrong” and even harder laughs when she was trying to quiet the child by showing him her “dancing phalanges” (better known as Spirit Fingers ) I’m sorry, but that was frickin’ hilarious.

So who cares if the Brennan/Baby bonding was contrived. Apart from that, it was handled well, acted well, and seemed like a natural thing. The mystery was tidied up, we get to see the softer side of Brennan, Booth is a natural with kids (since he has one of his own) and Angela and Hodgins aren’t going to waste screen time in the future fighting about whether they want kids. I liked this episode much better than last week’s.

I know I’ve said that I’ve pretty much abandoned “Lost” and that hasn’t changed. But just because *I* don’t watch it doesn’t mean everyone else has.

There is a new episode tonight. The show has been in reruns for a few weeks now so I’m guessing fans of the show are salivating for a new one. I have about four episodes sitting in my DVR queue and I keep meaning to watch them to get caught up because I’m not quite sure I’m ready to give up completely on this show I used to Really Love. But then something distracts me and the queue grows and grows until it becomes to daunting to find that much time to sit down and watch a bunch of episodes.

It’s actually a big night for ABC with their major shows coming in with new eps. Ugly Betty, Grey’s Anatomy and Lost. So break out the popcorn and settle in kids!

There is a lot going on in TV land this week. From a new Bones on Monday to a new Hell’s Kitchen last night (which has been TIVO’d to be viewed over lunch today ) to a new Wife Swap and Top Model tonight, to Smallville and Survivor tomorrow night, and finally - FINALLY a new Moonlight on Friday. That show’s been on hiatus forever and it was just starting to grow on me too.

Now, I know there are only a small amount of shows that I really talk about in this blog, and that my tastes run toward the rather nerdy stuff. I wish I had the time to get into a wider range of shows, but I’ll do my best to pass on the things I hear.

But speaking of nerdy, I have read that Joss Whedon’s new show, Dollhouse, began filming today! Excitement abounds! And former Angel actress, Amy Acker, has joined the cast. She played Fred/Illyria on that show. I’m ecstatic about that. Now we just have to hope FOX doesn’t cancel the show just when it hits its stride.