|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 3:26:54 GMT
I love it! I call shotgun for whatever vehicle he arrives in.
|
|
|
Post by peach on Jan 24, 2009 4:42:52 GMT
Latest Nielsen ratings, Eleventh Hour," 7.9/13, kept CBS on top at 10 p.m. "Private Practice" scored a 6.5/11 for ABC (and won the hour among adults 18-49), beating the 5.1/9 for "ER" on NBC.
For some reason it does not fare well with the 18-34 group (and this has been consistant) but does better and wins most of the time with the 18-49 group (again consistant week after week) CSI is helping and I hope they don't move EH to Tuesdays, that could be death knell for the show and a shame. Again I find a lack of publicity since the shows inception, and can't figure out why the network hasn't pushed it. It has been placing in the top 20 so I just don't understand.
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 4:48:14 GMT
It's very strange. It seems to get no love from the network or the media. I'd say I could understand the media's attitude, because Eleventh Hour isn't a stellar show (although it's improving), except that they love The Mentalist. I don't think that show is any better, except from a ratings/popularity standpoint.
Maybe it's Rufus' own plot so that he's not trapped in the show too long.
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 14:09:18 GMT
sobering opinion from an english gentleman on the cbs website, apparently the EH writers maybe not have a clue after all:
"Maybe the plot of the episode was better because this the 3rd story only to be transferred directly from the BBC version on which this story was based? As an Englishman I like to think so anyway...
Two minor (well one minor one major) quibbles with this ep, one is that in the original Dr Reeves and Hood had a burgeoning romance start (they had chemistry and they had dinner together). When the episode started with Rachel getting lucky I thought that would be an excuse for him to go on a date with another woman, but it didn't work out like that. That didn't bother me however, but there was a line that she gave when they were spending time together about her Giger counter, and how she refused to call it that instead calling it a radiation counter. She did this because she said that the original Giger was a Nazi war criminal. In a suicide note she was forced to write in the original she bequeathed her radiation counter to Hood, but in the note called it a Gieger counter. That is how Hood figured out that it wasn't a suicide, I thought basing that assumption on the fact that she hadn't fed her dog was not realistic.
The more major problem I had was that the heavy water was being made by terrorists. In the original BBC version the heavy water was being manufactured in secret by the British Government so it could be incorporated into nuclear weapons, which would then be sold to other countries. When Hood discovered this (not easy because the entire time the equivalent of the Director was trying to get them off the case even going so far as to manufacture a death threat against Hood from Animal Rights Activists to force Rachel to move him somewhere else). At the end of the ep Hood basically blackmails the British Government into shutting down the heavy water plant or he will expose them.
My problem is that by turning the villain of the story from the government into terrorists it has changed it from a valuable lesson about what one's government could get up to if they are not kept in line into yet another story about how the only thing between terrorists and innocent people are government agents, so lets give them even more power.
We know about terrorists. Now lets start seeing some more stories about what a government can do with too much power and secrecy. "
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 15:34:09 GMT
Sorry to hear that this wasn't an original plot, just because I enjoyed the improvement and I don't want to go back to the amateur plotting style of some of the earlier episodes. (On the other hand, I thought the cloning plot of the first episode was pretty dumb, and I think that was from England as well.)
I don't mind the change of villain, because I think shadowy govt agencies as power-mad bad guy has been done to death on US television and in films. As I mentioned earlier, my quibble with the choice of criminal was just that I picked them out as soon as they appeared on my screen. They always seem to act so obviously sneaky on this show.
|
|
|
Post by robbiesheik on Jan 24, 2009 18:36:43 GMT
As I mentioned earlier, my quibble with the choice of criminal was just that I picked them out as soon as they appeared on my screen. They always seem to act so obviously sneaky on this show. I have noticed on several shows, Cold Case in particular, that I usually pick out the bad guy as soon as the appear on screen. Because they are usually a actor I have seen before. The guest actor you have seen the most before usually has the meatier part of the "one who done it". Also when it is someone like Lee Majors......of course after they interview him the 1st time and rule him out.....you know that Lee Majors is not going to take a part that small. He will be back and turn out to be the bad guy. Anyway that was just something I noticed and was wondering if anyone else did. Many of my friends don't recognize actors from one show to another. I may not know their names but if I never forget a face.
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 19:03:34 GMT
yes... you kind of see a neon sign flashing on their foreheads saying "baddie here" with a large arrow pointing down. tv execs are so afraid we will not get it somehow. its like in the first star trek series, if you can remember so far back, i was tiny, and still i could figure out when one enterprise crew member would be dying within the first five minutes: you had never seen him before, and he looked like a total twat. i used to shout out: he will die! he will die! and off he went. my dad thought i was a genius. he just was not into tv a lot.
|
|
|
Post by peach on Jan 24, 2009 21:50:54 GMT
Why should the American incarnation of EH be an exact replica of the original? Whose to say they can't take poetic license? There have been improvements and I hope to see more. Sneaky if it is in fact a ploy though, interesting thought.
Speaking of cameo appearances by actors as bad guys, Law & Order CI has been doing that the past several years, only they do it with a twist, sometimes they turn out to be the good guy or girl. But that gets old really quick, only because you see the same secondary actors all the time, no real sense of spontaniety anymore, which is a shame, cause D'Onofrio is still good to watch. Talk about mannerisms, this man is king in that department. I still have high hopes for the show (EH) and hope that is back on the sked.
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 23:43:31 GMT
I agree that (famous) guest actors often seem to sign on just to play the villain, so it's probably not entirely the shows' fault. It is challenging for shows to "hide" the criminal, and it doesn't help when viewers like me are tv addicts who have seen every possible plot permutation already and can guess any twist the writers try to make.
With Eleventh Hour my gripe is that the baddies (who so far have usually not been famous actors) seem to be hamming it up or something so that I know who it is right away, despite the red herring characters thrown at us. Maybe in this case though they're not really trying to hide who it is, but the what, the how, and the why, and I should just learn to accept that. (I wasn't a fan of the old show Columbo, either, because they always showed the killer up front. So I guess I'm just hard to please, because most mystery lovers I know really liked Columbo.)
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 25, 2009 3:27:45 GMT
rueful: i liked columbo because at least the formula was different, it was not a "whodunnit", but a "howillhegetthem". and i loved peter falk in those movies. plus, they were often quite funny, not trying to take things too seriously. but unfortunately, that new formula got old too, screenplays were sometimes not that great nor logical, and direction was often so-so, which are probably the reasons why they displeased you, if you are a tv addict like me, which you seem to be.
as per the "hide the criminal" tendency, the problem is, imho, that most producers seem to judge their potential viewers as total dodos, so they cannot be too subtil about it or we will be so lost. and since, on EH, writers are often dodos themselves (being polite here), i think if they tried to hide the culprit too much, they would not remember who he was, and so would get lost themselves.
just once, i think it was in the cloning episodes, i took more time in finding out who the baddie doctor was, but since his reasons did not make much sense, and since doctors often are guilty parties in this show, i was not wowed. they made an effort at "hiding the criminal" in the epidemy episode, but, really, who else than oded fehr could it have been? there were no other secondary characters! and then, we were too busy to care, still being outraged at rachel's stupidity when she willingly took a bath and shower in the blood of a guy she knew was infected - the only logical reason for that weird behavior would have been that she wanted good dr. hood to be glued to her bedside, but she was even too stupid to require that much.
peach: i think that you are right about L&O, CI, it is one show where some effort is made towards renewing the genre. d'onofrio certainly has his mannerisms, which makes for the fact that i now rarely watch the show, he just gets on my nerves after a while, but at the very least i enjoy that they went for a non-typical detective for once. and i like his side kick.
one series that does it for me is "criminal minds" - dark and unsettling, good character development of main players (just LOVE THIS YOUNG AND CUTE AND BRILLIANT DR. REID!!!), good stories, but really i liked the first 2 seasons best with mandy patinkin, who i may never forgive for leaving the show. i always liked joe mantegna, its not his fault. but the premise of the series was so based upon patinkin's characters and his relationship with his team that he left a void when he left.
i like how "criminal minds" do not fear to include actual quotes from poets, philosophers and other thinkers, thus blatantly daring to respect the viewers's intellectual capacity. i think this is the very symbol of the intelligence behind that show.
but i generally prefer british mysteries, a la agatha christie - now, this dame could hide a criminal like no one ever could before or after her. i adore the latest miss marples, and david suchet as poirot was a pure delight, the best poirot ever - with the possible exception of albert finney in "the orient express".
and, at least, british mysteries take place in the nice english countryside, which i like to watch. a local cable station showed the "midsomer mysteries" a few years ago, and i taped them all for that very reason.
just love how brits tend to the the atmosphere, and devote enough space and care to better develop and explain characters, situations, and plot twists.
perhaps one day, my wish to see rufus sewell in a crime/mystery/suspense movie, perfectly cast as the perfect detective, will be granted, and perhaps this dream movie will take place in the cotswalds, or in wales, or in green ireland, and so i will be totally in heaven.
but, i digress...
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 25, 2009 4:15:05 GMT
On this board, digression seems to be a virtue. ;D but unfortunately, that new formula got old too, screenplays were sometimes not that great nor logical, and direction was often so-so, which are probably the reasons why they displeased you, if you are a tv addict like me, which you seem to be. Sorry to say you give me too much credit when you think I didn't like Columbo because of the illogical storylines and poor production values. I like some pretty cheesy tv. And I'm still watching Eleventh Hour, aren't I? As you correctly surmise, I have spent far too much time watching the boob tube. But hey, everyone has to have a hobby, right? I think I just felt I was wasting my time, since I "knew" everything up front, and I didn't like the character of columbo, so I didn't even enjoy watching him solve it. I get the Monk mysteries quite easily, but I still enjoy the show because I do like those characters. You are probably quite right about the producers underestimating viewer intelligence. And judging by the popularity of some of the really disgusting reality shows out there, they probably feel justified. I also love british mysteries, foyle's war and inspector morse being two of my favorites. I'm afraid I can't get into the new miss marples, since I've read most of the books and they changed them so much (including the murderers and motives, in some cases).
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 25, 2009 4:33:31 GMT
I LOVE MONK! and to show you how weird i am, i think that guy is sexy!
as for the marples, i like the fact that, for once, they pictured miss marple herself somewhat closer to the original - who is impossible to translate to movies as in the books, because, basically, she never leaves her chair. i mean, i liked margaret rutherford, but she was so different from the book character, they might as well have hired clarke gable to play poirot. i never noticed the changes you mentioned! i feel i have been a dodo now. thank you very much. i thought i liked you.
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 25, 2009 4:40:02 GMT
Oh, darn, I thought I had that quote thing down, where your beautiful words would be in a little box, but I failed! So we are dodos in arms, and that is a bond between us that will never be broken, no matter how much you may hate me now!
Monk can be very sexy, sometimes. Although I'm more partial to the captain, myself, so I think I win the weirdo contest.
I'm sure many people didn't notice the changes in the Marples. It's hard to keep track of all the murderers, especially if you're a big mystery fan.
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 25, 2009 4:46:52 GMT
oh come on, all is forgotten. the captain? have you realized that this guy played the baddie in "silence of the lamb" ? (come to think of it, he IS kind of cute... and since when have i overlooked sadistic baddies - look at whose fanclub i chose to join first...) ok, so fellow dodos we are. thanks for "the beautiful words". i sometimes wonder if anyone can decipher my ample babbling, as i am, after all, francophone by birth, and by temperament too.
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 25, 2009 5:02:18 GMT
Hey, I think you're a great writer. If English isn't your first language I doubly salute you, because you write better than many native english speakers. Sadism is a very unappreciated quality in men these days Kidding, kidding. Now, to get this thread back on topic, I will remark that I wish the lighting on eleventh hour weren't so dark. I don't think I've complained about that yet, and I need to fulfill my daily complaint quota. The interiors are always so dim, and I'd like to be able to fully appreciate the scenery, if you know what I mean.
|
|