First off, this is the sole opinion of Mark O. Estes, aka The Anti-Critic.

Last week, there were a lot of entertainment reports conveying surprise that DVR playbacks added to the live-plus-7 data, which Nielsen initiated a while ago to add the ratings of DVR playbacks with those of the live airings of programs. Dollhouse, Melrose Place, and Fringe (all considered “low-rated” by critics) all saw rating boosts from DVR playbacks that were lacking in their live performances. The reports also displayed ratings bumps in other high profiled shows like: The Office, Grey’s Anatomy, NCIS, and Desperate Housewives to name a few. Plus, online episode streaming from sites like Hulu.com and network websites have seen a nice sized growth from last year.

All I have to say are two things:

1)    Du- Du- Duh!

2)    The only thing that amazes me is that people are just catching on to this now. Especially after articles were written about this almost four years ago.

DVR has been on the market for how long? Almost a decade, perhaps? The TiVo’s and satellite/cable DVRs have been revolutionizing the way we watch TV for a good time now, so why haven’t Nielsen nor TV critics, who report ratings data, caught on to this earlier instead of rushing to sound the death knell on low rated shows?

Maybe it’s because people love to see the demise of a low rated show, even if they themselves don’t watch said show. Maybe it’s because the TV critics and other web bloggers report more on a show’s low ratings than the actual show itself. While reading comments on certain websites, I can’t help but balk at some of the stuff I saw posted from people who treat nightly ratings as the Gods of TV that shouldn’t be ignored. To some people, The Vampire Diaries, Glee, Gossip Girl, Dollhouse and Fringe are considered failures. Yes, failures, people. Forget all of the sales on iTunes, magazine covers, and whatnot. Those things don’t count when it comes to the national ratings that are released every day.

The reasoning the so-called “experts” give  (and they try to sound as if they read ratings for a living, it’s so sickening) is that shows like the ones listed above are not pulling in LOST or Grey’s Anatomy-like numbers, which is the dumbest thing I have ever heard when it comes to the ratings game. Keep in mind, these people are blog posters saying this and not blog writers who know their field from the back of their hand.

First of all, networks like The CW and FOX are not on the same scale as the big three giants of CBS, ABC, and NBC, which is basic common knowledge to the average person, let alone a wannabe TV critic. Secondly, The CW is not available in all areas, something that might come as a shock to some people. Gossip Girl got a full season order and was renewed off it’s performance on iTunes, which insinuates that it was a hit with viewers and they got to the show any way they could. The same can be said about Glee, which is bringing in tons of money from iTunes downloads from not only episodes, but music downloads as well. The cast of Glee has also been tagged to sing the National Anthem at the World Series and if that doesn’t scream ‘successful runaway hit’ then I don’t know what does.

But besides iTunes downloads, the DVR could be another huge (if not the hugest) factor into the staying power of television shows. I personally thought that it already was, but boy was I wrong. DVRs don’t just record the television programs; they also record the commercials as well, which is what matters right? The commercials? But according to Variety, networks still want shows viewed on a DVR to be viewed within three days of it’s airing, because of the C3 metric, which is how networks sell ad space. So if that’s the case then do the live-plus-7 data even matter?

See, it’s always something.

Another inconsistency that concerns me about the Nielsen report is what about the shows that people don’t watch during the time period slotted for live-plus-7 data? I have two episodes of Private Practice on my DVR that I have yet to watch. Will those be counted as well? There are so many loopholes in the way Nielsen reads ratings today that it’s a travesty and I think someone should call attention to it.

So, I think the TV networks and media companies need to adapt to the new technology and to do it whole-heartedly and not in a half-ass way. What do you guys think?

2001 was a big year for HBO. Already riding high off the successes of The Sopranos and Sex and the City, and their new sitcom Curb Your Enthusiasm, HBO was being critically acclaimed as finally making smart television for cable. But somewhat lost in this shuffle of groundbreaking TV was another fantastic show, Six Feet Under.

Six Feet Under followed the Fisher family, whose family-run funeral parlor has been handed down from generation to generation. When the father and namesake of the business, played by recent Oscar nominee Richard Jenkins, is killed, the family gathers together, including free-spirited son Nate (Peter Krause of Sports Night and Dirty Sexy Money) who comes to become a partner at the funeral home, a job he swore he would never take.

Nate partners with his brother David, Michael C. Hall of Dexter, to run the family business. Their mother and sister, Ruth and Claire, played by Frances Conroy of Sleepless in Seattle and Lauren Ambrose of Can’t Hardly Wait, respectively, who are polar opposites. Freddy Rodriguez of Planet Terror,  also plays family friend and employee of the Fishers, who takes great pride in his restorations of the recently passed.

While before the death of the eldest Fisher, the family seemed like a normal family, post-death the secrets start to pour out. Nate meets Brenda, Rachel Griffiths of Brothers & Sisters, on the night of his father’s death and what starts as a fling becomes something more. The introverted David turns out to be dating a policeman. Ruth cheated on her deceased husband with a hairdresser, and Claire is experimenting with drugs and dealing with becoming the girl who drives to school everyday in a lime-green hearse.

Every episode deals with very weighty topics, from homosexuality to abortion and mostly, the afterlife. Six Feet Under never shied away from dealing with real issues in unconventional, sometimes disturbing ways. The show became great at defying expectations and throwing the audience for a loop at any chance it could. Each episode felt like a mini-movie, each with its’ own underlining arch that makes every episode feel like an integral part of the season and entire series as a whole.

Six Feet Under lasted five seasons, the first of which earned them an Emmy for best drama and ended in 2005 with one of the most fitting finales in television history. Unfortunately by the end of the series, the show has been in the shadow of The Sopranos and other great HBO programming for too long. Yet Six Feet Under remains one of the best shows of the current decade.

Beautiful People Musical Number

I bet you didn't know you needed to watch a television show that fictionalizes the life of Barney's window designer and raconteur Simon Doonan's life, did you? Well you do. This show is filled with heart, laughs, and as you can see from above, musical numbers.

"Beautiful People" (LOGO, check local listings) is the fictionalization of Simon Doonan's life growing up in Redding, England. The show is framed by an object that Simon is either wearing or placing in one of his window displays. Each title begins with "How I got my…" and then tells the viewer how Simon gets something that becomes an important piece of his life.

Like many brit-coms, the show has many wacky characters, pratfalls, and an ease with race/class/gender issues that American TV does not normally have. Simon and his best friend Kyle (aka Kylie) and round pegs in a square world. They want desperately to move to London and be with the "beautiful people" but throughout the show, Simon begins to learn that maybe there are beautiful people everywhere and fabulousness is a state of mind, not just a place far away.

The openness that the show looks at life through the eyes of a teenage gay boy gives the show some heart. Even people who have not been outsiders will understand much of Simon's longing. For those of us who have in our lives felt like we were meant to be somewhere else or someone else, this show can strike a nerve. Feeling like an outsider can last for many their whole lives. Simon's story can be inspiring to most, if not all, of us.

This is not to say the show is perfect. The bookended sections are ok, but many times played way more broadly than the actual show. The setting is 1997 but may times appears to be 1987. But, these are just minor quibbles. The show is actually very funny and a nice change of pace from so much reality dreck and talking heads that are on the wir right now.

So, if you have a little bit of daring and want to find something with some sass and smarts, you will find a nice change of pace in "Beautiful People".

Michael and Tony hashing out world peace...naah it's just sports talk. But, it is good sports talk.

During the summer, sports can become a big part of  the TV schedule. This is because fringe sports can fill in the slots that would have to be filled with original programming. And, for many of the sports, it is the time they wheel and deal and make trades. Coaches and GM's are fired or hired. The world is filled with sports. You don't have to like baseball to be involved in sports in the summer. Tennis, WNBA, soccer, and one-off competitions are all being played while the NBA and NFL trade and begin the process of getting ready for the next season.

With so much to talk about, it makes sense that ESPN would want to have a talking head/debate format similar to shows like "Crossfire" but with a sports theme. Both "Around the Horn" and "Pardon the Interruption" (PTI) follow the idea and place it in the milleu of sports, but only "PTI" is succesful. "Around the Horn" can devolve into a yelling match and tries too hard to be clever. "PTI, on the other hand, works hard on just being smart and funny. It succeeds.

"PTI" (M-F 5:30pm ESPN, 6:30pm ESPN2) is hosted by Michael Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser (with the occasional guest host) has a list of topics that are helpfully listed for the viewer. Each host discusses and sometimes debates about the personality or topic discussed. The show then typically devotes 5 minutes to a guest. This guest may be an athlete or writer or expert on a sports-related topic. The show then has a comedic/gimmicky segment (Over/Under, Fortune Tellers, Good Cop/Bad Cop, etc.) that help spur debate and more time to discuss topics in a different way.

The show ends with a rundown of birthdays and famous events and ends with corrections by their production assistant. And this, to me, is where "PTI" makes itself different from any other talking head show. They admit their mistakes. Let me say that again. They admit when they misspoke or got a face incorrect. Many times, talk show hosts say something and never correct it when the fact has been found and they correct it for the viewing auidience. This humility and honesty makes Kornheiser and Wilbon more interesting and also more trustworthy. When you get your news from them it feels true and researched. They don't just spout off with impunity.

While not exactly a show for everyone, sports fans would be hard pressed to find a better show on TV that really talks sports.

A sitcom that's main character has Asperger's? Count me in!

When it comes to my television watching habits and my mother's we are not exactly a match. Her taste runs more to "Two and a Half Men", "NCIS", and HGTV. My taste is more geared toward challenging long form drama ("Lost", "The Wire") and postmodern situation comedies ("30 Rock", "Arrested Development"). So, there are very few times that our tastes converge. Imagine my surprise when during ym mom's last visit I was introduced to "The Big Bang Theory". This very funny and very intelligent show has become a new summer favorite.

Probably the most interesting thing about the show is that the main character "Sheldon" (Jim Parsons) appears to suffer from Asperger's Syndrome. This aspect of the show has been covered very well by Slate Magazine. The show features four roommates who are all graduate students in the sciences. Their neighbor is a young woman (Kaley Cuoco) with a quick wit but still trying to find her way as a grown-up.

The show uses the friction between a person with high emotional intelligence interacting with people high "IQ" intelligence. Her sarcasm and pithy comments always throw her neighbors for a loop. Her tough, funny, and highly attractive personality is what has drawn Leonard (Johnny Galecki) to her. His crush on her adds dimension to the show and gives some tension to their interactions.

The standard friends in an apartment complex has been been done a million times. What separates this show from many others is the care with which the characters are crafted. The young woman, Penny, is written as sarcastic and funny not just good looking. It's a nice development and keeps the show a little off kilter. Although she is no scientist she can hold her own with her genius but maladjusted neighbors. The show al;so does a good job of making the Sheldon character very different from his other super intelligent roommates. The show works well because we the viewer can look at all the characters and see that "geniuses" come with all different personalities. It might just help nerds get back into style, as if they need the help. 

"The Big Bang Theory" is on CBS Mondays at 9:30pm

Summer's here. That means you should be out enjoying the weather. You know, swimming, going to the park, taking walks, etc. But, sometimes it's TOO hot or it's raining or you are just tired. So, you decide to stay in and watch TV. Unfortunately, you remember it's summer. There's nothing on, right? WRONG! If you look in the right places you can find some fun, diverting television and maybe even some interesting new shows that are getting a summer run. Now, in all honesty, many shows on in the summer are not very good. The networks (and their cable counterparts) often dump reality shows that are cheap to do in this time of year. They also like to burn off episodes of cancelled shows or just run shows that might be ratings deprived during the fall. I will leave USA network out of this equation because they usually have interesting summer shows on ( The 4400, Psych, Burn Notice, In Plain Sight). But, for the rest of the channels summer can be more time filler than actual good content.

However, there are nuggets out there. Sometimes it's re-runs of a show you might have missed  or new shows that show promise or even something that takes a pig's ear and makes a silk purse out of it. I would like to introduce you, if you haven't already met, to the shows "The Soup", "The Dish", "Sports Soup", and "Web Soup". Each of these shows follows a very familiar conceit, wacky clips and snarky commentary and makes them into something interesting. Each one focuses on a different aspect of our entertainment culture and each has a different host, set, and tone. But, each offers some truly funny moments and are quite entertaining.

McHale and his green screen of funny

The Soup (E! Network, check listings) is the granddaddy of this genre. It began life many years ago as "Talk Soup". But, as talk shows started to become more sparse, the show went on a hiatus. When it came back it used it's general template to skewer many other forms of television. Host Joel McHale has great timing and has a great way with handling the absurdity of reality television, home shopping, and even telenovelas. The show uses a mix of comedic commentary, "celebrity" guests, and use of catchphrases makes it much watch television for people who like laughing at reality TV without having to actually sit through the banality. The show makes it all easy to digest and a lot of fun.   http://www.eonline.com/on/shows/thesoup/

The Dish (Style Network, check listings) is the most similar in tone to "The Soup". Sometimes, both shows have clips that overlap. However, the hosting of Danielle Fishel is more acting based than The Soup's Joel McHale. This is rooted in the fact that Fishel began her career as Topanga on "Boy Meets World" and seemed destined to become another child actor. But, she has become a deft comedienne as she has grown up. Her wit and timing make the show a nice female-centric romp. "The Dish" focuses much more on the worlds of fashion, celebrity magazine culture, and female based reality programming (much of the emphasis is on Style's own television programming) than the other shows. But, the fast paced nature and humor on display make you not miss all your magazine subscriptions as much.   http://www.mystyle.com/mystyle/shows/thedish/

Sports Soup (VS Network, check listings) is the highly butch brother to "The Soup". "Sports Soup" mixes interesting sports footage along with segments like "Bro-verload" (skewing extreme sports culture) and "Covering the Coverage" (comedic look at commentators and sports talk). The show uses a lot more comedic cut-aways and faked segments to fill in the time. But, host Matt Iseman is always game and is a master at comedic double takes. It's a newer entry and is still finding it's voice, but any sports fan will find at least one clip they enjoy. http://www.versus.com/sportssoup

Web Soup (G4 Network, check listings) is the newest addition to the Soup family. It has only been on for about a month but it has a seasoned host in Chris Hardwicke who is a stand-up comic and former host of MTV's "Singled Out". The show uses classic viral videos along with new items recently found by savvy viewers and the G4 staff. The shows fills the spot that VH-1's former show "Web Junk" held. The shows moves well and follows the typical "Soup" format. Some of the clips will be very familiar to anyone who spends time on You Tube with any regularity, but it has some nice perspective and can be very funny. Because it sticks with the internet and viral videos there is very little overlap with the other clip related programs.   http://g4tv.com/websoup/

Now, you have four fun shows to watch on the weekends. Stop complaining about this beautiful weather and sit down and watch some TV.

TVOvermind was fortunate enough to be able to take part in an interview with Oscar winner Timothy Hutton, where he shared much more than I actually thought he would in terms of where the show is ending its first season, and where he thinks it should go next season. I always expect actors to be so guarded and mysterious about their current projects, and it was so exhilarating to see his passion for Leverage, and his willingness to be open with the members of the press about the direction he believes the show, and his character, should take.

Timothy Hutton is an actor who has that rare ability to transform from an "everyman" to a villain; oftentimes in the same project, such as Stephen King’s The Dark Half, where he literally gets to play his evil twin. In King’s movie, he is, at heart, an artist wrestling with his creative demons. This is extremely similar to the role of Nathan Ford in Leverage, with Mr. Hutton getting to flex his creative muscles to play characters, both good and evil, all in the name of The Con. It is not just his job as the head of Leverage Consulting that affords him the opportunity to act out such differing personas; his real life is full of tragedies that effect every aspect of who Nathan Ford is.

Leverage provided the perfect role for this versatile actor, and it was awesome to get a glimpse into Mr. Hutton’s thoughts on the first season, what direction he sees The Team moving in, and, obviously, the journey he feels Nate Ford, as a highly flawed and haunted individual, should be on during the run of this magnificent show.

The first question on everyone’s mind seemed to be the same: Does Timothy Hutton feel a connection to Nathan Ford, in terms of his own life? The answer should not come as a huge surprise to anyone, but it does give insight into how he, as an actor, chooses roles:

Well, I mean in so much as playing the guy. But, no, I mean as far as, you know, what he’s going through, and the specific story points of his life, not really. Which, of course, makes it interesting to play because it’s not something, fortunately, I’ve lived through or experienced. And, you know, but it’s a fascinating character to play, I’ll tell you that!

Timothy Hutton has always been an actor who vacillates between television and the silver screen, and the question was asked if he considers it to be more fulfilling to work in television or movies, to which he replied:

You know, you get to develop a character over time. You don’t wrap up a character in two hours or three hours. But, you know, you have these different story lines where the character can kind of go to different places over the course of a season, hopefully more than a season. We’re very fortunate we got picked up for a second one! And, you know, I think that the writing for cable shows, it’s just really quite incredible. And, you know, you look at shows like everything from Monk, to Burn Notice, to Mad Men to, I’m forgetting the name of the show that’s on after Mad Men on AMC.

Yes, there’s really great writing in the show. And, you know, you look at the scripts, and everything, and that’s what you want to be doing. You don’t think, “This is TV, I wish this was a movie.” Or when you’re doing a movie, you think this would be better if it was TV. You know, you don’t really think that way. You just kind of go where the writing is. And there’s great writing in movies obviously right now, and there’s, I don’t think there’s ever been a better time for writing in television, and I think that’s what’s attracting so many people. And not just people that are doing the shows, but people that are watching the shows!

Continuing on, how did he decide that the role was one that he was interested in pursuing? From the mouth of the man himself, concerning the character of Nathan Ford:

Well, you know, from the beginning, from the outset, when I first read the script, I thought it was a great character, a great starting point for any actor to read a character like this and say,” Wow, he has so much going on, so many demons, and so much of a dark place that he’s been living in, you know, how does all of that shape this guy? How does he interact with other people?”

And he has this opportunity to sort of get on his feet again at the beginning of the season, with Leverage; he finds it very satisfying to be working with these other…these thieves that he’s known from the other, for so many years, for the purpose of helping other people. That becomes his reason to kind of get his life back together. You know, he understands very quickly that the best way to help himself is to help other people.

From this arose the obvious question about the nature of the business that Nate has started with his band of thieves, for lack of a better term, and how Mr. Hutton feels he fits into the group, and how the group responds to him as the “straight man”. He responds in a typical, well thought out fashion:

And then as the season goes on, you know, he realizes that it’s quite complicated working with these others. There’s personality issues. There’s trust issues. There’s ways that they go about doing things that Nate probably thinks could have been handled better. They probably think that Nate could have handled himself better in terms of, you know, him disappearing from time to time, and drinking, and letting the team down, and almost blowing apart some of the operations they have going.

So by the time we get to the finale, which we’re really with last night being part one, and next week being the end of the season; it really left in kind of an interesting place, I think, where nobody is quite sure if they want to continue. And you’re going to see a lot of kind of revelations. I think the audience is going to see a lot of things being communicated between the five of them, and they get a lot closer and by doing so maybe they can’t be around each other because they open certain doors.

As a huge fan of Leverage, I immediately wanted to know what this meant for the future of our rag-tag group of thieves, turned modern-day Robin Hood and His Band of Merry Thieves. If they don’t trust him, and he can’t trust them, as was brilliantly brought up with the character of Sophie Devereaux, seemingly out for herself and no longer for the good of The Team in this week’s episode, “The First David Job”, where does Nate stand in being able to continue to carry out his mission of redemption? After all, the entire group has aspects of their lives in which to seek redemption; Nate obviously has a problem with drinking after the death of his son. How does this affect Mr. Hutton’s view of how the redemption arc of Nate will play out? His response:

As far as what Nate might or might not want to do in terms of continuing on, I think that he’s learned a lot about how deeply satisfying it is to help others, and therefore, sort of find a way out of his own dark past and guilt and the demons that he has, that the great antidote for him is helping other people.

And I’m sure he’s aware that the drinking really has to get under control. But he’s probably in denial about it, and thinks a little self medicating, as long as it doesn’t mess with any of his functioning and his ability to continue running these cons and these elaborate schemes, then it’s okay, and it’s really nobody’s business, but the rest of the team knows better. And I think that the second season will kind of go into that, and perhaps Nate will find another vice.

What I found to be very interesting was that Timothy Hutton fully believes that it would be boring, not only as an actor, but for the viewers, if Nate does not get a handle on his drinking. He does not want this aspect of the character to go on, simply because we, as viewers, have seen it time and time again, and Leverage really is a better show than that. As anyone with an addiction can tell you, it is not going to be an issue that can be resolved by Nate suddenly throwing out the bottle and never having another issue to confront in terms of his demons, but what will Nate turn to next to fill the void left by the death of his son, among other things? Mr. Hutton responds:

I don’t know. I mean, there are some interesting ideas being kicked around. But you know, I’m personally not really interested in playing a character who, when he is having a difficult time, turns to the bottle. I think that has a certain shelf…that idea has a certain shelf life. I think that the demons don’t go away, but how he deals with them, and what his way to shut down or escape those thoughts and feelings has to kind of transform into some other type of behavior to keep it interesting.

This interviewer (and rabid fan) thinks that the obvious relationship between Nate and Sophie, and the triangle that was introduced with Nate’s ex-wife, is the obvious next step for Leverage, in terms of moving Nate along his path. Mr. Hutton was not coy about whether or not the viewers would be treated to a love triangle. In fact, he was downright blunt:

Well, no, I think that more of that is going to reveal itself as time goes on, and certainly in the second season. We’re going to learn more about the space between when [Nate and Sophie] first met, and they sort of reunited. This show has kind of exposed a lot of that already. But I think there’s going to be more. And I think that we haven’t seen the last of the Maggie character, Nate’s ex-wife. I think that she might come back in to the mix a little bit, which might create a rather complex triangle.

As to the issue of what influence the other members of Leverage Consulting have had on Nate, does Mr. Hutton believe that he is entering morally ambiguous territory himself? The answer may surprise you:

I don’t think Nate really thinks that he’s become a thief. I think he’s just trying to…he’s playing a role [like an actor would] a little bit. I mean, that was my take on it anyway.

At the same time, I think that he has come to terms with the fact that his life will never be the same again. He will never be part of that former self or world that he once inhabited. He has become a different person. He’s learned a few things along the way. He’s come to trust and appreciate and admire this team he works with, even though he doesn’t really have the ability…seemingly have the ability to show it, express it.

But…and I think that he actually, underneath it all, gets quite a thrill out of doing the work that the others have done their whole lives. He likes the idea of, you know, sneaking into an art gallery and, you know, disappearing a bunch of paintings, and slight of hand, and conning the best con artist in the world to help people that have been ripped of. I think that he really, really enjoys that. And it’s what’s saved him really.

The message of Leverage, overall, is “sticking it to the man." In these economic times, no one really wants to turn on the TV and be reminded of the fact that these are difficult times, while seeking moments of relief from reality. Leverage addresses many issues pertaining to the state of our world, and Mr. Hutton shared his thoughts on how the show deals with reality while keeping entertainment at the forefront:

Well, you know, I don’t think that the show should become a mirror, you know, exclusively. You know, there has to be a difference between the depressing headlines that you see when you pick up the newspaper versus the storyline when you turn on Leverage.

But, at the same time, there are a lot of things going on right now that can make for some compelling stories that really expose some of these people that prey on others. For example, one of the shows that I thought was really good in the first season was the one about the contractor who puts a lien on the house and then takes ownership of the house. I think that was the “Snow Job” it was called. I’m sure that the writers are going to keep their ear to the ground.

But at the same time, they’re not going to in any way turn Leverage in to you know something that is…a documentary based on how terrible the times are right now. I mean, it is meant to be an entertaining television show that also exposes, you know, things that are going on. But ultimately, his message is, you know, revenge is deeply satisfying!

What I wanted to know, and I’ll bet a lot of you want to know as well, are which episodes Mr. Hutton enjoyed the most. I, personally, would have been answering this one for the next year, but Mr. Hutton got an answer out fairly succinctly:

Well, you just brought up the “Bank Shot Job”. I really liked that one a lot because I really liked how the team was able to, kind of, go into plan B, plan C, and then plan D based on unforeseen events that happened. They had no idea that this bank would get held up. They’re in the middle, or the end of, finishing a con, and how they think on their feet, and how they communicate with each other, and how they have to quickly come together as a team, and each one take a role in kind of diffusing a very difficult situation, diffuse the crisis.

So, I like that show. And I also like the idea that it was basically one location. And you really…it really kind of, you know, raised the stakes, I felt, and the tension of the show’s drama.

I liked the “Snow Job.” I liked “Two-Horse Job”. I liked, very much, the episodes where all five of us at different points in the show play other characters as part of the con and assume different roles. And, you know, you have all five of the characters in different places, and they’re all communicating to each other. And thinking on their feet, and things don’t always go as they thought they would. And the most fun shows, I thought, were the ones where they had to go plan B. I would always say to everybody, 'Let’s do more plan B shows!'

The final question posed is clearly critical to the survival of Leverage Consulting, and that is: Who or what comes after Nate and the rest of the team next? Again, Mr. Hutton did not hold back on what he feels the direction the “arc of redemption” will take:

Yes, there will be some people that come out of the woodwork because the more this team has gone and turned over rocks and exposed some pretty slimy people, as we’ve seen in the first season, the more public their operation has become. And let’s not forget, with the exception of Nate, the other four of that team is wanted by, you know, everyone from Scotland Yard to Interpol to FBI.

I mean, there are people all over the world that look at Eliot as a suspect for something that happened some years back, Sophie for something that happened, Parker for something. And this has been alluded to in the first season. But the more that they’ve carried out these missions, the more public they’ve become. And I think that what might be interesting in the second season will be how they can continue to do these operations and help people without, you know, compromising themselves.

How do they stay underground, and operate above ground at the same time? I think that’s something that’s going to be kind of interesting to do. So, as far who they might go up against in adversaries, I think that a lot of people are going to come out of the woodwork that have been looking for each one of them.

For the record, the cast of Leverage, comprised of Mr. Hutton, Aldis Hodge, Christian Kane, Beth Riesgraf, and Gina Bellman do get along as well off-screen as on. The pilot was filmed entirely on location in Chicago, and they got to spend a lot of time off set just getting to know each other. They are having as great a time making the show as we are watching it! They have all had a lot of fun learning many useful skills, such as slight of hand, which means we should probably all keep our hands on our wallets if we are ever lucky enough to meet any of them in real life.

From my perspective, Mr. Hutton rightfully belongs in that elite group of actors, populated by the likes of Tom Hanks, who the public can look to for a truly spectacular performance. He's never the same character regurgitated, and retains a mystery about him that I, personally, find refreshing in Hollywood these days. Thank you so much to Mr. Timothy Hutton for this interview opportunity, and to Turner Entertainment, particularly Michelle Sisco, for including TVOvermind. Whatever comes next, we will be solidly glued to our couches, waiting to see how The Team gets out of the next mess they find themselves in.

Tune in to TNT, Tuesday, February 24, at 10:00 pm Eastern time for the finale of Leverage. If you have missed any of the episodes, TNT is running a marathon leading up to the finale at 10:00 pm EST. I strongly suggest, in fact I would insist, if I had that power, that you tune in and catch up! Leverage is a fantastic show that is not to be missed!

This week’s episode of Battlestar Galactica, “Blood on the Scales,” begins with the arrest of Admiral Adama and Colonel Tigh. The flash grenade the mutinous marines threw into the airlock at the end of the last episode has incapacitated them both, and Adama appears to be bleeding from his ears.

Meanwhile, Roslin and the other refugees from Galactica approach the Cylon baseship with two vipers closing in for the kill. Hotdog hesitates in making the kill, especially after he hears Roslin’s voice coming from the raptor, giving the refugees just enough time to make it aboard the baseship. The Cylons inside are alarmed that the vipers seemed to fire on them and even more alarmed when they hear that there has been a mutiny on board Galactica. Roslin tells the Cylons that they’ll never see their cybernetic comrades again if they jump away and advises them to take up a position inside the fleet so it will be more difficult for Galactica to attack. “Gaeta won’t jeopardize the fleet, he doesn’t have the guts, now come on, do it!” Roslin shouts.

Tigh is thrown into the brig with the other Cylon prisoners, while Adama is brought before Gaeta. “I care too much about this ship to let it be overrun by rats,” Adama growls when asked why he didn’t abandon ship. Gaeta says that if Adama really wants to save lives, he should call Roslin and tell her to surrender. Adama removes his flags and tells Gaeta that he’s the admiral now. “So call up Roslin, and make her laugh.”

Zarek informs Adama that he is charged with treason and desertion, among other infamies, and faces execution by firing squad. Zarek and Gaeta have retrieved Romo Lampkin, the attorney who successfully defended Baltar in his trial for the atrocities on New Caprica, to serve as Adama’s attorney. Gaeta will serve as the prosecution, and Zarek will preside. It is clear that the trial is only the flimsiest pretense at justice. However, Lampkin does manage to convey to Adama that his loyalists are on the march throughout the ship, seeking to reverse the mutiny.

Zarek goes to Colonial One and informs the Quorum that Gaeta has mutinied. The Quorum pointedly reminds Zarek that he is still vice president rather than president and dismisses him to deliberate on whether they should support the coup. Zarek then orders his henchmen to slaughter the Quorum, thus fulfilling his vow to appoint John Bolton as UN ambassador—I mean, thus eliminating legislative opposition to the coup.

Gaeta is appalled that Zarek has murdered members of the Quorum, but Zarek reminds Gaeta that he started it. Zarek suggests that Gaeta was naïve about what the coup would require and says that Adama must now be executed at all costs.

The Cylons tell Roslin that they see no alternative to jumping away, leaving Galactica in the hands of the junta. Roslin all but threatens them with hell if they flee, telling them that Adama will soon retake command of Galactica and will remember who stood with him and who did not.

In the meantime, Starbuck and Lee have broken into the brig to liberate the Cylon prisoners, except for Chief Tyrol, who managed to escape through a service access earlier in the episode. Tyrol emerges into a weapons locker and right into the sights of a mutineer. The two exchange wisecracks about how Tyrol is an alien and the marine is an imbecile, and then the marine lets Tyrol escape, demonstrating the shaky resolve of many of the mutineers.

Back in the brig, Lee is furious that his father is not among the prisoners. As the group flees, Samuel Anders is shot in the neck. Starbuck remains behind to tend to him.

Back at Adama’s "trial," Zarek is informed that the prisoners have escaped, but he lies and tells Adama that Colonel Tigh was shot. Adama refuses to speak to either Gaeta or Zarek any further, apparently wishing he hadn’t said all those things about Tigh’s wife being a total skank now that Tigh is dead.

As Lampkin is escorted away from his interview with Adama, he and his guard come across Starbuck and Anders. Starbuck tries to shoot the marine but is out of rounds. Fortunately, Lampkin stabs the marine in the neck with a fountain pen and then beats him to death. Starbuck pleads with Lampkin to help her carry Anders to the infirmary, and though the attorney refuses at first, he eventually agrees.

As Lee and his troops close in on Adama, the admiral is executed by a firing squad, but it turns out that this unlikely vision is only a nightmare in Baltar’s head. For the first time in his life, Baltar refuses to get it on with an amorous Cylon and instead expresses some remorse for abandoning his followers on Galactica in order to save his own skin.

Roslin maneuvers the baseship to fire on Galactica and orders Gaeta to surrender. Gaeta gives the order to execute Adama, but the marine who acknowledges his order has already been captured by Lee and the resistance.

Zarek taunts Roslin with the information that Tigh was shot and Adama has been executed, advising her to surrender. Roslin pledges that she will never surrender. “I will use every cannon, every bomb, every bullet, every weapon I have down to my own eye teeth to end you. I swear it! I’m coming for all you!” Roslin thunders.

Zarek urges Gaeta to destroy the Cylons, but Gaeta’s resolve is crumbling. He orders Galactica to jump away rather than fight. Just as the ship is about to jump, Tyrol removes an oversized spark plug, disabling the FTL drive. Apparently, traveling at faster than lightspeed requires engines bristling with oversized sprockets. It is also completely unclear why Tyrol’s heroically bruised knuckles amount to anything, because the coup soon falls apart.

Adama and the resistance sweep into the CIC, their numbers swollen with crew who had kept their heads down during the early success of the mutiny. The marines inside give up without a fight, and Gaeta and Zarek surrender.

Gaeta and Baltar have a final chat over cigars, with Gaeta telling Baltar about how he wanted to be an architect before he grew up to become a xenophobic murderer. Baltar seems genuinely upset by Gaeta’s impending execution. “I’m fine with how things worked out, Gaius, really I am,” Gaeta says. “I just hope that people realize, eventually, who I am.”

As Adama, Tigh, Lee, and Baltar look on, Gaeta and Zarek exchange wry glances before the firing squad, as if to signal, “Well, this was a bad idea.” Gaeta, whose stump has bothered him throughout the coup, looks down at his amputated leg and says, “It stopped.” The executioners fire their weapons, and the episode ends.

As the episode concluded, I found myself wondering what the point was of this diversion into coup immediately after the fleet’s discovery of Earth. After all, the show has spent only one episode actually down on the planet, and most of our questions about it remain unanswered. I think the best explanation is that the last few episodes reprise the rage of Achilles in Homer’s Iliad. No really.

In the Iliad, the greatest warrior among the Greeks is the semi-divine Achilles, but he sits out most of the poem’s fighting with the Trojans after the Greek leader Agamemnon steals the temple priestess that had been promised to Achilles. Mad at losing another slave to rape, Achilles refuses to fight, and the Greeks are pushed all the way back to their boats. Finally, Achilles’ young lover (not cousin, as Brad Pitt would have you believe) Patroclus is killed by the Trojan hero Hector. Achilles returns to the field, sweeping all before him in a holy rage, until he has destroyed Hector and dragged his body around the walls of Troy, which soon falls.

Here, Achilles is Roslin, and her gay lover is Adama. She does not withdraw from battle for the sake of wounded pride, but rather out of bitterness and religious disillusionment. After going so far out onto a shaky limb in relying on prophecy to find Earth, Roslin is devastated by the discovery that Earth was long ago poisoned by nuclear war. Yet, the fleet could never had made it so far under any other leader, and her withdrawal from public life precipitates the coup. For all his redeeming qualities, the admiral is tone deaf and heavy-handed when it comes to politics, and Zarek’s ruse in “The Oath” that Adama is installing a military dictatorship is successful because it has the ring of truth. Only Roslin has the political instincts and the personal charisma needed to sell an expanded Cylon alliance to the citizens of the fleet. Typically, Adama does not even try to sell the alliance, but instead declares it a military matter not subject to debate.

Roslin’s withdrawal from public life gives Zarek the opening he needs to stage his coup. In many respects, Zarek is better suited to such action than is Gaeta, who still thinks of himself as an idealist. Gaeta repeatedly shrinks from taking the measures required to make the coup a success, and he is strangely relieved when Adama and his troops sweep into the CIC.

By the time the mutiny is reversed, Roslin has already been seduced back into politics, first by Adama’s jeopardy and then by his reported execution. Her fragmentary proclamations to the fleet surely give comfort to those resisting the mutiny, and each time she speaks, Zarek shakes his head, knowing that the coup’s chances for success diminish with her every word. The coup is over, and the top conspirators are dead. The most salient result is that Roslin is now fully engaged in the fleet’s fate once more. Under her leadership, the humans will likely accept the Cylon alliance, and the fleet can move on to unlocking the mysteries of ruined Earth.