Yep, It's True: I'm Heading to BuzzFeed

A change is coming and I'm going to get personal right now.

I haven't posted anything personal on this blog in quite some time, probably ever since I was promoted to West Coast Deputy Bureau Chief at The Daily Beast back in October 2012 and stepped way back from the blog. When I founded Televisionary in the blogging hinterlands of February 2006, I did feel like a bit of an outsider, a television blogger who approached the medium and the work as though I were doing it full-time. It was a lark, something I did while I was also working in television development (and later in acquisitions/programming for a British television network), a chance to exercise my writing muscle while slaving away in the industry. Later, I would pour my heart and soul into this site, after I was pink-slipped, seeing it as less of a diversion and more of a means to an end.

More than seven years later, it's astonishing to me to see where those first steps have led me. First, to freelancing gigs with the Los Angeles Times and The Daily Beast and then to a contract position with the latter, where I became their television columnist and then moved to a full-time staff position covering television. When my editor, Kate Aurthur, left the company last fall, I was quickly moved into a management position, into the role of deputy bureau chief for the the Beast's West Coast operations. There, I juggled editorial duties on the entertainment side with overseeing a team of young writers, bringing in dynamic freelancers (including Ken Tucker, Jason Lynch, and Alyssa Rosenberg), and also covering television as the site's critic. It was a fantastic opportunity, one that I embraced, and I foresaw myself staying at the Beast for quite a while longer.

And then BuzzFeed came calling.

If you haven't yet heard the news, you can read this Variety story about my recent hiring. I've been poached from The Daily Beast and am heading to BuzzFeed, where I will step into the newly created role of Entertainment Editorial Director, beginning in mid-July. There, I will be overseeing the entertainment coverage--editing, writing, and making cohesive, overall decisions about BuzzFeed's nascent entertainment brand--for a site that I think is one of the most exciting, dynamic, and far-reaching on the web right now. This was not an easy decision to make, and I thought about what it would mean to leave behind The Daily Beast after four years. But I'm excited to see what this next chapter of my career will hold, and I think that BuzzFeed is at the forefront of the socially-driven web.

Despite the fact that the site has been around for years (positively decades in "Internet time"), it feels like a start-up, and I love that vibrancy and energy. BuzzFeed Entertainment is still somewhat of a newbie in the entertainment journalism field and I look forward to taking the brand into some new places. It's thrilling and scary and intense, and I'm really chuffed to see what I can do with their entertainment coverage.

I want to thank everyone who has read Televisionary over the years and who has been part of this story. Your support and encouragement means the world to me.

The press release that BuzzFeed prepared, which announces my hiring, can be found below:

Jace Lacob Joins BuzzFeed As Entertainment Editorial Director

Revered Television Critic And Pioneering Blogger To Oversee BuzzFeed’s Expanding Entertainment Coverage

New York, June 27, 2013
– Social news site BuzzFeed announced today it has hired Jace Lacob as its Entertainment Editorial Director. Lacob, who is currently the deputy West Coast bureau chief and television critic for The Daily Beast and Newsweek, will head up BuzzFeed’s Los Angeles and New York entertainment teams and shape the site’s television, film and industry coverage. He will be responsible for editing all entertainment coverage and will write regularly for the site.

"I am thrilled to be joining the BuzzFeed team. I look forward to working closely with Doree Shafrir and Ben Smith to make the entertainment vertical a dynamic and exciting destination for entertainment news and opinion with a strong emphasis on television and film. BuzzFeed has such a strong grasp on the socially-driven
pulse of pop culture today and I couldn't be happier to set forth on this next step with them," said Lacob.

"Jace a great journalist who is native to the social web and who has the vision to take entertainment coverage to the next level," said Doree Shafrir, BuzzFeed's Executive Editor.

“BuzzFeed is committed to expanding our Los Angeles Bureau, which has become a real center of gravity for our organization. BuzzFeed’s young, social audience is hungry for more sophisticated and fun entertainment coverage and we’re aiming to be the premier national outlet covering Hollywood,” said Ben Smith, BuzzFeed
Editor-in-Chief.

Lacob was most recently the deputy West Coast bureau chief and television critic for The Daily Beast and Newsweek. He has written about television and culture at large, including food and cocktails, books, film, and even the real-life sport of Quidditch. Prior to joining The Daily Beast in 2009, his work appeared
in the Los Angeles Times, TV Week, AOLtv, and Film.com. He also founded Televisionary, an award-winning television-criticism website, in 2006. Jace was previously a Programming Executive for British Sky Broadcasting (BSkyB) and the manager of longform development at Lionsgate Television. He is a member of the Television Critics Association and lives in Los Angeles.

Lacob begins at BuzzFeed on July 17.

Televisionary Turns Five Years Old!

Happy birthday!

Televisionary is five years old today. I want to thank all of you loyal readers who have made this site the success that it is today.

For those of you who haven't been around as long as Televisionary itself, the site has gone through several iterations over the past five years, but has always been an outlet for me to specifically write about television.

When I first started Televisionary back in February of 2006, I was working in the television industry and started the site as a way to discuss television outside of the office in more critical terms and sidestep some of the conventions of the development (and later acquisitions) discussions that these conversations tended to fall into during the day.

This was before the pink-slip that changed everything (I'm looking at you, Autumn 2008) but changes in job situations, marital status, and the economy had yet to occur when I first sat down to write Televisionary's first post (which, if I remember correctly was about the UK and US versions of The Office) and decided to pursue a path that would get me back to my grad school training.

Way back when, a few dozen readers who dropped by each day, but, amid an increasingly competitive landscape, Televisionary has blossomed over the last five years, into something much bigger than I ever dared dream.

In the days of semi-unemployment, I gave it my full and undivided attention and utilized the emerging social networking tools to brand myself and the site, landing freelance writing jobs with The Los Angeles Times and The Daily Beast, among others, all while continuing to keep the site humming along.

Last year, I was made the TV Columnist for The Daily Beast after freelancing for them for roughly a year. Now under contract with the IAC-owned company (which is itself merging with Newsweek), it's with a great deal of pride that I look back on the first steps that got me to this place and those tentative early posts on Televisionary. It's been an adjustment juggling both but I hope that this site continues to offer a critical perspective on programming and a community for people who realize the creative opportunities and rewards that television offers.

At the end of the day, while we may not always see eye to eye on everything (television is, after all, a subjective art), I hope that I've been able to share my passion and love for this medium while entertaining, informing, and maybe even coercing you into watching some series you might not have watched otherwise.

So please join me in raising a glass of champagne (and your remote) and toasting five great years of Televisionary and, hopefully, many more to come.

In Defense of Downton Abbey (Or, Don't Believe Everything You Read)

The proof of the pudding, as they say, is in the eating.

Which means, if I can get on my soapbox for a minute, that in order to judge something, one ought to experience it first hand. One can't know how the pudding has turned out until one actually tastes it.

I was asked last week--while I was on vacation with my wife--for an interview by a journalist from The Daily Mail, who got in touch to talk to me about PBS' upcoming launch of ITV's period drama Downton Abbey, which stars Hugh Bonneville, Dame Maggie Smith, Dan Stevens, Elizabeth McGovern, and a host of others. (It launches on Sunday evening as part of PBS' Masterpiece Classic; my advance review of the first season can be read here, while my interview with Downton Abbey creator Julian Fellowes and stars Dan Stevens and Hugh Bonneville can be read here.)

Normally, I would have refused, just based on the fact that I was traveling and wasn't working, but I love Downton Abbey and am so enchanted with the project and the work done by creator Julian Fellowes and the series' cast and crew that I relented after several email exchanges.

The journalist in question--that would be Chris Hastings--wanted to talk about Downton's journey across the pond and specifically the cuts that had taken place along the way. When ITV aired Downton Abbey, it did so as seven episodes of varying length, while PBS was airing it as four 90-minute episodes. Which brings us to the main point of this post: despite the fact that I spelled out for Hastings that barely any cuts had been made to Downton Abbey, he wrote a now much-publicized piece for The Daily Mail in which he alleges, according to the hyperbolic lede, that "Downton downsized... by two hours because American TV executives fear its intricate plot will baffle U.S. viewers."

To put it bluntly: it's simply not true.

While I would be incensed about the article to begin with--given that Hastings took up my time on vacation, interrupted me incessantly while I was answering his questions, refused to listen to me, clearly had an agenda of his own, and then had the temerity to quote my review without proper attribution--I'm most angry about the fact that I actually did the math for Hastings during the interview, demonstrating in no uncertain terms that there weren't two hours missing from the US broadcast of the series.

The only thing missing here are, in fact, the commercials themselves.

Let's take a closer look. PBS is airing Downton Abbey as four 90-minute episodes, bringing it to a run-time of roughly 6 hours. Removing the ad breaks, ITV's run of Downton Abbey ran for--wait for it--roughly six hours. (Two episodes ran as 60 minute installments, while five ran for 45 minutes excluding the commercials, of course.)

I pointed this out to Hastings, who countered by saying that the two episodes were 90 minutes. Yes, I said, with commercials. And I countered again by saying that ITV received complaints after the first episode that there were too many ad breaks. The numbers that Hastings was using to make his case about widespread cuts failed to take into account the commercials, which don't air on PBS, even though he himself admits this in his piece.

But Hastings clearly already had an agenda and he clearly wanted to make a point about "simple" Americans "in the land of the notoriously short attention span."

Furthermore, comments made by executive producer Rebecca Eaton of WGBH Boston, which co-produced Downton Abbey, were taken out of context and misunderstood.

In reorganizing Downton into four installments, editors altered the episodes' structures in order to accommodate the altered timeslot. When Eaton said that heir Matthew Crawley (Dan Stevens) came into the storyline in the first episode rather than the second, she's speaking truthfully. He does now appear in the longer-running first 90-minute episode, but it's not that the first hour has been excised from the show. Rather, he appears in the last 30 minutes, which does, yes, quicken the pace of the entail/inheritance storyline by dint of his appearance in Episode One.

Small changes were made in order to get Downton to fit precisely into the running time allotted by PBS. Hastings goes so far as to admit this ("Ms Eaton insisted that any changes were minor and did not affect the quality of the programme."), even though it seems to be at odds with his thesis. And the internet comments that he quotes--again, unattributed--were in fact addressed to me over Twitter and I reassured those involved that it wasn't the case.

He even repeated Eaton's comments about having only made small cuts of dialogue to me on the phone.

Hastings went on to discuss the fact that Masterpiece host Laura Linney explains matters of the entail and of the Buccaneers (American heiresses who married into the British aristocracy during the Gilded Age), using it once again to attempt to slap U.S. viewers. Hastings writes, "PBS also believes its audiences will need an American to outline the key themes of the show."

First, Masterpiece's hosts typically do explore the historical and social contexts for the series. This would include the matter of the entail (which Hastings admits was confusing for British audiences as well) and Lady Cora's role as one of those Buccaneers. Nothing new there as Linney is performing the same role that all of Masterpiece's hosts ably step into before each episode of a program. Second, Linney might be American but her fellow hosts--among them, past and present, David Tennant, Alan Cumming, Matthew Goode, etc.--are not. So I'm not sure what to make of the "Americans need Americans to explain things to them" comment, which just comes across as ill-informed and mean-spirited.

But that seems to be the point of Hastings' piece as a whole, really. His insistence that "two hours" have been cut from the runtime run counter to our interview and mathematics as well. His attempts to get both me and Lord Fellowes to come up with a predicted audience number for Downton in the US failed as neither of us would offer him a guess as to how many people would be tuning in.

It's safe to say, however, that Hastings' wrong-headed article could actually cut that number, as readers of the Daily Mail piece have been up in arms about the (false) loss of two hours of material and the perceived brazenness of PBS executives for altering the show. (Again, untrue.)

But Hastings may have wanted to do the maths for himself, confirm his findings, or actually sit down to watch the imported version of Downton Abbey before writing his article.

His messy article is, in some ways, awfully similar to Mrs. Patmore's salty meringue, and just as unappetizing.

Downton Abbey launches Sunday evening at 9 pm ET/PT on PBS' Masterpiece Classic. Check your local listings for details.

Poll: What Are You Most Looking Forward to Watching This Winter?

Happy New Year, everyone!

I'm back after a much needed vacation. I hope your holidays were as lovely as mine, which included playing host to some visiting family, a luxurious trip to Napa with my wife, and more screeners than you can shake a TiVo remote at.

Yes, we watched a host of DVDs for new and returning television series, including Shameless, Big Love, Lights Out, Episodes, Justified, V, The Chicago Code, Breaking In, Harry's Law, The Cape, and much more. With the Television Critics Association's Winter Press Tour just a few days away, there's still a lot more to get through before the beginning of the twice-yearly critics' gathering.

But I'm curious to know what you were all up to and what upcoming television you're most looking forward to over the next few weeks? Can't wait for the return of those scaly aliens on V? Looking to head down the pub with the Gallaghers on Showtime's Shameless? Tip your hat at Timothy Olyphant's Raylan Givens on Justified? (Which, just an aside, is already off to an outstanding second season, thanks to some deliciously gripping plots and fantastic performances from Margo Martindale and Jeremy Davies.)

Head to the comments section to discuss and debate what you're most looking forward to (television-wise, anyway) this winter.

Test Pattern: What's Your Indispensable TV Network?

We all have the networks--whether broadcast or cable, legacy or newbie--that we gravitate to, but I was wondering this morning about so-called indispensable networks.

Given that I write about television, nearly all networks could be said to be indispensable in one way or another, but what I was pondering was that one specific television channel that you can't turn away from, that you automatically switch to when you turn on the television, or which you have on as background while you're doing other things in our multi-tasking obsessed society.

Many years ago, that channel was--perhaps not surprisingly for those of you who know me--Food Network, but it was replaced by BBC America around 2000 and for many years that was my go-to network, the one spot on the metaphorical dial that I could always depend on for diverting fare, soothing background noise, or a sense of the familiar and comforting.

For whatever the reason, sadly, that's not the case anymore and--shock, horror--I've actually gone so far as to remove BBC America from my list of TiVo favorite channels as it's become a 24-hour network showcasing little other than Star Trek: The Next Generation, Top Gear, and repeats of three ubiquitous Gordon Ramsay reality series. (Three standouts this year: crime drama Luther, reality series The Choir, and culinary competition series Come Dine with Me all had short runs, unfortunately, and Doctor Who can't run all year long.)

But that's a rant for another post (and, believe me, it's coming).

What I am curious about is whether you have a specific network that fulfills those needs and just what network that might be. Are you addicted to USA? Hooked on HBO? Famished for Food Network? Drawn to Cartoon Network? Ingratiated towards IFC? Perpetually amazed by AMC?

Head to the comments section to discuss and debate.

Yes, It's True (And What It Means for Televisionary)

If you follow me on Twitter, then you likely saw my news on Friday afternoon: my new role is that of TV Columnist for The Daily Beast.

Longtime visitors to this site know that I've been writing features for The Daily Beast for well over a year now, but my relationship with Tina Brown's site has been on a freelance basis. Roughly a month ago, I entered into a new relationship with the news and entertainment site that solidifies my position there and shifts things into a far less transient arrangement. And while the paperwork has taken quite some time to finish, I can now officially announce my new gig.

So what does that mean for Televisionary? In terms of the big picture, absolutely nothing at the moment. I've been juggling this and my freelance pieces for well over a year now. In terms of the small picture, it might mean some changes in terms of content and what I choose to write about here.

Why am I telling you this? Because I don't want you think that I won't be writing in-depth advance reviews or select episodic reviews anymore. (I will be, I promise.) And I'll also be writing short-form breaking news here as well, when time permits. But I'm also curious to know what you want this site to be and what sort of content you think it should contain in order to balance the longer reported pieces, interviews, and critical essays that I'm doing for The Daily Beast.

I do want to know whether you like (and miss) recurring features like Channel Surfing, in which I recapped the morning's television-related news each day. (I read the trades so you didn't have to.) Or whether you use--or even realize that it's there--the TV listings on the right-hand side of the page.

What are your favorite elements of the site? And your least favorite? What do you want to see more of? Or less of? Head to the comments section or drop me an email and let me know your answers to the above. With additional commitments come some more deft juggling of available time, I want to be able to prioritize and see whether we agree about what's most valuable.

Thanks for reading the past four and a half years and here's to the next adventure, both here at Televisionary and at The Daily Beast.

AOL Television's Skype Second Opinion: Community's "Basic Rocket Science"

What did you think of last night's episode of Community?

This week marked another go on AOL Television's Skype Second Opinions, where I connected via Skype to ramble on for a few minutes about this week's episode of Community ("Basic Rocket Science"), which included an Apollo 13 homage, the KFC Eleven Herbs and Space Experience, butt flags, heroes' welcomes, SANDERS, and more. (You can read my advance review of this episode here.)

You can watch the video in full over here at AOL Television or right below.



Next week on Community ("Messianic Myths and Ancient Peoples"), Shirley consults Abed when she decides to make a religious film, but the two end up clashing after Abed reveals his plans to make one, too; Pierce is recruited by a group of students his own age.

An Open Letter to FX: Please Keep Terriers Around

Dear FX,

This fall television network has been pretty lousy at the broadcast networks. Massively hyped series have fizzled and viewers seem largely turned off by the prospects for new offerings, with several series already cancelled. It's likely that the axe will fall on a bunch more before winter comes.

Which is why your new series, Terriers, is such a breath of fresh air amid a what's largely a creatively stagnant landscape this fall.

For some reason, viewers haven't flocked to this remarkable series.

Perhaps it was the odd choice of title (it's not about dogs or dog breeders, despite the scrappiness of our protagonists) or the advertising campaign that played up images of snarling, biting, and scrappy dogs rather than focus on the beachy private investigator angle or series leads Donal Logue and Michael Raymond-James. Or perhaps this would have performed better in the summer rather than competing against a crush of new series, all premiering at the same time and jockeying for viewers' attention.

Regardless of the ratings (they, like the canines alluded to in the title, are small but fiercely loyal), Terriers is a series worth sticking with, a hysterical and heartbreaking series that's quirky and original and broadens the brand of FX.

Creators Shawn Ryan and Ted Griffin have winningly fused together the crime-based procedural with serialized, character-based arcs, fleshing out the world of Ocean Beach in include a cast of colorful characters that only get more, well, colorful over the next four episodes, which I gleefully watched recently.

Over the course of its first five installments, Terriers developed into a deeply nuanced series that explored the bond between brothers, between lovers, and between people, a taut emotional cat's cradle that examined the consequences of action.

These next four episodes, beginning with tonight's "Ring-a-Ding-Ding," find Hank and Britt grapple with a number of changes to their lives as the wedding between Hank's ex-wife Gretchen (Kimberly Quinn) and Jason (Loren Dean) fast approaches, the condition of Hank's sister Steph (Karina Logue) worsens considerably, and secrets between Katie (Laura Allen) and Britt threaten to derail their entire relationship. (I'll say that all four episodes were outstanding, and I adored the guys' unusual client in "Pimp Daddy," who nearly stole the show, and the tension of "Agua Caliente.")

Along the way, supporting characters like new mother Maggie (Jamie Denbo)--the guys' putative boss as well as attorney--and Hank's ex-partner Mark Gustafson (Rockmond Dunbar) get fleshed out further, as the series itself grows up a bit. It still hasn't lost its focus on odd couple Hank and Britt, but there's a remarkable sadness that's crept into its bones as well, making this far more than a one-trick pup.

Terriers may not be an out of the gate smash hit like Sons of Anarchy, your top-rated series, but it's also a critical favorite that adds a bit of screwball fun to the lineup. Positioned differently, it could be a quiet hit for the network as well as sit separately from the acid-tongued humor of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia and The League, the sweeping Shakespearean Sons of Anarchy, and the Western trappings of Justified.

Besides, those ratings aren't quite accurate now that Dish Network subscribers can't even watch Terriers, much less FX at all. So reports that ratings have plunged for this winning series aren't all that accurate, considering it's not available in as many homes as a few weeks earlier. Let's just keep that in mind when taking a look at the fate of this series.

But with so many doctor/lawyer/cop tropes on display yet again this season, Terriers has been a refreshing alternate to regurgitated and rewarmed genres that we've seen time and time again. And while PIs aren't exactly novel nowadays, the way in which they're handled here--they're too small to fail--makes for compelling and intelligent programming, something that's severely lacking on the broadcasters right now.

So why not do Terriers fans a solid and not put this dog to sleep just yet?

Terriers airs Wednesday evenings at 10 pm ET/PT on FX.

AOL Television's Skype Second Opinion: The Season Opener of NBC's Community

What did you think of last night's episode of Community?

While I've been raving about the second season opener for weeks now, I also was asked to host AOL Television's Skype Second Opinions, where I connected via Skype and rambled on for a full three minutes about Community's "Anthropology 101" episode, my thoughts on the fantastic opening sequence (set to Vampire Weekend's "Campus"), the most un-erotic kiss ever on television, urine-swigging June Bauer (Betty White), that sucker-punch to the gut, and Ken Jeong's terrifyingly twisted Ben Chang.

You can watch the video in full over here at AOL Television or right below.



Next week on Community ("The Psychology of Letting Go"), the study group comforts Pierce after the death of his mother; Professor Duncan tries to take over the anthropology class.

Lost Time: The ABC Drama Turns Six Years Old Today

As I said over on Twitter early this morning, "Six years ago today, Oceanic Flight 815 left Sydney for Los Angeles...and took our hearts with it. Happy birthday, Lost."

It's hard to believe that it's been six years since the passengers of the doomed Oceanic Flight crashed on that mythical, magical island and launched not only a television saga for the ages, but also a series of copycat programs that the original far outlived and an enduring legacy.

While my feelings about the series finale are no secret (you can read my behemoth 4000-plus word post about the finale here and my shorter late-night take at The Daily Beast), I still have a deep love for this series, which challenged the conventions of network drama series and introduced an overarching mythology whose spell many of us fell under in the years to come.

My relationship with the series dates back more than six years to when I first viewed the feature-length pilot episode in a tiny office in May of 2004. I wrote about my experiences with the series and saying goodbye in this post, which ran on this site just before the series finale.

But for many of us, regardless of your views of that polarizing series finale, it's still hard to begin the process of letting go and moving on.

Lost, you'll be missed for some time to come. Thanks for the memories. I'll see you on the other side.

The Daily Beast Exclusive: "Top Chef's Surprise Finish"

Still scratching your head over last night's season finale of Top Chef?

Head over to The Daily Beast, where you can read my latest feature, "Top Chef's Surprise Finish," an exclusive interview with the culinary competition series' executive producers Dan Cutforth and Jane Lipsitz--yes, the brains behind the ubiquitous Magical Elves--as we discuss the winner, what went wrong this season, culinary tourism, the language of reality television, and Justin Bieber.

(Yes, you read that last bit correctly.)

Head to the comments section to share your thoughts about the now-wrapped Washington D.C.-set season of Top Chef and whether you enjoyed the season or thought that it lacked the sophisticated palate of previous seasons... and what you'd do to correct any of the show's current issues, should you have any.

The Daily Beast: "Nine Shows to Watch, Six Shows to Shun"

My fall TV preview--or at least part of it, anyway--is finally up.

Head over to The Daily Beast, where you can read my latest feature, "Nine Shows to Watch, Six Shows to Shun," where I offer up nine new series to watch this fall and six shows to avoid like the plague.

Just which ended up on which list? Hint, The Event ended up on my worst-of list, while things like Boardwalk Empire, Terriers, Nikita, Sherlock, Luther, Undercovers and others ended up on my watch list. (While The Walking Dead is on there, I still--like every other critic--have not seen a full episode, so there's that to consider.)

But while this is my list, I'm also extremely curious to find out what you're looking forward to this autumn. What are you most excited about watching this fall? Head to the comments section to discuss, debate, and tear into my list.

Televisionary: En Vacances

Just a heads up that I'm officially on vacation and heading out of town, so thoughts on Sunday night's episodes of Mad Men and True Blood--along with Emmy reactions--will be delayed until I return.

In a weird twist of fate, my birthday weekend just happens to coincide with Emmys weekend this year (normally the latter is in September, whereas my birthday, um, stays the same each year), so I'm skipping everything Emmy-related. No after-parties, no flashy suit, no overindulging at HBO's Pacific Design Center shindig or the the after-after-party at the Chateau for me this year.

What I will be doing is taking a respite from work--and, scarily, from television--for a few days to recharge my mental batteries and soak up some much-needed relaxation.

See you on the other side. Or as soon as I post a link to my last Emmy-related story for this year from over at The Daily Beast, that is.

The Daily Beast: "Scott Pilgrim Gets a Life"

Okay, it's not quite television-focused but given that it does deal with one of my favorite all-time television series (Spaced), I figured that I had to plug it here.

Over at The Daily Beast, you can read my latest feature, entitled "Scott Pilgrim Gets a Life," where I talk to Michael Cera, Edgar Wright, and Bryan Lee O'Malley about their feature film, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, which hits theatres on Friday. Based on the graphic novel series by Bryan Lee O'Malley, the film stars Cera as the titular hero and features a huge cast that includes Brandon Routh, Chris Evans, Jason Schwartzman, Aubrey Plaza, Mae Whitman, Alison Pill, Kieran Culkin, and more.

Plus, Edgar Wright and I talked about Spaced and the similarities between the British comedy series Spaced (which Wright co-created with Simon Pegg and Jessica Hynes) and Scott Pilgrim itself, part of an amazing half-hour interview at San Diego Comic-Con (which was itself interrupted by the appearance of a Ramona Flowers t-shirt-clad Michael Cera), the morning after the top-secret Scott Pilgrim screening.

What you won't read in The Daily Beast piece, however, is the brief aside between me and Wright about the woeful US adaptation of Spaced, which never made it out of the pilot stage. (You can read my brutal review of it from 2008 here, which Wright thanked me profusely for writing.)

"When I talk about that pilot, I'm always very quick to completely absolve the cast, even though we're f---ing furious about it and I'm not really happy about it at any point" said Wright. "You realize the people who are in the show... it's a job. It was the way that it was handled in terms of the respect--aside from me and Simon [Pegg], just Jessica [Hynes], who a trade didn't even mention--that was bulls--t. But one of the funniest things was watching it for the first time with Simon, Jessica, and Nira [Park]. We all sat and watched it and soon as it started we went, 'ARGH!!!' and just held each other. It was a very surreal experience."

Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World will be released nationwide on Friday.

CONFIRMED: Jane Badler to Play Alien Queen on ABC's V

It's a homecoming of sorts.

Televisionary has confirmed reports that Jane Badler, who starred in NBC's 1983 miniseries V (and the subsequent V: The Final Battle and the short-lived 1984-1985 series) and is currently recurring on Aussie soap Neighbours, has been cast in ABC's revival series, which returns for a second season in November.

V showrunner/executive producer Scott Rosenbaum teased crowds at the V panel at San Diego Comic-Con (moderated by yours truly) when he let slip that we would soon be meeting the mother of Visitor high commander Anna (Morena Baccarin) and that Mommy Dearest's name was, um, Diana. (I then asked Rosenbaum point-blank if Badler would be cast and he declined to answer.)

Rosenbaum today confirmed a TV Guide Magazine report that indicated that Badler had been cast in the role.

"I'm very excited," Rosenbaum said to me via email earlier today. "As I said [at] Comic Con, the role would go to the best actor. Jane's audition was great and I'm thrilled to bring her on board."

So there you go: V, Jane Badler, and Diana, together again.

Clear Eyes, Full Hearts: I Am Now Officially a Friday Night Lights Convert

Confession time: I'm a recent convert to Friday Night Lights.

In the world of television, it's often necessary to make a judgment based on a pilot episode of a series. In fact, one job I held in Hollywood made it absolutely necessary to do just that: determine what would be a worthwhile series based on the pilot script and then the shot pilot. With financial investments on the line, it was imperative that one make a snap judgment based on a single episode of a series.

In a lot of cases, that initial judgment proves to be the correct one. But sometimes, the pilot doesn't quite match the full potential of the subsequent series.

When I originally watched the pilot for NBC's Friday Night Lights, it didn't click with me. I found it preachy, saccharine, riddled with some awkward dialogue, and placing far too much emphasis on the football aspect. I wrote off the series for a bit and then, when I heard about the creative struggles of Season Two, I opted not to go back and catch up.

How wrong I was.

Recently, I watched the entire 22-episode first season of Friday Night Lights in a handful of days, devouring the entire freshman season in the evenings and dreaming of Dillon at night. While the pilot and second episodes still failed to win me over, I persevered through those early episodes and found myself hooked on the series around the fourth installment.

What I had missed out on was a groundbreaking and emotionally resonant series that charted the ebbs and flows of life in a small Texas town. Revolving around a place where high school football was the focus, the residents of Dillon don't just see football as entertainment or sport but rather as an embodiment of Dream, an aspirational activity where the game becomes something akin to communion.

But Jason Katim's Friday Night Lights, while ostensibly about football, isn't really about the nitty-gritty aspects of the pigskin, instead using its importance in the town of Dillon to explore the relationships between the players, the audience, the cheerleaders, the teachers, and the students. Those who are obsessed with the game, those who avoid it, and those who find their fates inexorably intertwined with football itself: Eric and Tami Taylor (Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton), whose nuanced relationship marks one of the most realistic depictions of the joys and pains of marriage; their rebellious daughter Julie (Aimee Teegarden); and new starting quarterback Matt Saracen (Zach Gilford, perfectly cast here).

Then there was the way that Season One of Friday Night Lights handled the paralysis of star player Jason Street (Scott Porter). While most series would have written Jason off after the pilot, the season charted his own recovery, his attempt to regain use of his limbs, and the way that his fractured dreams impacted everyone around him, from his parents to devoted girlfriend Lyla (Minka Kelly) and best friend Tim Riggins (Taylor Kitsch). What developed was a painful and beautiful story of recovery in the face of adversity, of mistakes made, relationships broken, and new dreams created. Porter's compelling performance anchored the season in an unexpected and provocative way as Jason progressed through the difficult stages of acceptance of his new condition and its limitations.

It's a storyline that's built around hope and heartbreak in equal measure and that's true about Friday Night Lights as a whole, really. While the season plots the highs and lows of the Panther's season--from the shock of Jason's accident to their victory at the end of the season--it also follows the emotional state of the entire town as well.

Likewise, the season plunged headfirst into the relationship between Eric and Tami Taylor, setting both up as strong characters in their own right. What other series would take its central characters, in a committed marital relationship, and separate them in terms of space, sending Eric to TMU to pursue his dream of coaching college football while Tami remained--pregnant, no less--in Dillon so that she could continue to work with her high school kids as their guidance counselor and allow Julie to plant some roots in Dillon and continue dating Saracen, who had his own hands full caring for his grandmother, suffering from dementia, while his father served in Iraq.

It also tackled a number of controversial topics including steroid use, bi-polar disorder, pre-marital sex, rape, adultery, Katrina refugees, alcoholism, deadbeat parenting, dementia, the war in Iraq, quadriplegia, and much more, all within 22 episodes that, on the surface, seem to be about a high school football team on the road to the state championships.

It's the rare series that can make this jaded critic cry and yet I found myself wiping away tears during most episodes. That Friday Night Lights managed to do so without resorting to cheap sentimentality is a testament to both the writers and the talented cast, who completely embody these characters to the point that the cinema verite-style hand-held cameras aren't just capturing this drama but recording it as though it were a documentary. Characters cut each other off, talk over each other, and behave as though what's unfolding on the screen is reality, a reality that is impossible to look away from.

I could speak about Friday Night Lights all day, really. I'm perfectly willing to admit when I made an error and wrote off a series too early--though now I am struggling through the creatively uneven second season (and its ludicrous murder conspiracy plot)--but I know that there are much brighter spots ahead. I'll be blazing through the second, third, and fourth seasons all summer long and I'm happy to say that Dillon is a place that pulls me back after each episode, one that has not only captured my imagination but also my heart.

The Daily Beast: "Steve Carell to Leave The Office: End the Show"

Steve Carell made headlines earlier this week when he restated his intentions to leave The Office after the end of next season.

Over at The Daily Beast, I discuss why NBC should cancel The Office after Carell leaves rather than attempt to rejigger the ensemble cast or bring in a new manager for the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin.

You can read my latest piece, "Steve Carell to Leave The Office: End the Show" here.

Be sure to head to the comments section to discuss your own feelings about whether the creative spark has gone out at the once superb workplace comedy and what the network should do with the series post-Carell.

Requiem for a Dream: Saying Goodbye to Lost

"To everything there is a season..."

As hard as it is to fathom, the end is upon us.

Lost will end six seasons of mysteries, mythology, and smoke monsters with a two-and-a-half hour series finale tonight as ABC devotes what seems like seven hours to ending one of the greatest and most ambitious serialized storylines ever devised.

My relationship to Lost dates back to May 2004, when I was still working in television development. On that particular day in late May, a box of pilots arrived at the studio where I worked, as they did every spring like clockwork after the network upfronts.

Among the offerings, many of which have now been forgotten to the dustbin of time, was the two-hour pilot for Lost, which was co-written and directed by J.J. Abrams, then coming off of a successful run on ABC's Alias. We had been waiting for this day for quite some time.

I remember that our boss was out of the office that week, so several of us furtively entered his office and sat down together to watch the original pilot. For ninety minutes (remember, no commercial breaks), we sat there in near-silence, entranced by the story that was unfolding, one that was so unpredictable, so shocking, and filled with plot twist upon plot twist so that by the time Dominic Monaghan's Charlie uttered those immortal words ("Guys, where are we?"), we were all hooked.

Lost, more than any other network drama series, showed us what television storytelling was capable of delivering, in terms of complexity, scope, and drive. It was television as Dickensian literature, featuring a cast of hundreds, the push and pull between fate and coincidence, and an examination of the human condition, all there on the screen, but made even more intoxicating by the introduction of the series' trademark mysteries.

The questions that the series kicked up week after week made us ponder, theorize, guess, and devote huge sections of our lives to decoding, even as we followed the characters through thick and thin, through kidnappings at sea, imprisonment in bear cages, birth and death, and the never-ending battle between light and darkness.

That early viewing of the pilot, five of us huddled around a television set, was sharply contrasted with the first Lost panel at that year's Paley Festival, which showcased the cinematic qualities (save that stuffed animal polar bear, maybe) of Abrams' pilot on the big screen. The crowd that gathered was large but nowhere near the gargantuan following that the series would later have at other public events such as San Diego Comic-Con and others. Its mythology was only just beginning, its following loyal but not yet as rabid as it would later become. (It seemed to reach its apex with last week's beautiful and triumphant Lost Live: The Final Celebration, which saw 1,800 attendees attend what was essentially a wake for the beloved show.)

But I was already on board, compelled week after week to check in on these disparate characters--a doctor challenged by a lack of faith, a paralyzed man who believed in miracles, a fugitive who had nowhere to run, a con man loner forced to live with others. The list went on and on, each one of them special in their own way, a part of a larger puzzle that became more complex and labyrinthine as the years went on.

I started Televisionary back in February 2006. At the time, I was still working in television (and would be for a few more years after that) but wanted a place to vent my feelings about the medium and the programming that I was most fixated on. Not surprisingly one of the series that I wrote about frequently and passionately was Lost, then in its second season of faith versus science battles, lonely men in hatches, and an increasingly mounting body count.

I've been a Lost devotee since the beginning but I've also been willing to call the series out when it made some missteps or missed the mark altogether. I've struggled to solve mysteries, pondered the larger metaphysical questions that the series has raised, and followed the drama with a passion that bordered on obsession. It was a series that broke down the fourth wall between the series and the audience, inviting each of them to discuss, come together, and debate. It was perhaps the first real organic social networking experience, demanding that its viewers, like its characters, had to live--and watch--together, rather than alone.

Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse announced several seasons back just when Lost would be ending its run. We've had several years' warning on that account but it doesn't make it any easier to know that that fateful day has finally arrived, and with it, the end of an era for its audience and for television in general. There has never been a series quite like Lost and there likely never will be another quite like it again.

As I quoted at the outset of this personal reminiscence about Lost, all things have their season and all things must come to their natural ends, even Lost. I've loved writing about this remarkable series and discussing it with friends, critics, writers, family members, strangers, and each of you, who have visited this site over the last four years, sharing the experience of watching this series week after week. To you, I offer my thanks for allowing me to express my thoughts and theories about Lost with you each week, year after year.

To the writers, actors, directors, and below the line crew who have worked so tirelessly to provide us with fodder for thought and six years of entertainment, I'd like to also offer my sincere thanks. You all have made your mark on the television industry in so many important ways. But even more than that, you've incited our imaginations, returning us to a state of wonder and awe on a weekly basis, something many of us left behind when we embarked on the long, hard road to adulthood.

Many thanks for the memories and for the magic.

The series finale of Lost airs tonight at 9 pm ET/PT on ABC.

Televisionary Heads Back to AOL's Instant Dharma

It's time for some more Instant Dharma.

Last night, I had the extreme pleasure of being invited back to AOL's weekly Lost-centric show Instant Dharma, where I joined host Maggie Furlong and Kate Aurthur, my editor at The Daily Beast, to discuss this week's episode of Lost ("The Candidate"), where we talked about--SPOILERS!--this week's tragic deaths, another failed getaway attempt, why the castaways are now family, and much more.

You can catch my appearance on this week's episode of Instant Dharma below and read my further take on "The Candidate" here.



The final season of Lost airs Tuesdays at 9 pm ET/PT on ABC.

Getting Lost: Televisionary Heads to Orientation: Ryan Station Podcast

Looking for more Lost goodness?

After a particularly busy week, I was extremely honored and more than happy to crash on Friday evening in front of the computer, pour myself a drink (Hendrick's gin and soda with lime, to be precise) and catch up with The Chicago Tribune's Maureen Ryan and Zap2It's Ryan McGee.

Yes, I was the mystery guest this week on the latest edition of their weekly Orientation: Ryan Station Lost podcast.

Discussing this week's episode of Lost ("The Package"), we had a lot to say about Sun and Jin's separation (which I believe to be intentional), that stubborn tomato and a certainly conveniently located tree branch, the possible merging of the two realities, the handling of the series' female characters, and much more.

You can give the podcast a listen here (and very conveniently watch along to the episode on the embedded Hulu player), download this week's episode here, and subscribe to the podcast here.

Curious to see what you think, Lost fans! And thanks for listening.