<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>the TV addict &#187; TV Talkback</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thetvaddict.com/category/tv-talkback/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thetvaddict.com</link>
	<description>theTVaddict.com is your number one source on the net for TV news, scoop, reviews and commentary on all of your favourite TV shows. Check out theTVaddict.com daily for commentary, a WHAT TO WATCH TVguide, and a weekly podcast.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:23:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>TV Talkback: PUSHING DAISIES, GOSSIP GIRL &amp; SAMANTHA WHO</title>
		<link>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/10/18/tv-talkback-pushing-daisies-samantha-who-gossip-girl/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/10/18/tv-talkback-pushing-daisies-samantha-who-gossip-girl/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:16:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>theTVaddict</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gossip Girl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pushing Daisies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV Talkback]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetvaddict.com/2007/10/18/tv-talkback-pushing-daisies-samantha-who-gossip-girl/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CouchTater: The facts are these: There is no more quotable show currently airing than PUSHING DAISIES (&#8220;That wasn&#8217;t the truth bus. That was the crosstown bitchy express.&#8221;), which also happens to feature TV&#8217;s most eclectic gathering of characters (from pie-making ninja wannabes to retired mermaids). If you&#8217;re not watching this show, we can no longer [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://thetvaddict.com/blogpics/pdaisies.jpg" width="96" height="96" border="0" alt="" /><b><font color="ff6600">CouchTater:</font></b> The facts are these: There is no more quotable show currently airing than <strong>PUSHING DAISIES</strong> (&#8220;That wasn&#8217;t the truth bus. That was the crosstown bitchy express.&#8221;), which also happens to feature TV&#8217;s most eclectic gathering of characters (from pie-making ninja wannabes to retired mermaids). If you&#8217;re not watching this show, we can no longer be friends. Sorry.</p>
<p><b><font color="ff6600">TheTVAddict:</font></b> CouchTater — can we still remain friends if I&#8217;m watching the show but not as in love with it as the rest of the online community? Don&#8217;t get me wrong, <strong>PUSHING DAISIES</strong> had some fantastic one-liners last night, but smart script aside, the Jim Dale narration is almost too much to take. The show has to start giving its audience a little more credit. Not everything needs to be spelled by Dale&#8217;s enchanting vocals. </p>
<p><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://thetvaddict.com/blogpics/ggirl.jpg" width="96" height="96" border="0" alt="" /><b><font color="ff6600">CouchTater:</font></b> I&#8217;m starting to feel a little ambivalent about <strong>GOSSIP GIRL</strong>. It came out of the gate strong at the beginning of the season, but seems to be faltering rather than hitting its stride. Maybe it&#8217;s the fact that every episode revolves around a party which inevitably turns into a fight, or that bitchy dialogue (&#8220;I&#8217;m not a stop along the way, I&#8217;m a destination.&#8221;) is trying to pass for character development. I&#8217;m also not feeling  Leighton Meester&#8217;s take on Blair. It&#8217;s all beginning to seem like a PG-rated version of Cruel Intentions. Let&#8217;s give the show some real storylines which actually have an impact beyond a single episode and then maybe, just maybe, I&#8217;ll regain my original enthusiasm.</p>
<p><b><font color="ff6600"> TheTVAddict:</font></b> Gossip Girl Here. Spotted: The TV Addict taking CouchTater to task for slamming his favorite new show of the season. Forget CRUEL INTENTIONS, last night&#8217;s <strong>GOSSIP GIRL</strong> was straight out of the BEVERLY HILLS 90210 playbook. Which is quite possibly why this TV Addict loved it so much. Blair&#8217;s sleepover — who doesn&#8217;t remember the classic 90210 &#8216;skeletons in the closet episode&#8217; (although I don&#8217;t recall any Brenda and Kelly girl-on-girl action!). Jenny Humphry getting caught for shoplifting. Did she not learn anything from Brenda&#8217;s big bust? (okay, so she wasn&#8217;t born, but still.) Dan and Jenny Humphry are the Brandon and Brenda of the new millennium. <a href="http://www.thetvaddict.com"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/images/favicon.png"></a></p>
<p><span id="more-2349"></span><br />
<img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://thetvaddict.com/blogpics/swho.jpg" width="96" height="96" border="0" alt="" /><b><font color="ff6600">CouchTater:</font></b> Finally caught the premiere of <strong>SAMANTHA WHO</strong>? last night. (Thank God for abc.com!) Every time I pick a show to dub my favorite new offering of the season, something better comes along. Five minutes in, I was hopelessly in love with Sam, not to mention absolutely everyone in her life. I&#8217;m happy to report that this show lays to rest any and all rumors that the sitcom format is dead.</p>
<p><b><font color="ff6600"> TheTVAddict:</font></b> I couldn&#8217;t have said it better myself. Anyone who caught Christina Applegate in Broadway&#8217;s SWEET CHARITY knows exactly how charming and talented she is. <strong>SAMANTHA WHO&#8217;s</strong> success comes as no surprise to this Applegate Addict.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/10/18/tv-talkback-pushing-daisies-samantha-who-gossip-girl/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TV Talkback: THE OFFICE</title>
		<link>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/10/12/tv-talkback-the-office/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/10/12/tv-talkback-the-office/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 18:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>theTVaddict</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV Talkback]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetvaddict.com/2007/10/12/tv-talkback-the-office/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earlier today, frequent contributer &#8216;CT&#8217; took the TV Addict to task for our earlier post titled &#8220;The TV Addict to Michael Scott: REALLY?!?&#8221; CouchTater: You know, my friend, I think it&#8217;s official. You&#8217;ve lost touch with your funny. Sorry, but I thought Michael&#8217;s taking the kid hostage was hysterical. The roomie and I laughed our [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Earlier today, frequent contributer &#8216;CT&#8217; took the TV Addict to task for our earlier post titled &#8220;The TV Addict to Michael Scott: REALLY?!?&#8221;</p>
<p><font color="#ff6600"><b>CouchTater:</b></font> You know, my friend, I think it&#8217;s official. You&#8217;ve lost touch with your funny. Sorry, but I thought Michael&#8217;s taking the kid hostage was hysterical. The roomie and I laughed our butts off through that entire segment. And as silly as it was that Michael didn&#8217;t figure out the whole &#8220;chatroom&#8221; thing, you have to remember that this is a comedy… and that means we&#8217;re supposed to suspend our disbelief. And if you didn&#8217;t find the sequences in which Phyllis attempted to try a new route with Angela some of the funniest stuff on television this week, then you…<br />
you… I don&#8217;t know what.</p>
<p><font color="#ff6600"><b>TheTVAddict</b></font> While every TV Addict or Couch Tator for that mater is entitled to his or her own opinion, this TV Addict wholeheartedly disagree with yours. The TV Addict knows funny, and if you&#8217;re looking for &#8216;comedy night done right&#8217; one needn&#8217;t look any further than last night&#8217;s 30 ROCK.</p>
<p>Jenna&#8217;s dilemma as to whether she should remain fat [and popular] vs. thin and lonely was as hilarious as it was brilliant. Jack McBrayer has turned what could have easily been a generic and annoying sitcom sidekick [see GILMORE GIRLS Michel] into one of the funniest performances this side of Melora Hardin&#8217;s Jan. And Will Arnett, well why he doesn&#8217;t have his own show, or a more regular gig on 30 ROCK remains a mystery.</p>
<p>Simply put, 30 ROCK was laugh-out-loud funny. THE OFFICE — while humerous at times, touching and emotional — was not.</p>
<p><span id="more-2329"></span><br />
<font color="#ff6600"><b>CouchTater:</b></font> Okay, you&#8217;ve got me at a bit of an advantage since I don&#8217;t watch 30 ROCK. I tried, and Lord knows I wanted to love it, but too much Tracy Morgan makes me break out in a rash. So after a couple episodes, I gave it up. So while I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s very humorous (see, that&#8217;s how we spell it in America, where all this great television comes from), it&#8217;s kinda like asking a blind man to compare Jennifer Aniston&#8217;s various haircuts by holding up pictures for him to judge. I&#8217;ve read good things about ROCK this season, but that&#8217;s all I can say. I&#8217;ve agreed with you before — most recently, last week — that Michael Scott needs to be taken down a notch or two (driving into the lake was just beyond moronic), but the kidnapping incident was perfectly in keeping with his character: This is a man who acts without thinking. Even when everyone around him is saying, &#8220;The sky is blue,&#8221; he will insist it is Green. More importantly, last night was a case in which — and man, is this the rarity — I think most people could actually empathize with Michael. We&#8217;ve all been on the receiving end of some little jerk whose idea of customer service is to say &#8220;Whatever, dude.&#8221; I was not only laughing at the situation, but cheering Michael on! </p>
<p><font color="#ff6600"><b>TheTVAddict:</b></font> While I&#8217;ll agree with you that we&#8217;ve all been on the receiving end of a bad customer service experience and that Michael Scott&#8217;s kidnapping incident was perfectly in character. There&#8217;s still one problem. It wasn&#8217;t funny. Which is sort of what &#8216;Comedy Night Done Right&#8217; infers. Thursday night on NBC is supposed to let me forget about my rough day at work. These hour long episodes simply aren&#8217;t working — and I&#8217;m not the only one who thinks so. Check out what respected television columnist Alan Sepinwall said about these hour-long experiments by <a href="http://sepinwall.blogspot.com/2007/10/office-youve-gotta-fight-for-your-right.html" target="newwindow">clicking here</a>. <a href="http://www.thetvaddict.com"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/images/favicon.png"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/10/12/tv-talkback-the-office/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TV Talkback: FLASH GORDON</title>
		<link>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/08/02/tv-talkback-flash-gordon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/08/02/tv-talkback-flash-gordon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>theTVaddict</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Flash Gordon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV Talkback]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetvaddict.com/2007/08/02/tv-talkback-flash-gordon/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Couch Tater: When it comes to the Sci Fi channel, I&#8217;m willing to cut them a whole lotta slack. After all, they&#8217;ve given me hours upon hours of excellent programming in the form of FARSCAPE, BATTLESTAR GALACTICA and EUREKA. And their cheestacular original movies are a major guilty pleasure. But when it comes to the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/blogpics/flashgordon.jpg" alt="flash gordon logo"></p>
<p><font color="ff6600"><b>Couch Tater:</font></b> When it comes to the Sci Fi channel, I&#8217;m willing to cut them a whole lotta slack. After all, they&#8217;ve given me hours upon hours of excellent programming in the form of FARSCAPE, BATTLESTAR GALACTICA and EUREKA. And their cheestacular original movies are a major guilty pleasure. But when it comes to the network&#8217;s latest offering, FLASH GORDON, I&#8217;m afraid they&#8217;re eating up a whole lot of my good will toward them. There&#8217;s so much wrong with this show that it&#8217;s hard to know where to begin, but I&#8217;ll start with leading man Eric Johnson. In a way, he&#8217;s symbolic of everything those involved with the show did wrong. After all, Johnson was perhaps the most lackluster regular during the early days of SMALLVILLE, where he played Lana-lovin&#8217; footballer Whitney Fordman. Here, Johnson heads up a show that could have been the next SMALLVILLE, but instead plays more like a bad episode of BUCK ROGERS IN THE 25th CENTURY.</p>
<p><font color="ff6600"><b>theTVaddict:</font></b> Talk about harsh, Couch Tater! Have the endless summer reruns finally taken their toll? FLASH GORDON is mindless summer fun, and frankly a welcome diversion from the endless horror that is reality TV. That said, if the first episode of FLASH is any indication, the show really needs to find its voice. Is FLASH GORDON going to be a gritty and realistic re-imagination (similar to that of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA)? Or is it taking the same route as the corn-ball cheesefest 80&#8242;s movie some of us have come to know and love? I think with a show like this, we really need to give it a few episodes to see where it&#8217;s going. Because as of episode one, I&#8217;m not exactly seeing how this isn&#8217;t simply another STARGATE/SLIDERS/QUANTUM LEAP incarnation.</p>
<p><span id="more-2073"></span><br />
<font color="ff6600"><b>Couch Tater:</b></font> I think you&#8217;ve nailed it on the head with the STARGATE analogy, and that right there could be the problem. I&#8217;m definitely not a fan of that particular sub-genre of sci fi. I much prefer my space operas to be less campy. Like STARGATE, this incarnation of FLASH features a plethora of familiar-sounding, quasi-scientific words (there&#8217;s lots of talk of &#8220;rifts&#8221; opening and closing), all being spouted by characters right out of Central Casting. We&#8217;ve got the vaguely attractive hero (Johnson), the wacky scientist (Jody Racicot’s Zarkov) and a beavy of beauties in a variety of rolls, all of whom are pretty much indistinguisable. If our heroine, Gina Holden&#8217;s Dale Arden, was put in a line-up with the various women from the planet Mongo, I can’t say I&#8217;d be able to pick her out. Assuming, of course, they were all wearing those cool slave girl costumes the Mongo chicks don. Speaking of our time spend on Mongo, one major problem is with villain Ming. Those of us dug Max von Sydow&#8217;s take in the 80&#8242;s big screen feature may be surprised to find that here, Ming is more misquetoast than merciless. And that, my friends, is a major problem. </p>
<p><font color="ff6600"><b>theTVaddict:</b></font> While I don&#8217;t agree with your assessment of star Eric Johnson (I actually think he does a good job playing Flash), I do agree that Ming needs some serious work. Perhaps it&#8217;s just me, but when I hear the name Ming, my mind turns to an evil, terrifying dictator. John Ralston&#8217;s take comes across as sort of a B-list Bond baddie. (You know, the kind who dies thirty minutes into the movie to make way for the real evil mastermind). If FLASH GORDON really wants to find a place on my TiVo Season&#8217;s Pass list, it&#8217;s going to have to really kick it up a notch in the bad guy department.  Or risk being cancelled in, well&#8230; a flash.  <a href="http://www.thetvaddict.com"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/images/favicon.png"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/08/02/tv-talkback-flash-gordon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TV Talkback: Emmy Nominations</title>
		<link>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/07/20/tv-talkback-emmy-nominations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/07/20/tv-talkback-emmy-nominations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>theTVaddict</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Emmy Coverage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV Talkback]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetvaddict.com/2007/07/20/tv-talkback-emmy-nominations/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Couch Tater: Okay, right off the bat I&#8217;m going to have to say that while I agreed with a heck of a lot of what you said in yesterday&#8217;s vodcast, I&#8217;m going to have to slap you down for dissing Jenna Fischer and her beloved alter ego, THE OFFICE&#8217;s Pam. Don&#8217;t make me hurt you! [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font color="ff6600"><strong>Couch Tater:</strong></font> Okay, right off the bat I&#8217;m going to have to say that while I agreed with a heck of a lot of what you said in yesterday&#8217;s <a href="http://thetvaddict.com/2007/07/19/the-tv-addict-rant-clueless-emmy-voters/">vodcast</a>, I&#8217;m going to have to slap you down for dissing Jenna Fischer and her beloved alter ego, THE OFFICE&#8217;s Pam. Don&#8217;t make me hurt you! Then again, I suspect I&#8217;ll have a whole lot of her supporters offering to do the job for me! You were, however, right on where TWO AND A HALF MEN was concerned. How can there be two &#8212; count &#8216;em, two! &#8212; women from that show (Holland Taylor and&#8230; wait, I can&#8217;t be reading this right&#8230; Conchata Ferrell?) nominated in the Supporting Actress Category. Hello? Shouldn&#8217;t UGLY BETTY&#8217;s Becki Newton (Amanda) have been there with co-star Vanessa Williams (Wilhelmina)? For that matter, how was Michael Urie&#8217;s hysterical turn as lap dog Marc overlooked? And don&#8217;t even get me started on the Supporting Actress In A Drama category.</p>
<p><font color="ff6600"><strong>theTVaddict:</strong></font> &#8220;Don&#8217;t even get me started on the Supporting Actress In A Drama category.&#8221; Okay, Allow me. William Shatner — Again! How many more years do Emmy voters have to recognize Shatner for playing crazy? And speaking of crazy&#8230; Conchata Ferrell &#8211; Huh! Honest to God, had she not been nominated for an Emmy, I never would have had any idea who she was. I thought TWO AND A HALF MEN was about well, two and a half men. What&#8217;s with all the women? And finally in defense of my vodcast. As much as I love Pam Beesley, please fill me in on exactly what was funny about the year she just had. From breaking up her seven year engagement, to pining after Jim and one really sad art show, there was nothing comedic about Jenna Fischer&#8217;s performance.<br />
 <br />
<font color="ff6600"><strong>Couch Tater:</strong></font> Okay, now you&#8217;re just asking to be hurt. How about we move onto a topic we&#8217;ll agree on? Tell me BATTLESTAR GALACTICA didn&#8217;t get robbed. Oh, sure, they got some nods in the writing and directing categories, but no Outstanding Drama? No acting accolades? Then again, I&#8217;m getting used to the fact that shows I adore are going to be treated like red-headed stepchildren. GILMORE GIRLS is history and so are the chances of Lauren Graham or Alexis Bledel getting the recognition they deserve. Surely SVU&#8217;s Mariska Hargitay &#8212; whom I love but, lets face it, didn&#8217;t have a stellar year &#8212; could have been bumped for one of the Stars Hollow ladies. And is it really fair that the Supporting Actress category has six nominees from three shows? Yeah, sure, I love GREYS ANATOMY as much as the next person, but Sandra Oh, Katherine Heigl and Chandra Wilson? Talk about overkill. Oh&#8230; and how happy are you that both Mary-Louise Parker and Elizabeth Perkins were nominated for WEEDS? (I&#8217;d love nothing more than to see Parker win lead and Perkins take home supporting. Talk about your one-two punch!) Now let me take a wild guess: In the supporting actor in a comedy category, you&#8217;re handing a win to Neil Patrick Harris of HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER. Right?<br />
 <br />
<font color="ff6600"><strong>theTVaddict:</strong></font> Couch Tater, it&#8217;s not as fun when we agree on everything! Of course BATTLESTAR GALACTICA was robbed. But after three seasons of being perennially snubbed, I&#8217;ve come to this conclusion. The only way Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell are going to see Emmy love is if they happen to guest star on TWO AND A HALF MEN. On the subject of Best Actress in a Drama, I completely agree that this year wasn&#8217;t Mariska Hargitays. And yes, in a category that has not one, or two but three doctors from Seattle Grace, surely voters could have made room for one Gilmore. Of course my Gilmore isn&#8217;t Lauren Graham or Alexis Bledel, it&#8217;s Kelly Bishop &#8211; who yet again delivered a tour-de-force performance as matriarch Emily Gilmore. Taking a break from taking shots at Emmy voters, Mary-Louise Parker/Elizabeth Perkins, brilliant! And yes, as I channel my inner Barney, an Emmy nod for Neil Patrick Harris is most definitely LegenDARY.<br />
 <br />
<font color="ff6600"><strong>Couch Tater:</strong></font> I suppose that in the end, the Emmys prove that you can&#8217;t please all the people all the time. Let&#8217;s fact it: Even if every show and actor we mentioned here was nominated, there&#8217;d be something else to tick us off. I didn&#8217;t even mention the Reality category and the sin of nominating DANCING WITH THE STARS but not the far superior SO YOU THINK YOU CAN DANCE. The good news? Next year there&#8217;ll be at least a few more open spaces in many of the categories thanks to the fact that THE SOPRANOS has exited stage left. The bad news? TWO AND A HALF MEN will still be airing and eligible. <a href="http://www.thetvaddict.com"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/images/favicon.png"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/07/20/tv-talkback-emmy-nominations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TV Talkback: BROTHERS &amp; SISTERS</title>
		<link>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/05/09/tv-talkback-brothers-sisters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/05/09/tv-talkback-brothers-sisters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2007 14:38:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>theTVaddict</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Brothers & Sisters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV Talkback]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetvaddict.com/2007/05/09/tv-talkback-brothers-sisters/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two addicts. One conversation.  Let the games begin! CouchTater: Wouldn&#8217;t BROTHERS &#038; SISTERS have gotten a lot more mileage out of the off-screen kiss between Walker-clan newbie Rebecca and her brother-in-law Joe by having him deny the accusation or perhaps say that she&#8217;d been the one to kiss him? What could have been an intriguing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/blogpics/bands.jpg"></p>
<p><b>Two addicts. One conversation.  Let the games begin!</b></p>
<p><b><font color="#ff6600">CouchTater:</font></b> Wouldn&#8217;t <b>BROTHERS &#038; SISTERS</b> have gotten a lot more mileage out of the off-screen kiss between Walker-clan newbie Rebecca and her brother-in-law Joe by having him deny the accusation or perhaps say that she&#8217;d been the one to kiss him? What could have been an intriguing “he said/she said” plot forcing the family to take sides and reverberating for weeks to come was instead reduced to an easily-digestable morsel. But perhaps that&#8217;s part and parcel of this show&#8217;s bigger problem: It&#8217;s seeming determination to burn through three years worth of storyline in a single season. Are our collective attention spans so short that we wouldn&#8217;t be able to make it until season two without meeting Holly and William&#8217;s daughter? How about giving Balthazar Getty&#8217;s character a little airtime instead of introducing new characters every few episodes? Why ditch Nora’s relationship with the charming handyman played by Treat Williams in favor of having her get involved with the smarmy teacher? B&#038;S needs to slow down and let us enjoy the ride. </p>
<p><b><font color="#ff6600">TheTVAddict:</b></font> &#8220;Are our collective attention spans so short that we wouldn&#8217;t be able to make it until season two without meeting Holly and William&#8217;s daughter?&#8221; In a word — Yes. The unfortunate reality of modern-day television is that viewers all too often have demonstrated their willingness to move onto something new when a series fails to give them answers. (See: LOST losing five million viewers this season). </p>
<p>The introduction of Rebecca not only brought the remarkable Emily VanCamp back to television, its propelled B&#038;S from a good show to a potentially great one. Since her arrival on the scene, the &#8216;other&#8217; Walker has helped tear apart a marriage, pit brother against brother and create more drama than a month of alcohol-fueled game nights. Sure, the whole &#8220;he said/she said&#8221; thing sounds intriguing — but I&#8217;ll take an awkward weekend at the Vineyard any day. Who didn&#8217;t get chills listening to Holly&#8217;s final warning to Nora: “You don’t want my daughter living in your house!”</p>
<p><span id="more-1809"></span><br />
<font color="#ff6600"><b>CouchTater:</b></font> Okay, calm down. Nobody’s badmouthing your beloved Emily. All I’m saying is that if the show isn’t careful, it’s going to find itself heading into camp territory, in part because of its tendency to burn through plot quicker than the Walkers go through liquor. It’s hard to take a show seriously if every time we turn around, there’s fifteen new plots brewing. Not only that, but the show seems to be terrified of being identified as either a drama or a comedy. What the hell was up with that episode-ending catfight between Nora and Holly? What started as a clash of the drama queens eventually degenerated into a food fight. Holly wasn’t the only one who didn’t know whether to laugh or cry.</p>
<p><font color="#ff6600"><b>TheTVaddict:</b></font> Are you seriously telling me to calm down? Kitchen. One hour and come armed — carrots and celery at the ready, no throwing peas — they hurt. Jokes aside, I must respectively disagree with your assertion that &#8220;the show seems to be terrified of being identified as either a drama or a comedy.&#8221; One of the things I find so appealing about BROTHERS &#038; SISTERS is that we get the best of both worlds. The emotional and heartfelt moments are properly juxtaposed with the light and fluffy ones, creating the ideal balance for a Sunday night drama. Straight up depressing TV, that&#8217;s why we have the evening news. <a href="http://www.thetvaddict.com"><img src="http://www.thetvaddict.com/images/favicon.png"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetvaddict.com/2007/05/09/tv-talkback-brothers-sisters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

