Top Newsmakers of 2010 in Sci-Fi Television

In no particular order, but because they contributed greatly to making 2010 a tremendously entertaining year in science fiction television, special recognition goes to:

Matt Smith (“Doctor Who”) – He took on the biggest challenge of anyone in modern sci-fi — filling David Tennant’s shoes.  He then made “Doctor Who” his own and left fans clamoring for more.  Admirably and gracefully, he did the impossible.

Damon Lindelof (“Lost”) – Tackled the impossible task of ending one of the most significant modern sci-fi series on television, and when fans turned on him in anger with disappointment and frustration, he braved through the criticism and then issued a semi-apology 6 months later stating he understood why the fans felt let down.

Robert Carlyle (“Stargate: Universe”) – Hero or villain, Carlyle’s portrayal of Dr. Nicholas Rush has been riveting and must be credited for helping make “SGU” a must-watch television series.

Ronald D. Moore  (“Caprica”) – With its dying breath, Ron Moore stood by his electrically charged series and continued to fight for its existence.  Even at its death-knell, Ron was at one of the last event attempting to woo fans and bravely asked the fans to unite and keep “Caprica” on the air.  He did not abandon ship and stood by his show to the bitter end.  “Caprica” may not have been popular with sci-fi fans, but it inspired lively debate and carved out a niche in sci-fi history.

Russell T. Davies (“Torchwood”) – Single-handedly brought “Torchwood” to America to ensure the cutting-edge sci-fi series would continue and pounded the pavement to make it happen.  If only all showrunners were so tenaciously dedicated to their shows that they would seek financing half-way across the world and relocate their show in the process. Sheer brilliance.

While hundreds if not thousands of other people contributed to making 2010 a great year in sci-fi television, these were amongst those who sprung to mind and dominated the headlines.

When the World Cracks: The cancellation of “Stargate: Universe” has left a fan-base reeling in after-shock

On the fateful day that it was announced the Syfy had canceled “Stargate: Universe” the sci-fi fans rose up in anger and the sleeping horde of sci-fi fans let their voices be heard. It was the second time in as many months that a beloved sci-fi series had been canceled – on the same television network no less. It was a double-blow to an increasingly diminishing genre.

Science fiction has always been a hard sell on television. For one, the mass viewing audience tends to avoid anything remotely looking like science fiction. Another reason for the problems surrounding sci-fi shows gaining traction on the television landscape is that sci-fi fans are picky in what they will embrace. They are unforgiving of so-called bad sci-fi shows or lackluster writing.

Whatever the multitude of reasons, sci-fi fans did not whole-heartedly embrace “Caprica” and “Stargate: Universe.” Thus, it was with a heavy-heart that both were reluctantly canceled. But the ratings showed that fans were abandoning the shows, not sticking by them. So in light of the eroding audience retention, the ax fell.

We can debate why fans were not tuning in for the live broadcasts, or avoiding watching such stellar sci-fi shows. But, in the end, the reality remains the same: time had run out. With 10 episodes remaining to air hopefully next Spring, “Stargate: Universe” will have a chance to still enter sci-fi canon. It may or may not be the last chapter of a long legacy of “Stargate” franchises. Let’s hope not. But it will be a dark hour to see the last of a remarkable universe explored by three different television series.

“Stargate: Universe” began innocuously enough. It introduced an array of characters forced to flee through a wormhole onto an alien spaceship over which they had no control. Light-years away from home and unable to return home because much of the ship’s functions were damaged, the escapees had to learn to cope with being lost-in-space without the resources necessary to survive. The premise was familiar, yet more limited in scope of another classic sci-fi series where a rag-tag group of survivors were forced to flee into the stars.

Having been forewarned, I knew that the initial episodes would be heavily foundational. As the survivors on the alien-ship Destiny took their initial steps into alien territory, the viewer would experience each incremental step. Not every episode could start with a space ship fight. Much of the episodes were to emphasize the need for basic necessities and how ill-equipped a group of civilians and military personnel would be to secure such things when they have no ability to determine where they are going and the emotional strain and stress that would place on each of them.

However, right from the start, one of the largest portions of the sci-fi fan base was outraged over the portrayal of women on the series. While subsequent episodes did well to temper the outrageous stereotypes and give credence to a more equal status in the series, many female fans jumped ship (figuratively). Then many of the male audience became critical of the series’ laborious tone and pace. They wanted more action, more gunfights, more space battles. Alas, “Stargate: Universe” was a series not equipped to provide all those testosterone-laden elements. Instead, “Stargate: Universe” was something more. It was a thinking-fan’s show. It was borrowing from earlier sci-fi series and laying the groundwork for intellectual debate, more than simple physical confrontations. It wanted to use physical confrontations sparingly and as-needed to propel the story it wanted to tell.

But the damage had been done. Many female sci-fi fans had stopped watching and many male fans were too impatient to endure a well-thought out storyline. That left a tenaciously devoted core of fans who were delighted in the carefully constructed storylines intermeddling short-term and long-term story arcs to keep the fans engaged. “Stargate: Universe” also began unpeeling the layers of each of its complex characters – each neither fully altruistic, nor all evil at their core. The series wanted to explore the shades of gray and allow its characters to reflect as much possible the flawed humanity in which we all live. People are not clear-cut good and bad – they are something in-between; and to choose to highlight the flaws – the cracks in each person’s soul – was intriguing.

Therefore, the lens in which “Stargate: Universe” portrayed humanity was multi-faceted and provided a potentially limitless number of stories that could be told with just a core group of characters.

Having been given the time needed to establish its basic premise and introduce its characters, by episode 10 (“Justice”) the show had finally come into its own. For the fans who had stuck around, their patience was rewarded. When the show allowed Dr. Rush to be beaten to a pulp and left for dead on a planet while Col. Young returned to Destiny without him, it was galvanizing. Suddenly the harsh reality and brittle personalities stretched beyond their breaking point had reached a violent and brutal climax. It was brilliant storytelling. It left viewers breathless with anticipation during the long 4-month hiatus.

Then, astoundingly, the show returned with even more force and momentum with the introduction of the Ursini aliens in “Space (part 1).” The Ursini had rescued/captured Dr. Rush and had performed untold amounts of experiments on him. The simultaneous rescue of Dr. Rush and Chloe who had been abducted right off the Destiny ship was breath-taking. This was “Stargate: Universe.” It had laid its foundation so carefully that when the story broke out, it caught us all off-guard and became the cutting-edge series that we had hoped for.

In the subsequent months, the series reached another major crossroads with the incursion of the Lucian Alliance and the loss of T.J.’s baby. The dangling storylines thought forgotten were resurrected and woven into the main story. It was a roller-coaster ride that was moving faster and faster.

When the show reached its second season mid-point, it left us wondering if the Destiny-ites would forsake their journey home to Earth and go in search of the beginning of the universe, while being hotly pursued and toyed with by the Ursini aliens. The show was just about to embark on another fantastical journey. It was therefore a cruel blow to learn that when “Stargate: Universe” returns in Spring 2011 to finish its second season, that will be all there is. We may never learn if Destiny would actually take them to the beginning of life itself and what they would have found there.

It is also likely that the series will end on a cliff-hanger as the cast and crew found out about the cancellation after they had wrapped the second season finale; in which case, fans will be even more outraged when that time comes.

It feels too soon to really mourn a show that is coming back for 10 more episodes. But knowing in advance that those final 10 episodes will be the last, shall make them that more precious. As with any TV show that is canceled before its time, it is hard to understand the “why’s” of it all. But in the end, the “why’s” do not matter so much as taking the time to appreciate what we were given. In today’s ridiculously impossible world of keeping a television show on the air, it is a blessing that “Stargate: Universe” was given two full seasons. Not even “Caprica” can boast that feat.

So I challenge the sci-fi fans who loved “Stargate: Universe”: cherish the final ten episodes. Do not wail and gnash your teeth in despair. Rejoice that we were given those episodes at all. Sci-fi television is still in decline. It is a dying genre. Embrace the final amazing moments that are actually given a chance to be broadcast — for not every television show is given such a graceful end. It is time to appreciate what we are given.

Where to find this article:

http://www.thetvaddict.com/2010/12/28/when-the-world-cracks-the-cancellation-of-stargate-universe-has-left-a-fan-base-reeling-in-after-shock/ 

“Doctor Who” returns with its delightful holiday special on Christmas Day

Do I hear a “who?”  Yes, fans of the charming British series “Doctor Who,” it is that time of year again — the annual Christmas special of “Doctor Who” returns at 9:00 p.m., December 25^th on BBC America.

This marks the first time that the British series will be shown simultaneously in the U.K., as well as in the U.S.  Thus, fans will be able to tweet, email and chat online with friends in both countries now without worrying about the usual time-delay and worry about spoilers.

It is a rare treat to be able to sit back and enjoy “Doctor Who” on Christmas Day here in the U.S., so I heartily recommend that you indulge and partake in this once a year spectacular event.

If you caught the 5^th season of “Doctor Who” last summer, which introduced Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor, then you know exactly where the season left off:  with The Doctor dancing at Amy Pond and Rory’s wedding.  In the upcoming holiday special entitled “Doctor Who: A Christmas Carol,” the trio’s adventures continue as The Doctor hastens to help out Rory and Amy as they get into a sticky predicament while on their honeymoon.

The episode will also feature special appearances by Michael Gambon as the Scrooge-like Kazran Sardick and Katherine Jenkins featured as Abigail.  Both Gambon (best known for his role as Dumbledore in the “Harry Potter” films) and Jenkins will round-out the crazy Christmas caper as The Doctor tries to save his friends and Christmas.

For those not was well-versed in “Doctor Who” lore, then I highly recommend that you still tune-in and discover the magical joy that so many fans across the world have already found.

“Doctor Who” follows the journey of a lonely, but enthusiastic time-lord.  He is the last of his kind (unless you count his arch-nemesis the Master – but that is a story for another day), and The Doctor constantly seeks out companions and friends to sharing in his amazing adventures.  Over the course of the past 35 years, there have been ten prior versions of The Doctor, each played by yet another delightful actor as The Doctor regenerates and a new face (and actor) appears.  The regenerations have helped keep the “Doctor Who” series fresh over the past 3 decades and allows for an ever-increasing audience to appreciate each new incarnation of The Doctor.

With this year’s Christmas 2-hour holiday special, this is the perfect time to jump right into one of the most cherished sci-fi dramas to grace the television screen.  It will charm you, delight you, and dazzle you with its radiant joy, clever quips, and abundance of heart.  It is the quintessential holiday movie that is a must for everyone!

“Doctor Who: A Christmas Carol” airs Saturday, December 25, 2010 at 9:00 p.m. PST on BBC America.

http://www.examiner.com/museum-of-tv-and-radio-in-los-angeles/doctor-who-returns-with-its-2-hour-holiday-special-on-christmas-day

Brilliant But Canceled: Mourning TERRIERS and UNNATURAL HISTORY

The “brilliant but canceled” moniker hangs heavy on our hearts, as we mourn a few special TV shows cut-down prematurely this Fall

Looking back over the 2010 Fall season, it was a tough year for many shows trying to secure the attention of the increasingly fickle television audience. Some arrived as if they were but a blip on the radar, some lasted for a handful of episodes, and some were able to complete their first season episode orders. But there were a distinct few that lingered a bit longer in our hearts and minds as we wondered why they did not attract an audience – or worse yet, a big enough audience.

Two special stand-outs are FX’s “Terriers” and Cartoon Network’s “Unnatural History.” One came as a complete shock when it was not picked up for a second season; while the other cancellation was expected, but still painful when the news broke solidifying its dark fate.

They were only days apart. One day Cartoon Network quietly announced that it would not be picking up “Unnatural History” for a second season, and a few days later, FX made a splash in the news when it boldly declared that “Terriers” would not be renewed as well. Across the TV-writing realm an immediate outcry was heard, as viewers expressed anger and hurt over FX’s refusal to consider that a 250,000 increase in viewers was significant enough to warrant “Terriers” a second season and allow it to continue building its audience.

However, when Cartoon Network announced its decision to not pick up “Unnatural History,” virtually not a sound was heard – that is unless you were listening. Hearts broke quietly as fans lamented the loss of their beloved new series “Unnatural History.” Perhaps family viewers are not as ready to take to the public posting boards to scream in agony and frustration, but the pain was just as real. Instead quiet emails were sent to the show’s creator to express condolences on the loss of a fine television show.

No matter how painful it was hearing the news, it is quickly followed by the question: why? How is it that such critically-acclaimed shows are being cast aside as if they were unwanted and undesirable? In fact, these shows were no such thing; instead, they were cherished by the fans who had discovered these delightful gems. No matter whether you preferred a family adventure or the shenanigans of two good-hearted private investigators, both shows attracted loyal fan-bases.

In “Terrier’s” case, it was building from its solid 500,000 viewers to an increasing number of viewers each week. Alas, it had the misfortune to be launched just at a time when another new television show, “The Walking Dead,” managed to pull in over 5 million viewers for each episode of its first season (on AMC, a rival network of FX). When compared to that spectacular launch, 500,000 viewers increasing to 750,000 viewers does appear to be negligible in comparison. But “Terriers” did something rather remarkable – it overcame a crippling mis-naming and fought-off considerable competition in its timeslot. Wednesday nights at 10 p.m. is much more brutal to compete in than Sunday nights at 10 p.m. The fact that “Terriers” ferociously fought to attain and sustain its audience is laudable. It was a true under-dog (all puns intended).

The same was true of “Unnatural History.” It was up against some of the steepest competition on television as it had the misfortune to be scheduled Tuesday nights at 8 p.m. up against such shows as “NCIS,” “Glee” and “No Ordinary Family.” When competing with the most popular shows on television it is a wonder that “Unnatural History” was holding onto a solid 1 million viewers each week.

But instead of rewarding these shows for their tenacity, competing in some of the toughest timeslots on television, their networks chose to pull the plug, ending these amazing shows before their time.

One season is never enough. That is barely enough time to lay the groundwork and foundation of the various characters, their back-stories and the complex relationships amongst the characters. In “Unnatural History’s” case, we saw Kevin, Jasper and Maggie face a wide-array of mysterious historical challenges, but we barely scratched the surface of the deliciously unfolding relationships amongst the three friends as they were on the cusp of adulthood. In “Terriers’” case, we had but seen glimpses of the bond that was forged between a washed-up cop and a reformed thief and how they were determined to bring justice to those who could not fend for themselves in a corrupt world.

So many untold stories. So many amazing journeys not taken. Friends whose friendships would only deepen and become rich as tested by the trials and tribulations of time.

It should not feel so painful to say good-bye to fictional characters on a television show. Yet the magic of television is how real it made them feel. We invited these characters into our lives once a week for 13 weeks and in that short amount of time, they became part of our family. Some of us live alone and our television friends are dear to us as we see them perhaps more frequently than our own friends and family. Then, for others, we have rich family lives, but we enjoyed sharing the viewing experience together with them once a week to watch these remarkably fun shows.

That is television. It is an invitation into a world where the characters feel real and which are created so that we care about them – cheering when they are happy and torn when they are sad. Thus, the abrupt cancellation of a TV series that captured our imaginations and found a place in our hearts feels akin to the loss of someone close to us. It is a virtual-death. No one actually died, but we still grieve for the loss. We may be able to record the shows for multiple viewings or buy DVD sets, but we will never see how these wonderful characters lives continued. What further stories and adventures did they embark upon? To not know how they went on to live their lives feels wrong.

The fact that the stories just ended without a proper good-bye makes it feel even more disorientating. Network executives rarely consider how difficult it is for attached-viewers to let go. We need an end to the story. We want to see a “happily ever after” moment. No one would buy books if they ended so abruptly. How dare television networks treat us (and those who make the shows) so shabbily?

But instead of ranting about the unfairness of television network decisions, let us remember the moments of joy and wonder that both “Terriers” and “Unnatural History” brought into our lives. They may not have had proper good-byes, but they did accomplish something much more valuable: they will be remembered. They will join the hallowed halls of television history as “brilliant but canceled.” They will be the shows that everyone talks about for years and decades to come. Their legacy will be that they were once great and will always be remembered as wonderful TV shows who died too soon.

R.I.P. “Terriers” and “Unnatural History.”

Where to find this article:

http://www.thetvaddict.com/2010/12/21/mourning-the-loss-of-terriers-and-unnatural-history-special-shows-cut-down-prematurely-this-fall/

Take a trip down the “Rabbit Hole” with Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart

At a special screening at the in Los Angeles, viewers were treated to a special night as The Wrap previewed the indie film “Rabbit Hole” and provided a Q&A with two of the film’s stars Aaron Eckhart and Sandra Oh.   Both were effusive about what a blessing it was to work on such an extraordinary film and invited everyone to appreciate the story of love-lost and found.

“Rabbit Hole” is perhaps the saddest film one will see all year; but it is also perhaps one of the most beautiful.  It is a perfect balance of grief combined with hope.  It is also visually stunning as the entire film feels as if it were painted on a canvas with lush greens, whites and delicate infusion of color as necessary.  Set primarily in the magnificent, old Hampton’s style home in northern New York, the stately home showcases the parents of a young boy who met with a tragic accident.  Rather than dwell on the fresh period of grief, the film invites us into their lives eight months later.

Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart portray the grief-stricken parents, Becca and Howie, who are coping with moving-on in their lives the best way they know how.  In between suffocating grief counseling and blatant attempts to ignore the white elephant occupying their lives, Becca and Howie attempt to go about living their normal lives.  It is their jolting attempts to figure out how to do that which provides moments of levity mixed with raw pain.  But by far the most touching thread woven into the film is Becca’s attempts to reach out to the young teenager who also shares in their grief.

Portrayed by Miles Teller, Jason is a teenager haunted by a moment’s recklessness.  To watch as he and Becca bond over Jason’s half-finished comic-book shows us that they are trying to heal and to forgive themselves for the “what might have beens.”  Life at its worst is an open-wound, but at its best it is simply forgiveness and love.  Neither is so easy to attain, but with sheer determination, all three of these characters strive to heal.

Encountered along the way are Becca’s similarly grief-stricken mother, played delightfully by Dianne Wiest, and her sister, Tammy Blanchard.  As they try to surround Becca with their love, their attempts feel helpless; but even Becca understands that some love is better than no love.  On the flip-side, Sandra Oh portrays one of the grief group members who clings to her loss in order to give her life meaning.

The film does not answer the question of whether it is better to cling to what has been lost or to let go, but it does show that for each person, healing from such a grievous loss is a different path.  Kidman and Eckhart’s finely nuanced performances are scintillating.  They wear their characters’ grief with dignity and yet with compassion, simultaneously showing that underneath it all is a strong foundation of love.

“Rabbit Hole” will squeeze your heart, but it will caress it as well.  If you can appreciate a fine film which covers the spectrum of emotion, then you will enjoy “Rabbit Hole.”  “Rabbit Hole” opens in limited release on December 17, 2010.

Related article (SLIDESHOW):

http://www.examiner.com/museum-of-tv-and-radio-in-los-angeles/take-a-trip-down-the-rabbit-hole-with-nicole-kidman-and-aaron-eckhart

“Frankie and Alice” shares the amazing story of a woman with a mysterious condition

In the independent film “Frankie and Alice,” Halle Berry invites the audience on an unusual journey. In what turned out to be a 10 year struggle to bring the story of a woman with multi-personality disorder to screen, Berry’s tenacity made it a reality. In the film, piece by piece Berry introduces the audience to Frankie’s world – at a pivotal juncture just as Frankie discovers that she has been living in a fractured world; for, unbeknownst to her, she has been living with a condition known as disassociative identity disorder (DID). In lesser hands, this film would have been a darker story; but due to Berry’s passion, Frankie’s story is a beautiful portrayal of self-discovery and healing.

Set in 1973, the world simply does not recognize medical conditions as rare as Frankie’s.  Therefore, it is remarkable that she even encountered a doctor who could diagnose her condition, let alone one who willing to help her. By fate or remarkable coincidence, Frankie met Dr. Oz who ultimately helped her identify her different personalities and gain a measure of control over them.  The journey they faced together was at times funny, comical and astounding, and at others, sad and illuminating.  But the courage and determination that Frankie demonstrated revealed a strong woman who was bound to conquer her fears and live a full life.

Berry’s portrayal is mesmerizing.  She shifts between the multiple personalities with ease that is simply stunning.  She is a chameleon on screen.  Matching her ferocious  performance was co-star Stellan Skarsgard, playing the inquisitive Dr. Oz.  The pairing unexpectedly works seamlessly.  As Berry’s performance exceeds expectations with mercurial ease, Skarsgard’s performance charms with Dr. Oz’s awe at discovering such a fascinating woman. A platonic friendship forms and they tackle the mystery of Frankie’s multiple personalities.

“Frankie and Alice” is in turns a mystery, a journey of self-discovery and an unexpected friendship.  “Frankie and Alice” opens in limited release on December 17, 2010.

Related article:

http://www.examiner.com/museum-of-tv-and-radio-in-los-angeles/frankie-and-alice-is-the-amazing-story-of-a-woman-with-a-mysterious-condition

Deconstructing BONES: When Television Becomes Art-Worthy and Makes Us Want to Weep With Joy

In a recent episode of BONES entitled “The Doctor in the Photo” (written by Carla Kettner), one particular line stood out and resonated.  It was when Dr. Gadh quoted, “I will show you fear in a handful of dust” (which is a line from the famous T.S. Eliot poem: “The Waste Land: The Burial of the Dead”).  When Dr. Dadh explained, “We do not actually fear death — we fear that no one will notice our absence — that we will disappear without a trace,” it echoed just as loudly.

It is a rare and magnificent feat when television is written with this kind of literary intensity.  When it is, we pick up our ears in disbelief.  For suddenly, whatever we are watching is no longer just a television show, it has risen to the level of art.

Frequently there are scenes so emotionally portrayed that we are touched to our core by the actor’s performance or by the storyline so delicately laid-out.  But it is not always the words themselves that grab our attention.

So I challenge you, when was that last time that a specific line or phrase grabbed you by the throat and made you want to cry with joy?  If you are like most viewers, it is virtually impossible to conceive of any such language.  We may recall a funny line, or a great one-liner  — something used to zing or highlight the moment.  But to feel so overcome with the words that we think to ourselves, “that needs to be written down” or immortalized in some way so that the essence of what was said or written is memorialized.

It should not surprise me that the words that caught my attention were from one of the world’s most renowned poets.  But hearing them so surgically inserted into an episode of “Bones” was astounding.  When famous authors or poets are typically quoted throughout television, it feels done with little grace.  So special credit should be given to Ms. Kettner for the deft use of such famous words.  Not to mention, her own phrasing accompanying it was beautifully done.

Any writer can insert a quote in a script.  What elevated this particular use of such a famous quote was how apropos it was the episode for which it was used.  In “The Doctor In the Photo,” Dr. Temperance Brennan had over-identified with the victim, who had essentially died and no one noticed.  The theme struck a chord within all of us, as this too is our greatest fear.  To have lived a life un-loved, and without leaving our mark upon it, is terrifying.  It has been noted that rich and powerful men are more concerned about their legacy than keeping their wealth.  Money is fine, but you cannot take it with you when you die.  Thus, all that one will leave behind is our name – who we were and what we did in our lives.  Legacy, therefore, is of utmost importance.  Similarly, for most of us, our legacy is measured by whether we are loved in our lives.  Does someone love us enough to notice if we disappeared?

Ms. Kettner could have easily written this episode differently.  She could have elected to make the same points without the use of T.S Eliot’s words.  Yet the fact that she did elevated it.  It made the episode feel infused with electricity.  It zapped us and held our attention because she chose to use such poetic words – and the fact that she used them at such a specific point to give them maximum effect.  The entire episode was written as if it were painted on a canvas.  The foundation was laid with broad strokes and then the details carefully placed to draw attention as needed. But the crowning achievement of any great art is adding the one element that will draw the viewer’s attention.  Whether it is in visual art or hearing words from a television show, accentuating the key piece with such nuanced precision is what makes it exceptional.

These are the words and moments that we should remember.  So much of television is lost in the sands of time simply because there is so much of it.  It is elusive and continuous.  It is hard to highlight a rainbow, which vanishes within moments of being seen.  Yet, for this moment, I would ask that you remember how beautifully T.S. Eliot’s words were used in “Bones.”  If only more television writers aspired to create more moments of pure joy.  It is one thing to entertain for but a moment; it is another to be remembered for eternity.

Where to find this article:

http://www.thetvaddict.com/2010/12/16/deconstructing-bones-when-television-becomes-art-worthy-and-makes-us-want-to-weep-with-joy/#more-19832

Burning questions that remain from THE VAMPIRE DIARIES

As the CW presents a marathon of the season 2 episodes to date of THE VAMPIRE DIARIES, this seemed like the opportune time to reflect back on some lingering questions.

De-clawing Katherine: Did it help or hinder the story?

At the end of Season 1, when Katherine made her grand entrance back into Mystic Falls, viewers were floored. She brilliantly impersonated Elena, fooling Damon into confessing his love and kiss her, then getting Aunt Jenna to invite her into the Gilbert home so that Katherine could deftly remove John’s invincibility ring and stab him in the chest. All summer fans everywhere were thinking the same thing: what would Katherine do next? The breathless anticipation had everyone on the edge of their seats.

When the second season began, Katherine was as deadly and unpredictable as ever. She calmly killed Caroline — not realizing that Caroline had Damon’s blood in her system and would revive. Katherine also began a deadly game of cat and mouse with Stefan, which led to the big showdown at the masquerade.

Just speaking Katherine’s name sent shivers down our spines. Yet now that Katherine is entombed, she seems no more than an angry genie in a bottle. It would be so much more tantalizing to have her loose wrecking havoc on the world again. She knew exactly how to mess with Stefan and Damon and she terrified all those who she came across.

With Klaus circling from the outside, I say let’s level the playing field and allow Katherine to do what she does best — stir up trouble. It would give Klaus someone other than Elena to play with and it would remind everyone in Mystic Falls that Katherine is not someone to toy with.

Keeping Katherine safely tucked away in the tomb is like keeping Damon locked up. Just because someone has their own agenda and no morals does not mean that they are not riveting to watch. They also make things very interesting. The kids in Mystic Falls are getting way too complacent. Letting Katherine out would sharpen their reflexes and get everyone back on the edge of their seats. A good adrenaline rush can help prepare them all for the next battle looming — Klaus will undoubtedly strike soon.

Thus, I say: let’s get Katherine out of her cage and let the games begin!

In Memoriam: Mourning those who gave their lives in this gothic battle of good versus evil

The death toll on THE VAMPIRE DIARIES has been astounding. Nearly each episode someone dies — and not just faceless, background characters. Many of those who have died have been fan-favorites and accordingly deserve to be remembered for their sacrifice.

Looking back at the first season through the present, no less than 23 named characters gave up their lives. It began with the death of Mr. Tanner in the episode “Friday Night Bites” and ended with the death of Slater in “Katerina.” Special mention should be made of the humans and non-humans who gave their lives to fuel the high-octane pace of this energized series (in no particular order):

Mr. Tanner – school teacher, killed by Damon to demonstrate his lack of humanity to Stefan.

Zach Salvatore – Stefan and Damon’s “uncle,” killed by Damon in retaliation for working with the Town Council and supplying them with vervain.

Vicki Donovan – Jeremy’s girlfriend, newly turned-vampire, killed by Stefan when she attacked Elena and Jeremy.

Lexi – Stefan’s vampire friend, killed by Damon to demonstrate his loyalty to the Town Council.

Bree – vampire bar owner, killed by Damon for setting him up.

Logan – Jenna’s ex-boyfriend and wayward vampire, killed by Alaric as he tried to attack.

Sheila Bennett – Bonnie’s grandmother, died after opening the tomb at Damon’s command.

Ben – Anna’s vampire minion, killed by Stefan.

Noah – another one of Anna’s vampire minions, killed by Stefan.

Trudie Peterson – high school friend of Isobel, killed by man compelled by Isobel.

Frederick – evil tomb vampire, killed by Stefan after he kidnapped and tortured Stefan.

Amber – the Mystic Falls contestant who Stefan killed in his blood-lust.

Harper – friendly tomb vamp, killed by Uncle John.

Pearl – mysterious tomb vamp, killed by Uncle John.

Anna – Jeremy’s girlfriend vampire, killed in the Founder’s Day round-up fire after Uncle John staked her.

Mayor Lockwood – Tyler’s dad, possible werewolf, killed in the Founder’s Day round-up fire.

Carter – carnival worker killed by Caroline.

Aimee – girl killed by Katherine at masquerade.

Sarah – girl inadvertently killed by Tyler at masquerade.

Trevor – Rose’s vampire friend, killed by Elijah.

Slater – also vampire friend of Rose and killed by Elijah.

Mason Lockwood – Tyler’s uncle and closet-werewolf, killed by Damon.

In taking this short walk down memory lane, it is remarkable how rapidly these characters were introduced and just as quickly dispatched. Perhaps we did not cry over all these deaths, but some were more shocking and saddening than others. Some were around but for a single episode or two and gone before we could become attached to them; then there were others who we fell in love with and still mourn their loss.

Vicki was an out-of-control teenage girl who had the misfortune of crossing paths with Damon when he needed human blood. Damon attempted to assuage his guilty conscious by turning Vicki into a vampire, but all that accomplished was unleashing another blood-thirsty vampire on an unsuspecting Mystic Falls. Thus, when Stefan was ultimately forced to kill her to save Elena and Jeremy, Vicki’s death felt more of a relief.

The next major death was Sheila Bennett who gave her last ounce of remaining strength to protect Bonnie and aid Damon in his nefarious plan to open the tomb. She lived long enough to save Bonnie and return home, but her death left an indelible mark on Bonnie for which she has never quite recovered. It brought home the reality that witch-craft can literally suck the life right out of you and Bonnie is still testing the boundaries of her own mortality to see how much she can take without giving up her own life.

At the end of the first season, when Anna was caught in the Founder’s Day vampire round-up, it seemed ludicrous that the show would kill off the girl who had helped Jeremy overcome his grief over losing Vicki. Yet perhaps condemned to be the loneliest man in Mystic Falls, Jeremy’s second great love of his life also died — and Anna’s death was haunting. She died a useless death. She was not a threat to anyone and yet she was caught in a ruthless trap put into motion by Uncle John, aided by Bonnie who was still angry over her grandmother’s death.

Finally, there was Mason Lockwood. He was doomed from the start. The minute Katherine got him in her cross-hairs and made sure that the werewolf curse was invoked, it guaranteed that he would be her pet love-slave for as long as she needed him. Therefore, it was heart-breaking that Mason became the one way to strike back at Katherine. When Damon casually ripped out Mason’s heart, we were never sure if it was for revenge or merely to eliminate the one known werewolf threat. But our hearts broke yet again to lose another treasured life.

So many deaths. So many unnecessary lives lost. Yet life in Mystic Falls is all about survival. For Stefan and Damon, they will kill to protect those they care about and to stay alive. It is all they know.

The Sins of the Salvatores – How quickly we forget . . .

As fans of THE VAMPIRE DIARIES, we are programmed to believe that Stefan and Damon are the heroes of the show. We may not have always trusted or believed so well of Damon, but the more he grew to love Elena, the more humanity he demonstrated. He even aligned himself with his brother and they became the unwilling protectors of Mystic Falls.

Yet in the course of just over a year, we have conditioned ourselves to forget the various sins the Salvatore brothers have committed in order to protect their immortal lives. They have killed indiscriminately at times simply to feed or to demonstrate that they could. Have we truly forgotten how long Damon used Caroline as his chew-toy and that Stefan did little or nothing to stop it? Even after Stefan finally decided to lock Damon up for his own good, he did little to punish Damon for his indiscriminate, horrific actions.

The Salvatore brothers have a symbiotic bond that demands that they forgive each other for all their sins and live in a wary truce to accomplish their mutual goals. Stefan relies on Damon to protect Elena when he cannot and to use his mind-manipulation abilities when Stefan cannot (like, wiping Jeremy’s memory of Vicki’s death). Damon and Stefan instinctively know that they are destined to walk throughout history together and that they need each other. So they turn a blind-eye on whatever bad activities the other may employ to accomplish their goals.

Neither truly regrets their vampire life and the compulsion it places upon them. Stefan in his blood-lust killed Amber and yet all Damon did was lock Stefan up until he was back under control. It was the same technique that Stefan employed when he thought Damon needed a reminder that his actions were being watched.

They are constantly justifying their actions by telling themselves that it is okay to kill humans, other vampires and werewolves — so long as it keeps them safe and their friends safe. But what about all those unnamed “red shirt” people who they kill along the way? The ones that Damon kills when he is hungry. Or when Damon recklessly “turns” others? Damon turned both Isobel and Vicki for no better reason than he was either bored or because he was asked to. Astoundingly, he thoughtlessly inflicted two more narcissistic vampires on the unsuspecting world without a second thought.

Is either of the Salvatores truly seeking redemption for their sins, or are they merely hoping to forget the evil they have done in their lives?

Philanthropy: What good have vampires done with their eternal lives?

In a seemingly innocent throw-away line in “Rose,” Slater casually mentioned that he had obtained 18 degrees, 3 Master’s, and 4 PhD’s. He had said it to taunt Damon, who admittedly had none. Yet it seemed more like the “pot calling the kettle black” with that snarky comparison: Slater had all those degrees yet chose to run a coffee shop. It smacked of hypocrisy.

It then begged the question of: what exactly have vampires been doing with their eternal lives? They are virtually immune to death; they are stronger, faster and possess remarkable abilities. Yet why do none of the vampires portrayed in THE VAMPIRE DIARIES exhibit any desire to be philanthropic?

Surely Stefan with his desire to cling to his humanity would have found something more worthwhile to do with his time and energy in the past 140 years than simply skulk around and party with Lexi. Wouldn’t his conscience and desire to help others have driven him to employ his time and energy into creating something better for the planet he occupies? Why not start an orphanage for abandoned or lost children? How about building a company to eliminate world hunger? Surely something would have struck a nerve and provoked Stefan or some of the other vampires to do something useful with their lives.

As admirable as it is that some vampires choose to help the humans that they love or care for, it seems that they could be doing so much more with their lives. If they are or if they have, then let us see it. Otherwise, the vampires appear only to be living lives of professional leeches. They need to give back.

Who Is the True Protector of Elena’s Soul?

With the battle for Damon’s soul being such a big theme throughout the series, it is of interest whether Damon or Stefan is truly looking out for Elena’s soul. The topic is of much debate amongst fans. But looking back over the actions of the two Salvatore brothers, it seems that while Stefan is more preoccupied with protecting Elena from bodily harm, it is Damon who actually tries to protect her soul.

Stefan has not tried to change who he is for Elena, but has instead tried to hide who he is from her. Damon, on the other hand, has never attempted to hide who he is from Elena. But he has gone to great lengths to attempt to change who he is. He is trying to be a better man — a better vampire man.

Damon also knows that Elena cannot take on the weight of his true feelings for her, so in “Rose” he erased her memory after he told her how he felt about her. He knew he could not just erase all the bad things he has done from her memory for she would be angry that he got inside her head and manipulated her memories, but he also knew that she did not have to carry the burden of his love either.

It was a truly selfless act of love. Whereas Stefan constantly proves his love through physical actions, he rarely considers the emotional ramifications. To truly be an unconditional love, Stefan would have to make the same sacrifice that Damon has made — yet he cannot do it. Stefan acts out of selfishness in wanting to keep Elena in his life regardless of the peril it places her in.>

So while everyone is distracted by the need to keep Elena physically safe, it is more interesting to see who is more concerned with the protection of Elena’s soul. Which brother is willing to sacrifice the one thing he truly wants? Damon has proven time and time again, he will always do what is best for Elena. He places her first no matter what. And if that means keeping her from martyring herself to save others, or to ease her emotional burden, then he will do just that. Damon wants to take care of her heart, body and soul.

As THE VAMPIRE DIARIES continues, it will be fascinating to see how these questions are answered: Will Katherine escape her prison? Will the Salvatores seek redemption? Will we discover that vampires have philanthropic hearts after all? Will another contender arise to be Elena’s champion? And how many more lives will be lost in the process?

No matter what, each step of the way, we are riveted.

Where to find this article:

http://www.thetvaddict.com/2010/12/14/we-sink-our-teeth-into-the-vampire-diaries-and-reflect-on-burning-questions-we-need-answered/

Sharing a few of my favorite Christmas television memories . . .

The Christmas holiday season brings back so many good memories. The long hours spent in the kitchen baking yummy cookies and pies; sneaking presents in and hiding them throughout the house; carefully wrapping the presents to keep prying eyes from peeking; going back and forth to the grocery store for that one last magical ingredient; hearing Christmas music in every store and throughout the house for weeks on end; and even dashing from mall to mall, store to store trying to find the perfect gifts.

Christmas invokes memories of lots of love and laughter. It is the time that family comes from across the globe to enjoy a meal together and delight in the fun, obscure trinkets that everyone finds under the Christmas tree or in their stocking.

It is not a wonder that it is my favorite time of year. When asked to share some of my favorite television related memories, a few jumped right out. I cannot recall a holiday season as I was growing up where my entire family did not sit down and enjoy watching “The Wizard of Oz” and “The Sound of Music” together. These films invoke all the wonder and joy of life that we cherish and celebrate. To experience the fantastical journey as Dorothy finds herself in a colorful world with even more engaging characters populating a whole new world of wonder and delight in “The Wizard of Oz,” is to remind ourselves that there is a world of possibilities out there and amazing people to befriend and get to know. Dorothy did not selfishly seek to get back home, she opened her heart and helped others along the way. Her giving spirit is something we all should emulate. After all, Christmas is all about giving.

Then “The Sound of Music” is about family, new beginnings, and also opening your heart to the possibilities for which life presents us. Based on the true and heroic story of the Van Trapp family, their story inspires us to stand up for what we believe in, to pursue love no matter what the cost, and to embrace even the most unconventional family that we find ourselves thrown amidst. “The Sound of Music” shows us a beautiful story of courage, love and family. This too is what Christmas is about.

Finally, because in my family, “Doctor Who” holds a special place in our heart, another favorite Christmas past-time in recent years has been to sit down and watch the BBC “Doctor Who” special. Ever since 2005, Christmas Day has become a day spent enjoying the latest “Doctor Who” adventure. It is a special event and one that we find ourselves talking about and reflecting upon for many months afterwards. Starting with “The Christmas Invasion” in 2005 through this year’s “A Christmas Carol,” this is the biggest treat of the year. The “Doctor Who” holiday specials remind us that in this vast universe we live in, for better or worse, as long as we stand by each other and work together, we can make unexpected friends, keep peace on Earth and live better lives. It inspires us to do more for each other and make resolutions to be better people. It may be an unconventional way to spend Christmas Day, but it brings my family together and we enjoy every minute of it.

May you too be blessed with time with your family, sharing in the joys of the holiday season and reflecting on the good lives for which we have been blessed.  May you be inspired to live richer lives, befriend and help others, and one day perhaps we can have peace on Earth too.

Where to find this article:

http://nicegirlstv.com/2010/12/14/tv-related-holiday-memories/

Remembering a few of my favorite holiday specials . . .

Looking back over the years and remembering all the wonderful holiday specials that have been broadcast across the television screen, a few that hold special fondness for me are as follows:

While others may prefer the Dickens’ classic, “A Christmas Carol,” for me growing up, the story of “Dr. Seuss’ How The Grinch Stole Christmas,” resonated louder. To this day, it reminds us that even when others may try to steal Christmas from us, it is impossible, for Christmas is in the spirit, not just the decorations.

Another treasured holiday classic is “Frosty the Snowman.” The story of a girl who makes a snowman friend that comes to life still manages to charm us after all these years. It is a story of friendship, despite the odds — and no matter what the distance, that friendship will endure time and distance forced apart. It reminds us that every year at Christmas, we too will see our friends that we were perhaps not able to see the rest of the year.

Along the same vein is the holiday classic, “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer.” It is the story about a reindeer that was looked over and rejected time and time again because of his one physical difference. It was seen as a handicap and a reason to mock and tease him. But when the opportunity came, that very difference made Rudolf the one thing that the entire world needed for a very special purpose. “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” reminds us that no matter what our differences, we are all special and that we all have a purpose in this life. It may not be readily apparent, but one day, we too will be given the opportunity to shine.

If there is one ultimate image in television history that conveys the Christmas spirit, it perhaps is no better done than in “A Charlie Brown Christmas.” The stark image of a lonely, little Christmas tree that no one wanted or loved being chosen by Charlie Brown is a vivid reminder that none of us are unloved and unappreciated during the holidays. It just takes a special person to open their eyes and see our true value.

Then, while there has been many variations of the story over the years, my favorite version of “‘Twas the Night Before Christmas” is the story about a little mouse who wrote a spiteful letter to Santa Claus and very nearly caused Santa to skip their town that year until the little mouse had a change of heart. Similar to the Grinch story, this one little mouse was letting his negative feelings towards a holiday he did not want to believe in try to push his feelings onto others. Yet, no matter how we each may feel about a holiday, it is ultimately wrong to deny others the fun of enjoying a holiday.

Last, but not least, Tim Burton’s “The Nightmare Before Christmas” also brings a fun story into the Christmas holiday lore. While the Grinch may have wanted to steal Christmas and prevent it, in Jack Skelliton’s case, he wanted to be Santa Claus. Given how cool Christmas is and how Santa Claus does have perhaps the coolest job on the planet, it is understandable. Who amongst us does not wish we could be Santa Claus for a day? It would be a dream job to make children’s wishes come true.

These are but just a few of the magnificent holiday specials that air each Christmas season. Make sure you take the time to share in the joy and memories that each brings into our lives.

Where to find this article:

http://nicegirlstv.com/2010/11/30/tiffanys-favorite-holiday-specials/