I Would Rather Be Watching Babylon 5

The last few years I have been putting up a post shortly before the Fall season in which I ponder whether I want to invest my time in the many (many, many) new and returning sci fi / fantasy shows on the upcoming schedule or if I would rather revisit a classic sci fi TV show like Babylon 5 (you can see last year's post at this link). Well this year, I am writing the post early because I have already answered my question: I would rather be watching Babylon 5. Despite the fact that the Too-Much-TV era has given us heading helping of viewing options--and some really good ones at that like Game of Thrones, The Expanse, Daredevil, The Man in the high Castle and more--I find myself increasingly disenchanted with the glut of genre shows across the TV channels and streaming services (you can get a glimpse of that at this link) and with the networks offering them. And rather than invest myself in these many shows that often fail to rise above mediocrity and/or that the networks have little commitment to, I would just prefer to go back and re-watch B5. I’ve seen the show all the way through once, and most of Seasons 1 through 4 twice, and that is a show that stands up to multiple viewings. I loved it the first time around (witch I watched live as it aired in the pre-DVR era) and I know that the re-watch will deliver a return on the time invested. As for many of the new and returning shows? Not so much. And here are four of the primary reasons why:

1. The current glut of original programming: New shows are getting cranked out in what is commonly referred to as the Peak TV era, but how invested are these networks in these offerings? Their spaghetti-against-the-wall strategy in an attempt to score the next Game of Thrones or Walking Dead or Empire has emphasized how many of these are little more than corporate products with a primary mission to grab viewers, not deliver good television. Think about all the shows from just the last few years that have been mediocre to downright bad or that may have shown promise when they started but failed to live up to that. Just a few examples include Falling Skies, Defiance, Under the Dome, Extant, Damien, Beowulf, Minority Report, Heroes Reborn, Revolution. I could go on and on. Then think of the promising shows that were quickly squashed because they didn’t grab an immediate audience based on the overnight ratings (and yes, the networks do still watch those closely): Siberia, Constantine, Limitless, Forever, Almost Human, Dracula, Cult, Witches of East End, and more. The quality we are getting these days amongst the many genre offerings is often mediocre at best and when we do get good shows they are not give much chance. Of course that’s not a new trend, the scale has just been enlarged. But it proves that not much has changed other than the number of shows hitting the schedule each year.

2. Even the shows that stick around are not that good: We’ve had a lot of one or two season and out shows, but several have managed to make it past the three season mark. Unfortunately, many of these just haven’t been worth sticking with. Shows like Agents of SHIELD, Arrow, The Flash, Once Upon A Time, and more got off to good starts but could not sustain momentum. I gave up on both the ABC shows mentioned above by their second seasons and The CW entries have become such copy-and-paste affairs that I have a hard time sitting through them any more (and they completely squandered the promising Legends of Tomorrow premise). I made a decision a couple of seasons ago to drop shows that I was hate-watching, and most of the ones that have been around for several seasons have moved into that category for me. Even one of my favorites, Person of Interest, disappointed a bit with its final season, but I still consider it a stand out show.

3. The networks are still not listening to the viewers: Despite all of the technological advancements and the ability to measure engagement on the social networks and other platforms, the broadcast networks and--to a lesser extent--cable channels continue to remain old school when gauging the success of their product. Shows like Constantine, Agent Carter, Limitless, and Witches of East End have proven to have a very engaged audience and it seems like these are the ones the networks should be holding on to. As far back as the original Star Trek, audience engagement (then demonstrated by letters written to the network) has proven a good indicator of long-term success. But despite the fact that nearly instant information is available now beyond the Nielsen ratings to measure the audience, the networks have shown little interest. Instead, they drop the shows that fail to pull in decent overnight numbers and move to the next entry in the pipeline. I have reached out to the networks multiple times and asked them to tell the viewers how they can work together in the current environment to keep well-liked shows going, but have had no notable response. Massive social network campaigns have been mounted to save shows, but with no success. The audience has proved it is there, but the networks still want those Nielsen numbers. This has become much less of a factor with cable shows as we have seen low-rated shows (according to Nielsen) like The Expanse, 12 Monkeys, The Shannara Chronicles, Scream, and more escape cancellation. But the broadcast networks are definitely still living in the past.

4. AMC turned hostile against fans of The Walking Dead: Everything that I mentioned above has been going on for several years now, but point number four is the tipping point for me. The Walking Dead has been my favorite show on television (at least until the unbelievable Season 6 Game of Thrones just delivered), but the events of its last season soured me on the show and television in general. The manipulative story-telling tricks TWD pulled (which I go into in more detail at this link) were completely unnecessary for the highest rated scripted show on television. But even worse, after leaving fans hanging with a finale that delivered a very unsatisfying ending to an already marred season, the network took a hostile stance against fans trying to predict the outcome of that episode (and I have some very harsh words about that at this link). AMC invited the speculation and then lashed out at the fans that tried to fill in the blanks during the long wait for the show’s seventh season return (and I offer my prediction, lawyers be damned, at this link). I am expecting some backlash from the viewers on that as well as all of the misguided decisions from this past season. And even though this show has been my favorite, I’ve decided to take a break from it this year.

Instead of The Walking Dead, I will be watching Babylon 5. And I plan on watching it on Sunday nights, especially when TWD (and Fear the Walking Dead) will be airing new episodes as part of my protest against that network and the current television environment in general. I know that I will enjoy B5 and I know that I will get something from the re-watch. As for all the current offerings on television? That’s a crap shoot. Sure, I will tune in for some shows. I will check out HBO’s Westworld. I will watch the second season of The Expanse and probably The Magicians as well. The Man in the High Castle is a must-watch (though I’m a bit worried about the departure of Frank Spotnitz as showrunner). And there are a few others I will tune in for as well (can Legends of Tomorrow redeem itself in its second season?). But the Babylon 5 re-watch is on and I’m definitely pumped for that. The Too-Much-TV era may be verging on giving us 100+ sci fi / fantasy shows throughout the year, but I am burnt out on what it has to offer. Time to go back to the classics and enjoy watching sci fi TV once again.

You can follow my Babylon 5 Re-Watch posts at this link.

SPOILER ALERT!!! Here's Who Died at the End of the Walking Dead Season 6 Finale

WARNING!!! SPOILERS FROM THE WALKING DEAD SEASON 6 FINALE AND POSSIBLY THE SEASON 7 PREMIERE PLUS THE COMICS AND THE REST OF THE SERIES.!!!

You have been warned . . .

So The Walking Dead left us hanging on a huge cliffhanger at the end of the Season 6 finale. The show gave us the long anticipated introduction to comic book villain Negan and he bashed in the head of one of the major characters with his barbed-wire-wrapped bat Lucille. But then we don't know who it was because of the point of view shot they used and the fade out as the episode ended, leaving viewers hanging until October to see which one of their favorite characters died. I've already discussed in detail (at this link) how this sort of manipulative ploy to keep viewers on the hook for seven months is completely unnecessary for the most-watched show on television and actually denigrates what has been a high quality television entry throughout its six seasons (though it slipped some this past year).

Of course the cliffhanger launched endless speculation across the web on who died with people picking apart those last few minutes to find any possible clues. And that led to AMC becoming spoiler-Nazis and going so far as to threaten legal action against sites like The Spoiling Dead claiming copyright infringement. I have some very harsh words about AMC's ill-advised stance at this link.

And that has led me to this point where I am going to throw out my predictions on who I believe was at the wrong end of Negan's bat. Now before I proceed, I just want to say that personally I hate this sort of crap. Picking apart episodes to find spoilers is just a waste of time and there are plenty of better things to do with your hours in the day (like tying to stay caught up with the massive number of sci fi / fantasy shows currently on television). At my Twitter site, I rarely pass along spoiler-filled headlines, and those annoy the crap out of me if I have an episode waiting for me on my DVR and I'm trying to maneuver through the Twitter-verse. But AMC has pissed me off so bad with their hostile stance toward fans, especially after they are the ones who set up the situation in the first place that has so many people speculating (that ending has network-exec-tinkering written all over it).

So spoil I am going to do, because I have a pretty good idea who was Negan's victim.

Now I should point out that I have no inside information and I haven't seen any leaked scripts and I'm not looking at the pictures from the Season 7 production or anything like that. I base my predictions mostly on an analysis of the final sixth season episode along with the trends we have typically seen on the show and from television in general. So if AMC wants to come at me with their lawyers for offering a critical analysis with predictions in a country that supposedly believes in free speech, I'm right here.

Note that I do not have any spoilers in the title of this post and that only those people who freely choose to read past all this rambling will learn my predictions. But one last time in case you missed the multiple instances above: WARNING. SPOILERS. AHEAD!!!!!!

So let's do this as a process of elimination:

Rick is not the one who died. He is the main character in the show and he is still alive in the comics.  Plus. the finale sets up a whole story arc where he must face the consequences of his arrogance, i.e.  thinking he and his people can take on anyone and anything in their zombie-pocalypse world. Also, Negan said that he wouldn't kill Rick.

Daryl is safe too. He's the breakout star of the show, even though he was criminally under-utilized this last season. The fans would also absolutely revolt if Daryl was the one to die, so there's almost no chance the show would go there. But there is one contingent to that. Daryl could be the one to die if Norman Reedus wants off the show. But despite his lack of screen time, I don't believe that is the case. He has opened a restaurant and bought a house in the Georgia area where the show is filmed, so he has settled there for now. And I don't think his restaurant or his bike show are cutting into his time too much. So unless they have completely kept under wraps a desire by Reedus to leave the show that made him internationally famous, I consider him safe.

Next, I'm eliminating all the women from contention. It's a pretty brutal death that the character suffers and I don't think AMC wants to deal with a violence against women controversy. I could be wrong about that, but I just don't see them chancing that. Carl as well, because that invites violence against children claims (though admittedly Carol did execute Lizzie back in Season 4). Plus, Negan's comment about if anybody does anything cut the boy's other eye out and feed it to the dad.

So that leaves us with four possibilities: Aaron, Eugene, Glen, and Abraham. I'm going to toss Aaron out first because he's not a major enough character and that would be far too anti-climactic after seven month's wait (plus, it invites more bury-your-gays controversy). So consider him safe.

Next is Eugene and the episode surely seemed to telegraph that he was destined to meet Lucille up close. There was the (almost too) long goodbye between him and Abraham where they also buried the hatchet on their past issues. There was the scene with him giving the recipe for bullets to Rick upon the assumption that he would not survive the ordeal. And there was his sacrifice of going off in the RV alone as a diversion so that the others could sneak away from the Saviors. But . . . all that was so telegraphed that I think it was used as a diversion from the real victim. Eugene was made to seem like the obvious choice, so I'm betting its not him.

Which leads me to my top pick . . . good ol' Abraham. And here's the case for him being the person who went one-on-one with Lucile: First, he's a pretty tough cookie and Negan made a comment about the person taking the initial hit "like a champ". Two, he's already dead in the comics. He's the one who took the arrow through the eye instead of Denise. Three, Abraham had a pretty defiant stare-down with Negan during that final scene that may have brought him undue attention. Four, and most important, the scene where he and Sasha talked about having a baby. Nobody gets to be happy in The Walking Dead and future plans are almost always a death knell in this show (go back through all the episodes and you will see the trend). This is actually a common trope through many television shows as well. Characters start to make future plans, or they finally hook up after a long time and then one dies shortly thereafter (which means that if I'm wrong about my assumption on the women above, Sasha could be the target).

But then there is one other character still in the running and that one ties to the point-of-view scenes we saw throughout the final episode. There were several quick POV shots from inside the trailer holding the people Dwight had captured, and a theory going around the internet suggests one of that group met their demise because Negan's final attack was also at the POV angle. Among the people I have narrowed it down to, that leaves only Glen. But would they really go there? After the much reviled faux-death earlier this season and teasing his death several other times over the course of the show? He is the one who gets bashed in by Lucille in the comics, so its possible. And his previous non-death could have been trying to throw us off from his ultimate fate. So he could be the one who died, though I believe fans would consider that a very unsatisfying resolution considering the all the baggage the show has around his character.

That keeps my top choice as Abraham, but Glen is a close second. And Eugene is a distant third. But I do strongly believe it is one of those three. Not because I have any inside information, mind you, but based on my critical analysis of the episode along with what I know about the comics (I have not read that far, though, I have just heard the spoilers). I could be completely off-base here, and Negan's victim could be a character I haven't even considered. But I feel pretty confident it is one of those three and would put the most money on Abraham.  (Does Vegas have a line on this one?)

I won't be watching the Season 7 premiere, though, because I have decided to boycott the show (which used to be my favorite) this coming year and start my re-watch of Babylon 5. AMC's actions against their viewers after stringing them along and providing an unsatisfying ending to the Season 6 finale are just inexcusable. I will watch all of the seventh season at some point, though. It's still a great show, despite the ill-advised network tinkering, and I will want to get caught up. But I will likely wait until it comes out on DVD and then buy a used copy just to make sure AMC doesn't get any of my money. And I'll be watching the spoilers from the Season 7 premiere to find out if my predictions were right, because I'm not a spoiler-phobe.

We'll revisit at that time and see if I called it, but in the meantime you have my predictions to chew on and feel free to offer your own. But be warned: the big bad corporate monster AMC may come after you if you speak your mind and try to make a guess on how that ill-conceived cliffhanger from Season 6 turns out.  And if you want to see how to do a season finale right, go watch Game of Thrones, especially all of Season 6.  AMC, that's you I'm talking to.

AMC Needs to Back Off from its Irresponsible and Misguided Walking Dead Anti-Spoiler Crusade

AMC, the cable network that airs the most-watched scripted show on television The Walking Dead, has flexed its muscles against fans this week when they threatened legal action against any websites posting spoilers on which character was killed in the Season 6 finale. Their primary target is The Spoiling Dead which has a particular history of making accurate predictions, but AMC indicated that anybody posting spoilers could face litigation, claiming copyright infringement. TSD has backed down from the television juggernaut, but not because they believe they are wrong. They claimed that they would refrain from releasing any spoilers simply because they could not afford the legal costs involved with defending their position.

Now while I understand that AMC is irritated by the many TWD spoilers regularly appearing across the internet (they annoy me too if I haven’t seen the latest episode yet), their hostile stance toward the fans is nothing more than corporate bullying and poor judgement on their part. The cabler would have a case if someone had leaked a whole or partial script from the show or revealed other inside information. But they are threatening sites that are making predictions on who died in the final scene from the show’s sixth season.

Let’s not forget that the network created this situation to begin with. The last episode to air introduced the antagonist Negan who killed off a major character when he first appeared in the comics (trying not to reveal too many spoilers from either the show or the comics here, though). But instead of letting the episode end with us finding out who met their demise, we were left hanging until October for the resolution of that final scene. And it was a pretty major cliffhanger seeing as the majority of the show’s main characters were present and any of them could have been the one to die. It was purely a manipulative move (and likely ordered by network execs) for a show that doesn’t need it because it is known for telling compelling and engaging tales without stooping to such cheap contrivances (I go into that in more detail at this link).

Guess what, AMC? People are going to speculate when you leave an episode hanging on the imminent demise of one of their favorite characters. That’s what they do! Especially after such an unsatisfying ending to an already controversial season (due to other, similar missteps). People are going to try and fill in the blanks to tide them over because the ending strung them along. And then to threaten them with legal action for making guesses? That’s an inexcusable and irresponsible stance from a corporate entity that knows they can get away with it only because they have the deep pockets to press and sustain legal action.

Just how arrogant has AMC become now that they have the top show on television? Have they forgotten how fickle the audience can be and how quickly a hit can spiral to a bottom-feeder in the world of television? Have they forgotten that they already tempted fate by kicking original executive producer Frank Darabont to the curb and then dropping the show’s budget and increasing its episode order for its second season? That could have easily destroyed the show, but apparently the steady guidance from Robert Kirkman as well as the stellar cast and the strength of the source material helped them dodge that potentially disastrous move (though Season 2 is widely considered the show’s weakest). Have they not heard all of the hate directed at the show this past season for its other misfires that came before the season finale?

And now AMC is going to take a hostile stance with fans for speculating on which character dies? Attorney Mitch Stoltz with the Electronic Frontier Foundation has said that “copyright probably doesn't cover revealing a single fictional detail about a show. And copyright doesn't apply to facts that are discovered without having access to the creative work.” And I’m sure AMC wouldn’t have a legal leg to stand on. But as the people running The Spoiling Dead have said, trying to fight Goliath in this case will have too high of a cost.

If AMC wants to throw away money filming eleven different death scenes, that’s their business. If they want to go after people for illegally obtaining and distributing scripts and/or other inside information, they have a right to do so. If they want to respectfully ask that fans refrain from posting spoilers in the immediate public view (i.e., article titles), they might have received some cooperation.  But if they start taking legal action against fans for speculating on how a poorly placed cliffhanger plays out, I believe the backlash will come quick and hard. I’m already seeing a fair amount of hate directed at The Walking Dead from the fan community, and that could spread like wildfire if the network persists with its boorish, anti-spoiler crusade.

It’s time for AMC to BACK OFF on this issue and let people speculate away as they are want to do. That’s not violating any copyrights. If the fans want to take their best guess on who was Negan’s victim (which is not that hard to narrow down as I will go into with an upcoming post), the network needs to just let them do so and get back to minding their own store.

The Walking Dead Needs to Discard the Stunts and Stay Focused on the First-Rate Drama it is Known For

The Walking Dead has been taking quite a drubbing in its sixth season, especially after its finale on Sunday, and in all fairness it has brought some of that on itself.  But don't get too caught up in the anti-TWD hype getting whipped up by the naysayers because, despite some stumbles, this show continues to deliver first-rate, challenging drama in a post-apocalyptic setting.  Needless to say, be warned before proceeding as plenty of spoilers from this season (and the comics) will follow below.

For those who may not be up to speed, this season has teased the introduction of the big bad Negan from the comics and it has been a slow build up to his first appearance in the season finale.  And in the comics, he kills off a major character by brutally beating them with his barbed-wire wrapped baseball bat which he has named Lucille.  The TV series follows that relatively closely, but we are given a first person view of the attack followed by a fade to black which means that we will not find out the identity of Negan's victim until the show returns in October (though dedicated fans have already started scouring for clues).  The decision to leave the audience hanging has enraged many fans (myself included), made worse by the fact that the show teased the death of Glen earlier in the year only to reveal that he miraculously escaped from a hoard of zombies that had him trapped in an alley (and not to pile on, but the later killing of a gay character seemed unnecessary as well).

As to these stunts, I will flat out say that they represent poor choices on the part of the producers and the creative team.  Making us think that Glen had perished and then dragging out the reveal for several weeks was just a malicious trolling of the audience that added nothing to the dramatic structure of the show.  The cliffhanger ending for the finale was even worse because it detracted from the dramatic intensity of the final scene.  As the most-watched (by far) scripted show on television, TWD does not need to bait its audience to come back for the next season, and many seem to have taken that ending as more of a back-slap than anything else.  How much more dramatic would it have been if we knew who met their demise at the end of Negan's bat and the season ended with a demoralized Rick being forced to lead the Saviors into to Alexandria to plunder it as they wished?  Instead, the tease of a major character death with no resolution just left too many of us feeling cheated and angry after the episode ended.

I put the blame on showrunner Scott Gimple for these unnecessary tricks, though I wouldn't be surprised if an AMC executive wasn't whispering in his ear (or reminding him who signs the paychecks) because that sort of manipulative TV seems like the type of thing that would spring from a boardroom rather than the mind of a writer.  But trolling like this is just not necessary for the most popular show on television.  It needs to stick to the good drama it has been delivering for years because that's where it excels.  And many of the people currently slamming the show across the net the last few days have actually forgotten about that.

One of the most common complaints I have heard directed toward The Walking Dead of late is that the buildup to the introduction of Negan was far too slow.  But then those people read ahead and knew what was coming based on events in the comics and became impatient waiting for the introduction of the villain.  Well, if you skip ahead several chapters, don't go complaining about the story you have to read back through to catch up.  It is true that the sixth season of TWD was slow at times, but I rarely felt like it dragged.

Think of all the important moments that were covered in this season: The Alexandrians realizing just how unprepared they were for a violent world that was ready to beat down their doors.  Daryl's encounter with Dwight in which he later regretted helping him.  The Morgan flashback that revealed how he came back from the edge.  The introduction of another community like Alexandria, Hilltop.  Carol's breakdown as she pays the price for her cold-blooded behavior.  Rick's arrogance about his people's ability to deal with the Saviors and the near lack of strategy used in the preemptive attack, which ultimately puts them at Negan's mercy.  And those are only some of the highlights, with plenty of good story linking them altogether.

Could that all have been fit into less than sixteen episodes?  Possibly.  But this is a television series, and the sixteen episode count is what AMC wants out of the deal to make it worth their while.  It's less than the twenty two that the networks demand (and there is plenty of padding amongst those shows) and more than the ten to thirteen eps that cable nets typically ask for (which I think allows TWD more opportunities for story development ).  Did the season finale really need to be ninety minutes?  Maybe not, but it sure raced by pretty quick for me.  I was on the edge of my seat the entire episode and only became irritated with the show when it left us hanging at the very end.

But we need to remember that The Walking Dead is still delivering first-rate drama rife with moral quandaries and engaging stories as opposed to the copy and paste retreads we find too often on television.  It has done that quite well for six seasons now, and even though it has slipped from time to time, I'll take its worst episodes any day over more than half of what television has to offer of late.  But at the same time, the creative team and the network need to remember that the quality of the show is what has kept it on top, not the stunts like unnecessary cliffhangers and fake-out deaths (or pointless real deaths) of major characters.  That sort of thing is actually an insult to the audience that has supported the show throughout the years.  TWD needs to keep its focus on the challenging story-telling it does so well and leave the manipulative TV tricks to the lesser fare that airs on the broadcast nets and some of the cable channels.  If not, its audience will certainly start to dwindle in the ever-fractured television viewing landscape.

Would I Rather Be Watching Babylon 5? Fall 2015 Season Edition

Each year about this time I ponder whether I want to tune in for the new and returning Fall sci fi / fantasy shows or if I would rather just go back and re-watch a classic sci fi series like Babylon 5 (one of my all-time favorites).  I love re-watching classic shows and B5 is a sci fi epic that just begs to be watched multiple times.  Of course, there are plenty of current genre offerings on television these days, in fact so many that it would be quite a task to keep up with them all.  On our Fall 2015 Schedule (which you can see at this link), there are 37 shows scheduled to air between now and December!  37!  That's practically a full time job just to keep up with all of those each week (I know that they are not all airing concurrently, but work with me here).  But how many of these are really worth watching?  I'm definitely looking forward to the return The Walking Dead as well as my guilty pleasure show The Librarians and The Originals.  Among the new entries Minority Report looks interesting as does Into the Badlands, Ash vs. the Evil Dead, The Expanse, and a few others.  And of course I have to check out the Heroes revival.  But while I enjoyed shows like Arrow and The Flash last season, I didn't find myself tuning in every week for them (though I am pumped for mid-season superhero-fest Legends of Tomorrow).  And I gave up on shows like Agents of SHIELD, The Leftovers, and The Last Man on Earth because they lost my interest.  I have to wonder at this point how many of the Fall entries will go that way as well.

Interestingly enough, the series that I have enjoyed watching the most this past year is not a genre entry at all.  A friend of mine kept badgering me to watch Breaking Bad and I finally gave in and started binge-watching the seasons (I'm down to the last eight episodes and prepared for a wild finale).  That is one hell of a good show and I highly recommend it.  I would put it in my all-time Top 10 (maybe even Top 5) favorite television shows.  And I found much more enjoyment watching that one than many of the current sci fi / fantasy shows like Grimm, Gotham, or Continuum.  And the show I enjoyed watching the most the Summer a year ago was 2003's Carnivale which I revisited on Amazon streaming (one of several HBO shows included with Prime Membership and I go into more detail on it at this link).  So as I think about how to invest my television watching time over the next few months, do I want to spend it on the current crop of shows or would I find more enjoyment going back to B5, Farscape, or Battlestar: Galactica (minus the finale)?  Or should I check into another of the recent, non-genre breakouts like Sons of Anarchy or House of Cards?

The fact is that there is a lot of sci fi on television these days and a lot of original scripted programming in general.  But how much of it is really good and worth investing my time?  I think of the number of shows that I watched or started watching and gave up on over the past few years because they just weren't any good (or started good then took a turn for the worse):  FastForward, The Event, Terra Nova, The River, Falling Skies, Under the Dome, Once Upon A Time, Agents of SHIELD, Sleepy Hollow, Defiance, Extant, etc., etc., etc.  That's a lot of time that I invested in those shows, with nothing much to show for it.

And among the many sci fi / fantasy shows from the past few years, how many will eventually be counted as classics?  Surely The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones.  Maybe Person of Interest if it ends strong.  Beyond that?  Daredevil shows a lot of promise and The Last Ship is solid enough.  Arrow and The Flash have their moments.  Dark Matter and Killjoys have been fun, but I wouldn't call them great shows.  Beyond that, they all start to bleed together for me as one copies from another and others copy from all.  We have a state of sci fi mediocrity on television with far too much quantity and far too little attention to quality.

Meanwhile, I've really been wanting to go back and do a five season binge-watch of Babylon 5 (throwing in the movies and Crusade as well).  And I'd like to do the same with Lost.  Plus, I tuned out of Star Trek: DS9 during its fourth season which is when I understand it really hit its stride.  I'd like to go back and catch up on that one.  And there are plenty of other classic sci fi shows worth working into binge-watch weekends and the streaming services make that really easy these days.

So should I watch all the Fall sci fi / fantasy entries which have started debuting this week, or would I rather be watching Babylon 5?

For those interested, you can read my 2014 edition of Would I Rather Be Watching Babylon 5 at this link and my 2013 edition at this link.

Buy Babylon 5 on DVD from Amazon.com:

Television Review: The Whispers

Rating: 2 ½ out of 5 Stars  (after 3 episodes)

Bottom Line: It's not a bad show, but it is less than engaging as it fails to take advantage of its creepy premise.

ABC's new Summer series The Whispers is based on / "inspired by" Ray Bradbury's short story "Zero Hour" and follows a silent invasion of Earth where some unseen entity is using children to do its bidding.  Impressionable children under the age of ten are selected and contacted by someone know as Drill.  He communicates with them through lights and other electrical instruments and gives them instructions that often lead to malicious acts.  There is also a mysterious person who keeps showing up in the vicinity of these kids (we find out eventually that he is pilot Sean Bennigan who's plane went missing several months earlier), and he becomes linked to the crimes that the children are committing.

The premise for this series is somewhat interesting and it has some potential to develop into a decent sci fi entry, but I have to admit that after three episodes my attention has quickly waned because of the show's rather unengaging, by-the-numbers delivery.  The premise has a definite creepiness about it and we have seen it developed rather well in other attempts such as The Children of the Corn (the first movie), Torchwood: The Children of Earth and even the Ray Bradbury Theater adaptation of "Zero Hour" (which you can watch on YouTube at this link).  But The Whispers lacks any vision to play up the horror elements at its core, or it was sufficiently scrubbed of that vision by network executives looking to appeal to the broadest audience.  Instead, it takes the procedural angle (with plenty of soap-opera assides thrown in) and it focuses on the adults trying to figure out what is going on with the kids.  And it also piles mystery upon mystery (and throws in the all-too-tired flashbacks) instead getting down to telling a story, as has become the norm with broadcast network sci fi entries in their ongoing attempt to find the next Lost.

I don't consider The Whispers a bad series, it has just failed to engage me thus far and I'm not certain how much more time (if any) I will give it.  It has a decent cast (and its nice to series Heroes alum Milo Ventimiglia back on a sci fi show, even if he does walk around with a perennial wtf look on his face), and the production values are good.  But it just seems to waste the potential of its premise by pushing the genre element to the background behind procedural and soap opera storylines (I am reminded of FlashForward, Alcatraz, No Ordinary Family, and other broadcast networks entries that similarly buried their genre elements).  And with so many options out there for original sci fi and fantasy (you can see a list of over 60 active/returning/upcoming shows at this link), is it worth investing the time in something like The Whispers that seems to be skirting around giving us the good sci fi we are looking for?

I may end up giving this one a few more episodes (and I admit that Wayward Pines finally has me hooked after it meandered about for for half its season), or it may end up just getting lost in the shuffle.

Looking at the New Summer Sci Fi / Fantasy Entries: Humans and Fear the Walking Dead Should be Winners, Killjoys Could be Good Shoot-Em-Up Fun

As of the current count, I see
eleven new sci fi / fantasy shows set to debut in the months of June through July (and that's tacking on Golan the Insatiable because it's right on the cusp with its May 31st premiere).  That's quite a lot considering the hot months also have (at current count) over a dozen returning shows (you can see the full schedule at this link).  So which ones are worth watching?  Hard to say, especially for some of the new entries, but below is my guide to each of those.  I have included the official synopsis for each with my comments beneath the entries.  They are listed in order of their premiere dates (links are to the show's page on this site):

Golan the Insatiable (FOX, Debuted May 31st): Golan is the dark lord or an alternate universe, that comes to our world and is befriended by a little goth girl and her family and buffoonery ensue as he deals with everyday life. IMDb.com

Johnny Jay Says: I never caught this one when it ran on FOX's Animation Domination, and I haven't seen the premiere yet (but it's in my queue).  Looks like it might be worth giving a look for some Summer chuckles, though.

The Whispers (ABC, Debuts June 1st):  We love to play games with our children. But what happens when someone else starts to play with them too? Someone we don’t know. Can’t see. Can’t hear. In The Whispers, someone or something — is manipulating the ones we love most to accomplish the unthinkable.  ABC.com

Johnny Jay Says: This is based on the Ray Bradbury short story "Zero Hour" which definitely has me intrigued.  But it was originally scheduled to bow at mid-season before getting pushed to a Summer run which has me worried that it may be starting off DOA just like The CW's The Messengers.  I'm still going to give it a look.

Stitchers (ABC Family, Debuts June 2nd):  Follows Kirsten, a young woman recruited into a covert government agency to be ‘stitched’ into the minds of the recently deceased, using their memories to investigate murders and decipher mysteries that otherwise would have gone to the grave. Working alongside Kirsten is Cameron, a brilliant neuroscientist whose passion for the program is evident in his work. The secret program is headed by Maggie, a skilled veteran of covert operations, and includes Linus, a socially immature bioelectrical engineer and communications technician. Kirsten’s roommate, Camille, a gifted computer science grad student, is also recruited to use her skills to assist Kirsten in her new role as a ‘stitcher.’ ABCFamily.com

Johnny Jay Says: Yet another series about someone who talks to/communicates with/sees through the eyes of/channels dead people and uses the information to solve crimes.  This one has received almost no promotion (I just stumbled on its existence today), which is not necessarily a good sign.  I know I will be passing on it.

Sense8 (Netlfix, Debuts June 5th): One gunshot, one death, one moment out of time that irrevocably links eight minds in disparate parts of the world, putting them in each other’s lives, each other’s secrets, and in terrible danger. Ordinary people suddenly reborn as “Sensates.” Netflix

Johnny Jay Says: Will we get the good Wachowskis (Matrix) or the bad Wachowskis (Jupiter Ascending)?  And will J. Michael Straczynski be able to temper their excesses?  The early reviews have not been great on this one, but if JMS is involved then I have to check it out.

Dark Matter (Syfy, Debuts June 12th):  In Dark Matter, the crew of a derelict spaceship is awakened from stasis with no memories of who they are or how they got on board. Facing threats at every turn, they have to work together to survive a voyage charged with vengeance, betrayal and hidden secrets.  Syfy.com

Johnny Jay Says: The first of two Syfy Summer space-based shows (the other being Killjoys) and some high expectations are coming with this one.  It was created by Stargate vets Joseph Mallozzi and Paul Mullie and is based on their comic book series of the same name.  The network is hoping this can become one of their next flagship franchises, so the pressure is on.  I will definitely be tuning in.

Proof (TNT, Debuts June 16th):  Jennifer Beals plays Dr. Carolyn Tyler, who has suffered the recent, devastating loss of her teenage son, the breakup of her marriage and a growing estrangement from her daughter. Carolyn is persuaded by Ivan Turing (Modine), a cancer-stricken tech inventor and billionaire to investigate cases of reincarnation, near-death experiences, hauntings and other phenomena, all of it in the search for evidence that death is not the end. TNTDrama

Johnny Jay Says:  This series may only have minimal genre elements but still may be of interest to those who have tuned into supernatural dramas like Ghost Whisperer and Medium. It does have the added bonus of having Eureka‘s Joe Morton (an all-time favorite actor of mine) onboard in a supporting role, but I can't say this will be high on my Summer viewing list.

Killjoys (Syfy, Debuts June 19th):  Killjoys follows a fun-loving, hard living trio of interplanetary bounty hunters sworn to remain impartial as they chase deadly warrants throughout the Quad, a distant system on the brink of a bloody, multiplanetary class war.  Syfy.com

Johnny Jay Says:  The second of Syfy's space-based Summer entries (the other being Dark Matter), this looks like it could be just good shoot-em-up fun.  It might pair up well with TNT's GI-Joe-saves-the-world series The Last Ship.

Humans (AMC, Debuts June 28th):  A bold new eight-part drama series from AMC, Channel 4 and Kudos, is set in a parallel present where the latest must-have gadget for any busy family is a ‘Synth’ – a highly-developed robotic servant eerily similar to its live counterpart. AMCTV.com

Johnny Jay Says:  Coming from AMC, this one has some pedigree to live up to as that network has produced two of the best shows television ever with The Walking Dead and non-genre entry Breaking Bad (and I hear that Mad Men show wasn't half bad either).  This one is currently at the top of my Summer viewing list and I hope AMC lets it fully explore some of the interesting concepts in its premise.

Zoo (CBS, Debuts June 30th):  A global thriller about a wave of violent animal attacks against humans sweeping the planet. James Wolk will play Jackson Oz, a young, renegade American zoologist who spends his days running safaris in the wilds of Africa when he begins noticing the strange behavior of the animals. As the assaults become more cunning, coordinated and ferocious, he is thrust into the race to unlock the mystery of the pandemic before there’s no place left for people to hide. CBS.com

Johnny Jay Says:  This one sounds like it could deliver some good, dumb fun with its global/ecological disaster premise in the same vein as TNT's The Last Ship.  I think they would be best advised to keep it action-packed and not too heady (just like the other show mentioned) for it to appeal to the Summer audience.  Seems like it could be a good counter-balance to the heavier material that Humans and Fear the Walking Dead will deliver (both of which are topping my Summer viewing list).

Scream (MTV, Debuts June 30th):  What starts as a YouTube video going viral, soon leads to problems for the teenagers of Lakewood and serves as the catalyst for a murder that opens up a window to the town's troubled past. Everyone has secrets. Everyone tells lies. Everyone is fair game.  MTV.com

Johnny Jay Says:  How do you do Scream without ghostface (which is the current plan as I understand it)?  For that matter, how do you drag this out into an ongoing series?  The movie franchise was already getting tired by its third entry, so I don't have a lot of confidence in this show breathing new life into the original concept.

Fear the Walking Dead (AMC, Debut TBD):  What did the world look like as it was transforming into the horrifying apocalypse depicted in The Walking Dead? This summer, AMC will answer that question with Fear The Walking Dead, an all-new original series set in Los Angeles, following new characters as they face the beginning of the end of the world.  AMCTV.com

Johnny Jay Says:  This seems like a can't miss entry as it expands on the world of The Walking Dead and gives us a look at the early days of the zombie-pocalypse.  This one, along with the same network's Humans, will be topping my viewing list for the Summer.

First Look at the New Sci Fi / Fantasy Shows for the 2015-16 Season: DC's Legends of Tomorrow and Lucifer Look Like Winners

Below are the official synopses for the new sci fi / fantasy shows that the broadcast networks announced at the upfronts for the coming 2015-16 seasons.  Interestingly, ABC has no new genre entries this time around despite being the one Big Four network that has championed sci fi / fantasy the most the last few seasons.  But then they are bringing back four shows from the current season (Agents of SHIELD, Agent Carter, Once Upon A Time, and Galavant), and they do have another Marvel show in the works, though no word on when that one will hit (and the SHIELD spin-off is not completely dead).  Plus, ABC is bringing the Muppets back, and you can debate all you want on whether it is a genre show, but you should be watching it.  Also of interest, sci fi-averse CBS has three new entries on its schedule, which is the most it has had in years.  FOX has the most new shows with five (that's counting The X-Files revival as a "new" entry), whereas NBC has only one (if you count Heroes Reborn as new) plus Blindspot that may prove to have some genre elements.  And The CW only has two new sci fi shows on the way, but seeing as they are carrying over eight (!), I don't believe that we can complain too much.

Following is the info on each of the new genre shows (sorted by network) with my comments below each.  You can see the initial schedule for Fall 2015 at this link with my comments and I will be giving my cancellation predictions on these shows as its gets closer to the beginning of the Fall season.

The Muppets (ABC): The Muppets return to primetime with a contemporary, documentary-style show. For the first time ever, a series will explore the Muppets’ personal lives and relationships, both at home and at work, as well as romances, breakups, achievements, disappointments, wants and desires. This is a more adult Muppet show, for “kids” of all ages.

Johnny Jay Says: This looks like The Muppet Show meets The Office, which could be a ton of fun if done right (ABC, you better not mess this up!).  I would have preferred that they just bring back the old Muppet Show variety format (that could have worked great, and it already had a behind the scenes feel to it), but I will definitely be tuning in for this one.

Angel from Hell (CBS): Golden Globe and multiple Emmy Award winner Jane Lynch stars in a single-camera comedy about Amy (Lynch), a colorful, brassy woman who insinuates herself into Allison’s (Maggie Lawson) organized and seemingly perfect life, claiming to be her “guardian angel.” Allison is an intense, driven doctor who is sure that Amy is just an inebriated, outspoken nut, until every one of her warnings proves true. Cautioned by Amy not tell anyone about her, Allison can’t discuss this over-the-top oddball with her father and business partner, Marv (Kevin Pollak), a sunburned dermatologist who shares an office with Allison, or her younger brother, Brad (Kyle Bornheimer), a pharmaceutical sales rep who lives over her garage. As Allison tries to push Amy away, Amy makes her final pitch: her sole mission is to provide Allison with helpful guidance that nudges her in the right direction in life – and it’s her final chance to prove herself as an angel. With that, Allison agrees to this unlikely relationship because maybe a weird friend is exactly what she needs… and what if Amy really is her “guardian angel”?

Johnny Jay Says: The trailer for this supernatural comedy looks interesting and I enjoyed sci fi sitcom The Last Man on Earth a lot more than I expected.  I will give it a look.

Limitless (CBS):  (Based on the feature film) A fast-paced drama about Brian Finch (Jake McDorman), who discovers the brain-boosting power of the mysterious drug NZT and is coerced by the FBI into using his extraordinary cognitive abilities to solve complex cases for them. Working closely with Brian in the major case squad in New York City is Special Agent Rebecca Harris (Jennifer Carpenter), a formidable investigator with a dark past, and Special Agent Boyle (Hill Harper), a former military officer and Rebecca’s confidante. They report to Special Agent in Charge Nasreen “Naz” Pouran (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio), a canny manipulator of the reins of power. Unbeknownst to the FBI, Brian also has a clandestine relationship with Senator Edward Mora (Academy Award nominee Bradley Cooper, recurring), a presidential hopeful and regular user of NZT who has plans of his own for his new protégé. Fueled now with a steady supply of NZT that enables him to use 100% of his brain capacity, Brian is more effective than all of the FBI agents combined, making him a criminal’s worst nightmare and the greatest asset the Bureau has ever possessed.

Johnny Jay Says: Never got around to seeing the movie, but the TV spin-off looks worth checking out.  Seems real close to 2014's Intelligence, though, with a drug enhancing the hero's brain this time around rather than a computer chip.  And it's getting the same timeslot that killed that show, so that is concerning (more on that at this link).

Supergirl (CBS):  An action-adventure drama based on the DC Comics character Kara Zor-El (Melissa Benoist), Superman’s (Kal-El) cousin who, after 12 years of keeping her powers a secret on Earth, decides to finally embrace her superhuman abilities and be the hero she was always meant to be. Twelve-year-old Kara escaped the doomed planet Krypton with her parents’ help at the same time as the infant Kal-El. Protected and raised on Earth by her foster family, the Danvers, Kara grew up in the shadow of her foster sister, Alex (Chyler Leigh), and learned to conceal the phenomenal powers she shares with her famous cousin in order to keep her identity a secret. Years later at 24, Kara lives in National City assisting media mogul and fierce taskmaster Cat Grant (Golden Globe Award winner Calista Flockhart), who just hired the Daily Planet’s former photographer, James Olsen (Mehcad Brooks), as her new art director. However, Kara’s days of keeping her talents a secret are over when Hank Henshaw (David Harewood), head of a super-secret agency where her sister also works, enlists her to help them protect the citizens of National City from sinister threats. Though Kara will need to find a way to manage her newfound empowerment with her very human relationships, her heart soars as she takes to the skies as Supergirl to fight crime.

Johnny Jay Says: The first trailer was more girl and less super in this superhero / Ally McBeal hybrid (okay, I never watched Ally McBeal, but Supergirl does have Calista Flockhart).  It should be worth checking out, but don't care for the scheduling (directly against FOX's Gotham), and I go into more detail on that at this link.

DC’s Legends of Tomorrow (CW): When heroes alone are not enough… the world needs legends. Having seen the future, one he will desperately try to prevent from happening, time-traveling rogue Rip Hunter is tasked with assembling a disparate group of both heroes and villains to confront an unstoppable threat – one in which not only is the planet at stake, but all of time itself. Can this ragtag team defeat an immortal threat unlike anything they have ever known?

Johnny Jay Says: This is the 2015-16 season show that I am most pumped about from the broadcast networks and looks like it could be the most expensive show that The CW has produced to date.  It appears to be bringing along more of the fun elements of The Flash and less of the dark-and-gritty of Arrow and could deliver a decent superhero team-up romp!

Containment (formerly Cordon) (CW):  When a mysterious and deadly epidemic breaks out in Atlanta, a vast urban quarantine is quickly enforced, forcing those stuck on the inside to fight for their lives while local and federal officials desperately search for a cure. Trying to keep the peace on the streets is police officer Lex Carnahan, who has quickly risen through the ranks of the Atlanta PD. But Lex’s job becomes even harder when he learns that his longtime girlfriend, Jana, and his best friend and fellow officer Jake, are trapped within the cordoned area.

Johnny Jay Says: I'm always a sucker for a good pandemic tale, though I wonder if TWD prequel series Fear the Walking Dead might cover the same territory much better.  The trailer makes it look like it has less of The CW's trademark soap opera diversions, but you have to wonder how they will pad this out into a thirteen episode season (it bows mid-year) and then into more seasons beyond that.  Still, I will have it on my watch list.

The Frankenstein Code (FOX): A modern reimagining of the Mary Shelley classic, about a man brought back to life by two scientists playing god. Seventy-five-year-old JIMMY PRITCHARD is a shell of his former self. A drinker, a womanizer and a father who always put work before family, Pritchard was forced to resign as L.A. County Sheriff for corrupt conduct more than a decade ago. Now, some 15 unkind years later, he is killed when he stumbles upon a robbery at the home of FBI Agent DUVAL PRITCHARD, one of his three children. But death is surprisingly short for Jimmy, who is brought back to life by billionaire tech-genius twins MARY GOODWIN and her brother, OTTO, founders of the social networking empire, Lookinglass. Resurrected as a younger version of himself, with physical abilities of which he never dreamed, a re-animated Pritchard is given a second chance at life. What will he do with it? Will he seek vengeance against those who killed him? Will he try to repair the damage he did to his family? Will he embrace a new sense of purpose or fall prey to old temptations?

Johnny Jay Says: There were several Frankenstein pilots making the rounds across the networks (one starring Sean Bean), and this is the only one that stuck.  The premise seems rather tired, though, and it throws in the title of Mary Shelley's book to get some name recognition.  I'll check it out, but don't have high hopes.

Lucifer (FOX):  Based upon the characters created by Neil Gaiman, Sam Kieth and Mike Dringenberg for DC Entertainment’s Vertigo imprint, LUCIFER is the story of the original fallen angel. Bored and unhappy as the Lord of Hell, LUCIFER MORNINGSTAR has abandoned his throne and retired to L.A., where he owns Lux, an upscale nightclub. Charming, charismatic and devilishly handsome, Lucifer is enjoying his retirement, indulging in a few of his favorite things – wine, women and song – when a beautiful pop star is brutally murdered outside of Lux. For the first time in roughly 10 billion years, he feels something awaken deep within him as a result of this murder. Compassion? Sympathy? The very thought disturbs him – as well as his best friend and confidante, MAZIKEEN aka MAZE, a fierce demon in the form of a beautiful young woman.

Johnny Jay Says: I never read the Neil Gaiman comic book, but the trailer makes it look like a ton of fun!  Seems like it would have been a better fit on one of the cable channels (and a great pair up with Constantine), but hopefully FOX won't water it down too much.

Minority Report (FOX): Based on the international blockbuster film by executive producer Steven Spielberg and the first of his films to be adapted for television, MINORITY REPORT follows the unlikely partnership between a man haunted by the future and a cop haunted by her past, as they race to stop the worst crimes of the year 2065 before they happen. Set in Washington, D.C., it is 10 years after the demise of Precrime, a law enforcement agency tasked with identifying and eliminating criminals…before their crimes were committed. To carry out this brand of justice, the agency used three precogs – “precognitives” Dash, Arthur and Agatha – who were able to see the future. Now, in 2065, crime-solving is different, and justice leans more on sophisticated and trusted technology than on the instincts of the precogs.

Johnny Jay Says: There's a ton of potential with this one and maybe they could dive into the pre-crime moral quandaries that Person of Interest has only skirted around.  But I'm worried that this will turn into another procedural with a few sci fi twists.

Scream Queens (FOX): FOX has ordered SCREAM QUEENS, a new genre-bending comedy-horror anthology series.  The series, produced by 20th Century Fox Television, is from Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk, Ian Brennan and Dante Di Loreto, the executive producers of GLEE and “American Horror Story.” The first installment in the new anthology series revolves around a college campus which is rocked by a series of murders.

Johnny Jay Says: Not really sci fi, but genre fans may find something to like here.  The trailer sure makes it look fun.

The X-Files (FOX): Thirteen years after the original series run, FOX has ordered the next mind-bending chapter of THE X-FILES, a thrilling, six-episode event series which will be helmed by creator/executive producer Chris Carter, with stars David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson re-inhabiting their roles as iconic FBI Agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully. This marks the momentous return of the Emmy- and Golden Globe Award-winning pop culture phenomenon, which remains one of the longest-running sci-fi series in network television history.  (Premieres Jan 24, 2016)

Johnny Jay Says: Holding out hope that they will do justice to the original series.  That show really slipped in quality its last few years, but with just a few episodes (six total) the creative team can hopefully focus their energies and deliver a good addition to the show's legacy.

Blindspot (NBC): A vast international plot explodes when a beautiful Jane Doe is discovered naked in Times Square, completely covered in mysterious, intricate tattoos with no memory of who she is or how she got there. But there's one tattoo that is impossible to miss: the name of FBI agent Kurt Weller, emblazoned across her back. "Jane," Agent Weller and the rest of the FBI quickly realize that each mark on her body is a crime to solve, leading them closer to the truth about her identity and the mysteries to be revealed.

Johnny Jay Says: Another one of those shows with conspiracies and mysteries padding out each hour.  It may have some sci fi elements, but it will have to hook me quick to keep my attention.

Heroes Reborn (NBC): The saga behind the 2006 breakout series "Heroes" will continue this fall as creator Tim Kring returns to the fold and develops new layers to his original superhero concept.  This highly anticipated 13-episode event series will reconnect with the basic elements of the show’s first season, where ordinary people were waking up to the fact that they had extraordinary abilities.

Johnny Jay Says: We're all hoping that the revival will be more Season 1 Heroes and less Seasons 2 thru 4.  This could be great continuation (that gives some resolution to the Season 4 cliffhanger) or it could be yet another derailment for that once-promising show.

If an Agents of SHIELD Spin-Off Does Happen, They Need to Get More Marvel Superheroes Involved With Both Shows

Last week, rumors surfaced that ABC was considering a spin-off series from Agents of SHIELD that would carry over several cast members from the current show.  That seemed like surprising news considering that AoS has struggled in the ratings throughout its second season, but then it is part of the multi-billion dollar Avengers franchise and Disney--which owns ABC--has an interest in keeping that franchise visible.  I mulled over the strategic implications of the spin-off from the network standpoint at this link, and thought I would present my idea on the best direction for these two shows here.

When Agents of SHIELD debuted last season, I rather enjoyed it at first for its witty scripts and stories that incorporated plenty of sci fi elements. But then it just seemed to start treading water and not really going anywhere before eventually rebooting itself to an extent with its tie-in to Captain America: The Winter Solder.  And when it returned this year, it went dark and almost completely lost touch with the sense of fun it had when it started.  And not surprisingly the show has seen its ratings head on a steady decline since bowing with monster numbers for its first season premiere.  But still, there are rumors of a spin-off and if that does happen then I believe they should take a page from what The CW is doing with its DC superhero shows Arrow and The Flash.

Both of those two have been strong performers for the fifth place networks, and The Flash is currently only a few ticks behind Agents of SHIELD as far as its season to date ratings average.  And I believe that a large part of the reason those shows have registered with the audience--apart from stellar casting and decent writing--is that they have shown respect for the source material.  They may have re-written much of the history of the characters for the TV universe they are creating, but they regularly dip back into the well and bring in additional characters that fans are familiar with from the comics.  That's one area that I believe Agents of SHIELD has missed out on from the beginning, yet it also presents an opportunity to revitalize the series going forward.

Personally, I believe that the show would have been better off bringing in superhero characters from the comics right from the get go.  The mission for Coulson's team should have been getting the many heroes out there onboard with SHIELD (just like we saw Nick Fury do in several of the movies) or clamping down on those getting out of control.  It wouldn't necessarily have to have followed a hero-of-the-week formula, but get familiar faces in there on a regular basis.  Marvel has a ton of them, so there's plenty that could show up on the series that wouldn't interfere with future movie plans (and DC is planning separate movie versions of some of the TV characters, so why couldn't Marvel do the same?).   And that format would have still worked after the events of the Captain America movie, because at that point SHIELD would need the help of those superheroes even more to build up the ranks of their decimated agency.

Of course that's not the way they went with Agents of SHIELD originally, but the spin-off presents an opportunity to still consider that direction.  I'm guessing that the new show will explore the Inhuman characters that have been introduced during the second half of this season (no inside information, just a hunch).  So let the spin-off go in that direction and let AoS go on a recruiting drive for superheroes.  They need the help and I'm guessing the familiar faces from the comics could re-energize interest from the fans.  Or if they want to keep the Inhumans storyline with the main show, then let the spin-off go hero hunting (though I think Coulson would be best suited for that and I don't see him leaving the main show).

The fact is that Arrow and The Flash are considered hits for The CW and they continue to parade characters from the comics through their episodes.  Agents of SHIELD is struggling in the ratings and has mostly avoided familiar faces from the Marvel ranks.  Spinning off from the current format seems sure to fail seeing as the parent series is barely holding on now.  But reconnecting with the comics could help revitalize both.  Bringing in the Inhumans is already one plus because of its nod back to the comics.  Now they need to get even more familiar Marvel faces in there, even if it is some of the B and C list characters.

Of course at this point we don't even know for certain if Agents of SHIELD will get a third season renewal, and if it doesn't then the spin-off is certainly dead in the water as well.  But just the fact that ABC is considering that spin-off suggests that AoS has a decent chance of coming back for at least one more year.  And if they do, then they need something to bring the viewers back to the show to help keep that advertising revenue flowing in.  Going back to the source material and bringing in familiar superhero faces is that something.  That's what I believe the fans want to see and that's the best chance AoS and its potential spin-off have of keeping the audience engaged.

Buy Agents of SHIELD Season 1 on DVD and Blu-ray from Amazon.com:

CW's Tales from the Darkside Reboot Needs to Happen, Plus an Idea of What that Network Can Do with its Burgeoning Cast of DC Superheros

The CW has picked up a pilot for a reboot of George R. Romero's classic 80's horror anthology series Tales from the Darkside meaning that they are considering that as an addition to their 2015-16 Prime Time schedule.  And that is something in my opinion that needs to happen.  Mind you, I don't consider myself a huge fan of the original series, though I remember tuning in to watch it and enjoying the episodes that I saw.  And I know several horror fans who consider it one of the better entries for that genre on television (though I'm sure they are cringing at the thought of The CW's trademark young and uber-hot faces picking up the baton for the franchise).  The main reason I want to see it happen, though, is that the anthology series needs to come back to television and this network is a good one to lead that charge.  With all of the science fiction and fantasy shows they currently have on their schedule (including upcoming mid-season entries iZombie and The Messengers), The CW has essentially become the broadcast network sci fi channel (as it continues to out sci fi Syfy even though that cable net keeps claiming it is getting back to its roots).  And despite the preponderance of young, pretty faces on the fifth place network, they have still managed to do pretty good with the genre the last couple of years, far outpacing the other broadcast networks (and Syfy) in this area.  They are willing to take some chances and I can see them doing that with an updating on Tales from the Darkside.

And we really need to get an anthology show or two back on television as they have less focus on extended arcs and more on telling a good, short and simple story.  This would even be a good one to air when other shows are on hiatus because it does not require viewers to watch every episode in order.  It gives The CW a good way to pad out the schedule and run less repeats (which we are about to get assaulted with over the next few months).  A good sci fi anthology would be much welcome as well.  They could reboot The Twilight Zone or Outer Limits, or just come up with a new title.  It doesn't really matter if the stories are good.  Anthologies offer writers/directors the opportunity to take some chances and push the boundaries of television,  They also offer the chance to tryout some new ideas that may carry on into their own shows.  But mostly, they can--if done right--give us some damn good genre tales.  Twilight Zone, Outer Limits, Tales from the Darkside and more all did that in their prime and its about time we get that back on television. It's been a while since we have had a really good genre anthology series (Masters of Horror?  The Outer Limits reboot?), and I'm hoping that The CW will succeed in bringing one back starting next season.

And speaking of anthologies, there's another one that network should think long and hard about for next season as it is planning its schedule.  Currently, they are looking at doing an Atom spin-off from Arrow and there are plenty more characters from the DC milieu that have been introduced on that series and its recent spin-off The Flash.  All of these have the potential to jump to shows of their own, But with the network only programming ten Prime Time hours a week, how many can they realistically get onto the schedule?  And how long before this leads to a superhero burn-out?

So the obvious answer to the question?  A superhero anthology series that can accommodate all of those characters and more.

Call it The Brave and the Bold, DC All-Stars, Showcase, or something like that.  You could run a multi-episode Atom or Birds of Prey or Suicide Squad arc then throw in a onesy for Firestorm or Ra's al Ghul or any of number of other characters they have introduced or have waiting in the wings.  And there are currently rumors floating around that Arrow's Diggle could become Green Lantern.  This anthology could handle all of that and more.  And as I mentioned above, it could air when the other shows (particularly Arrow and The Flash) are on hiatus to ensure less repeats throughout the year.  This seems like the best way to cover all DC characters they currently have plans for as well as future additions.  They could even take a page from the comics and have something like an Atom lead story and maybe a ten minute segment featuring another character.  Or pick one main character and have him/her team up with other superheros, similar to Batman's long run in the Brave and the Bold comics where he fought next to a revolving door of DC characters.

Seems like a great way to go about it and also gives the creative talent the opportunity to take some chances and try things that may be too daring for an established show like Arrow or The Flash.  And the network has already done an excellent job with those two characters so I would trust them to continue that streak having an expanded cast of DC superheros to work with.

As the other broadcast networks have seen their audiences dwindle notably the last few years, The CW has actually seen some gains as it has revitalized its schedule and reached out to the genre audience.  And I believe that the Tales from the Darkside reboot as well as a DC superhero anthology (and possibly a sci fi anthology) can help them to increase their momentum and possibly overtake one of the lagging Big Four broadcast networks.   

TV Review: Agent Carter

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars (after 4 episodes)

Bottom Line:  A fun show that delivers plenty of pulp action as well as a strong female lead character.

ABC is doing some schedule experimenting this season and bringing in the Captain America spin-off series Agent Carter to fill in the gap while Agents of SHIELD is on hiatus and it means less repeats during the regular season.  I like the idea and Agent Carter is the perfect series to timeshare with AoS because both exist in the same universe as the Marvel Avengers big screen entries.  This show takes place in 1946 as Agent Carter finds herself working for SSR (Strategic Scientific Reserve) on the home front after the war.  However, she is looked upon by the other male agents that she works with more as a secretary and is not appreciated for her true skills.  Howard Stark contacts her and asks her to help clear his name because he is on the run, accused of treason.  She then teams with his butler Jarvis and works on the sly to try and uncover who has framed Stark.  The series has a retro, pulp feel to it with a bit of noir thrown in for good measure.  And it has that same sense of fun that we have seen in most of the Avengers movies (something that Agents of SHIELD unfortunately has mostly dispensed with this season).  Hayley Atwell delivers a commanding performance as Carter with James D’Arcy proving himself quite capable as her partner/side-kick.  I would have preferred if they had avoided the angle of Carter having to skirt around (pun unintended but accepted) the chauvinistic attitudes of the day because it just acts as a plot anchor dragging down the stories from time to time.  It would have been much better it they just let her reputation from her war days carry over into her new assignment and have her step up as the kick-ass agent she really is.  Sure, the sexist attitudes might be a more realistic touch for the period, but then how much of this really depends on realism?  It’s not a deal-breaker, though, just a minor annoyance and does not keep me from enjoying the show.  But the show has definitely kept my attention across its first four episodes, and it has quickly found itself on my must-watch list.  And next week's episode brings in some of the Howling Commandoes, so hopefully they will set the record straight on what Agent Carter can do. Unfortunately, the ratings for the show have not been great thus far, though not terrible either.  But if ABC does not see fit to bring the show back for a second round next year, maybe Marvel will consider one or more direct-to-video films like the one that hit in 2013 to continue her story (or perhaps Netflix could pick the show up).  I, for one, am enjoying this entry and would definitely like to see more.

TV Review: The Man in the High Castle

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 Stars

Bottom Line: The pilot can be muddled at times, but there is plenty of potential here if this one were to jump to an ongoing series.

Based on the Phillip K. Dick novel of the same name, The Man in the High Castle is one of the latest entries from Amazon's "Pilot Season" where viewers can watch it for free online (at this link) and vote whether they want it to continue as a series.  The story takes place in an alternate version of 1950's where the Axis powers won World War II and ended up dividing the United States between them with Germany getting the eastern states and Japan getting the western side with a "neutral zone" in between.  In the pilot, we learn that an aging Hitler is in failing health and a power struggle amongst the German leadership is expected to follow once he dies with the repercussions that will impact the political divisions in the United States.  San Francisco resident Juliana Crain is pulled into the resistance movement by her sister and she watches film footage that shows the Allies winning the war, cluing her in to an alternate reality.  In search of further answers, she heads to the neutral zone where she then encounters a member of the resistance from the west.

The pilot episode runs about an hour and does a good job of setting up the premise and establishing the look and feel of this alternate American past.  Ridley Scott executive produced The Man in the High Castle, so the strong visual appeal is to be expected and it adds much to the experience.  The story itself tends to be rather muddled and confusing at times, but that appears to be more about trying to cram as much as possible into the show's first hour to set up the story.  Surprisingly, though, despite delivering a packed episode, it can be slow at times.  Still, I never found it boring and it stays mostly on track as its sets up a concept with plenty of potential.  I have never read the book it was based on, so I can't speak to how faithful it is to the source material (I would expect that it takes many liberties as most Philip K. Dick adaptations do), but I would definitely like to see more from this one.  X-Files veteran Frank Spotnitz wrote the pilot and is onboard as showrunner, and I believe that he could do a good job with this as a series.  I will be giving this one a thumbs up in Amazon's Pilot Season ballot and I believe that it has a good chance of getting the greenlight if enough sci fi fans show their support.  So give it a look and cast your vote, as this time around it is us and not the network executives making the decisions on what sci fi we want to watch.