The newest casting news to come out of Heroes is pretty intruiging. TV Guide’s Ausiello reports:

Bruce Boxleitner…has snagged a top-secret recurring role that was originally going to be modeled after Sen. John McCain. The character has since been reconceived, and now all I know for sure is that he’ll be sharing scenes with a female series regular.

This makes me excited about watching Heroes again. While I might make fun of Captain Sheridan often, I do really like Boxleitner and I’m going to enjoy seeing him on television again. Plus, after playing the president of the Interstellar Alliance, he’s got experience being a politician.

The sad thing is how quickly my mind start drawing parallels between Sheridan and John McCain…

The Battlestar Galactica spin-off Caprica has announced their lead actress, according to io9:

Paula Malcomson, best known for her work as Trixie in Deadwood, will help bring the soap operatics to the “Dynasty in space” backdoor pilot.

Malcomson is playing a double agent, who is having an affair with her husband’s rival, and passes on secrets that help create the first Cylon.

One of the best television shows ever is coming to the big screen, Gizmodo reveals:

Zlotoff mentioned he somehow ended up with the movie rights years ago (extremely uncommon), giving him full control over the film. While few specifics were mentioned, and no formal announcement has been made, its extremely promising that the man with the power to make the film is getting the ball rolling.

I grew up on MacGyver, and I have to say that if Richard Dean Anderson is playing the role, I’ll be first in line. Of all the 80’s television resurrections, this is about the only one I’m excited to hear about. There’s only one thing that could keep me from it, and that’s if Richard Dean Anderson isn’t involved. Nobody else can play MacGyver, and nobody else should. If Harrison Ford can still be Indiana Jones, then Anderson can still be Angus MacGyver.

The Writer’s Strike did more than change the landscape of tv for a few months as we all waited through reality programming for the return of our favorites. It’s changed the way television is made, Variety says.

In profound and permanent ways, the television business has changed since the writers declared pencils down. Network and media agency executives agree that the stoppage was the first line of an entirely new script for the television industry, one which, to borrow entertainment parlance, “reimagines” how TV has been developed, bought and sold for more 50 years.

In my talks about the strike with friends, this is the one thing I noted time and time again. The one thing the strike guaranteed was that television was never going to be the same, but the question remains if the changes are good or bad.

The number of pilots has gone down, and some networks are abandoning the idea altogether. Instead of launching in the fall, networks are now looking at leading out new series year round. But the most dangerous development is the network’s plans to defray costs: more integrated advertising.

“There’s always been a Plexiglas that surrounds the creative community when it comes to talking to the advertising community,” Caraccioli-Davis adds. “That might have flipped with the strike.”

I admit that this wasn’t something I really expected, but I’m not surprised. When the strike started, I made the comment that sure the writer’s only wanted a small percent more of the profits, but nobody seemed to be asking where that percent was coming from. Television producers and networks are going to want to cut into their portion of the profits to distribute that money, so they’ll have to bring it in from somewhere. Apparently these advertising deals are the way they’ll be doing it.

I also wonder about other long reaching effects of the strike. Producers are making an monetary investment in a product, which they expect to see a return on. With the return on an individual property being divided more thinly back to them, I can see a turn to where they’ll only want to greenlight properties that they feel are guaranteed to make their money back. How often will somebody take a chance on a show like Lost or Heroes, that both came in during a period where television science-fiction was not a money maker for mainstream networks. Television already is a business where “more of the same” is a motto, so how much worse is that going to get?

These fears could be completely unfounded. It could be that enough people in the network brass are visionaries and want to see not just money but quality product. But I have to say that I’m not optimistic.

In what might be a sign of the apocalypse, TMZ on TV has been declared a news broadcast by the FCC. Variety reports:

The Federal Communications Commission has ruled as such in the cases of Fox’s “TMZ” and the Christian Broadcast Network’s “The 700 Club,” declaring Friday that each show meets the test for “a bona fide newscast” and therefore would not trigger political equal-time requirements.

Technically, this decision is only regarding the rule that stations must give equal time to opposing political candidates outside of news broadcasts. In general, this just means that TMZ can gossip about Hillary Clinton’s haircut, and the stations that broadcast it don’t have to worry about giving an extra three minutes to Obama to even things out.

But in the grand scheme, I wonder if this ruling can affect anything else. For one thing, the article also states:

Congress defined “bona fide newscast” as one that holds “genuine news value” and is not intended to boost or aid any particular political candidate.

What interests me about this is that “genuine news value” aside, I think anybody who has been watching mainstream media for the last six months can see that the most news broadcasts are very CLEARLY endorsing and aiding particular political candidates, mostly by tearing down their opponents and avoiding negative stories about their chosen candidate. The depressing thing is, that the show I’ve seen have the most pretense of objectivity is The Colbert Report. He’s given time to just about any candidate who wants to come on the show, and during the Pennsylvania primaries he had Hillary Clinton on the show (on set) and Barack Obama (on a satellite feed). While I have my own opinion about which he favored, he let them both have a their own humorous moment.

I think this election has been one that hopefully will make Americans notice the role the media is playing in politics, and decide what they think about it. I know it’s been on my mind quite a bit.

MTV is once again asserting itself as a channel that does NOT play music videos. One of the highlights of their summer schedule is “Legally Blonde The Musical: The Search for Elle Woods”, according to Variety:

Eight-episode, pre-taped series will follow 10 actresses vying to replace Laura Bell Bundy as the star of “Legally Blonde,” the 2007 tuner based on the 2001 MGM pic. Haylie Duff (”Hairspray”) hosts.

There will be no audience voting, and the judges are the people in charge of the musical itself. But I’m still disgusted. I realize I just wrote about the democratization of art, but I don’t think that reality tv competitions actually reflect that. America’s Next Top Model has not turned out a single top model (some success stories, of course, but not the next Tyra). Project Runway has created some “reality celebrities” but they haven’t really turned the fashion world upside down yet. The most successful reality tv contestant I can think of is Harold, the first winner of Top Chef. He went out, he found an investor, and he started a very well received restaurant in New York City. I’m not sure how much more there is to being a Top Chef.

Even a show like “The Next Food Network Star” has had three seasons and only really produced one “star,” despite the fact that the winner is guaranteed their own show at the end.

The last time they tried this formula was with “Grease: You’re the One That I Want” and while the show is still running, it was not a move that many received very well. So while I think an open casting call is great idea, and hiring unknown talent an even better one, I think this reality tv competition is going to do nothing but get a handful of girls who just want to have their fifteen minutes, no matter the cost. Those are not the types that will really become the next Broadway sensation.

The New York Television Festival and Fox Entertainment are hosting a screenplay contest, Variety reports:

The best half-hour pilot script will earn its writer $25,000 and a development deal with Fox.

Submissions are open as of June 2 and will continue through June 13 or until 1,500 submissions are received.

The competition focuses on comedy scripts, and is the second one that Fox is helping host. Apparently their reliance on reality television is waning.

I’m excited to see this kind of project. I love competitions that let people at least get their script read, and possibly get feedback. While I know it didn’t really achieve it’s goals, I loved Project Greenlight for that reason. It let people get their work out there, find out what was good and what needs tweaking, and it gave a few people a chance to circumvent the system.

I like the democratization of art, because I think especially in Hollywood we’ve never really had it be a place where it was about finding and cultivating the most talented or the hardest working artists. I think it’s depressing how many talented writers are unable to tell their stories because they just don’t have a way to get their foot in the door.

So, is anybody going to enter? I think the first step towards writing great television is being a fan of great television, and our readers seem to fit that requirement.

There are some new characters being added to the next season of The Sarah Conner Chronicles, Ask Ausiello reports:

The show is hunting for a couple of new regulars: Becky, a hot teenaged hipster, and Catherine, an unusually earthy business bigwig in her early forties.

Ausiello thinks the new girl is going to be John’s girlfriend. I certainly hope not, nothing makes me more cranky than throwing in a ridiculous love interest. Don’t they have enough strange tension between John and Cameron already? Didn’t Heroes teach us all that this is a bad idea?

I guess it’s been done well in the past, but it just seems like a ridiculous thing to do. Why add more hormonal teenage boy drama? Here’s hoping this teenage girl is something more than just a random hot girl that John wants but can’t tell his secrets to, and convinces himself that he can’t be with her for her own safety, thus breaking both their hearts.

It’s Wednesday Night, which means it’s the night for Bravo to air one of their flagship reality shows. Right now, we’re in the middle of Top Chef: Chicago, which the commercials promise is “the number one food show on cable.”

I personally can’t cook, but I love this show. Some of the stuff in it goes over my head, but for the most part it’s a rather accesible show even if you don’t enjoy cooking.

But I have to say that this current crop of chefs is not really inspiring. While I have a few chefs that I enjoy watching (Stephanie in particular, I enjoy Dale’s cooking but not always his attitude, and for some reason Nikki) for the most part, I’m annoyed.

About ten minutes into the first episode we’re treated with a “only in reality” type “twist:” chef’s Jennifer and Zoi are a couple. I’m not sure what casting director thought this would be a great idea, but a lot of nothing was made of it as the season carried on. It also didn’t help that Zoi came off as a very sour grapes chef, she never accepted criticism well, and consistently was on the chopping block. It was no surprise when she got eliminated, at least not to anyone watching the show. The fact that Jennifer followed her two episodes later was not much of a surprise either.

But the reason for that is that the chefs this season don’t really seem as capable or interesting as seasons past. Has anybody else noticed how often they cling to the same tricks over and over again? Faux caviar, battery powered smokers, on and on with the same list of things. Somehow Richard has even managed to make mixing innovative and different flavors something boring and tired.

And I probably shouldn’t get started on Spike and Andrew, whose attitudes have been ridiculous and make me wonder if they have actual disorders or if they’re playing to the cameras. Andrews speech about having to be dragged out would have made me want to eliminate him on the spot (and it seemed like Colicchio had the same idea).

I can’t be the only person who is watching, who are you rooting for? I’m hoping that a female chef takes it this time, but Stephanie seems to be the only real contender on that front. I’m still disappointed that last season it was Casey’s game to lose, and she didn’t manage to hold up in the last round.

Curious about what in the world is going on in the world of Project Runway? Spin-offs, network changes, and lawsuits!

First, Blogging Project Runway:

Bravo Press confirms that Season Five will premiere in July. We are guessing that the Final Challenge will be at Bryant Park in September.

The important thing to remember here is that Season Five will be on Bravo, but Season 6 will premier on Lifetime in November. How much runway can 2008 take?

The Hollywood Reporter gives us a rundown of new projects:

But Weinstein disclosed that Lifetime would televise two new Weinstein Co. reality series: “Project Pygmalion,” in development for 2009, which will remake the winner and give her entre into high society, and a series looking at “Project Runway” from the models’ eyes (”Models of the Runway”) that will air in November along with the reality series’ sixth-season premiere.

Also revealed: Nina Garcia wants to stay with the series but may not be able to.

Variety goes in depth about the lawsuit between NBC Universal (who owns Bravo) and Weinstein.

Lastly, back to Blogging Project Runway who tells us that Tim Gunn’s Guide to Style is slated to return but there’s been no mention of co-host Veronica Webb.

Was that enough news all at once? I think there’s one thing I’m really worried about: overexposure. I have been a huge fan of Project Runway since season two, where I was glued to my screen and started writing up reviews of all the garments on my personal blog. But this last season felt forced, and too self-aware, and honestly boring. So if we’re going to put out a similar series, and have two spin-offs? I think I might reach my limit.

Naomi Campbell was slated to appear on Ugly Betty last season and had to postpone. It looks like her day has arrived, according to TV Guide:

Supermodel Naomi Campbell will make a guest appearance on the season finale of Ugly Betty (Thursdays at 8 pm/ET, ABC).

Maybe she’s decided that her recent bad press needs a bit of good PR to round it out. Who thinks she’ll be making fun of herself, and who thinks she’ll play a serious part?

It turns out that Shawn from Psych has an even nicer pedigree than just having Corbin Bernsen for a dad. His mom will be played by Cybill Shepherd according to TV Guide:

Shepherd will appear in at least two episodes, beginning with the third-

I’m not sure how thrilled I am with the casting. On the one hand, it’s good to have such a big name on the show. On the other, I’ve never personally been a huge fan of Shepherd. How about you?

Stanley Kamel, the actor who played Monk’s psychiatrist Dr. Charles Kroger, has passed away at age 65. Access Hollywood quotes a statement from a USA Network representative:

USA is deeply saddened by the news of Stanley Kamel’s passing. Stanley was an amazingly talented and extremely kind man, and an important member of the USA family. He will be sorely missed.

Kamel had a very long and varied career, and is familiar to many. I really loved his work as Dr. Kroger, and I wonder how the series will handle his loss. I am confident that the show will address the issue well, but I hope that they take the opportunity to make a fitting tribute to the actor instead of simply replacing him.

While a lot has been said lately of “young actors lost before their time” I think that even those out of their twenties are leaving us too soon.

CBS let one episode of Secret Talents of the Stars air, but as the country music singers took the stage to do stand-up, the viewers didn’t tune in. The show was immediately canceled, according to CNN:

The first airing Wednesday had former “Star Trek” actor George Takei singing “On the Road Again.” Only 4.6 million people tuned in — and thousands tuned away as the hour continued.

I was surprised this was supposed to be a series and not just a one or two episode special. Who really cares about seeing stars do things they don’t normally do, unless they’re doing it terribly? And if they’re doing it terribly, even that only has so much appeal.

Dancing With the Stars is popular because the stars actually do get to be better and put in some great performances, along with a few people who really shouldn’t have signed up in the first place. Even Circus of the Stars showed people who worked very hard to manage to perform the acts that they do.

But a Star Trek actor singing? Been there. A singer tap-dancing? What’s the point? There have been double and triple threats for years.

Hopefully CBS learned a lesson here.

We here at the TV Show Blog obviously love our Science Fiction. But what about those shows that we love too much? io9 asks what the most overrated sci-fi show of all time is:

We’ve all had the experience of looking back at a movie or TV show that rocked our worlds a few decades ago, and going, “Oh.” Suddenly, the awesome classic of the 1970s or 1980s looks kind of cheesy and silly. The robot pets, the speechifying, the Klingons in cowboy hats. You expect the special effects not to be that special or effective, but you’re not prepared for the dialog or the acting.

Right now, Star Trek: The Original Series is winning by a mile. Star Trek: The Next Generation and the original Doctor Who are in a close second place. The Twilight Zone is in last place, as it should be. Of all the shows on the list, I can see what problems people have with them. But The Twilight Zone easily had some of the best writing to grace television, in an era when writing wasn’t that well rewarded. Especially not such subversive stories like Rod Serling liked to tell.

But I wonder how much of the poll is really people voting for something that they feel is overrated, or something that they’re just tired of or have a specific complaint against. Since Babylon 5 is rarely “rated” at all, and sadly has been mostly forgotten, I can’t imagine it being “overrated.” I admit to being a huge fan, but at the same time I think it deserves quite a bit of the praise it gets, despite the terrible fifth season.

To me the term overrated applies to a show that is consistently praised while it’s faults are consistently ignored. I’d say until recently, Battlestar Galactica fits that bill pretty nicely. But Alien Nation? Was it even that big a hit when it first aired?

Who did you vote for? I personally cast my vote for classic Trek, simply because I think people are all too willing to pretend it was so much better than we all remember. But it really wasn’t, it was a good show, and it was innovative. But it had some pretty big faults too.

I admit it, I’m a huge Project Runway addict. So this news completely baffles me. Project Runway is leaving Bravo and going to…Lifetime? The The New York Daily News reports:

The deal, estimated to be worth upward of $150 million, has officials at Bravo and owner NBC Universal feeling way too last season.

So much so that NBCU has filed a breach of contract suit against “Runway’s” owner, the Weinstein Co.

I don’t know what NBC Universal did to the Weinstein brothers, but this move is just ridiculous. It has to be motivated by money (but then, everything in television is). But Bravo was the perfect home for Project Runway, and to suddenly move it to Lifetime? I don’t even know if I get the Lifetime channel, I never watch it. The article says it’s a channel known for reruns of the Golden Girls, but I personally only think of overly melodramatic films about cancer.

I don’t know much about the general buzz, but I know most of my friends and I were very unhappy with the last season (which is a bit of an understatement). The general critical reception early in the cycle was lukewarm. Moving networks at this stage, especially to one that half their viewers don’t even, seems like a very bad idea to me.

Did you enjoy last season? Will you actually tune into Lifetime for the new season in November?

It started decades ago, but court television shows have finally hit their peak and gotten an Emmy category. Variety reports:

“It wasn’t really a talkshow or a reality show or a soap opera,” [Michael Rourke] says. “It had elements of all of those things. The genre was an orphan. It’s great they’re acknowledging it as its own category.”

In my current job, I actually spend most of the day with a television on behind me. I leave it tuned to one channel so my background noise for the afternoon is Divorce Court, Cristina’s Court, Judge Hatchett, Judge Alex, Judge Joe Brown, and then Judge Judy. That’s apparently only a small selection of the available shows.

The shows are pretty fascinating, especially when you consider how much of them are actually a front for what they really are. They pretend to be a court, but they are actually “binding arbitration” and most participants are paid if they win or lose.

Watching these so much, I’ve actually started to wonder if people aren’t that upset about these debts or problems, but agree to appear on the show just for the money.

While I have to admit that I enjoy the first four shows of the day, the two juggernauts of the genre, Judge Joe Brown and Judge Judy, drive me to distraction. I’m sure that Judy will sweep the category year after year until her retirement, and I think that’s a shame. But it’s a category that will reward sensationalism and she makes for good clips.

So admit it, which court shows are you secretly addicted to? I can’t be the only one!

Last week at Paley Fest ‘08, Chuck’s creators said they want to bring in Jean Claude Van Damme for the show. Turns out, it wasn’t a joke, says TVGuide:

Josh Schwartz was deadly serious when he told the crowd that it’s his goal to cast Van Damme as one of next season’s Big Bads. “I would love to have him on the show,” Schwartz later told me. “I’m just not sure if he’s available.”

More information about the panel can be found at TV Guide. Plus, a little bit of info about a certain statue on Lost.

The show resumes production in May.

CBS has issued their final word, despite the fact that the internet is full of buzz that Jericho is just getting better every week, they’ve canceled the show. Again. The Hollywood Reporter says:

“The March 25th episode of Jericho will be the series finale,” CBS said in a statement. “Without question, there are passionate viewers watching this program; we simply wish there were more. We thank an engaged and spirited fan base for keeping the show alive this long, and an outstanding team of producers, cast and crew that went through creative hoops to deliver a compelling, high quality second season. We have no regrets bringing the show back for a second try. We listened to our viewers, gave the series an opportunity to grow, and the producers put a great story on the screen. We’re proud of everyone’s efforts.”

We’ve talked a little here before about fan campaigns and if they are worth it. So was it worth it to bring Jericho back for this one extra season?

The reviewer is just as surprised as you must be, in this article from Variety:

Not surprisingly, the “Rock Monster” narrative becomes a bit wobbly by the time it reaches its climactic section, but it’s still a cut above most of these movies, which tend to have a mailed-in quality. Too bad the channel’s programmers didn’t recognize as much, scheduling the telepic against CBS’ NCAA basketball coverage in much of the country…

It seems this movie, while being about a large monster made out of rocks, actually contains nods to other horror films, competent acting, and fun scenes among the gore. How in the world did this get greenlit, and why is it on Sci-Fi Channel?

(I mostly kid, I have enjoyed at least two Sci-Fi Pictures films in recent memory).