• Leave it to John Jakala to make me laugh at the Civil War stupidity. Everything I read about it makes it sound more and more of a trainwreck. Yeah, my money’s going to manga, as well.

• The State is now available on iTunes. Me, I still haven’t gotten into watching iTunes videos.

• Another buzzed Brit show gets optioned, this time HBO is hoping to make an Americanized Suburban Shootout. Camilla Diamond probably has her best chances at HBO and, if done right, Suburban Shootout is exactly the kind of show HBO needs to keep those subscribers planning on dropping the premium channel when its last buzz show, The Sopranos ends.

• Stephen Colbert will be filming a segment in Colbert County, Alabama to celebrate his discovery of a county named after him.

• Do addicts of social network websites behave similarly to Massively Multiplayer Online video game addicts?

Supplemental tags: The State, Suburban Shootout, Civil War

Whew! Just as I thought I’d have to come up with some lame joke about the Christmas special season starting in September to justify a post about Doctor Who’s second season premiering tonight on The Sci-Fi channel, I find out that the Guinness Book of Records named it TV’s longest running sci-fi show, with Stargate named the longest running science fiction show (consecutive). Guinness counts Doctor Who’s run as lasting 43 years and 723 episodes.

The second season of Doctor Who makes its 150-minute American premiere tonight on The Sci-Fi Channel, starting with The Christmas Invasion special and following with “New Earth”.

According to overnight numbers reported by Media Life Magazine, last night’s premiere of Ugly Betty won its time slot, beating Survivor, though Survivor had a larger audience of adults 18-49. The brightest news, though:

“Betty,” which recorded the fifth-best premiere for a new show this season, built 25 percent from its first half hour to its second, going from a 4.2 to a 5.6. It became just the third debut this season to grow in its second half, joining NBC’s “Heroes” and CBS’s “Jericho.”

While it’s not a certainly, a premiere that can grow its audience from the first half-hour to the second is more likely to hold on to its audience. The only show among those three mentioned to air a second episode, Jericho, is the first new show to draw a larger audience watching its second episode.

If you missed it, ABC has made the premiere available online.

I linked to the video earlier, but I’m posting this trailer for La Maquina de Bailar because it’s worth watching.

Yeah, I know, DDR fandom is so 2002.

Yeah, that too, lazy blogger. It’s friday.

Two bits about superhero video games caught my eye yesterday. First, the team behind Justice League Heroes talked to SciFi Wire about their intention to make the game one a variety of audiences can play:

The new Justice League Heroes interactive video game will cater to women and also allow less-experienced gamers to play roles alongside the experts, Warner Brothers Interactive Entertainment producer Jason Ades told SCI FI Wire.

“We get a lot of e-mail from husbands and wives, boyfriends and girlfriends, who enjoy playing these games together,” Ades said in an interview at a special preview of the game in Los Angeles. “It’s nice to have the wives sitting down with the family, and they can play these, too. And in the DC Comics, there are powerful women among the characters that they enjoy.”

While being inclusive is a noble goal, I find it interesting that the producers were talking up the marketing benefits of the effort. I’d rather hear that Zatanna’s a playable character because she’s a great hero previously ignored in videogame adaptations of the DC Universe (I still wish for a New Teen Titans game that mimics the old X-Men arcade game, because I’d like to play as Donna Troy or Nightwing in that environment) but it is nice to hear that the “Aren’t you interested in courting women’s wallets, as well?” isn’t falling on deaf ears, anymore.

Then again, it’ll be cooler when a game aimed at hardcore gamers tries to make sure it doesn’t focus solely on the male audience. In such a short article it’s hard to differ where they see making the game welcoming to women and to inexperienced gamers differ.

Also, Cryptic Studios, the studio behind City of Heroes, will be working on the Marvel MMO currently being developed. It’s an encouraging sign for the Marvel MMO, since there was some really good design in City of Heroes — a game that managed to be engage players with different play styles and skill levels.

A lot of speculation is wondering how the game will work, especially since many City of Heroes players wanted the chance to be their favorite heroes. My ideal solution would have players creating their own characters in a Marvel universe who get to interact with various Marvel characters and frequently battling Marvel villains. (At level one, you face off against the White Rabbit.)

As for clones, well it’s not like anyone’s going to get to be Wolverine. VVolverine, maybe or W0LV3R1NE… so I imagine in the MMO Marvel universe Logan had a lot of secret love children.

Unlike many an anglophile, my appreciation of The Office always lacked enthusiasm. I connected with the characters, laughed in certain places and wrote a handful of message board posts about how American audiences would be challenged by how the show parodies a TV genre (the docu-soap) unfamiliar to stateside audiences. (At one point, I thought the formula for importing the series would involve turning it into a parody of American candid reality shows like The Restaurant — c’mon you know the Rocco DiSpirito we saw really was David Brint in a chef’s hat.)

Along those lines, I was also found myself holding a rare opinion in how I embraced the American remake of the series from the moment I saw clips of “Diversity Day” online. That episode is so perfect, to me. Watching Michael Scott repeat a Chris Rock routine makes a perfect demonstration how the topic of race can turn so incredibly uncomfortable in the wrong hands. Michael is simply repeating (or, rather, imitating) a routine without showing any understanding of the issues in the routine. Rock’s insights are reduced to an excuse to use forbidden language in Michael’s hands.

In their third season premiere, “Gay Witch Hunt”, the show managed to revisit “Diversity Day” with gay issues, effectively tearing apart some of the bigotry and stereotyping that LGBT people face. Oscar’s outing starts in motion when Michael calls Oscar “faggy” and Michael is appalled to learn that he said that to a gay man. Michael defends himself by noting the difference he sees between the slur and what he sees as an acceptable use for the word. “I would never call a retarded person a retard — that’s what you call your friends when they’re being retards.” he says, hilariously eviscerating every past defense of saying that its okay to use “gay” to mean lame.

When Oscar was outed to The Office’s audience, I speculated that Oscar was probably closeted at work because he didn’t want to add to the stupid comments he suffers from Michael. He already received insensitive comments about his ethnicity and didn’t want to add to Michael’s ammo. While, that suspicion wasn’t confirmed, we did see that such a concern would have been justified. A large number of Oscar’s co-workers start treating him like he were a different person upon his outing — Angela lets out a terrified scream when he touches her, Dwight is tricked into trying to buy gaydar from The Sharper Image (or, if they’re out of stock, Brookstone) and Kelly suddenly starts sending admiring glares his way, telling him that she thinks he’s so cool. (”Yes, I’m super cool. I’m an accountant. At a failing paper company. Like Sir Ian McKellen.” Ocsar hilariously deadpans later on. It’s a moment that captures the pain that model minority stereotyping can cause.)

Even though “Gay Witch Hunt” had some very sharp and thought-provoking social commentary to challenge its viewers, it also never forgot to entertain. The show’s great success has been in its ability to (in a complete contrast to most TV sitcoms) find the humor in these characters’ nuances, in taking them away from the broad characterizations typical of the sitcom and it managed to explore gay stereotyping within these character details. It’s one thing to do a good job exploring social issues, but it’s a testament to The Office’s quality that they managed to be relevant without the slightest change to the show’s other qualities.

I won’t be tuning in to Survivor tonight (and with Ugly Betty and The Office on at the same time, I can only say thank you Comcast for your dual-tuner DVR) but I will likely be checking it out via VOD. In the meantime, there are two discussions into the series I’ve been meaning to point out.

I’ve always been the type that seeks out the optimistic take on things and, while I agree the model minority stereotype is being reinforced, I do think there’s some Asian stereotypes being busted. With Yul and Brad, we are seeing two Asian-American men being presented as sexually desirable which is still a pretty rare occurrence outside of Lost (and that show became so obsessed with the same four white people in its second season that one could almost forget that Daniel Dae Kim was a cast member) and there’s a lot of talk about the different Asian cultures, so I do think there’s a desire to educate the nation that Asian-Americans all share a common background.

From my view, the members of Pukapuka tribe are interested in maintaining the parts of the model minority stereotype that makes themselves feel better while challenging the ones that have caused them frustration. I can understand that — as infuriating as model minority stereotypes are, I’m not sure how I’d go about challenging a stereotype of intellect and being good at puzzles in a reality show while trying to maintain my self-esteem. I mean, I don’t think I’d want to be the one to bite the bullet and enter the national memory as the guy who proved that Asian-Americans can be total dumbasses for the sake of challenging the model minority stereotype… which I guess is one of the subtleties of the model minority stereotype — I want to be perceived as smart but I don’t want people crediting my intellect to my genes.

Of course, Television without Pity recapper Miss Ali offers my favorite take on the season when she quips

You know, I feel like for this season, there should be some sound, like “doink,” that we can all agree to make when something happens that would normally motivate us to say something kind of like: “I’m not saying it’s funny, because even admitting it’s funny means that I am recognizing that a stereotype exists, and by recognizing the existence of the stereotype and the unfortunate coincidence of what just happened, I am in no way implying that it is not a stereotype or that it is accurate; I am only saying that it is unfortunate in terms of timing, and I beg you not to misunderstand, and to instead embrace the incredible awkwardness with me so that we may contribute to the world’s ability to work together in a spirit of peace and understanding.”

Dionk is already part of my vocabulary. Too bad no one knows what I mean.

While reading Steven Grant’s latest column dissecting the harsh reviews that reviews sometimes receive I started thinking about how I’ve reacted to reviews where I was in disagreement with the reviewer.

The time I joined the dogpile over Manga Life’s review of From Eroica with Love (and, looking back at what I said, Grant’s column doesn’t make me reconsider the point I tried to make, that the review’s weakness didn’t live up to the website’s goal) but I also thought about the story of how Free Enterprise failed to go beyond a limited release.

According to a panel with the film’s writer and director, they claimed that the film was done in by bad reviews in Chicago (when the film was being tested in only two markets) reviews that still invoked anger because they felt it was unfair. The film was about (in case you’ve never seen it) two Star Trek and comic book geeks who are attractive (con and smart, but have personal issues to overcome. One was having trouble accepting adult responsibilities, choosing to buy a limited-edition replica of the Enterprise, rather than pay his overdue electric bill while the other is turning mean as his birthday approaches. As described by Free Enterprise’s creative team (unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find those reviews online), the harsh reviews didn’t note flaws in the film but instead complained that casting attractive actors as Star Trek geeks made the film unbelievable, laying out geek stereotypes and saying that a film that didn’t reinforce those stereotypes wasn’t believable.

Now, at the time I heard about these reviews, I thought they were unfair assessments. However, I did find it interesting to reconsider my reaction to those reviews with Grant’s explanation of reviewing in mind:

That’s what separates critics from reviewers: while it’s the job of a reviewer to respond to material, it’s the job of the critic to illuminate it. Reviews are about opinion, enlightened or otherwise. Criticism is about understanding.

I know why there’s confusion about this. Most regular reviewers, and I don’t discount myself, feel some need to write more about a work than “it’s good” or “it’s bad.” It’s a communication thing, really; you want to give your audience some basis for accepting that your opinion’s worth listening to.

So. Looking back at those reviews, I think I’m willing to take back the idea that they were bad reviews — perhaps a better way to put it would say that they’re probably not a useful review, since the basis of the bad review isn’t enough for a newspaper reader to make the review pertinent to their entertainment purchases.

Yay! Tonight the show I’ve been most excited about, Ugly Betty debuts.

Why have I been so drawn into this series? Reading the Boston Globe’s Suzanne C. Ryan discuss this fall TV season’s geek chic ethic made me realize how the concept behind Ugly Betty is very unique.

The story of the unattractive (or attractive guy with bad hair and unstylish clothes) guy who manages to win the heart of the pretty girl he’s pined after (or realizes that he’s overlooked his less-pretty female friend who always loved him for his personality over his appearance) is solidly a part of our folklore thanks to John Hughes romantic comedies. It’s even the storyline to a hit reality show, Beauty and the Geek.

Betty Suarez is the first time a large audience is being asked to cheer for the handsome guy to look past a female protagonist’s appearance (which, again, amounts to bad hair and makeup) and see her for her inner qualities, especially her intelligence. (In the original Betty La Fea Betty was underemployed because of her appearance, forced to take a job she was very overqualified for.) Women learning to desire more than beauty in their mate is common, but men aren’t asked the same in our fairy tale romances.

Plus, the trailer for the show seems to be positioning the show as a sappy sweet Cinderella story. I like those when they hit their notes right (and America Ferrera is an actress I expect to be very capable in that regard). If that’s the case, Ugly Betty will be a show that’s both sappy and subversive, a contradictory mix I find very appealing.

Watching this Daily Show clip (I do love YouTube for alerting me to the really good stuff on my DVR I haven’t watched yet) I picked up on a message common to many a Daily Show segment — when the news is the news, the informative parts are cut out… but, if you watch The Daily Show you get to see them put the informative part back in, even if it’s there to make a joke about its absence.

I don’t feel like debating the merits of that argument right now (though it is something that feels true — something you feel in your gut — if you occasionally glimpse the cable news networks and see The Daily Show mock them) but this clip nicely shows on why Daily Show viewers feel better-informed by “the fake news” than the “real” news, the jokes that mock the mainstream news for missing the substance of the story by highlighting the substance. It probably doesn’t help, either, that when the major media outlets talk about younger viewers who see The Daily Show as a more credible news source, they don’t see beyond the irreverent attitude and the crude language and fail to notice the frequent jokes that highlight their failings.

(Oh, and there’s that Annenberg Center report (PDF warning) from October 2004 that declared Daily Show viewers knowledgable about the 2004 presidential campaign.)