NBC source: Conan contract doesn't guarantee "The Tonight Show" start time
NBC and Conan O’Brien and his camp have been divided in recent days over a key question:  Is it “The Tonight Show” if the program does not begin at 11:35 p.m., immediately following the late local news?

Friday, an NBC official said that there was no mention of an 11:35 p.m. start time in O'Brien's contract, which guaranteed him the job as host of "The Tonight Show." NBC has proposed pushing O'Brien's show to 12:05 a.m. to make room for Jay Leno's return to late night.

O'Brien "does not have any time-slot protection in his contract," said an NBC executive who asked not to be identified discussing provisions of O'Brien's contract. Representatives for O'Brien were not immediately available to respond.

The issue is important because it could decide whether NBC is in breach of O'Brien's contract -- and whether the legal case could end up before a jury. People close to O'Brien said that O'Brien's earlier agreement with NBC specifically spelled out that "The Tonight Show" begins at 11:35 p.m. -- so they are confident in their position that "The Tonight Show" starts at 11:35 p.m. O'Brien in his public missive earlier in the week said that "For 60 years the Tonight Show has aired immediately following the late local news."

Said O'Brien: "The Tonight Show at 12:05 simply isn’t the Tonight Show."

Meanwhile, people from both camps said they were close to a resolution that would end the acrimonious week-long battle that has damaged the reputations of NBC, Leno and O’Brien. The deal would call for O’Brien to leave NBC, clearing the way for Jay Leno to reclaim his longtime seat behind the desk at “The Tonight Show.” O'Brien was expected to host his show tonight and next week, said people close to the situation.

The exit agreement would end the seven-month tenure of O’Brien, who became the fifth host of “The Tonight Show” in June. It would also mark a high-profile misstep of NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker, who devised the plan in 2004 to give O’Brien “The Tonight Show” in 2009. Last year, Zucker shuffled the deck again, giving Leno his own prime-time show in an effort to try to keep both comedians in the NBC fold.

-- Meg James
Rating and evaluating '24,' 'Burn Notice,' 'Human Target' and 'Leverage'

The following piece discusses "24," "Burn Notice," "Leverage" and "Human Target." There are no spoilers for upcoming episodes of those shows below. There are quite a few clips from each show in the video player on the right side of this page. I haven't put them within the text because there are a lot of them and doing so could cause this page to load more slowly for some people.

When is predictability a bad thing?  

A few new and returning shows ("24," "Burn Notice," "Leverage" and "Human Target") have a few things in common: They stick a bit of humor and a lot of action into their chosen formulas, which they tend to stick to pretty faithfully.   

And I'm certainly not here to unthinkingly rip on formulas: Sometimes they can be quite pleasing. A solid formula, executed with smarts and flair and a terrific cast, can be both comforting and intriguing. Take the uptick in quality of the old-school "Law & Order" in the last couple of seasons, which proved that, despite having one of the oldest recipes out there, there's life in the old girl yet.

Then there are formulas that have -- or should have -- built-in expiration dates. Of course, networks don't want to let successful shows expire, they want to milk them forever. Thus we're doomed to see shows that used to seem fresh and appealing start to look ragged, threadbare and in need of a massive jolt of imagination.

"24's" gimmick was so different that the show got several seasons' worth of mileage out of Jack Bauer's perilous adventures; it's kind of amazing to think about how long it took for the endless succession of cliffhangers to get old.

But now the show's central conceit has become an albatross. The fact that the show takes place in 24 hours and allegedly hews to "real time" has given rise to any number of in-show cliches and shortcuts: Jack Bauer never hits monster traffic jams; CTU's whiz-bang technology always works; a character who talks about an event in the near future will always mention that said event is going to occur in "about an hour" (i.e., it will be the source of that week's cliffhanger), and so on.

And that's not even to touch on all the verbal cliches that started to be funny in the middle of the show's run but by now aren't quite as amusing: Jack needs that information from CTU "Now!" Bad guys need to "tell [him] what you know now!" etc. He is running out of time! We get it!

So when is a given formula enjoyable and when does it start to seem too tame and predictable? Each one of us will draw that line in a different place, but one fact is plain: Writers have to get more inventive the longer a show runs, which is hard to do but it's the only way to prevent indifference on the part of the viewer.

I thought I'd take a look at how predictable each of the following shows are and discuss whether that's a problem. Below are capsule reviews of "24," "Human Target," "Burn Notice" and "Leverage."

"24," returns 8 p.m. Central Sunday, Fox: There are really only so many scenarios that Jack Bauer can find himself in, and by now we've seen them all (aside from "Jack Bauer held hostage by violent circus clowns"). "24" got around this problem most adeptly in Season 5 -- the show's high-water mark -- by turning it into a creepily engrossing character drama about a Nixonian president and his cuckoo-bananas wife. In that season, the show took a character actor I'd never heard of, Gregory Itzin, and gave him a lot of great material as the troubled, twitchy President Logan. Given the number of solid recurring players among Logan's aides and the CTU staff, the show had a deep bench of good actors and a number of inter-character relationships to draw on as well.

But these days, when I read who's been cast in an upcoming season of "24," I just sigh. I know these actors won't get much to do, aside from running around with (or trying to avoid) Jack Bauer as he saves the world. Katee Sackhoff is in the "24" cast this season, but as I said to a friend the other day, loving a great show like "Battlestar Galactica" means watching the cast scatter to projects that don't draw on half their skills but pay the bills (there's a rap song in there somewhere). In the early hours of the new season, Sackhoff gets to show almost none of her range, and if the show proceeds with clockwork efficiency, well, so what? "24" just seems wan and tired to me. The show's few interesting actors get little to do and the new characters aren't that compelling. Pass. 

How predictable is it? Very predictable.

Is that a problem? By this point in the show's life cycle, yes. Fox should just let this show die while it still has a little dignity left.

Rating: One and a half stars.

"Human Target," premieres 7 p.m. Central Sunday, Fox: Comic book nerds, don't expect this show to have anything to do with the fine graphic novel series of the same name. In this "adaptation" (i.e. complete re-working) of "Human Target," Mark Valley plays an expensive, high-powered bodyguard who can protect anyone from anything with because he … zzzz.

Oh sorry. Where was I? There are a lot of explosions and running around on display here, but there's just not much substance to "Human Target." Little thought has been put into any of these characters, which is a shame, given that the lead cast is composed of Valley, Jackie Earle Haley and Chi McBride. These terrific pros would be good no matter what material you gave them, but "Human Target" doesn't give them much of anything. The show doesn't quite know what to do with their particular skills in the two episodes I've seen.

At times, "Human Target" was a decent, escapist hour of action-adventure (and "Battlestar Galactica" fans should know that Tricia Helfer and the guy who played Doc Cottle guest in the pilot). But there's just something unambitious about the whole enterprise. It felt like a collection of action beats in search of a coherent plot. Shortcuts are taken in the storytelling so that more action sequences can be stuffed into the proceedings, and the "shocking twists" that occur in the second episode -- well, I saw them coming in the first five minutes.

How predictable is it? Pretty predictable

Is that a problem? Yes. Despite a terrific cast, "Human Target" feels like a soulless thing created from bits and pieces from better TV shows and movies.  

Rating: Two stars.

"Leverage," returned Jan. 13, airs 9 p.m. Central Wednesdays on TNT: This is the most formulaic show of the lot, but I find myself watching it a few times a year, mainly when "Burn Notice" isn't available. It's genial enough and the cast, which displays a rather odd collection of vibes and energies, has gelled to the point where I can watch it without thinking (too often) that Aldis Hodge is much, much better than most of the actors he's working with. Tim Hutton is good too, and as for the rest -- well, at least Beth Reisgraf has toned down her Parker schtick to an acceptable level.

The main thing I think about now as I watch the show is how ridiculous Christian Kane's hair is. I mean, it's comically lush and can easily overpower a scene when he doesn't put it in a ponytail.

Yes, I'm probably thinking too much about extraneous elements -- and not watching the show all that regularly -- because "Leverage" sticks very closely indeed to its formula. The hacker guy has a scene where he hacks stuff and magically produces whatever information the gang needs; the fighting guy fights bad guys; the break-in woman steals something and whoever is grifting that week has a few scenes in which they run a scam. And that is that. No matter what the con of the week involves, that's what "Leverage" does, week in and week out. If you're in the mood for something along those lines, the show more or less fills the bill. But truth be told, it also looks a little cheap and I tend to think of it as "Burn Notice's" less cool cousin.

How predictable is it? Fairly predictable.

Is that a problem? To a degree. But least once per episode, the show surprises me. So there's that.

Rating: Two and a half stars.

"Burn Notice," returns 9 p.m. Central Jan. 21, USA: "Burn Notice" typically depicts Michael Westen helping some hapless citizen out of a jam, and using a fake persona, some MacGyver-esque technology and sometimes old-fashioned fists of fury to do so. It doesn't really matter that the components of the show don't change all that often; seeing Jeffrey Donovan give Westen grit and watching him assume Westen's cover identities is still quite entertaining. Plus the cast is one of the most enjoyable ensembles in cable. Bruce Campbell usually looks like he's having a good time, which means, as a viewer, I do to.

Of course the best "Burn Notice" stories are tied into some emotional issue that penetrates Westen's tough shell; for that reason, the high-water mark of the show remains the Victor arc from Season 2. "Burn Notice" hasn't quite entered that realm again, though the episode it returns with on Thursday (which has Sharon Gless' "Cagney and Lacey" co-star Tyne Daly as a guest star) is satisfying and enjoyable. Gless in particular gets some fabulous material, which she hits out of the park.

My only quibble at this point is that the "who burned Michael" plot is starting to feel a bit stale. It almost feels like they're running out of ways to play out that string; it's possible that "Burn Notice" just needs to move on to some other kind of ongoing story arc. I'm starting to feel a bit jaded about the "Big Bad" that gets introduced once or twice each season. Every time the show peels a layer off the "Who burned Michael?" onion, another few layers are revealed and the stakes suddenly don't feel so high -- it just feels like we're never going to see a resolution of that issue.

Are we at the point where finding out more about how and why Michael got burned is like finding the mother on "How I Met Your Mother" -- i.e., a card that shouldn't be played that often because it gets less effective over time? We might be.

How predictable is it: Somewhat predictable.

Is that a problem: Not really, unless the "Who burned Michael?" plots start to get too repetitive.

Rating: Three stars.

SFMOMA's 75th-anniversary photography show focuses on California and San Francisco through the decades
This museum was one of this country's first to consider photography an equal to painting and sculpture. 'The View from Here' features 275 pictures from the 16,000-image museum collection, many of them chronicling the evolution of California, which paralleled the development of the photographic medium from a nickelodeon-style entertainment to a full-blown art form.

David Bianculli: The Latest From The Late-Night Wars

Fresh Air's guest host and TV critic recaps the best of last night's salvos from the talk-show wars — which are getting fiercer with every passing hour.