Opening day: '2012' looking huge, 'Christmas Carol' holding strong

Opening day: '2012' looking huge, 'Christmas Carol' holding strong

The end of the world is going to do big business once again.

Sony Pictures' "2012," the latest disaster movie from director Roland Emmerich, appears headed toward an opening weekend gross of just over $60 million after it sold a studio-estimated $23.7 million worth of tickets in the U.S. and Canada on Friday. That will make it Emmerich's second biggest opening ever, behind 2004's "The Day After Tomorrow," which had the advantage of launching Memorial Day weekend.

Combined with what's expected to be an even bigger performance in 105 foreign territories, "2012" could easily collect about $150 million or more worldwide this weekend, making it a major hit despite its hefty $200 million production cost.

Disney's "A Christmas Carol," meanwhile, appears to be recovering from its weak start. Ticket sales declined only 37% on Friday, putting in on track for a drop of about 30% through Sunday. That would give it a second weekend gross of around $20 million and could augur a long and healthy run through the holidays, particularly on 3-D screens.

Independent favorite "Precious" is headed towards another very strong weekend. According to a competing studio, it collected nearly $2 million at 174 locations on Friday alone, meaning it will likely gross more than $6 million through Sunday. That would give it a very strong per-theater average of about $35,000.

-- Ben Fritz

Photo: John Cusack and Woody Harrelson in "2012." Credit: Columbia Pictures.

'Abandon All Hope...': Clips from the last 'Supernatural' of 2009

Below are clips from "Abandon All Hope...," the "Supernatural" episode that airs Nov. 19. My weekly "Supernatural" recaps and stories can be found here.

"Abandon All Hope" is the final episode of 2009. After a two-month break, Season 5 resumes Jan. 14, 2010.

An episode summary is also below. Pictures from the episode, which was written by Ben Edlund, are on this post. Beware: The photos give away spoilers about guest stars for the episode, and regarding what's below, oh yes, spoilers ahoy.

Here's an "Abandon All Hope..." episode summary from the CW: "Sam (Jared Padalecki), Dean (Jensen Ackles) and Castiel (Misha Collins) track down the Colt and head off to find Lucifer (guest star Mark Pellegrino) to send him back to Hell.  It’s a hunter’s reunion when the crew joins forces with Bobby (guest star Jim Beaver), Ellen (guest star Samantha Ferris) and Jo (guest star Alona Tal) for what could be their last night on Earth.  Also guest starring Mark Sheppard as ‘Crowley’ and Rachel Miner as ‘Meg.’ " “Abandon All Hope…” was written by Ben Edlund and directed by Phil Sgriccia.

Abandon yourself to these cliptastic promos:

And hey, here's a bit of a personal update: I'd mentioned an ill family member -- thanks for all your kind words and thoughts! They did the trick, I think. That situation (as of Friday night) seems to be improving, thank goodness. So there's about an 80 percent chance that I will be at the "Supernatural" convention in Chicago on Saturday, mostly during the afternoon (probably between about noon and 5:30 p.m.). I'll be tweeting from there and also, if you see me and want to say hello, please do. I'm very tall and have red hair and look somewhat like the picture at the top of this column. Hope to see you then!

Review: Ray Davies delivers 'Kinks Choral'
You've got to love a show that starts out in fine fashion and just keeps getting better as the night progresses, which describes the Warfield show in a nutshell.
In 'Prisoner,' Twisted Whimsy Flirts With New Fears

At the height of the Cold War, the television series The Prisoner was so subversive and enigmatic, it lasted just 17 episodes. There's finally a remake, but if you're expecting a faithful re-creation of the British series, actor Jim Caviezel says you'll be disappointed.

FILM: Challenging 500 Years of Globalisation
NEW YORK, Nov 14 (IPS)To end poverty, you have to know how it beganwith globalisation. No, not the 20th century variety engendered by multinationals and their friends at the IMF, World Bank and WTO. They just codified practices that kept developing countries poor.

Who ya gonna call? 'Supernatural'! Let's talk about 'The Real Ghostbusters'

MGM gets another debt payment extension

MGM's lenders agreed to give the struggling studio another forbearance allowing the company to extend its interest payments until Jan. 31, 2010. This is an extension of a deal MGM cut with its lenders last month that let it forgo those payments on its $3.7 billion debt until Dec. 15.

In a statement, MGM said its lenders gave the extension to support the company's efforts to "develop and evaluate long-term strategic alternatives, including "operating as a stand alone entity, forming strategic partnerships and evaluating a potential sale of the company."

Everyone in Hollywood is betting on the latter and that MGM will officially go on the auction block shortly. And, there won't be a shortage of bidders, including Time Warner, News Corp. and Lions Gate Entertainment.

--Claudia Eller
Who ya gonna call? 'Supernatural'! Let's talk about 'The Real Ghostbusters'

How do you feel about angels? Ha! Let's talk about "Supernatural's" "The Real Ghostbusters" below. 

Well, that was quite fun. Though it's a little bit strange to have a two "funny" "Supernaturals" in a row. And I know what you're going to say -- that both had sincere subtexts and even serious moments. [Dean voice] "I get it."

But yeah, two jokey ones in a row -- that's a little odd (haven't they normally been separated by several episodes in previous seasons?). And hey, remember that Apocalypse that somehow got started at some point, that one time? I'm sure it's around here somewhere. Maybe the Apocalypse fell between the couch cushions. That must be it.

Hey, I'm nitpicking "Supernatural" -- and of course, we nitpick because we love. As evidenced by the very good questions asked by the "Supernatural" super-fans at the convention in "The Real Ghostbusters." Too bad that German dude got killed by evil ghost children. Because I would have liked to grab a beer and talk "Route 666" with him.

It seems to me that the episode had a couple of purposes -- to demonstrate to the Winchesters, especially to Dean, that saving the day is not such a bad gig after all. And to show them that their heroism may actually inspire their fans. Especially their gay fans. Which is awesome.  

But anyway -- themes, schmemes. Let's get to just a few of my favorite lines or moments. I normally watch each episode twice, but I'll have to watch this one for the second time in a few days (time is not on my side this week). I do look forward to watching it again, so loaded was it with in-jokes and fanservice. But for now, this is just a really short list of fun moments. Please share yours in the comment area.

Anyway, here goes:

The German dude's line about Ruby being evil. And his "sigh" over more creepy children in "Supernatural." I love that guy. Despite the fact that "Hook Man" was a pretty bad episode, I would totally be fine with the German dude getting resurrected in time for the next on-screen "Supernatural" convention. Fake!Sam and Fake!Dean repeating the "I may have to kill you" conversation on the way to the graveyard. Classic. Sam and Dean having to "play" Rufus and Bobby in the LARPing scenario. Loved spotting the Ash clones in the audience, but there were no quality Fake!Ash interactions! What's up with that?"How do you feel about angels?" Golden Chuck line. Pretty much everything that came out of Chuck's mouth on that convention stage was hilarious, especially the highlight reel at the end of the episode. "'Supernatural' makes digging graves seem so easy!" Yes, and I've also noticed that when a grave is dug on "Supernatural," it takes barely any time and the sides of the hole are always perfectly straight. The line about weapons being knocked out of the boys' hands -- and then that happening. Twice. Get a bungy cord, boys! Listen to German dude!I loved how most of the nitpicks from fans and even quotes from Fake!Dean were actually incorporated into the actual ghost children plot. The "Six Million Dollar Man" sound effect when Chuck saved the day? Awe. Some. In general, Fake!Sam and Fake!Dean were pretty great, and I loved their gravelly Winchester Voices. 

Now on to a some quibbles (and hey, I wouldn't be a fan if I wasn't quibbly, right?). What was up with the "Supernatural" convention attendees being mostly guys? What's that all about? I haven't been to any "Supernatural" conventions, but going by the crowd at the "Supernatural" Comic-Con panel, as well as by my own general sense of the message boards and such, the women outnumber the men in the fandom. Don't they? But hey, I'm totally not dissing guys in the "Supernatural" fandom. Male "Supernatural" fans represent!

Still, it did weird me out a little that the convention was mostly guys, who mostly dressed as Sam and Dean. Where were the ladies?

Also, the ghost story line could have been sped up much more. I think I'm as tired of demon kids as the German Hook Man. I would have loved it if more time had been spent on the fans and the convention. More of the Chuck Q&As would have been awesome (if there are a lot of outtakes from that, I cannot wait for the Season 5 DVD set).

And it's odd, but I guess I expected there to be a more obvious Chuck-as-prophet moment. In that regard, "The Monster at the End of This Book" has "The Real Ghostbusters" beat, as far as Chuck-meta episodes go. "Monster" tied in really well with the ongoing story arc of that season and the overall mythology of the show.

But as I wrote last week, the story arc of this season isn't quite as tight and focused as it was in Season 4. Again, I like my meta as much as the next person, but the show does seem to be stalling a bit about getting to the mega. You know, mega-developments such as Satan walking the Earth. I know, the show appears to be moving various pieces into position for later in the season. I do hope it all pays off with a well-paced second half of Season 5.

Anyway, Chuck did provide the crucial clue that we need to get to the next phase of the story -- though he did so inadvertently, through a clue that Becky remembered from a book that had been published some time ago (and, if I'm being honest, that was tacked on to the convention story rather randomly).

Still, I'm a sucker, a major sucker, for meta commentaries such as "Monster" and "The Real Ghostbusters." Give me enough of that stuff and it almost shuts down whatever critical facilities I may possess. And I had a pretty rough day on Thursday. Sitting down and seeing a lighter "Supernatural" -- well, that was just what I needed. An hour of escapist diversion hit the spot.

But I think I'm kind of done with the funny-haha for some time to come. I want me some meaty mythology, and I want it soon. Next week's episode (and for pictures and info about it, look here) promises to be full of meaty mythology goodness -- and if it isn't, there will be Hell to pay. Kidding! Only a little. 

OK, three things before I close: 

1. There is a good chance I will be attending the Chicago Supernatural convention on Saturday in the afternoon. It's not set in stone due to a personal situation that I may have to attend to that day. But if I go, well, how perfect is that, to attend my first "Supernatural" convention two days after this episode airs? If I go, I'll try to talk to as many fans as I can -- I'd love to hear people's reactions to this episode and to... The Road So Far.

I thought about having some kind of gathering or meetup that day, but I may be doing couple of actor interviews, so the day might be hectic (plus I may not be able to go at all). So -- here's a question for you, fans who are attending or have attended "Supernatural" cons in the past -- should I just tweet that "Hey, I'm by the food stall, come and talk to me," or just wander around and trust that people who spot the six-foot-tall redhead and want to talk to her will make their presences known? I'm not really sure what the convention etiquette is.

Well, anyway, come say hi if you're going. It would be fun to meet folks in person. Oh and if you have any advice/thoughts about "Supernatural" conventions in general, do tell!

2. If you're new to this site, there are rules to commenting on this site (a fuller explanation of the rules is at the end of this post. Please abide by the guidelines on that list). The very short version: No comments over 500 words. No Samgirl/Deangirl nonsense. No spoilers at all. No attacking other people or condemning the show for ruining Western civilization. Basically, just don't be a drag or an unpleasant shrieker, or I will ban you from commenting here without warning. But -- win! -- I have not had to do that once yet. Because you are all awesome and you totally Get It.

3. Tonight and Friday, I think I will set comments to post automatically -- which is something I only rarely do, but I feel OK doing that because, as I mentioned earlier, you have all been really cool and non-shrieky and I trust you. I will be with a sick family member most of the day Friday. I know you will be awesome. And if someone does not Get It, report nasty commenters to me via email (moryan@tribune.com). And I will take those people down like Chuck slaying a ghost. 

Let the commenting fun begin!

Andre Agassi tells all
The new autobiography by tennis star Andre Agassi is a fascinating book.
'Disturbing the Universe': William Kunstler 101

Lawyer William Kunstler famously took on controversial cases: from radical Abbie Hoffman to mobster John Gotti to Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, Kunstler's clients earned him both praise and loathing. In a new documentary, his own daughters ask whether his choices made Kunstler a great man — a question critic Mark Jenkins says they never really answer.

Exclusive first look: 'Battlestar' prequel 'Caprica' retools, reduces and readies itself for January debut

Blockbuster's woes didn't let up in the third quarter

Beleaguered DVD renter and retailer Blockbuster Inc. got no respite from its problems last quarter as revenue plunged 21% and net loss, excluding one-time costs, more than doubled.

Blockbuster stock, which was already trading at under $1, plunged 13% in after-hours trading to 72 cents on the news.

The company had a net loss of $116.8 million for the third quarter, much of which was connected to one-time costs from the company's recent debt refinancing and the sale of an Irish subsidiary. Excluding those events, net loss was $38.3 million.

Total revenue for the quarter ended Sept. 30 was $910.5 million.

Blockbuster attributed its problems to cutbacks in marketing and inventory in order to conserve costs and pay debt, ongoing store closures and the "macroeconomic environment." The ongoing recession and particular weakness in the DVD market hit Blockbuster hard. Domestic same-store rental revenue fell 14.5%, compared with the year-earlier quarter, while same-store sales revenue plummeted 35.6%.

In the quarter that ended Sept. 30, Blockbuster closed 216 stores. The DVD retailer it said was expecting to shut as many as 115 in the current quarter. In September, the company said it would close nearly 1,000 locations by the end of 2010.

One of the few pieces of good news for Blockbuster was an increase in its gross profit margin to 57.3% from 53.7% a year earlier. The company said it has increased its revenue-sharing arrangement with movie studios for rentals of some top-selling DVDs and that it was shifting focus away from video games, a once-hot business that has slowed down this year and carries smaller profit margins.

In a statement, Blockbuster Chief Executive Jim Keyes said that with debt financing issues solved for the time being, he is aiming for growth this quarter. "In the fourth quarter we are adding inventory, expanding product assortment, increasing advertising and reaching out to our customers in new and exciting ways," he said.

The company is also rolling out Blockbuster-branded rental kiosks with partner NCR Corp. to compete with Redbox and is deploying its digital download and streaming service to new devices, including TiVo digital video recorders.

-- Ben Fritz

Photo: "Duplicity" DVDs at a Blockbuster store in Park Ridge, Ill. Credit: Tim Doyle / Bloomberg

Exclusive first look: 'Battlestar' prequel 'Caprica' retools, reduces and readies itself for January debut

"Caprica" arrives on Syfy Jan. 22, and in anticipation of that premiere, the network has released this poster for the show exclusively to the Watcher site. The image at right, which features the "Caprica" character Zoe Graystone (Alessandra Torresani), is the key art for the new series.

"There's something really interesting about the idea of Zoe and the Eve metaphor," said Mark Stern, executive vice president of original content for Syfy and co-head of Universal Cable Productions, in an interview on Thursday.

"Caprica," which serves as a prequel to "Battlestar Galactica" and tells the story of the invention of the mechanized Cylons, "deals with our relationship to technology and the question of 'When is too much knowledge a bad thing?' Knowledge and technology can turn against you and can be dangerous weapons," Stern said.

He noted there were many internal discussions at Syfy about the signature image for the new series, which stars Eric Stoltz, Esai Morales, Polly Walker and Paula Malcolmson. But Stern and other executives realized all the debate was a good thing. "That's the point of the show," he said. "Like 'Battlestar,' the show doesn't take one particular stand -- it starts a discussion. That's true of 'Caprica' too. What we love about this image is that it invites many different points of view or opinions and they're all valid."

The series will premiere with a two-hour pilot that is already available as a standalone DVD. Eight additional hours of "Caprica" will air through March. Then the show will take a break and the remaining nine hours of "Caprica's" first season will air some time in the second half of 2010.

If you've done the math in the previous paragraph, you've realized that "Caprica's" episode order has been reduced by one hour. Syfy had originally commissioned a total of 20 hours for Season 1, but the show, which is currently in production on the last third of the season in Vancouver, will now consist of 19 hours.

Stern said that the decision to reduce the episode order was made in consultation with the show's creative team and was driven purely by financial considerations. Quite simply, "Caprica" turned out to be more expensive than the network thought it would be, he said. The episode reduction was part of an effort to make those 19 hours as good as they could be without sacrificing the quality of the drama, a story of intrigue and family conflict that follows the Adama and Graystone clans in settings that resemble present-day Earth.

"We always knew it would be a challenge to bring it in on budget, and the deeper we got into it, the more we realized that if we [stuck to the budget too closely], it was not going to be satisfying," Stern said. "We were cutting corners and we weren't happy with that and the executive producers weren't happy with that."

It turned out to be "a more elaborate production" than "Battlestar," Stern said. Once the standing sets for "Battlestar" were built, that show was mostly filmed on soundstages and thus budgets were somewhat more containable. Location shoots were rare. But "Caprica" is "set in the real world," Stern said. "They're always outside."

The show's creators also ended up devoting more time to certain characters than they had originally planned to, and the show lined up recurring guest stars such as James Marsters and Patton Oswalt.  

Stern said that as part of the effort to keep costs down, scripts were coming in with a lot of what he characterized as "bedroom and boardroom" scenes. "That's not the show," he said. "We wanted to keep the quality of the show as high as we could, and so we put more money into it, but it still wasn't quite enough. We said, 'OK, would it help to cut an episode?' and we talked about it and they adopted the decision creatively."

There was a discussion regarding how many episodes to cut, and the show's executive producers -- Ronald D. Moore, David Eick, Jane Espenson and Kevin Murphy -- said cutting two episodes would be too difficult. But Stern said they saw the wisdom of cutting one hour.

"They're certainly vocal," Stern said of his relationship with the show's creative team. "But they've been great about this and they endorsed this decision and are making it work. [A few years ago] Ron and David were the ones who called me to say, 'There are only going to be four seasons of "Battlestar."' They are the first ones to recognize that it's better to do fewer episodes than stretch something out and vamp."

"This was the time to make the decision" about whether to cut an episode, Stern added. Production is underway on the thirteenth hour of the show and thus the producers have time to retool the last third of the season. "If it didn't work creatively, they weren't going to do it," Stern said.  

During production of Season 1 of "Caprica," there have been the kinds of creative growing pains associated with any first-year program. I've had ongoing contact with various people associated with "Caprica," not just Stern, and those sources say the growing pains have been "normal" and nothing out of the ordinary.

The show recently took a two-week break to retool scripts and recalibrate where "Caprica" was heading, and Kevin Murphy, a veteran of "Desperate Housewives," has joined the show. He, along with Eick, Moore and Espenson, is an executive producer of "Caprica" and Murphy has been taking the lead on breaking stories.

"Ron, Jane and David are still very much in that mix," Stern said. "Every show has to find its voice and figure out what it wants to be. Every show has to find out which characters pop and which story lines play. There were some growing pains as they found the right balance of stories and characters."

Despite the differences between "Caprica" and "Battlestar," fans of the latter show should find the storytelling of the prequel series recognizable, even if the new show has a somewhat different tone, Stern said.

"The thing that 'Caprica' has that the 'Battlestar' viewer will recognize -- aside from the obvious little winks and nods [to the saga of the rag-tag fleet] -- is that 'Caprica' is, at its core, a strong character drama about people going through situations in extremis," Stern said. "There are characters who are driven to do things that are morally ambiguous because of the situations that they're put in. And yet tonally, it's not as dark, it's not as grim. Because [the characters] are not on the run, having had their whole world destroyed, that allows more opportunities for poignancy and joy and celebration.

"There's definitely more of that than there was in 'Battlestar.' It's not about someone getting their jaw broken every other episode," Stern said with a laugh. "But there are elements of that kind of extremity in this that I think will attract 'Battlestar' viewers. And yet our hope is, because it is dealing with world that is more familiar to us and dealing with issues that are maybe a little more germane to our daily lives, that it will attract a broader audience."

A few final thoughts from me: I'm reserving judgment about "Caprica's" overall quality until I see more of Season 1, but I liked the pilot and think the premise has potential (my review of the first two hours of "Caprica" is here. There's a preview clip of the show below). "Caprica" has a tough act to follow -- "Battlestar" is one of my favorite shows of all time -- but I'm looking forward to Jan. 22, which, as I noted in this "Dollhouse" post, is likely be a interesting night for fans of genre television.

Photos: Toressani; Morales; Walker; Malcolmson; Stoltz.

The Star Report: Spider-Man arrested? Plus: 'Twilight: New Moon' premiere
Taylor Lautner, Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson at "Twilight: New Moon" premiere. Plus: Kristen Bell, Jason Bateman, Eric Dane, Levi Johnston, Stephanie Pratt.
In 'Fantastic Mr. Fox,' The Dazzle Is In The Details

Director Wes Anderson's first foray into animation, The Fantastic Mr. Fox, is based on the charmingly wicked children's book by Roald Dahl. The film follows a battle of wits between the sly fox (voiced by George Clooney) and three formidable farmers. Critic Kenneth Turan says the film's stop-motion animation is tailor-made for the sort of quirky details that Anderson employs.

Rich Ross restructures Disney movie studio

Rich Ross restructures Disney movie studio

Rich Ross is putting his mark on Walt Disney Studios, bringing over a technology guru from Pixar and promoting the home entertainment chief to a newly created job. In addition, Jim Gallagher, the president of marketing, has left the studio.

The moves reflect Ross' attempt, in close coordination with Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Bob Iger, to remake the studio to better reflect the new ways audiences are viewing movies in theaters, at home and on digital devices.

"The studio restructuring will embrace new possibilities and opportunities and find innovative ways to provide quality entertainment that is readily available," Ross said in a statement.

Bob Chapek, formerly president of home entertainment, has been promoted to the newly created role of president of distribution, in which he will oversee distribution across all platforms, including movie theaters, DVDs, pay TV and digital. In recent years, Chapek has led the studio's digital initiatives, particularly with Apple Inc.'s iTunes Store. Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs is the largest individual shareholder of Walt Disney Company stock. Chuck Viane, previously president of distribution, will continue to oversee theatrical distribution and will now report to Chapek.

Greg Brandeau, who oversaw technology at Disney-owned animation studio Pixar from 1996 through 2001 and again starting in 2004, is taking the newly created role of chief technology officer.

Alan Bergman, a 13-year studio veteran who is currently president of Walt Disney Studios, retains that job and adds oversight of "studio franchises," an emphasis that reflects former Disney Channel chief Ross' emphasis on brands that can be utilized through the Disney company's many businesses.

Production President Oren Aviv, whose future has been the subject of much speculation in the industry, retains his job overseeing development of live-action movies.

Gallagher's departure leaves Disney without a president of marketing. According to a person familiar with the studio's plans, a replacement will be named later and report directly to Ross.

Since the ouster of former studio Chairman Dick Cook in September and his subsequent replacement by Ross, two other top executives already have left the company: Daniel Battsek, president of specialty label Miramax, and Mark Zoradi, president of the Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Group.

-- Dawn C. Chmielewski and Ben Fritz

Photo: Rich Ross with Robin Williams at the premiere of "Old Dogs" at the El Capitan theater in Hollywood. Credit: Kevin Winter/Getty Images.

Wiped: 'Dollhouse' goes inactive as Fox cancels the show

Well, this is sad but not unexpected news."Dollhouse" will not get a third season. It has been canceled by Fox.

However the network will air the remaining episodes that Joss Whedon & Co. shot for the mind-wipe drama. According to Dan Fienberg of Hitfix, we'll get two "Dollhouse" episodes on Dec. 4, Dec. 11 and Dec. 18. Then the last three episodes will likely air Jan. 8, Jan. 15 and the series finale will air on Jan. 22.

The show's cast and crew are working on the eleventh "Dollhouse" episode, and the creative team will have time to give the show a proper ending, according to news reports.

It's had a short, rocky lifespan, but I've been a staunch defender of and advocate for "Dollhouse" (all my stories on the show are here). It may not have been the most consistently great show out there, but here's my thing about consistency: Who cares?

OK, of course I care. Obviously we all want to watch TV shows that are good week to week. But if a show is taking chances and swinging for the fences, I'll give it far more leeway. I'd rather have quite a few amazing "A" episodes mixed in with a few "Bs" and "Cs" than a steady diet of predictable "Bs" or snoozy "B minuses."

Because when "Dollhouse" was firing on all cylinders, it was really something to see. It was, as I've written, one of the most thought-provoking shows on television. The best episodes have (and will) offer up twisty questions about identity, memory, morality and free will, all within the context of a tautly written hour of drama.

"Dollhouse," I'll miss you.

I've seen the first episode that will air Dec. 4, and it is a treat and a half (for a bit on why I liked that episode and the one that preceded it, look here). I'm certainly going to keep watching.

There's a chance I might be speaking to Joss Whedon in the next week or two. Again, it's just a chance -- a time/date has not been locked down yet.

But if I do speak to him, got questions for the man? Leave them -- and your "Dollhouse" thoughts -- below.

NOTE: I have an event to go to Wednesday evening -- I'll be participating in the Funny HaHa reading at the Hideout, do come! -- so it may take a while for your comments to be posted. Thanks in advance for your patience.

Knee surgery keeps pianist Toradze from performing this weekend at Stanford
Two of his protégés, Vakho Kodanashvili and Nikita Abrosimov, are to fill in for him at Friday and Saturday 'Prokofiev Project' performances.
From The Vaults, A Look At Early Indie-Movie History

Independent cinema is as old as movies themselves: For as long there have been major studios, there have been smaller rivals pushing back against the conventions of the system. Most of those little startup studios are all but forgotten — but one man has spent the past quarter-century trying to salvage that part of his family's history.

ARGENTINA: 'Grandma, Will You Read to Me?'
BUENOS AIRES, Nov 11 (IPS)"Moving," "rewarding," "therapeutic" are some of the terms used to describe their volunteer work by some of the women taking part in the Storytelling Grandmothers Programme aimed at awakening a love of reading among youngsters from poor families in Argentina.

Excerpt: 'The Department of Mad Scientists'

Discovery board doesn't hear a lot about Oprah

Discovery Communications' board of directors held its quarterly meeting today but anyone looking for news about Oprah Winfrey and her cable network was sorely disappointed.

While some of the cable programming giants top executives made glowing presentations to the board, neither Winfrey nor her svengali Tom Freston were anywhere to be seen around Discovery's headquarters in Silver Spring, Md. Not even Christina Norman, chief executive of the Oprah Winfrey Network, made the cross-country trek for the meeting. That seems slightly unusual given all the attention around the network. 

Apparently there is little to update on the OWN, hence a song-and-dance from Winfrey, Norman or Freston wasn't seen as necessary. At this point, though, isn't the fact that there is little to update about the channel worth an update? The place has had a revolving door of executives and has been vague on its programming plans. Discovery has already pushed the date of the launch back several times. (Before some Discovery or OWN rep picks up the phone to scream,Webster's defines several as "an indefinite but small number.")

For now, OWN is not saying when it will launch, but already it seemsvery unlikely that it'll happen in the first six months of next year.There have been many executive shuffles and very little programming inthe works so more time will probably be needed to get it off theground. And then there are those who think ultimately that this channel willnever fly.

Much of the channel's fate hinges on Winfrey, who is keeping quiet. Her move last week to dispatch one of her top executives -- Lisa Erspamer -- to Los Angeles to work on OWN set off speculation that Winfrey herself was thinking of moving her daytime talk show to OWN. Winfrey's current daytime TV contract is up in 2011.

A Discovery spokeswoman declined to comment on the board meeting.

-- Joe Flint

Photo: Oprah Winfrey. Credit: Brian Killian / Getty Images

Perfect pitch? Not quite, but there's much to enjoy as 'Glee' returns
You have to appreciate the diabolical cleverness of the Fox network.

Its flagship program, "American Idol," has been softening in the ratings for the past few years. It's still the Death Star of television, but "Idol" is no longer getting the kind of ratings that cause executives at rival networks to spend their days under their desks, weeping over the latest Nielsen numbers.

But now Fox has "Glee" (8 p.m. Central Wednesday, WFLD-Ch. 32; three stars) which may not have an "Idol"-sized audience but is an unqualified hit, especially among the 18-34 demographics that advertisers (and television networks) prize. And "Glee," which follows the progress of a rag-tag high school show choir, is a program that has learned the lessons of "Idol" well.

Though it's a scripted show, "Glee" does what "Idol" does at its best: It creates moments of pure enjoyment. When a performer bristling with potential sings a good song really well, the result is exhilarating, uncomplicated pleasure.

Actually, "Glee" may go "Idol" one better: "Glee's" singing-and-dancing production numbers are often fun and creative, unlike "Idol's" clunky group sing-alongs, which are painful to watch. Someone on the "Idol" staff needs to pick the brains of "Glee's" choreographers and directors.

Creating "Glee"-ful moments sounds simple, but it's not. It takes exceptional performers, and in Lea Michele (who plays the pampered diva Rachel Berry), Chris Colfer (who plays the fantastically acerbic Kurt Hummel) and Matthew Morrison (who plays Will Schuester, the teacher who leads the club), "Glee" has three standouts. All three excel not just as singers but as actors, and even if the story lines they're given are already getting repetitive, they make every scene they're in worth watching.

Cory Monteith, who plays well-intentioned jock Finn Hudson, isn't the most gifted singer in the cast, but he hold his own and his deft portrayal of Finn's frequent befuddlement is a pleasure in itself. Other cast members have varying levels of talent and charisma, but the show's go-to characters are so enjoyable -- as was recent guest star Kristin Chenowith -- that lesser performances fade a bit by comparison.

Still, the first volume of the "Glee" soundtrack, which came out last week, is a big hit in the Watcher household. Any TV show soundtrack that induces people of all ages to dance around the kitchen is doing something right.

Fun as it can be, "Glee" is not perfect, though Wednesday's episode is a case study of what "Glee" does right. There are provocative and thoughtfully handled stories involving Artie (Kevin McHale), a character who is in a wheelchair, and Kurt, who has recently come out as gay to his father. Within the context of satire/dramedy with musical numbers, the show explores the question of difference -- when differences should get special treatment and when they should not.

What Wednesday's episode, "Wheels," has that other episodes of "Glee" have lacked is coherence and narrative drive. Unlike "Idol," which merely has to provide a couple of memorable performances and at least one zingy Simon Cowell quote, "Glee" is supposed to supply a story. Though the humor and music often take center stage, "Glee" is better when it has something to say, not just something to sing.

But some weeks, "Glee" has opted to haphazardly throw together a few intentionally soapy story lines (a teen pregnancy, the migraine-inducing Terri Schuester's fake pregnancy, Will's chemistry-free flirtation with a fussy fellow teacher, someone or other quitting the singing group for the millionth time) and hope for the best. The first season of the show is only one-third over, so it's a bit troubling that some stories seem so tired and lazy already. And too often when a wobbly, slapdash episode threatens to fall apart -- hey, how about a song?

Having said all that, I must acknowledge the show's addictive elements. Dolton native Jane Lynch is giving one of the best performances on television as cheerleading coach Sue Sylvester, a driven woman who would be better suited to a gig as the dictator of small, fearful country. I must also note Iqbal Theba, who plays Principal Figgins with a perfectly calibrated mixture of world-weary ennui and canny opportunism. Any episode that has a lot of Sue, Figgins and Kurt and no Terri (Jessalyn Gilsig), as is the case with "Wheels," is a win in my book. 

When "Glee" comes up with a well-proportioned mixture of drama and comedy and makes the arch, soapy stuff relatively painless (or better yet, gets creative with stereotypical soap storytelling), it's one of the most enjoyable shows on TV. When it doesn't, well, there are always Sue's one-liners.

And if nothing else, there are those songs. Get out your hankies, because what these performers do with "Defying Gravity" on Wednesday will have you sniffling and smiling at the same time ("Glee's" version of the song is here).

Sana kisses Kiss kwaheri
Celebrity radio presenter Sanaipei Tande has left Kiss FM. The Kwaheri singer left the station on Wednesday, last week.
Review: A clever 'Body of Water'
Lee Blessing's 'A Body of Water' needs some tuning but it's still a sly mind game about the nature of identity.
Excerpt: 'The Department of Mad Scientists'

Comedian Katt Williams jailed in Georgia over burglary

Walt Disney Studios President Mark Zoradi resigns

In a continued housecleaning at Walt Disney Co., studio distribution veteran Mark Zoradi is leaving the company after 29 years.

The departure of Zoradi, president of Disney's motion pictures group, follows the ousting of his former boss, Disney Studios Chairman Dick Cook and Miramax Films President Daniel Battsek.

The studio is being remade under Cook's successor, Rich Ross, who was formerly president of Disney Channels Worldwide.

During his nearly three decades at the company, Zoradi worked in the television, home entertainment and film divisions, most recently overseeing worldwide marketing and distribution for pictures made under the Walt Disney Studios, Pixar Animation Studios and Disneynature banners.

This weekend, Zoradi received the Louis B. Mayer motion picture business leader of the year award from the UCLA Anderson School of Management.

-- Claudia Eller and Dawn C. Chmielewski

Photo: Mark Zoradi. Credit: National Assn. of Broadcasters

Sterling Coup: A terrific ending to 'Mad Men's' season

Below is a discussion of the Season 3 finale of "Mad Men," "Shut the Door. Have a Seat."

"It's a heist movie."

I often start off my "Mad Men" posts with great (and telling) quotes from the show, but not this time. The quote above came from my husband Dave when we were discussing the Season 3 finale of the AMC show.

When he said that, I thought, he's exactly right. Much of "Shut the Door. Have a Seat" could have been called "Draper's Eleven." The wardrobe and period details were of course perfect. The Rat Pack was nowhere in sight, but we saw a colorful, witty and creative crew pulling off a daring theft. What's not to love?

There were other elements to the episode, and of course I'll get to those, but the chugging narrative drive made "Shut the Door" a well-matched bookend to the Season 3 premiere, which had a lot of activity, shifting alliances and moving parts. The things set in motion by that season premiere -- actually, events set in motion in Season 2 when PPL bought Sterling Cooper -- all finally came to a head. With a heist.

In this case, it was a theft of advertising accounts and talent from the top ranks of Sterling Cooper. But it didn't really matter that they weren't blowing up a bank vault or pulling off a long con. A well-executed robbery by men and women in snazzy clothes is always going to be a possibly illegal amount of fun.

I could spend all night just writing down hilarious lines from the episode:

Connie: "Cooper will definitely be put on an ice floe." Bert: "We got tea!"Don: "Do you know how to do what he does?" Bert: "I don't!"Roger: "Join or die? Jesus, Bert, [Don] was doing better." Roger: "You going to read us your will? I want the Cadillac."Pete: "Am I getting a few more adjectives added to my title? Don't bother." Pete: "I'm not really sick."St. John: "You are fired for lack of character!: Lane Pryce: "Very good, Happy Christmas!" Pryce: "Nothing good ever came of seeking revenge." Bert: "Nonsense. We'll make you a partner." Roger: "Peggy, can you get me some coffee?" Peggy: "No." Joan: "Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce, how can I help you?" Beat. "Yes, Harry, it's Room 435." And there were so many other little moments that I loved:
Pete realizing that maybe Harry didn't know what was going on and desperately trying to seem nonchalant in the elevator. Harry: "Why are you here?" Pete: "Uhhh. Work?" Harry's stunned stare after he was told the news of the Sterling Cooper coup  (a.k.a. the Sterling Coup). And Bert threatening to lock him in the storage closet. Pete walking out of the SC office with his infamous Season 1 rifle slung over his shoulder. Trudy fussing with a chip and dip platter in the Campbell's apartment. I know it wasn't the famous chip and dip that Pete returned after their wedding, but I still shouted "Chip and dip!" at the screen. St. John being revealed as a complete snake. The dutiful Pryce's revenge on him was a thing of beauty. Roger trying to stop Lane Pryce's name from being added to the firm's name. Hilarious. Someone had defaced the door of the Art Department so that it read Fart Department. In the cramped new temporary offices of SCDP, Don was doing his own typing and Pete and Peggy were sharing a desk. There was something about the way Don turned his head as he left Connie's suite, after Connie dumped him and told him to have a great holiday, that was just so perfectly suited to the moment. And how about the sardonic gleam in his eye as figured out Connie's game. "I get it now, Connie. It's business." OK, I can't just keep writing down things I found delicious or hilarious. I could be here all night (I'm not kidding). Suffice to say, if there's one thing "Mad Men" consistently does really well, it's office politics, and this was every bit as entertaining as Duck's attempted coup in Season 2. And as he did then, Don wriggled ever so neatly out of the trap that others had laid for him. Contract, schmontract.  

This was an episode of opening and closing doors, of endings and beginnings. And it was also about Don having to come clean -- or eat crow, depending on how you saw it. Don -- the island, the loner, the solitary man -- looked out at that improvised office near the end of the episode and he saw a family of sorts. The man who didn't need anyone realized he needed quite a few people, actually.  

Since the show began, Don's been longing for connection. But his need to hide his true self and his real identity precluded any real intimacy. Here he is, three years later, finding that these people are still in his life.

The look on his face in that moment was, like so many Don Draper looks, ambiguous. Does he fear the responsibility he's created for himself? Is he relieved that he has a support system? Is he excited about the possibilities for the future? Is he wishing that, instead of this improvised family, his actual family was still intact?

It's hard to know. This is a Don Draper who cannot still be fully truthful (he tried to sell Sally on the idea that his departure was temporary, but his pitch went about as badly as Bert Cooper's pitch to Roger). But he had to admit to himself and to these people that they were necessary to his life.

He spent this season trying to find a father figure (Connie), trying to find comfort in the arms of a welcoming maternal type (Miss Farrell), even trying to undo the wrongs he did to his own brother with Miss Farrell's sibling. All for naught -- all those people are out of his life now. His Sterling Coup family is all he has left.

He may have had to gild the lily here and there, but there were grains -- or huge chunks -- of truth in what he told every one of them.

He really does need Roger, a seasoned accounts man. Connie may have been a Macguffin this season -- the Hilton account was dangled in front of Don but it was snatched away again. (On the one hand, Don had every right to be ticked at Connie, who treated Don like a plaything to be cast aside when Connie was through with him. On the other hand, Don saying to Connie, "You come and go as you please…" Well, that's the pot calling the kettle black, Mr. Draper.)

But if there's a lasting lesson to be learned from the Connie affair, it's that Don can't be both a creative executive and an accounts man. He just doesn't have both skills, and he knows Roger can do the accounts thing in his sleep. And what's most telling about the conversation in Roger's office is that, for all his bluster and cynicism, you can tell that Roger wants their relationship to be "put back the way it was" (to use Don's words about buying SC).

I love these performances and this show because of tiny details like this: A look flits across Roger's face that tells you that he wants nothing more than for Don to need him -- and like him -- just a little bit. Same thing at the bar later: Roger just wants them to be buddies again, but he inadvertently screws that up just as they were getting back to normal.

Who knows where their relationship will go in the future: Don surely needs Roger, but Roger needs to be the Sun King, and hates admitting he needs Don's skills. If nothing else, I'm glad the show kept Roger around for his Superior Quipping Abilities (though Bert and even Pete gave Roger a run for his money in this episode).

For Pete, it must have been delicious to compel Don to praise him. And here's another reason I love this show: In Season 1, the words "Pete" and "weasel" were pretty much synonymous. But we've all noticed that Pete is often right about a lot of things. He does have insight into the future and he does have interesting ideas. Don and Roger absolutely need someone who is not trapped in the usual ways of thinking. Sterling Cooper was in a bit of a mess this season, and the same old way of doing business was not going to cut it. Pete had grown up, and he was the right man for the job. With Trudy by his side, he will probably go very far.

That's all well and good, but did Don and Roger want Pete because he could bring more clients over to the new firm? The most likely explanation lies in what Roger said to Pete -- they know Pete will do what it takes to get the job done. Despite having been born with the right name and having gone to the right schools, Pete's more desperate and cunning than Ken Cosgrove ever will be. Not that Ken doesn't have a great future in front of himself as a mid-level executive at McCann. Ken is one of those guys who will always do well in life. He's Don Draper with two-thirds of the intellect but all the self-loathing removed. He'll be fine.

As will Harry, but only because he stumbled into a job that will have him failing upward for decades. Actually "failing" may too strong a word for this moderately competent but unimaginative executive. Harry did have one good idea in his life -- to start a TV/media department at SC. He's been riding that idea ever since. And because he's the only guy the new partners know who knows how to do that job, he's got the gig at the new firm (of course Joan, if given the Head of Media job, would wipe the floor with Harry. Ah well).

But back to Don's Praise You tour. He needed Pete, he needed Roger, but he needed Peggy most of all.

Notice Don's demeanor the first time he speaks to Peggy. He barks for her to come into his office, he orders her to collect her accounts, he won't give her any relevant information, he assumes she'll join the new firm.

Don can really be a massive idiot sometimes.

Of course he's distracted by his family problems and by all the machinations at the office. But at some point, he did start treating Peggy like a piece of furniture or like an extension of himself (and if on some level he hates himself, why bother sparing Peggy that? Just as he had to take his abusive father's treatment, he assumes she can take it).

After he's been thrown out by his wife and had that gut-churning conversation with his confused kids, Don's demeanor is entirely different. He's reminded that what unites him and Peggy is their secret history of loss. He finally sees her as a person, not a servant or an errand girl. Good for Peggy for standing up for herself -- literally. She stood in her apartment, looming over Don as he had loomed over her when he read her the riot act earlier in the season. He was a jerk to her and he would have to pay with contrition.

I've talked a lot about the delicious office politics and other things I enjoyed about the episode, but there were, of course, more somber yet enthralling moments as well. In Peggy's apartment, I held my breath during the scene, as I wondered if she might make a break with Don once and for all. She didn't though, which is a good thing, because "Mad Men" without Peggy is not really something I could comprehend. But she's very much proven that she is (and I love this phrase) not Don's "nervous poodle."

But it's worth taking stock of who's where at this point:

Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce staff:
Don DraperBert CooperRoger SterlingLane PrycePete CampbellPeggy OlsenJoan HarrisHarry Crane
In the wind:
Sal RomanoPaul KinseyKen Cosgrove(I'm assuming we won't be seeing much of characters such as Smitty, Kurt, Allison and Lois again in the future.) Much as I would hate to lose characters from this ensemble, I also recognize that it makes sense for the original SC crew to move on to new jobs and new opportunities. The character I want back most is Sal. But then, of the three characters from the old SC who appear to have been cut loose, Sal is the one most likely to be in Don's orbit in future. It's just speculation on my part, but in my head, Sal has reinvented himself as a freelance director of commercials, and maybe at some point the new firm will want to hire him for a job. Just not for a Lucky Strike ad.

Just as Don assembles and solidifies his Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce family, he loses Betty and the kids. And though the major explosions in Don and Betty's marriage came in the last few episodes, there were still a few gripping aftershocks in "Shut the Door."

The first shocker was Don finding out about Henry Francis (and having to find out about it from Roger -- Don, the man of secrets, not knowing Betty's biggest secret and having to find it out over cocktails from Roger. Ouch. That really stung.) Don finding that out was the ultimate death knell to the relationship. Don was willing to put up with the facade of a relationship -- or even try for a real relationship -- but only if Betty was "his." It's not an enlightened attitude (especially given Don's extravagant string of infidelities), but it's in keeping with the Don we've known, who was more interested in Betty as an accessory to his lifestyle than as a person.

In the midst of this painful breakup, we saw what I've taken to calling Dark Don. When he dragged Betty out of bed and called her a whore, the awfulness of the place Don was in was mesmerizing. Much as he hated the guy, Don/Dick learned from Archie -- he learned how not settle for the hand you've been dealt. But he also learned how to drink and how to treat others with contempt. That loathsome piece of Archie still resides somewhere in the deepest, darkest part of his son.

Again, I know I've already said this stuff a million times, but Jon Hamm does not hold back with this character. He's fully willing to show the ugliness that lives inside this handsome, dapper man. In Don's eyes in those moments, you could see the echoes of Archie. Don, in that moment, was actually the Dark Dick Whitman, an angry man who is not so different from his father. You could see that it took everything Don had not to start beating Betty. Gene's presence was probably the only thing saved her from that.

And then there was that scene with the kids. I was just transfixed by Sally's watchful brown eyes. She just kept looking from parent to parent, waiting for someone to tell her the truth. More effectively than anyone else has ever done, she called Don on his b.s. "You say things and you don't mean them! You can't just do that!"

Later, we see Sally once again in front of the TV, her comforter, her friend. Carla and the TV are the most stable forces in Sally's life. Truth be told, Carla being the biggest influence on Sally's life would not be a bad thing at all.

Later when Bobby was clinging to Don's body like a little monkey, unwilling to let go, holding on tight with every limb -- that was heartbreaking. I've gotten death-grip hugs like that from my son when I've left for a few days on business trips. I can't imagine what it would be like to extricate myself from that hug to walk out the door forever. Don's jettisoned a lot of his lies and a fair amount of his baggage this season, but he's going to carry the pain losing his family forever. That's a heavy burden, and one he largely brought on himself.

Archie died and left Dick fatherless and in desperate straits, just as Connie cut Don loose without barely a backward glance. And now Don has repeated the pattern by exiting his own marriage. Both Don and Betty made mistakes and have their share of flaws, but deep down Don knows he vowed to give his kids a better life than the one he had. Yet he's leaving them to grow up, as he did, fatherless.  

And motherless, at least temporarily. Is Betty really leaving her children for six weeks just before Christmas, just for a quick divorce? Honestly, what's the rush? I still don't quite know what she's doing with Henry, and I suspect he doesn't know how things got to this stage so quickly either. (I've restored this paragraph to its original form, after commenters noted that Betty would indeed have to reside in Reno for six weeks to get her divorce.)

And I have to admit that the end of the Draper marriage left me dissatisfied in some respects. After getting too much repetition of the "Betty's dissatisfied/Don's hiding secrets" home-front stuff in the first half of the season, a lot of the Betty story has felt rushed toward the end of the season. We see her suddenly in love with Henry Francis, and he with her -- based on a few conversations, a few kisses and a couple of stolen moments here and there. I still don't feel that that relationship was filled out enough or had enough depth or texture or substance to it.

I wrote last week that I could see how, in a world thrown into turmoil by the death of JFK, Betty might want someone more stable and truthful than Don. Yet I could not escape the feeling during "Shut the Door" that I never truly saw the reason for Betty's change of heart. On Halloween, Betty and Don were tentatively reconciled after he'd told her the truth. Then JFK dies, she sees Henry at a wedding and that's that -- the marriage is over? As Alan Sepinwall wrote here, I find myself wishing we'd seen more of the intervening steps -- the moments that led to Betty to decide to end her marriage.

So where does all this leave Don, as the Sixties really start to get underway? Connected to his job and his co-workers in ways he never was before. In that realm, he's captain of his own fate and yet he has responsibilities he didn't have when he was just a hot-shot creative executive.

But now he's without a family. Betty once said that without Don holding her down, she felt as though she'd float away (which is why she made sure that she had another man ready to support her as soon as her marriage to Don ended. Being on her own terrified her, and not just because she has three kids. All Betty's known is being taken care of, and she's not quite ready to step out of that dependent role yet.)

So is Don the one who will float away without his family, without his kids, without that house in Ossining to go to?

That's the biggest change as the show goes forward. On the work front, things are, in some ways, back to the way they were. Though I loved every delicious minute that this episode spent in the SC offices, what we saw here was "Mad Men," in one sense, hitting the reset button.

When the show began, it was about an advertising firm, and at that firm were Bert, Roger, Joan, Don, Harry, Pete and Peggy (among others). Season 3 ends with the creation of a firm that employs that same crew, though of course there have been some significant changes.

Don's name is now on the door, and he's now on an equal footing with Bert and Roger. Pryce is now a player (and I hope Jared Harris continues on the show, he has fit in seamlessly with the show's cast). Peggy is a respected member of the team (though I suspect that, on occasion, some clod will ask her fetch coffee for the next decade or two). Joan's in more or less the same position -- office manager -- and let's hope that she ditches her idiot husband a.s.a.p. Or that he steps on a land mine in Vietnam.

Pete got what he always wanted -- he's head of accounts. Harry will likely continue on as he always has, keeping his head down, bumbling along and hoping not to get fired. And Roger may think he's a happily married man, but he married a child, and being around the fabulous Joan every day may get him to recognize what he truly has in that relationship. He may be too much of a child himself to want someone as assertive and strong as Joan, but what can I say? I just love seeing those two together.  

But all those changes are relatively minor compared with the end of the Draper marriage. Don and Betty are no longer the perfect couple on the top of the wedding cake. They're done for good -- or at least I hope it's for good. As I said last week, I don't want any more go-rounds for these two. The show has used their breakups as the source of tension enough times, and now "Mad Men" appears to be letting go of the Don and Betty relationship once and for all. That's fine by me. It's time to move on.

Not that I'm ready for the season to be over. Far from it. I may have my quibbles and beefs with "Mad Men" here and there, but holy cow, there have also been some exceptional episodes and performances this season. It's almost 3 a.m. -- in the wee small hours -- and I can't begin to sum everything I think and feel about the show and this finale. But I'm over 3,000 words now, so it's time to wrap it up and just say, wow, what a great capper to the season.

Fellow "Mad Men" fans, I hope you got everything you wanted. And thanks for the weekly gabfests about the show. Leave your thoughts about the finale below, and thanks for your interest and insight all season. Even if I don't respond to every comment, you can be sure that I read every single one. (Note: There may be a lag time between when you post your comment and when you see it appear. Comments posted at night usually won't appear until morning.)

Cheers 'til Season 4!

Sponsored Link: Amazon's Mad Men Store

Comedian Katt Williams jailed in Georgia over burglary
Williams, who police say is 38, is charged with burglary and criminal trespassing, according to Coweta County Sheriff's Office Major James Yarbrough.

Tina Brown's 'Beast'-ly Reading List: Nov. 10 Edition

Host Steve Inskeep invites the editor of The Daily Beast back into the NPR studios for another installment of Word of Mouth. Brown's picks this week: articles on a budding media celebrity, on the possibility of "fuzzy math" in foreign policy, and on whether the Internet is killing storytelling. Plus: the "raw and compelling" story of a Harlem girl.

Lionsgate planning aggressive rollout for 'Precious' after huge start

Most years, at least one independent movie opens in the fall with dreams of Oscar glory and ends up a box-office sensation. This year, it's looking like that movie is "Precious," if Lionsgate's expansion plans pay off.

The Sundance award-winning, critically acclaimed adaptation of the 1996 book "Push" opened to an outstanding $1.8 million at just 18 theaters in four cities this weekend. Its average take of $100,000 is the highest ever for a movie at more than six locations. The indie studio achieved the remarkable debut with a hybrid strategy of playing theaters that targeted affluent moviegoers likely drawn by the movie's rave reviews and theaters in African American communities, where endorsements from Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry likely helped.

A little more than 50% of ticket buyers were African American, and a much more lopsided 68% were female, according to exit polls. Moviegoers gave it an average grade of A, a sign that it will have excellent word-of-mouth.

With any independent movie, however, it's never guaranteed that niche appeal, no matter how strong, will carry over to a more mainstream audience. Last November, for instance, Fox Searchlight debuted "Slumdog Millionaire" to $360,000 at 10 theaters, a solid opening but well below that of "Precious." It went on to gross more than $141 million, helped by a best-picture Oscar, a prize that many think is a possibility for "Precious." But many other movies, like "Melinda and Melinda," "Lust, Caution" and "The Aristocrats" started very strong in limited release but ultimately grossed less than $10 million.

Lionsgate's plan is to take advantage of this weekend's momentum quickly. Friday, it will open in five new cities -- Philadelphia, Washington, Houston, Dallas and San Francisco -- while expanding in the cities where it's currently playing, bringing its total theater count to more than 100. One week later, on Nov. 20, the movie will start playing nationwide. That's an aggressive strategy. "Brokeback Mountain," another movie that many doubted could appeal to broad crowds, didn't expand to more than 500 theaters until its sixth weekend. It ultimately grossed $83 million.

The studio paid $5.5 million to acquire "Precious" at the Sundance Film Festival this year, an investment that seems certain to pay off handsomely, even if the movie doesn't turn into a monster hit.

Disney also is hoping for a strong performance in the weeks to come for its new movie that opened this weekend, albeit for different reasons. "A Christmas Carol" opened to just $31 million domestically, a surprisingly weak start given its hefty production budget of nearly $200 million and substantial marketing push.

The very similar "Polar Express," another stop-motion-animated holiday film directed by Robert Zemeckis, opened in November and played well through the holidays. That movie cost less to produce, however, and got an average grade of A+ from moviegoers, according to market research firm CinemaScore. "A Christmas Carol" garnered a less impressive B+, a sign that word-of-mouth won't be as good.

Its disappointing debut is leading many to question whether Disney opened the movie too far in front of the holiday season and whether star Jim Carrey is no longer a box-office draw.

The soft start for "A Christmas Carol" drove down overall ticket sales 12% from a year ago, when "Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa" opened, according to Hollywood.com.

Sony's decision to extend the run of "This Is It" beyond the announced two weeks looked like a smart one this weekend as the Michael Jackson movie dropped only 40% on its second weekend, a modest drop for a concert film. Ticket sales for the genre have historically been front loaded.

The most impressive hold of the weekend was Universal's "Couples Retreat." On its fifth weekend in theaters, ticket sales for the romantic comedy were virtually flat from a week ago, a rarity in the business. It is now very close to grossing more than $100 million domestically.

Here are the top 10 movies at the domestic box office, according to Hollywood.com:

1. "A Christmas Carol" (Disney): Opened to $31 million domestically, $12 million from 18 foreign countries.

2. "This Is It" (Sony): Declined 40% on its second weekend to $14 million. Domestic total is $57.9 million, foreign is $128.6 million.

3. "The Men Who Stare at Goats" (Overture/BBC/Winchester Capital): Debuted to $13.3 million.

4. "The Fourth Kind" (Universal/Gold Circle): Launched with $12.5 million.

5. "Paranormal Activity" (Paramount): Fell 48% on its seventh weekend to $8.6 million, bringing its domestic total to $97.4 million.

6. "The Box" (Warner Bros./Radar/MRC): $7.9 million opening.

7. "Couples Retreat" (Universal/Relativity): Pulled off the amazing feat of not declining at all from last weekend, grossing $6.4 million once again. U.S. and Canadian ticket sales after five weeks have reached $96 million. Overseas, it has collected $28.8 million in 18 territories so far.

8. "Law Abiding Citizen" (Overture/Film Department): Dropped only 17% on its fourth weekend to $6.2 million. Domestic total: $60.9 million.

9. "Where the Wild Things Are" (Warner Bros./Village Roadshow/Legendary): Fell 29% on its fourth weekend to $4.2 million. $69.3 million in domestic ticket sales so far.

10. "Astro Boy" (Summit/Imagi): $2.6 million on its third weekend, down 25%. $15.1 million domestic total.

-- Ben Fritz

Top photo: Gabourey Sidibe and Mo'Nique in "Precious." Credit: Anne Marie Fox / Lionsgate

Bottom photo: Carlos Ponce, Vince Vaughn and Malin Akerman in "Couples Retreat." Credit: John Johnson / Universal Studios

A 'Stargate Universe' producer takes issue with criticism of the show. Here's my response

In October, I published my review of "Stargate Universe," and subsequently on Twitter, I also expressed my disappointment with the Syfy show. In my recent review of "V," I mentioned a couple of prominent genre shows that had premiered this fall, including "FlashForward" and "Stargate Universe." My comments about the latter show weren't complimentary.

That prompted "Stargate Universe" executive producer Brad Wright to leave the following comment on my "V" review: 

"Maureen,I find people who write "I have no axe to grind" are often the onesmost likely to grind axes. Taking the time to slam SGU in your reviewfor "V" is not politically tinged, it's just petty. I really wish youhadn't given up on our show so quickly. I was surprised, consideringyour past (occasional) support of the franchise. You can't have seen afinished version of "Darkness" or "Light" because the weren't evenclosed to being finished at the time of your review. I don't know whatthe network sent you. SGU seems to be a love it or hate it sort ofshow. You obviously fall in the latter camp, but fortunately there areenough viewers and reviewers who think SGU is neither boring, poorlyplotted, or sexist to keep us on the air long after "V" is just aletter in the alphabet again."

Brad, given that you posted your reactions to my comments in a public forum, I thought I'd respond in a public way. Online discussions about "Stargate Universe" have been getting pretty heated, and this is my chance to set things straight on where I stand.

First and foremost, I can't think of anyone in the mainstream media who, before "Stargate Universe" premiered, was more predisposed to give it a chance.

I've watched every episode of "Stargate SG-1" and probably about half of "Stargate Atlantis," and I've done multiple features and reviews on both shows. And I've watched and championed many dark, multilayered, complicated dramas such as "The Wire," "Battlestar Galactica" and "The Shield," among others. I wish I had a dime for every time I've used the word "gritty" or "ambiguous" in a review.

So the idea of show that combined elements of the "Stargate" franchise with the kind of morally complex storytelling we saw on those shows certainly sounded good to me on paper.

After I watched the first three hours of "SGU," well, you could say I had reservations. At that point, I asked Syfy for additional episodes. So before I wrote my review, I'd seen a total five hours of the show ("Air," Parts 1-3, "Darkness" and "Earth"). In other words, I went out of my way to see as much of the show as I could before writing about it.

I remain a fan of the performances of David Blue and Robert Carlyle. As for my response to the rest of "Stargate Universe," well, my thoughts are in my review. I also agree with quite a few of the people posting comments on that review, with many of the commenters at Television Without Pity's "SGU" board and with Dan Owen's rundown of what doesn't work for him about the show.

If I seem passionate in my disappointment in "Stargate Universe," that's only because, in my experience, people are more intensely disappointed by things they had high hopes for. I'm not demanding that "SGU" to be a clone of past "Stargate" shows nor am I secretly expecting it to be another "Battlestar." I just wanted "SGU's" characters and stories to emotionally or intellectually engage me. That's all I ask of any show. That hasn't happened.

You are of course entitled to your opinion of my "Stargate Universe" review and my comments about the show in the "V" piece. But people who have seen the show are also entitled to their opinions. I wish I got the sense that those who who have problems with the show were being truly heard by the "Stargate" writer/producers.

In talking to and emailing with other people who've seen "Stargate Universe," and in looking at comments about the show on my site and on other online forums, the overall sense I get is that there are a number of people -- a significant number -- who eagerly tuned into "Stargate Universe" and were let down by it. Some people like it, of course, and I have no problem with someone sitting down to watch a TV show and feeling as though their time has not been wasted.

But I keep seeing comment after comment along the lines of "I've given the show a lot of chances, but now I just have to give up."

Many of the people sharing disappointed critiques of the show come off as smart, thoughtful, open-minded and perceptive viewers (and I don't pay much attention to the ones who can't express themselves in a rational and calm way). Sure, snarkiness might creep into some comments, but that's the nature of the online beast and sarcasm is often a vehicle for feelings of disappointment and dismay.

If there's anything I have a problem with, it's an idea promulgated by some of the show's defenders -- that people who don't like "Stargate Universe" just don't get it. I am stunned some of the condescending attitudes I've seen. It's frankly laughable to me, this idea that people who have issues with "SGU" just aren't smart enough to appreciate qualities such as complexity and ambiguity.

I and many other viewers get what the show is going for. We're not failing to understand its intentions. We think "SGU" is, in many key respects, falling short of its own goals. 

I'm not expecting "flawless people, square-jawed heroes, and stories that set up and deliver all the answers over the course of a forty-five minute episode," to use executive producer Joseph Mallozzi's recent warning to fans. I'm expecting an hour of TV that pulls me in and entertains me and makes me think. I'm hoping for complicated characters responding to compelling situations. I'm expecting suspense and surprises.

Occasional flashes of sharp dialogue on "SGU" havereminded me why I stuck with previous "Stargate" showsthrough many ups and downs. But I eventually gave up on "Stargate Atlantis" (I grew tired of the same plots being recycled again and again), and regarding "SGU," I'm really not seeing many reasons to stick around. If "SGU" is supposed to be a character drama, so far the characters aren't doing much for me. Eli's wisecracks and Rush's intensity don't make up for the fact that the rest of the characters are vaguely defined and bland. 

If you think the fact that the show has gotten decent ratings makes my opinion and the opinions of other disappointed viewers invalid, well, you're welcome to that belief. The show is pulling in around 2 million live viewers on a weekly basis lately, which in my book means "SGU" doing about average or above average at best (as evidenced by these charts from TV By the Numbers, Syfy's "Destination Truth" is pulling in substantially higher numbers, and "Sanctuary," which got a tiny fraction of "SGU's" promotion, is not far behind "SGU" in the ratings).

Personally, I believe the ratings would be higher if the show delivered more consistently on the potential of its premise. And I admit that this is purely anecdotal, but it seems to me that the show is turning off a pretty significant number of female viewers.

Ah, now we've gotten to the much-discussed issue of whether "SGU" is sexist. In my opinion, it is. The other day, Mallozzi wrote a "rant" about fans who had been making what he considered offensive remarks about the actors and/or characters. One of the sentences from that piece hit home for me: "Sometimes, you can be offensive without even meaning to." Yep.

I don't think "Stargate Universe" set out to be sexist, though given the track record of past "Stargate" shows, my hopes in that arena weren't terribly high. And I have to preface these comments by saying that many of the male characters are a disappointment to me as well.

But the female characters are even bigger disappointments than the men, given that the women have been consistently shoved to the sidelines since the show debuted. They generally get far less to do (Ming-Na's character in particular is underused). Overall, they've been less important to the stories and have had less prominence.

The female characters, if we see them at all, are largely defined by their relationships or interactions with the male characters. Or they're defined by their anatomy.

Let me briefly mention the infamous hallway scene featuring Lt. James. I almost turned off the TV and stopped watching the show for good when that came along. If the scene was meant to be a comment on Eli's voyeurism, well, we already knew he was had voyeuristic tendencies. So that scene was completely gratuitous. And there's a fine line between depicting a character's actions or attitudes and endorsing them. Given the amount of time that the scene focused intently on the character's body, the Lt. James scene crossed that line.

If the "SGU" creative team can't understand why many viewers found that scene exploitative and gratuitous, I think that's proof that we shouldn't expect much in the way of subtlety on this show. All I can say is, if that moment had come amid wonderfully nuanced storytelling and prominent story lines for the female characters, I am betting there would have been far less of an outcry about it.

Of course, the two previous "Stargate" series frequently had trouble giving female characters consistent depth or compelling material. I suppose I should not have been surprised by more of the same. (I must add that I remain a fan of Amanda Tapping from "Stargate SG-1," who made watching Samantha Carter a pleasure for years.)

In my view, most of the people critiquing "Stargate Universe" are not trolls, idiots or prudes. They're not small-minded "Stargate" fans who wanted a replica of "SG-1" or dismissive TV viewers who just don't like sci-fi. They're like this commenter. They are, like me, people who very much wanted to like your show.

In closing, let me quote Mary Ratliff, an io9 contributor and commenter:

"I have no problem with movies, books, or television shows that genuinely explore human sexuality. However, I feel that 'SGU' is more often than not falling into old stereotypes and common tropes regarding sexuality, and has indeed fallen into common sexist traps as well. To say that simply portraying sex is enough isn't true for me. I need the sex and sexuality to be portrayed well."

Exactly. I would expand on Mary's point: I don't have a problem with sex or complexity or ambiguity or open-ended stories. I just want to see those kinds of things done well. I don't think that's too much to ask.

If you and the show's creative team truly think all those things are being done well, we'll have to agree to disagree. In any case, I think I've given "Stargate Universe" a fair shot. Don't worry about me mentioning the show anymore. Unless I hear that it's taken a big step forward in quality, I think I am, like many other potential viewers, pretty much done giving it a chance.

Photos: The "SGU" cast; Alaina Huffman, Ming-Na, Elyse Levesque.

Milton Nascimento: The Songbird Struggles
For 40-plus years, the Brazilian songwriter’s voice has conveyed a pure and shocking beauty. But his concert Saturday at the Masonic Center in San Francisco didn’t carry much more than an echo of the Nascimento whom audiences fell in love with in the late 1960s and ’70s.

Categories Fit For 'Radio'

To mark Liane Hansen's 20th anniversary hosting Weekend Edition Sunday, this puzzle is a game of categories using the word "radio." Will Shortz names the categories, and the guest names something in the categories beginning with each of the letters in "radio."