Talk Show Product Deals Weariness

Photo: The Talk

Have you noticed? Product deals have become a major feature of morning and afternoon talk shows. Called "Steals and Deals [NBC], MorningSave [CBS], or "View Your Deal [ABC]," lately it seems every talk show has a daily segment devoted to so-called bargains. But, why are all the talk shows hyping products? 

Product placements provide a steady income stream by driving product sales. Retailers benefit by reaching a wider audience, and television networks rely heavily on advertising revenue to pay for the production of their shows, which is why we are subjected to TV commercials.

Photo: GMA

Nowadays television hosts including news readers, meteorologists, and medical doctors regularly join product promotors in the demonstrations of 5 or 6 products claimed to be offered at a discount during the show.

If viewers buy the featured products the talk shows get commissions (a cut of each sale) or affiliate sales revenue for driving viewers to buy the products.

Yet, I'll confess, I'm getting tired of them. It's beginning to feel like the home shopping network is taking over talk shows and we're watching infomercials disguised as program segments. The featured products are fairly random from skincare to cooking or exercise equipment and clothing. Usually, we're given 24 hours to go to a specially set up website for the network (which tracks the sales) to grab a deal.

Photo: The Today Show

Although I understand the appeal of some of the products, I've never taken the bait because I'm not an impulse buyer. I can see getting caught up in the enthusiasm of the promoters who are hawking discounts, but I wonder how many viewers have buyer's remorse after receiving their goods? The prices seem reasonable enough, but if consumers wait a beat, would they still need or want the merchandise in the 1st place? 

Let's discuss further:

Are television audiences bombarded by sales pitches coming into their living rooms spending more than they should?

And lastly, is the line between journalists and promotors on GMA, CBS Mornings, and The Today Show getting blurred? Is replacing genuine content with selling commodities ruining talk and morning news shows? Certainly, a show's attempts to make money must be balanced by offering viewers substance of value.

What are your thoughts?

You may also enjoy:

Live As An Under Buyer

The Story Of Stuff: A Review

Keeping Up With The Jones In Denmark

I Can't Watch Mel In Melbourne Anymore

Plantagenets, Tudors and Stuarts

Photo: Carae - Elizabeth Woodville, Queen Consort of England, mother of the princes in the tower.

The question of the day is: How are you spending your extra pandemic hours at home? 

I have stepped into the past to watch history documentaries, as well as, historical fiction -- dramas that combine facts with inventions, including The White Queen, The White Princess and The Spanish Princess. As long as I can google known facts to learn what really happened or to flesh out the true characters of kings, queens and power players at court, I will accept the historical fiction story I'm watching as entertainment, and yet often I think the truth doesn't need the invention, as the real history was dramatic and fascinating enough. The old saying applies, life is stranger than fiction.

Photos: Henry VII & Elizabeth of York, the elder sister of the Princes in the tower - their marriage (happy) ended the 30 year Wars of the Roses.

Overall, I notice the 3 historical fiction series listed above get the outlines and major events right, but sometimes mess with the timeline, minor yet important details, or motivations of a character, getting them wrong by making a confident historical person weak or needy, or a righteous person of the past calculating and unrighteous. I understand the need to composite characters into one for reasons of time or storytelling, but I dislike when producers change the nature, or established deeds of a historical person. While watching you must go with it to enjoy the series ... then look the person up later to know what is real and what liberties are taken.

Catherine of Aragon & how she'd look today

In school I took required Western Civilization history courses ... and yes, learned some things ... however, I have never cared to take an extended look at Plantagenet, Tudor or Stuart England thereafter ... until 2020. Mores change in a millennium, so I didn't think I could relate. But you can relate when studying the past, and I am re-examining English history in reverse order:

The 5 eldest children of Charles I by Van Dyck
1638 - Mary, James, Charles, Elizabeth and Anne

1) Stuarts - Mostly like them despite their faults. The Stuart Kings were good fathers and (except for faithful Charles I) philandering husbands, but who protected their wives when needed. History is hard on James II, who had become a Catholic. His chief flaw was his stubbornness. James lacked the charm of his older brother, Charles II. As King, James passed laws showing tolerance of Catholics and Quakers alongside the Church of England, reforms unwanted by segments in the Church of England who had benefited from the previous history of stripping the Catholic Church of its property; and it lead to the loss of his Crown. James II was followed by his 2 Protestant daughters: Mary II and Anne (skipping over his infant Catholic son from his 2nd marriage). Queen Anne's death ended the Stuart line.

2) Tudors - Dislike Henry VII and Henry VIII. What a bloodthirsty, greedy, miserly dynasty.

Like Catherine of Aragon and Mary I, who were both victims of their tyrant husband and father, Henry VIII. Dislike Anne Boleyn (What somebody will do with you, they'll do to you ... and worse ... as she discovered!) Catherine, the wife married to Henry the longest, remained popular with the English people who considered her their true Queen and recognized her worth until the day she died in spite of Henry and Anne's efforts to erase her. Anne lasted 2 short years as Queen and never earned the love of the English people regardless of her Englishness. Have great sympathy for the other wives. Jane's reign was short, dying in the childbirth of Henry's only legitiment living son. Anne of Cleves got a raw deal, then negotiated a lucrative divorce. Poor young Catherine Howard was in over her head and lost it; and Catherine Parr married an overweight, ulcerous King and outlived him. Haven't gotten in-depth into Elizabeth I ... but will likely think she's ok.

Richard III - face
created based his skull.

3) Plantagenets -  I'm now watching every documentary about them. Lots of family infighting and betrayals happening. Tough times. Divided country. Family feuds with money and retainers!! Generally, I understand and like them. I like (English born, German) Empress Matilda who became a claimant to the English throne, and Eleanor of Aquitaine rocked! I like Elizabeth Woodville and Henry IV well enough. Richard III ... did he kill the princes in the tower as has been accepted for 500 years? Well, maybe not, I'm unsure. It could have been directed by Henry Tudor or his wily mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort. We will likely never know who killed those boys. Richard III was the last of the Plantagenets. Defeated by Henry Tudor, the new King (as Henry VII) spent his reign hunting down potential Plantagenet rivals whom he feared had a better claim to the English throne.

Photo: The Telegraph

My ancestors have the same Norman roots and took the same English paths of migration as the Plantagenets, but after 600 - 1,000 years how would you truly know if you are related? I'm skeptical when people say their gateway ancestor was a long-ago royal. Without a meticulous paper trail that stretches all the way back, you're only guessing. But you know what? I still hate those Tudors! The revisionists of history.😏 What a cutthroat bunch of murderous paranoids ... and nasty to their own family to boot!💂👑

You might also enjoy:

Masters Of Sex, A Review

Princess Louise, Duchess Of Argyll

The Marriage Of Charles II And Catherine Of Braganza

Aboard The Underground Railroad: A Picture Book In Verse

Queen Victoria's Family Pictures

All 9 children together at The Rosenau near Colburg to honor their father, Prince Albert, August, 1865. (Back row) Princess Louise, Albert Edward, the Prince of Wales (Bertie); (front row) Prince Leopold (who, lame at the time, leans on a chair), Princess Alice, Princess Beatrice, Princess Victoria (Vicky) of Prussia; (standing) Prince Alfred (Affie), Princess Helena (Lenchen), (sitting cross legged in front) Prince Arthur {Photos: Royal Collection Trust}

In Great Britain Victoria, season 2 returns to television on Sunday August 27, 2017. A Christmas special will follow that I can't wait to see, knowing that Prince Albert, the Queen's husband, introduced the tradition of Christmas trees to his adopted country.

Season 2 won't air in America until February, 2018; but fans can watch it online with the Brits if they search for it. I don't feel naughty for doing so, as I will watch the series again when it airs here on PBS, which after all is free TV. (Why doesn't the series air simultaneously? Is it a matter of business and contracts?)

Standing: Prince Louis of Hesse (husband of Alice), Prince Alfred, Princess Helena, Alexandra, the Princess of Wales (wife of Bertie), Albert Edward, the Prince of Wales (Bertie), Princess Louise, Prince Ernest II, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (their uncle and Albert's brother), Prince Arthur, Princess Victoria of Prussia. Seated: Princess Alexandrine, Duchess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Crown Prince Frederick of Prussia (husband of Vicky), Prince Leopold (on Fritz's lap) and Princess Alice at The Rosenau near Colburg, August, 1865. 

Louise, Beatrice, Alice, Alfred, Bertie, Arthur, Helena, Leopold and Vicky - at The Rosenau, August, 1865

The screenwriter, Daisy Goodwin, says season 2 is set in the 1840s, with Queen Victoria juggling consecutive pregnancies, young children and her husband with her job of [constitutionally] ruling an empire. In Europe, the 1840s were years of "revolution, famine and unrest." Even in England, there were hostile republican groups in favor of abolishing the monarchy.

Left photo: Bertie (who became King Edward VII), Vicky, Queen Victoria, Alfred, and Alice, 1854; right photo: Helena, Queen Victoria and Louise, 1850.

I adore these photos of Queen Victoria's domestic life. Prince Albert and the Queen took to photography, recognizing its value in getting images of their family out to her subjects, connecting the public to the Crown. They look very middle class, but in reality had a huge staff of nurses, tutors, maids, ladies-in-waiting and equerries to assist them, not to mention palaces and castles to occupy in London, Windsor, the Isle of Wight and Scotland. By royal standards though, the Queen and Prince Consort were involved parents.

Left photo: 1854 - Queen Victoria with her favorite son, Prince Arthur (7th child, born 1850) and 2 of her ladies-in-waiting. As a child Arthur charmed the court and visitors with cute remarks. When younger brother, Leopold, was born in 1853, nurses reported, Arthur "talks to him like an old woman," calling his brother, "my baby." Victoria wrote that Arthur was "more dear than all the rest put together." Right photo: Prince Albert, Princess Alice, Queen Victoria holding Prince Arthur; (Back corner) Crown Prince Frederick (Friz) of Prussia, Princess Victoria (Vicky). In white hats: Princess Helena, Princess Louise, and Prince Alfred, 1857.

Between 1840-1857 Victoria bore 9 children. She hated being pregnant, but in her era the only effective method of contraception was abstinence. What's more, a dynasty has a duty to produce heirs.

Vicky and Arthur in the Tableau of Dreams, 1854

The cast of Tableau of Dreams dressed as seasons: Princess Alice  (Spring), Arthur with Victoria, the Princess Royal (Summer), Princess Helena (Holding a cross as A Spirit Empress), Prince Alfred with Princess Louise (Autumn), Prince Albert Edward (Winter), May 24, 1854 on the occasion of their mother's birthday.

Prince Albert was a strict, yet loving father. He oversaw the children's education, implementing a rigorous academic curriculum. The oldest child, Vicky, thrived, while her brothers Bertie and Alfred (Affie) less so. The children spoke fluent English, German and French, as well as, studied Greek and Latin. Additionally, the children took lessons in music, painting and drawing, recited poetry and put on plays to celebrate birthdays and anniversaries. The girls learned to cook and bake; and all of the children planted their own vegetable gardens. Affie was mechanically minded and skilled at building forts. The boys played soldiers. Queen Victoria thought Prince Albert was perfect and after his death, tried to follow what she interpreted as his plans in raising their children. But the youngsters' world darkened, as they were engulfed in their mother's prolonged period of mourning.

Left photo: 1854 - Prince Alfred (4th child, born 1844) - At his own request his parents let him join the royal navy at age 14. At 17, Affie was away at sea, when Prince Albert died in 1861. Queen Victoria never forgave Affie, her 2nd son, for having affairs as a young man. She was critical of him throughout his life. A boy leaving home at 14 is so very young, though the Prince had a happy naval career. Right photo: September, 1854 - Arthur and Alfred dressed as Skeikh Princes at Osbourne. Four year old Arthur is a little ham! Often visitors to the nursery noticed the 7th child's charisma.

There is no doubt Queen Victoria loved her children (and they loved her), but she was not a natural mother. She was not only their mother, but their sovereign, a trump card she was quick to use when provoked. For all her faults as a mother, she gets cut a little slack. After Albert left her a widow at the young age of 42, she had 8 unmarried children at home. Princess Alice and Prince Albert Edward (Bertie) married within two years, according to the paths their father had sanctioned for them.

Another snap of Arthur and Alfred dressed as Sheikh Princes at Osbourne, 1854

Prince Leopold, Princess Beatrice and Prince Arthur at Osbourne, 1958

Princess Helena, Princess Louise, Prince Leopold and Princess Alice at Balmoral, 1860

It left Queen Victoria with 6 young children to make all the decisions for their well being as a single mother. Granted she had wealth, resources and servants to help her, but still her family's health, education, moral and social development -- their futures rested solely on her shoulders. It had to overwhelm her at times. She was especially fearful when upper-crust boys (i.e., princes) became young men. She believed all too often they grew aimless, reckless and immoral "running up to London" with the wrong set of people. Certainly, only a strong-willed woman could soldier the responsibility of a big brood. According to her biographers, she was a domineering mother. 

Left photo: 1865 - Prince Leopold (8th child, born 1853). Like his sisters Vicky and Alice he was studious and very intelligent. He was a gifted pianist and could paint and draw; right photo: 1866 - Princess Louise (6th child, born 1848). All of Victoria's children could sketch and paint. Louise stood out, becoming a professional sculptress.

Her children hated to disappoint her or incur her wrath. She had a mighty temper and did not like to be contradicted. She had few expectations of Bertie and Affie, who were, in fact, "running up to London," to have a randy good time. Leopold had an independent, feisty nature (but not wild like his brothers). He was miserable to be smothered and criticized as if he did. Helena (Lenchen) and Beatrice (Baby) were the most submissive children. Poor Beatrice (age 4 when Albert died) was raised to submit to her mother's needs over her own. Still ... Victoria loved them, guided them in good faith (if sometimes unfairly or selfishly), selected tutors and caretakers mindfully and allowed each child to marry for love. 

Princesses Alice (3rd child, born 1843) and Helena (5th child, born 1846), 1860. Both sisters played the piano beautifully (like Leopold, Beatrice and their parents).

When the Queen's children persisted in something they desired to do, if they took their mother on with tact and patient diplomacy, she would listen and at times relent (always with a written list of her conditions); however give in she would do, if the child strongly wished to pursue an interest or purpose. Thus Princess Louise attended a public art school (the first royal to do so and married a subject over a foreign prince); Prince Leopold (despite his setbacks with hemophilia and mild fits) was allowed to attend Oxford University, plus marry; and youngest child, Beatrice, (who Victoria groomed to stay unmarried at home with her) was also permitted to marry after a 7-month battle of silence and wills. With the shock announcement that Princess Beatrice had fallen for Prince Henry of Battenberg, Queen Victoria stopped speaking to her most devoted daughter. Written notes were passed between them during the feud at the breakfast table! Moreover, Princess Beatrice continued (as required!) to work as her mother's private secretary. It seems cruel to a modern reader.

Prince Leopold, Princess Louise, Prince Alfred, Princess Alice, Princess Helena at Buckingham Palace, February 29, 1960.

Vicky and the Queen, 1857

When the Queen clashed with one of her children, she wrote detailed letters, explaining her disapproval and anxieties not only to the child who challenged her, but to other members of the family such as eldest daughter, Crown Princess Victoria of Prussia; the child's tutors and doctors; chaplains (and depending on the issue, a college dean or prime minister!) who's consuls {and consoles} she sought in the matter. She sent them copies of the letters: the child's request and her replies. Victoria was always upfront about what she thought!

Fortunately, the Queen was surrounded by many well-intentioned retainers; and the other children who were sympathetic to their siblings.

For all the upset over Beatrice's wedding, Queen Victoria grew to love Prince Henry of Battenberg. The Queen's new son-in-law gave up his military career to marry his English Princess; and the couple had to agree to live permanently with the Queen. Eventually, they gave her 4 more grandchildren.

Left photo: 1862 - Queen Victoria with her favorite and most devoted daughter, Princess Beatrice (9th child, born 1857). Right photo: 1864 - As an adult, Princess Beatrice was shy, but confident and determined if she had to be. She didn't seek nor crave her role as a sidekick to the center of power; it's what the Queen wished. Although Victoria was more maternal with Beatrice than she had been with her older children, it was a double-edged sword. From the age of 4, Beatrice was conditioned to put her mother's needs and happiness first. The Queen expected her two youngest children, Leopold and Beatrice, to live out their days unmarried as her companions. Prince Leopold was too spirited and independent and was unhappy until he was permitted to marry. Beatrice got married but complied. As selfish as Victoria appears to a modern reader, it was more common in Victorian times for one child in a family to remain home to care for parents.

It is not easy for offspring of a mother born to be a ruler ... as she will rule! Despite her maternal shortcomings, I mostly like Queen Victoria because on balance: her children were likable, responsible, respectable adults. They were instilled with a sense of duty and a desire to do good. All of them were gracious, humble and kind.

Even Bertie turned out to be a diplomat and good king. (King Edward VII loved his wife and mistresses, but that's another blog!) Affie, who became the Duke of Saxe-Colburg-Gotha in 1893, won over his subjects also. Mostly the siblings got along and were warm and open toward one another. Princesses Louise and Beatrice had squabbles, which were mended. Beatrice celebrated a happy 80th birthday with sister Louise, her next door neighbor, at Kensington Palace.* Bertie (Victoria's spurned heir) and Beatrice (her beloved confidante) were not close. Queen Victoria treated her oldest son and youngest daughter so differently, and some resentment stayed with the heir. Princess Beatrice was not part of the new King's inner circle (as was Princess Louise), but "remained a presence at court."* Bertie always invited her on the King's yachting trips; and his youngest sister was among the family who gathered as Bertie lay dying in 1910.* Unlike other dynasties, there were no ugly intrigues, plotting, nor backstabbing in Victoria's family. 

They were privileged royals, yes ... but spoiled, no. When looking at results, you understand, Queen Victoria was fundamentally a good person. So were her adult children. As a parent, she must have done many things right. 

Now for the countdown to season 2 of Victoria! Will you watch?

*The Last Princess: The Devoted Life of Queen Victoria's Youngest Daughter by Matthew Dennison here

Blogger changed something so writing captions for pictures messes up the format of a paragraph, therefore, I will identify the Royals in the last photo (above) in this spot: Standing: Alice, Louis of Hesse, Bertie, Helena. Sitting: Louise, Queen Victoria, Beatrice, Alexandra (Bertie's bride), and kneeling: Leopold. Poor Alexandra. It's her wedding and she holds a photo of the dearly departed Prince Albert, as her in-laws surround his statue, 1863.



You may also enjoy:
It's Christmas Once Again    
Princess Alice Of The United Kingdom   
Remembering Prince Leopold, Duke Of Albany
Queen Victoria & Prince Albert: Books & Series

Duck Dynasty, A Review

Photo: CBS Baltimore

Recently I watched a few full episodes and clips of Duck Dynasty on YouTube. I have never, ever watched a reality television series (outside of the contest shows). I'm sure I would not care for most of the genre, but I find Duck Dynasty very entertaining. In short, the Robertson family is hugely likable, as portrayed.

The series features Phil and Miss Kay, their four adult sons, Alan, Jase, Willie and Jep, their daughters in-law, Lisa, Missy, Korie and Jessica, plus their grandchildren, employees and friends. Perhaps, the most popular family member is Phil's brother, Uncle Si, a Vietnam veteran, who is off-beat and crazy in a good-natured way. Uncle Si is quite the storyteller. He claims his "stories are 95% true." You gotta love him for it!

The show takes place in West Monroe, Louisiana. It revolves around a family-run business, Duck Commander, which makes a duck call for duck hunters. The Robertson men are avid hunters and known for their ZZ Top-like beards and their strong Christian values. (Oldest brother, Alan, is the exception. He shaves.)

But so far, these characteristics don't bother me as a viewer. As long as people are honest, transparent and tolerant, I can accept some differences.

Duck Dynasty seems less scripted and more positive than other reality TV shows are reported to be. There is no high drama, or negativity. Ribbing, yes, but no fighting between family members. How refreshing not to have a king-or-queen of mean in a series. Watching pettiness and bad behavior gets old fast!

Despite their redneck image, Phil and sons are actually college graduates, as are the daughters-in-law. And, they have other talents. Miss Kay cooks banquet-size meals. Jase's wife, Missy, has a lovely singing voice, and Willie and Korie's daughter, Sadie Robertson, with no prior dance experience, came in second place on Dancing With With Stars. Back in the day, grandpa Phil was recruited to play pro-football, however, he turned the chance down because duck hunting was his calling. That decision seems to have worked out.

I enjoy the humor and (dare I say) sincerity of the show. A critic might compare its realism to that of Ozzie And Harriet. Romanticised ... surely, but viewers are getting the essence of who the Robertsons are. 

The family sticks together, but are also altruistic and kind. They believe in giving back and helping a neighbor.

It's not featured on the show, but various family members have overcome adversity. None of them claims to be perfect. Phil was not always a model husband, and youngest son, Jep, had to find his way before he matured, but that's what fans like about the family. They are not saints, but come across as compassionate people trying to lead purposeful lives.

Although not a hunter, myself, I am OK with it on the show. In their environment, I understand why they do it. The Robertsons were money poor before Duck Commander made them wealthy, and they were brought up to kill what they eat. Even with money, it puts food on their table. Phil doesn't want his children and grandchildren to become as he puts it, yuppie boys and girls.

The Robertsons like to laugh at themselves, and television viewers like them for it. The show is fun, down home and charming. It's also a top rated series on the E-Network.

You may also enjoy:
Another Election Done
Watching Game Of Thrones
What's On Your Playlist?
10 Woman I'd Like To Meet For Tea

Masters Of Sex, A Review

Photo: Showtime

Recently I binge watched the Showtime period drama, Masters of Sex. There are two seasons of 12 episodes each to watch, and it's a good investment of time. 

The show depicts the lives of sex therapists Dr. William Masters and Virginia Johnson, who are brilliantly portrayed by Michael Sheen and Lizzy Caplan. The real William Masters was an esteemed fertility doctor; Virginia Johnson, a divorced mother of two and former night club singer without a science degree. Initially, Mrs. Johnson was hired as Dr. Master's secretary. 

They began their sex studies in the 1950s when such research was considered smut, not science. It's not easy being pioneers in a field with controversy and misconceptions galore, and it requires brains, ambition, panache and an unrelenting tenacity to succeed. Each of the groundbreakers had qualities (i.e. strengths) the other lacked. First Masters and Johnson needed to set up a sex lab at the hospital where they worked; then they needed more autonomy so they moved their study to independent offices, therefore they needed backers with deep pockets; and still later, they needed to get published for their work to be taken seriously, not to mention, reach the ears of scientific grand poobahs and the public ... all of which took personal sacrifices and years of their lives.

Masters of Sex is one of the best written shows airing. It's a rich story. The characters are real and multi-layered, sometimes flawed, but not irredeemable or destructive. You understand what motivates them. There are no throw away characters on the show. You are interested in the entire cast of lead and supporting characters. There is not one person, who I haven't felt sympathy for at one time or another.

It gets complicated too. Smart people aren't always smart, and moral people fall short. Sometimes ignorance, ambition, ego, insecurity, politics or the times get in the way. The scripts are beyond good; they are sophisticated with slice of life insights.

Overall, it's an upbeat show. But at times people make compromises ... to get ahead ... to get along ... to get the job done.

And yes, there is plenty of sex to watch. But, none of it is gratuitous. Um, let's just anoint the show's talented cast as the bravest actors on TV. They do not flinch. Television viewers experience the venerability ... and get into the hearts and minds of all the characters. We root for them; and sometimes, ache for them.

What a quality show. There will be a season three.

You may also enjoy:
Penny Dreadful: A Review
Watching Game Of Thrones
Are You A Downton Abbey Fan?    
What I Like About Mad Men And The 60s

Penny Dreadful: A Review

Photo by Jonathan Hession - Showtime

Recently I binge watched the first four episodes of Penny Dreadful, a horror suspense television series, created and written by John Logan and co-executive produced by Sam Mendes for Showtime. 

I give the show a B+. I don't always understand what makes a character tick. Parts of the storytelling are engaging, and it should get better. Penny Dreadful has a handsome cast. Excellent acting by the entire ensemble. Hopefully after the back stories are told and the characters gel, the plot and action will snap, crackle and pop up to an A.

The edgy drama takes place in Victorian England and features famous 19th century British and Irish fictional characters, including Mary Shelly's Dr. Victor Frankenstein, Oscar Wilde's Dorian Gray and Mina Murray from Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Other principals are veteran actor, Timothy Dalton, who plays Sir Malcolm Murray, a seasoned African explorer, on a mission to rescue his kidnapped daughter, Mina from evil supernatural beings before it's too late. He teams up with Vanessa Ives (Eva Green), who is in touch with the occult and was close to Mina before a trust between them was broken. Sir Malcolm is aware of the history (and perhaps in the thick of it), but this arc is still unfolding for the audience.

Eva Green has beautiful, expressive eyes, though in my opinion, she should tone down the eye widening for television. She is a gifted stage actress, but for television, her expressions need to be a bit more restrained. That surely will happen as she grows more confident with her character. A notch less would turn very good acting into superb acting. She has the chops.

Rory Kinnear portrays a very interesting misunderstood Frankenstein's monster. Caliban, the creature, is bitter that he came into the world in agony; was quickly abandoned; and is the polar opposite of handsome. So he hunts Victor Frankenstein down, subdues Frankenstein's much improved 2nd creature (which is sad!) and threatens to kill anyone Dr. Frankenstein holds dear unless the doctor makes an immortal mate for the resentful, anger-festering monster. It turns out Caliban longs for love and acceptance, which he is denied by most in society. Something bad is brewing ... perhaps at the theatre where Caliban works and finds a measure of acceptance and contentment. [Sweeney Todd is playing at the theatre!]

We discover that Dr. Frankenstein ... as a boy ... was wounded by seeing too much death. His purpose in life is to unlock the key to immortality. 

Josh Hartnett is American Ethan Chandler, a man of action. The actor is super watchable and easy on the eyes! A former gunslinger, brave and capable, his easy charm hides a more complicated nature. Ethan gets involved with Irish immigrant, Brona Craft, who is battling tuberculous. Brona and Ethan become friends with benefits. He wants to help her get treatment. So to earn the money, Ethan joins Sir Malcolm and Vanessa to find Mina. Without a doubt, Ethan is honorable, but we have yet to find out what kind of man he is. Is he in the habit of falling for lost causes ... or is he capable of life long commitments? We'll have to stay tuned.

The only certainties are ... it will take time, a mystic and the ability to outwit, out-fight and out-kill many terrifying demons before finding Mina Murray; and whatever Ethan Chandler is getting paid, it isn't enough.

You may also enjoy:
Watching Game Of Thrones
Who Am I: Pete Townshend
Are You A Dowton Abbey Fan?
10 Women I'd Like To Meet For Tea

Premiers: NBC's Believe & ABC's Resurrection

This week two promising shows premiered on network TV. While the scenarios of each varies, both shows feature children with special gifts as central characters. 

Believe is co-created-written-and-directed by Gravity's Oscar winning director, Alfonso Cuaron. In it a little girl, who has paranormal powers, must be watched by a team of protectors to keep her from falling into the clutches of a corrupt millionaire, played by Kyle MacLachlan. MacLachlan's character, the well-connected Mr. Skouras, wants to use the child's powers for his own misguided purposes.

I adore a scene in Believe where the young girl, named Bo, tells a convicted murderer, Tate, who is sent to a hospital to bar her kidnapping, that the reason he has a tear streaming down his cheek is: "You remembered you were good once."  

The chase over the course of a television season should be fun and suspenseful, if the characters are multi-dimensional and worth getting to know. I will give the show a chance.

If you have ever lost a close family member, you may be disturbed and equally drawn in by Resurrection. In the series, an 8 year old boy, named Jacob, appears at his 60 year old parents' door, looking very much like the day he died, 32 years earlier. Most of us can identify with loss, grief and wanting our loved ones back. So it's not an easy episode to watch, but you don't turn the channel.

It looks like Jacob won't be the only person in town to rise from the dead. Previews show other dearly departed arriving. Past events will now have to be re-examined. Jacob's cousin, Maggie, a local doctor, gets involved. Her own mother died in the same accident, trying to save Jacob from drowning, or so everyone believes. Soon long ago secrets begin to unravel, and new mysteries need to be understood. What is happening in the small Midwestern town of Arcadia?

If the creators are clever in responding to the age-old questions about the meaning of life and death, the show will be gripping to watch. Resurrection is co-produced by Plan B Entertainment, Brad Pitt's company. Brad just won an Oscar for co-producing Twelve Years A Slave.

Fantasy and sci-fi genres can be more creative and take more liberties than straight dramas in explaining good and evil. The really genius ones (like HBO's Game of Thrones) do shed light on human nature. 

Let's hope these latest two will be complex and entertaining to watch. It's fantastic the networks are hiring talented people to produce different kinds of shows. Hopefully, it will lead to imaginative and great storytelling.

You may also enjoy:

Watching Game Of Thrones

What I Like About Mad Men And The 60s

Are You A Downton Abbey Fan?    

The Voice Tribute - Hallelujah