DECEMBER 2001 ARTICLES Sela Ward - On Her Marriage and Mission by Tom Sikes
Sela Ward is one busy actress, wife and mother. Yet she took time from her set of "Once and Again" to talk with us about her life. What is going on in her life after her successes of winning two Emmy awards, growing in her marriage and raising her family between Hollywood and Mississippi?
Paving Your Way- We see you as an Emmy-award-winning actress, a movie star, business woman and model. How do you see yourself? Who is Sela Ward today?
Sela Ward- First and foremost, I am a wife and a mother. I am a daughter, a friend and a sister. Finally, I am an actress and a businesswoman who is incredibly BUSY!
PYW- How has your character, Lily Manning, enabled you to reach out to single parents and blended families?
Lily represents a large percentage of women in this country who are struggling with single parenthood and who suddenly find themselves starting over both in their relationships and in their careers. Over 50% of the couples in our country are divorced. It's a sad statistic but, nevertheless, a subject our show tackles in a very meaningful way.
PYW- People who are successful continue to ask "Now what?" What projects are you involved with beyond your acting career?
Sela- I think once you have reached a level of success you are comfortable with... it's important to think beyond one's self. I find that for most of us, we spend our 20's and 30's building our careers and families without many pauses. However, once that intense time of self-actualization is over, it becomes the perfect time in your life to give back.
My bigger-picture focus has been to create a foundation called Hope for Children. The first project this foundation will be involved with is creating a state-of-the-art "campus" for neglected and abused children in Meridian, Mississippi. It will be a facility to house the children temporarily and/or permanently with educational and therapeutic facilities under one umbrella. This is a facility greatly needed in this area, and it will become a pilot program to be implemented all over the country. I am also involved in helping to create a school for performing arts in Meridian that will have as its performing venue the soon-to-be-restored "Grand Opera House of Mississippi." The arts are very healing, and this project will be a wonderful outlet for our children in need.
PYW- For aspiring actors, what would you say to them about your journey and the entertainment business today?
Sela- I never thought about acting as a career. I had many other passions. However, I guess it was meant to be for me, as it was something that seemed to happen divinely as I look back and connect the dots. It is a very difficult profession, wrought with rejection and tremendous competition. I think that half of the equation in ones success in this business is perseverance. The ability to pick ones self back up by the boot straps and go at it again. Often in the face of overwhelming odds. It takes a very particular character to survive in the acting arena. I have beaten "the odds" over and over again. Why? How? Im not sure. Except to say that I have never given up and have always been driven by a deep inner belief that I could do it.
I struggled much more when I was young and didn't know who I was or what I wanted. As I grew and became more comfortable with who I was, success came easier for me. Its almost as if I had to discover myself before I could really be successful.
I am a big believer that we choose everything in our lives. We choose to stay in unhealthy, destructive relationships. We choose to stay in jobs we hate. We choose not to take care of our bodies. We choose to eat unhealthy meals full of fat. We choose not to exercise. We choose to play the victim of circumstances instead of taking responsiblity for our own accountability in a situation – owning it and making a change. I blame no one else for my failures or my successes. I own them all. My only advice is to always take a hard look at what you want for yourself – choose it and go for it. Live in the "land of possibility" and you'd be surprised how often you get what you want. One should always follow ones heart and dreams. I've beaten the odds, I know the value of not giving up in the face of incredible negativity.
PYW- Would you mind sharing about growing up in Mississippi and in particular your spiritual background? How has that background helped you in discovering your purpose in life?
Sela- Growing up in a small town teaches you about "community." It instills strong ties to ones family and friends and can give one a wonderful sense of belonging. It's the strength that my family and friends provide that has really gotten me through my struggles. That's something that my mother was very certain to instill in us – the ties to each other and the strength they provide.
Meridian is definitely that place for me. Somewhere to retreat to that nourishes my soul – it helps to ground me and balance my life. I live in a very fast-paced world and I obviously thrive on it, or I wouldn't create it! I love big cities and all they have to offer. They are incredibly stimulating culturally, but do not offer the respite I need from time to time. That place is the farm property my husband and I have in my hometown in Mississippi.
It was important for me to have my children experience the little slice of Americana I grew up in. I want them to grow up with a same sense memories I have ... the taste of fresh iced tea on a hot summer day, porch swings, the sound of creaky screen doors and cicadas at night. It will always be magical and full of warmth and charm to me. The "southern way" is woven into the fabric of my being, and I will always cherish that part of myself.
PYW- At the Emmys, you mentioned your deep appreciation for your husband. What do you love about him?
Sela- My husband, Howard, is truly one of the greatest men I have ever known. (It took me long enough to find him! I didn't choose well in my younger days.) I waited to get married until I was 35. Thank God I had sense enough not to marry before then. It would not have served me well.
Howard is an awesome partner and father. He participates in the care of our children. He is never too busy. He is incredibly kind, loving and giving. I love his intelligence. I love the way he listens to me and honors my opinion. He is my best friend. I feel that he cherishes us and that is a feeling so yummy and so warm that I can't find the words to describe it. As I wrote to Howard in a note slipped to him before we walked down the aisle, "God smiled down on me when I met you! What a gift he gave me in you."
PYW- Sela, many of our readers are searching for meaning in life. What would you say to them about failure and doubting on their way to discovering their purpose?
Sela- You can't look at anything in your life as a "failure" in the traditional sense of the word. Every single thing that happens is a learning experience.
So maybe you don't reach the goal every single time, but you certainly learn something more about how life works which prepares you better for the next opportunity.
Failure is necessary. Failure is necessary in order to experience success. It only serves to teach us. Doubting is also necessary, whether it's in ones faith or elsewhere, for the questioning only serves to clarify who we are and what we choose to believe in. Without these experiences of challenging our belief systems, we would not be able to grow. And that would not aid anyone who is seeking to discover and define his or her purpose in this life.
PYW- You and your co-star Billy Campbell have a chemistry on the set. The viewers are seeking that same chemistry in their marriages and relationships. What are you doing to build your own marriage?
Sela- Billy and I have a chemistry which is written by writers, choreographed by directors and acted out by actors. Its a television show; its a fantasy. Life isn't well-lit. I've discovered some things in my personal life that have certainly made my marriage romantic. That includes occasionally spending the night in a hotel (instead of sleeping at home) or having a romantic candle-lit dinner by ourselves.
As far as marriage, it is the best thing you'll ever do and the worst thing all rolled into one. And there is no perfect relationship. June and Ward Cleaver (Leave it to Beaver) don't exist. It's a big relief to finally get that! You don't have to spend your time trying to live up to something that isn't real.
Having said that, I like to think of a marriage as an abundant garden. But it won't flourish by itself. It takes a lot of care. It takes weeding and fertilizing and lots of watering, or the plants will die. I feel that if we choose the commitment of marriage, then we, together as couples, have a responsibility to one one another to take care of our garden. There will be droughts, and there will be times of delicious fruits of our labor. I personally happen to love the partnership of marriage. It works for me. It doesn't work for everyone and that's okay. It's a complicated partnership that can offer many rewards if that's what one chooses.__ Pavingyourway.com (December 29, 2001)
Back to archive index
Steven Weber: Still Cursed? By Angel Cohn
Steven Weber doesn't blame NBC's seemingly hexed post-Friends timeslot on Thursday nights for the demise of The Weber Show — formerly titled Cursed. He blames the sorry show itself.
"I think the show failed for reasons other than that it was in some timeslot with a bad mojo on it — I think that's crap," Weber tells TV Guide Online. "If the network finally has some balls and puts a show there that is good, appeals to an adult audience, takes a chance and [they stop] bemoaning why audiences are fleeing the network and going to cable, then that mysterious Bermuda triangle of an 8:30 timeslot suddenly won't be so bad."
The 40-year-old actor and recent first-time father says his series's problems began early on, thanks to network tinkering. "From the beginning, the original idea was kind of misunderstood or [the network execs] were afraid of it," the former Wings star says. "[It] was essentially a guy who gets out of bed and steps in crap all day, just trying to get through his day. But again, keeping to the network precepts of what makes a successful show, they decided to kind of pander to a certain demographic, which they feel required romance, etc. — and that was the death of that show."
"I really just wanted to do something different from the beginning," he admits sadly. "And I ended up doing something that was so average and common." Though Weber's now a regular on the critically acclaimed Once and Again — whose recent move to Friday nights at 10 pm caused a dip in viewership — he still won't pin poor numbers on the timeslot. "I don't think ratings are a science," he grouses. "Not everybody goes out Friday night. I feel that this show appeals to an audience that's watching, but they're not counting. Young people go out and they don't watch TV, but what about those poor, old, decrepit people like myself that are in and watch TV?" __ TV Guide (December 29, 2001)
Back to archive index
'Wow!': Dream of Hope Village becomes a reality By Chris Allen Baker
A passion for the well-being of abused and neglected children helped warm a brisk December day Thursday, offering a fresh reminder that dreams can come true.
Feelings of hope and love for children permeated official opening ceremonies for Hope Village for Children — a dream of Emmy Award-winning actress Sela Ward shared by hundreds of contributors and volunteers. Working together as a community with a common interest, they transformed the old Masonic Home on 23rd Avenue into a new facility that will accept its first young residents next week.
"Wow!" Ward said with a sigh as she received a warm hometown welcome. "This is so exciting. It's something to have a dream or a passion. It's another thing to take that dream and run with it which is what our community has done.
"I'm thousands of miles away, and I can cheerlead from afar, but it is the real blood, sweat, tears and work on everyone's behalf in our community — the really big heart that Meridian has which has made this happen," she said. "It's probably one of the most thrilling days of my life to have a dream and vision of something and actually see it become a reality."
Ward, a Lauderdale County native, was instrumental in development of the multi-million-dollar residence. But, she was quick to point out, she could not have done it alone.
After the ribbon-cutting, the crowd moved to a flag pole in the front area of the campus where a Girl Scout color guard raised a U.S. flag donated by Sen. Thad Cochran. The flag had flown over the U.S. Capitol shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks.
With a patriotic salute by the Meridian Children's Choir, the late state Sen. Glenn Deweese, an early and active supporter of the project, was honored for his longtime leadership in Hope Village's creation.
Dr. Raymon Leake, pastor of First Baptist Church, said two voices were dominant during the first meeting to make Hope Village a reality — Ward and Deweese.
"Sela painted the picture of a dream of Hope Village, then Glenn Deweese spoke up and said this is the way we need to get it done," Leake said.
Deweese's widow, Janice, and son, Doug, who now holds his father's seat on Hope Village's board of directors, participated in the official opening ceremonies.
Hope Village's opening was the culmination of Ward's dream that began about two years ago during a visit to an emergency shelter in Meridian.
"I fell in love with these two little boys who were brothers and about to be split up and moved to different parts of the state. The only thing they had was each other. It just killed me. I thought, 'we have to do something about this.'"
The idea evolved into re-thinking the more traditional orphanage concept and developing one that would fit the needs of 21st century children.
"The foster care system today is not working in this country," Ward said. "We need to create a really warm and nurturing environment for kids to thrive in. That's Hope Village for Children."
Through Ward, fund-raising spread beyond Mississippi and the U.S. as more than $1.6 million has been collected or pledged with other gifts in-kind.
Ward said she was not surprised that people responded, but the amount of response was unexpected.
"I grew up here and I know the hearts of people in this town. But I will say that I have been overwhelmingly surprised by just how dedicated people have been and support coming from places I never expected."
Ward said her immediate objective is to stay focused and get the campus up and running "in the most progressive state-of-the-art way as possible. My dream from there is to franchise this all over the country."
Meridian High School junior Robby Followell, 16, said he believes in Hope Village and plans help change children's lives as an academic tutor.
"It's neat how everyone has worked together to make an idea come to reality," he said. "It'll be great to invest my life in someone else, especially academically. I've been blessed with a good education so I can give back a portion of that to other kids who need help." __ The Meridian Star (Dec. 28, 2001)
Back to archive index
Name Dropping By John Parkyn
After years in show business, Sela Ward has finally become a major star on Once and Again. Why did it take her so long to reach the top?
"Once and again" is an apt description of Ward's career, which for years was a stop-and-go kind of affair based on the state of her love life. Born in Mississippi in 1956, she had no thoughts of becoming an actress. Instead, she studied art at the University of Alabama, became a cheerleader for the Crimson Tide and dated local jock Bob Baumhower, who would later play nose tackle for the Miami Dolphins. Ward expected to marry Baumhower, and when they broke up she decided on an impulse to move to New York City. She began as a graphic artist, turned to modeling to supplement her income, and then, at the age of 27, headed to Hollywood to try her luck as an actress. Soon she had a role on CBS's Emerald Point N.A.S., but put her career on the back burner when she fell for one of the show's stars, Richard Dean Anderson. After three years, the couple broke up and Ward moved on to a romance with actor Peter Weller. When that relationship fizzled, the 35-year-old actress realized it was time to get back to work. Though she was turned down for a Bond movie as "too old," television came to her rescue with the showy role of a recovering alcoholic on NBC's long-running Sisters.
It was while on that series that she finally found the man she would marry -- venture capitalist Howard Sherman, whom she met on a blind date. Wed in 1992, the couple now have two children, Austin, 8, and Anabella, 3. __ Ft. Lauderdale Sun Sentinel (December 23, 2001)
Back to archive index
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner By ALEX KUCZYNSKI
Ameena Meer, a writer who lives in Manhattan, will celebrate the holidays this year with a cast of (practically) thousands.
There is her immediate ex-husband, James. And her first ex-husband, Andrew. There is her 9-year-old daughter, Sasha, by her first husband, and her two children by her second husband, Zarina, 6, and Jahanara, who is almost 3. At a Christmas Eve dinner Ms. Meer is planning in Washington, Andrew will bring Stephanie, his girlfriend, and one of Ms. Meer's ex- boyfriends is also coming. Her brother, his wife and their new baby — the sole concession to the traditional nuclear family — will also be a part of the celebration.
"Sometimes I need a flow chart to keep everybody straight," she said.
As families gather this holiday season, many will be reminded that American divorce culture has traveled far past "Kramer vs. Kramer." Sure, people were divorced 25 years ago. And sure, there were Brady Bunch stepfamilies. But these days, post-divorce families are better represented by the critically acclaimed ABC series "Once and Again," in which Sela Ward plays Lily, who is married to Rick and who used to be married to Jake. All three, along with the children from both marriages, not to mention Jake's pregnant girlfriend, Tiffany, spent Thanksgiving together on the show. And in an episode broadcast Dec. 14, it was Lily and Rick who assisted at the birth of Tiffany's child.
Three decades after divorce rates first soared in the United States, removing the dire stigma of a broken marriage, and long after custody-law changes began forcing former spouses into close contact for years of joint child rearing, there seems to be a new tolerance emerging in many households for former partners.
No longer are the names of exes unmentionable at the dinner table. No longer are the details of passing children between homes confined to emotionless e-mail messages. Family therapists, sociologists and researchers note that family members who 25 years ago would not have had anything to do with one another are finding it desirable to stay connected, and at no time more than the holidays.
"There are certainly growing numbers of stepfamilies, and many more exes than in the past," said Dr. David Popenoe, the co-director of the National Marriage Project, a research institute at Rutgers University. "Now you routinely have third marriages and fourth marriages. And every year there are more and more cases of people spending Christmas together who in times past would not be talking to each other, let alone spending Christmas together."
In 2000, the United States Census Bureau reported that fewer than 25 percent of households were made up of the traditional nuclear family, with both parents and their children. Divorce rates continue to hover around 50 percent, and a vast majority of former spouses remarry. These are the trends that have produced nearly as many stepfamilies as nuclear families. And within these new blended families, many are forging closer bonds with former spouses than in the past, said Dr. Harvey Ruben, a family therapist and professor of clinical psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine. A new norm — Mom and her new beau, Pop and his second wife, Junior, Sis and assorted step-siblings — "is becoming a part of the culture," Dr. Ruben said.
Of course, just as every unhappy family is different, every divorce is too: they range from the highly acrimonious, in which husband and wife cannot stand even to hear the sound of each other's voice and so communicate only through their children, to those marriages that conclude with a shrug of the shoulders. Those are the people who are finding it is no longer necessary, or even acceptable, to excommunicate their ex.
Take the example of Jill Brooke, the editor of Avenue Magazine, who has such a friendly relationship with her husband's first wife, Alicia Lazaro, that she calls her "my wife-in-law."
The relationship between Ms. Brooke's husband, Gary Goldstein, and Ms. Lazaro — they have two daughters — is also so amicable that even when they were divorced in 1990 they did not dissolve their business partnership. He is the chief executive of the Whitney Group, a Wall Street recruiting and search firm, and Ms. Lazaro is vice chairman.
"We have been best friends for 20 years and business partners for 18," Mr. Goldstein said. "Our business relationship has never suffered."
Mr. Goldstein said that his wives past and present should be role models for divorced families. "Jill and Alicia both chose to be accommodating," Mr. Goldstein said. "Alicia knows when to give Jill her space. She knows that it's Jill's house now. And Jill is respectful of Alicia. Everybody is an adult."
Ms. Brooke said her own family had been skeptical of her close friendship with Ms. Lazaro at first. "They looked askance at the whole thing," she said. "Then I explained to them: "This is not 1950. People are a bit more relaxed today. And we can't just think of ourselves. We need to think of the children.' "
At Thanksgiving, the crowd at the table included Ms. Lazaro, her two daughters with Mr. Goldstein, Mr. Goldstein, Ms. Brooke and Ms. Brooke's son with Mr. Goldstein. Jessica, a daughter of Mr. Goldstein and Ms. Lazaro, made a toast to her "three parents."
"It's really a big happy family," Ms. Brooke said.
Several therapists and marriage scholars credited the laid-back attitudes typified by the Goldstein-Lazaro-Brooke clan to a culture that is increasingly diverse and has been forced to deal with the relentless rate of divorce. There are no statistical records on how many families spend significant time with former spouses. But experts who study marriage and advise couples note that stepfamilies in which ex-spouses are on good terms to the point that they celebrate holidays together are becoming more frequent.
"The definition of family has changed," said Dr. Jonathan Lampert, a family therapist who has practiced in Manhattan for 25 years. "So have our notions of loyalty, and the importance of sex and sexual life as a binding force." He said that he recently had a holiday lunch with a family group that included a husband, his first two wives, his present wife, children from all three marriages, the third wife's child from her first marriage and several grandchildren.
Not everyone at the table lived together, but Dr. Lampert said that the family has created a latticework of connections, sympathies and familiarities that are similar to the rhythms of a regular family. And he emphasized that successfully blending such a family takes time — he recommends 10 years — and a lot of work.
Plenty of therapists think that asking people to bond with their spouse's former partner is unrealistic. Diane Sollee, the director of the Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, an advocacy group, and a family therapist in Washington, said that Americans who are planning to form some sort of happy blended family in which former spouses are business partners, live next door and appear at the lunch table ought to understand the difficulty.
Negotiating the potential crevasses in a plain old stepfamily is hard enough, she said. "It is the hardest family form in mankind," Ms. Sollee said. "No one can imagine how hard it is going to be until they experience it. The whole Brady Bunch idea, that you're going to love this man and his children and everyone is going to be so happy is so extremely rare and can only happen in truly exceptional cases."
And so, she added, a situation where one's ex is present would be vastly more complicated. There can be terrible jealousies between former spouses. The holiday table, even for traditional families, is often a time of heightened tensions, rather than of peace and goodwill.
But Ms. Meer, with her two former husbands and three children, said that it was important to keep her exes in her life. "Once you are engaged in someone's life with that level of involvement, they don't just disappear," she said. "They are a part of you. You can't just close the door." Ms. Meer said that her former husband James recently spent time in the hospital, and that she went every day to bring him books and flowers and just hold his hand.
"A few people were surprised, but most were not," she said. "It didn't work for us, but that doesn't mean I hate him."
Dr. Henry Spitz, the director of couples therapy at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, said that the biggest mistake blended family members make is to have unrealistically high expectations for family bonding. "Modest to low expectations are the way to go," he said. "This is not Norman Rockwell here. That idea of the new fantasy family is where most people run into trouble."
The family fantasy worked for Christine Rubin, a business consultant in Washington, for about five years. After a second divorce in 1998, she spent holidays with her first ex- husband, her daughter with him, and her second ex-husband, and there was little discomfort. Her daughter appreciated seeing her parents together and also got along well with the second husband — who, by the way, had nothing to do with the first marriage's end, Ms. Rubin said. But then last year, after Ms. Rubin married a third time, it became time to limit the number of men at the table. And there was something else.
"It was when No. 2 wanted to bring his male companion along to the Christmas table that I sort of lost interest," she said.
Ms. Brooke of Avenue magazine said that she felt lucky because many factors that usually cause tension in a reconstructed family were absent in her situation. "If it was me, the stepmother, who had caused the initial split between the parents, that would be a very hard chasm to cross," she said. She added that it was also important that her husband's ex-wife, Ms. Lazaro, was economically independent. "It would have been horrible for the girls to see a situation in which their mother's life had been diminished because of the divorce," Ms. Brooke said.
She added that getting along makes the children happy, and that making the children happy makes her husband happy. "Being nice to his ex-wife gives the kids permission to love me, because we don't live in a battle zone," Ms. Brooke said. "You only hear these "War of the Roses" battle stories with people who aren't smart enough to surrender their ego for the family good and aren't smart enough to carve out a little civility for the sake of the children."
Of course, there are those who can't bear the idea of blending eggnog with a former spouse, let alone blending a family. E. Jean Carroll, a writer and advice columnist for Elle magazine, said that she has been married "the usual number of times" (two) and that she would never spend the holidays with her ex-husbands even though she is good friends with both, nor with her present companion's ex-wives.
"I think it's warped," she said. "You have to be nice to your ex-boyfriend's wife, and you know stuff about her that she would never dream that he had told you. Horrible."
And even Ms. Meer, the very picture of unflappable serenity and acceptance, said she did stop at some limits.
"One Christmas, when I was pregnant with Jahanara, Andrew brought Stephanie," she said. (Remember: Jahanara is her daughter with James, and Andrew is her first ex-husband, and Stephanie is Andrew's girlfriend.)
"And the girls had such a good time with her, they said, "Mommy, we ought to name the new baby Stephanie!' " Ms. Meer said, then made a harumphing sound. "Naming my next child after my ex-husband's girlfriend was where I had to draw the line." __ New York Times (December 23, 2001)
Back to archive index
High Society
In magazines and movies, on the radio and on TV, it seems that everybody must get stonedBy Vanessa E. Jones
Sniff. Sniff. Smell that? It's the pungent odor of marijuana wafting in the air as the music, television, and film industries inhale a lungful of pot culture:
On the cover of High Times magazine, Aaron Lewis, lead singer of the rock group Staind, proudly clutches a bong and a handful of weed. Afroman had a novelty hit song this year, ''Because I Got High,'' which had nothing to do with altitude.
On ABC's ''Once and Again,'' the eldest son passes a joint to his teenage stepsister, while on NBC's ''The West Wing,'' the surgeon general floats the idea of decriminalizing marijuana. [non O&A content snipped]
Blame the revival on a generation of baby boomers working in film and television today who came of age during the pot smoking era of the 1960s and 1970s. Add to that teens and 20-somethings who are creating what the Department of Justice ominously calls ''the New Marijuana Epidemic'' by making ganja their drug of choice. Combine these two generations with an ongoing public push to legalize marijuana and suddenly, it seems like we've jumped into a time machine and gotten off in the 1970s, the heyday of Cheech & Chong.
All of which is enough to make organizations such as the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy want to spoil pop culture's high. We are, after all, still in the midst of a war on drugs.
''We have decided as a society, or at least as a legal system, that there isn't anything called responsible drug use,'' says Donald F. Roberts, a communications professor at Stanford University who has worked on studies examining drug, alcohol, and cigarette usage in music, television, and film for the National Drug Control Policy. ''That being the case, one would hope you would portray it in ways that make people not attracted to it.''
The darker side of marijuana use is clearly delineated in the news. A conga line of celebrities has been arrested for marijuana possession this year, including Aaron Sorkin, creator of ''The West Wing,'' Snoop Dogg, and former Dallas Cowboys lineman Nate Newton, who was caught twice in the last two months. And the LA Clippers' Lamar Odom was suspended for five games for smoking it.
That hasn't stopped the nation from embracing its bongs, blunts, and joints. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, about 10 million people use marijuana and 69 million people over the age of 12 have smoked it at least once. The drug trails only alcohol and cigarettes in popularity.
So it's hardly noted that the lead singer of the rock band Nickelback wears a marijuana leaf T-shirt onstage and calls for the legalization of the drug. Or that a spate of high-quality films - ''Eyes Wide Shut,'' ''American Beauty,'' and ''Wonder Boys'' - feature characters smoking weed as casually as they'd light up a cigarette or drink a glass of wine. It's a subtle shift from the past, when, according to Steven Hager, editor in chief of High Times, pot users were depicted as destructive people with dead-end lives.
''I don't think marijuana is treated as badly,'' says Mark-Boris St. Mourice, managing editor of the year-old Heads magazine, which, in another indication of marijuana's increasingly popularity, is battling with High Times and Cannabis Culture for dominance in the pot publications genre.
''It's more levelheaded,'' continues St. Mourice, who likens the drug's more casual treatment to how homosexual lifestyles have increasingly gained acceptance in pop culture. Take Tommy Chong's recurring role as the stoner owner of a photo lab on television's ''That '70s Show.''
''He isn't denigrated; he's just another one of the characters,'' says St. Mourice. ''The young characters are smoking pot on a regular basis on that show. That's a big deal, too. Yet they still happily go on with life and don't end up cutting their mom's head off with an ax.''
''Once and Again,'' which focuses on the second marriage of two parents who both have children, kicked off its season with the eldest child, 18-year-old Eli, being arrested for pot possession. A recent episode started with him getting fired from his job for arriving late one too many times, possibly because of his ongoing drug use. It ended with Eli introducing his 16-year-old stepsister, Grace, to pot - at her behest.
''We're showing a fully dimensional, complex person who has a lot of great qualities who's smoking pot a lot - maybe to his detriment - and it really isn't spelled out,'' says Winnie Holzman, an executive producer for the show. The story line developed out of the experiences of Holzman and her co-executive producers, Edward Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz, the pair behind the angst-ridden dramas ''thirtysomething'' and ''My So-Called Life.''
''In our generation it was very common to smoke pot,'' says Holzman, who's in her 40s. ''It's an issue now because we're all raising teenagers.''
On the other hand, we still live in an era where television and movies, such as the teen flick, ''Dude, Where's My Car?'' and last year's ''Saving Grace,'' use goofily doped-up characters for laughs.
''One of the problems with illicit drug use is that it gets portrayed sometimes seriously and responsibly in the sense that, "Gee, this guy used marijuana and it did reduce his reaction time driving the car - and that cost the kid his life," says Roberts, ''but the next film is a comedy. ... There's not much consistency there.'' And anyone who's raised a child, he adds, knows how important consistency is in affecting behavior. [rest snippped] __ Boston Herald (December 19, 2001)
Back to archive index
The Futon's Ratings School, Part 5 By Brian Ford Sullivan
Most questions we get at this site are about ratings - what are they, what do they mean, how are they compiled, etc. And while we have plenty of features and articles on that site that explain all these questions and more, we still like to go back and talk about them again every so often for our newer readers or those just seeking further explanation. This past week we're took a look at the most commonly asked questions about ratings and explained the answers in great detail. We conclude today with a discussion of the basic problems with the Nielsen system and what can be done to fix them.
Question: What, if anything, do you think is wrong with the Nielsen system and how do you think it could be improved?
Answer: As my inbox and the poll this week indicate there's quite a few people who object to the Nielsen system. There's even been a few people who have sent me their own mathematical proofs that the Nielsen system is flawed. And while I'm not going to make a stand here and say that the Nielsen system is perfect, I will say that much of people's frustration with the system comes from either not knowing how it works or the left out feeling they get from not being one of the families Nielsen tracks. I hope in the past week we've at the very least quelled some issues people have about the Nielsen system - whether it be how it works or the feeling that "your" worldview is being left out. But before you think I'm a card carrying member of the Nielsen Fan Club today I'm going to write about what's bad about the system or more specificially how the networks screw it up.
One of the chief things people attack Nielsen for is its small sample size - 5,000 households (i.e. 13,000 people). That's roughly 1% of 1% of the total possible television viewing audience on average (105,444,330 people). How can 1% of 1% of the people watching television say what over 100 million people are watching? Obviously they can't completely. But logistically speaking tracking the viewing habits of 13,000 people - not just if they watched show X or not, but even single channel flip they make during an entire year - costs a ridiculous amount of money. How ridiculous? Nielsen's annual revenue runs around 4 billion a year and they employ over 35,000 people. While Nielsen does other tracking services for other industries even if the television division was a small fraction of their total revenue then we're still talking the GNP of a small third world nation. For television. That's baffling.
Anyway to get back on track here, all logistical elements aside, Nielsen has been doing this for the better part of a century and I doubt a mass conspiracy exists to fool the world into thinking that certain shows are watched more than other shows. There's lots of smart, talented people at Nielsen (just like there are at any company) and I'm sure they are working hard on better solutions to tracking viewership. But that obviously doesn't address the sample size complaint.
Here's my take on the whole thing - even if you went door to door to all 268 million Americans you're not going to prove that more people are watching "Sabrina, the Teenage Witch" than "ER." Furthermore if you consider how a series performs over a season (or even seasons) wouldn't such a small sample net vastly different results from week to week? Nielsen very often changes around those in its sample so that in any given year Nielsen could have the opinions of roughly half a million people used at some point in their sample. And yet week in and week out series always fall within a small range of their average. Doesn't sound like Nielsen is that crazy does it?
Obviously when you get down to the nitty gritty there's some variance (Nielsen admits it themselves) but the Nielsen ratings are meant to give a solid picture of the ratings makeup on any given night of television - not necessarily the exact one. While "Gilmore Girls" may finish with a 2.98 average and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" with a 2.99 average if all the votes were counted up one could just as easily surpass the other. But that's not the point of Nielsen ratings - the point is to show that "Gilmore Girls" is doing miles ahead of what it did on Thursday night or that "Buffy" is doing way better than "UPN's Night at the Movies." These are things that one can easily tell from the ratings - either there's a huge difference or there isn't.
While it's nice to brag about that show X beat show Y (no dobut [sic] the networks love doing that) realistically a network can only hope to beat what it did last year and continue to grow so that they can make more money. It's these factors - change from how a show did last season versus this season, change from how the network did in a show's time slot last season versus this season, and its build or loss from its lead-in - that factor into its survival more than their overall rank. Just because "Friends" is the number one comedy doesn't necessarily make it more successful to NBC than "Reba" is to the WB. That's why we post the factors we mentioned above next to our season-to-date averages on the site. These elements are vastly important. "Inside Schwartz" got put on hiatus not because it wasn't highly rated (it was) but because it was losing a ridiculous amount of "Friends'" lead-in, something that could put in danger the shows that air after it (since people have already changed the channel). 99% of all programming decisions by the networks are based on the factors we mentioned above (not to mention the performance in these factors in the coveted 18-49 demographic, something sadly we do not have the numbers for each week).
Starting to get the Nielsen isn't evil? Now you're probably thinking - what does he mean he's not a card carrying member of the Nielsen Fan Club? Okay here's my pet peeve. The major thing I don't like about the Nielsen system (and this extends far into the networks themselves) is their use of "sweeps" periods. Sweet fancy Moses I hate sweeps. Why so much stock is put into how a network performs in four months out of the year versus say something crazy like the entire year is beyond me. It's sort of like telling athletes that the only time what they do counts is during certain months. But sadly its these periods that are used to set ad rates, not the yearly performance. And even worse is that advertisers buy into it. Maybe it's just me but if you're investing in something (as advertisers do when they advertise on a show) wouldn't you want to, you know, base your decision on how well a show does overall versus some artificially inflated periods of the year like sweeps months.
Sweeps are obnoxious. It's when all the big guest stars appear, when all the big storylines happen, when all the special programming stunts are used. It's essentially the time of year that's not like anything else during the entire year and yet more importance is placed on those months than the rest of the year. Frightening for sure. But this just the symptom of a larger problem. Why in the world does the television season have to be this Labor Day to Memorial Day period then back up and go home type of situation. Certainly every network executive will tell you that the summer months are when people go see more movies, go on vacation, etc. I'm not going to debate that. What amazes me is the need to stretch series across a 34-36 week period when they only make anywhere between 13-24 episodes on average. Well it doesn't amaze me - networks want you to watch each week regardless if an episode is a repeat or not - but I guess I just don't follow why they stifle a show's growth by not having it one each week.
Back in the day as the kids say, you could guarantee that shows would be on each week during the season with a few minor exceptions (holidays, breaking news, the Super Bowl, etc.). Nowadays a show running off 13 episodes in a row is as rare as a Detroit Lions win. I don't get how networks hope to build viewership with these kinds of practices. And obviously these sweeps periods factor into it. Nothing beats having a show off the air for four weeks so a network can put some special program to artificially inflate its ratings during sweeps just because its lower rated than said special programming when for the rest of the year the ratings will closely mirror the lower rated show than the special programming. Crazy for sure. But I guess the thing that really bothers me is that what's the most successful, highly rated, Emmy winning, critically acclaimed network right now. Easy: HBO.
And strangely how does HBO operate? It runs all of a season's episodes in order and without interruption. It offers creative freedom. It repeats episodes multiple times a week. And everybody loves them. It's not even a new method of running a network. British and most European television run the same way. While they air less episodes than most network series personally I'd rather see less episodes of a show if it meant higher quality. I mean it's taking David Chase over 18 months to put out new "Sopranos" episodes but people are still going to go crazy when they are aired. Truth be told I think more damage is done by trying to stretch shows out over 34-36 weeks than letting them run in succession, taking some time off, then coming back. Networks have more than enough series to fill an entire year with this method. After all they fill most of their schedules with sports, newsmagazines and game shows as it is that at least doing things this way would make them seem less like "fill-ins" and more like actual series.
I mean look at ABC which only has eight of its 22 hours of its schedule filled with actual scripted programming. That's not even half their schedule. Would it be that horrible to switch things around so that "Once & Again" airs in a good time slot 22 weeks in a row instead of this "maybe it's on, maybe it's not" bullshit they've ran the show into the ground with? There would still be plenty of room for "Millionaire" and "Monday Night Football." But that would make their beloved sweeps periods in a mess since they can't air "The World's Craziest Bloopers Hosted By Washed Up Comedians" in its place because 5% more viewers watch that than an episode of "Thieves."
Anyway as you can probably see there's a lot of fire in my belly about this stuff. While I don't hate Nielsen, I hate how the networks bizarrely use the Nielsen system so that they can try and fool people into watching things each week. Television should be an event, not some white noise to fill the background. So I hope you've enjoyed this series of columns as much I have had writing them. No doubt this isn't the last we've seen of such a discussion. __Thefutoncritic.com (December 14, 2001)
Back to archive index
Back to Fight the Good Improv Fight By F. Kathleen Foley
Once upon a time, when Dungeons & Dragons ruled the teen demographic, a likely young actor, Bruce A. Young by name, concocted a sword-and-sorcery-filled stage show inspired by popular fantasy games. It required great bravery on the part of that actor and his fellow performers, for although loosely scripted, the show was largely improvised and relied heavily on audience volunteers.
Verily, the show, which was dubbed "Dungeonmaster," lived long and prospered throughout a four-year run. And Sir Bruce was therefore rewarded with the riches of his craft--a kingly portion of featured roles in A-list films. "Dungeonmaster" was first spawned in a faraway land--Chicago, to be precise. Twenty years have passed since then, but Sir Bruce's heart remains staunch. Joined by his old comrade-in-arms Billy Campbell, now the star of television's "Once and Again," Sir Bruce attempts to recapture the long-ago magic of "Dungeonmaster" in an open-ended run at Santa Monica's Magicopolis. But alas. Magic is a quicksilver element, likely to slip from your firkin while you are still firing up your alembic.
Despite the best efforts of Sir Bruce and his stouthearted yeomen and yeowomen, the magic was frustratingly elusive, at least on this particular evening.
Sir Bruce's tasks are many and mighty. Not only does he perform in the show, he outlines the scenario and directs each installment--no two of which are alike. Each tale is a myth-based "game," a heroic quest in which the audience participants win or lose points based on their performances.
Not that audience members aren't willing. Many arrive in full costume, already in character and eager to enter the lists. From those ranks, six are chosen to join the adventure. Those six largely determine the outcome of the evening, both in terms of its plot and its entertainment value. And woe betide the regular troupe if those chosen prove to be duds.
Hence, "Dungeonmaster" is only as good as its audience volunteers--a parlous situation for Sir Bruce and his sturdy compatriots, who are frequently left to twist on the gibbet while the volunteers ignore every basic tenet of improvisation, first and foremost the Sacred Law of Listening.
Yet, prithee, give Sir Bruce, and Sir Billy, and the other valiant participants full points for sallying forth to recapture the enchantment of a long-ago time, when they could just as easily have stayed home watching reruns of "Ivanhoe" on their wide screens.
"Dungeonmaster," Magicopolis, 1418 4th St., Santa Monica. Fridays-Saturdays, 10:30 p.m.; Sundays, 5:30 p.m. Dark Dec. 21-23, 28-30. Indefinitely. $15. (310) 451-2241. Running time: 1 hour, 20 minutes. __ Los Angeles Times (December 13, 2001)
Back to archive index
"I want to be on TV" : Once actress started working on dream at 5 By Judy Bergeron
"I kept telling my mom, 'I want to be in the movies. I want to be on TV.' She said I had to get an agent. So I did."
At the tender age of 5, Meredith Deane listened to her mother and with the help of her dad, secured an agent. In no time, the youngster was making TV commercials and by age 7, getting parts as extras on several shows. At 9, the young New Yorker was seen in Saturday Night Live and Late Night with Conan O'Brien skits. So it shouldn't be surprising that at age 10, she landed a prime-time role, as Zoe Manning on the ABC drama Once and Again. "Zoe's going through a lot of pre-teen issues, trying to figure out where she fits in in these new or changed relationships. She's trying to find something that's still whole," Deane, 12, said from Los Angeles.
As last season, the show's second, closed, Deane's character's divorced mother, Lily Manning (played by Sela Ward) married again, to Rick Sammler (portrayed by Billy Campbell). The merging of the two families, each bringing two children into the mix, has been rocky. Take the Thanksgiving episode, for example, in which an argument erupted at the dinner table, as did a fire in the kitchen.
"Sela and Billy are the most amazing people," the soft-spoken Deane said. "Sela includes you in her real family. She's always there for you. And Billy, he's an 8th-grader trapped in a 40-year-old's body. He's fun to hang out with."
Hanging out on the set also means at least three hours of school work for Deane, enrolled as a 7th-grader back at her New York school.
"They Fed Ex my work weekly, and I do it here with a tutor," she explained. "I have two more separate tutors for Latin and science." When an episode involves the children, Deane said she'll be at the set every day; if it's an "adults" episode, once a week.
When not wrapped up in homework, she fills her time with talking on the phone, on AOL, and listening to music, not to mention Tae Kwon Do lessons, singing, horseback riding, designing clothing, knitting and needlepoint.
She said she learned knitting and needlepoint from her grandmother and her clothes designing ranges from sketching evening gowns to her own bas mitzvah gown.
"And I go home (to New York) once a month for about 10 days," she said matter-of-factly, explaining the family's bi-coastal setup.
When the show's in production September-May, Deane, her 5-year-old brother and mother live in L.A. Back home are her father, who owns a high-end furniture company in SoHo, and her sister, 10.
"It's always fun, and that's what really counts," she said of her trips home.
Deane said she was in her third-period math class on Sept. 11 when the teacher announced that the World Trade Center's Twin Towers had been attacked.
"We had a close friend of the family who worked for CantorFitzgerald and ... he was a victim."
The actress went back to California the weekend after the terrorist attacks, but was home in Upper Eastside New York for the Thanksgiving holidays.
"It was a lot more solemn," she said of her hometown. "But our family was intact and we were just happy to be together again." It's uncertain how long her on-screen family will be together, though, as the drama has fallen in the ratings since its move from Wednesday to Friday night.
For the week of Nov. 19-25, the show ranked 76th in the Nielsen ratings, with a 4.4 share. The same week last season, Once and Again was tied for 56th, with a 6.4 share.
"I think moving it from Friday nights back to Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday is a necessity," Deane said.
As for her future, Deane said she hopes to star in a sit-com since she enjoys comedy and improv. She's not working on any such projects right now, however.
"I'm trying to remain a child for as long as possible." __ Baton Rouge Sunday Advocate (December 9, 2001)
Back to archive index
TV Gal Declares Her Best ofs By Amy Amantangelo
They're simply the best, better than all the rest. Here's my list for the best of television:
[snip to O&A mention]
Best Sister: Judy on "Once and Again."[snip]
Where Have I Seen Them Before?I cannot believe I missed this one. I hate it when I'm off my game. Edward Atterton, who played Sidney's fiancé in the series premiere of "Alias," played Karen's sexy one night stand on "Once and Again." Thanks to Terri for bringing this egregious oversight to my attention. __ Zap2it.com (December 10, 2001)
Back to archive index
Who Wants to be a TV Programmer? By Tim Goodman
In our continuing quest to find out what makes television work or not, we bring you the Worst Executives of the Year (or More) Award: Stu Bloomberg and Lloyd Braun, co-chairmen of the ABC Television Entertainment Group.
They win for what amounts to an incredible legacy: lack of vision, unmerited smugness and the stubbornness necessary to drive ABC into the ground.
Congratulations, boys, superb work.
Now, if that sounds a little bit mean, well, it's supposed to. Both Bloomberg and Braun have honed an effortless disdain for television critics, and their pompous, belittling performance twice a year in front of said critics from across the country and Canada is a thing of sustained beauty.
Not liking TV critics is nothing new. UPN's Dean Valentine is almost in a class by himself when it comes to that, and yet there's something immensely likable about a guy who loves the game of television but just happens to be at a network where it's almost impossible to succeed. That he's bashed for it endlessly, well, such is the fate of the guy who runs UPN. Valentine still shows up, though, and he's even warmed up a tad.
Bloomberg and Braun, however, are two people who feel it's beneath them to have to trot out twice a year and answer for their productivity or lack thereof. Unfortunately for them, everybody else does it. And, you know, it ought to be a joyous thing if you do well. And sometimes ABC had done very, very well.
Each time, good or bad, these two stonewall the press. Just a little more than year ago, riding high on the wave of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," ABC and these two programming geniuses decided to essentially abandon the future and let "Millionaire" crush everything in its wake. Why make new shows when you could just position "Millionaire" anywhere on the schedule and it would win?
Bloomberg and Braun put "Millionaire" on four times a week. Yes, four. The question asked of them was, hey, do you think that might be overkill? Answer: No -- said smugly, of course. The other question was, uh, hey, since you didn't really develop anything else, isn't that risky? Answer: Of course not, you morons. Or something to that effect.
The two, in the course of deflecting our silly questions about vision, foresight and such, even sat onstage and did a low-five with each other -- for being so great at giving us nothing.
You know where this is heading by now. Yep, right to the "well, well, well" part of the story. Turns out that having "Millionaire" on four times a week wasn't that great of an idea (imagine that). Ratings dipped. The rest of the schedule was weakening (it had been ignored, or was poorly bolstered by inane development ideas), and so Bloomberg and Braun came back before critics recently and said, defiantly, that "Millionaire" would be cut back -- two episodes a week max.
Ah, but ignoring the development of good shows had already started catching up with ABC. Simultaneously, the "good" demographics had all but fallen away from "Millionaire" -- meaning, and this is Madison Avenue talking -- that only older people were watching. All the young demographics that had fueled ABC toward the top were tapped out.
Uh-oh. Then shows started failing. At the end of last season only a humorless midseason replacement, "My Wife and Kids," looked like a hit.
And now? Slightly less than instant karma -- but swift payback nonetheless.
ABC has had a 22 percent decline in households, meaning millions of viewers have vanished. Ratings are heading south in all the key demographics. In short, the Disney-owned network is spewing oil.
ABC's fall offerings are a disaster. Holdover "What About Joan?" was axed. Newcomer "Bob Patterson" (yep, Bloomberg and Braun deserve the blame for not seeing that dog coming) also got killed. "The Mole 2" was shelved barely after it had begun. "Thieves" was canceled.
Midseason reality show "The Runner" will never get on the air -- shelved. There's ratings hope in the unfunny "According to Jim," but little for bland "Philly." Most of the returning shows are creatively tired and ratings starved.
Only "Alias" -- an exciting, fun piece of fluff -- has the look of something to brag about.
Boy, it might have been nice to develop some shows back in the glory days, right? Finally Bloomberg and Braun have admitted as much. They say "Millionaire" may not be on next fall's schedule at all. (What? The magic gun is empty? You mean firing it four times a week was a bad thing? Geez, that's too bad. Who knew?)
The now less-than-dynamic duo say ABC needs to get back to its "core sensibilities." You know, like making sitcoms and dramas. Having taken leave of such sensibilities, ABC is frantic to develop something new. Word is that more scripts are flying around Disneyville, and Bloomberg and Braun are running around hoping to catch five or six good comedies and maybe that many dramas.
The shopping cart of failed dreams. That's an E-ticket scary ride to Tomorowland.
There are no guarantees that ABC will turn it around anytime soon. In fact, it's quite likely that the network will be down for a while. "The Job," a critically acclaimed midseason show, will return this midseason for another try, but despite its quality attracted few viewers. "The Wayne Brady Show," which worked in the summer with little competition, will come out of hiding soon.
But Bloomberg and Braun will have to pull off some kind of miracle, otherwise those executive offices at Disney won't be the happiest place on Earth.
Mickey doesn't like to lose money.
Can these two survive long enough to develop some much needed hits? What will they do with aging shows like "NYPD Blue," "Spin City," "Drew Carey," "Dharma & Greg," "Once and Again" and "Whose Line Is It Anyway?"These have been solid performers in the past but have shown more than a few cracks.
While other networks -- particularly Fox and CBS -- have made major gains creatively and turned that freshness into ratings victories, ABC has ridden the Regis train to the end of the line.
Here's a low-five to Bloomberg and Braun. __San Francisco Chronicle (December 9, 2001)
Back to archive index
Angst, again and again By Tom Jicha
Q. Do you think the ABC series Once and Again has any lasting future? It seems that they better add some comedy and suspense to this drama. I'm getting indigestion from these characters' problem.
A. Once and Again's ratings would have merited cancellation long ago but for two factors. It is produced by Disney, which has two seasons-plus invested in it. It takes at least four seasons, ideally five, for a successful syndication. Also ABC wants to stay in business with its acclaimed producers Marshall Herskovitz and Ed Zwick, who were miffed at the quick hooks their My So-Called Life and Relativity got from ABC. I agree that Once and Again is at its best when it lightens up the story lines, but teeth-grinding angst is the trademark of Herskovitz and Zwick. __ Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel (December 9, 2001)
Back to archive index
Series' burdens heavy By Joanne Ostrow
The challenge for writers and producers of TV dramas this fall is whether and how to take note of current events within their plots. Some series are more adaptable to commenting on the times, and are letting the tragedies of war and anxieties of terrorism bubble up naturally within their plots. Others are finding effective ways of noting reality without being exploitative.
The programming questions networks faced in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11 - regarding pre-emptions because of heightened sensitivities - now are giving way to artistic questions confronting series creators.
Should the attacks of Sept. 11 be an unspoken undercurrent of dramas seeking a contemporary, realistic tone? Is it better to draw parallels to avoid hitting the subject too heavily but to acknowledge a changed world for fictional characters, like that of viewers?
Certain dramas tackled the subject forthrightly and immediately, notably "The West Wing," on the cerebral side, and "Third Watch," aiming at the heart in an hour that paid tribute to firefighters, offering testimonies "in their own words," recalling moment by moment and emotion by emotion their experiences of 9/11.
John Wirth, executive producer of "The District," in a letter to critics this week noted the difficulty facing the creative community. "As we began to grapple with the very perplexing problem of how to write about this on an "entertainment' show," he wrote, "we realized that perhaps the best way to deal with the events of September 11th (was) to let them inform our writing, rather than trying to write about the events themselves."
As a result, on Dec. 15 the cops of "The District" remember one of their brothers who gave his life to save others. Nicholas Turturro ("NYPD Blue") makes a guest appearance as the police officer who dives into a river to help victims stranded in their car.
The episode is like much of "The District," safely melodramatic. This one includes Craig T. Nelson quoting Andrew Jackson and Winston Churchill on the subject of courage. Leavened with references to the officer's weight and excess chili fries, the flashback sequences are ultimately a tribute to the heroism of "an average cop."
Shows about emergency personnel have an obvious entree to the subject. Interweaving the tragedies of 9/11 into the lives of civilians on TV requires a more delicate touch.
The most deft resolution of the problem so far this season was on "Once and Again," where the real-world headlines were subtly noted in passing, perfectly in context for the intelligent, informed characters. The reference was inescapable yet not heavy-handed.
As Rick (Billy Campbell) sulked in front of the television, viewers could overhear bits of what he was watching, obviously an all-news cable channel, with words like "Taliban," "bin Laden" and "bombing" going by in the background. Nothing more was needed.
Similarly, during a Thanksgiving grace, Lily (Sela Ward) observed that this year in particular it is important to be thankful for our lives. Inferences about tragedy and global events were left to viewers. The connection was apparent.
Hollywood still is weighing how much and how pointedly to address the realities of war and terrorism within the scripted lives of TV characters. The dilemma is less pressing for comedies, of course, where characters live inside a fantasy bubble and viewers look forward to a weekly 23-minute escape. But dramatists can't ignore the over-arching story of our lives. __ Denver Post (December 6, 2001)
Back to archive index
From E! Online's "Ask Marilyn" column: Dear Marilyn: Please tell me about Sela Ward. I think she's the most beautiful woman on television.
K. San DiegoDear K: I agree, and it seems her beauty goes deeper than just a pretty complexion. Jennifer Crystal, who played Ward's boss on Once and Again, says of her, "She's my role model. She's so hard working, but her family comes first."
Similar kind words come from others who have worked with Ward, who was born in Meridian, Mississippi, and went from being homecoming queen to New York model.
When she moved to L.A. to try her hand at acting, she made some unmemorable movies and, finally, in 1991, scored as the alcoholic, oversexed Terry Reed on TV's Sisters, which teamed her with George Clooney. She says, "It was the first time I could show I wasn't an ice princess."
Ward has been married to businessman Howard Sherman since 1992, and their top priority is their children: Austin, 7, and Anabella, 3, who often visit the set. __ E! Online (December 4, 2001)
Back to archive index
Critics' winners are viewers' losers By Eric Deggans
With the dust settled from the end of November's "sweeps" ratings period Wednesday, it's time to ask a pointed question: What the heck is going on in prime time TV these days?
True enough, the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, coming six days before the TV season was to begin, threw a titanic monkey wrench into America's TV industry.
The season started a week later, baseball and football (two big-money industries guaranteed to draw viewers) got pushed back as well, and creative types fretted for weeks about what they could and couldn't show on screen.
TV critics, with our heightened cynicism and vulnerability to the Next Big Thing, regularly miss the boat on what viewers will watch. But it seems we couldn't have been more misguided about what people might like during the fall TV season kickoff.
Remember all those highly hyped stories about ABC's spy drama Alias? Or Fox's CIA-style real time drama 24 and college comedy Undeclared? What about NBC's medical comedy Scrubs, and the WB's kiddie sitcom Maybe It's Me?
Yes, these shows are good -- the best new programs of the season. But they're all ratings-challenged in way or another: Alias regularly falls behind NBC's spinoff Law & Order: Criminal Intent, 24 places fourth in its time slot, Scrubs lost more than 30 percent of the audience when it aired after Friends a few weeks ago, and Maybe It's Me is overshadowed on Friday nights by a new sitcom featuring country star Reba McEntire.
So what are people watching? McEntire's broken home comedy Reba. CBS' drama about a fallen lawyer The Guardian. UPN's Star Trek prequel Enterprise. NBC's nonsensical drama about a rebellious medical examiner, Crossing Jordan. ABC's newest family sitcoms: Damon Wayans' My Wife and Kids and Jim Belushi's According to Jim.
Established shows are also breaking the ratings bank, including Friends, ER, NYPD Blue, JAG, Everybody Loves Raymond, The West Wing and Law & Order.
A few groundbreaking new shows have found viewer traction, including Fox's stylized sitcom The Bernie Mac Show and the WB's Superboy reinvention, Smallville. But some of the biggest ratings draws in November sweeps were specials starring Lucille Ball, Carol Burnett and Michael Jackson.
It seems there's a war going on in TV land: cool vs. comfort food. "How do we define comfort food (TV)? Shows you are comfortable with and time periods you're used to watching," said Lloyd Braun, co-chairman of ABC Entertainment Group, who blames part of his network's ratings woes on a lack of such shows.
"In such turbulent times, to be able to go home and turn on your TV and leave reality . . . these shows are like your family," Braun added. "It's comfortable."
Some aren't buying this theory. "There has been a run for the familiar, (but) at the end of the day, it's about quality," said NBC entertainment president Jeff Zucker -- but bear in mind, he also uses this argument to explain the success of Fear Factor and Weakest Link. "You can sit and make excuses . . . (but) you have to acknowledge, quality programs have cut through."
Perhaps. But a look at the winners and losers so far this season may tell another story -- one that finds viewers passing up truly revolutionary television for TV that reassures as much as it entertains.
Here's my list:
[snipped to O&A mention]
Losers:
ABC -- Last year, the brain trust running Disney's TV network swore that scheduling four nights of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire wasn't the stupidest move ever. Now they've killed the golden goose, foolishly convinced that lame-o shows such as Thieves and Philly could prop them up awhile. The only plus here is that they're hurting so badly they can't afford to cancel the quality yet low-rated family drama Once and Again. __ St. Petersburg Times (December 3, 2001)
Back to archive index
Steal This Look: Sela Ward, Once and Again By Anna Pezik
After a somewhat tentative roller-coaster romance—replete with parenting, emotional and financial hardship—Lily Sammler (Sela Ward) transitions from divorcee to newlywed and embarks on a career as a radio talk-show host. She even freshens up her look. With a shorter, hipper do and slightly sexier duds, Lily is embracing her second chance at love and life, full on. "She's starting over in a fresh, sexy, woman way," says costume designer Kathryn Morrison. "Things are going well for her." But this is TV based on real life. So for Ward that means downplaying her onscreen look—one that's not too glamorous. "We try to keep her modern but not too made-up, not too untouchable," says makeup artist Bernadette Beauvais. "We want the audience to relate to her."
Clothes
You wouldn't catch the old Lily in brown suede knee-high, lace-up boots or a little low-slung denim skirt. But expect her in them this season—as well as in tank tops that show some skin (like this tie-dyed Michael Stars). "Previously she was locked into a more casual style," Morrison says. "Now she is hipper; she has more confidence." To stay true to character, though, a classic, sexy simplicity is essential, Morrison explains. With a new family and job under her belt (a Banana Republic metal-studded one, to be exact) her style—and wallet-friendly wardrobe of J. Crew, Urban Outfitters, Juicy Couture and Trina Turk—remains practical. Says Morrison, "It's a work look and a home look."Lips
For Ward's "amazing smile," a hint of color and a coat of gloss complete the look. After lining with MAC lip pencil in Chicory (a rusty orange), Beauvais glazed lips with Philosophy Kiss Me clear lip balm, "blending it all together."Eyes
"Sela's eyes are her strongest feature, so I always want to keep them defined," says Beauvais, who favors a palette of soft browns to complement Ward's hazel eyes. For an under-eye concealer and shadow base, Beauvais applied Trish McEvoy Protective Shield concealer in Natural. Next she swept Philosophy eye shadow in Sensitivity on the lids, Simplicity in the crease and Serenity on the brow bone. She lined then shaded the lids, just above the lashes, with a medium brown eye pencil, and for the lower lash line used a slightly softer brown, which she feathered out with a brush. The final touch: MAC mascara in black.Face
A former model, Ward used to get paid to look glamorous. Playing Lily on the small screen, her greatest pitfall, makeup-wise, would be looking too dramatic. "She has strong features, so I try to keep her makeup natural and fresh," Beauvais says. "I stick with soft pinks on the lips and cheeks." On Ward's light olive skin Beauvais uses a mixture of her own foundation and Clarins Moisturizing Tint SPF 6, followed by a dusting of Bobbi Brown pressed powder in Soft Sand to set. Playing off the coral in her tank top, Beauvais applied Bobbi Brown cream blush in Warm Peach to the cheeks with a sponge. __ InStyle (December 2001)
Back to archive index
TV Gal Tallies the Top 10 TV Characters by Amy Amatangelo
In the spirit of the holiday season, I'm going to be positive TV Gal (can you feel the love?). Instead of bemoaning all the television characters that have been ruined (Bobby on "The Practice," John Cage on "Ally McBeal") or worrying about those who are taking a turn for the worse (Abby on "ER"), I'm giving you my list of the ten best characters on television.
Sometimes there's perfect synergy on television -- the performance, the writing, and the plot lines all converge to create a fabulous television character.
One caveat -- all the characters I picked are on established shows (my column, my rules). This season has offered up some great new characters (I'm a little bit in love with Marshall on "Alias"), but great characters evolve over time and can withstand the test of time.
[snip to O&A mention}
Karen Sammler on "Once and Again": "Once and Again" is one of those exceptional shows where a character slowly unfolds and people's exterior impressions often belie their interior workings. Externally Karen is harsh, controlled and kind, internally, she is fragile, hurt by her children's slightest pain and by Rick's new life with his new wife. She's constantly unable to let her proverbial hair down and she awkwardly bristles at any sexual attention. On a show full of fascinating characters, she's the most fascinating of them all. __ Zap2it.com (December 3, 2001)
Back to archive index
