As many of these blog entries have shown, I certainly do love to watch tv, particularly comedies and dramas. Since I briefly recapped last season's shows in May, I figured I would preview this season's shows in September. So, here is my quick run-down of what I'm going to be watching in between NFL games. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it), Fox passed on Supreme Courtships. Maybe the next time around they will try it as a comedy.
Although I hear that some of the new fall shows are available via their respective torrents, none of the shows I have any desire to see have done what Heroes did last year and did an early premiere online. Thus, all of my thoughts on the new shows are based off the commercials I have seen on tv or the internet.
The quick rundown is that out of all the new fall shows, I will give Journeyman a chance, and maybe also Cavemen and Back to You on occasion. Overall, I'm not overly optimistic about new shows for this fall. Only time will tell whether my predictions are correct, and more in depth reviews of one or more of these shows may possibly follow.
In & Out (by network):
NBC:
In:
Journeyman. This is some sort of pseudo-time traveling show, which means it has the potential to be interesting, so it might be good enough to watch once or twice. I just wonder if it's going to be like a tv version of The Butterfly Effect. Maybe it will surprise me, but I'm not holding my breath. It has a good timeslot going for it (it premieres right after Heroes on Sept. 24), so I'll give it a shot if I'm not too overwhelmed with work by then. There's a 50/50 chance of me watching it past six episodes; whether the rest of the Neilson audience gets to do the same remains to be seen. It probably will survive at least this season if Heroes' success is any indication of what people are willing to watch instead of MNF.
Heroes Season 2: Like many other Heroes fans who I've spoken to, the finale certainly left a lot to be desired. But it did manage to save itself in the last six or so episodes of last season (as compared to the first few), so I'll probably watch it again, at least for a few episodes. Heroes returns on Sept. 24. In the interim, the Heroes season 2 trailer can be found here.
The Office: Premieres September 27 and has moved to the coveted Thursday night 9 PM timeslot. Excellent. Apparently there will be 30 episodes this season. Also excellent.
Medium: Returns in January on Fridays. Although the show began to lose me by the end of the season, I'll probably watch a few more episodes before giving up on it completely.
Pass:
Bionic Woman. Nah. It doesn't look bad though, so I predict it will be picked up, just not by me.
Life. I have no desire to watch another cop show, particularly one about a cop trying to figure out who framed him "after years of false imprisonment." I would rather watch Law & Order (which I don't). Prediction: Probably will not be around that long.
My Name is Earl. I've already explained my reasons for this here.
ABC:
In:
Lost. Of course it won't premiere until February or March, and I can only hope it returns to its 9 PM timeslot for its 16-episode season.
Maybe but probably not:
Cavemen (see long preview here): Although I do want to have a new comedy to replace My Name is Earl, and I may give Cavemen a chance once, I probably won't watch it more than that unless it's great. If ABC really wants it to succeed, they should put it on Thursday at either 8 PM or 8:30 so I have something to watch before the Office comes on. I predict that it will have as much success as the George Lopez show, and perhaps more if its timeslot is changed.
This show warrants two paragraphs because before it even starts, it has a black mark against it. I haven't been overly impressed with the Geico cavemen commercials, and I am passing that neutral to negative bias onto the show. And since I'm sure Geico is hoping to generate big business from sponsoring (either directly or indirectly) a tv show based on its advertising campaign, that's just one more reason for me not to watch it. In the hopes that maybe someone working for Geico comes across this entry and can do something about it, I will say that I think the Geico cavemen commercials could be much funnier than they currently are. Maybe they will put one on during the Superbowl to impress us all.
Pass:
Chuck. From the commercials, this show looks like it will be some sort of drama-comedy that will turn Johnny Mnemonic into a tv show. Somehow they think if they throw a hot blond into the show that will help it succeed. A hot actress didn't work for the movie; I highly doubt it will work for this particular show. Thus, my prediction for "Chuck" is self-explanatory.
Samantha Who?: Monday night has enough going on that I don't think a comedy will work. Particularly a comedy about an amnesia victim. This show won't be around very long.
Pushing Daisies. This show is about a guy who can bring people back to life in order to collect reward money or to solve the crime. I get enough of this type of show from Medium. Or even Heroes, if I'm correct in assuming this show is about someone discovering the potential within. I found one blog that gave it a ringing endorsement, but without any real substance in the review, I find it lacking in believability. ABC seems to be able to pull rabbits out of its hat sometimes, so this will probably survive the slaughter of the rest of the fall lineup.
Private Practice. This is a spin-off of Grey's Anatomy, which I never got into. I'm sure if you like Grey's Anatomy, this show will be just as good and do as well as the first CSI spin-off. I don't watch CSI either, so someone else would know better than I on how well this show will do.
Big Shots: I think the preview speaks for itself, but this show is about a bunch of rich power players and their tales of woe. Having joined a profession of these "types," I have no interest in watching a dramatization of it on tv. I'm sure I won't be the only one. Between this and Pushing Daisies, I think Pushing Daisies will succeed and this one will not.
Boston Legal. It may be still on, but I have explained my reasons why I think this show has ran its course in this previous entry, and I will not be watching it.
Fox:
In:
Sarah Connor Chronicles (premiers probably after the Superbowl) - I'm a fan of the Terminator movies, so I may watch a couple episodes of this. It could be really cool, or awful. The Sarah Connor Chronicles trailer can be found on this blogger's page. Prediction: Will be picked up but probably only for a season, at most.
Maybe:
Back to You. This is a comedy, so that's good, but it's a comedy on Fox and not NBC, so I'm a little leary. It has Kelsey Grammer, which is good, but also Patricia Heaton, which I'm not sure is a plus. As a result, it may be worth tuning into. We shall see. Prediction: Will last as long and do as well as Till Death Do Us Part.
Pass:
K-Ville. Another cop show? Give me a break.
24. I'm going to give Jack Bauer the day off when it comes back on. If it turns into a movie though, I'll pay the ten bucks to go see it. Hopefully it's not as much of a letdown as The Sentinel.
CBS:
In:
Jericho moves to Fridays at 9, which may be a kiss of death time slot for this great show. Not sure when it starts, but I'll keep watching it probably until the end, at least on the internet. Hopefully when and if CBS does ultimately kill it, ABC or Fox will pick it up and give it the justice it deserves. If you haven't watched this show and had time, watch the entire season 1 online through CBS's website.
Maybe, but probably not: Kid Nation. This show has potential, but I don't think I'm in the target market. If I was a network executive, I would want this showing Fridays at 8 PM and would heavily promote it to the 18 and under demographic. As it currently appears, I could care less about how kids think they can make things better. I get enough of that from reading briefs from lawyers or watching Campaign '08 on tv. Prediction: Probably will stick around but not for the reasons I have stated.
Pass:
Cane. Although this one could be good, I just can't get into another show that requires me to watch it every week to follow. Sugar as the new oil? It just doesn't grab me. Prediction: Has the same potential as Studio 60 or The Black Donnellys, but I think this one will be picked up for a little longer.
Moonlight. I think this is about some sort of werewolf or vampire man. I think that about sums it up. Prediction: May last as long as Ghost Whisperer, but probably not.
HBO:
Curb Your Enthusiasm starts up in September, so I'll be watching that. I think Entourage only has a couple episodes left this "season."
CW:
Pass: Smallville. I've had enough. Clark is a wimp. Clark is mad. Clark wants Lana. Clark doesn't want Lana. Clark hates Lex. Clark doesn't hate Lex. I get it. The show sucks.
In: Nothing. Who watches the CW? If you liked the OC though, supposedly Gossip Girl is by the same guy. I never did, so I won't.
As far as my predictions for last season, I batted a thousand:
Heroes: Correct that it had the potential to survive the six episode run and it did. See my review of the pilot and the flack I took for it here. Also correct were my October predictions about the finale.
Shark: Correct and still around it seems (although I rarely watch the show).
Jericho: Correct in part. I still say it needs a better timeslot.
Justice: Correct that the show sucked and it would be canceled.
Supreme Courtships: Correct in my implication that this show would probably fail.
24: Correct that the ratings would not be as good this season. See review of the season 6 premiere part 1 and part 2.
Enough tv for now.
Read more!
Friday, August 31, 2007
New Fall TV review/schedule
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Fox's New Amsterdam show mirrors a book without any credit
Being one that can appreciate the important of copyright and giving credit where credit is due, I always get a laugh out of when the news reports the coincidental nature of two different works, particularly when one work is strikingly similar to another's. Sort of like the Offspring's Why Don't You Get a Job and the Beatles' Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da. For Fox's new show, New Amsterdam (premiering in January 2008), CNN reports that it bears an uncanny resemblance to the plot and character in a Pete Hamill book. See Author suspicious of similar character on TV. (Update 2/19/08: This CNN link is dead, but I've put some new ones in the comment to this entry).
As the article reports, the author is simply laughing it off, and I can only hope that Fox or the show's producers at least give him a little credit or a piece of the small pie this show is likely to bring in. Speaking of which...
I think the whole New Amsterdam show, based on this CNN article and a couple of webpages that appear to give it positive reviews sans substantive evaluation, seems very similar to the old Highlander tv series. Immortal person, fighting for honor, looking for love, that sort of thing - why not just turn him into a vampire. Or make it a comedy instead. Regardless, because it appears that creativity in Hollywood seems to consist of recycling old ideas and lazily creating sequels, I think I will simply pass on this show when it finally does air. Absent some sort of incredible previews or reviews, I would suspect that many will do the same. Perhaps, however, it will be picked up on the Sci-Fi channel or Spike instead, and die its slow death there.
Read more!
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Test of the expandable entries
Obviously some of my entries are longer than others. I finally figured out a way to fix the pages so that the longer entries are short and if you want to read the entire thing, it will open in a new window. I'm not going to waste my time and go back to the old entries to edit them, and apparently the "Read More" aspect is a default now so it's just on there. To read the rest of my short entry, click below.
There isn't any more than this. This is mostly a test for myself. Fall TV review is coming tomorrow before I head out to visit some college friends for labor day weekend. To learn how to do this using Blogger, visit the Dummies Guide to Google Blogger Beta.
Read more!
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Getting rid of old textbooks challenge
I will have more to add to this entry at another time, but I find my collection of books has grown too large and cumbersome for any one person's lifetime. While I was able to get rid of most of my now useless law school textbooks thanks to my fellow law school sufferers via Amazon's used book sales, I am at a loss in trying to figure out how to get rid of old textbooks that sell for less than a dollar on Amazon (and in many cases, less than a nickel). Some of these texts are from law school and others are from college. For all intent and purposes, I highly doubt that I will ever use the ones I want to get rid of. Unfortunately, the Internet was not as useful as I would have liked, and neither was ebay.
Now, I did come across a way of getting rid of some books by sending them to the troops overseas. I may wind up using this Operation Paperback site to get rid of some of my books, but I wouldn't think anyone is going to want a bunch of old textbooks any more than I would. I also found a definitive list of ways to get rid of old books (Textbook Revolution: Getting Rid of Used Books) but again, even this person's suggestions are limited (although highly useful). Sending some books to one of the state prisons, as she suggests, could prove interesting though.
Anyway, I am open for suggestions, so if you've figured out an effective way to get rid of these books, please feel free to post a comment. In the meantime, I suppose they will just gather dust and inch closer to the trash can.
Friday, August 24, 2007
iPhone hacked article
I'm heading out for a few days of golfing before the clerkship starts, but this article caught my eye on my way out and I had to put my two cents in before everyone else. Apparently some teenage computer wizard in New Jersey "unlocked" his iPhone so it can work on any network: NJ Teen Unlocks iPhone from AT&T Network.
I appreciate the big deal of trying to keep technology within a corporation and copyright and all that jazz, but it's this line from the article that kills me:
"The hack, which Hotz posted Thursday to his blog, is complicated and requires skill with both soldering and software. It takes him about two hours to perform. Since the details are public, it seems likely that a small industry may spring up to buy U.S. iPhones, unlock them and send them overseas."
"That's exactly, like, what I don't want," Hotz said. "I don't want people making money off this."
He said he wished he could make the instructions simpler, so users could modify the phones themselves."
Well, Hotzshot, if you don't want people making money off this (other than, of course, yourself, who probably secretly hopes for a magical computer job one day), why would you post a step by step instruction sheet online for the world to see? Obviously someone will profit from your work, and it won't be you. This type of thing only perpetuates unaccounted for problems and higher cell phone bills for everybody and more work for lawyers. So it's sort of a lose-win situation. I can only hope that somehow this kid's actions violates some sort of patent that teaches him a valuable lesson regarding giving stuff away for free: You get what you pay for.
And how about that Michael Vick? I sort of feel sorry for those who wasted their pick (although who would schedule their draft that early to begin with?).
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Citibank loans coming due
I can only hope that I'm not the only one happy about last weeks' rate cut since it should lower my rate. Theoretically. At whatever ridiculous percent that it's jumped to over the past three years, I can use all the help I can get. The letter I received today was the one that tells you what your monthly payment is. Hello? I am going to be a government employee for a year, they don't pay us squat. As one of my friends put it in a phone call to Citibank, "you could say I owe a million dollars and I'm going to give you the same answer." Of course, I can't really complain since I'm pretty sure I'm likely to exercise my option and go to a firm that pays me the $50k clerkship signing bonus. Once I get real confirmation about all this (and the various other perks included with being a clerk), I'm sure I'll have plenty to write about it.
What bugs me about Citibank, and what prompts this entry is the fact they require me to enter in answers to their ridiculous "security questions." And for whatever reason they didn't work, so I had to jump through another hoop to get back into my account. Now, I'm as for internet security as the next person, but it's a secure account and I didn't have any problems logging in. Is it necessary to go through the rigmarole of the various check process every month?? And why does it mail me a hard copy some months and prompt me to log in other months? I can't wait until the day I cut them a check for the entire balance of this private loan.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Question about waiving into DC bar
A couple of my conversations with some of my midwest and westcoast friends and a couple of searches have centered on the DC bar and how you become a member.
The Office of the Attorney General gives this as the general answer. First, you must have graduated from an ABA accredited law school. Additionally, you need to be either a member in good standing of any state bar for more than five years, or if you are a member in good standing less than five years, have received a MBE scaled score above 133 and an MPRE score above 75.
So, if you pass your state bar and got better than a 133, you should be able to waive into DC after filling out their application. Conversely, if you get better than a 133 and fail your state bar, you're probably going to have to take your state bar again. You can always contact the DC bar examiners and find out for sure.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Another bite at the McDonalds apple, or the continued failure of modern journalism to be objective
I read a news article that a Mr. Jeromy "Yes, that is with an 'O'" Jackson has decided to sue McDonalds for failing to "hold the cheese.” While this isn’t as ridiculous as the Borat frat suit from a few months back, it certainly is close, based solely on the facts as described in this article. See Justin D. Anderson, Man Says Hold the Cheese, Claims McDonald’s Didn’t, Sues for $10 Million.
Even assuming, as one probably must here, that Jeromy did tell the worker to not put cheese on his sandwich, old Ronald McD has at least two things going for him. First, three of them ordered food and then drove them to a darkened room where they were "going to watch a movie." Did Jeromy’s friends eat Jeromy’s sandwich and simply failed to realize it? Were they sneaking McDonalds into a movie theater? All kidding aside, if he was that concerned over his allergy, why would he not have checked the sandwich WITH THE LIGHT ON before chomping down? I think that's a pretty common thing to do. I know I’m not the only one who has gone out to some fast food restaurant and said to leave off the pickles and am not at all surprised when they magically appear.
Negligence? Maybe. But an IIED claim? And punitives? Seriously? I don’t know what kind of comparative negligence law West Virginia has, but isn’t it possible if not probable that a jury would think that Jeromy is close to or over that 50% + 1 mark? But again, this is America. Sue who you want. We aren’t responsible for anything we do. It’s always someone else’s fault.
It’s not this article that bothers me, nor does this lawsuit. What kills me is the final lines of Justin Anderson’s article: "In one notorious instance in 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, N.M., sued McDonald’s after she suffered third-degree burns from spilling a hot cup of coffee in her lap. A jury later awarded Liebeck $2.9 million." Perhaps, but this is severely deceptive. The American Association for Justice (formerly ATLA) summarizes my beef with this paragraph the best: "[Urban myths, such as the Liebeck McDonald’s coffee myth] clearly are part of a massive disinformation campaign designed to undermine Americans’ confidence in our legal system and to benefit powerful corporate interests at the expense of average people harmed by corporate wrongdoing and indifference."
A simple Google fact check should have led Anderson to rephrase his conclusion to avoid perpetuating the McDonald’s coffee burn myth. As pointed out by the Center for Justice and Democracy and Wikipedia, Ms. Liebeck never saw too much of this $2.9 million award. By (probably) most of Google’s 883,000+ accounts, she probably got less than half a million after fees. Now, I’m not sure how reliable either of these first sources are, but at least one law firm (O’Steen & Harrison) has a press release emphasizing how the award was reduced. So does the American Association for Justice and Overlawyered. Seems to me that the better way to end the article would be to avoid the last paragraph all together rather that spin what I can only assume is Anderson’s (perhaps overly anxious) suggestion that Jackson is en route to big bucks.
Maybe I’m being too harsh. And granted, I haven’t read any other of Anderson’s articles, so I don’t know if this particular incident is isolated or part of a regular agenda. In the end, that’s not my point. I see it simply as a confirmation of the notion that the media’s biases (or simple laziness) continue to drift away from the objective center line. It’s no wonder people are so misinformed about the legal profession, or life in general. Is it too much to ask that news articles be written or reported in such a way to report the news and not direct it?
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
What about the other 90-95%?
I was talking to my father the other day about law school. In this conversation, the topic eventually shifted to how many lawyers there are, what jobs are available, and how much debt everybody was in. In his mind, there are thousands of lawyers being churned out every year by the 190+ ABA-accredited law schools (the top "100" according to US News & World Reports can be found here). Where do they all work? That is a good question.
As any law student knows, there are no shortage of adages that all say the same thing: it's all about who you know and who you blow. Put another way, the curve at the top ten schools is much different than the curve at any of the other tiers. Yet, the breakdown is about the same. The top of the class will have the best opportunities and the rest will be fighting for scraps. I look at the breakdown slightly differently: I see the only difference on paper between #1 and #190 is how deep the barrel for the "top" goes.
Granted, once you pass the bar, your opportunities increase. But as most law students are well aware, the opportunities present themselves well before this point for those who are on law review or at or near the "top" of the class. That is not to say that those not on law review or in one or more of the other law school societies (clinic, moot court, externs, etc.) can't get a job. I'm saying that for 90%+ of law school graduates, the job market is severely limited until you pass the bar. And even afterwards, it's still limited unless you were at the "top" (or know someone).
But more to the point, the debt is the same for all. Regardless of where you go, you are graduating with a debt ranging from $0 to $150,000+ (plus more if you have undergrad debt), and probably closer to the $80-100,000 range. Obviously if you are at the top of your class, opportunities abound, and debt probably isn't that big an issue. But for the rest, who I would say are taking public sector or small firm jobs, how can you live on a median income of $59,000 with that much debt?
Crunching the numbers, you've got around $47,000 after taxes. Granted, you'll get to deduct some of your interest, but that is still at least another $500 coming out of your $4000 monthly paycheck. And after you deduct rent or your mortgage and basic living expenses, it winds up being a rather modest monthly stipend. It's even worse for doctors (for their first three years of residency). But obviously you can survive on this. And given that us "J.D.s" are pretty well educated at this point, nobody should really be complaining.
I guess my point to all of this, and my answer to my dad's question is that the job market for attorneys are no better than any other profession. To paraphrase Christina Applegate in Don't Tell Mom the Babysitter's Dead, "It's a rat race, and everyone hates it." You still need to have a good resume, and in most cases, need a thick skin in order to survive. To even get in the high stakes ballpark to play their game, the odds are very much against you. Nevertheless, there are plenty of ballparks for all of us to play in. Everybody works somewhere.
Have something to add to this rambling? Feel free to post a comment.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Law School Advice Links
Here is a collection of various law school advice links, including my own. Want your link added? Post a comment.
Advice if you are starting law school in the fall
My list of useful study guides
Advice for non-traditional/older students thinking of going to law school
General advice for those considering law school
Top Law Student.com
Above the Law.com
Anonymous Lawyer
The Once and Future Lawyer
The Federalist Papers
Judicial Watch
As far as practice exams, the best advice I received was to do some practice exams in advance of the final, which (minimally) will help to show you how well you know the material. The fake exams in the back of the Gilbert's books are usually pretty general enough, and obviously old exams from your professor are the best. Here are a couple links I found as well:
LawNerds.com: Take a Practice Exam
CALI Lessons are sort of useful in your first couple months of law school, but I found them worthless after that.
Martindale-Hubbell is the best source for finding alumni of your undergrad and law school. Networking is key to success in this profession. For a good example of how networking works, watch Thank You For Smoking. Or Jerry Maguire.
Working for free your first summer? Look for funding here: PSLawNet: Summer Funding.
Just-Advocates.com is another legal job search engine which I never used, but appeared to be useful.
Doing a mock trial your second or third year? Take a look at these helpful hints deciphering the rules of evidence and procedure.
Throwing a law school party? Everybody uses Evite now.
Friday, August 03, 2007
Bar exams recovered
I see from the ABA email that the uploaded NY/NJ bar essays were recovered without incident. Why they didn't use examsoft is beyond me. See NY Bar Essays Recovered.
And not surprisingly, another someone is suing Barbri for being an overpriced monopoly.
And is Flight of the Conchords really that funny? I've only seen one and a half episodes but haven't been that impressed. Is it one of those shows that you have to watch a few episodes to get into?
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Selling books on Amazon
Per my various classmates' advice, I have begun to list my old textbooks and study guides on Amazon (which I have done a few times before). If you aren't already doing this, you are losing money and are keeping relatively worthless books around to clutter up your house or apartment.
In the past, when a book was sold, Amazon would send you an email with the various shipping information. Now they make you log in and do it. I guess this is good for security reasons, but I find it pretty inconvenient. Nevertheless, I love getting emails that tell me that I have sold a book.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Cingular 6102i screws up again
Not surprisingly, the white screen on my (new) Cingular/AT&T Nokia 6102i flip cell phone has once again appeared. See original complaint here.
So, when I got this replacement phone a few months ago, I asked what would happen if it screwed up again. I was assured that it would not. Lo and behold, here comes the same screw up, just slightly faster than the last time. And what are they going to do? Send me the same make and model again. This replacement has a 90 day warranty, which I am assured will be sufficient. Sure it will.
Is AT&T/Cingular worth this hassle? I'm beginning to think not. Most of my lawyer friends use Verizon; I think it may be time to switch... any recommendations?
