Listen: Firewall & Iceberg Podcast No. 152

Dan and Alan talk '30 for 30,' ratings, 'Homeland' and much, much, much more

Are you a fan of 30 for 30?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

The

Happy Monday, Boys & Girls!
 
It's a Kitchen Sink installment of The Firewall & Iceberg Podcast.
 
In this week's installment, we talk about Tuesday's return of "Raising Hope" and review the first two new "30 For 30" films. We also talk about a ton of TV from last week, including weighing in on "Sons of Anarchy," "How I Met Your Mother," "The Office" and "Homeland." We also discuss the idea of Seth MacFarlane as Oscars host and Week 1 ratings. 
 
Seriously. Lots of stuff. 
 
And pay close attention to the outline if you don't want things spoiled. I take a long pause before we get into The Big Thing That Happened on "Sons of Anarchy," but beyond that... It's on you!
 
Today's breakdown:
"Raising Hope" (00:01:15 - 00:10:55)
"30 for 30" (00:10:55 - 00:23:45)
Oscar host Seth MacFarlane (00:23:45 - 00:31:40)
Early Ratings (00:31:40 - 00:40:30)
"Sons of Anarchy" (00:40:40 - 00:50:15)
"The Office" (00:50:15 - 00:54:05)
"How I Met Your Mother" (00:54:10 - 01:00:45)
Listener mail - Guest Appearances (01:01:10 - 01:04:15)
Listener mail - "Life" (01:04:15 - 01:07:15)
"Homeland" (01:07:15 - 01:14:00)

As always, you can subscribe to The Firewall & Iceberg Podcast over at the iTunes Store, where you can also rate us and comment on us. [Or you can always follow our RSS Feed.] 

And as always, feel free to e-mail us questions for the podcast.

Firewall & Iceberg - Podcast 152

Dan-feinberg-sm
Daniel Fienberg
Executive Editor
A long-time member of the TCA Board and a longer-time blogger of "American Idol," Dan Fienberg writes about TV, except for when he writes about movies or sometimes writes about the Red Sox. But never music. He would sound stupid talking about music.

Daniel Fienberg Recaps & Reviews

View By Show »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    WaltEagle

    I do think it's possible for Sutter to kill someone major and the audience to have a positive reaction to it. I think that would have happened if he killed anyone else in some kind of logical way besides Jax. If you did a poll before this season, or even after episode 5x02, about what character had the most potential in the rest of the show up to its endgame, [spoiler] would have been #1. He was killed prematurely.

    October 1, 2012 at 8:17PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Michael

    After a "Wait. Christina Hendricks was on 4 episodes of Life? I forgot all about that." moment I went to hulu to watch the first episode she was in, and who pops up, but Schmidt! Well, now I might have to rewatch the whole episode.

    Life was a pretty good show. Lewis' character was very fun.

    October 1, 2012 at 9:25PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    synnerman

    Opie wasn't Laertes – he's Ophelia (hence, the name Opie).

    October 1, 2012 at 9:55PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan Synnerman - Name aside, he hasn't been used as Ophelia at all. And if he's Ophelia, then Sutter has decided that Laertes doesn't matter to Hamlet at all, which would be a comical misreading. Either way, my point remains: There's a value to the character dynamics Shakespeare laid out. Sutter doesn't care. That's fine.

      -Daniel

      October 1, 2012 at 10:03PM EST
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall And the name Opie comes from Sutter's love of The Andy Griffith Show and his desire for Charming to feel like Mayberry. It's why the barber is also named Floyd.

      October 1, 2012 at 10:49PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Brendan Noel

    Dan you have Canadian roots? How so? I like you even more now!

    October 1, 2012 at 10:13PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan Brendan - I'm a first generation American. My parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles and most (but not all) of my cousins are from Toronto. I'm a dual citizen and all that fun stuff...

      -Daniel

      October 1, 2012 at 10:19PM EST
  • Picard_facepalm_talkback_profile

    happygolucky12

    I really hope Joss comes up with a new title for the SHIELD series, unless he wants me to keep thinking of Vic Mackey.

    October 1, 2012 at 10:46PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    MoreTears

    Dan -- or Alan, if you have the information and would like to answer -- I am hoping you can settle an argument that a friend and I had earlier today. While discussing Homeland and the subject of how long the actors involved (like the high-profile Claire Danes) would be willing to continue with the show, I said that it is my understanding that when a new TV series starts in the US (my friend and I are Canadians) the actors are signed to a standard six-year contract that is basically pretty one-sided because it commits the actor to the show for six years but the producers/network can fire the actor (and write their character out of a show) without having to pay six years worth of salary. My friend insists I am wrong and he says there is no way the actors' union (SAG) would allow such contracts. My friend also says that IF -- only if -- I am right, this convention has to be fairly new. So, Dan, could you please tell us what the situation is with TV series cast member contracts, and if I am right, how long these six-year deals have been the norm.

    October 1, 2012 at 11:04PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan MoreTears - I'm not sure if it's six seasons, but actors definitely sign standard ongoing contracts when they agree to do a show. That's why you have circumstances like the "Modern Family" hold-out. The actors sign contracts and then if a show blows up, of course they're going to want to renegotiation, just like an NFL player, because like an NFL player, it's not like the contracts are guaranteed, as you say. So yes. Long-term, multi-season contracts. The studios can't NOT sign actors to long-term contracts. Imagine if you had to re-sign every single actor on every single show to a newly negotiated deal every single season in order to renew a show. That'd be ridiculous. [Potential franchise movies also do the same thing for the most part. You don't sign on to play Captain America without committing to "X" number of subsequent movies at a sliding pay scale. Otherwise, the studio would never hire you.]

      What I *don't* know is if there are differences in the duration for a cable series contract. Let's see if Alan knows!

      -Daniel

      October 1, 2012 at 11:22PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Prettok

    Back in the day, sitcoms like Family Ties would have hopscotched right over the awkward toddler years.
    After a year of childbirth amd dirty diaper jokes, baby characters would mysteriously disappear for a season before suddenly returning as mischievous 5 year olds. Modern sitcoms might be better off following that model.

    October 2, 2012 at 2:56AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Crumb_talkback_profile

    CrumbThumber

    Am I the only one who is bothered that Jess calls Brody, "Brody?" It is her last name too. I can understand if they weren't married and they had just met, but they have been married for many years and she took his last name. I have know many married couples, but never has a wife referred to her husband with her own last name.

    October 2, 2012 at 8:36AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      debbie My mother-in-law does that...She calls her husband his last name, which is also her last name and has been for over 35 years. I agree...it's weird, but they're weird.

      October 3, 2012 at 1:27PM EST
  • A_talkback_profile

    belinda

    OMG all terriers podcast. Oh, the letdown.

    I found the leaving people in offices a tad bit more annoying here in Homeland than in BB, because it's the head of the CIA office vs. a head of a police department in ABQ office. You'd think the CIA would be a bit more careful.

    October 2, 2012 at 11:29AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    debbie

    Totally agree with Dan on Gracie Bell and don't think he's at fault...I think the Internet has ruled on that.

    October 3, 2012 at 1:29PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Breaking News

Around the Web

News From Our Partners