Laugh-In’s Dick Martin dead at 86
Dick Martin was the “Martin” in the comedy duo Rowan & Martin, who hosted the incredibly popular 1960s/early ’70s comedy sketch show on NBC, Laugh-In. Dan Rowan, who died in 1987, was the straight man (that’s Rowan on the left in the pic).
Martin also appeared in several other TV shows over the years, including Third Rock From The Sun, The Lucy Show, Love Boat, Fantasy Island, Coach, Blossom, Dave’s World, Baywatch, The Nanny, Diagnosis: Murder, George & Leo, The John Larroquette Show, and Two Guys, A Girl, and a Pizza Place. He was also in the movies The Maltese Bibby, Carbon Copy, and The Glass Bottom Boat.
Besides acting, Martin was a director as well, helming such shows as The Bob Newhart Show, Family Ties, Archie Bunker’s Place, Mama’s Family, In The Heat of the Night, Newhart, and Sledge Hammer.
Martin died of respiratory complications in Santa Monica last night. He was 86.
I’m worried about Jane Doe
So what did you do yesterday? I spent the entire Sunday watching detective movies on The Hallmark Channel. Of course, when I say “detective movies” it sounds like I was watching old film noir flicks from the 40s and 50s. Actually, I was watching Murder, She Wrote, Perry Mason movies, and Matlock.
Yes, I have the social life of a 70 year-old woman.
I’ve always been a sucker for these shows, going back to the NBC Mystery Movie and Columbo and McMillan and Wife. Those shows were probably better produced and written than the stuff you see on Hallmark Channel, but I think the new shows are quite entertaining and fun, and it’s good to see favorite familiar faces on TV again: the McBride movies with John Larroquette, the Murder 101 movies with Dick Van Dyke, and the TV movie series I’d like to talk about, Jane Doe.
To put it simply, I’m worried about Jane Doe.
Jane (Lea Thompson) is a fortysomething suburban housewife with two kids and a hubby (played by William R. Moses of Melrose Place and Falcon Crest) who supposedly works for a puzzle/toy company. She also happens to be a secret spy who helps out agent Frank Darnell (Joe Penny of Riptide) on baffling cases. Her puzzle background helps in that regard. One problem: she has to keep the assignments secret from her husband and kids. Plots like this have always bothered me. What if Jane is killed on assignment? Not only will the family have to deal with the fact that their wife and mother is dead, but she’s been living a secret life for years. That would be crushing.
Anyway, Jane is always getting phone calls and text messages from Frank saying he needs her (if her husband found these text messages he’d probably think she was having an affair, but I digress…), so she’ll make up an excuse about there being some type of emergency at the puzzle company (not sure what type of emergencies puzzle companies have, but I’ll go along with it) or spilling milk “accidentally” so she has to rush out to the grocery store to get more. Oh, by the way, the secret HQ for the Central Security Agency is in the back of the store.
So we have the set-up for a fun series of movies, sort of a Long Kiss Goodnight meets Banacek. But something troubles me. I’ve noticed (in the two movies I’ve watched anyway) that whenever Jane goes out to do a little snooping around, she often goes alone, with no gun. She’ll go into abandoned houses and spooky staircases and deserted office buildings, following the bad guy, and then the bad guy will come up behind her and try to shoot her, and all she can do is run or hide in a closet. Now, as far as I know, Jane is not Jason Bourne, able to kill any bad guys with a rolled up newspaper, and she constantly has to duck bullets and call for backup on her cell phone. This is probably really good for Verizon’s bottom line, but if she carried a gun she wouldn’t get in trouble like this all of the time.
So Jane, I like your movies and I like the plots and I think you’re a very smart, capable women. I just wish you’d either carry a gun or just be a little more careful out there, OK? Thanks.
Boston Legal: The Mighty Rogues
(S04E16) “During the strike, I fell in love.” Jerry Espenson
I think I have finally figured out how Crane, Poole & Schmidt can justify keeping so many nutcases on staff. It’s because there isn’t one sane person on the entire payroll. In fact, it seems that the higher you rise in the firm, the nuttier you become. Think about it, one named partner is legally insane and another is famous for his dementia. I don’t know why Carl Sack hasn’t figured this out yet.
In Shirley’s case, I suppose she still has a few things keeping her grounded. Although having a father who is losing his battle with Alzheimer’s is certainly enough to send anyone over the edge.
While I really enjoyed watching Candy Bergen and Shatner work together, I was upset by their case. How is it that thousands of elderly people can die every year due to poor living conditions or mismanaged health care but when you actually want them to end your loved ones’ suffering, the medical community suddenly has too many ethics? I won’t take up too much space arguing for assisted suicide, you can do that in the comments section, but I will say this…if a person lives every day in constant confusion and fear because of a disease that has no cure, I consider that a terminal case.
I’m glad John Larroquette finally has something to do. I was worried when he joined the cast that the show just wouldn’t be big enough for him and Shatner both. Turned out I was right. The curse of the ensemble drama is that sometimes the ensemble is just too good. Inevitably, one or more characters end up getting more screen time and your favorite disappears. Heck, I barely recognized Clarence.
Speaking of Clarence, he really needs to be fired. I’m just saying if one of my employees refused to do the job he was hired for, he’d be dismissed. I applaud Clarence for his ethics but a high-powered firm like CP&S is not the place to wave them about. I’m sure Boston has plenty of legal aid outlets that help the underprivileged and pay about a tenth of what he’s making.
While Carl’s client was, at the least, misguided, I applaud him for telling the associates why they needed to take the case. As with most law firms it is all about money. One thing that has always bothered me with BL is how they always seem to take on pro bono cases and rarely have any paying clients. Finally, we get an example of where most of the firms income is from. I would imagine the bill for having a partner work a case like this is astronomical.
The best part of Carl’s case was the Machiavellian reason it was even started. I guess spending thousands of dollars on absurd lawsuits is how the obscenely rich stage protests.
I’m really done with Jerry and his freaky dating life. Firstly, I have enough dating problems of my own to care about Jerry’s and secondly, if Katie really cared about Jerry like she claims, she would realize that when it comes to women, the guy is hopeless. Her pep talks and kind words are just not cutting it.
Jerry’s case was simply ludicrous. For his date to insist that he damaged her somehow is laughable. Seeing how smoking hot she is, she must have been damaged to even go out with Jerry in the first place. At least she admitted that her lawsuit was out of line.
In closing, I must say that I am amazed that after so many balcony scenes, I can still be moved by the brilliant combination of writing and acting that made tonight’s one of the best I’ve ever seen.
By the way, the song that was being played in the bar was called “Who’s Next” and was written by Tom Lehr. Now watch and see how many idiots post a comment asking the name of the song.
Jane Seymour, TV detective
She’s been a vamp, a vixen, a medicine woman, royalty and she’s even tried Dancing with the Stars. Now she will solve crimes. The Hallmark Channel has greenlit Dear Prudence, a Jane Seymour crime-solving Martha Stewart-type celebrity. They’re calling this a backdoor pilot because Hallmark doesn’t do series TV; however, if the movie were to be successful, it could become one of a rotation of star-driven mystery movies that Hallmark currently presents.
Dear Prudence will be co-authored by Les Alexander, who will also executive produce the picture. The story revolves around Prudence, star of a house and garden TV show, who has an eagle eye for detail. While vacationing in Santa Fe, she “stumbles on a murder mystery” — just like Jessica Fletcher did on Murder She Wrote. Using her skills at observation, she sees things that even forensic experts miss an helps catch the killer. It’s Martha Stewart meets Monk without the neuroses!
If the first film scores, Hallmark would be likely to put the group into production for a few more after that. This is especially true because Hallmark’s executive vice president is behind the project and is talking about a major marketing push for an August premiere. The late summer date is intentional; to take advantage of the plethora of reruns the networks will be broadcasting then.
Dear Prudence could be slotted in the Hallmark mystery movie wheel which now includes Dick Van Dyke in Murder 101, John Larroquette in McBride, Kellie Martin in Mystery Woman and Lea Thompson in Jane Doe.
Considering Jane Seymour’s TV popularity — she single-handedly kept the western alive in the 90’s with Dr. Quinn — Dear Prudence has a great chance of making it. I know that that I’ll be curious to see her and watch, and so will my husband who’s followed her career faithfully since she played Solitaire in the James Bond flick, Live and Let Die.