We care less about sex scandals than financial or other ones. And so we should; trusting a political leader, especially someone who could have been a potential candidate for president, necessitates that she or he can be trusted not to wilfully and negligently abuse the responsibilities of their oath and office.
24 is back on Fox, giving viewers front row seats to the most action-packed 24 hours we'll ever bear witness to. We wondered what a season of some other popular shows would be like if broken down by the same, groundbreaking guidelines: 1 hour = 1 episode.
I realize that in relation to the digital colosseum the sad print tabloid industry is merely a fungus on the underside of a rotting stump. But that doesn't excuse its existence.
My TV and movie selections for the majority of my life have tended to be relatively juvenile. So recently, I've been making an effort to watch "real people movies" and "grown-up shows." Through this personal cinematic transformation, I've noticed a trend in the shows and films I've been introduced to.
Silver's tone was perfect. His remarks were appropriate and substantive. The league's timing was ideal: not too rushed, yet not protracted. While Silver was spot-on, much of the subsequent commentary and analysis misses key points.
Aside from the obvious fact that Olivia would not be welcome at a Clippers game (the character is played by African American actress Kerry Washington), there are a few tips any crisis expert would have advised.
Washington, DC and the right wing outrage machine are all abuzz that the IRS allegedly targeted groups based on their presumed political affiliation. Obviously, that was wrong to do, but let's not forget that there are two IRS scandals.
The DC show is clearly experiencing something of a moment right now, occupying the same position of cultural prominence as, say, the lawyer show did in the late '90s. But what does the DC-based show's dominance mean?
Because Scandal is so much like real life, there are some very important life lessons to take away from it each week, because after all, which one of us can't say we haven't been a part of an international cover-up that seemingly resolves itself in 44 minutes or less? No one, my point exactly.
Mellie may not be a "good" person, but she's a fascinating, hooch and whiskey-guzzling, political badass. The beauty of watching a TV antihero is that while you may not like the fictional first lady, you've probably found yourself cheering her on.
That question has been asked repeatedly since the legal team hired by Christie released its findings last week.
Even if federal and state legislative investigators are unable to prove that Christie gave the order for the bridge closures, or had advanced knowledge, he has no chance of becoming the Republican Party's nominee for president in 2016.
To watch two concurrent, high-profile dramas about the presidency and the government and have both as fixated on the darkest, most vile, unscrupulous, and cynical versions of that place, those jobs, and most of the people populating them, is to reflect a culture at odds with itself. Certainly its government.
While no one knows how this case will unfold in the most likely months ahead, one thing is for sure. It's not over for Mayor Vincent Gray.
Last week, the two of us looked around and realized that HuffPost didn't have anybody recapping "Scandal." We are here to rectify that horrible error,...
So what draws us to these shows especially at a time when the public has so much disdain for government? Why does there seem to be an inverse relationship between "approval ratings" of the shows and the real-life counterparts of their characters?