The first list in the series is the obvious one.  Without further ado, I present to you Ten From My TiVo: Hottest Women.

#10 Julie Bowen (Modern Family)

Sure, she plays a mom of three on Modern Family every week but Julie Bowen is smokin’.  Though Phil often steals the show with the laughs, Julie’s character, Claire, adds her own manic humor to the mix.  Julie Bowen is both hot and funny — double threat!

#9 Alison Brie (Community)

Perhaps one of the most under-utilized actresses on Community, Alison Brie manages to play her honor student character with glee.  If her big puppy dog eyes can melt Jeff Winger every week, then consider me melted.

#8 Parvati Shallow (Survivor)

In her third season as a contestant on Survivor, Parvati has been called a lot of things on the show.  Her victorious run in Fans Vs. Favorites earned her the ultimate title of Survivor’s Black Widow, and she most recently charmed the immunity idol out of Russell Hantz on Heroes Versus Villains.  It’s never been so fun to distrust someone this much.

#7 Erika Christensen (Parenthood)

Though a new show, Parenthood is a show that has it all.  And one of those great things is Erika Christensen.  She is superb as Julia Braverman-Graham, desperately trying to juggle a successful law career with attentive parenting, leading to both laughs and tears.

#6 Jessica Stroup (90210)

Just to be clear, Jessica Stroup is an adult despite playing a high schooler on the new 90210.  Despite being thrown into a show full of hotties, Jessica stands out as the queen of them all.  She’s also a refreshingly good actress, able to play the panic and angst of high school with ease.  Just don’t look into her eyes; you may become hypnotized.

#5 Sofía Vergara (Modern Family)

A true Colombian, Sofia draws you in with her looks and then slays you with her accent.  As the much younger wife of Ed O’Neill, Sofia excels as the awkward stepmother to a couple of kids who are her age.  There’s nothing like an exotic accent to draw you in.

#4 Kaley Cuoco (The Big Bang Theory)

Kaley Cuoco first caught my eye a few years ago in 8 Simple Rules, but now she graces my TiVo every week in The Big Bang Theory as the curiously last-nameless Penny.  Kaley’s genuine demeanor makes her the perfect choice to portray the hot girlfriend of a socially awkward physicist, but it’s her comic timing that keeps you hooked.

#3 Lauren Graham (Parenthood)

Sure I’m a dude, but I was an avid fan of Gilmore Girls.  Lorelai Gilmore was the role of a lifetime for Graham’s effervescent personality, and I was afraid we’d lose her forever after its cancellation.  Imagine my relief when Parenthood snagged her for yet another hot mom role.  I won’t complain — there’s no such thing as too much Lauren Graham.

#2 Stana Katic (Castle)

I came for Nathan Fillion in my usual blind Firefly loyalty, but I stayed on Castle for the adorable but stern Stana Katic.  Keeping up with Nathan Fillion is no easy task, but Stana Katic plays Detective Kate Beckett with a rapier wit that keeps Castle in check.  The facial expressions that she musters in exasperation are some of the best on television.

#1 Yvonne Strahovski (Chuck)

Of course #1 would go to Yvonne Strahovski by default — I do run a website dedicated to her afterall.  Every bit as sweet as she is hot, Yvonne Strahovski wows us every week with her amazing portrayal of Agent Sarah Walker.  Fresh from Australia, Strahovski has quickly made it clear that there’s no one on television hotter than her.

Our relationship has been a little rocky for  a while.  Though we still share a home, we only pass like ships in the night.

You’ve been sleeping on the couch, and I’ve been halfway ignoring what you had to say while shoving my nose into my laptop.

I haven’t spent much time thinking about you, because we have just grown apart.  You aren’t the same person you used to be.

I’d like to say that it’s not you; it’s me.  But let’s be honest, it’s totally you.  You became an intolerable partner for a while.

But last night during our Monday night date night (that you’ve insisted we maintain during this dark period in our relationship), I saw a glimmer of what really made me fall in love with you in the first place.

For the briefest of moments, I was able to fondly remember those times we spent together saving the cheerleader, and yes, even the world.

I don’t know if this means we’re going to get back together and have the sort of relationship we used to have, but I do know that perhaps my heart still belongs to you in some small way.

Please don’t screw up again.  I just don’t think my heart could take the abuse.

With love,

Lykaon

So let’s talk about the newest Sci-Fi-JJ-X-Files ripoff of the day — Fringe.

Starring Pacey, Denethor, and some average-looking chick I’ve never heard of, Fringe tries to capture the nostalgia of the X-Files fans with a little bit of Heroes drama and JJ twist.

What does that equal?  Pretty mediocre television so far in my opinion.  I’ve given it two episodes before writing a review because I want it to be good.

Here’s where I admit to an embarassing fact: I was a big fan of Dawson’s Creek, and an even bigger fan of the character of Pacey.  This naturally leads to warm fuzzy feelings about Joshua Jackson… manly ones, of course.

To be honest, I gave the show a shot at all because of Jackson.

He’s one of those natural actors that can believably bring humor to most situations (like The Beef and Mr. July).  He’s entertaining to watch.

But I’m not sure he can save this show.

The real problem comes down to its characters.  For any show to win my attention, it must have interesting and well-developed characters.  Even if it’s just starting out, I at least want to see potential in its characters.

Plus I want those characters to be attractive.  Don’t mistake my meaning.  I don’t mean I want them to be pretty.  I mean I want them to be intriguing to watch.

Though Pacey does the best he can, the only character who is even remotely intriguing to watch is the crazy scientist father dude played by the same guy who threw himself from the top of Minas Tirith (which was dramatically added for the movie).

The subject matter isn’t particularly compelling.  It’s supposed to be dealing with fringe science, but they cram so much fringe into one episode that you don’t ever get as much as you really want.

This past episode had them reading visual images off of dead eyes.  That little gem had nothing to do with the plot and such capabilities could be saved for a whole show dedicated to the weirdness and ramifications of being able to do stuff like that.

Not to mention, by fringe they mean ‘made-up.’  So far they haven’t really dealt with common fringe science that we’ve all heard of (or at least can look up on wikipedia).

Also.  The little name plate thingies for location awareness is a total ripoff of Heroes and much more intrusive.  It’s not clever.  It’s not neato.  It’s just stupid.

And lastly we come to the real problem with the show — it’s lead.  I had never heard of Anna Torv before this show, but I just can’t warm up to her.  She keeps the audience at a distance; and I find her to be mostly offputting.

She is not overly attractive.  She is not overly charismatic.  She is not really anything that a good leading lady should be.  The redhead chick from Massive Dynamics is more compelling than she is (plus she has robotic arms!).

So that’s where I stand on Fringe.  I’ll probably give it another episode or two to win me over, but it’s not really leading the charge so far this season for great entertainment.

Work harder, Pacey, you can do it!

Though it is dated, silly, and not all representative of what life in the fifties was probably really like, it’s still a great show with some of the best displays of tv tropes in our short television history.

This past weekend I watched an episode all about Wally.  He started dating a girl who’s older sister (by 3 years) was already married.

Ward and June were absolutely horrified by all of the time Wally was spending with the married couple and were sure he was going to drop out of high school and get married prematurely.

So, being good parents they questioned him about his new girl over dinner.  Wally got short with them, and finally asked them to stop. Why?

And I quote: “It’s kinda creepy like when the gym coach watches you shower.”

Wait–what? Did Wally really just say that?  Wally was playing ball for a pedophile and his parents are worried about a girl?

Ah.  The fifties.  So innocent.

The characters are so much deeper and the plotlines so much more involved.  It honestly makes TNG look like a walk in the park, full of privileged brats.

But that’s not why I’m writing.  Instead, I’m commenting on a particular episode in the second season called “Paradise.”  What?  Don’t have every Star Trek episode memorized?  I’ll sum up.

Be warned: If you haven’t seen The Village and don’t want to be spoiled, you should probably stop reading.

Basically, Sisko and O’Brien go galavanting onto some planet where they find a colony of crash-landed humans who have been living planetside for 10 years.

They haven’t left or contacted anyone for help because none of their technology works thanks to some sort of interference field that they surmise is some sort of naturally occuring phenomenon.

But then we find out that that natural occurrence is actually a technological device placed there and hidden by the leader of the colony because she abhors technology.  So she hoodwinked a few dozen people for 10 years so that she could live out her fantasy of a “better life.”

Fast Forward over 10 years later in real time, and Shymalan releases The Village to mixed reviews.  I actually liked the movie a great deal and really wish people would move past The Sixth Sense to appreciate him as a filmmaker.

But it occurred to me as I watched this episode that The Village is practically the exact same story.  Sure, the macguffin is different but the goal is the same — crazy purist seeks to destroy lives by forcing them to live a ’simpler’ life.

I’m not naive enough to think that the DS9 writers came up with this sci-fi plot device all by themselves, and I even admit that Shymalan could have gotten his inspiration from a wholly different source.

But where from?  I find it interesting how some stories are so familiar yet so new at the same time.  Both Trek and Shymalan likely pulled on some earlier source that probably also pulled from an even earlier source.

Not being well-versed in sci-fi literature and media, I open it to you.  Where did this story get its start?

In an effort to be witty, I lovingly titled the post “WTB Luke Perry.”

Lo and behold, I flipped on my Amanda Bynes show and what did I see?

A guest appearance by Luke Perry as Valerie’s (played by Jennie Garth) high school fling.

They had an extrememly humorous 90210-themed flashback complete with really goofy 90s garb.

And people think God doesn’t listen…

I’ve recently started working out, and that has led me to seek out good television between the hours of 4 and 5pm.

For the record, good television does not exist during this time.

Still, I have settled on ABC Family to watch a long forgotten show called “What I Like About You.”

It’s really not very good, but Amanda Bynes has a lot of charisma and the show tickles me in that “Saved By the Bell” kind of way, so I watch it.

Aside from Amanda Bynes, “What I Like About You” also stars Jennie Garth from 90210 fame. She’s actually a lot less annoying in adulthood, and kind of cute despite her unnaturally little nose.

To add to Jennie Garth, I watched a show the other day with Jason Priestley in it. He is more annoying in adulthood, and he is not cute despite his perfect nose.

Then last night I was watching Terminator and what to my wondering eyes did appear? Why Brian Austin Green from the future so near.

Turns out little Green is playing the brother of Kyle Reese, John Connor’s father. That makes him John’s uncle in one of the more surprising and entertaining twists of the series.

So what can all this mean? Why are my airwaves being inundated with the actors from Beverly Hills, 90210? Why do I actually like them showing up on my television? Is it a sign of the coming apocalypse?

Only time will tell.

I’ve talked about Time Travel before. Everyone knows that I’m not necessarily a huge fan of the concept in movies and television.

I would be lying if I said I didn’t enjoy a good Star Trek episode with time travel. Episodes like ‘Yesterday’s Enterprise’ and ‘Trials and Tribble-ations’ are too much fun to pass up.

But the beauty of Star Trek time travel is that each movie and each episode is self-contained. Star Trek was never a serial drama, so the fact that cast and crew went whipping through time last week really had no bearing on what happens this week.

When time travel is put into a story that does matter, though, it almost always screws up the story in one way or another.

Enter Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.

There’s a writer’s strike going on and I have few choices in entertainment. Terminator isn’t exactly my kind of show, but I like Summer Glau enough to stick with it.

Last night’s episode kills me, though. If you haven’t watched it yet, stop reading now because I’m about to talk all about the plot.

The basic premise in this episode is that a Terminator has been sent back from the future to store off some metallic alloy in a bunker so that when the apocalypse comes, Skynet will have tons of material from which to build its army of evil.

Our heroes, John, Sarah, and River, are going to save the day by making sure that the alloy doesn’t get stored in the bunker, and the Terminator army isn’t as strong in the future. Sounds like a major blow to the whole future war, right?

There’s just so many problems associated with this, though, that it hurts my head to think about it.

First off, when Skynet opens up the bunker in the future, it’s going to know that its terminator failed and when said terminator is reactivated it will also know that John, Sarah, and River stopped it from succeeding.

So then Skynet knows that John, Sarah, and River are at that place and time. So then Skynet can send back terminators to deal with that. Or it can reprogram the first terminator to be watching for them.

Regardless of the outcome, Skynet has to know that its alloy is never stored away. And since its alloy is never stored away, why did it even bother sending someone into the past to store it? It has to, of course, because if it hadn’t then it would never know that it wasn’t stored.

So Skynet had to make the illogical decision of sending a Terminator back to store some alloy that it knew wasn’t going to actually get stored.

Furthermore, Skynet had to have made the illogical decision to not even let said Terminator know that it was going to fail at its mission at the hands of the person they’re all out to kill — John Connor.

John Connor delivered himself into their hands, and Skynet was too stupid to capitalize on it. Skynet’s not so bright. I don’t understand why the resistance is having so much trouble with it.

Aside from my fandom of Keri Russell, I watched Waitress because Nathan Fillion was a supporting character.

What can I say? I have a soft spot for the cast of Firefly, and I like to support them in whatever they do. Together, they were one of the most impressive casts in television history so its only natural that my loyalty to them extends to other endeavors.

Enter Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Besides the absurdly long name, Summer Glau stars in this series based on the 1984 Schwarzenegger flick.

Summer Glau plays River in Firefly, and a Terminator in this show. She certainly knows how to pick’em.

At least Adam Baldwin had the good sense to get away from the network that ruined Firefly. Let’s hope Summer doesn’t get burned twice by the network who is notorious for mismanaging its sci-fi.

I’m not usually one for pure action.

As good as they may be, I get little joy out of the Bourne movies, double-oh seven, Dirty Harry, or even the hallowed John McClane.

Terminator leaves me at a crossroads. I want to support Summer Glau. In fact, I think she did an amazing job being a kick-butt robot chick from the future.

But at the end of the day, I just don’t think Terminator is my kind of show. I don’t get excited about explosions and gunfights between indestructible machines. And we all know I don’t get excited about time travel.

My bias against action shows aside, the first episode of this tale wasn’t bad – if you like this sort of thing. It certainly blew the Bionic Woman out of the water.

The action was decent, the special effects were believable, and the acting was adequate for the type of show it’s trying to be.

If I had one complaint it would be how heavily it leans on its source material.

I haven’t watched any of the Terminator movies in years, and my wife has never watched them. I found myself more confused than not, and I had to continually pause to explain something that I had just remembered about the movies.

Being based on a franchise that has long since died, it’s suprising to me that they wouldn’t do at least a little bit more recap. Perhaps they could have even used some footage from the films to lend credence.

Also, Lena Headey is no Linda Hamilton. And really, could you expect her to be? As the titular character of the series, I think she’s going to have to find a way to not be upstaged by her 16 year old son and his hot teenage robot.

Overall, if you think you’d like Terminator: TSCC, then I think you probably will. In these television starved times, it’s is a worthwhile expenditure of time.

Growing up, my Mom always watched the Dallas Cowboys and I never really got into it. Yelling at a television was just weird, and I didn’t really understand the rules well enough to care who won or lost.

But then I attended Texas A&M University and my whole perspective on the sport changed. Texas A&M is not a place where you can easily ignore the football team. It is Texas, afterall, where football is almost a religion.

For anyone who’s a fan of college football like myself, this first week of the year marks the week of bowl games leading up to the BCS National Championship game.

I brought in the bowl season watching the Aggies lose to Penn State (how do you beat someone who was around when football was invented?).

I then watched Oklahoma embarass themselves against an under-rated West Virginia team.

What’s up next? Kansas versus Virginia Tech.

Notice a pattern? All three games include a Big 12 team, the conference in which A&M is a part.

A couple of years ago, the University of Texas played for the National Championship against #1 ranked USC. I invited a couple of friends over (literally) and my Aggie friend was rooting for USC the entire way.

Afterall, her time at Texas A&M had taught her that UT was bad. They are the arch-rival of the Texas Aggies, and we should always want them to lose – always.

But I disagree with her, and this arrives at my point — Concentric Loyalty.

I have a levels of loyalty which let me easily determine who my favorite team is for any given game. It’s moderately complex, but perfectly navigable. With over 120+ teams to sift through, it’s absolutely imperative that one have such a system.

The way I see it, any team close to Texas A&M should always win unless they’re playing Texas A&M. Why you ask?

Let’s take the scenario where Texas A&M loses to Team A. I then root for Team A in any match-ups. If Team A wins, then that means they’re a good team and it’s not so bad that Texas A&M lost to them.

In the reverse, let’s say Texas A&M wins against Team A. I still root for Team A to win, because if Team A wins, then A&M must have beaten a pretty good team. See how that works?

Basically, I follow this simple concentric set of rules:

• Texas A&M
• Texas teams
• Big 12 South
• Big 12
• Any team that has played anyone in the Big 12 that A&M has played

It gets complicated there at the end. It’s not always obvious which team is the one to root for in a given match-up, and it requires some real Kevin Bacon style work to figure it out sometimes. It’s not always direct. Perhaps Team A beat Team B who beat Team C who played A&M.

Likewise, there are inevitable match-ups that conflict with my concentric rings of loyalty. What do I do when Texas Tech plays UT? They’re both Texas teams and they’re both in the Big 12 South!

In such cases, the tie-breaker usually depends on the season. More often than not, I’ll root for the underdog in the match-up when I need to decide between two teams that live in the same ring of loyalty.

And then there are strange exceptions. One of those exceptions is Virginia Tech. Because I now live in Virginia, and Virginia Tech shares so much in common with Texas A&M, I tend to root for them in any match-up that doesn’t directly affect the Aggies.

That makes the next match-up between Kansas and VA Tech quite interesting.

So there you have it. A strange look into the concentric loyalty that is my college football fandom. Just one more thing for you to read that you don’t care about brought to you by Lykaon.com.