No surprises there. Both series were almost certain of renewal.

To be honest I'm not into either one. Hugh Laurie is just brilliant in his role but the show itself falls flat for me, for some reason. Can't they have him quit being a doctor and suddenly decide to become a private detective with a wacky sidekick, played by Tony Robinson, to bounce his dry humour off? Maybe have Rowan Atkinson play his annoying neighbour? And Stephen Fry could play his old friend who just happens to work in the local police department and serves as a handy source of information. That would work for me.

As for Bones, again, just not my thing. It runs rings around any of the Law and Orders or CSIs (procedural drama is only slightly more entertaining to me than kettle boiling observation) but there is still that lack of anything really thrilling happening. Find a body... get some evidence... get some suspects... find your culprit... next... Not really for me, despite it actually having characters that I find reasonably three dimensional, at least for a procedural.

So, back to my House P.I. idea...

Demon-X | February 16, 05:19 CET

Yay for Bones! Not a masterpiece of a show, but still fun to watch.

I'd still give it up for just a full season of "The Nine" or a full season of Wonderfalls (or, of couse Firefly). Argh we hardly knew ya...

foreverwes | February 16, 05:31 CET

I'm glad they are renewing this, Bones has been getting better and better (I hope Stephen Fry keeps making occassional appearances).

embers | February 16, 06:24 CET

Great news.

Buffyfantic | February 16, 06:30 CET

I joyfully call myself a fan of a show that has heart & humor at its core. David Boreanaz and the rest of the talented cast deliver an entertaining show every week. Just as David promised, the show has gotten better and better.

I think it's quite a compliment to David and Emily for Haskell, the film historian, to make this statement:
'Some of these television shows are more sophisticated than most movies and have better writing,' says Haskell. 'You have to have the right people with the right electricity, and it's more on TV than in movies. On 'Bones,' there's more chemistry between the two leads [Emily Deschanel and David Boreanaz] on that show than any movie I can think of.'

It's nice to see them get an early renewal from Fox. It shows confidence in the future of "Bones."

Kizzy | February 16, 07:25 CET

Unfortunately, I agree with Roxtar.

I'm a huge fan of Hugh Laurie and DB and watched the first seasons of both Bones and House, but found myself losing interest in the second year.

However, I'm thrilled for the many fans of House and Bones that these shows got renewed.

Reddygirl | February 16, 07:37 CET

That was quick. Aside from "Idol" and "24", "Bones" and "House" are the one-two punch for Fox's ratings success.

impalergeneral | February 16, 07:47 CET

Yay. Glad for 'Bones' which I enjoy and think has some of the best inter-personal chemistry in any procedural (uh, oh, now the 'CSI: Original' fans are gonna come looking for me ;). Didn't occur to me to doubt 'House', it's gotta be a slam-dunk for renewal.

I dunno how, on paper it should get really dull really quickly but probably largely down to Hugh Laurie, the layered, subtle complexity that is Greg House and the way the show can create suspense over the validity of an entire world view it's just incredibly compelling viewing for me. It's also one of the most self-aware shows on the air but somehow manages to not crawl up its own arse in a post-modern stylee, instead using its awareness to play along with the viewer, tease us, joke with us. Almost perfect television IMO (i'd say perfect but it can't be, right ? Nothing is in this life ;).

Gotta say though "On 'Bones,' there's more chemistry between the two leads [Emily Deschanel and David Boreanaz] on that show than any movie I can think of" ? Really ? Bogart and Bacall (in e.g. 'The Big Sleep') ? Tracy and Hepburn (in e.g. anything) ? It's his opinion of course, just seems a bit, err, premature.

Saje | February 16, 13:08 CET

Reddygirl - "Unfortunately, I agree with Roxtar."

Not that I mind being agreed with but do you have to make it sound like it's a bad thing? Is agreeing with me really all that unfortunate?

Kidding! ;)

CSI: Original, Saje? Is that like Star Trek: The Original Series, where all the subsequent spinoffs made it impossible to just refer to the first show by it's true name?

"You ever watch Star Trek?"

"Yeah. I love Data!"

"No, I mean Star Trek."

"Oh, what? DS9? That one with the female captain? Quantum Trek?"

"The one with Kirk!!!"

"Didn't they do the movies?"

"Never mind..."

Demon-X | February 16, 14:00 CET

-Gotta say though "On 'Bones,' there's more chemistry between the two leads [Emily Deschanel and David Boreanaz] on that show than any movie I can think of" ? Really ? Bogart and Bacall (in e.g. 'The Big Sleep') ? Tracy and Hepburn (in e.g. anything) ? It's his opinion of course, just seems a bit, err, premature. -

Saje, I thought it was interesting that you mentioned only old time movie actors. In fairness to you, the quote I used from Haskell referred only to modern day films, so you were actually proving her point that it's rare to find that kind of chemistry (Tracy&Hepburn) in today's films on TV or the big screen.

Kizzy | February 16, 14:14 CET

Ah, didn't realise that was the context of the quote Kizzy. Yeah, I guess it is rarer these days though it's also the case that films that have stood the test of time have obviously done so for a reason - one of which may be cast chemistry - so that they stand out in the mind. Modern examples ? Hmm, maybe Helen Hunt and Jack Nicholson in "As Good as it Gets" ? As I say though, bizarrely, it'll probably be easier to name the good ones from now in about 20 years time ;).

Roxtar, it's more like Original Coke i.e. before they added the cheese ('CSI: Miami') and took out all the fizz ('CSI: New York').

OK, as far as I know there's no Coke with cheese but you get the idea (and it's an appropriately minging concept ;).

Saje | February 16, 14:33 CET

I really wanted to like Bones and did enjoy House in the first season, but after a bit watching it felt like deja vu all over again. I also never got into CSI, Friends, ER, American Idol, etc.

Reddygirl | February 16, 15:59 CET

Yeah, the most common complaint I hear is that 'House' is formulaic and that's absolutely true, the plots are formulaic. But though it's a medical mystery show, for me the real mystery is House himself (hey, he's medical, in a way ;). Just when you think you've got a handle on him the writers (and Hugh Laurie) will tease another aspect of his character out into public view and so long as that continues and it feels like there's still more there to discover then i'm happy to keep watching.

(to be honest, I treat the disease of the week like any other plot device that furthers character development i.e. basically as something to put up with most of the time except on those occasions where the writers use it as an excuse for a self-referential joke - there's an ongoing riff about Lupus for example).

Course, it's each to their own and I can totally understand a lot of the criticisms of 'House' and it not being everyone's thing (used to be a huge 'Colombo' fan so I guess i've just got a high tolerance for formula ;).

Saje | February 16, 16:23 CET

-Gotta say though "On 'Bones,' there's more chemistry between the two leads [Emily Deschanel and David Boreanaz] on that show than any movie I can think of" ? Really ? Bogart and Bacall (in e.g. 'The Big Sleep') ? Tracy and Hepburn (in e.g. anything) ? It's his opinion of course, just seems a bit, err, premature. -

Saje, I thought it was interesting that you mentioned only old time movie actors. In fairness to you, the quote I used from Haskell referred only to modern day films, so you were actually proving her point that it's rare to find that kind of chemistry (Tracy&Hepburn) in today's films on TV or the big screen.

How about Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan?

The_Joker | February 16, 16:33 CET

This is great for David Boreanaz. He really deserves the success of a third series. Buffy, Angel and now Bones.
David does have a lot of chemisty with his t.v. leading lady but it doesn't even compare to the chemisty he had with a certain vampire slayer. Yep, the beautiful and talented Sarah Michelle Gellar. In all fairness though, how many times can you capture lightening in a bottle?

cheryl | February 16, 17:44 CET

I'm really happy for David and the cast of 'Bones'. Unfortunately, I don't get to watch 'Bones' that often but when I do catch it, I really enjoy the show. David has another great role for himself.

maje | February 16, 20:37 CET

This makes me happy. I love both shows.

Earlier this month, we got to be a Neilsen family for a week. I was somewhat mortified at the end of the week to realize that the network my family watches most is FOX.

mnspnr | February 16, 21:51 CET

maje ... did you know that FOX puts the Bones episodes up on their myspace page? Maybe you could catch missed episodes from there? It is true that David had great chemistry with SMG, but he also had great chemsitry with Julie Benz and lots of other actresses. The chemistry he and Emily have is different than that with SMG but no less 'lightning in a bottle' imo (and the producers of Bones as well ... they used that exact phrase to describe it).

resa | February 16, 22:18 CET

resa,

I wasn't aware they put the episodes on myspace. Thanks. :)

maje | February 17, 04:00 CET

happy to help :)

resa | February 17, 04:35 CET

Saje, I loved Columbo; also was a big fan of McCloud, MacMillan and Wife and Banacek. Plus, the Rockford Files is a show I loved.

But, something happened to my brain after watching Buffy so many years. I just have trouble getting into shows that don't have arcs and lots of metaphor.

Maybe I should write an essay for the contest about how Buffy has affected our lives. It changed my brain!

Reddygirl | February 17, 07:06 CET

Reddy, I know what you mean. In the BB (Before Buffy) period of my life I thought I liked a lot of television. Now, in the AB (After Buffy) period, I feel like I am missing something. Television is no longer fullfilling. I simply can not stomach television that doesn't make me feel something. I need to feel everything. I need to watch something and not know where we are going. I like the element of surprise when I'm least expecting it. I want to laugh, cry and be in awe. I want it all. Sadly, nothing on AB comes close.

resa, I had no idea the producers of Bones used the same words to describe David and Emily. You are absolutely correct about David and the chemistry he held with about anyone on screen with him. I think he just has that "it" factor.

cheryl | February 17, 08:15 CET

Good news for all us Bones fans.

Derf | February 17, 14:38 CET