TV listings are a bit iffy to link too (they have a habit of not being permanent. So I've changed the link to Sky One's Bones site. I believe there's a David interview knocking about there.

And I'll be watching it tonight too. Wish they'd put it on at 9pm though.

Simon | January 12, 22:23 CET

IMO the writing is standard for TV, but DB does a consistently nice job in this. The others...not so much. The first few episodes are kinda rough, but if you keep watching, it does gets better.

Being as DB is both nice eye candy & a satisfactory actor, I try never to miss an episode.

anindoorkitty | January 12, 22:46 CET

BONES is improving steadily, IMHO. I just LOVE the girl in the lab, she's a hoot. The curly-haired "squint" is a bit annoying, and the younger lab nerd is just OK. But DB and Bones have some nice chemistry, and it's getting better.

VerseRoamer | January 12, 23:13 CET

Thanks Simon. Makes more sense.

I am quite looking forward to this (anindoorkitty I hear you), I've read a few of Kathy Reich's novels, hopefully it will at least be reasonably entertaining.

miranda | January 12, 23:35 CET

Yeah, this show is all about the chemistry between Booth and Bones, and I love it. My favorite scene is the one where he is taking her application for a gun permit (ep. 7, "A Man on Death Row"). Also, any time they ride in a car together, sparks fly. Here's hoping the writers keep them apart for a looooong time. ;-)

jam2 | January 12, 23:49 CET

Definitely worth sticking with considering how little else there is on tv at the moment - It does get better about 4 episodes in when they take a road trip to check out a bear.

I don't know how it compares to the Reich novels though, but I think the description 'reasonably entertaining' applies most of the time.

The Do That Girl | January 13, 01:23 CET

Not really all that faithful to the Reich novels as I recall them. In the books, Temperance is older and has a grown-up daughter.

Eden | January 13, 01:28 CET

David so does not suit red glasses!

gilesno1fan | January 13, 02:05 CET

Does anyone else have issues with David being in sunlight?

Simon | January 13, 02:22 CET

Hee. I know what you mean.

I did at first - but I got over it.
Mostly I was surprised at my increased appreciation of DB's acting. I assume it's a combination of improvement with experience and having a different character to portray. But whatever it is, it's yummy.

anindoorkitty | January 13, 02:38 CET

He really does look great. It's good to have my David fix again.

Simon | January 13, 02:39 CET

I was going to give this a look but i'm a little overrun with television at the moment. Between new episodes of Stargate SG-1, Stargate: Atlantis, Battlestar Galactica, Invasion and Dream Team, Buffy reruns at two episodes a day, not to mention that E4 are showing Lost from the beginning again from next Friday, ITV2 have Supernatural starting in a week or so and Sky One have the fifth season of 24 coming up in February with Bravo to follow soon after with the final season of Alias, i just don't have enough time for another series.

Maybe i'll give it a chance when Sky repeat it somewhere down the line but for now i'm giving it a miss. A little too procedural for my tastes anyway, i reckon. Plus, up against the juggernaut that is Lost over in the States, i really don't see it making a second season, if i'm honest.

EDIT: Oh yeah! And at possibly the busiest time of the year for good television, Living TV have decided to repeat Veronica Mars in a timeslot that i will actually get to watch this time. So there is yet another series to add to the list.

Like i said, no time for yet another show. Sorry, DB! :(

[ edited by Vampire With A Gun on 2006-01-13 00:56 ]

Buffysmglover | January 13, 02:42 CET

It's not a bad show, and it's gotten better as time goes on. My shock is that it's on Fox and they're actually allowing that to happen....if only they'd done that with, well I've lost count of how many other shows that we loved. At any rate, at least it's not another blatent CSI clone, they twist the concept enough to make it interesting.

It will be up against Lost at the end of January on Wednesday nights, but it will be helped by the lead-in of another juggernaut called American Idol. They're probably counting on the hold-over audience to be enough to counteract Lost's huge draw, not win, but boost Bones enough to keep it afloat. It will be interesting to see if it works, but at least they're positioning it with a fighting chance, unlike so many others.

djalpine | January 13, 03:09 CET

I'd say it's almost certain Bones will get a huge ratings spike from the move to Wednesday. All power to Fox for doing it - they have really got behind this show.

gossi | January 13, 03:14 CET

That wasn't bad. The dialogue was clunky in a couple of places with obvious exposition but I guess that's going to happen in first episodes ('..that you're a good shot and know martial arts... - gee, thanks Agent Exposition ;) and DB was, most importantly, pretty convincing as an ex-soldier FBI agent (the quick expression on his face when he subdues the stalkery guy was pretty funny). After about 5 mnins I wasn't seeing Angel at all (tho' every time the wind blew his jacket I was expecting it to go into slow motion ;). Nice chemistry between the leads tho' the supporting parts feel a bit generic at the moment but it's early days and i'll certainly be giving it a few weeks grace.

The red glasses are indeed a bad idea, tho'.

Saje | January 13, 03:19 CET

After about 5 mnins I wasn't seeing Angel at all

Really? I found it almost impossible not to!

And yeah the show was solid enough. Definitely worth waiting to see if it gets stronger.

Grounded | January 13, 03:32 CET

Yeah I thought it was decent enough to give it another go. Was strange seeing David in sunlight though but I think I was used to him not being Angel by the end of the episode. Can't remember having that problem with any of the other Buffy/Angel actors before.

Paul_Rocks | January 13, 03:40 CET

Hmmm, okay, you aren't all supposed to be coming back after watching it saying that it is pretty good. I need comments like "average", "not really worth your time", "really wish DB had chosen a better series than this". I need a reason NOT to change my mind and catch one of the repeats shown throughout the week.

Seriously, not helping!!! :)

Buffysmglover | January 13, 03:56 CET

Vampire With a Gun: Erm, the red sunglasses were really, really bad ? Also, near the start there's some plainly dangerous driving. I don't care if you are in the FBI, how about a signal when you pull in ? You could legitimately boycott it just for these reasons alone. Don't even get me started on the jaywalking ... ;)

Saje | January 13, 04:04 CET

LMAO! Thanks for trying, Saje, but i'm actually considering giving just the first episode a look when it is repeated tomorrow night, to make sure i'm not missing a series i would really get into.

Damn you, Whedonesquers and the fact i value your opinions!!!

Buffysmglover | January 13, 04:10 CET

If you're really interested in getting the best impression, I'd suggest you give it a couple of more weeks. Really. The first few shows are rough, but it does get considerably better as you get further into the season. Just don't let the pilot be your deciding episode.

Unless, of course, you're just watching to see DB's lovelines - then it wouldn't matter 'cause that's good from the start.

anindoorkitty | January 13, 04:55 CET

djalpine: from what I've heard, Bones is getting good ratings. I'd say that's the simple reason Fox is allowing it to develop. Surely it wouldn't be for creative reasons...

Vampire With A Gun: this may sound like blasphemy but maybe you don't need to watch 2 Buffy reruns every day. I did that to catch up back when I was new to the show, but since then I just watch the DVDs at whatever pace suits me. Just a thought...

jam2 | January 13, 10:57 CET

I thought it seemed promising. There were some naff bits of writing, but I thought both DB and the Emily Deschanel were very good, and I am willing to make allowances for it being the first episode. Glad to hear people say it gets better: I plan to stick with it.

Kiddo | January 13, 12:09 CET

Well, I liked it fine enough and very much enjoyed looking at DB (yummy indeed). Agree that acting wise he is getting better and clearly he is having a lot of fun. Also agree with the clunky exposition comments, but then the writers have very little time to play with and really have to cram it all in.

It never ceases to amaze me how short US originated episodes are. Man, you must have so many ads! We are so spoiled with the BBC. Even on ad supported channels in the UK, I believe there is a fixed time maximum of ads you can broadcast during an hour and it must be lower than the US (? I could be wrong). Usually with US shows there seem to be all sorts of fillers (mostly previews) to cover that time. This is why I normally refuse to watch Sky One or other cable channels showing US shows – life is short, I can’t deal with all these fillers and ads. That’s why God (or some very nice technology nerd) invented DVD. But I’ll make an exception for Bones.

miranda | January 13, 13:55 CET

A friend was flabbergasted by the number of adverts in US shows when he went over there, telling me he now knows why they have a pre-credit teaser. It's because they have post-credit commercial breaks ! He grew frustrated in the end and stopped watching (probably a good idea anyway when you're meant to be on holiday ;). I've noticed that the shows are actually getting shorter too (e.g. Star Trek used to last about 44 minutes, now most 'hour' shows are around 42 minutes) though this could be partly due to the modern penchant for flashing the end credits past at about a gazillion miles an hour. Makes me wonder what happens when BBC shows are broadcast in the US. 'Spooks' for example (which I think is called MI5 in the states) is a 'BBC hour' long which would make it a US 1hr 20 mins. Do they show it all or is it cut for length ?

Saje | January 13, 14:34 CET

Jam2, you are absolutely right that i don't need to watch the two rerun episodes of Buffy that are shown each weekday on Sky One. But the fact is that i look forward to them more than the majority of new stuff that is currently on.

As much as i enjoy all the new episodes of Stargate, Battlestar, Invasion or whatever else they still don't compare to the enjoyment i get from watching an old episode of Buffy or Angel. In fact, only Farscape and Lost even come close to matching them. Not to mention the fact that i still haven't got around to buying all the DVDs yet so Sky One is my only option for the last four seasons right now.

So need to? Nope! Want to? Most definately!

Buffysmglover | January 13, 16:07 CET

I've been watching bits and pieces of S4 in the mornings on Sky One. Which is weird because I have the videos but never watch them...

Grounded | January 13, 17:22 CET

VWAG, I too enjoy watching Jossverse reruns on TV. It may be due to the fact that I can't manipulate it as I'm watching. I'm forced to watch it as it's shown instead of FF to the parts I love most, as I usually do when watching the DVDs, thus surprising myself with little treasures I've forgotten about.

I believe the reason for all those pesky ads on US TV is revenue. It takes alot of money to produce those shows and companies are willing to shell out big bucks for time to sell their wickets. It's why most people think of the US when they think visual entertainment.

anindoorkitty | January 13, 17:51 CET

In answer to the question, in the USA, British TV shows are pretty much only shown on "Public Television" (though I'm sure there are cable stations I don't get that show them as well.) That means no commercials. It also means a fairly small audience and a very limited number of shows as "Public Television" is also sometimes referred to as "educational television...or elitist television if the speaker has certain political leanings and wants to cut whatever government funding is left. ;-)

newcj | January 13, 19:19 CET

Ah, that explains it, thanks newcj. It did seem a bit unlikely that you could cut 18-20 mins of a show and not have anyone notice.

Bit uncertain how anyone could call TV that's freely available to all and has no conflicting commercial interests 'elitist' but maybe I just don't lean the right way ;).

Saje | January 13, 20:01 CET