Join my newsletter for info on upcoming books, classes, appearances, and discounts.Join Now!

Must-see TV

Once I started writing–just over a year ago–my television viewing dropped off dramatically. Other than a few shows my husband and I have watched for years, I almost never turned it on.

But now that I’m looking for insight into organizations like the DEA and military special ops, I find myself hunting for good viewing material everywhere. For example, I found a great show on Hulu that used to air on Spike TV–the network for the testosterone-fueled set–called DEA. Well, perfect! It’s like COPS but it follows around DEA agents. I have two whole seasons of badness to plow through.

Today I watched The First 48 (A&E) for the first time while sweating on the cross-trainer. I may not stick to this one, but I started recording it, just in case. It’s all about real-life detectives trying to find a suspect within the first 48 hours after a murder victim is discovered. I also added Manhunters to the DVR list so I can get some insight into tracking fugutives.

Netflix provided a boon of documentaries from the likes of National Geographic, Nova, and others about the DEA, FBI, special forces, and the secret service (though I do have a contact for that one). Unfortunately, they’re not all available on instant play, so I put them at the end of my queue to move up when I’m ready.

Yes, I still watch fiction. I love my CSI (Original) and Heroes (although it may have jumped the shark this season), and we usually watch movies on the weekends. But now, if I feel like watching TV, I can still work on my writing.

For me, that’s the best of both worlds.

Write on!

0 Comments

  1. Reply

    I’ve been testing the Structure question against some really old Movies. Tuned into TCM. Watched 42nd St. The structure is there. It doesn’t slap you in the face. But, the plot points are there and in the general vicinity of the time frame Larry suggests. Fun thing to do.

    And, it is great to see movies that didn’t because they couldn’t rely on special effects. But, I guess a person could argue that a movie, being also a “talkie” in 1933 was in itself a special effect.

    • Reply

      Yes, I suppose being a “talkie” in 1933 might have been enough. 🙂

      We watched The International the other day. I didn’t do a formal structure analysis, but I did annoy my husband with my theories on why it felt a little flat. Mostly in the characterization for me, especially the motivation.

      I’ll try to pick something better for my upcoming post.

      • Reply

        “I’ll try to pick something better for my upcoming post.”

        Gwen, it’s your blog. Write about what you want to. It’s cool. All of it. That’s the fun part of what you are doing. You have lots of interests. Give them play here. And, you “voice” it well. Please do what you do. I will beg you to go with what you think needs to be said on anything you think you want to talk about. This is space. I mean,check who pays the bills.
        Taint none of us in the peanut gallery. 🙂
        Write on Lady.

  2. Reply

    Curtis: Thanks for the support! Actually, I just meant I’d try to pick a better movie than The International to evaluate.

    Guess I need to be more articulate. 😉

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: