Believe it or not, people have asked about this. So here's the announcement:

Good Lord!  Warner Home Video is bringing one of television’s most beloved dysfunctional families to DVD this fall with the release of Mama’s Family: The Complete First Season on September 26, 2006.  The two-disc set will include 13 episodes of the show’s first season and will retail for $26.97. 

Mama’s Family, the delightfully offbeat comedy whose successful run spanned from January 22, 1983 to March 12, 1990, originally began as a skit on the legendary Carol Burnett Show.  Entitled The Family, the sketch was roughly based on Carol Burnett’s childhood and was such a hit that it generated its own spin-off series which premiered on NBC.

Mama’s Family mined humor from a squabbling family in the Midwestern blue collar suburb of Raytown.  The noisy clan was headed by Thelma Harper “Mama” (Vicki Lawrence, The Carol Burnett Show, The Vicky Lawrence Show) a buxom, gray-haired widow with sharp opinions and a sharper tongue who shared her small house with her high-strung sister Fran (Rue McClanahan, The Golden Girls), a journalist for a local paper.  Mama’s lazy, dimwitted son, Vint (Ken Berry, F-Troop), a locksmith by trade, moved in at the start of the series with his troublesome teenage children, Buzz (Eric Brown) and Sonja (Karin Argoud), after his wife ran off to become a Las Vegas show girl.  Much to Mama’s disgust, Vint soon took up with the flirtatious neighbor Naomi (Dorothy Lyman, All My Children), who works as a checker at the local grocery store, Food Circus. 

Mama’s Family also starred Betty White (Golden Girls) as Ellen Jackson, Harvey Korman (The Carol Burnett Show) as Ed Higgins/Carl Harper/Alistair Quince and Carol Burnett (The Carol Burnett Show, Carol & Company) as Eunice Higgins.

The first time on DVD, Mama’s Family: The Complete First Season will include all 13 episodes from the show’s premiere season, which aired from January 1983 to May 1983. 

Much buzzing the last couple of days about Dan Rather leaving CBS after 44 years. It's now official, as you can read here. No doubt this will prompt extended reflection on his career, his influence and his decline.

But didn't we do this already?

When Rather stepped down as anchor of "The CBS Evening News" in March 2005, that effectively marked the end of Rather as a bright star in the TV news universe. His place in TV news was duly assessed, and the only thing that has changed since then is, well, nothing. He went into network limbo, and there he has stayed.

The end of his deal with CBS will free him from that limb, allowing him to pursue other work, of course. Big-name former newsmen can keep working as long as they choose — be it on public television, cable or in commercials. They can also be sought out for the occasional pithy quote during anything that looks like a major change in TV news. ("So, Dan, did you watch Katie's debut?") Already there are reports that Rather will sign with HDNet to do a newscast once his CBS gig is over, although I'd prefer a weekly hour of Rather talking with HDNet boss Mark Cuban. (Yes, the guy who owns the Mavs — giving him and Rather both an association with Dallas.)

That's not a slam at Cuban, either. I met Cuban a few years ago and liked him; he may be outspoken, but he also stands ready for the heat. It's remarkable to meet a guy that rich who gives out his e-mail address to a roomful of reporters. So put him with a Rather who has nothing to fear — and no further need to overload metaphors — and we could all have some fun.

I suppose Connie Chung — Rather's former co-anchor — thought she was having fun when she ended her MSNBC series with a musical number. (You can find it here, and be glad that there is YouTube.) But it's just bad. Scary bad. So bad, I may watch it again.

My study is beautiful, if a bit spartan for the time being. We have moved the desk back in, which gave me a place to hook up the computer, and I can go back to blogging from home in the most casual of wear. (Trust me, the less said the better.) I'll be online later with a few thoughts, none of which involves "W.W. and the Dixie Dancekings."

Later, with more added to the office and my workspace even more in shape: As regular readers here know, I've been working my way through fall series pilots, as well as brain-picking colleagues doing likewise, and don't have an overarching theory (aside from my post-9/11 musing, below). I do see some of the battle lines being drawn; I've written here about the "30 Rock"/"Studio 60" parallels, and expect at some point to get to "Vanished"/"Kidnapped." An early consensus seems to favor "Kidnapped," which has a really good cast, but I found "Vanished" better paced, if unbelievable in the way of Fox adventure serials. (That opinion, like any expressed about a series pilot, is subject to change before my review of the premiere appears, since the show may change cast, concept, title and nuances.)

This is, after all, ping-pong time, since there are new summer shows to deal with even as the fall stuff looms. The two intersected last week when I had a nice interview with Ron Livingston,  who is in the summer cable series "Nightmares and Dreamscapes" as well as fall's "Standoff." There were plenty of other things to talk about as well, from dealing with home projects to "The Cooler" (where Livingston had a supporting role) and at least a glance toward cult fave "Office Space," where Livingston starred. But we talked about his series, and it felt as much like a conversation as an interview, and I hope to get a good story out of it.

But I'm rambling, and what I really want to talk about is "Friday Night Lights," the NBC drama for the fall, which is so far my favorite of the new series I've watched. In fact, it feels better every time I watch another show that isn't quite as strong and self-assured. "FNL," as you could easily guess, is inspired by Buzz Bissinger's book and the movie derived from it; although it has new characters, it is still about a small Texas town where high-school football reigns.

"FNL" aims to be about more than just football, although the game provides a focus for all the characters, whether rich or poor, young or old, serene or sad. In fact, the football part of the storytelling in the pilot may be the most predictable. You'll know what the future holds for a couple of characters not long after you meet them. But it's a show where predictability can still be entertaining.

And the show jumped high on my list for a scene that took place on a football field after the big game was over. It involves people kneeling in prayer, and it summed up part of what the series has to say, and it puts football in its proper place, and it moved me. That scene told me this is a series I'll want to watch a second time, and probably a third, and it will have to pretty bad to get me to quit even then, because I know it has the possibility of a scene like that one.

A couple of friends lately have mentioned trying to go without TV for an extended period — with some exceptions. (One borrowed a review DVD of a show airing during the no-TV period, so it could be watched before video abstinence kicked in.) I have had my own brand of denial for the last day or so, and it isn't fun.

The study in the House of Heldenfels is getting a makeover — new paint on the walls, and new carpet arriving today. I've been working around the painting by clearing out the bookshelves but keeping the computer up and running. Yesterday, the walls by the desk had to be reached, so the computer had to be disconnected, and we spent the rest of the day offline.

Of course, there were plenty of things to do without the computer. We had a nice Father's Day dinner out. (Beef, mmmm.) The bride was busy with painting. I was stamping envelopes for the newsletter for the arts boosters at younger son's school, as well as stuffing envelopes (with help from younger son). And I had the TV for company during that time — flipping between a cable replay of "Batman Begins" and the Indians game.

You can figure out which was more enjoyable. "Batman Begins" is slow in spots, but the Indians were torturous. Even at the end, when losing seemed inevitable, the Indians made it worse; why lose by just one run, after all, when you can give up a walk-off homer and lose by three?

Anyway, the envelopes were stuffed. But, as is often the case, while watching TV I had the urge to look things up — which, most of the time, means going online. Also, I like it there.

Today, Beacon Journal movie critic George Thomas and I were discussing "W.W. and the Dixie Dancekings" — a movie he has never seen, and therefore fails to appreciate as fully as I did when I saw it in a theater during the Southern portion of my life. Because of that chat, I did a Google search that among other things pointed me to  www.varaces.com, the Movie Car Chase Database. Imagine, a place where you can read about "The Da Vinci Code" in terms of its car chases! Is nothing too specialized?

Anyway, I couldn't do that yesterday. Or this morning, when my ritual includes checking e-mail and browsing some favorite sites. I had to wait until I was at the office to check out the latest info on   www.poynter.org/romenesko, let alone www.hollywoodrag.com. It wasn't quite as bad as doing without TV, but it sure reminded me how addicted I am to high-speed information. And, OK, unflattering pictures of celebrities.

Here's the official announcement:

Showtime’s award-winning TV series, “Weeds,” starring Golden Globe winner Mary-Louise Parker, Elizabeth Perkins and Kevin Nealon, is now being made available for the first time on DVD.  Lionsgate will release Weeds: Season One on July 11, and the second season begins airing on Showtime in August.  The DVD set is loaded with special features including “Smoke & Mirrors” - an original marijuana mockumentary, Agrestic “herbal” recipes, audio commentaries from the cast and show creator plus much more.  …

One down note: Full-screen format.  But 5.1 Dolby Digital (as well as 2.0). List price will be $39.98.

Near the end of Anderson Cooper's book "Dispatches From the Edge," he writes that "I've started to believe in signs and magical thinking." The line delighted me. More than once, reading Cooper's book, I thought of Didion, and her book "The Year of Magical Thinking."

I'll come back to that, after noting that I liked Cooper's book quite a bit, and there are plenty of passages that would-be journalists should study. He's especially good about the emotional component of covering disaster zones, and I was reminded that it was Cooper's personal connection to viewers that made him a CNN star. It also explains a lot about why he replaced the chillier, more professorial Aaron Brown. Cooper knows how to touch people viscerally.

One notable passage:

   It was my first trip to Sarajevo. 1993. The first year of the war. A woman was shot crossing the street, near Sniper Alley. .. I followed (the woman and people helping her) to the hospital and into the ER. The doctors allowed me to shoot footage for a while. They were well versed in the kabuki of cameras, but no longer believed that anything about the situation in Bosnia would change.

   "What picture has not already been taken?" a man in the ER asked me. "What haven't you seen? What don't you know? What remains to be said?"

Here's another section I bookmarked, from his Katrina accounts:

  I don't want to go back to New York, to my job, to the way it used to be. Stories about missing coeds in Aruba and runaway brides, stories that titillate but aren't as important. … I want to yell at (friends), "Don't move on! Don't go back to your normal life, get caught up in the petty falseness you see on TV!" It's the same feeling I had weeks after my brother died. I was back at school, and everyone else seemed to have forgotten.

Of course, as a host of a nightly news show, Cooper hasn't exactly gotten his wish about the stories he covers. Here's a recent CNN release: "In her first U.S. television interview since the birth of her daughter, Angelina Jolie spoke with CNN’s Anderson Cooper about her work with refugees in Africa and around the world as well as the birth of her daughter in Namibia last month. The exclusive interview will air on Tuesday, June 20, as part of a special edition of Anderson Cooper 360° marking World Refugee Day from 10 p.m. to midnight (ET).  Jolie sat down with Cooper for nearly an hour earlier this week in Los Angeles."

But here's another passage from the book:

   They die, I live. It's the way of the world. … I used to think that some good would come of my stories, that someone might be moved to act because of what I'd reported. I'm not sure I believe that anymore. One place improves, another falls apart. … No matter how well I write, how truthful my tales, I can't do anything to save the lives of the children here, now.

There's more, but you should just go ahead and read the book. I don't think the use of the word "Dispatches" in the title is casual, because it reminds me of Michael Herr's "Dispatches," a classic memoir of Vietnam, which was also about covering a terrible situation. I don't know if Cooper has read Herr, or Didion, but they echo in his prose.

Didion especially. Part of that comes from the current of grief in Cooper's book, which has him facing the loss of his father and brother, blending his personal emotions (and withholding of them) with the agonies he has seen as a reporter. Didion's "Magical Thinking" is also about grief, from the death of her husband, but I also felt in Cooper's writing repeated nods to Didion's journalism, to her use of detail as social commentary. Didion was generally subtler, though equally barbed, as Cooper, but Cooper's on-page voice is just as compelling.

I also admire Didion and Cooper on a more basic level, because they are able to face their dealings in a forum where all the public can pay witness. Sure, a lot of people are willing to talk in a way about demons in their lives, notably celebrities indulging confessional urges about their (presumably past) substance abuse. But those accounts often feel as if they are still skimming over a surface — I made a mistake, I paid a price, and now a clip from my new movie — where Didion and Cooper are digging deeper. I envy them their ability. Plenty of us manage to avoid confronting our pain privately, let alone in a forum as lasting as a book.

Here's an announcement from CBS today…

The houseguests of BIG BROTHER:  ALL-STARS have a new home on Sundays, one of several summer scheduling changes announced today by CBS.

         The Saturday edition of BIG BROTHER: ALL-STARS will move to Sunday (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT), followed by the relocation of COLD CASE (9:00-10:00 PM. ET/PT) and WITHOUT A TRACE (10:00-11:00 PM/PT) to their new fall time periods, effective July 16.   The move of BIG BROTHER: ALL STARS to Sunday warms the time period for another reality series in the fall when THE AMAZING RACE moves to Sundays at 8 PM.

            The Tuesday edition of BIG BROTHER:  ALL-STARS (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT) and Thursday edition (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT) will not change.                             

WITHOUT A TRACE will continue to be broadcast in its current Thursday time period (10:00-11:00 PM, ET/PT) through the remainder of the summer. 

In other summer scheduling moves, the July 5 premiere of ROCK STAR: SUPERNOVA will be expanded to 90-minutes (8:00-9:30 PM, ET/PT), followed by a 90-minute CSI: MIAMI.

         NCIS and THE UNIT will relocate to Fridays for the duration of the summer, effective July 7 with NCIS broadcast from 8:00-9:00 PM, followed by THE UNIT from 9:00-10:00 PM. (This is a temporary, summer-only move.)

Also, HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER will get two Monday airings, first in its regular 8:30-9:00 PM time period and another following TWO AND A HALF MEN (9:30-10:00 PM, ET/PT) beginning July 10.  THE NEW ADVENTURE OF OLD CHRISTINE returns Aug. 7.

Over the weekend I was talking to my cousin, who lives in London, and the issue of TV came up. (I know, I know, wherever I am, the issue of TV comes up.) We were talking about what he watched and he mentioned "Nighty Night."

"I LOVE 'Nighty Night,' " I said, probably scaring people with my enthusiasm. But I do love the British comedy, which Oxygen has aired here, and delight in following its relentlessly nasty main character, played by Julia Davis, who also writes the show.

So much do I love the show that, when making my regular stroll through TV Tattle, I was distressed to see a link to a Variety story that Darren Star is planning an American version of "Nighty Night." Heresy, I thought. There's no way that a good American version can be made of the show.

And then I thought of "The Office." Yes, there had been adaptations of British shows for American TV before that ("All in the Family," "Sanford and Son") but there was a much longer list of shows that either failed or could not capture the flavor of the overseas originals, or both. But "The Office" — passionately loved in its British form — found a way to be American, uniquely itself (notably in the development of the supporting cast) and still faithful to its predecessor. So if "The Office" can do it, why not "Nighty Night"?

Because it's really difficult, that's why. You have to find writers who not only understand the original but know how to match the tone. You have to get just the right actors — Steve Carell for Ricky Gervais was inspired. And you have to hope that no one at a studio or a network messes you up along the way.

At this point, I'm not convinced that Darren Star can match what Davis did. But I'll be interested to see him try, and more willing to give an American "Nighty Night" a look because "The Office" turned out so well.

Yesterday kind of got away from me. Morning telephone interviews with Tavis Smiley and the Son of Ghoul, mailbag questions, writing the Smiley story for Thursday's paper, some family business,  an afternoon meeting, a little more Anderson Cooper … Days fill up, and they don't always feel as if we control them.

I was thinking about that lack of control later when plowing through a couple of more pilots — NBC's "Kidnapped," Fox's "Standoff," and adding them to a vibe I had already gotten from "Vanished" and "Jericho" and "Justice" and currently-on one-word shows like "Lost" and "24." Even two-worders like "Prison Break." And that this all had to do with 9/11.

I'm not talking about specific links to terrorism in shows (although there is some of that) as much as about the sense that, since 9/11, people feel vulnerable to arbitrary and unpredictable forces — exemplified by a sudden, ruthless kidnapping or a hostage taking or, in the case of "Jericho," a nuclear attack.

Hand in hand with that idea is the one that our system is still ill-equipped to handle those things — assuming our system wants to handle them at all. Think of the high-reaching political forces at work in "24" and "Prison Break." "Vanished" involves the disappearance of a U.S. senator's wife, a disappearance that soon pivots on how little the people in the show know about each other. in "Kidnapped," the taking of a wealthy man's son leads not only to questions about how well law enforcement works but a hint about that something much bigger than a kidnapping is going on.

And, even though TV is dominated by shows about law enforcement and prosecution, this fall brings "Justice," about defense attorneys — which quickly makes the argument that the innocent need good defenders against relentless prosecutors (while simultaneously admitting that the public doesn't like smart defense attorneys in theory).

That's not all that's on TV, of course. There are shows that contend the system is working, at least when it's in the hands of capable and dedicated people. (Choose your own "CSI.") But I still think we're seeing a prolonged reaction to 9/11 and, perhaps, to the Iraq war. You could even argue that "West Wing" finally ran down and "Commander in Chief" didn't catch on because most viewers no longer believe that politicians can solve problems — especially when "24" is pointing to them as a source of trouble.

There's something for further discussion here. For one thing, ABC's fall pilots landed on my desk just today. But this is what's spinning in my head right now. Any comments?

I didn't see as much of the US-Czech Republic soccer match as I had hoped, but by the time I got to it, the Czechs were up 2-0 and things were pretty settled anyway. I'm saving my "Hell's Kitchen" comments until after I watch tonight's second hour; a review disc I had included only the first. And, while the invective hurled was intermittently entertaining, I want to see if it there's anything different in the second hour.

I'll save "Friday Night Lights" for extended consideration later, not only because it deserves such treatment (and praise), but because it's looking even better after I sat through some of Fox's pilots tonight — "Vanished," all right but I'm already beginning to wonder if I could sit through a season; "Justice," where if nothing else I liked seeing Victor Garber play someone who both enjoys his own nastiness and understands the price of it, and "The Wedding Album," which was better than I expected though not quite as good as I thought it was becoming. And, after those intermittent enthusiasms, I still liked "Friday Night Lights" better than the lot, so I want to take some time to explain why. For future reference, it involves a prayer.

And I expect to post fairly soon about Anderson Cooper's book, "Dispatches from the Edge," at least as soon as I read it. So far (about 70 pages in), he has me thinking a lot about Joan Didion, and Michael Herr, and of course Anderson Cooper.

So that's where I've been, and where I am. A good remainder of the night to one and all.

At least, have we seen the end of dating as we used to know it — two people meet, go out together, get to know each other? I've been feeling that it's an outmoded form based on the modern dating shows — "Date My Mom," "Next," shows where the idea of making a match also means making a gimmick. But I was especially disheartened by "How to Get the Guy," premiering tonight on ABC, which indicates that smart, capable women still need to be instructed in things like making eye contact and paying compliments.

At least, the show's two love coaches end up giving advice like that to the four women on the show, and it's especially sad that in the premiere a lot of the advice goes to the one repeatedly branded the "girl next door." Isn't "girl next door" supposed to refer to homespun qualities that might include how to talk to "the guy"?

I had modest hopes for "How to Get the Guy" since I was entertained by "Hooking Up," ABC's matchmaking series from last summer. But "Hooking Up" operated on the assumption that its women had tried other approaches to finding men and just hadn't succeeded, while "Get the Guy" goes back to basics. Way back. The people on "Hooking Up" also seemed more interesting than the ones on "Get the Guy," where the reduction to cultural stereotypes (as in, "girl next door") seemed all too understandable.

After filing some notes here this morning, a few additional points occurred to me, which I have added in bold type like this.

Thursday got away from me as I was trying to get some things written before taking care of some family business during a long weekend. (Happy 80th again, Mom!)

Thanks to all of you who have been checking in, and leaving comments. (See "Back Soon," below.)Fred — things do feel much better here now that we have a somewhat clearer idea of what the next chapter at the Beacon Journal will be. Eric — I STILL haven't gotten to the "Everwood" finale. Maybe this week.

As for the DVDs, this is one of the pains felt by fans of long-running TV shows; a season or two will come out on DVD, not sell as well as expected and be followed by a long, long wait for more seasons, if they come at all.

My suspicion, though, is that DVD is becoming less important as a way of storing and revisiting beloved shows of the past. It may survive in a limited form for collectors, but we're moving ever closer to having shows available via the Internet, so you only need to acquire the specific thing you want — and you save a lot of shelf space at home. Still, for now, it would be nice if a company would commit to releasing all of a series before they issue a single season, so consumers are not left hanging.

More thoughts about DVD: Notes that come in from fans longing for a specific show on DVD often include the complaint about other things that have arrived ahead of their favorites (as Eric noted about the release of "F Troop"). I can understand the frustration. My weekend e-mail, for example, included an announcement of the DVD release of the "Blue Thunder" TV series, which ran for all of 11 episodes in 1984. But the whole DVD issue, which I talked about some in my "JAG" DVD post earlier, keeps coming back to what distributors believe will sell. Action shows seem to have a following, for one thing. And supernatural/sci-fi/cult shows will get a DVD hearing even when they haven't done well in prime time, because the fans will want to own the shows. They'll even buy them again and again in revised configurations. That doesn't explain "F Troop," though; I have to think that it popped up in some survey of shows boomers remember fondly from childhood. (I remember it from childhood, though not especially fondly.)

Other things: My review of "Deadwood" is here, and my column about "The Closer" is here.

Later today I expect to post some notes about "How to Get the Guy," an ABC series premiering tonight at 10, and possibly about "Friday Night Lights," an NBC series premiering this fall, inspired by the book and movie of the same name. (Short take here: I liked it, more perhaps than I expected.) I'm also hoping to get in something about "Hell's Kitchen," the Fox reality series beginning its second season tonight.

I didn't see much TV over the weekend, except for sports, and even that was piecemeal — bits of baseball, track, tennis, soccer. I confess to being a World Cup fan. And, as I have said before, I especially like to watch it in Spanish. I don't speak Spanish, but the narration seems more dramatic, and not understanding the language makes it easier to tune out the talk and focus on the game.

I was going to make a joke here about being busy googling the lyrics to "O Canada" but just about everyone at the Beacon Journal has made an "O Canada" joke by now. (And if you're confused by that comment, read the story here.) I do expect to post a list soon of the many fine Canadians who have worked in U.S. television, as well as an appreciation of "King of Kensington." (And if you don't get that reference, see here.)

Actually, I've just been busy with a few things — watching five new episodes of "Deadwood," working through reader mail (today's mailbag in the Beacon Journal is here), digging through DVDs for tomorrow's column, watching "Treasure Hunters" for a Channels cover — and taking care of some family commitments.

The "Everwood" finale still waits on the DVR, and I never got around to writing about how much involved I got in last week's telecast of the Spelling Bee.

On that topic: I was studying the players for signs of weakness, trying to spell along — well, with the few words I had heard before — and even screaming at the set near the end. As the TV commentary and the post-elimination interviews showed, anything can be turned into a TV sportscast, and I am happy to play along.

And thank you to those of you who have been posting comments. I do read them, and when it seems appropriate, I reply.

More later today.

Fans of "The Shield," me among them, have feared that the 10 episodes planned for 2007 were going to be the last. But there will be more than that. Although those 10 have been thought of as a continuation of the current season, FX is now treating them as a separate, sixth season. (Forest Whitaker, so good on the show recently, will be back on a limited basis for that sixth season.) And there will be a seventh after that.

I don't really care what they call them — although the separate-season labels could lead to an extra DVD set being squeezed out of the show — just as long as the makers of the show are convinced they have more good stories to tell. Here's the official announcement from FX:

FX has set the timetable for the conclusion of its Emmy and Golden Globe Award-winning drama The Shield, ordering a seventh season of 13 episodes that will bring the groundbreaking series to a close in late-2007 or early-2008, following the upcoming 10-episode sixth season which begins in early 2007, announced John Landgraf, President and General Manager of FX Networks.

Shawn Ryan, The Shield’s creator, executive producer and writer, will continue in those duties as day-to-day showrunner for the remaining 23 episodes. Production of the 10-episode sixth season began in April and will conclude in July, and production of the series final season will take place in mid-2007. The final two seasons will bring the overall total number of episodes for the series to 88.

"It has been the privilege of everyone at FX to work with Shawn Ryan, Michael Chiklis and their colleagues on The Shield," said Landgraf. "It has always been our intent to have the show exit television as it entered, as one of the best dramas series ever.  We’re thrilled Shawn has come up with a great way to end the series and that it will require one final season for his vision to reach completion.  We look forward, along with fans of the show, to following Vic Mackey on his final ride."

Shawn Ryan said, "The writers and I weren’t quite ready to step away from these characters just yet. We asked FX for an additional 13 episodes to conclude the show properly and, as always, the network graciously let us do what we thought was best for the show."

The semi-season finale of "The Sopranos" on Sunday was a frustrating hour. As much as I understood what the show was doing, I wasn't crazy about the way it went about its business.

To be sure, I came to it with an increased longing for satisfaction. I watched it at about 11:30 Sunday night because the bride and I had spent the earlier part of the evening at a Cleveland Indians game. A very bad Indians game. It's a good thing we filled out our All-Star ballots before the game was under way. But I'll come back to that.

Once we got home, I had the DVR playing back "The Sopranos." This was the last new episode for a bit. HBO has shown 13 in this cycle, with eight remaining for telecast in 2007. That in theory creates an extended final season, but Sunday's telecast felt like a season finale. The Soprano clan had gathered the way it tends to for season finales. And most of the big drama had happened in the episodes leading up to this one.

As I said, I know what the show was trying to do. These episodes have come back repeatedly to the issue of whether people can change or not, especially Tony, whose shooting earlier this season should have been a life-changing experience. In some ways, the show has demonstrated, Tony cannot change. He has tried to stop his infidelity, but just can't do it. He is drawn to women for mere lust (as was the case with his brief encounter with a Bing dancer) and for more complicated reasons (most recently embodied by the real-estate agent played by Julianna Margulies). But, in his meeting with a hospitalized Phil, Tony did indicate that he has changed, that he has no stomach for pointless feuds and macho posturing. There was a further indication of it when he took no action against Christopher upon learning that the real-estate agent and Christopher were canoodling; the old Tony considered women his possessions even if he was no longer involved with them, and he was still in pursuit of Julianna.

Change was also a factor in the different view we got of A.J., whose surliness at last diminished when he met a woman who gave him a comfort zone, an older woman who was domestic in a way that he had not seen with his club-hopping contemporaries. To see A.J. bond with her son was to remember that somewhere inside the younger Soprano was a sweet kid who had gotten lost in poses and attitude.

But as much as we saw those characters change, they were counterposed against the ghost of Vito (whose inability to change ended up killing him) and Christopher's dark shadow. As much as any character on "The Sopranos," Christopher has wanted to believe in change — to believe that he can change from a thug into a writer, or a producer, or a decent married man. But as much as he dreams of change, he cannot change his most basic self — an addict.

Not just a drug addict, either. Christopher seems addicted to self-destruction; he knows his drug habit risks his future with Tony, and that taking up with one of Tony's women has, in the past, been as great a risk. At the end of Sunday's episode, it's not clear if Christopher has once again given up his habits. (We know he has gone to an NA meeting, but we don't know if it's a stopgap or a real step back to recovery.) But even if he has done that for the moment, odds are that Christopher will lapse into drugs once again, because that's what he does. And sooner or later, it's going to kill him.

And in between, we have Tony's rival Phil, put in a place where he needs to change, but still full of rage over past grievances. (And I loved the way Little Carmine unknowingly pushed exactly the wrong button with Phil — proving Carmine's inability to change into the wise leader he wishes to be.) Tony has brought him the message of change. Now we'll have to wait to see if Phil learns from it.

So there was a lot of thematic business in the episode. But it didn't play out well dramatically. For most of the hour, we were offered a mood of dread and danger — that Phil's guys were going to take out one of Tony's, that Christopher was going to make a fatal error, that Tony was going to revert, that Phil's illness might pass power into the hands of guys trigger-happy enough to firebomb Tony's home during the holidays. (At least, after all those threats, I wondered if that would be the episode's end.) And then? No power, no force, no shock. Just ideas, and a long wait to see where the story goes.

Unfortunately, I knew where the Indians had gone.C.C. Sabathia gave up two home runs in the first inning, the Angels were leading 7-0 by the end of the third. When we left, midway through the seventh, the score had ballooned to 11-0 and the lackluster Indians gave no hint they would mount a memorable rally. In fact, they let the score go to 14-0 before they scored a couple of meaningless runs, and we were home in time to see the final out on TV.

We still had fun at the ballpark, and the rain that threatened early in the game never became more than a few drops. Good seats. Good junk food. But the Indians disappointed, not so much because they lost, or because the pitching staff was way off, but because some of the players seemed to decide the game was over long before it really was.

When Jhonny Peralta declined to give maximum effort to prevent a base hit, an angry fan a few rows above us yelled, "Omar would have dived for it!" Not only that, Omar probably would have stopped the ball. As I said, we left early. But a lot of fans were gone before we were; it was a work night, after all, and the Indians weren't giving fans anything to chat about happily on the job the next day.