If you haven't watched tonight's "Rescue Me," come back after you have, because I am going to talk about plot developments.

And I am ticked off about them.

If you've read anything about "Rescue Me" the last of weeks, then you know about the debate over a scene where Tommy Gavin — Denis Leary's character — attacked his ex-wife Janet. To some viewers, myself included, it looked as if he raped her, and that she eventually enjoyed it. Others have looked for a less damaging interpretation; Robert Bianco in this morning's USA Today said that "to imply that (the scene) endorsed or trivialized spousal abuse is to misread the scene."

Bianco also urged that "before we decide the story doesn't work, let's see where the talented people in charge at 'Rescue Me' plan to take it."

Well, we saw some more tonight. And, as I said, I didn't like it.

In the key scene tonight, Janet showed up at Tommy's place and had a brief, aggressive sexual encounter with him. She may or may not have been doing it because of a public exhibition Tommy put on with his brother's ex (as part of a scheme to make Janet and his brother jealous). That quadrangle will interact more next week, according to the previews, and there's a fifth player — Tommy's sometimer Sheila — who could become pivotal.

But this doesn't really get us past the earlier scene. Nor does it justify Tommy's earlier actions. It indicates that Tommy is caught up in a tempest of sex and near sex, sure. Only the previous scene wasn't about sex. It was about Tommy's uncontainable violence and rage, which were unleashed against Janet — an extension of the beating Tommy gave his brother.

"Rescue Me" has not dealt with that side of what happened — unless it is, indeed, trying to to trivialize or diminish it. Janet's reaction sure seems minimal.

There were other scenes tonight that I enjoyed to some degree, but when I was trying to get back into my old "Rescue Me" groove, I kept thinking about that rape scene and what they were going to do about it. So far they haven't done much. And the show won't work for me until they do something more serious about it.

Dan Rather has come and gone. There's some debate over whether he followed Shannen Doherty's tears with some of his own, but it was clear that he choked up some when talking about Edward R. Murrow.

I've written a column about his press conference for tomorrow's Beacon Journal and will post a link later. But I didn't get into a couple of things there. One was Rather's reference to having worked for a living — meaning tough manual labor when he was young — and how television is pretty eapressy compared to that. It was interesting to me because I remember him saying much the same thing at a press conference in New York City about 20 years ago. (So many things in my life now come with the phrase "about 20 years ago.") It always stuck with me — as a reminder that, no matter how self-important some TV newsgatherers may get, they're doing it for an audience of people home after a day of genuinely hard work.

The other thing I didn't get into is what a boon Rather is to HDNet. As I said when he left CBS, he was going to end up working somewhere, because network newscasters do. (Ted Koppel will be here tomorrow, wearing his new hat for the Discovery Channel.) And one reason they get work is that they're brand names, and they bring attention to places that might not get so noticed. HDNet is mentioned in a lot of places today, and will be in other places tomorrow, because it had Rather in the house. Even though he has only done a promotional tape for the channel so far, he's already earning his paycheck.

I've written some harsh things about Shannen Doherty over the years. But she was in very good form today as she talked about "Breaking Up," a show she is doing for Oxygen.

She was smiling, joking, seemingly relaxed (although she later said she fears live audiences). She also showed a sweet vulnerability when talking about her media reputation.

She teared up a little when talking about her bad press, particularly because her family reads it — and her mother was in the room during the press conference.

As the tears fell, I got the microphone and asked a gentle question about "Breaking Up." The show has Doherty helping people to end bad matches; in a clip, she tells a guy that his girlfriend is dumping him — and the guy began to make a play for Doherty.

So I asked if, among other things, this was the only one to try that.

"No," she said with a grin. And, happy that she was able to get away from the emotional stuff, she suddenly added, "Thank you. … I love you. Are you single?"

"No," I said. "And not looking to break up either."

I should add that I wasn't trying to bail her out of a difficult situation(In fact, I was reminded later that the guy who made her sad is very good at the gentle question, where I'm more commonly cast in the role of grouch.) I just had a question to ask. But she sure seemed to like the way it worked out, and I didn't mind it either. As a colleague said to me afterward: "Blog gold."

Right now I am sitting in a meeting room while Oxygen shows a clip from *li Fight Girls, *lf of a new documentary series about women doing Muay Thai fighting. (Mauy Thai apparently translates as "Thai Boxing," but it's more than that, with a lot of martial arts moves.) A live demonstration is also promised.

"I love this sport," says one fighter, while two other women show their moves with the Muay Thai expert Master Toddy. The name makes me think of some Richie Rich in knee pants, but I'm not going to tell him that.

This is not a big room and the smack of fists and feet against pads sound pretty scary. My ribs are sore just from listening. And we're being told that the temperature in the ring in Thailand gets to 110 degrees, so these are tough folks.

Now they're talking about it being a mental sport — although it's also one where the best strategy is to knock out your opponent before you get knocked out. After one of those punches I just heard, I would probably just roll up in a ball and beg for mercy. (A colleague, asking the fighters a question, promises up front that it will be a friendly one.)

Someone asks about the dating life for women who can beat the daylights out of many men. The answer: They date their trainers.

Former NBA player Doug Christie says he would like to get back in the NBA — and one of the places he likes is Cleveland.

Christie played with league runner-up Dallas last season  before an ankle problem led to his retirement. Before that he had been with the Knicks, Lakers and Kings among others.

But at a press conference today, Christie said he is back in playing shape and looking for a team. And the Cavaliers are "one of the teams on our list," he told me after the press conference.

"I think they're an up and coming team," he said. "They did a lot of good things in the playoffs.  … There a lot of good components, and they've definitely got a good coach; I played against him in college."

His wife Jackie also spoke well of Cleveland, which she considered "real family-oriented." And a new TV show will make clear that Jackie is key to any decisions the Christies make.

In fact, she runs the family, according to clips from  *li Committed: The Christies, *lf a premiering in October on BET J. She doesn't even allow him to look at other women.

Some may consider the relationship odd. BET J (the reformatted and retitled BET Jazz channel) calls them "a train wreck," and refers to the Christies as "a hen-pecked husband who acts like his stage mother."

Doug and Jackie have a different view (albeit one that allows Doug to admit he's a little bit afraid of Jackie.)

"What has American done to love?" Doug said. "Why is it odd for me to love my wife and to want to be with her?"

And even while the promotional material seems mocking, BET J executive vice president Paxton Baker said the show is ultimately "a classic American love story" because the Christies stay together. "There is no tragedy in this marriage," he said.

You will probably get some whining here during the press tour. I am away from home, and yesterday I was away while my wife and younger son had to deal with megastorms, a power outage and water in the basement.

But even before I got here, I knew there would be times when I realized I have a cool job. Take last night. I am sitting and talking with colleagues who have also been friends for many years. Then, nearby, we see Mark Cuban. Yes, the Dallas Mavericks guy. The billionaire. He's here because HDNet, which he owns, is having a press conference tomorrow with Dan Rather, who since leaving CBS has made a deal with Cuban's operation. But at this point Cuban was just walking through the hotel.

We wave. Cuban waves back. Led by the TV critic from Dallas, we go over to say hello. Cuban is polite, even cheerful; he's had dinner with Rather and is now waiting for word about a possible basketball deal. But he's talking about Rather, he's talking basketball — and not only his team's. (All right, a lot of it is about Dallas. And he hasn't forgiven the refs yet.) When other people draw near, he pauses, extends his hand to them and says, "Hi, I'm Mark."

Believe what you want about him. I think he's a good guy, a very basic sort of person. I thought so when I first met him a couple of years ago and I think it still. Also, as cool as my job is (since it gives me a chance to do things like stand around with Cuban), he has a much cooler one.

Michael Ruggiero is vice president for programming and scheduling at Starz. He was been onstage while a clip was run from "Going to Pieces," a new documentary about slasher films, which Starz will air in October. The clip had violence — duh — and nudity.

"Clearly the Disney Channel presentation has concluded," Ruggiero said.

Ruggiero had a lot more to say, probably too much for an executive when the subject is horror and the panel also includes Wes Craven. But questions were eventually directed to Craven including one by me, which — at Starz's request — included identifying myself by name and publication.

"Akron, Ohio?" Craven said with a big smile. He noted that he was from Cleveland. I knew that, of course, but it was nice to make a connection. And Craven was iteresting — making slasher films sound more important to the culture than they may seem — both during the press conference and when we chatted briefly afterward.

I had hoped for more time with him. But, as sometimes happens at these things, he was taken out one door when I was waiting at another. Then, when a few of us caught up with him, after a couple of questions a publicist rather insistently took him away from another interview. In any case, from the press conference and the chat after, I got enough for a decent little column for tomorrow's Beacon Journal. (The column is here.)

Because I was chasin' Craven, I missed the first part of a press conference for a new Starz documentary about Hunter S. Thompson. I'm an old school Thompson fan, and the added attraction was the presence of Nick Nolte, who narrates the documentary and who knew Thompson.

Time and wear are evident on Nolte, visible even under a fedora and a white beard; rasp in the voice has gotten heavy, too. But he was — is — a pretty good actor, and attention was paid when he recited Thompson's suicide note. Nolte thought it was like poetry. He made it sound that way, too.

After that press conference, I went back to the room and wrote the Craven column around visits from hotel staffers trying to fix my air conditioning. Fortunately, they did so before the room became an even better imitation of a sauna. I also wrestled with a few computer problems — the joy of a new laptop on the road — before finally managing to get the column sent. Then I went down to a gathering by the TV Guide Channel because I wanted a glimpse of Joan Rivers. Turned out she had come and gone, and in a message delivered by satellite at that. Oh, well. Tomorrow will bring new adventures.

We've had the first session and several important press tour firsts:

– First remarks by a British executive (there are surprisingly many in U.S. TV), Paul Lee of ABC Family.

– First large panel, 8 people for "3 Moons Over Milford": five actors and three executive producers.

– First awkward pause, when the "Milford" panel started taking questions and the assembled critics had to muster up some.

– In spite of the first awkward pause, "Milford" was also the first session to run overtime.

– First comment suggesting depth. "3 Moons" is about a small town dealing with the possible end of the world, since the moon has split into three pieces. (One producer called it "Picket Fences at the End of the World.") Hence co-star Nora Dunn's declaration that "the moon is a metaphor, I think, for desire and hope. … How do you deal withh your hopes and dreams when you look at the moon and it's in pieces?"

Next up was the ABC Family movie "Fallen," about a half-man, half-angel. The promotional clip included the would-be catchy line, "Go back to heaven and leave me the hell alone!"

Then the Disney Channel plugged the upcoming "Cheetah Girls 2." It's been three years since the original "CG" so I asked if "High School Musical" had helped get the sequel going. I got an answer about how busy the actresses are. But the press material notes that "CG2" uses a lot of the songwriters from "HSM."

Best line: A reference to actress Belinda Peregrin as "the Hilary Duff of Latin America."  She was wearing a hat that, for want of better description, resembled a beanie with a peace sign.

More later, including Raven-Symone's discussion of her name changes.

About half an hour ago, I was on an airport shuttle with three other people. We were talking about "Rescue Me" and other TV topics. Three of us write about television for a living. The fourth person works for the Weather Channel.

Yes, I am in Pasadena and in roughly an hour the TV critics' press tour kicks off with a session by the Disney Channel and ABC Family. You can find an introduction of sorts that I wrote for today's Beacon Journal on www.ohio.com.

In addition to the stories I write for the Beacon Journal, I expect to post frequent notes here — including some from the sessions in progress, assuming I have competently made the transition to wireless.

"Chappelle's Show: The Lost Episodes" begins tonight (and will be on DVD on July 25) as Comedy Central harvests the remains of its aborted megabuck deal with Dave Chappelle.

The comedian was one of Comedy Central's biggest stars when he made the deal, only to drop out while the show was in production. And you can see exactly why in tonight's telecast (at 9 p.m.) as a couple of sketches show Dave dealing with the idea of being really famous and really rich.

The sketches in toto are only sporadically funny, and the show is padded with introductions and jokes by Charlie Murphy and Donnell Rawlings. But I did laugh hard at times, especially in a bit where Dave decides to use his new fortune to get revenge on some people from his past. And I thought a lot about Bob Hope while watching.

Like Chappelle, Bob Hope made his bones as an outsider, as a mocker of convention. There were some differences — Hope often played coward and the sneak, while Chappelle is more directly confrontational — but they both often came back to the idea of hey, I'm just saying what a lot of people in the audience are thinking — even if they're too nice to say it.

In both cases, they also received considerable financial rewards for their efforts. But money changed things. It was much more difficult to accept Hope as an outsider when you saw him playing golf with presidents or read about his fortune. And while Hope worked long and hard into his eighties, he did not do so as inventively as he had when he was younger; the jokes were more automatic, the delivery closer to phoning it in.

Based on tonight's sketches, Chappelle found himself in a tough spot. He wasn't some outside guy anymore. He was rich, he knew it and, even more importantly, his audience knew it. So he had to face that issue in his comedy. But once he had done that, what next? Would he be willing to do material that didn't work? Would he accept that he could phone it in and still collect a big check? He may not have looked specifically at Bob's arc, but he surely anticipated the consequences. And he took a different road — one that got him out of town.

ABC has yanked "How To Get the Guy" with two episodes still to go.  There's a chance that the network will make the remaining episodes available as downloads for the 3.5 million people (including me) who watched the show.

"We are all disappointed, but what can you do?" Michelle — AKA "the career girl" told me in an e-mail.  "It's sorta like dating:  you go into it hopeful, but sometimes, inexplicably, it just ends."

Also, in case you want to see my longer gripe about the Emmys for today's Beacon Journal, it is here. I'm still irked, too, possibly more than I was yesterday, since the craziness of it all has sunk in.

One of the funniest shows in prime time was the Drew Carey-hosted "Whose Line Is It Anyway." So here's some good news:

It is outrageous, ridiculous, somewhat absurd, but absolutely HILARIOUS and it’s coming to DVD with Warner Home Video’s release of Whose Line Is It Anyway? Season 1, Volume 1 on September 26, 2006.  Voted as one of the top requested series for release on DVD by fans on TVshowsonDVD.com, Warner Home Video will be bringing the laughter of Wayne Brady, Colin Mochrie, Ryan Stiles and Drew Carey home to on DVD for $24.98 SRP. Order due date is August 22, 2006.

Unfortunately, the set includes only 10 episodes, besides some extras.

A new season of "Monk" begins tomorrow night, followed by another quirky detective in "Psych." We've got our share of twitchy snoops right now — "Monk," "Medium," "The Closer," "Ghost Whisperer" — but "Psych" may have the ultimate tic: none.

It involves a guy who has been well trained in observation (thanks to his policeman father), so well that he can figure out things no one else can. But, since no one believes you can simply observe the truth — figure that no one on this show has ever read Sherlock Holmes — he claims to be psychic. The weird is more plausible.

It's not a bad show, although the 90-minute premiere feels padded and the premise, once established, doesn't have very far to go. I have more hope for the father/son relationship as a reason to watch than I do for the sleuthing itself. Of course, I feel similarly about "The Closer," engaged by the characters even when I'm bored by the mystery. And I always try to watch "The Closer."

I don't always watch "Monk," even though I usually enjoy it when I do. And tomorrow night's premiere has some good things in it, notably in the way Monk has to deal with his grief over the loss of his wife, with an unlikely helper — another version of himself.

That version is played by Stanley Tucci (who, you will remember, worked with Tony Shalhoub in "Big Night"), as an actor preparing to play Monk in a movie. There's some fun stuff, as Monk's cohorts offer tips to Tucci on being Monk, and in the scenes where the two of them face that old grief. But there is also a lot of predictable material. After all, the actor-imitating-life thing has been done before on TV and in the movies, and the gag well is pretty dry.

Most years I'm in California when the Emmy nominations are announced; more than once I have actually gone to the Emmy announcement — at 5:35 a.m. L.A. time. Even those years when I didn't go, I was up early to get the nomination bundle and try to figure it out.

This year, I'm still in the East, was able to sleep until a reasonable hour — and am nonetheless befuddled by the nominations. First glance suggests lots of sentimental favorites, and people are already buzzing over the omissions of "Lost" and "Desperate Housewives." Looks like there's still no love for Lauren Graham (although "Gilmore" had an off year) and I haven't seen any major praise for my beloved "Veronica Mars."

But at least I'm not yawning while thinking about it.

More later.

Added later: Having looked closely at the long Emmys list, I have gone from mere disappointment to prolonged rant — and not just because of Kevin James, mentioned in Roger's comment below. "Veronica Mars" got skunked — and you know that I was hoping for a Jason Dohring nomination in particular — while the academy contrived ways to get one nomination to "Reba," among other shows. Little attention for "Over There." Edie Falco, who had that "just give her the doggone Emmy" vibe in that hospital-bedside scene on "Sopranos," did not even get nominated.

Looks as if the old guard has prevailed, thanks to the blue-ribbon panels. And even though I am happy with some noms (Steve Carell, Kyra Sedgwick, Chandra Wilson, Sandra Oh, Jeremy Piven), I can come up with a much longer list of omissions (let me throw in the rest of the "Office" ensemble, Hugh Laurie, "Rescue Me" and "Lost" for drama series), and the smoke starts pouring out my ears.

A later addition: If you have had enough contemplation of the Emmys — I haven't quite cleared my head, but I'm trying — then you might find some amusement in my column today about dating shows. I don't think I quite conveyed how dispiriting "Foursome" is, but you'll get the general idea.

For the most part I have been sitting out the Star-Barbara brawl over "The View" because, well, I didn't care a whole lot. And I didn't care because I hardly ever watch "The View."

Make that almost never. Make that, I can't remember the last time before today. It's not just that I'm working when the show is on. Watching TV is part of my working. There are two sets flanking my desk, and a couple of DVRs that could be running at home.

Bottom line is this: I can't stand the show. I have no connection to the core characters, and no part of me cares what Elisabeth Hasselbeck has to say about men and their hamburgers.

(That's not a euphemism, by the way. She was talking about hamburgers.)

I mention the burgers because it was one of the topics on the show this morning when I tried to watch. It may even have been the only topic. In about three minutes, my mind was befogged and my ears were bleeding. I felt I had discharged my professional duty of looking at the post-Star "View" and could move on, conscience clear.

Now, there was a moment when I wondered if I was simply the wrong audience for the show — that it is not targeted at middle-aged men, so I was just off the meter. But I watch plenty of things aimed at an audience that is not me. I even like some of them. Want to talk "Gilmore Girls"? "Veronica Mars"?

No, I think it's just that "The View" is bad. Pointless. The kind of show that is palatable only when you read or watch brief highlights, thereby avoiding brain-killing prolonged exposure.

I'll be back, of course, when Rosie starts. I may even last more than three minutes. Well, if Rosie is doing all the talking.

(A small update: It's now the morning of July 4, and "The View" is a "previously recorded" show from after Meredith's departure but before Star left. Elisabeth is explaining that she can tell how women voted in the last presidential election based on their footwear. Joy is talking about what women's shoes do to feet, based on what she sees while getting pedicures. Star has shown off a very high heel. And coming up: two-time Academy Award winner Meryl Streep …)

Close viewers of the "Rocky" saga will note that a great deal of "Rocky III" goes along as if "Rocky II" never happened. Aside from his winning the title at the end of "R2," Rocky has put aside all the problems he was facing — from poor financial wisdom to functional illiteracy — as "R3" begins. Hollywood sometimes doesn't pay attention to its own history.

I bring this up because, after taking care of some yardwork this morning, the Family Heldenfels went to a matinee of "Superman Returns." Most enjoyable, but also a movie that picks and chooses from the Man of Steel's onscreen history. Even that nod to the George Reeves era (courtesy of cameos by Noel Neill and Jack Larson) is window dressing. This is a movie that remembers Christopher Reeve's first two Superman movies — and skips over the woeful third and fourth ones.

This thing is awash in homages of "Superman" and "Superman II" including: Brando's Jor-El, the photograph of Glenn Ford on the Kent family mantel, the arc of Parkey Posey's character being so close to Valerie Perrine's and, most important, putting Clark and Lois's relationship in a place that fits nicely with where they were in "Superman II."

I didn't entirely mind this, either. "Superman Returns" was made for an audience that has not lingered much over the comic books and graphic novels, "Lois & Clark" and "Smallville" and animated series. It's more for people who haven't watched a Superman saga since "Superman II" in 1980. Indeed, as I watched, I thought that this was the movie I had been waiting a quarter-century for.

The only pang of pain came from the absence of Christopher Reeve; I wish he had had a chance at this script, to complete a "Superman" trilogy, instead of the third and fourth films he made.

Oh, Brandon Routh is fine as the new Superman. But you can see Reeve in his performance, and even hear Reeve in Routh's intonations. 

Most of today was spent outside, soaking up sun and digging up bushes. Two transplanted, four retired, with the new stuff waiting for the spaces once occupied by the retired shrubbery. It felt good to do, although my hands, arms, elbows, shoulders, wrists, palms and whatever are a little achy now. But the transplanting made for some nice improvements in one spot, and the new bushes will do likewise once we get them in.

Now, for the Indians. We were relaxing late in the day, and channel-flipping while thinking about pizza, and there among the premium channels was "Major League II," the second in the wish-fulfillment saga of the Indians (and a precursor to their real-life, on-field success). We lingered until the movie's end. (I know, the first one is better, but the second one is still OK.) I made note of all the actors in it who now have TV series — Dennis Haysbert in "The Unit," Charlie Sheen in "Two and a Half Men," Omar Epps in "House." And it was nice to see the Indians win a big game.

I had no such optimism for the real Indians, especially after watching last night's debacle, an ending so horrible I kept flipping over from "The Wire" to watch in nightmare-building disbelief. But I was curious enough to go to their game after the movie ended, just in time to see Hafner's grand slam, which gave the Indians a five-run lead.

The real game wasn't — isn't — done. The Reds have gotten one run back, making it 8-4, and it's still only the sixth inning. The movie was tidier, and therefore more satisfying.