Funny thing is, though, I wasn’t joking: I really did get selected to receive a Gary Gnu photo which — unless I very much miss my guess — will bear the signature of puppeteer Jim Martin, who brought Gary to life on the show.

Here, for your reading enjoyment (and possible education) are a few that crossed my mind. Some were on broadcast networks, others were in syndication, but they all clearly left their mark on me in one way or the other, since it’s been at least 30 years since I’ve seen full episodes of most of them. Mind you, that’s not to say that they’d hold up for me now, but I’ll say this much for ‘em: every damned one of the theme songs has a hook that’ll stick in your brain for the long haul…except maybe the one that leads off this list, but, damn, even that’s screaming to be sampled by an industrious DJ somewhere.

1. Curiosity Shop (1971-1973)

Chuck Jones, the man behind some of the most memorable Warner Brothers cartoons of all time, brought his unique sensibilities into a live-action setting for this educational program which, at least as far as ABC was concerned, seemed like a perfect opportunity to pull in some of the audience of this new PBS show called “Sesame Street” which was all the rage for the single-digit set. Thanks to Jones’s cartoon connections, he was able to pull such luminaries as Mel Blanc, June Foray, and Don Messick to give voice to the various characters, but there were also actual cartoons incorporated into the show, including animated adaptations of such comic strips as “Dennis the Menace,” “The Wizard of Id,” and “Miss Peach,” and trivia buffs may also be interested to know that the Schoolhouse Rock song “Three Is A Magic Number” made its debut on the show.

2. New Zoo Revue (1972-1977)

It’s rather hard to wrap one’s brain around the fact that there were 196 episodes of this series, which taught life lessons to youngsters through the actions of Henrietta Hippo, Charlie the Owl, and Freddie the Frog. (Are there even 196 lessons to learn about life?) The trio of animals were guided through their trials and tribulations by their human pals, Doug and Emmy Jo, played by real life couple Doug Momary and Emily Peden, with occasional guidance from their mailman, Mr. Dingle, played under old-age makeup by an often-unrecognizable Chuck Woolery.

3. The Harlem Globetrotters Popcorn Machine (1974)

Why give the Harlem Globetrotters their own live-action Saturday morning series? Because they were already pop culture icons by that point anyway – this was well after the debut of their Saturday morning cartoon – and kids loved them. Why was the show called “The Harlem Globetrotters Popcorn Machine”? Your guess is as good as mine.

4. Big Blue Marble (1974-1983)

In the days before cable, kids’ choices for educational programming beyond “Sesame Street” and “The Electric Company” were pretty limited, but if you were interested in learning about other children your age both in America and elsewhere, “Big Blue Marble” was a great way to expand your knowledge. Some of the segments were done documentary-style, others were dramatizations, but the end result was a lot of new information entering young minds.

5. Uncle Croc’s Block (1975-1976)

You’ll never look at Charles Nelson Reilly the same way again after you watch the film version of his one man show, “The Life of Reilly,” but if you haven’t seen that yet, then you might want to watch some clips from this Filmation series first. A precursor to “Pee-Wee’s Playhouse” with just the tiniest hint of what would now be called an Adult Swim sensibility, Reilly plays Uncle Croc, a very grouchy kids TV show host who hates his job and is perpetually annoyed with the incompetence of his co-workers. Trapped somewhere between being ahead of its time and paying homage to shows that the current Saturday morning viewers didn’t know anything about, “Uncle Croc’s Block” started as an hour-long series, was cut to 30 minutes, then got the axe altogether.

6. Hot Fudge (1976-1980)

This syndicated series had some of the creepier-looking puppets seen on kids TV in the ’70s, but it also had some of the grooviest, funkiest tunes. I have no recollection as to whether it was actually funny, but I sure do remember the songs.

7. Animals, Animals, Animals (1976-1982)

While parents were watching Hal Linden play the title character in the ABC sitcom “Barney Miller,” their kids were enjoying the actor’s side job as the host of this nature show, which was part of a small window of children’s programming offered by the network on Sunday mornings.

8. The Skatebirds (1977-1978)

An unabashed attempt by Hanna-Barbera to duplicate the success of “The Banana Splits” almost a decade before while cashing in on the rollerskating craze that was sweeping the nation, “The Skatebirds” followed the format of the earlier series almost to the letter, using the birds to bookend the various other segments of the show, including “Mystery Island,” “Wonder Wheels,” “Three Robonic Stooges,” and the “Clue Club” spin-off, “Woofer and Whimper: Dog Detectives.” Despite its limited competition on Sunday mornings, “The Skatebirds” most decidedly did not prove to be the next “Banana Splits,” departing the airwaves in under a year.

9. Marlo and the Magic Movie Machine (1977-1980)

Probably the most obscure show on the list, this show starred Laurie Faso as the mustachioed Marlo, a computer whiz whose so-called Magical Movie Machine showed him various film clips and even told the occasional joke. Although it was ostensibly in syndication for three years, it only played in my neck of the woods for a year, as I recall, a fate it likely shared in other regions of the country. Still, dig that ‘stache…

10. Kids Are People Too (1978-1982)

My big memory of this show was that the original host left after a year, and I was glad, because I never particularly liked him. As it turned out, Bob McAllister was a noted TV personality, particularly in New York City, having hosted “Wonderama” for the decade immediately prior to joining “Kids Are People Too.” Just goes to show you what I know. Anyway, McAllister apparently didn’t love the fact that the show was catering more toward a teenage audience than the younger crowd, and his departure led to the arrival of Michael Young, who later became a major player in the world of TV production. The best thing about “Kids,” though, were its guests, who were way hipper than any other kid’s show, including everyone from KISS to Patti Smith, Cheap Trick to Blondie.

Bullz-Eye: From what I understand, it sounds like we’re both on the same page as far as being unable to refresh our memories on “China Beach”: they tell me my copy of the complete-series set is due to arrive tomorrow.

Robert Picardo: Oh, good for you! But I did already get mine. [Laughs.] They got it to me yesterday, and I devoted some time to it. I watched a couple of the bonus features. There are 10 hours of bonus features, and I guess I watched about two hours of them, or thereabouts. And then, even though I had to get up very early this morning to do these interviews, I thought, “Well, I’ll pop in the pilot and just watch the first five minutes to see the quality of the transfer.” And, of course, I watched the entire pilot. I couldn’t turn it off! So that was a good thing. The fact that I was so captivated was a good sign.

I’m really happy to see that the show, which was a period piece to begin with…I mean, we made it in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, but it was set from ’68 to ’71, principally, and then the last season we kind of skipped into the future as late as 1987. But basically it was a period piece to begin with, so in that respect it hasn’t aged. It’s still a great time capsule and doesn’t feel dated, and I’m so proud of the work in it. Dana is extraordinary, Marg Helgenberger is extraordinary, but the whole ensemble is just great. You know, it was a very special time in my career, and I know and I’ve heard Dana and Marg and pretty much all of the actors say the same, so to have it reach a new audience is really very gratifying and exciting.

BE: What do you remember about your first read of the pilot script?

RP: I remember reading it and thinking it was great. And important. It felt like an honor to be part of something like that, which was really about something, I mean, obviously, you’d…I guess you’d say the success of the movie “Platoon” led to the possibility of major television networks doing Vietnam dramas. And, of course, “Tour of Duty,” our sister show… [Laughs.] Well, that was really more about “Platoon” and about the soldiers fighting. What was unique and special about “China Beach” was that the point-of-view character was a woman, an Army nurse who served there. So it gave the show a special perspective. It wasn’t about combat, it was about saving lives. It was about supporting and helping soldiers. The war was like an offstage character.

We were the support group there—the nurses, the doctors, the USO people—to sort of support and patch the guys up and either send them back or, if they were too injured, send them home. And more often than not, if they were dead, you’d offer the last gesture of respect to them. That’s what Michael Boatman’s character did, the guy who ran the grave registration. What a terrific role, and an extraordinary performance for a 24-year-old guy. I mean, to have so much…what’s the word? He created such a character who had seen everything, and he was totally believable as a guy who…that was his life, just all of that death and loss. And what that had turned him into was sort of a 24-year-old old man. Anyway, it’s just great writing. William Broyles, who served in Vietnam and who co-created the series, said that he feels it’s the best war drama that’s ever been on television. And, well, yeah, you could say that he’s a little partial, since he co-created it. [Laughs.] But you know what? I agree with him.

BE: Regarding other war-themed series, to read the one-liner about your character on Wikipedia (“head surgeon and womanizer dealing with being drafted into Army and away from his family”), he sounds like the perfect amalgam of Hawkeye Pierce and B.J. Hunnicutt from “M*A*S*H.”

RP: Yeah, he… Well, first of all, “M*A*S*H” was set in the Korean War, of course, and those characters were obviously creations of…the sensibilities of those men were created in the ‘50s. The same goes with my character on “China Beach,” Dr. Richard. I think of him now, with “Mad Men” being such a popular show on TV, as having very much that same attitude as guys from the early seasons of that show. He thinks very highly of himself. [Laughs.] He’s a little full of himself. In the pilot, I think I pinch at least five women on the butt. So, uh, it was a good job. It’s not very politically correct nowadays, but it was fun to be able to recreate those old, politically incorrect moments.

BE: It took ages for the series to finally make it to DVD, due to the expense of licensing the music being seen as cost-prohibitive.

RP: Yeah, y’know, because I did a “Star Trek” series, I make a lot of personal appearances and go to a lot of conventions and stuff like that, and I would often get asked, “Why hasn’t ‘China Beach’ come out?” And I always have to explain that answer: back then, they never anticipated selling a television show like that, so they never secured the music rights for sale or even for broadcast for a certain number of years. So it’s been completely out of the marketplace. At least “The Wonder Years,” which has had a similar fate and can’t be released because they haven’t secured the rights, but that at least still seemed to be in rerun everywhere. But “China Beach” hasn’t even been seen for over a dozen years. And that’s why it’s such a pleasure that Time-Life did it right. They invested the million dollars or whatever, they hired the lawyers, they secured…oh, gosh, 262 songs, I think they told me. Songs by people like the Supremes, the Temptations, the Four Tops, Van Morrison, Ben E. King, Janis Joplin, Aretha Franklin…I mean, that’s one of the things that made the show great: that music. So to have it out finally with that music intact makes it worth waiting for.

BE: Do you have a particular favorite episode of “China Beach,” perhaps a spotlight episode for Dr. Richard?

RP: Well, for my character, there’s an episode called “Crossing the Great Water,” which was in the second season. It’s one where my character finally deconstructs himself and the identity that he left the States with. I’m a married, suburban golf-playing doctor with two young kids and a beautiful wife, and the world is my oyster. That’s the life he leaves when he’s drafted. And, basically, that all falls apart for him while he’s gone. His wife starts having an affair, she divorces him, and…actually, one suggestion that I made was that he discovered the affair inadvertently through a drawing that his child has made. His young child keeps drawing pictures of “Mom and Uncle Doug.” [Laughs.] And I’m, like, “I don’t know who Uncle Doug is!” That was the suggestion that I made to the writers, which they ended up doing.

Anyway, in the episode “Crossing the Great Water,” his wife serves him with divorce papers, and he basically just loses it. What was fun about that was that it was nice to take a character who had this patina of arrogance and self-confidence who walks around going, “Get out of my way! I am the hands of God, and I will save that person if you just get out of my way!” That kind of shell, that professional shell he had, is completely cracked and destroyed, and then he had to completely rebuild himself after that, and he ultimately became a better man for it. But that made it a fun show to shoot for me, because there were so many different emotional levels to it.

BE: Would you say are there any elements of your “China Beach” character that people can spot in the EMH on “Star Trek: Voyager” if they’re looking for them?

RP: It’s a good question. I tried to hide that. [Laughs.] I would say that, if I had a stock and trade as an actor, it was to play characters that you initially didn’t like, or that you thought that you were not going to like and then grew to like in spite of that negative first impression. So the Doctor on “Star Trek,” they shared a certain arrogance, I think, the two of them. Obviously, because my character on “Star Trek” was an artificial creation, he was sort of a first-generation program for a holographic emergency medical physician, there was a certain artifice to the way he acted for the first season or two. But eventually, as the show went on, he became more and more successfully human-like. So they didn’t have that in common. But as far as the initial impression of being full of themselves and a little arrogant…I mean, you would never see the holographic doctor pinch a woman on the butt. [Laughs.] But he still had that “I’m the smartest guy in the room” feeling that I think Dr. Richard also tried to project.

BE: Lastly, do you have a favorite project that you’ve worked on over the years that didn’t get the love you thought it deserved?

RP: Oh, let’s see… [Long pause.] Um…yeah. Although I don’t know if “love” is the right word. I did a small movie called “Sensored,” which is available on DVD and download or whatever. It’s a little horror movie, or a psychological thriller, and I play a really creepy guy, but I worked really hard on this and I really liked it. And it’s totally different from anything else I’ve ever done. Talk about a character that has nothing in common with…I mean, if you can find one moment in that performance that reminds you of me in “Star Trek,” then I will shoot myself in the head. [Laughs.] Because it really is totally unlike anything I’ve ever done.

But then this little company that bought it for DVD release and all that, they screwed up the DVD release! They just blew it. They literally had orders from Wal-Mart and all that, but – get this – they didn’t have the movie rated in time, and Wal-Mart will not sell an unrated movie. So this whole little roll-out we had, where it was going to be seen and it was going to be sold and people were going to be able to get it, was cancelled because the company forgot to get their own movie rated. It was idiotic. It’s, like, you can’t believe it. It’s like saying, “Ah, yes, we went to the hospital, and my wife and I, we had a child, but somehow we forgot to bring it home!” [Laughs.] I don’t get it.

So, yes, the movie “Sensored” would be my answer, but the reason I say that “love” is maybe not the right word is because I play a very creepy guy. I’m a weird-ass, creepy guy. And you don’t know how much of the terrible things I’m doing are real and how much I’m imagining them. But I worked very hard on the role, and I wish it’d gotten seen by a larger audience. So that’s why I think it qualifies.

Bullz-Eye: First of all, I’m supposed to tell you that Donal Logue says, “Hello.”

Megyn Price: Awwwwwww… I love him! We’ve been going back and forth on Twitter. My former TV husband…

BE: Yeah, he and I just did an interview in conjunction with his debut on “Vikings” for the Onion AV Club.

MP: Oh, you did? Oh, great! That’s fun. He’s such a great guy, isn’t he? Did you have a 400-hour interview with him? ‘Cause he can not stop talking. [Laughs.]

BE: Well, actually, it started out a phoner, and then we ended up doing a bit more by email. It was for a feature called Random Roles, and I wanted to try to cover as many of his roles as possible. Lord knows he’s got enough of ‘em…

MP: Oh, God, I bet he loved that! He has the best stories. He used to tell a story about being on “The Patriot” anytime wardrobe would come up to us on “Grounded for Life,” about how there was this stampede, where everyone was getting run over by horses, and he said that wardrobe would come up to him and fix his collar. He’s, like, “Okay, you don’t need to fix my collar. I’m about to get run over by a horse!” [Laughs.]

BE: Okay, on to the topic at hand: your directorial debut. What took you so long to get behind the camera?

MP: It’s hard to get the shot, y’know? There are no small directing jobs. There are small acting jobs, but no small directing jobs. Somebody’s really got to be generous and kind, like our producers were on this show, and give you a shot. And, y’know, I think I had to earn it a little bit. A) I had to have the experience, but B) I had to do a lot of research and a lot of studying with other directors and prove that I was serious about it all.

BE: Was it something that you’d been wanting to do for awhile?

MP: Yes. Like, my whole life. [Laughs.] It’s something where…I always look at shows, look at scenes, look at projects that I choose from the directing standpoint. I mean always. I always think of myself as sort of a reluctant actor, because I think I’m really good at acting, but it only engages one side of my brain, which is the really base monkey brain that just goes and does it. I don’t really think about it. I just can do it. But the directing is much more the analytical side. It’s a creative side as well, but it’s, like, you get both sides of your brain working, which to me is a dream come true.

BE: You mentioned that you had to study with other directors. I’d guess that Ted Wass must’ve been one of those directors, given how many episodes of “Rules of Engagement” he’s helmed over the years.

MP: Actually, no! I’ve worked with Ted a million times, but Ted has a style that is really interactive, so…you almost don’t have to study Ted, because it’s so apparent when he’s working, so I went and shadowed people who are a little quieter. Not that Ted’s a big loudmouth. [Laughs.] But I shadowed Mark Cendrowski, who loves to teach what he knows, and I shadowed Andy Ackerman a couple of times, ‘cause he’s probably my favorite director that I’ve ever worked with. He’s so quiet that I really wanted to just sit on his shoulder and watch was he was doing, which was so informative. It was amazing. And Andy works really well with actors who are having a hard time, which I didn’t know until I watched him. He’s so kind, and he becomes almost like a dad. He was just great. But I think that once I kind of realized that I might have a shot at directing our show, I started hyper-watching everybody who directed our show.

BE: I’m sure you picked up more than a few things, but was there any particular lesson that you learned while shadowing these directors that really surprised you, something that you’d never really noticed before?

MP: [Laughs.] Well, I’ll tell you: the thing that was the most interesting to me was a conversation I had with Anthony Rich, who is one of my dear, dear friends, but he’s also been directing “The Big Bang Theory” for the last couple of years. I think he’s directed six or seven episodes at this point. But I called him the morning of the taping, and I said, “Anthony, I just can’t believe how vulnerable actors are!” He goes, “What are you talking about? You’re one of ‘em!” I said, “No, but I’m not a vulnerable actor! It’s amazing to me that your main job as a director is to make sure the actors are comfortable.” And he said the greatest thing I’ve ever heard: he started laughing, and he goes, “I love that you’re now realizing this. I’ve always called directing…it’s like wrangling unicorns. Because actors are magical people, and if you make them comfortable, their magic turns out…and if you make them uncomfortable, their magic turns off. So that’s your main job: to make sure that everyone’s comfortable enough that they can let their magic show.” And it’s great advice, because it’s so true! I know it from the other side: if I’m worrying about stuff, I’m not a good actor.

BE: Was it weird being on the other side of the camera for your own show?

MP: No, it was weird being an actor the week I was directing. Which sounds completely insane, but it was. It was weird. Because, like I told you, when I act, I don’t think about anything else at all. I’m just totally present, doing my thing. And when I’m acting and I’m directing, my head’s going, “I wonder what this looks like. I wonder if we need to tighten up that shot. Oh, he needs to say that differently…but I can’t say that ‘cause now I’m an actor in the scene!” [Laughs.] It was a bit of a schizophrenic kind of experience. But I think the night of taping I figured out a few tricks to really just turn off my directing head once the shots were set and just actually be an actor, so I didn’t ruin the show.

BE: How was it directing your cast members? Did they treat you with kid gloves, knowing that it was your first big shot behind the camera?

MP: They were beyond incredible. Talk about turning on their magic! They turned on their magic in rehearsal. They were unbelievable. They were so great. And I will tell you that, when you work with people for seven years on a show, there are many weeks when – I myself included – do not bring the A-game during rehearsal. [Laughs.] But they really did. Every single one of ‘em. And it was a rough week for David (Spade) and Adhir (Kalyan), because they had tricky stuff to do. I know you haven’t seen the episode, but…well, it’s called “Timmy Quits,” and they had to kind of play it real a little bit, because it was kind of an intense thing that Timmy was quitting, and then there was a joke five seconds later. So it was a tricky week for them, but they worked their little buns off.

BE: You guys are coming up on the end of the season, and CBS’s press department has already released a photo from the finale which shows Audrey and Jeff holding their new baby. Now, when I talked to Patrick Warbuton a few years ago, he said he’d fight against it if they ever tried to add a baby to the mix, and the last time I talked to you, you said, “Oh, God, every time we read even hints of that, we’re, like, ‘That can’t happen.’”

MP: [Laughs.] Yeah, famous last words, huh? Well, you know, we knew it was inevitable. I think that Patrick and I had been fighting against having a baby on the show the same way we’d fight against having a monkey on the show: we’d love having a monkey on the show, but that’d be a big, difficult shoot, wouldn’t it? Every time we have all eight thousand of Liz’s cats on the show, it takes two extra hours to film! But once we had an actual baby on the set, well, of course we just melted. We’re a couple big, sappy idiots.

BE: So what’s the status of the show? Is it still in flux? Will there be a Season 8?

MP: You know, every year we say it’ll take a miracle, and this year it felt done. I mean, we did 100 episodes, and it felt like, “Well, that’s an amazing number for any show to get to.” But as ever with this show, I guess you never know.

(Writer’s note: Funnily enough, if you go back and look at the interview I did with Warburton during the show’s third season, when I ask him about the possibility of Jeff and Audrey having a baby, he replied, “Yeah, well, hopefully, that will be season eight.”)

BE: When you look back at the run of the show thus far, do you have a particular favorite – or favorites – that leap to mind immediately?

MP: Oh, man, I have a million. And the truth is, my favorite…I don’t think of a whole episode as a favorite, generally, as much as particular scenes. Oh, no, wait, there is one. It’s called “Atlantic City.” Jeff lies to Audrey that he’s going to Atlantic City, and Audrey lies to Jeff that she’s going to a spa, but they’re both telling each other complete and total untruths for absolutely no personal gain. And then it just keeps avalanching, snowballing down a hill, lie upon lie upon lie, with both of them trying to race home to prove that the other one is lying while still somehow covering up their own lie. And yet, again, none of it is for personal gain. They’re not doing anything that the other would even care about! [Laughs.] So, yeah, I love that one, ‘cause to me it feels like a Noel Coward play. It was crazy, and very fun to do. But I love anything with Jeff and Audrey just talking about life. Nothing big happening, just their interaction. To me, it always sounds like a real couple. A real messed-up couple, but a real couple nonetheless.

BE: It really is a realistic dynamic that they’ve got between them.

MP: Yeah. I don’t know which one of the writers’ relationships it is, or if it’s an amalgamation of all of them. [Laughs.] It makes me feel sad for their wives.

BE: “Rules of Engagement” is one of those shows that’s been a stalwart of the CBS lineup even as it pretty consistently flies under the critical radar. Does that bother you, or are you just glad that you’ve got the dependable fans who keep coming back to watch the show?

MP: Well, I’ll tell ya: it falls under the critical radar except when they criticize it, but it makes us really appreciative of the people who notice the little things. Like, Patrick called me a couple of weeks ago, and he was, like, “I can’t believe this! I can’t believe this!” In USA Today, one of the writers had written that our relationship was the most realistic, funniest couple that’s ever been on television. And I’m, like, “What, in Season7 They just wrote that?” He said, “Yeah, there’s a whole article about how great our characters are!” And I was, like, “That’s, uh, unbelievably kind!” [Laughs.] Because, y’know, I feel like a lot of fans know that, but we haven’t really heard it in the press too much.

But, then again, our show has been a little inconsistent. I mean, when you have only a few episodes each year, or when you’re pulled and then put back on…we turned over a lot of writing staff, so I think there were years when it was a really, really well-written show, there were years when it was okay, there were years when we had new writers, and years when we had amazing writers who then left and, uh, went to do “Modern Family.” [Laughs.] It’s tough to keep your writing staff consistent when you never know when you’re coming back.

BE: In regards to the writing, is there any plot development related to Audrey that just rang untrue for you?

MP: [Long pause.] Yeah. I think it was very tough for me to constantly…well, I shouldn’t say “constantly,” but it was tough for me to do anything that rings in my ears to be, like, Clichéd Sitcom Wife. So if I’d have scenes where I’m going, “Hey, you’re supposed to be taking care of your health, we’re having a baby,” or that sort of thru-line, it’d just make me nuts. Cliché sitcom couple stuff has always been my biggest pet peeve, starting with taking the show with Donal. The only reason I wanted to do “Grounded for Life” was because that was not a couple that I had seen on TV. So for this couple, for me, every time Audrey feels like any other TV wife, I just get my hackles up.

BE: Well, to start wrapping up, since you brought up “Grounded for Life,” I have to tell you that, in the comments section for that interview I did with Donal, one of the recurring motifs involved people first praising the show, then praising “the hot wife.”

MP: That’s hilarious! You know, I once overheard these kids talking about me when I was on a plane. We were actually in the middle of shooting “Grounded,” and I was trying to get home from Arizona, and my flight was canceled. So I wound up with the last available seat on a Southwest flight back to L.A., so I could make it back for shooting. So I’m sitting in the middle of the aisle in the back of a Southwest plane, and these two teenage boys are sitting behind me, and they keep punching each other and arguing, and they’re whispering back and forth. Finally, one of ‘em goes, “Dude! If that was the hot mom from ‘Grounded for Life,’ she’d have her own plane!” [Laughs.] That’d be nice, wouldn’t it, my own plane? Mostly, though, I was going, “They think I’m hot? That’s so cool!” I also got free flip-flops at a surf store once because the clerk had been 16 when “Grounded for Life” was on!

BE: Okay, lastly, I just wanted to let you know that you were directly responsible for one of my wife’s favorite moments from the Television Critics Association press tour. It was at a Sony party a couple of years ago, and you were talking to my wife when Matthew Perry came up. You and he talked for a few minutes, but then you got called away to do an interview, at which point Matthew Perry turns to my wife and says, “So I suppose you want to talk to me now.” And because she’s not a journalist, she just looks at him and says, “Oh, GOD, no.” His jaw dropped. Then he burst out laughing.

MP: Oh. My. God. That is hilarious! That is so funny. He always loves to bring up how I blew him off when he was doing “Friends.” I was at Jennifer Aniston’s birthday party, and I was totally ignoring him, and he walked up to me and he goes, “I don’t think you understand, little girl: you better date me now, ‘cause my star is on the rise!” And I think in his head he was totally kidding…or he wasn’t, and now he claims that he was kidding. Because at the time it did not sound like he was kidding. I was, like, “How big is your ego, dude? Move on!” [Laughs.] So, yeah, now he likes to bring up how I misunderstood that he was joking. Uh-huh. Sure he was. In the heat of “Friends,” I’m real sure…

My favorite Television Critics Association story was when we were launching “Grounded for Life,” and there was all this talk about how I was only 10 years older than Lynsey Bartilson, who played my daughter, and…I mean, they just could not get off the subject. And finally, this big, fat guy raises his hand and goes, “Hey! Megyn! How old are you?” And I’m up on the dais, in front of this huge group of people. And I go, “How much do you weigh? Can we move on from the rude questions, mister?” It’s, like, “How rude are you, asking ‘how old are you’ to an actress?” And he said it in such a rude way. Thankfully, everybody in the whole room starting laughing, but, I mean, seriously, how inappropriate is that question? But I will say that usually I have fun at the TCAs. They tell you, “Oh, I’m sorry, you have to go to this thing,” but I like it, because it’s not all Hollywood types. It’s normal people. Well, you know, for the most part. [Laughs.]

Bullz-Eye: “Hemlock Grove” marks the first time you’ve ever taken on a series-regular role for television. Did you have any trepidation about taking that kind of a plunge for a show that’s being delivered to viewers in a non-traditional manner, or was that part of what drew you to it?

Famke Janssen: Trepidation about that element? No. Doing a series, period? Yes. [Laughs.] But to me, I think the fact that it was for Netflix and not your traditional network or cable show was one of the deciding factors—or certainly an added bonus, anyway—because it felt like we were kind of in the wild west, with new territory to explore. It wasn’t this whole weight of a specific way of working that we had to carry through in some way. So with that, I was hoping that there would be less control coming from above, and not so much like a big studio standing there with a whip, making you feel like you’re more of a puppet than anything else. Also, the whole 13-episode part was attractive as well, because I’m designed my life in such a way now that I’m trying to go back and forth between writing and directing and acting, and signing up for something that would’ve taken an entire year, as a network show would’ve…I hadn’t considered that at all, just because I don’t have the time for it. I don’t want to tie myself down. So in that regard, it was a perfect set-up, because I can make money and then I can pursue my passion of writing and directing in my free time.

BE: So what can you tell us about Olivia Godfrey without divulging anything too spoiler-y?

FJ: Olivia’s still mysterious even to me, and I’ve lived with her now for 13 hours onscreen, not to mention many more hours shooting the series, of course. She’s married into this Godfrey family, a family with a lot of money, but she comes from a lot of money as well…or she seems to, anyway. But whether she does come from a lot of money or where she really comes from or what her deal really is, nobody really knows, and maybe nobody will ever find out. [Laughs.] She’s highly manipulative. She loves her children, but she’s also somebody who just has an agenda most of the time. And she’s in love with her husband’s brother, and…there are all sorts of integral relationships with bizarre things going on within this small town as well as with these family members. [Shrugs.] It feels like “Twin Peaks” to me. That’s what it felt like. That’s the reason why I really liked it: because it is, in a good way, nonsensical. It’s not linear. You’re not gonna…not everything is going to be explained. There are going to be a lot of mysteries surrounding it all. Nothing is going to be wrapped up with a neat bow.

BE: It’s certainly appropriate for an Eli Roth production to have a David Lynch feel to it, given that the latter did a fair amount to launch the career of the former.

FJ: Exactly. Yeah, and it was one of the things that we all talked about in the beginning, in terms of the look of the show and the feel of the show and all of that.

BE: Obviously, Mr. Roth wasn’t able to be here today for the “Hemlock Grove” panel, but how interactive was he as far as the day-to-day goings-on of the series?

FJ: Well, in addition to producing, he also directed the pilot. But then, like the way that both network and cable TV shows are filmed, you have circulating directors who come in and out for the other episodes.

BE: The choice of phrase they’ve used to describe the show is “a murder mystery wrapped in a class-warefare struggle.”

FJ: [Long pause.] Okay, I’ll go with that. [Laughs.] If that’s what they want to call it, then I’ll go with that.

BE: You brought it up a moment ago, but I wanted to ask you a bit about the experience of writing and directing “Bringing Up Bobby,” which you produced as well. Clearly, it was a positive one.

FJ: Yeah! It was really… Actually, just yesterday, I got the most incredible review, one where I was finally, like, “Okay, that’s exactly what I tried to do, and somebody got it.” It felt so good. I know, you’re not supposed to read reviews, because if you’re gonna believe the good ones, then you’ve gotta believe the bad ones, and all that stuff. But once in awhile, it’s nice when someone gets exactly what you’re trying to do. It’s now going to be released on DVD, and it’ll be viewable on Netflix on Demand soon and you’ll also be able to order the DVD from them as well. It’s just been such an incredible learning experience, and that’s what I wanted it to be. I made many mistakes on it, but I learned an incredible amount of stuff, so I can’t wait to do it again. I can’t wait to get better at it. I love film so much that it’s frustrating for me to be an actor sometimes, because I’m only allowed to be part of a tiny little element of it. It’s that feeling when…it’s, like, you’re on set, you film your portion, and then they go, “You can go now,” but you go, “I don’t want to go! I want to stay! I want to watch what happens!” [Laughs.] That’s the great thing about being a director: you’re always there. I loved it. And it suits my personality.

BE: Are you willing to admit to the biggest mistake that you made while working on it?

FJ: [Long pause.] I don’t know that I could narrow it down to just one. [Laughs.] There were so many! It’s also that I don’t know that, had I known certain things, I wouldn’t have still made some of the same mistakes. A lot of it also had to do with our time restrictions. We had 20 days to shoot the film, it was 105 degrees in Oklahoma where we shot it, we had money complications, as everybody does with independent films these days, and actors falling out or coming in at the last minute. They call it guerilla filmmaking for a very good reason. So we had a lot of hurdles to overcome, but it turned into an hour and a half movie that came in on time and on budget, and…that’s at least something, right? And we sold it all over the world. Literally. And I’ve gone to almost every festival that you can imagine, including some in China, Germany, Italy, Holland, Russia, France, Canada, all over America…I mean, everywhere. It’s been all over the world. And that, to me, is something that a lot of people can’t say about the first film they directed. So it’s been fantastic. Fantastically difficult. But the emphasis is definitely still on the “fantastic.”

BE: I don’t know how much time we have, but I always try to ask folks about at least a couple of obscurities in their back catalog, and I feel like I have to ask you about “Deep Rising.”

FJ: Oh, do we call that one obscure? I can think of many more obscure films I’ve done. [Laughs.]

BE: Fair enough. What’s your favorite obscurity?

FJ: Well, I did “Monument Ave,” which probably nobody saw, that Ted Demme directed.

BE: Actually, that’s funny you should mention that movie: I actually talked to Greg Dulli (who played Shang in “Monument Ave.”) about it a few months back.

FJ: Oh, okay, then that’s not that obscure, either, is it? [Laughs.] I’m sure anything I say won’t be obscure to somebody, but how about…oh, what’s the one with Harvey Keitel? It’s set in part of L.A. “City of Industry”! I have a big list of obscurities. There’s also “The Gingerbread Man,” by Robert Altman. A lot of people didn’t see that.

BE: How was it to work for Robert Altman?

FJ: Fantastic. You know, Deran Sarafian, who’s one of our big directors on “Hemlock Grove,” he was an incredible influence throughout this whole process for all of us, somebody who really helped us a lot in finding the look and feel of the characters on the show…he’s related to Robert Altman.

BE: What was it like when you met with Altman for “The Gingerbread Man”? It seems like everyone I’ve spoken with who’s been in one of his films , they didn’t so much audition as they just kind of met with him for a bit and chatted.

FJ: I don’t know! It’s a good question, but…I can’t even remember! But then I’m just so blown away that I had that experience at all, that I got to work with him.

BE: There’s a story which has made the rounds that you were up for the role of Jadzia Dax on “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.” True?

FJ: Yep. They offered to me, I believe, but I didn’t do it. I’ve always been very scared of television series.

BE: Setting aside its horror-themed content, was “Hemlock Grove” as scary as you’d feared? You survived 13 episodes, anyway.

FJ: And 13 was just enough. [Laughs.] That’s not a statement on the show. It’s just that, to me, television is…oh, this is a terrible comparison, because it’s really not fair, but it’s like having a good nine-to-five job, like working at a bank or something. I never want to have that feeling, because to me, what draws me so much to what I do is that every day is different. And I’ve seen it with friends who are on television shows, mostly network, where they go all year and…it becomes a little bit like that. So, yeah, 13 episodes was just enough. My life is full of surprises, and I love that aspect of it.

BE: And yet you did have a pilot (“Alibi”)  in the works a few years ago, didn’t you?

FJ: I did, yeah. It was with the people from “House” (David Shore and Peter Blake).

BE: That must’ve been a scary prospect, then.

FJ: Oh, I was definitely sweating buckets on that one. [Laughs.] But it didn’t get picked up, so…everything worked out for a wonderful reason, I guess, in this case, because I ended up being able to make my own movie, and I’ve worked with a very interesting group of people on this show, while continuing to do all the things that I want to do on the side.

BE: Lastly, I would be remiss if I didn’t ask you about the experience of being a Bond girl in “Goldeneye,” especially with the film franchise having celebrated 50 years.  

FJ: Well, can I just tell you that I presented at the National Board of Review? I presented to Barbara Broccoli and Daniel Craig, because (screenwriter/producer) Michael G. Wilson couldn’t be there, the William K. Everson Award for Film History for 50 years of James Bond. So it was great to be a part of it. They put this incredible montage together, kind of an elongated trailer, of all 50 years of Bond, and it was just so astonishing to look at. Because, I mean, we’ve all seen the movies, but to put them all together in one show reel, it’s just…I’m so blown away by what they’ve done, how they’ve kept this franchise alive for 50 years. Can you even imagine? And they haven’t even changed it that dramatically over that time. Just enough. And before you can get bored of any Bond, he’s been replaced with another one. And little tweaks like making M a woman or…whatever thing happens. The women, who were clearly completely objectified, have moved into having a little bit more to do. [Laughs.] Like my character, who I feel was a very strong, interesting character to play, yet still with a wink to the audience. So I’m very impressed with the way they’ve kept the franchise going.

BE: How was it working with Pierce Brosnan, given that it was his first time at bat in the role?

FJ: Well, it was a lot of pressure, both for him and for the franchise, because it was the first Bond film in, what, seven years? So there was a lot riding on it…and probably, had our film not worked, it might have ended the franchise. So I’m sure there was a lot of pressure for him, but he did it swimmingly. And I had fun. In fact, to me, it’s the reason why I’m here today. Not just in “Hemlock Grove,” but I couldn’t even have directed “Bringing up Bobby” without the help of having been in a Bond movie. That’s the way I see it. It really catapulted me into…some type of stardom, I suppose. [Laughs.] Some level of recognition, anyway!  So it was great. And I’m still very grateful.

Bullz-Eye: So how are you enjoying “Rogue”?

Leah Gibson: It’s great! I’ve never done anything on this scale before. I’m from the west coast of Canada, so I’ve lived in Vancouver for the last five or six years and worked on different TV shows…guest stars, recurrings, whatever…and had some small roles in some big features, like “Twilight” and “Rise of the Planet of the Apes.” But being a part of this show feels very different. It’s a very wonderfully written series that’s been an absolute joy to be a part of. The characters are very in-depth, and the intricacies between their relationships are just a joy to explore from script to script. Being a part of it has felt very much like being part of a 10-hour film, in a way, and I certainly have never seen anything of the like in Vancouver while I’ve been there. So being the token “foreigner” with all these Brits… [Laughs.] It’s been a whole different vibe on set and everything than I’ve been used to!

BE: Can you talk a bit about your character, Cathy Laszlo?

LG: Yes! Cathy Laszlo is…I’m the devoted wife to a hot-headed gangster, Alec Laszlo (Joshua Sasse), who’s the eldest son of Jimmy (Marton Csokas), who’s basically a crimelord. The Laszlos in general are a very infamous crime family, and my husband is very sort of… [Hesitates.] A lot of muscle, not so much brain. He often creates a mess for others to clean up, and my character sort of represents his foundation, his support network, the thought behind his action. I come to influence him in taking advantage of certain opportunities and claiming the status that goes along with those things at what turns out to be at a very high cost to our family.

BE: How much of the character was already on the page when you came to the role, and how much were you able to bring to her? Were there any aspects that were added?

LG: That’s an interesting question. You know, I went through a handful of auditions before I was booked on this job, and initially the sides for my character were sort of…I could tell that there was more being alluded to than was on the page, and as an actor with limited knowledge of where the show is going to go, you don’t want to make any really solid choices and, y’know, sort of make the wrong decision. I heard at some point that I was no longer being considered for the role, but then I got a phone call saying they’d like me for a chemistry reading with Joshua. So I went in and met Josh, and we did our thing, and we workshopped a couple of scenes with Nick Hamm, the executive producer, and…it was only then that I started to realize where they were really going with Cathy.

And then I showed up on set and, really, to be honest, I was very much informed by the wardrobe, the hair, and the makeup. It was a total transformation for this character. I’d never physically played a role like this before, so it was kind of a joy to embrace the character in a physical sense and be informed by the wardrobe, and the specific choices about the hair and makeup. She’s decked out to the nines, long nails, long, big hair, heavy makeup. I’m, like, “Okay, I get it.” So I would step onto set and just feel a different energy. And I had a few comments from…y’know, I’d worked with some of the crew members before on various different productions in Vancouver, and they’re, like, “Oh, my God, I didn’t even recognize you!” So it’s such a joy to play something like that, and to really physically feel it that way.

BE: That’s funny that you say that about the importance of the wardrobe. I’d never really thought about how much it means to an actor’s character until I interviewed Tess Harper, who just couldn’t say enough about how much the costumer meant to her role in “Crimes of the Heart.”

LG: Yeah, y’know, it really is a collaborative medium we’re doing. I think that some actors have come prepared with a very specific perspective of what their character is, and in so doing they inform wardrobe and makeup about specific choices. For me, though, it was the opposite, and I was really happy about that. I sort of just opened my eyes, saw the look, and went, “Oh, my God, I get it now.” And the whole thing took a turn from there.

BE: What’s the structure of “Rogue” like? Is there a cliffhanger at the end of every episode, or is each episode relatively self-contained?

LG: Well, I’ll tell you that I am absolutely in love with the writing of Matthew Parkhill, our show creator. Something that’s so amazing is that in the first episode…we went ahead and filmed 10 episodes without filming a pilot, but in the first episode, immediately Grace (Thandie Newton), the undercover cop, her cover is blown. I just remember finishing reading the pilot and going, “Oh, my God, so where are they going to go next?” It’s amazing. Honestly, I feel like the writing is very satisfying, in that it delivers. It delivers to the audience, it answers your questions, and it just goes in very different directions and is very surprising. There are definitely cliffhangers, but you’re also delivered the answers to the questions you’re asking.

BE: Is the sort of series where someone can come in late and still understand what’s going on? I presume there’ll be a “previously on…” intro for each episode, but…

LG: I would honestly say that it’s the kind of thing you would want to watch episode to episode. But my understanding is that, being in the format of DirecTV, that’s possible. If you miss Episode 2, and they’re on Episode 3, you can just bounce back and watch Episode 2 first.

BE: How’s DirecTV been to work with?

LG: They’ve been wonderful. Honestly! And for me, having been so far predominantly a Canadian actor, this is my first major American show, and they’ve been just wonderful. They’ve been so incredibly behind the production, and I really feel that they believe in it. And it’s just lovely to feel so supported in any project that you work on, but they’re excited. Like, they’re genuinely excited. And we’re excited as actors, too, but we read the scripts, we’re there to do our jobs, and then whatever happens after that, we have no control over it. But at this stage of the game, they’re giddy about it, which is cool. So I just hope people respond to it!

BE: As you mentioned a moment ago, one of your past roles was in “Twilight.” How has it been to be a part of that phenomenon?

LG: Ah, yes, my little bit in “Twilight.” [Laughs.]

BE: Hey, even a little bit matters in “Twilight.”

LG: I know! I was talking about it earlier today that, y’know, “Twilight” happened to me a couple of years ago, I hadn’t done all that much yet, and I was still plugging away, but then all of a sudden I was part of this beast that was affecting every corner of the globe, and I was literally traveling all over the world to be a part of the promotional excitement of the film. It was an amazing thing. It’s just incredible to be a part of something that affects so many people in so many different cultures and that everyone responds to it.

BE: Which means you’ve got a lifetime pass to attend “Twilight” conventions as a guest.

LG: Hey, who knows? [Laughs.] But I’d like to think that there are a plethora of other actors who’d fill those spots before I would!

BE: Lastly, do you have a favorite project that you’ve worked on that didn’t get the love you thought it deserved?

LG: Oh, that’s an interesting question. Y’know, I’ve always been kind of an indie darling. I’ve done a lot of indie films in Vancouver, and I’ve always sort of had the mentality that wanting to work hard and prove myself through my work, speak through my work, and have that be what speaks for me as a person…that’s all I wanted to do as an actor. And so I’ve worked for free, I’ve worked for minimum wage, I’ve worked in anything that excited me, including some indies that never saw the light of day. [Laughs.] But at the time, it was a love affair. The work was, anyway. I wouldn’t say I have any regrets about anything, though. Everything happens for a reason. You try not to think about career moves all that much and just exercise integrity to your craft, really.

Bullz-Eye: Just the fact that “Men at Work” has gotten a second season, period, has got to be pretty thrilling in and of itself, but how was it to go back to work for season two?

Danny Masterson: You know, it’s funny: we actually only took about six weeks off, so we didn’t feel like we had a whole summer hiatus. We just took six weeks, and then we kept going with the same director and same crew, so it just feels like a really long first season that we’ve shot. We just had a lot of excellent new guest stars, I guess.

BE: Yeah, the list is pretty impressive.

DM: Thanks! I think it’s sort of a benefit of having both Breckin (Meyer) and I both working since we were little kids. We’ve worked with a lot of people who are known actors, so it’s fun to sort of bring those friends in to work with you for a bit.

BE: When you guys came onto the series, how well-defined were the characters on the page versus what they became once they were actually cast?

DM: You know, I think they were pretty well defined. Breckin sort of based them off…well, he based my character, Milo, off himself. [Laughs.] And the three friends are based off of his three best friends. So pretty much everybody knew exactly who they were in the beginning. And then, obviously, as you’re going through the episodes, you sort of change your characters a little bit to make them suited towards you a little bit, just in terms of everyone’s own personalities. But I’d say 95% is exactly how Breckin wrote it to begin with.

BE: Did the cast bond pretty quickly?

DM: Yeah, I’d say so. I’ve known James Lesure for…I dunno, maybe 10 years. I hadn’t met Adam (Busch) or (Michael) Cassidy before, but, y’know, right from the table read everyone was really excited to have a really cool job, so… I get along with everybody, and they’re all really great people. Three totally different personalities, but we’ve never had a single fight. I mean, it’s only been two years, obviously, so we’ll probably wrestle at some point. [Laughs.] But they’re really fun. Everyone’s really stoked to have a good job, we all enjoy it, and as long as the writing stays good – and the writing’s been really good – I think we’ll all stay really happy.

BE: Speaking of writing, as a writer, I have to wonder how many times you’ve heard from various critics that, uh, not many magazine offices tend to run the way the one on “Men at Work” does.

DM: [Sighs.] Um…y’know, honestly, we’re entertaining people. We’re doing a situation comedy. We’re just there to make people laugh. So…I mean, it’d be like every lawyer watching “L.A. Law” and going, “You know, that’s not really what court’s like.” [Laughs.] It’s just one of those things..

BE: As you mentioned, you’ve got several new guest stars coming up for season two, but who were your favorites from season one?

DM: Y’know, it was super fun, obviously, working with (Laura) Prepon again, having spent eight years with her (on “That ‘70s Show”), so that was just sort of, like, every time we would say, “Cut,” we’d just start laughing. It was, like, “Oh, my God, this is ridiculous. This is just like what we used to do together.” And then, for me, working with Kevin Pollak, who I’m just such a massive fan of and who’s a friend of mine, but it’s still, like, “I can’t believe I get to be friends with Kevin Pollak!” [Laughs.] So to get to do that episode with him, the scene about the toilet bowl, was definitely a highlight. And it was probably the only scene that year that I had a hard time getting through. I just kept breaking and laughing every time. It was great.

BE: I was surprised that your brother (Christopher Masterson) turned up on the show playing someone other than your character’s brother. Was that just deemed too obvious?

DM: Well, y’know, it’s one of those things where the scripts come out and Breckin says, “Oh, we have this role for someone and that role for someone,” and when he said, “We have this role for this really strange, weird guy…” It could’ve been any kind of character. We didn’t know what Chris was gonna do when he came in. The character was not supposed to have an accent of any sort or…be any sort of persuasion or anything. [Laughs.] He just came in and, at the first rehearsal, just started doing that character, and everyone started laughing. That’s basically what happened.

BE: To bring it to season two, would you say that Milo has changed at all since we saw him in Season 1?

DM: Yeah, I’d say so. In season two, we have a really good relationship arc with Sarah Wright that’s really funny, where he goes from not being able to handle chatting with girls, then all of a sudden he has this girlfriend that he doesn’t know what to do with. And they very quickly become a very boring relationship that seems like they’ve been together for 20 years, even though they’ve only been together for a few weeks. So that was fun playing the exact opposite of season one. Otherwise, you know, it’s sort of the same thing in terms of Milo doing something kind of stupid and the guys sort of getting on him. He does something idiotic, and the other three pounce on him. That’s what’s been the most fun to do, character-wise.

BE: It’s great to see that you’ve brought back J.K. Simmons for this season.

DM: Oh, yeah, he’s done a few episodes, and he’s in the season finale. He’s so funny, and getting to work with him is amazing.

BE: How much of the show is scripted, and how much of an opportunity do you have to adlib?

DM: There’s basically zero adlibbing.

BE: Really?

DM: Yeah. Y’know, there are certain shows where there’s a lot of improv, and there are shows where there isn’t. When I was doing “That ‘70s Show,” Bonnie and Terry Turner kind of beat improv out of us. [Laughs.] We’ll definitely have…we’ll shoot a scene twice, and then if there are any jokes where it’s, like, “Let’s try this,” or, “I have a joke!” Everybody pitches everybody jokes, you pitch the writers, the writers pitch you, and if you find something that’s funny, then you might do two or three different pick-ups with alternate jokes. But that’s not really improv. That’s like being in the writer’s room, and then you go ahead and perform it. There’s never really any sort of curveball thrown. And that makes it easier, really, because you don’t have everybody trying to do one-ups and shit. The writers do their jobs, and as actors, we do our jobs.

BE: Setting aside “Men at Work,” what would you say is your favorite project you’ve worked on over the years that didn’t get the love you thought it deserved?

DM: Um…that’s a good question. I would say the movie “The Brooklyn Heist,” which I made in New York and produced. I thought that turned out really, really good. Y’know, we got a small theatrical release in New York, but a lot of people haven’t seen it. I don’t think it’s ever gotten a TV deal. It seems like these days you make a movie and…it used to be that people would see it on HBO or Showtime years later, but that doesn’t seem to happen as much anymore. I think it’s because of iTunes and downloads and all that stuff. But I think that movie, for the amount we shot it for and the way that it was shot, genre-wise, it was really, really smart. So, yeah, “The Brooklyn Heist,” that’d probably be my one that people would enjoy.

BE: You know, “Star Kid” is now on Netflix on Demand.

DM: Wow. You know, I’ve never actually seen that. What do I have, like, one scene in that movie? [Laughs.]

BE: Not significantly more than that, anyway.

DM: Ashlee Levitch, who plays the older sister in that movie, used to be a very good friend of mine. I haven’t seen her in probably 15 years, but when we were teenagers, she was always on a show, I was always on a show, so she called and said, “Hey, I’m doing this movie with the kid from ‘Jurassic Park’ (Joseph Mazzello), would you come play my boyfriend? It’s just for a scene or two.” So I said, “Yeah, okay, sure!” That’s literally how I got that movie. I never even saw the script. But I remember it was actually called “The Warrior of Waverly Street” when I signed onto it.

BE: You did some film work after “That ‘70s Show,” but do you enjoy returning to the routine of series television?

DM: Oh, yeah, I love it. And I definitely wasn’t looking to do a drama. I did a one-hour drama when I was 18, and it’s just such a brutal lifestyle. I mean, that’s a schedule that…most actors who are on one-hour dramas are leads, which means no life for 10 months out of the year, and if it goes for 10 years, then that’s sort of who you are. For me, doing a sitcom is…I mean, toward the end of “That ‘70s Show,” we were working 20 hours a week to get the show together, but on “Men at Work,” we’re obviously working a lot longer, because it’s newer and not everybody knows what they’re doing exactly…including myself, because we’re all still sort of getting to know each other. But it’s basically just summer camp all day, every day. You’re literally just rehearsing to make each other laugh, making fun of each other, and trying to get it ready to do it in front of a live audience. There’s really no better job in show business.

This, as you might have guessed, is precisely what I experienced when I went into the room at the Langham Huntington Hotel which served as a temporary home base for the publicists of BBC America and was introduced to the cast of “Orphan Black. “

Fortunately, the young trio awaiting my arrival—Tatiana Maslany, Jordan Gavaris, and Dylan Bruce—had already been dealing with this problem with the interviewers who’d preceded me, as I was their last chat of the day. As such, they had a sense of humor about the situation…which worked out quite well, as I’d decided to throw caution to the wind and have a bit of a laugh about it myself.

Bullz-Eye: Well, as you know, you have me—and everybody else here—at a tremendous disadvantage, since I haven’t been able to see the pilot of “Orphan Black” yet.”

Jordan Gavaris: Ugh, I know.

Tatiana Maslany: We haven’t even finished shooting the series yet!

Dylan Bruce: How often does that happen to you guys?

BE: It…happens. Maybe 10-20% of the time. It’s certainly not unheard of.

TM: Okay, ‘cause when we’re done here, we go back to shooting Episode 7…no, wait, 6!

JG: Episode 6, yeah.

TM: So we’re not even halfway through shooting yet!

BE: Well, that being the case, I’m going to apologetically make with some painfully general questions for you, since I don’t really have the option to be but so specific, and even if I could, I presume you wouldn’t be able to say but so much, anyway. So…how did each of you find your way onto this project?

TM: I auditioned a few months before I got the part. I auditioned about four times, went through a chemistry test with Jordan and a few other guys, and he…

JG: I did exactly the same thing. [Hesitates.] Sorry.

TM: No, go ahead!

JG: I was just going to say that I auditioned just exactly the same way, I went through a few months of casting, and it was at the network chemistry read, when they paired us together, that my agent told me that I wasn’t the front runner. They told me that they knew they wanted her, but that I wasn’t going to get the card.

TM: [Horrified.] They did?

JG: Yeah! That’s what my agent told me. She said that some guy named… [Starts to say the other actor’s name, then catches himself.] Yeah, I, uh, probably shouldn’t say that. [Laughs.] But, you know, I will say that every actor there was a wonderful young actor, and at that stage of the game, it’s really more about physicality and who works well with each other. You can have two really great actors who just don’t connect for whatever reason. But, anyway, there was another actor who was up for the part, and she said, “He’s probably gonna get it. He’s older and more experienced.” And instead of getting really down on myself, I just got really angry. And when I went in, I was just completely fueled by fury, and when I met (Tatiana), that’s when sparks flew. Like a Taylor Swift song.

DB: Awwwwwww… You just quoted a Taylor Swift song! [Laughs.]

TM: Really, Jordan? Really? [Laughs.]

DB: Well, I auditioned 35 times. They really didn’t know what they wanted from me. [Laughs.] No, that’s not true. I put myself on tape here, ‘cause I’m based out of L.A., and then I did a Skype audition with the creator, John Fawcett, and…

TM: You did?

DB: Yeah.

JG: I know, that was so cool!

DB: It was so terrible. [Laughs.] It sucked. But John was fantastic about it. And then I did a screen test with Tatiana as well, and…here we are!

At this point in the interview, I noted to the cast that I’d be including a description of the series for you, the reader, so that I’d be able to ask one of the few specific questions that I had at my disposal, so here goes:

Sarah has always lived the life of an orphan outsider. But a clone is never alone.

Sarah hopes that cleaning out a dead woman’s bank account will solve all her problems. Instead, her problems multiply – and so does she. Experience a whole new side of BBC AMERICA with the channel’s next original scripted series, “Orphan Black,” the exciting and ambitious new addition to the Supernatural Saturday programming block. “Orphan Black” features rising star Tatiana Maslany (“Cas & Dylan,” “Picture Day”) in the lead role of Sarah, an outsider and orphan whose life changes dramatically after witnessing the suicide of a woman who looks just like her. Sarah assumes her identity, her boyfriend and her bank account. But instead of solving her problems, the street smart chameleon is thrust headlong into a kaleidoscopic mystery. She makes the dizzying discovery that she and the dead woman are clones… but are they the only ones?

Sarah quickly finds herself caught in the middle of a deadly conspiracy and must race to find answers about who she is and how many others there are just like her.

Got it? Good. Moving on!

BE: Tatiana, you clearly have the most challenging role of the series, at least from an acting standpoint, in that you’re playing yourself as well as at least one clone of yourself, if not more.

TM: Yeah, it’s, uh, bizarre. It’s a very bizarre concept. But a total gift. For me, at least, it’s an actor’s dream to get to be on screen that much. ..and to steal that many scenes. [Laughs.]

JG: Scene-stealer!

TM: [Laughs.] It’s, like, “Hey, I’m both of the characters in this scene!” So it’s a challenge, and it’s technically and creatively difficult, but it’s exciting as well. I’m never bored on this show. Never, never, ever. Never bored on set. There’s always something exciting that…you know, you do seven scenes a day, and there’s not a single one of them that isn’t without its challenges.

JG: Or discoveries.

TM: Or discoveries.

JG: You always discover something new about your character or the people that you’re working with or…just yourself. You’re always exploring. For me, it’s always about exploring myself versus becoming another person or putting on another skin. You sort of turn the mirror just slightly to another degree, so that you see a side of yourself that maybe you wouldn’t be comfortable exploring in regular society.

DB: We’re finding out about our characters as we go. We don’t really know much about our characters. We have a brief synopsis of a lot of our characters, but as the scripts come out, we’re just learning more and more, and it’s becoming more and more fun and awesome to play.

BE: Can you offer up your synopses of who your characters are?

DB: Yeah! A nutshell synopsis of my character, Paul: he’s a consultant, he’s generally a good guy, with a lot of layers, and…a complex kind of personality. I guess that would be a brief synopsis.

BE: And who did you have to pay to have the words “very attractive” added to the description of your character?

DB: No way. Let me see.

TM: You’re kidding.

BE: [Pulls out the press release and puts it on the table.] See? Says it right there. Apparently, Paul is “a very attractive, decent guy.”

TM: [Reads it herself.] “Very attractive.” Unbelievable.

DB: You know, I didn’t have to pay for that. I actually wrote it myself. [Laughs.] They’re, like, “You know what? Just go ahead and write your own.” Okay, sorry, allow me to revise that synopsis of my character.  He’s a very attractive, very, uh, Ernest-Borgnine-looking individual.

TM: Oh, I love Ernest Borgnine.

DB: I love Ernest Borgnine, too, God rest his soul.

TM: Not attractive, though. Not attractive at all.

DB: No. No, not really. [Laughs.] Sorry, go ahead. Proceed!

JG: Felix is…Sarah’s foster brother. They were fostered together in the UK. He’s an artist with a penchant for the, uh, odd hit of cocaine. [Laughs.] And he funds his artistic endeavors by selling his body now and again.

TM: Yeah, so Sarah’s Felix’s foster sister, she’s bounced around a lot of her life, hasn’t really had a family, hasn’t really known a lot about her past, and has run away a lot from any semblance of somebody who could be an authority in her life or help her. She has a daughter, Kira, who’s seven years old and who she’s kind of abandoned her for about 10 months with their foster mother, but she’s back in town now, trying to commit to being the mother she really wants to be, but she’s just not equipped to be. Money-wise, experience-wise, education-wise, she’s just not…she just doesn’t have the tools that she needs, so she’s desperately trying to figure out how to do that.

BE: How is it playing a mom?

TM: It’s awesome! I’ve never… [Hesitates.] Have I ever? I don’t think I’ve ever played a mom.

DB: What a great question!

JG: I know, right? That’s the first time she’s been asked that all day!

TM: Yeah, that’s great! So, yeah, it’s awesome playing a mom. The entire drive of Sarah’s life is getting to Kira and being a mother and assuming that role. It’s very visceral, because, y’know, mothers are very visceral animals. There’s something that kicks in when something happens to your kid. There’s nothing intellectual about it. And yet at the same time, Sarah’s so unfamiliar with what a family would be, what responsibility is, or even what sitting still is, so she has no way of doing the thing that she wants to do and be the mother that Kira needs. I love it. I love playing a mom. It gives your life stakes that you wouldn’t have otherwise.

BE: Do you have anything to draw from? Not necessarily your own child, but perhaps a younger brother…?

TM: Yeah, I have two younger brothers. One is just a little bit younger than me and not so wild as… [Starts to laugh.] Well, I don’t need to draw from anything to work with Jordan. It’s all there. Everything I need is right there.

JG: [Laughs.] She’s very kind.

TM: But for Kira…well, first off, the girl who plays her is actually seven herself, and she’s ridiculous. I mean, she’s a jaw-droppingly amazing actor and singer who’s wise beyond her years. But a lot of my understanding of that relationship comes from my little brother, who’s 15…and who I can’t even talk about or I’ll start crying! But that protectiveness and that mama-lion thing, it’s there. For sure.

BE: “Orphan Black” is being positioned as part of BBC America’s “Supernatural Saturday.”

DB: Yes, it is.

BE: What is it about the series that makes it supernatural?

DB: That’s such a funny question…and another great question!…because I was talking to Graeme (Manson, co-creator), and I asked the same thing. I think we start off pretty much grounded in the real because, as we’ve said many times, cloning is very much a thing of the present. It is not something that’s science-fiction. It’s very much science-reality. I think as we go, it’s inevitable that we will delve deeper into cloning origins and how it all happened and what it means to the characters. I don’t know if we’ll see anything supernatural in sort of like a Whedon-verse supernatural sense, or something out of “The Exorcist,” but something maybe more “Fringe”-like. I don’t know if you’ve seen “Fringe”…

BE: Oh, yeah.

DB: Yeah, okay, so something maybe borders the paranormal and the scientific. Something that’s maybe more like…alchemy? Maybe. If we’re gonna explore it. But I think because most people aren’t familiar with the realities of cloning, it will seem supernatural.

JG: Yeah, like what you can do with cloning. You can clone body parts. Maybe I’ll get a certain…

TM: A circumcision?

JG: No! [Laughs.] No, no, no. I don’t know, maybe I’ll end up with horns one day on the show. You never know. That could be very supernatural. [Shrugs.] It’s a dark, sexy show. But, like he said, it’s real issues.

TM: We don’t know the origins of anything, though, including ourselves. It could be something quite supernatural. Or it could be basic science. We just don’t even know. So I think that idea of not knowing where these people come from can kind of possibly fall into the supernatural.

JG: Yeah, let’s go with that. [Laughs.]

BE: Lastly, since you guys are, for all practical purposes, going to be more or less unknowns to a lot of the audience tuning in for “Orphan Black,” I’m going to ask you to out yourselves: is there anything on YouTube that I should link to as a clip?

JG: Oh, no. No, no, no. Yes. [Laughs.] There’s a cover of me singing a song by Young the Giant called “Cough Syrup.”

TM: Okay, what I loved about that was the way you went, “Oh, no. No, no, no. Yes.” [Laughs.] “And then let me just write down the link for you…” That was awesome.

JG: Look, it’s gonna come out. I might as well give it up.

DB: Um… [Long pause.] Um…

BE: It’s not like I can’t search for something myself. I’m just trying to give you the opportunity to choose it. This is for your benefit, man!

DB: Oh, God…

JG: Is your demo reel on the internet?

DB: No, but… [Another long pause.] Well, from my soap opera days, there’s a lot of me being shirtless in and out of bed on the internet. In fact, it’s called “Shirtless In and Out of Bed.”

TM: I’ve seen that. It’s awesome. It’s, like, a montage of Dylan, and you’re just looking into space…

DB: [Laughs.] Yeah, well, it starts with one where I’m a doctor and I’m helping a nurse study for her anatomy test, and I’m kissing her body, telling her that her ankle bone is connected to her leg bone as I kiss my way on up. So go ahead and link to that. What the hell. [Turning to Tatania.] Now, what about you?

TM: Um…I did an improv monologue once. Part of this project called The Improv Monologue Project. Not a great improv monologue. [Laughs.] But it’s up there. Maybe you can link to that. That’s embarrassing enough.

BE: Yeah, but that’s pretty classy compared to the song and the soap-opera clips.

DB: I know, right? It’s, like, that’s a properly valiant effort!

TM: No. Wait ‘til you see it. [Laughs.] I, uh, do a lot of yelling and screaming.

DB: You watch. It’ll be the best one.

TM: It’s not. Jordan’s singing is gonna be the best one.

DB: Mine is definitely not the best one. Although it’s actually got over a million views.

JG: [Incredulously.] A million views.

DB: A million and a half, actually. [Grins.] Watch out, Bieber!

TM: That is unbelievable.

BE: So you’re very attractive and you’ve got a million and a half hits on YouTube. Nice one.

DB: Oh, my God, I sound like the biggest douche right now!  That’s terrible!

TM: About as terrible as my monologue! [Laughs.]

Actually, you might be surprised.

If you haven’t seen “Glengarry Glen Ross” recently, maybe you should see how Roma’s described on Wikipedia:

Although Roma seems to think of himself as a latter day cowboy and regards his ability to make a sale as a sign of his virility, he admits only to himself that it is all luck. He is ruthless, dishonest and immoral, but succeeds because he has a talent for figuring out a client’s weaknesses and crafting a pitch that will exploit those weaknesses. He is a smooth talker and often speaks in grand, poetic soliloquies.

Those who’ve read about Spector’s brusque, often downright crazed interactions with musicians in the studio, his turbulent relationship with ex-wife Ronnie Spector, and a notorious obsession with firearms which—no matter how you spin the story of the night a woman named Lana Clarkson ended up dead in his home—was directly responsible for his eventual incarceration will certainly see some immediate similarities between him and Roma. After seeing HBO’s “Phil Spector,” you will see even more of them. What you will not see, however, is a movie that matches “Glengarry Glen Ross.”

But, then, you probably didn’t expect that, anyway.

Discerning the difference between a good Al Pacino performance and a bad Al Pacino performance is a bit like the old “Remote Control” category, “Dead or Canadian”: sometimes it’s awfully hard to tell.

Take, for instance, his turn as John Milton in 1997’s “The Devil’s Advocate,” which was so insanely over the top that…well, it wasn’t what you’d describe as good in the traditional sense of the word, but it’s got such a can’t-take-your-eyes-off-the-screen quality to it that it’s hard to write it completely off as bad, either.

This is not what you’d call an isolated incident within Pacino’s filmography, but he’s certainly not beyond the point of being able to disappear inside a character. In particular, there seems to be something about working for HBO which brings out the very best in him: he’s earned the Emmy for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Miniseries or Movie twice now for his efforts in the network’s production, first for playing Roy Cohn in 1993’s “Angels in America,” then for his depiction of Dr. Jack Kevorkian in 2010’s “You Don’t Know Jack.” The quality of work might also have something to do with a desire to do justice to his portrayal of real people. Whatever the reason, his performance in the latter role effectively made me an Al Pacino fan all over again, because I forgot I was watching Al Pacino. Hand on heart, I cannot begin to tell you the last time I’ve ever experienced that, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it’s because it was the first time it had ever happened.

Suffice it to say that it does not happen during “Phil Spector.” Or, at the very least, it does not happen with enough consistency that viewers will ever truly find themselves lost in Pacino’s performance. Part of that may come from the fact that it would be impossible for anyone to play Phil Spector without a certain amount of flamboyance, thereby sending Pacino down a road where it becomes almost inevitable that he will fall victim to his tendency to go over the top. Certainly, the need to wear several different wigs and at least one fake moustache don’t exactly help one’s suspension of disbelief, either.

Still, you may have noted the caveat in the previous paragraph which implies that there are, in fact, some occasions where, despite whatever get-up he may be wearing at the time, Pacino captures the viewer’s attention successfully enough to vanish into his character for short periods. There’s definitely a special kind of magic when Mamet’s dialogue and Pacino’s delivery meet, and it’s evident during Spector’s soliloquies about his career, his way with women, and various and sundry other topics. Sometimes they come across as considered and thoughtful, other times they play like the ravings of a lunatic, but when Pacino’s given the opportunity to get on a roll, he delivers.

Oftentimes, however, Spector’s rants are interrupted by his attorney, Linda Kenney Baden, played by Helen Mirren, which shatters the magic. As a result, the back-and-forth between the two of them isn’t nearly as effective as when they’re provided their own spotlights, or when Mirren gets to play against Jeffrey Tambor, who plays her fellow attorney Bruce Cutler.

It’s also worth noting that there’s a slightly mind-bending announcement made at the beginning of “Phil Spector” which may affect your appreciation of the subsequent events:

“This is a work of fiction. It’s not ‘based on a true story.’ It is a drama inspired by actual persons in a trial, but it is neither an attempt to depict the actual persons, nor to comment upon the trial or its outcome.”

So what the hell is it, then?

Ultimately, it’s a reminder that Mamet and Pacino can, when the circumstances are right, work magic together, but whereas “Glengarry Glen Ross” was pure wizardry, “Phil Spector” is just a couple of nicely-executed card tricks: it’s not entirely unimpressive, but you’ve seen ‘em do better.

Bullz-Eye: Your character on “Smash” is regularly described in reviews as “difficult but brilliant,” and even on the NBC website they sum him up in a single sentence by calling him “one of Broadway’s most brilliant, yet arrogant, director-choreographers.” Did you have to pay people off to get the word “brilliant” out there so prominently?

Jack Davenport: Probably, yeah. [Laughs.] You know, the way the character’s written is the way people generally refer to him, and you are to believe that the man has half a dozen Tonys, probably two musicals that are international franchises, but that also makes you cocky. Also, in the real world of show business, no one refers to anybody as talented or brilliant. But when you’re doing a show about show business, weirdly, you do have to point that out on occasion. Not too often, but it’s sort of… Otherwise, you’re not really setting the scene properly, I don’t think.

BE: True enough. A few adjectives can save the writers from having to come up with a complete back story right off the bat.

JD: Oh, yeah. And as for “difficult,” I think that one speaks for itself. [Laughs.]

BE: How much of Derek was on the page when you arrived, and how much has been added to the character since then?

JD: Well, you know, when you initially get a part on a series, you only have the pilot script to go on, but then things evolve as you grow into the part and the writers see what you’re doing with their stuff. If you’re fortunate enough to do something that lasts more than one year, in this context… What’s interesting is that I’ve done series—not in this country, I have to say—which did two, three, four seasons, but I’d sort of forgotten to a degree that, on some level, one develops a sense of…ownership, really. So you start to get a sense of what does and doesn’t quite feel right for that character.

What’s been really great about having Josh (Safran) is that, when I first met him, he sat down and sort of billed himself as extremely collaborative, and he’s been amazingly—and unnecessarily, I have to say—respectful of the fact that we sort of did it a year before he came here. So we have a very open dialogue about… not so much storyline, because, you know, he’s the show runner. But in terms of detail within scenes, he’s amazingly amenable, and I guess at this point you feel that’s it’s more a two-way street. When you do a first season of something, you don’t know any better than the writers do. Whatever comes down the pike, you just go [In a very silly voice.] “Okay!” Because, you know, the character hasn’t been established.

But the writers always—or at least they do in any cleverly-staffed writers room, which they generally are—see the rushes and stuff, and when they do, they see what works and what doesn’t, and they’re, like, “Oh, okay!” So I imagine it’s been shaped to me, and…it feels like a good fit!

BE: Can you talk a bit about Season 2 and Derek’s place in it?

JD: Well, the season starts with him in a similar place, inasmuch as it’s only three weeks later, but what you also find, and I think this is a great way to tame the character, is that some of his more questionable interpersonal tactics slightly come home to haunt him. It gives him a chance to be vulnerable, and he’s not a character who’s allowed to be vulnerable very often, because his job is to not be. His job is to start in front of rooms full of people where no one knows what the fuck to do next and say, “I have a plan!” So it’s been nice to have that facet to explore.

BE: To ask about your last series in this country, one of the ones you semi-referenced that didn’t make it beyond its first season, what were your feelings on the way “Flash Forward” wrapped up?

JD: Well, I mean, in truth… Look, clearly it wasn’t intended to only last for a season, and if you are doing a show in which the hook is an event that affects the entire planet, it’s unlikely to end after one season in a satisfactory fashion. [Laughs.] So, no, of course I wasn’t happy with how it wrapped up. There were loads of unanswered questions. But, sadly, that’s the way it went. When I sat down and met David Goyer when I took the job, though, David had a very clear, specific, and, frankly, a five-year vision of where that story was going to go. And he really just didn’t a chance to do it. So, of course, it was, like, “Oh, okay, so it’s blackouts interruptus, then, is it?” But what are you gonna do?

BE: When I interviewed Richard Curtis on the press junket for “Pirate Radio” a few years ago, I said, “Poor Jack Davenport’s character, Twatt…the name’s a bit on the nose, isn’t it?”

JD: [Laughs.] Well, Richard has a history with this. He has a tendency on occasion toward characters with names which are arguably a bit too on the nose as far as reflecting the person they are. I mean, I’m just saying… Would anyone with that surname not change it? But, again, what are you gonna do? It did seem a little on-the-nose to me as well, though.

BE: Given the resurgence in the popularity of vampires in recent years, how often do you find yourself being asked about “Ultra Violet” nowadays?

JD: Well, it’s funny. As you say, because vampirism in all its forms is all the rage… Funnily enough, David Goyer defined that show with the best soundbite I’ve ever heard about it, which was that it was like “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” but with the high political seriousness of “The West Wing.” And it kind of was! Telly-literate people know that show well, because it was a damned clever idea. You know, vampires are just about the oldest story there is, and all of it’s been done to death…or un-death, as it were. [Laughs.] But I thought Joe (Ahearne), who wrote that show and directed all of it, spun accepted ideas about vampire folklore in ways that no one had ever thought of before.

Now, the people from the series have obviously managed to go on to do other quite good things, but I think we would’ve loved to have done more. Funnily enough, though, it feels okay that it ends where it does. It ends on a rather brilliantly bleak note. But at the same time, it didn’t feel like, “Huh?!?” But people do ask me about it. People who love television. Mainly television journalists at this point, I’ll be honest. [Laughs.]

BE: Is there a favorite project that you’ve worked on over the years that didn’t get the love you thought it deserved?

JD: Oh, yeah. [Laughs.] I’ve lost count of the number of independent films I’ve made. But, then, that’s the difficulty of independent films, actually. Some very smart, committed, talented people throw their heart and soul into something that then, just because of the vagaries of distribution, no one gets to see. I mean, I’ve done things on TV that didn’t work, but it’s still on TV, and if it works, it works. But, yeah, sure, I’ve made a bunch of independent films that I felt more people would’ve enjoyed, or might’ve, if they’d ever gotten to see them.

BE: In regards to TV, would “Swingtown” qualify?

JD: Oh, well, see, “Swingtown” is actually a perfect example. That was the year that CBS tried to slightly deviate from their, uh, CBS-ness. [Laughs.] The problem, however, is that their key demographic is still their key demographic, and they like the procedurals and that’s it. And in some ways… well, it was originally written for… [Hesitates.] I want to say HBO, but it was possibly Showtime.

BE: It seems like a cable concept.

JD: It does. But Nina Tassler is such a talented and persuasive woman that my feeling is that she sort of…she talked Alan Poul and Mike Kelley into going to CBS to doing it, and with the best of intentions. And it’s not as though we didn’t make the show they wanted to make. We did. But it was interesting that…y’know, people got really upset about that show, in the sense that they felt it was immoral. But it’s, like, “We’re not making this up!” [Laughs.] It happened. And happens. And, actually, the show wasn’t about wife-swapping. It was about feminism, actually! It was about the changing role of women in American society. And it was really…I mean, I thought it was a fucking good show, actually, and could’ve…it was just…

Well, I mean, look, here’s a perfect example of something where you go, “Oh, if only we’ve had maybe just one more year…” Because that show was literally the story of Mike Kelley’s childhood. I was playing his father, essentially. And stories like that, stories that are truly from a very personal place and are being overseen by someone who’s emotionally invested, resonate in a way that is very rare in this business. And I loved the people in it. There were some great, great actors. Molly Parker, Miriam Shor…amazing people. Yeah, it was a damned shame. But it was probably the wrong home for it. Not from the point of view of the people who worked at the network, who wanted to try something different, but just the people who watch that network weren’t, uh, up for a show about that, I guess. [Laughs.]

BE: As far as “Coupling” goes, it was obviously more or less only a cult show here in the States, but I’d guess it still had to be gratifying to be able to move successfully from being recognized as a sitcom actor into working in more dramatic roles.

JD: Well, the genius is that I’d been doing only dramatic things for years prior to “Coupling.” And when “Coupling” came along, I jumped at it precisely because it wasn’t a dramatic role. I was, like, “Wow, you want me to do a sitcom?!? Fuck, I never thought anybody would ask me to do that!” [Laughs.] So that was a ticket into that world, and it sort of became successful for a long time, I think much to everyone’s surprise. I don’t think anyone expected it go for four years. That’s a long time in the UK! But it wasn’t like that’s where I started. It was more of the middle part. And to be honest, it’s such a specific, odd format, the sitcom, that I’m sort of happy to not do it for awhile. I mean, never say never, but it’s a very specific performance requirement, and I feel like I’ve been there. For now, anyway.

BE: Lastly, if you were invited to appear in another of the Pirates of the Caribbean films, would you be up for it.

JD: Well, I’m dead…but, then again, that’s never stopped anyone in those films in the past, has it? So far, though, I remain the only major character who, when they’ve been killed, has stayed dead. So if nothing else, that does kind of make me the answer to a Trivial Pursuit question, at least. [Laughs.]

True enough: in 1987, NBC aired a TV movie called “Bates Motel,” which starred Bud Cort as Alex West, a fellow with a few mental troubles who shared some quality time with Norman Bates in the state insane asylum and, as a result, finds himself the beneficiary of the Bates Motel in Norman’s will. The intent was to use the movie as a backdoor pilot for a weekly anthology series of sorts, following the lives of individuals passing through as guests of the motel, but when ratings for the movie proved disappointing, the plan for the series was abandoned.

But A&E’s “Bates Motel” isn’t a retread of that premise. Instead, it’s a prequel, revealing how Norman Bates became the kind of guy who’d grow obsessed with his mother that he’d take on her identity on occasion and kill anyone who looked at him sideways.

Oh, wait, you say that’s already been done, too?

Yep, it sure has: in 1990, Showtime produced “Psycho IV: The Beginning,” which pointedly ignored the aforementioned TV movie and showed a very-much-still-alive Norman (Anthony Perkins) calling into a radio talk show about – what are the odds? – matricide, using the conversation as a framing device to flash back to his youth and reveal the bond between Norma Bates (Olivia Hussey) and her son (played by Henry Thomas). It doesn’t exactly hew 100% to the continuity established by the preceding three films, but as a standalone film for casual fins, it holds up relatively well, thanks in no small part to Perkins’ performance.

Actually, A&E’s “Bates Motel” isn’t a retread of that premise, either. Not really, anyway. I mean, yes, it starts at approximately the same point in Norman’s life, and the general idea is the same, in that it’s looking into all the Oedipal-ness of the Norma/Norman relationship. This time, though, it isn’t a period piece. For better or worse, it takes place in present day, which means that it’s arguably not a prequel at all but, instead, more of a complete reboot of the franchise.

Don’t worry, though: the Bates Motel itself still looks just as decrepit and foreboding as ever.

But, of course, “Bates Motel” is far from the first occasion of an existing property has been turned into a prequel for TV. Heck, it’s not even the first time it’s happened in 2013!

Muppet Babies (CBS, 1984-1990): Although baby versions of the Muppets first appeared in a scene in “The Muppets Take Manhattan,” the film only appeared in theaters a few months before “Muppet Babies” joined the CBS Saturday morning line-up, so it’s clear that the powers knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that kids wouldn’t be able to resist the li’l darlings. As it turned out, though, the writing on “Muppet Babies” and the incorporation of its characters’ imaginations and their resulting fantasies made it one of the most enjoyable Saturday morning series in many moons. It’s just a shame that we’re likely never to see a complete-series set of the show, as the funds it would require to secure the rights to include the episodes featuring clips from other TV series and films would be decidedly cost-prohibitive. Sigh…

Star Wars: Droids (ABC, 1985-1986)
Star Wars: Ewoks (ABC, 1985-1986)

Unlike “Star Wars: The Clone Wars,” which was always designed to serve as a bridge between the goings on in the second and third chapters in the “Star Wars” saga, no one knew in 1985 if George Lucas would ever deign to fill in the blanks he’d established for a possible prequel trilogy. As such, younger “Star Wars” fans lost their minds when they learned of “Droids,” which was intended to loosely establish what R2D2 and C3P0 had been doing in the years immediately prior to “Star Wars IV: A New Hope.” Decidedly fewer viewers cared what the Ewoks had been doing prior to “Return of the Jedi,” but we got the answer to that, too.

The Flintstone Kids (ABC, 1986-1988)
A Pup Named Scooby-Doo (ABC, 1988-1991)

Not that animated series are required by law to follow their established chronologies, but there’s something really obnoxious about the way Hanna-Barbera decided to cheapen the legacy of two of its most iconic series by saying, “Hey, let’s make ‘em little kids and wring a few more bucks out of the franchise!” In fairness, we never really knew how Scooby and the gang got together, so “A Pup Named Scooby-Doo” might well be considered part of the canon, but in the Season 4 “Flintstones” episode, “Bachelor Days,” we got the back story on the first meeting of Fred and Barney and Wilma and Betty, and it definitely didn’t take place when they were wee.

The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles (ABC, 1992-1996)

For my part, I don’t think I’ll ever forgive the way this series, when it was released on DVD, opted to trash all of the book-ending sequences featuring George Hall as an elderly Indiana Jones, presumably because Harrison Ford was getting a little too close to that age by that point. Still, this was a fun series which helped fill in some gaps in Dr. Jones’ history while also helping younger viewers learn history.

The Little Mermaid (CBS, 1992-1994)
Jungle Cubs (ABC, 1996-1996)
Hercules (Syndication, 1998-1999)

Disney may have done to the characters from “The Jungle Book” basically the same thing that Hanna-Barbera did with “The Flintstones” and “Scooby-Doo,” but darned if they didn’t do it in such a beautifully animated fashion that you tend to be more forgiving of their efforts. “The Little Mermaid” and “Hercules,” however, were slightly less egregious in their flashbacks, with the latter actually turning out to be an extremely funny series filled with tons of great guest voices.

Ponderosa (PAX-TV, 2001-2002)

You don’t have to be all that well-versed in TV history to know that the turn of the millennium was not exactly what you’d call the glory days of the western genre, but given that PAX-TV was trying to cater to an older, gentler demographic, it’s understandable why they’d decide that it might be a reasonable plan of action to try and revisit the lives of the Cartwright family and reveal what was going on in the years prior to those portrayed in “Bonanza.” Unfortunately, series with gentler tones don’t tend to draw a lot of attention to themselves, especially when they’re on a relatively small cable network.

Star Trek: Enterprise (UPN, 2001-2005)

The idea of doing a series about the earliest days of the United Federation of Planets was a reasonable one, given the amount of history which had been established in various other “Star Trek” series over the course of the preceding decades. Unfortunately, “Enterprise” spent so much more time trying to create its own new history that by the time the creators realized that they’d made a tactical error, the writing was already on the wall for the series’ fate. It’s a shame, really, as the last series was easily the best season of the bunch.

Clifford’s Puppy Days (PBS Kids, 2003-2004)

We all know that Emily Elizabeth’s love made Clifford grow so big that her family had to leave their home and relocate to Birdwell Island. What we never knew, however, was what life was like for this little girl in the early days of her relationship with her then-little red dog. This was possibly not need-to-know information, as “Clifford’s Puppy Days” only lasted for a single season.

Caprica (SyFy, 2010)

For those “Battlestar Galactica” fans who wanted all the deets on how the Cylons first came to be created, Ronald D. Moore came up with “Caprica,” starring Eric Stoltz as Daniel Graystone, the man who used his daughter Zoe as the model for the very first Cylon. Although critics embraced the series for the most part, viewer became increasingly less enthused, resulting in only a single-season run for the show.

The Carrie Diaries (The CW, 2013)

Since the odds of seeing another “Sex and the City” movie seem to be shrinking with each passing day, it’s not entirely unreasonable for The CW to decide to move forward on a series based on Candace Bushnell’s story of Carrie Bradshaw’s life circa 1984. Surprisingly, the series is a great deal of fun, offering an inevitably awesome soundtrack while providing a sweet, nostalgic look back at day-glo days gone by while offering a bit of new insight into the character of Carrie that was established on the HBO series.