Here's the official description from a CBS release:
(modified by breaking into 3 paragraphs)

According to the tentative CBS schedule (listed in the above linked press release), this will air on Tuesday nights @ 9pm Eastern, right after it's mother show, NCIS. (The Mentalist, which formerly occupied that timeslot gets moved to the cushy post-CSI timeslot of Thursdays @ 10pm.)

The backdoor pilot was aired as two episode of NCIS ("Legend, Part 1" and "Legend, Part 2"). And, yes, Callen is alive, he did survive the drive-by assassination attempt (see the NCIS episode, "Semper Fidelis"). Discussion of these episodes starts around this post in the main NCIS thread.

I thought the two-parter showed that the series had potential, but that the episodes themselves weren't all that special. They suffered from traditional "pilotitis" issues (e.g., bad exposition, or just unnecessary exposition - what I mainly remember is longish dialogues about the new characters backgrounds that didn't feel organic at all). But, I did end up liking Chris O'Donell's character and have a much better opinion of him than before -- the last place I saw him was in the TNT mini-series The Company. Also, I hadn't seen LL Cool J in any acting roles and what I thought was a bit of stunt-casting doesn't seem to be.

Essentially, the show, as presented in the "Legend" two-parter seems a bit like the British series MI-5 (or Spooks - original UK title) in that the OSP is basically acting like a smaller version of the UK's Security Service (aka "MI5"), which is charged with guarding the internal security of the UK, and roughly takes the form of a traditional intelligence agency (such as the CIA) but with some police powers.


(The thread title "'Cause San Diego Isn't Cool Enough" is because I feel that San Diego would have made much more sense as a spin-off location, as it has the largest Naval base on the West Coast which is home to the Pacific Fleet. That idea formed before the spin-off turned out to be more of a spy procedural rather than a crime-solving procedural, which was how the original NCIS started out.)

They shoulda went with NCIS: Special Ops. This just sounds like they're copying CSI.
Well, since O'Donnell is getting pimped pretty hard, I'm guessing he makes a full recovery.

Although, the fact that he does this without ever changing what he looks like is interesting. I mean ... at some point, aren't the bad guys going to catch on that all of their contacts look exactly alike?


Personally, I like "NCIS: Special Ops" because, y'know ... that's who they are. Seems to make sense. Even if they'd have gone with "NCIS: Pacific Fleet" or "NCIS: West Coast" it would have been better. Plus, it would have given them room to move around, if LA gets boring. But "NCIS: Los Angeles"? Unless every episode is going to include jokes about CSI and its various locales, it seems kind of "been there / done that."

I liked NCIS:Legend, which was the jokey title Mo Ryan, James Poniewozik and a couple of other critics were batting around last week.

I kind of wondered how Callen could keep moving around LA and not change his looks... Really odd.

I hate the title too, I like NCIS: Special Ops better. Maybe they'll change it, they changed Navy NCIS, didn't they?

If the show lasts, maybe they could get a different actor each season to play Callen.

I can't believe I'm posting on this board already ... sigh ...

There are already too many shows set in Los Angeles, and now they have to put the name in the title of the show. NCIS: Los Angeles is a dumb title. Should have been simply OSP. I was interested in it based on the two-parter, but not so much now.

I can see why they didn't choose OSP because that would make it quite a long list of letters. NCIS: OSP. Still, the setting (Los Angeles rather than San Diego), the focus (are there that many undercover operations necessary in NCIS?), and the lack of Navy presence makes me wonder how long this show will last.

I found the cast to be...fine in and of itself, but I don't see how this is going to be actually focused on the Navy. NCIS has trouble with this problem already, and I'm not hopeful about the spinoff succeeding in that regard.

I think I hate NCIS: Los Angeles for exactly the reason stated in a comment above-- it sounds too much like the CSI spin-offs. And we all know this show is not another CSI. Urgh. I would have liked NCIS: Special Ops or NCIS: Legend much better than the current title. Here's to hoping they decide to change it again before the fall.

As for the show itself, I'll probably watch because I enjoy NCIS, but the spin-off doesn't really seem to have a flavor yet. The "back-door" pilot only gave us a glimpse into the world of the OSP, so I'm curious to see what it'll be like when it's on it's own. I like Chris O'Donnell's character already, but the rest are still part of the background and don't have much personality yet.

Exactly what I have been saying, partly because I liked CSI and never any of the ":locations" but also because it is way too similar in name. But then again NCIS: Special Ops follows the "Law and Order: Squad" formula so there is no winning I guess.

Someone suggested NCIS: Undercover (kind of as a joke) when the backdoor pilot was airing but I think that would have worked best. They are the undercover team, they could be anywhere with the title and there is perceived (stress: perceived) sex appeal with the name.

Although, the new show will end up being called NCIS: LA, which is only one letter less. So ... NCIS: OSP would be a much better choice!

I'm not sure, LA is recognizable most people know what is stands for. OSP is confusing to casual viewers who probably barely know what NCIS stands for. In the end NCIS: OSP is a bunch of confusing letters and NCIS: LA is instantaneously recognizable since LA is basically a word.

I saw a preview for NCIS: Los Angeles last night during Criminal Minds. For now I guess they're deliberately typing out the whole city name rather than shortening it to LA (though that's obviously what writers and fans will do). The name looked even more ridiculous to me in the promo than it had just talking about it here.


OSP might be confusing to some people, but so was NCIS which is why they put the redundant Navy in front of it for the first couple of seasons. I would be more willing to overlook the silly name choice if I knew there was a possibility that they would be willing to change it down the road to something better like how they allowed NCIS to drop the Navy at the front.

Official behind the scenes promo (2:20). It employs the classic cliche of having the various lead actors give interview answers about how awesome, new, and different the show is suppose to be, which I find to be very annoying. -- So, if you're on the fence about the show, don't watch it.

At the end is a graphic with a possible logo. (Zoned Out, is that the same or similar to what you saw regarding the title?) Anyway, I hate, hate the choice of fonts used (which looks to be in the Bitstream Square 721 family). The wide "C" in NCIS and the equally wide "O" in "LOS" overwhelm almost everything else.

***
If this show can finds its leg as some sort of domestic spy drama that "keeps it real" (e.g., avoids the absurd) then I'll be a long-time viewer. And, I much prefer that this show becomes the hub for Shane Brennan's spy fetish, so that the NCIS mothership can return to its roots as a crime procedural.

Yes, ScribblerGuy, that's exactly the logo I saw last night. And it's maybe partly about font, but mostly I think it was just seeing NCIS: Los Angeles in a promo that really brought it home to me how stupid an idea that name choice was.

Other than the bad name, I find the time in which this show will air odd. I am not sure if I can handle back to back NCIS' each week. Once and a great while but every Tuesday seems like a horrible idea. I know that CBS does not have a lot of time slots open but Thursday after CSI sounds like a much better idea.

I agree the time slot is too much, one right after the other, I guess they are hoping that because you watch one you will stick around for two but personally I rarely have the patience to watch two shows in a row, I have other things to do so in the end I'll DVR it and watch it whenever.

For those up north in Canada, CanWest Global has picked up the series (Variety article).

Recast news on one of the lead roles from The Hollywood Reporter. Interesting.

Yay! That was my least favorite of all the characters but I felt it was mostly due to the casting.. which I felt was not done well in that particular instance.

I'm not surprised. When NCIS was doing its spinoff episodes on JAG, there was a different female lead until Kate was brought on, which I was very thankful for. It is very hard to judge the spinoff episodes when it is on a different show because so much can and will probably changed. It will be easier to make a more objective call once it is on its own and the changes can be seen. I liked what I saw and besides Chris O'Donnell is nice to look at.

From TV Guide:



Looks like Louise Lombard wasn't a hit. It's too bad they can't do some story tweaking. Susanna Thompson won't be doing Kings anymore, so I'd bring Col. Mann out of CID retirement, make a lateral move from Army to Navy, and send her to LA. There would have to be a suspension of disbelief, but ST's Mann definitely has the presence to head the OSP.

I agree Ohmo, but I don't see why there's be any suspension of disbelief. NCIS is a civilian organization and Col Mann is no longer Col Mann, and could easily be hired by NCIS.

I say, bring Susanna Thompson on! I loved her and I loved her chemistry with Mark Harmon!

Yes she was, AimingforYoko!

Wasn't MD talking to her about that very thing?

I just made this very same suggestion on another site. :) I really liked Hollis Mann and I think she'd do well. At least, if they have to have someone with a "past" experience with Gibbs, hers is one not fraught with romantic angst. They may have broken up but it doesn't seem to have been something terrible on both sides.

I'm very happy that Louise isn't going to be on this show. I couldn't stand her on CSI. Anyone else would be an improvement. She wasn't believable as a CSI/Detective and certainly wasn't believable as a former Marine.

Thumbs up on gettting rid of Lombard. I like the Col Mann idea. I feel better about the direction of the show already!

If they have Col Mann on the show they guarantee me as a viewer. Not that that makes any difference...

Enthused Fish: Then they can forget the history with Macy, because that was just stupid. At least, I thought so.

I didn't find Louise Lombard to be a problem. What I disliked was the history they made with Gibbs. I think it was a big mistake and made her less sympathetic, less tough and less likable overall.

I'd be much more tempted to watch the spinoff if they put Mann on the show, myself.

Just read about the recast, I'm glad I wasn't a fan of her on CSI either, I'm surprised though because I read years ago she was a favorite of one of the big wigs at CBS Les Moon-something-or-other), which was one of the reasons why she was brought to CSI in the first place.

I am now getting more interested in this show, now if only they could change the name and move it to a new night (spread it out).

Add me to the Hollis Mann camp. I loved Susanna Thompson's episodes. Hated the whole Macy backstory with Gibbs. I was hoping it was more that she did something to mess up the protection of Kelly and Shannon, resulting in their murders. I thought that would be more interesting than the way they played it. But hey, at least it wasn't romantic.

I still thinks NCIS: Special Ops is a good name. Maybe when it starts to gain its own audience they can move it.

OK, works for me. I thought there would be an issue with Mann working for the Army and then moving to investigate the Navy. If there had been, I would have suspended disbelief anyway because I like her character, and I can totally accept Mann as head of an undercover unit.

I hope that Shane Brennan completely takes Macy off the canvas. I'd really have liked it if he had never written that Macy has been shielding Gibbs from a murder investigation for 18 years. Since the audience can't "unknow" what they know, taking Macy off the canvas would at least be something. Mark Harmon's Gibbs isn't going anywhere that we know of on NCIS, so damage control on Gibbs' history could be addressed by getting rid of Macy. Maybe she'll resign because of what happened with Callan, and then Hollis Mann can be brought in.

If it's not just a recast (compare the "Elizabeth Weir" character in Stargate: SG1 and later Stargate: Atlantis, who was originally played by NCIS's own Jessica Steen and later Torri Higginson) but bringing in a whole "new" character such as Col. Mann, then this could be a very good way of shaking things up.

And, this change might be useful for adding a season long mystery or some other arc, i.e., if they have Macy's character murdered, kidnapped or otherwise missing -- which would lead to a discovery that the LA crew has a mole or some other leak, or at least a way to introduce a nemesis/baddie. (Yeah, the murder route would probably be an over-used trope, but this would give the show's season premiere a solid kick start.)

Then, Col. Mann, or whoever they bring in, would be the by-the-book boss brought in to clean things up. And, I do very much like the idea of Col. Mann as I always enjoyed the character. Plus, the back-and-forth between her and Callan would be interesting, along with the psych guy trying to study her.

Was ambivalent about Macy - although I hated that they had to tie her story in with Gibbs, blech. But Holis Mann? DO NOT WANT.
I never took to her on NCIS and if she was on the spinoff, well even Chris O'Donnell and LL Cool J wouldn't get me to watch.

NCIS investigates crimes involving all branches of the Armed Forces, not just the Navy.

Actually, Beacon, (unless you work for NCIS and can correct me...which would be very cool ;D ), according to the official NCIS (organization, not TV show) website, their mission is:



That seems to confine their investigations to the Navy and Marine Corps, not to all branches of the military. JAG investigates all branches of the military, but NCIS is only for the Navy/Marines.

Enthused Fish is correct, each branch has their own investigative service:
Naval Criminal Investigative Service
U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command
Air Force Office of Special Investigations
Coast Guard Investigative Service


This is kind of correct, but not exactly. There is not an overarching JAG Corps that investigates anyone in the military. Each branch of the military has its own JAG Corps:
Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy
Judge Advocate General's Corps, United States Army
Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Air Force

The show JAG dealt with the Navy's JAG Corps which means it also encompassed the Marines. They rarely if ever dealt with the Army or the Air Force.

Ah, thanks for the clarification!

...and wasn't Col. Mann part of Army CID?

Ask Ausiello



Hopefully they'll re-introduce an existing character (Hollis Mann, Hollis Mann). I'd be willing to bet that Macy's backstory didn't test well with viewers either. Shane Brennan really screwed the pooch there.

Yes! *joins in chant* Hollis Mann! Hollis Mann! (I like the idea so much that I've started writing a story about it... ;D)

I agree that the Macy backstory was a huge mistake. I don't know why it was even necessary to have a person with that kind of relationship with Gibbs. tsk tsk Big mistake.

You have to love how Hollywood thinks. The lousy story was a big part of her not testing well so - fire the actor! "Mr. Jones, we've discovered you have a brain tumor, so we're going to amputate your leg."

I was reading the original posts from last night's repeat and it played about the same time this spin-off was announced. The first suggested title? "NCIS: Cleveland" So close, and yet, nowhere.

LOL. Blame the actor - it does seem a lousy deal.

I didn't mind her or the role. She seemed young but watching TV always requires some suspension of reality and I was OK with that.

But then I didn't like Hollis Mann as I remember a caricature - she started out as a strong woman who was not intimidated by Gibbs and became needy when they struck up a relationship. Ugh!

I don't find that to be unusual. Primetime television series aren't like soap operas, where viewers often accept several actors who play one character throughout the years. There are exceptions in primetime, but for the most part, once an actor is publicly aired in a particular role, the show is committed to whatever was written for that character. If Shane Brennan had tested Macy with a private focus group and they hated her backstory, he could have re-worked it with Louise Lombard in the role. However, she was unfortunate enough to air in a lead role with a major backstory that now becomes crappy canon within TWO series.

This isn't a small thing like Gibbs and Fornell not knowing each other and then several episodes of NCIS later, the two characters now have a history. Viewers can accept minor tweeks like that. However, Shane Brennan wrote that the established lead character of a six-year-old series, who's supposed to be seen as a good guy, has been allowed to get away with murder for 18 years because evidence against him was discovered but knowingly suppressed by someone who now also is in a position of power. That's not something that Brennan can just fix with a little tweak. It was a major screw-up, because he tampered with Gibbs' canon in a way that he shouldn't have. It's not like Macy can turn around and say, "Oops, Nate got it wrong. I have no proof that Gibbs actually killed someone." Nate's supposed to be a super psychologist. The audience will not buy that, especially on a series that has no history to begin with, and Gibbs certainly isn't going to be investigated on NCIS.

The only way to really do damage control here is to take Macy off the canvas so that we can sort of return to where we were before, that it's known that Gibbs killed the drug dealer, but there's no actual concrete evidence that he did so. Macy knows where the evidence is because she suppressed it, but Gibbs and Nate now only know that such evidence exists. If Macy's gone, that evidence kind of fades into the background because no one knows for sure where it is. If she stays, then viewers of either show will always remember that she is responsible for Gibbs being a free man and even having a career at NCIS. Sabotaging the entire mythology of Leroy Jethro Gibbs by allowing Macy to remain as a viable character is just stupid. She's toast, and that means LL is too.

There's a link on the Without a Trace thread to a Poppy Montgomery fan site with the following rumor...

It is just a rumor but it seems like Poppy has been contacted to play Lara Macy on CBS's new show NCIS Los Angeles, since Louise Lombard finally said no to the role. NCIS Los Angeles is the spin off of hit show NCIS and will be aire next fall on Tuesday 10pm.

So if this is true, Louise wanted out? Doesn't sound right.

Please let that only be a rumor. I didn't like PM on Without a Trace. The spinoff is already iffy to me. If she ends up being the leader of the team...no. Just no.

That's the first indication we've had for a reason to recast the team lead. I suppose it's as likely as any other possibility.

Ohmo posted Ausiello's comment that Macy didn't test well with viewers. Change the actor or change the character? It will be interesting to see what they do.

Whoops! I forgot about that. My apologies. ...maybe it's because I tend to view Ausiello as someone else who talks without really saying anything.

Well I loathed Sam on Without a Trace, but I actually quite liked PM on the few eps I saw of Glory Days. (even when she got to snog Eddie Cahill ;-)
So long as they don't have her shagging her way around the team, I guess it could work.