this isn't real life

Entertainment in Samoa

2008-12-16T13:16:00.000-08:00

Okay, so I’ve been in Samoa for the past six months and have had limited access to current entertainment. But, just for fun, here’s the lowdown on some of the movies and such I’ve had opportunity to see over the past few months. I should point out, that I don’t really watch movies in the same way I did at home. I analyze in much the same way I always have, but in terms of what I actually enjoy, I’m all topsy-turvy. I get way more enjoyment out of something bad (see: Eagle Eye, Death Race), but there’s no way I can get through something heavy or thought-provoking I would have enjoyed at home.

(There are spoilers, but all these movies came out months ago.)

Transformers

I just watched Transformers this week on DVD. Definitely not a movie I would have watched at home. As I was watching (in the opening credits, production is in association with toy manufacturer Hasbro), I was trying to figure out what this movie is all about, that is: is it a kids’ movie? an action movie? It’s a popcorn movie, but without a clear genre, I feel totally lost – I don’t know what to expect. An hour into the movie, when the Transformers (Autobots) are finally introduced as characters, it hits me, “Oh! It’s just like the cartoon – that’s awesome!” Ultimately, I think they were trying to hard to straddle two demographics – on the one hand, this is clearly a kids’ movie (a movie based on a cartoon inspired by popular action figures), which I guess means casting Shia LaBeouf makes sense. But at the same time, Transformers seemed to be trying to be something that it wasn’t – playing it too straight as an actual action movie aimed at twenty/thirty-something males caught in adolescence. If the Autobots had been introduced as the main characters within the first 20 minutes, and had just gone for kids and went cornball, it would have been awesome. And besides, kids movies are the big money makers anyway.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

I also watched Kiss Kiss Bang Bang this week. This one I actually enjoyed. It’s sort of along the lines of The Big Lebowski, in that’s it’s an L.A. detective story that really isn’t (and by the end you’re not totally sure what it was about, but enjoyed the ride nonetheless). Although, where The Big Lebowski revels in the absurdity of the setting, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is more about mocking La La Land from a New York perspective (favorite line: “This isn’t Good Cop/Bad Cop, this is Fag and New Yorker”). I was also thinking today about the scene where Robert Downey Jr. has his nuts hooked up to the car battery and Val Kilmer won’t shut up, RDJ keeps yelling, “Stop helping! Stop helping!” – I kind of related to that sentiment sometimes…

Death Race

Unlike Tarantino’s Death Proof (which was actually a pretty good movie) Death Race is a true B movie. I went to see this one at Magik Cinemas; I was hoping for something a little more over-the-top and ridiculous, something that would make me chuckle, but it didn’t really do that. I can’t complain too much I suppose, because really, Death Race delivered what it promised: cars with Gatling guns and lots of T & A. Personally, I give more credit to a undeniably bad movie that never tried to be something that it’s not than a mediocre movie trying to be something more. Although, as a friend said leaving the theater, “I kept hoping for a plot point just so the cameras would stop moving.”

Eagle Eye

So Hal has a girlfriend, who knew? Other than that, I’m not totally sure what this movie was about. I spent most of the movie with the same look I used to get when I tried listening to George Bush speak (head slightly tilted, eyes squinted and brow furrowed, mouth slightly open as though about to speak, trying to make some sense out of what I’m witnessing). I enjoyed Billy Bob Thorton in a totally out-of-place role just being Billy Bob Thorton (as always), and Shia LaBeouf isn’t bad to look at for a couple of hours, I guess. The ending had the canned stench of a focus group influence (LaBeouf was supposed to die, Billy Bob was supposed to live, I’m sure that’s how the script must have read). I didn’t mind the absurdity of the plot, although overall the movie was a bit seizure-inducing (although still not as bad as Death Race).

Good Night and Good Luck

Good Night and Good Luck could be one of those movies I may have liked at home, but not so much here. Although really, my problem with GN&GL was that the characters were totally flat. Such a great cast, but still no character development – the characters felt less like people and more like these bodies reciting dialog to each other. By the end of the movie I felt like, “Oh that was it?” I just didn’t feel the dramatic tension.

Tropic Thunder

I went to see Tropic Thunder in the theater the night of the U.S. elections. My company did not catch the fact that the three trailers before the movie were phony, just a device to introduce the characters. I guess some alcohol had been consumed (but still, three famous actors being introduced as names that clearly aren’t theirs and two of the trailers were sequels to movies that don’t exist, come on guys). I think “Satan’s Alley” was my favorite, no I take that back, “Scorcher VII: this time it’s different” was the best.

I’ve seen more that a few Nam movies, and I enjoyed the spoof. Robert Downey Jr. totally stole the show (“Why are you still in character?” “I know, but I don’t have to tell you”). I caught a few references: Platoon, The Deer Hunter, Saving Private Ryan, I was watching for an Apocalypse Now nod, but didn’t catch it (although apparently it is in there).

I’ve also since watched the DVD cast commentary, during which Robert Downey Jr. stays in character. The commentary is well worth the extra time, I was cracking up through the whole thing.

Prison Break

When I first got to my site, my host family had the first season of Prison Break on DVD. This is another one I never, ever would have watched at home, but here I got totally into it and now I’m dying to find a region four copy of season two. I’ve been assured that the series goes steadily down hill with each season after the first mediocre one and I can’t wait.

I guess Prison Break, for me, is another lesson in what makes a TV show watchable and successful – it’s the characters. The story is ludicrous and the writing is questionable, but the characters (especially the B characters) are just so good that I kept wanting to watch just to see what would happen to them.

Wall•e & Ratatouille

I keep waiting for the newest Pixar movie to let me down and not be quite up to par, but man, it sure hasn’t happened yet. Wall•e was adorable – a little ironic that Disney produced a movie about a huge corporation that takes over the world, but okay, we’ll accept that Pixar was the driving creative force and let that one go (since the movie was just so charming). Ratatouille was great all-around, but that one moment where the food critic tries the ratatouille and is instantly rocketed back to his childhood in the French countryside was one of those totally perfect moments.

Hamas = Big Scary Thing on Lost

2008-05-09T08:03:00.001-07:00

So, earlier this week John McCain was on the Daily Show. Now, I used to like John McCain - but less so since he started his presidential bid.

Part one below, part two here.

Is it just me or does McCain talk about terrorism/terrorists sort of like the weird smoke monster thing from Lost? That is, a disembodied, formless force of pure evil and death, that instills pants-shitting fear into all those who encounter it; a force with no traces left of humanity, culture or history, but only a thoughtless, programmed objective of total destruction.

I mean, geez guy, even Darth Vader was human in the end.

Never trust Rupert Murdoch

2008-04-21T18:01:00.000-07:00

I apologize for my earlier post where I said "House" would be new tonight. I've been lied to by the Fox network. Let's take a look at some of the other horrible things Fox has unleashed on the world:

Speaking of dumb ideas...

2008-04-21T15:40:00.000-07:00

There are several reasons I won't be participating in TV Turn Off Week, which began today.

I enjoy watching television and I have free cable and a tv I got for free. Why shouldn't I enjoy it?
Given the state of the nation, I don't think I want to be participating in any national activities.
Fresh of the writers' strike, I've just gotten back in the swing of watching my favorite shows. Whoever organized this clusterfuck couldn't have picked a worse week. As we speak, I'm watching the countdown to a new "House" on Fox's website, eagerly awaiting a new episode of "The Paper," and Barak Obama is going going to be on "The Daily Show." That's an important political event, man! God, and then tomorrow, Jon Stewart will be interviewing John Waters. Wednesday is "South Park" day and Thursday means a muchly anticipated new "Lost." This is just a bad week to not watch tv.
And, finally, what does a week of no tv teach us? I get that turning off the tv sometimes is a good idea. I mean, people who only have one interest are lame. But why not learn self-control? I mean, no tv means you miss out on many well-written and educational programs.

A literal media whore

2008-04-20T18:27:00.000-07:00

Hmm...I call up the local paper and tell them I'm doing x, y, and z and they think it's pretty interesting so they come interview me and then run a story on it. But, haha, joke's on them. I didn't tell them the truth and omg isn't it funny how the media can be manipulated?

Last week I followed, with interest, the saga of a pretentious art school bitch who may or may not have been shooting herself up with jizz and then taking drugs to induce chemical abortions.

The story about Aliza Shvart's "art project," for which she was going to show videos of her home-abortions and have her period blood on display, hit the mainstream media after an article about it ran in Yale's student newspaper. That story, it appears, came after Shvart issued a press release about it. Naturally, this didn't sit well with anyone with half a brain and the day after the story broke, Yale issued a press release saying the project was not what it appeared. Then Art Bitch backpedaled a bit, but stuck to her main story.

It's seeming like part of the project was supposed to include the media and public reaction. But the way Shvart went about it really don't make any point. I mean, if you lie to someone and they believe you, aren't you the bad guy?

I never thought I'd say this, but I really like what Ashton Kutcher is doing over on E!'s Pop Fiction. (Sidenote: I really like a tv station whose official name includes an exclamation point.)

I've only seen a few set ups, but the premise of the show seems to be that various celebrities get involved in ambiguous situations and then let the paparazzi make what they will of the situation. Naturally, they always get it wrong.

The best-executed episode I've seen focused around Eva Longoria and Mario Lopez who are, apparently, BFF. The two went out shopping a few times and the celebrity gossip columns started buzzing that they were doing it. Then, over lunch, Lopez gave Longoria a necklace. IRL, Longoria was opening a restaurant and the necklace had a congratulatory message engraved on it. Naturally, that was not what made press.

What kind of world is it where the dude who starred in Dude, Where' My Car? gets how to make good social commentary and an ivy leaguer doesn't?

We're all too young for syphilis

2008-04-20T17:02:00.000-07:00

Hey, God, it's me, Meghann. Are You mad at me? Here it is, 4/20, I'm sober and She's Too Young is on. I mean any movie with the tag line "To fit in, you've go to put out" and a bunch of kids getting syphilis requires some serious drug use.

Seriously, though, "She's Too Young" has it all: the totally over-protective, naive, out-of-touch mom; the younger girl with no self-esteem; the slutty, cool mom; the older boy who, because his parents are never home, has a lot of time to have unprotected sex with younger girls; and, most importantly, the girl who plays Emma on "Degrassi: The Next Generation."

What takes "She's Too Young" to the next level, however, is that once her daughter gets syphilis the totally over-protective, naive, out-of-touch mom tries to do a whole bunch of syphilis awareness. As if getting an STD when you're 14 isn't bad enough, your mom has to tell everyone about it. Oye.

As South Park has taught us about AIDS, diseases go out of vogue. Since syphilis stopped being cool about 300 years ago, Lifetime really had to step it up by making a movie where a bunch of underage hotties get it.

Politics of silly

2008-04-18T18:02:00.000-07:00

Wow, Thursday night's Daily Show/Colbert Report pretty much made all of my wildest dreams come true.

I mean, I'm a total politics junkie, and even I'm totally burned out on the Democratic primary race ridiculousness.

But somehow, whenever Jon Stewart calls "bullshit" on the candidates and/or the pundits shenanigans, I feel a little bit better (even if only temporarily).

I also enjoyed the surprise guests on the Colbert Report's final night in Philly, especially the "Ed-word."

Life is not a bad sitcom.

2008-04-17T11:54:00.000-07:00

This morning, m'colleague sent me this blog post from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution which discussed this delightful piece of [expletive deleted] from MSN.com (apparently bankrupt for copy), which outlined a Wives' and a Husbands' Bill of Rights.

Some choice examples:

From the Wife's Bill of Rights:

We have the right to speak to our girlfriends every day.
We have the right to foreplay.
We have the right to flirt.
We have the right to keep and bear tons of girly bathroom products.
We have the right to experience PMS in all its glory.

and,

From the Husband's Bill of Rights:

We have the right to go out with our friends at least once a month.
We have the right to have a few things of ours in the house.
We have the right not to be scolded by you.
We have the right to as much reading material in the bathroom as we need.
We have the right to the remote when we're on the couch.

Seriously?

I wouldn't want to be married to either of these people.

These scenarios sound like they're taken out of some combination of Everybody Loves Raymond reruns, According to Jim and 'Til Death, and other similar trite sitcoms where the husband is a boorish slob and the wife is a shill nag (of course, I suppose these couples are meant for each other, since they're equally self-involved and insensitive).

In general, I'm all for life imitating art and pretending that my life is a zany sitcom/courtroom drama/medical mystery series/what-have-you, but seriously, can we please stop basing our real-life lifestyles and marriage/relationship advice on bad sitcoms?

When you take out the canned laughter, living with someone you resent stops being funny and cute really quickly.

(Side note: both of these were listed under lifestyle: men.)

Today is too much: my AM switch

2008-04-16T19:13:00.000-07:00

I’ve officially switched morning news shows. Against my better judgment, I’ve been watching The Today Show for far too long, and with the recent announcement that Kathy Lee Gifford would be joining the show in the fourth hour, I realized I had to make the jump. Granted, I never get as far as the fourth hour, but out of principle I suppose, I had to acknowledge that the show had officially jumped the shark.

The show has been bad for as long as I’ve watched, and I admit that I continued to watch mainly to see just how low it could go (and now I know). A painful discontinuity arises between fluff pieces (how to make a low-cal margarita, who got bumped off last night’s Idol?) which segue into misguided attempts at hard news (death toll in Iraq, the genocide du jour). The whole thing leaves me uncomfortable and confused – the real news seems less sobering when sandwiched between sugar-free cocktails and the latest Britney news – and why am I making margaritas at 7 a.m., anyway? And while I enjoy a bit of celebrity gossip as much as the next person, I like to take it for what it is: gossip. But Today has that habit of trotting out some quack psychologist, psychiatrist, therapist or some other “-ist” for an armchair analysis – somehow making the segment less “gossip” and more “news” (but I’m not buying it).

So this week, I made my decision. I must find a new, less nauseating morning news show to go with my coffee. But once the decision was made, the tough question was where to go next? I can’t take Good Morning America seriously since I saw that zero-gravity clip on The Daily Show. I still don’t hate myself quite enough to turn to Fox and Friends. And I have no idea what the deal is with The Early Show (but I suspect it's for old people).

But, ah, then I found it – CNN’s American Morning. No cocktail recipes, no celebrities, not even any gimmicky, self-deprecating segments to garner ratings. John Roberts achieves that balance of Serious News Anchor, but he’s relaxed enough for a morning show (I mean, I can only handle so much before my first cup of coffee). Likewise, Kiran Chetry is cute (though comfortably short of “perky”), but I can still take her seriously when she’s telling me about the sub-prime mortgage crisis or the latest Congressional hearings. It's not perfect, but at least with American Morning, I can actually get a sense of what’s going on the world, but without feeling totally overwhelmed before I even make it to work.

Plus, Sanjay Gupta is totally dreamy.

(Looks like I made the switch none too soon.)

The Paper (no, probably not what you're thinking)

2008-04-16T18:44:00.000-07:00

From the network that brought you The Real World, Road Rules, and my not-so-secret favorite guilty pleasure Engaged and Underage (seriously, watch it, you knew one of these couples in high school) comes my latest obsession: The Paper (not to be confused with The Paper).

I've always been a big proponent of showing the American public who's brining them their news. I think it's good for Dr. and Mrs. John Q. Public to know that it's an underpaid, oversexed, alcoholic that's covering their city council meetings. Your average journalist tends to have some emotional and/or substance abuse problems. Also, we tend to be masochists. I mean, how else can you explain sitting through a budget meeting?

But, as a journalist, I've got to say, the kids on "The Paper" are freaks. In the first episode both boys and girls cry over the pressures of applying for the next year's editorial positions. Amanda *SPOILER ALERT! says that being named editor-in-chief is the best day of her life. The girl spends, like, four or so hours working on her application. Dude, I've never spent more than 20 minutes on a job application.

Having been on a high school newspaper myself (for the record, I was editor-in-chief my senior year) I'm not going to pretend like newspaper kids are cool. I mean, geez, they're on the school newspaper. But there's no need to be dorks.

"The Paper" reminds me of going to student newspaper conferences in high school. We always showed up late, in jeans, and generally had a good time. The kids around us, though, would show up in suits and ties, early, and would actually take notes during the lectures. LOSERS!

I often wonder, though, if these kids and "adults" that appear on reality shows realize how they look to the outside world. You know those little catty remarks you make to your friends? Well, they're going public. Everyone, including the bitch you were talking about, are going to hear them. How about that melt-down you had? Immortalized for all time.

Oh well, at least I can look back my high school newspaper days and say, at least compared to the kids on "The Paper," I was cool.

Learning? Ew!

2008-04-14T17:18:00.000-07:00

If you're trying to get a point across, you might as well make it fun.

I started playing the $3 trillion shopping spree. The idea is to show you how much fighting in Iraq is detracting from other stuff.

Not being good with numbers, I have no concept of $3 trillion. Hell, there are days that $3 is a fortune to me. So, I started playing and I figured after a few expensive purchases -- eliminating dependence on foreign oil, universal health care -- I'd be getting close to $3 trillion. Not even close.

Back in Black?

2008-04-14T16:32:00.000-07:00

I’m a huge Lewis Black fan. He’s easily one of my favorite stand-up comics. A few years ago I got to see him perform in Boston and he pretty much made all of my wildest dreams come true.

Anyway, now he has his own show on Comedy Central: Lewis Black’s Root of All Evil. Each week two arbitrary forces of evil go head-to-head (Donald Trump vs. Viagra or Beer vs. Weed, YouTube vs. Pornography, what-have-you) and two comedians (thus far, we’ve been cycling through the same handful) argue about which is the “root of all evil.” Black, of course, is the judge and makes his final ruling at the end of the show.

My initial issue with The Root of All Evil, is that there simply isn’t enough Lewis Black – it’s mainly the other two knuckleheads arguing about which is more annoying, drunks or stoners. But my other, and more consequential issue, is that the show isn’t that funny. Last week I only watched the first two acts before I turned it off. Even the parts with Lewis Black aren’t up to par with his stand-up or even Daily Show segments.

And while I appreciate that the concept is tongue-in-cheek and meant to be silly, the pettiness also sort of annoys me. Lewis Black’s stand-up actually does delve into real evils (eg. war, racism, greed, Dick Cheney) and I’ve always found his performances cathartic (in a twisted kind of way), and now we’re bickering about what’s more annoying – Donald Trump’s hair or Viagra commercials? (Although, I guess I could get past this if the show was actually funny.)

The show does benefit from a killer time slot, though – it’s on between the other two shows, which have kept Comedy Central afloat for the past decade: South Park and The Daily Show.

Speaking of which, I did enjoy Lewis' appearance on The Daily Show the other week.

I'm glad to see Kumar is endorsing Barack...

I guess.

Fry & Laurie

2008-04-13T16:32:00.000-07:00

I really love British comedy. In particular, I really love Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie.

I got thinking about this clip from A Bit of Fry & Laurie (series 4, episode 5) today (this is basically how I feel about American culture at present):

I think it's probably a good thing I'll be leaving the country in a few months. I mean, I love my country and all (really, I do), but at the moment I'm finding rather - eh, exhausting. Naturally, it took two comic geniuses from England to accurately articulate my sentiments.

This is another of my favorite clips from Fry & Laurie (series 3):

Stephen Fry, of course, is as gay as the day is long and utterly delightful.

I'm usually not much on sketch shows, but I do enjoy Fry & Laurie. It's not quite as zany as Monty Python, which its often compared to, but its pretty irreverent in its own right. They toy around with language, and sometimes make some social or political commentary, they're always silly, and occasionally eerily prophetic.

And here's a clip from Blackadder Goes Forth (a.k.a. season four of Blackadder):

(I was looking for the scene that directly precedes this one, but I guess this works too.) Anyway, Blackadder Goes Forth is easily my favorite season, especially since both Fry and Laurie co-star.

Fry & Laurie is all over the web - lots of clips are available on YouTube and full episodes are on Veoh. Episodes of Blackadder are on veoh as well (used to be on YouTube, but was taken down, I'm afraid).

Political satire and then some

2008-04-11T18:39:00.000-07:00

Slate had an interesting piece this week about the "recession" in political comedy. In part, the article suggests that certain arenas of political comedy (SNL, late night shows, for example) treat political figures more like characters or cast members of the latest water-cooler drama-comedy and/or soap opera, trivializing real political issues and (at least potentially) important figures. (Contrasted by, say, The Daily Show, which pokes fun at the trivialization of political issues.)

Also this week, New York Magazine published "Four Days in Denver," an imagined account of a possible deadlocked 2008 Democratic National Convention, by Lawrence O’Donnell Jr., former West Wing writer-producer in movie-treatment form:

"The premise is that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton arrive in Denver, neither having sufficient delegates to gain the nomination nor a decisive majority in the popular vote. And so it’s on…"

Anyway, "Four Days in Denver" is a funny idea and well-executed (very gonzo). And also pretty fitting after Obama's comment that the primary race was like a good movie that had gone on too long, and Clinton's retort that "I like long movies." (Whatever that means.)

Obama's comment was really accurate in more ways than one (although, I think a more fitting analogy would be a hit reality TV show that should have been concluded a long time ago, but we keep watching to see who's voted off next - but that's not the point). The point is that this primary race has become a spectacle, something to be watched and mocked with no real investment. Pundits and candidates talk about talking about "real issues," but somehow nothing ever gets said.

For good political satirists, that is the material - the very fact that something so serious has become a spectacle. Unlike SNL or other late night shows, the NYMag piece is so overt, so over-the-top in its treating real political figures as characters, that it turns the whole situation on its head, turns the spectacle into a spectacle. "Four Days in Denver" comes off as delightfully sarcastic that sense.

We're watching this like a movie anyway, so why the hell shouldn't someone (with better understanding of story structure than Howard Dean and better dialogue skills than Bill Clinton) go ahead and script it?

Into The Wild

2007-11-28T15:05:00.000-08:00

Oh dear, I haven't blogged in a million years. So sorry.

Anyway, a couple weekends ago I finally read Into the Wild (in my defense, I was in elementary school when it was originally released). I had to drive an hour to find a proper a book store and hand over $14 (very painful for me, I never buy new books), but it was totally worth the trouble. I couldn't put the book down - I love to read, but it's really not often that a book grabs me like this one did.

Chris McCandless' story is truly fascinating in its own right, but Krakauer's commitment to the story made the book what it was - the time and research he put into it boggled my mind. His storytelling is skilled, and his craft of writing is absorbing. Truly one of the best books I've read in a very long time.

Then over Thanksgiving weekend, I finally had a chance to see Sean Penn's film adaptation of the same name. A good adaptation is a tricky craft, but my hat is off to Sean Penn - the movie totally holds up. The film Into The Wild is beautifully shot - really in its simplicity, I suppose. Showing off the various natural wonders across the continent - showing us the world through McCandless' eyes. And man, I thought Christian Bale was frighteningly skinny at the end of Rescue Dawn, but I think Emile Hirsch may have out done him.

Ultimately, I think the Into The Wild book and the movie are a perfect example of how a good film adaptation should work. It shouldn't be a matter of "the book was better" - not if it's done right. Obviously, the two different mediums (book and film) function very differently - so, a film adaptation shouldn't be a verbatim translation - it needs to be (ah ha!) adapted for the screen.

With Krakauer's book, as the reader you follow McCandless' story through Krakauer himself; you're a step removed, it's a bit more documentary. The finding of the story becomes a part of the story - trying to figure out just who this McCandless character was, how he thought.

The movie functions differently, though. As the viewer, you follow McCandless on his journey, you're a passenger through all his adventures; it's much more intimate.

House Premiere:

2007-09-28T20:14:00.000-07:00

just a few observations:

He seemed less bitter - maybe even nicer - although that could have been because he didn't have any targets.

I, for one, did not miss the old team.

And, most interesting, no pill popping.

A Sad Day.

2007-09-05T12:55:00.000-07:00

So, for the past couple years I've been basically running my life according to my Couch Potato widget, which provided the local TV listings by using the index from Zap2It Labs. Unfortunately, Zap2It Labs announced a few months ago that since so many people were violating the site's terms of use, they would be forced to shut down the index starting this month.

For the last couple months, I've been savoring the listings, knowing all the while that I was running on borrowed time. Today my subscription finally expired for good.

What's a TV junkie to do? Use the newspaper? TV Guide? Come on.

Flight of the Conchords

2007-09-04T11:17:00.000-07:00

My brother first introduced me to Flight of the Conchords when he insisted I listen to “Business Time,” and I later started noticing web ads for the HBO series. I even won some Scene Points a while back when some friends were talking about the series, and I said, “Oh, I only know the songs.”

But as of late, I’ve been catching up with the show. It’s pretty weird, but I do enjoy it. Flight of the Conchords has the stripped-down, awkward humor made popular by The Office, the geeky, oddball aesthetic of Adult Swim, and the endearing quirkiness of Napoleon Dynamite. Plus, it has that whole it’s-not-TV-it’s-HBO, New Zealand-import, we-heard-about-them-before-you, elitist thing. The show is like a hipster’s wet dream.

Flight of the Conchords is also perhaps the only series that’s been able to truly master the problematic TV musical genre. But a kiwi folk-parody duo starring in a series about a kiwi folk-parody duo is perhaps the only context in which a musical TV show even begins to make sense (sorry Steven Bochco, Cop Rock just didn’t make it for me). Most of the story lines are simply flimsy set-ups to the songs, but since the songs are so goofy to begin with, it actually seems to work. But despite the zany and surreal nature of the show, Jemaine and Bret are very sweet and charming, in that you were a weird little kid, weren’t you? kind of way (of course, I’m not sure if that’s strictly “in character” or IRL – either way, the accent helps). The song interludes are always fun, but I think my favorite scenes are the so-depressing-it's-funny "band meetings" held in the chintzy New Zealand consulate.

I started out by making the best comparisons I could, and while I do think my comparisons are accurate, I should also point out that as a whole, Flight of the Conchords is entirely unique. I can honestly say that I have never seen anything else quite like it.

No reservations, indeed.

2007-08-28T11:50:00.000-07:00

With the exception of HBO, documentary TV series are frequently overlooked by critics, and such is the case with Anthony Bourdain: No Reservations. And I must admit that try as I might, I haven’t known quite what to do with the show for some time. As a critic, I'm accustomed to looking at writing, acting, story, and the like. So all I can really say is that I like it. That much is for sure. And with every show comes another addition to my ever-growing “must travel” list.

Bourdain is a man after my own heart. Regularly referencing famous movies and books (from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now, to James Bond, and even Graham Greene's Quiet American), Bourdain is funny, swears like a sailor, smokes like a chimney, and each episode climaxes with his becoming properly soused.

I found the voice-over distracting at first, but it's grown on me - and in watching other series, it's definitely better than the alternative. Rather than the host yammering on about whatever he's doing on-screen, the series uses a wry and irreverent narration recorded after the fact, though still very preset-tense.

In fact, the series feels a bit more gonzo than other travel series (in that it’s just as much about Bourdain himself as the locale, and he’s anything but unbiased). I'd even call it postmodern – certainly in documentary terms, anyway. Between self-referential comments and intertextuality, the series is delightfully po-mo. Hell, the Cleveland episode was even interspersed with Harvey Pekar-style comic book cells of Bourdain and the other guys featured in the episode.

Copywrite infringement in context

2007-08-27T18:04:00.000-07:00

I came across this interesting piece in the Boston Globe. I enjoyed it for two reasons.

One of those being that it talked about book piracy. This was a crime I had never considered before. Apparently, though, it's still quite common. Well, you learn something new every day.

The other thing I like about it is that it puts current events in context. I must confess, with all the recent recalls, I was starting to wonder if China had it out for us. It was nice to be pulled back from the edge and reminded that, well, things aren't as dire as they seem.

CNN * YouTube Debates

2007-07-21T16:33:00.000-07:00

I'm very excited about the upcoming CNN * YouTube Democratic Debate this Monday night. Of course I'm interested simply as a voter and news junkie, but this debate in particular has the potential to be very interesting.

See, it occurred to me that this a very rare occasion in which the marriage of television news and the quest for ratings may actually benefit the quality of the programming (rather than dumbing it down into 24-hour Paris Hilton coverage). Most debates are designed to allow the candidates recite their canned answers and to never challenge - this makes it easy for the candidates, but doesn't make for very compelling television.

In this case, though, the questions are from real people - the people who are actually affected by governmental policies - the questions are personal and specific. So naturally, it is in CNN's best interest to pick out the most challenging and thought-provoking questions for the candidates (making for much more interesting TV viewing and better ratings). And, perhaps, we the viewers and voters may actually be able to see at least a glimpse of the candidates' true colors.

Hey, now...

2007-07-15T17:15:00.000-07:00

I'm not one to play the gender card, but I can't help myself in this instance:

As I was waiting for public transportation the other day, I noticed the train station was plastered with ads for an upcoming money management class. The ad that caught my eye had a young woman sitting on a couch surrounded by a dozen or so shopping bags. That was all well and good until I noticed the ad next to it.

The next ad was for the same money management class, but this time it had a young man in it. He was sitting on the floor simultaneously checking his Blackberry and laptop.

To be fair, maybe that ad was supposed to convey that the guy had racked up such a huge bill texting and subscribing to porn sites that he couldn't even afford a chair. Maybe.

I have two main issues with these ads:

1) They imply that the woman is unable to handle her finances and, therefore, needs to be taught. The guy, however, well, we don't know why he's taking the class. In the male ad, the guy looks fairly put together, as long as you ignore that he doesn't have a chair.

2) The two images imply something about each gender: The woman had nothing better to do all day than go out shopping. The man, however, is checking his e-mail and phone; he clearly is important or, at least, trying to become important.

Summer Viewing

2007-07-09T16:19:00.000-07:00

Generally my TV viewing habits are strictly scripted, but stranded in the middle of the summer months, I've been forced to look elsewhere. Apart from catching up on episodes of House I missed from last fall, I've become hooked to a few gamedocs and docudramas - okay, reality shows. Although two of them are on Discovery Networks, so I don't think those can count as true reality series.

Against my better judgment, I've become hooked on NBC's America's Got Talent. Although the title itself bothers me (it should be America Has Talent), I've found the show delightfully trashy. Between Jerry Springer, Sharon Osbourne, and David Hasselhoff, it all adds up to a good time, albeit pretty ridiculous and very tongue-in-cheek.

Anyway, I've also been watching a lot of Anthony Bourdain: No Reservations and Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe.

I was first introduced to Anthony Bourdain back when I was living in Allston and my then-roommate Ben would read passages from Kitchen Confidential as we rode the T to class in the morning (I finally finished reading the book myself on my way back from Boston a few weeks ago).

No Reservations at first stands out on the Travel Channel simply because it is actually about travel (unlike most of the programming, à la Most Haunted and World Poker Tour). But also, and perhaps more importantly, the show is unique because Anthony Bourdain is a much more interesting character than the typical bland white-bread hosts (I'm thinking Samantha Brown and that annoying couple from 1,000 Place to See Before You Die). No, Bourdain is different, and a man after my own heart, I might add. Regularly referencing famous movies and books (from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now, to James Bond, and even Graham Greene's Quiet American), Bourdain is funny, drinks heavily, swears like a sailor, and smokes like a chimney. But he's also an experienced and adventurous traveler. Bourdain, as a rule, travels as far away from the tourist hot spots as possible, and I actually end up learning far more about whatever the locale or culture is that week than on any other travel series. But really, no foreign tourist ever learned anything about American culture by visiting the Statue of Liberty.

And Andrew Zimmern can kiss my ass.

And yeah, I've also been watching a lot of Dirty Jobs, mainly because it's on a lot. Although I don't think it's something I would have ever started watching if I hadn't been introduced to it by my father and brother. I'm not really sure what to say about it though, as I'm pretty sure I've never actually learned anything from this one. I'm really more in it for Mike Rowe's charm, good looks, and sarcastic remarks.

Oh, I've also started watching Confessions of a Matchmaker on A&E, but I haven't decided if it makes me feel more or less pathetic then I did beforehand.

Rejoice!

2007-07-09T14:04:00.000-07:00

Mika Brzezinski, the MSNBC newslady who literally destroyed news of Paris Hilton, is getting the praise she deserves.

More encouraging is that other anchors are following suit!

Now, I'm not going to pretend like I don't engage in celebrity news once in a while. It's nice to turn off my mind after a hard day of real news. But, that's the thing, I've already gotten my real news.

So, kudos to Brzezinski for standing up for real news.

Fred Thompson

2007-07-06T16:20:00.000-07:00

At this point, I can't tell you who's thrown their hat into the presidential ring and who's still pussyfooting on the sidelines. Last I heard, Fred Thompson wasn't running, but that could all be untrue at this point. I plan on not getting too invested until, oh, it's actually 2008.

When you Google Thompson, the third thing coming up is his IMDB entry. Admittedly, I know nothing about Thompson's politics other than he's a Republican. So, he may very well be a super wonk, but, like most people, I know him as the crusty D.A. to oh-so-sexy Jack McCoy. Given that Thompson's current career as an actor seems to be the big focus of the media attention he's gotten so far, I just want to issue a warning: Beware the actor/pol.

Take Ronald Reagan. He was suave and charming. He took America out to dinner, fingerbanged her under the table, and then fucked her economy in the ass, unlubed. Seriously, Reaganomics? Did the Great Depression teach us nothing?

The media, if they want to actually do their job, need to stop talking about Thompson being an actor. Or how much John Edwards pays for his haircuts. Or whatever. These people have voting records. They've made speeches before. Look into their credibility. Look into their stances on issues. Blast their bullshit. You know, do your job.

Speaking of TV "News"

2007-06-28T13:01:00.001-07:00

Okay, this is easily the most ridiculous development in the history of fake news.

I'm sure at this point most have heard of FOX News' answer to Comedy Central's Emmy-Award winning series The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The 1/2 Hour News Hour. The series has been described by its creators as "The Daily Show for conservatives." I have actually tried watching the show when I catch it. But even when ignoring its politics, the show is altogether painfully not funny (oh yeah, and I though FOX News was supposed to be "Fair and Balanced" without political bias?).

Anyway, news satire is certainly nothing new - it's actually a very important and relatively old comedic medium. Before the Daily Show and the Colbert Report there was Saturday Night Live's Weekend Update, The Onion, the Canadian series This Hour Has 22 Minutes, and many others - there have even been popular news satires in Iraq and Soviet Russia.

But what has always set The Daily Show (and the Colbert Report) apart is that unlike its peers and predesecors, The Daily Show is reporting factual news (as opposed to fictional stories satirizing real-life). In fact, studies have shown that an episode of The Daily Show is just as substantive as regular network news. Sadly, no one could make up shit zanier than what's actually going on in American politics right now, even if they wanted to (have you seen the new "You Don't Know Dick" segments?)* See also: previous post dated June 14, 2007, "Obligitory Paris Post."

But clearly, the most disturbing element of The 1/2 Hour News Hour is that it is on a so-called news network -- The Daily Show is on Comedy Central.

I leave you with this:

*If not, you can still check out the videos on the show's website (linked above).

I don't even need to say anything

2007-06-28T10:51:00.000-07:00

PopMatters

2007-06-21T16:31:00.000-07:00

I have an article featured on another website, it's very exciting and you all should check it out.

It's about violence in contemporary television.

Obligitory Paris Post

2007-06-14T15:34:00.000-07:00

Okay, now I think it's a very sad commentary on the current state of journalism when The Daily Show is above reporting on Paris Hilton, but we have 24 hour coverage on CNN. Don't even get me started on the fact that their most quoted source is TMZ.com.

Creature Comforts

2007-06-05T17:35:00.000-07:00

I used to watch the original, English version of Creature Comforts on CBC when I could catch it. It seems to me that unlike the plethora of other retooled English shows, this one actually may lend itself to adaptation. The concept is extremely simple: take audio footage of ordinary people talking about any subject - anything from zoos to extraterrestrial life to cats vs. dogs - and then use the voices to animate claymation animals.

So last night the fam and I watched the new American Creature Comforts on CBS. The themes covered were doctors, secrets and lies, and animal magnetism. It's the same animators who made the British version (also the people who made Wallace and Gromit). The American version was cute and charming and funny, and I'm sure I'll continue to watch it. Creature Comforts just may become the only CBS series that I actually watch regularly.

I'll admit though, that while the two series are essentially one in the same, I'm still a little biased towards the English one simply because I like the accents.

The Dichotomy of Good and Evil.

2007-06-03T14:06:00.000-07:00

I went to see Pirates 3 this week, although, admittedly, at this point I was just in it for Keith Richards.

Anyway, I noticed that the lines between the "good guys" and "bad guys" was quite blurred in the series - not altogether significant in the history of cinema, but certainly interesting for a Disney film and especially for at three-part epic.

First of all, we're rooting for the "bad guys" throughout the series - that is, the pirates themselves. And after thinking about the series and all the characters, I realized that no one is all Good or all Bad. I won't go through everyone, but here's a look at the Big Ones:

Our would-be hero, Captain Jack Sparrow, is a cowardly drunk most of the time - albeit, skilled with a sword. And even the honorable Will Turner and the virginal Elizabeth Swann have their treacherous and backstabbing moments.

And it's not just the good guys that have their bad qualities - the bad guys also have their good qualities. Captain Barbosa was the height of evil in The Black Pearl, but comes back at the end of Dead Man's Chest and is actually one of the most level-headed and relatable characters in At World's End. Davy Jones, the octopus-faced villain in Dead Man's Chest, actually comes across as very sympathetic in At World's End. And Tia Dalma is neither good nor bad - just pissed.

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that no one - not even the minor characters - is all Good or all Bad. Our heroes have their weaknesses, and our villains have their redeeming qualities - and some characters can't be put into either category at all. While this can be a bit frustrating for the viewer - not always knowing where the characters stand, that is - it does make the series more complex and interesting (or "better" in my book).

On a separate note, my favorite quotes:

"You add an agreeable sense of the macabre to any delirium."
~ Sparrow to Tia Dalma

"Gentleman, I wash my hands of this weirdness."
~ Sparrow

Larry Sanders

2007-06-02T18:30:00.000-07:00

I just finished watching the first disc of Not Just the Best of The Larry Sanders Show. I decided to try out the show at the recommendation of my former boss, Chris (who also recommended Dexter), and after reading that the show was one of Ricky Gervais' big influences (along with Spinal Tap and The Simpsons, et al).

In brief, I've enjoyed it, and I'm looking forward to my next Netflix arrival. My initial impression was that the series was, indeed, "ahead of its time" - as they say. A TV show about a TV show, The Larry Sanders Show was at the height of television postmodernism. But, perhaps more importantly, the series - a half-hour comedy on HBO - broke away from many of the generic conventions of the day (and set the stage for numerous shows which followed). The series had no laugh track, was shot single camera (apart from the scenes of the show-within-the-show, of course), and lacked any sort of sitcom-y punchline-a-minute hackneyed storytelling and dialogue which was (and still is by-and-large) typical of many sitcoms and other comedies.

None of these aforementioned observations are new though, but still worth pointing out, as we do tend to take these characteristics for granted in our contemporary sitcoms - everything from The Office to 30 Rock (okay, that's a pretty limited scope, but you get the idea) owes something to The Larry Sanders Show.

Anyway, in terms of my personal take on the show - I could take or leave Garry Shandling. And although I enjoy Jeffrey Tambor, he'll always be George Sr. to me. Oddly enough, my favorite is Rip Torn as Arthur, producer of The Larry Sanders Show. I'm not completely sure why, but maybe it's because that character - more than any other - rings completely true to me, and comes across as funniest. For one thing, Rip Torn has a great speaking voice. But, I think that perhaps Arthur makes me think of the crazy old coot I'll probably end up marrying someday: above all, he knows when to humor, and when to be brutally honest.

Dr. Oz

2007-05-23T12:53:00.000-07:00

is a douche bag (the medical benefits of which are dubious at best).

First of all, whenever he's on Oprah, he's wearing those damn scrubs - just in case he has to jump into surgery at a moment's notice.

Perhaps even more troubling than his poor fashion sense, his is lack of credibility as a doctor and scientist. First of all, there's this story about misleading comments about hypertension in African Americans.

I sensed right away that this man is full of shit. I consider myself a pretty good judge of Bullshit - and one of the big signs is if somebody never says, "I don't know," if someone has a definite answer for every question, they're probably making some of it up. Anyway, while I am by no means any sort of authority on medicine or science of any kind, there were a few things I picked up on myself.

On one "Ask Dr. Oz" episode of Oprah, a viewer asked why mosquitoes seem to pick on some people but not others. Among the list of reasons Dr. Oz provided was body hair - according to Dr. Oz, mosquitoes don't like body hair. Well, I have it on pretty good authority that this isn't true. For one thing, in northern Maine (where I'm from) during the summer the moose are actually driven out of the woods (and into the roads, unfortunately) by the black flies and mosquitoes (and moose are pretty much covered in body hair). And yes, I do know humans that, well, lean towards the furrier end of the spectrum who do get eaten alive by bugs during the summer, regardless.

Continuing on the same subject Dr. Oz went on to say that people with a lot of body hair are probably descended from areas with high cases of malaria. Well, that's just stupid. Malaria is common in equatorial areas (sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, for example), and people with body hair are generally descended from cold climates (like Europe).

On the last episode I saw with Dr. Oz, they were on the topic of parasites. Of course, it's general knowledge that eating raw meat can lead to parasites. Dr. Oz explained that this is why humans starting cooking their meat before eating it. Well, this isn't true either. It sounds good, but actually humans started cooking their meat well before they had the wherewithal to put raw meat and parasites together. Humans started cooking their meat simply because it was easier to chew.

This is why the only TV doctor I listen to is House. Okay, so he's fictional, he's still more trustworthy. Hell, I'd have more faith in Hugh Laurie than Mehmet Oz. And besides, House is a much better dresser (and naturally, all important life decisions should be based on fashion).

Here's the bottom line: if "Doctor" Oz was genuinely interested in the practice of medicine (or any good at it, for that matter) - he'd be practicing medicine, not pursuing a TV career.

"David Duchovny,

2007-05-20T19:07:00.000-07:00

why won't you love me?"

I never watched The X-Files when it was on TV, but this past semester I had to do a little research on the series and a brief, in-class presentation (without actually watching it). We watched an episode in class, and a discussion followed. Someone more familiar with the show mentioned (in passing) Mulder's unusual porn habits. I thought to myself, "Unusual porn habits? That sounds like someone I would hang out with! I should start watching this show."

"Well, it's one a.m. Better go home and spend some quality time with the kids."
- Homer Simpson, The Springfield Files

So, I've started watching repeats on Sci Fi. It's pretty addictive. Even the Fam has gotten into it - it's become part of our family viewing hour (that and Dr. Phil, of course).

Among other things, I do enjoy the ongoing sexual tension. But I also have to say that I much prefer the latter-season sassy Scully to the slightly mousy early Scully. After all, I always got the sense that that was why Mulder liked Scully - she kept him in line.

There are humors floating around that another X-Files movie is in the works. I'm not holding my breath. Apparently, (though this certainly isn't gospel) Duchovny is into it, but they're still in talks with Gillian Anderson (always the tease). As far as I know, there isn't actually a script yet though.

Perhaps more thoughts on The X-Files at a later date.

The Simple Life:

2007-05-04T19:18:00.000-07:00

LA County Jail Edition.

Anybody? Anybody?

Why being a journalist makes you a better superhero.

2007-04-16T21:25:00.000-07:00

For a while now, I've been really keen on the idea that Clark Kent and Peter Parker are both in the news biz and two of the world's most beloved super heroes.

But, here's the thing, working in print journalism is the perfect cover for a superhero and here's why:

You need a job where you get to stay on top of what's going on; preferably something with a scanner. You can't be a cop or a firefighter, though, because you wouldn't be able to sneak away at the scene. So journalism affords you the perfect opportunity to be keyed into public safety emergencies. As long as you keep coming back with stories, your boss won't be suspicious of why you're always running out.

You're also able to be a really good cops and fire reporter because you're at every emergency. You come back to your editor with details no one else can get. Shots and angles no other photographer could get. You're probably getting awards for this stuff.

Journalism and super-human crime fighting really go hand-in-hand, huh?

Imus 2.0

2007-04-16T20:58:00.000-07:00

This post is actually not really about Imus or his firing or his dumbness. Although, I will say, if you're a white man, you really should know better.

Anyway, this is a post about freedom of speech. If you're not familiar, I suggest you read the First Amendment first and then we'll talk.

So, as I get it, the First Amendment says the government (and, sure, I'll expand that to include any governing body) can't tell you to not say things. Keeping that in mind, here are some of the reasons anyone calling Imus's firing some sort of infringement on his rights is a moron:

1. Now, I'm totally sympathetic to the "corporations own the government, man" way of thinking. But, last time I checked, whichever conglomerate it is that owned Imus is not a government. That company is just that; a company. Last I checked, "being a dumbass" is totally kosher as a reason to fire someone.

2. Imus was not making any statement that would serve a company's best interest to support. Had Imus made a controversial statement or asked a probing questions, I'd be mad that he got fired. His statements were a joke, at best, and racist and sexist, at worse.

3. No one stopped Imus from saying what he said. There are no statutes outlawing racist, sexist, or idiotic remarks. No one said he couldn't say that. Here's the thing about free speech: You can say whatever you want and people can react to it however they want. If you make a careless joke that offends broad sections of society, don't expect to be making many new friends.

As Peter Parker said, "With great power comes great responsibility." The First Amendment gives us all, but those in the media even more, power. It never hurts to think before you speak, I mean, especially if it's to a national audience. Geez.

Imus

2007-04-16T19:18:00.000-07:00

Okay, so I never heard of Don Imus before this scandal, but I guess I feel somewhat obligated to make comment. But, I'll keep it brief. There is a lot of buzz going around now that this is somehow a gross violation of free speech (there was a good piece in the Times, which commented on this, in part).

At any rate, my view is this: the advertisers for Imus's show pulled their ads almost immediately after his controversial comment - thus making Imus in the Morning no longer profitable. The Media is a business and above all things, it is about making money. Imus's show was no longer making money, so he got the boot. Racism or no, it just makes good business sense.

Cavemen

2007-04-15T17:25:00.000-07:00

Last night I was about to leave my apartment when I noticed a new Geico caveman ad:

This is actually one of my all-time favorite ad campaigns, and I laughed out loud to this one. Now, maybe I'm reading into a little to much, but this ad in particular made me think about the caveman series which is in the works. While my knowledge of the development of this potential series is limited, and I've reading conflicting articles about whether or not the original creators of the ad campaign are involved with the series.

Anyway, this ad was particularly well written - in a thirty-second ad three solid characters were established. It feels almost as though it's less about selling Geico than the characters themselves.

I've always like these ads and even the characters, but I don't know if I can see it as a viable concept for a series. I want to like it - but I fear that the series might ruin the fun of the ads. This most recent installment, could, maybe inspire a little more confidence though.