Archive for the ‘TV’ Category
The Big Bang Theory
Quick TV Review...
If you don't watch "The Big Bang Theory," give it a chance. CBS Mondays at 8:00 and online. Sure, the premise is ridiculous (two super-nerds move next door to the proverbial sitcom "hot babe" and hilarious antics ensue -- See, they don't know how to relate! She likes shopping, they like Star Trek! Haha.) Well then, the show gets decent ratings (in the 8 million viewers range, compared to the Office's ~6 million), but it gets no respect. TV Squad doesn't provide weekly recaps (though they do write-up each episode of Big Brother). The stereotypical fan of The Office is too cool for "three camera sitcoms," and this one thrives on the "mismatched neighbors" and "nerd" constructs.
Four Geeks ± Babe (Math Humor!)
All that said, it's actually really funny, and one of the "support" geeks (meaning there are two physicist roommates and two equally geeky friends providing plot "support") is made fun of for being an engineer. I can't remember the joke exactly, but it involved something about calling engineers "the oompa-loompas of science." I haven't felt that way in a while, but in academic circles, I'll give them points for accuracy.
I have noticed that the show has actually moved away from the relationship the "babe" has with her neighbors. She has had little development - she basically sits there and makes simple jokes about her neighbors' lack of social skills or just how far over head their discussion is. I guess at some point the sort-of "head" geek needs to act on his crush he first showed in the pilot (but the show has left it sort of unaddressed since then), but I think that's the lazy way out for the writers. Family Matters did it years ago. I would guess that the writers felt like they needed a girl to be their "normal" foil for the four scientists, but as the show has gone on, they've realized the "geeks" personalities and competitiveness have been able to carry the show.
Now, the show takes an odd line between "same as every other sitcom" and "something new." If they ever fall back on "dorky nice guy chases after girl completely out of his league," we'll know that the writers have given up. The writers have stumbled onto four entertaining, dynamic characters who are unlike their TV geek forebears; they're the center of the show, not just one-note jokes on the periphery of a normal sitcom cast.
CBS has a good thing going. Unlike The Office, there's more potential upside for this show. The Office won't get significantly higher ratings - there's simply a finite number of people into sarcastic, dry humor (not that there's anything wrong with that). I've elaborated on The Office previously, and everything that was true then is still true now, the viewership numbers aren't improved, but they are more vocal (oddly enough, crossing into standard "geek" territory like having a convention). The Big Bang Theory is more straight-forward and, yes, "easier," but those aren't bad things. Tune In.
If you don't watch "The Big Bang Theory," give it a chance. CBS Mondays at 8:00 and online. Sure, the premise is ridiculous (two super-nerds move next door to the proverbial sitcom "hot babe" and hilarious antics ensue -- See, they don't know how to relate! She likes shopping, they like Star Trek! Haha.) Well then, the show gets decent ratings (in the 8 million viewers range, compared to the Office's ~6 million), but it gets no respect. TV Squad doesn't provide weekly recaps (though they do write-up each episode of Big Brother). The stereotypical fan of The Office is too cool for "three camera sitcoms," and this one thrives on the "mismatched neighbors" and "nerd" constructs.
Four Geeks ± Babe (Math Humor!)
All that said, it's actually really funny, and one of the "support" geeks (meaning there are two physicist roommates and two equally geeky friends providing plot "support") is made fun of for being an engineer. I can't remember the joke exactly, but it involved something about calling engineers "the oompa-loompas of science." I haven't felt that way in a while, but in academic circles, I'll give them points for accuracy.
I have noticed that the show has actually moved away from the relationship the "babe" has with her neighbors. She has had little development - she basically sits there and makes simple jokes about her neighbors' lack of social skills or just how far over head their discussion is. I guess at some point the sort-of "head" geek needs to act on his crush he first showed in the pilot (but the show has left it sort of unaddressed since then), but I think that's the lazy way out for the writers. Family Matters did it years ago. I would guess that the writers felt like they needed a girl to be their "normal" foil for the four scientists, but as the show has gone on, they've realized the "geeks" personalities and competitiveness have been able to carry the show.
Now, the show takes an odd line between "same as every other sitcom" and "something new." If they ever fall back on "dorky nice guy chases after girl completely out of his league," we'll know that the writers have given up. The writers have stumbled onto four entertaining, dynamic characters who are unlike their TV geek forebears; they're the center of the show, not just one-note jokes on the periphery of a normal sitcom cast.
CBS has a good thing going. Unlike The Office, there's more potential upside for this show. The Office won't get significantly higher ratings - there's simply a finite number of people into sarcastic, dry humor (not that there's anything wrong with that). I've elaborated on The Office previously, and everything that was true then is still true now, the viewership numbers aren't improved, but they are more vocal (oddly enough, crossing into standard "geek" territory like having a convention). The Big Bang Theory is more straight-forward and, yes, "easier," but those aren't bad things. Tune In.
“Heroes” - Four Months Later
Every Tuesday, I'll be blogging about the show "Heroes", for the TV site Magnetic Media Fed. Here's my review of last week's season premiere.
Sometimes, I wish this was a show called "Her Es" about a girl and her magical adventures with her favorite letter of the alphabet.
For as weak and underwhelming as last year’s finale was, this episode was everything a season premiere should be. It took nearly all of the incredibly good-looking characters from last year and put them into new and intriguing storylines, with mostly success, and it introduced a bunch of new faces into the mix as well. It effectively created plenty of new mysteries and raised lots of questions, but as we’ve learned in the past, how well they pay off is anyone’s guess.
The main problem with this show (besides cramming an insane amount of story into one season) is that it relies too much on setup. Everything is plot setup for a future payoff. Think back to last season. You had about a thousand characters, with the unspoken promise that all these characters would come together in some sort of pre-determined climax, and a battle of immense proportions would ensue. Interestingly enough, the real climax of the season didn’t come in the season finale, but in an episode three weeks before it, with events that technically aren’t even going to actually happen since the present was changed to fix the future (GREAT SCOTT!). This is not to say that tremendous amounts of setup aren’t worth it. Personally, I don’t have a problem with being strung along, even if the end is weak, because I enjoy the ride, the guessing at where the plot is going to go, or what the answers all are. You look at LOST, and even though they didn’t really start giving much payoff to any storylines until halfway through this past season, I enjoy being thrown all these curveballs, all these mysteries to ponder.
That being said, I do and have always thought that this show throws way too many at one time, and therefore has a hard time hitting a home run with any of them (how’s that for a baseball metaphor?). This episode alone had eight storylines running — nine if you count the Dr. Manhattan-like reformation of previously exploded Peter Petrelli — and we still haven’t even seen the Sanderses, Sylar, and newbies Veronica Mars and Dana Davis yet, not to mention this Bogeyman guy. That’s possibly fourteen different ongoing plots running at the same time. In addition, there were also a ton of small mysteries and such that were briefly touched upon that are presumably going to become bigger as they go along. Is it safe to assume that all of these mysteries will get solved in a neat and orderly fashion? Now that all the Heroes, at least the ones from season one, have each other on speed-dial, is it safe to assume that they’ll all congregate at the Hall of Justice and figure it all out? As Kensei would probably say, “Not bloody likely�. Does it mean that a bit of a letdown at the payoff isn’t worth the months of awesome exposition? We’ll have to wait and see how it plays out.
For now, I liked more about this episode than I disliked. To clarify, the only thing I didn’t really care for at all was the Honduras duo, but I’ll get to that later. Even with my criticisms, I think that overall, they’ve done a great job in moving the characters on from last season, and organically segued them into new storylines with some growth. The only one that didn’t really feel natural was the Parkman divorce thing, because of where the two characters were at the end of last year, but I can see how his sense of duty to this girl might be more important. With that in mind, onto what I liked and didn’t like.
I really enjoyed the Parkman/Molly stuff. The two are good together onscreen, and are given some of the best material from the episode to work with, especially their dinner scene. In a show as plot-driven as this is, it’s good to see some character moments, and I could watch Greg Grunberg all day. His fellow Alias alum, and the second best part of that show, NPH-lookalike David Anders is going to be great in Hiro’s "TMNT3"-meets-"The Last Samurai" storyline, even though it’s very tough to tell why this story is even being told in the first place and why Hiro can use his powers in old Japan, but can’t teleport out of there, or back to when he got in the middle of that fight. Maybe it was because of the eclipse, which lasted all of one minute and served no purpose besides looking cool. It’s no big deal, though, because I think this dynamic between the characters/actors could work, and I’m willing to see where it goes, even if it’s just some character growth for Hiro. The best “little thing� about the episode was when Hiro took his glasses off when Kensei asked if he was a scientist and then put them back on to make sure he wasn’t seeing things when the mask came off. I think I might like the Mohinder storyline this year, as he’s basically playing go-between for HRG and Stephen “Werner Brandis. My voice is my passport; verify me.� Tobolowsky. It really is a perfect fit for where he should be, and a natural progression from what happened at the end of last season, not to mention that the two more interesting characters/actors will be driving the story. I liked the mystery of the deaths of the elder heroes, even though I question how George Takei knew who hoodie-guy was, even though we never saw who he was. Although, we never knew what Takei’s superpower was anyway (seems like a waste), so maybe it was some sort of people identification power. It’ll be interesting to see whether this plotline is a tie-in to the Bogeyman story, the Sylar story (probably not), or the “Company� story.
What didn’t I like? Claire’s re-introduction to high school/HRG’s Office Depot job. I get that they’re trying to start a new life and be boring and low-key, but could they do it with some more realistic characterizations? I understand that I’m saying this about a superhero show, but it always seems like the normal people who are always the side characters, are the most unrealistic, ironically. Take HRG’s porn-star-mustachioed boss; I can’t imagine a guy working at a place like that taking his job so seriously. Not only that, but the whole story was kinda a waste of time, really, other than to have something for HRG to do for the episode. There’s no reason why it couldn’t just be casually mentioned that he has a job somewhere, if that’s even necessary. I didn’t buy Claire at school either. Maybe it’s just because I’ve always hated the completely unrealistic Hollywood portrayal of high school as this place where there’s only 40 people, and the cheerleaders always wear their uniforms to school for some reason and have practice during their gym class that only has one guy in it. Actually, was there more than one guy at the school in total? The only one I saw was the ridiculously-named “West� whose superpowers seem to be showing up at exactly the most convenient time, plot-wise, and super-stalking. I liked the robot vs. alien convo the first time, but thought the call-back was unnecessary. Also, while I’m at it, my high school was on the state “empowerment� (read:worst of the worst, academically) list, and even we knew who Darwin was. The kids at this school must not have watched season one of Heroes, because that’s all the narration ever talks about. Another issue about this show is that I can’t remember one side character, who has been focused on, even minorly, and who doesn’t have a power of some sort. It’s getting incredibly easy to guess that someone is going to be superpowered, and that totally blows the reveal, in this case, when he flew at the end. Maybe the twist is that he actually is an alien, and those questions were totally literal. Lastly, that dinner scene was probably the most bizarre, out-of-place segment I’ve ever seen on the show. It was like someone hired Terry Gilliam to do it, what with the strange tension, weird close-ups, and the mom bringing the dog to the table and talking to it.
The Honduras story I found to be kinda boring and one-note, and considering I just saw that superpower on The 4400 last week, it didn’t shock me as much as it was probably supposed to. This is another wait-and-see story.
Nathan’s story wasn’t really fleshed (HA! I KILL ME) out at all, but one presumes that his perpetual drunkenness, and playoff/get-over-my-breakup beard, along with the Man Without a Face vision will play into future episodes, so I don’t really have any opinion on this.
Lastly, the little things that are going to be important in the future: I think they’re overextending themselves with this symbology. That insignia is in every freaking shot now, it seems like. Even when Peter shows up at the end, he’s wearing a necklace with it on for some reason. It’s in Japan; it’s on Molly’s papers; it’s on the pictures of the Elders. This is the sort of plot point (much like Hurley’s numbers on LOST) which has never been given a specific meaning, and can just be thrown in in random places to make things seem mysterious, and in doing that, they run the risk never being able to answer it, leaving the audience completely unfulfilled. I already mentioned the Nathan’s mirror/scarring shot. Obviously, they keep mentioning this Bogeyman, and it, along with Mohinder’s taking down The Company, the Elders’ murder mystery, and the Virus story seem to be what will comprise the main drive of the season, much like last year’s was to stop someone setting us up the bomb. Hopefully, much like Teri Bauer, Peter’s amnesia will go away after three hours time.
Despite all of these criticisms, the show is still easily one of the easiest to watch on TV, as it’s generally well-shot, well-paced, well-acted, and has a host of diverse and mostly likeable characters. And thankfully, they gave time to the interesting ones this week and left Nikki and that "My Wife and Kids" kid off. We’ll see how long they can walk the fourteen-plotline tightrope for.
Sometimes, I wish this was a show called "Her Es" about a girl and her magical adventures with her favorite letter of the alphabet.
For as weak and underwhelming as last year’s finale was, this episode was everything a season premiere should be. It took nearly all of the incredibly good-looking characters from last year and put them into new and intriguing storylines, with mostly success, and it introduced a bunch of new faces into the mix as well. It effectively created plenty of new mysteries and raised lots of questions, but as we’ve learned in the past, how well they pay off is anyone’s guess.
The main problem with this show (besides cramming an insane amount of story into one season) is that it relies too much on setup. Everything is plot setup for a future payoff. Think back to last season. You had about a thousand characters, with the unspoken promise that all these characters would come together in some sort of pre-determined climax, and a battle of immense proportions would ensue. Interestingly enough, the real climax of the season didn’t come in the season finale, but in an episode three weeks before it, with events that technically aren’t even going to actually happen since the present was changed to fix the future (GREAT SCOTT!). This is not to say that tremendous amounts of setup aren’t worth it. Personally, I don’t have a problem with being strung along, even if the end is weak, because I enjoy the ride, the guessing at where the plot is going to go, or what the answers all are. You look at LOST, and even though they didn’t really start giving much payoff to any storylines until halfway through this past season, I enjoy being thrown all these curveballs, all these mysteries to ponder.
That being said, I do and have always thought that this show throws way too many at one time, and therefore has a hard time hitting a home run with any of them (how’s that for a baseball metaphor?). This episode alone had eight storylines running — nine if you count the Dr. Manhattan-like reformation of previously exploded Peter Petrelli — and we still haven’t even seen the Sanderses, Sylar, and newbies Veronica Mars and Dana Davis yet, not to mention this Bogeyman guy. That’s possibly fourteen different ongoing plots running at the same time. In addition, there were also a ton of small mysteries and such that were briefly touched upon that are presumably going to become bigger as they go along. Is it safe to assume that all of these mysteries will get solved in a neat and orderly fashion? Now that all the Heroes, at least the ones from season one, have each other on speed-dial, is it safe to assume that they’ll all congregate at the Hall of Justice and figure it all out? As Kensei would probably say, “Not bloody likely�. Does it mean that a bit of a letdown at the payoff isn’t worth the months of awesome exposition? We’ll have to wait and see how it plays out.
For now, I liked more about this episode than I disliked. To clarify, the only thing I didn’t really care for at all was the Honduras duo, but I’ll get to that later. Even with my criticisms, I think that overall, they’ve done a great job in moving the characters on from last season, and organically segued them into new storylines with some growth. The only one that didn’t really feel natural was the Parkman divorce thing, because of where the two characters were at the end of last year, but I can see how his sense of duty to this girl might be more important. With that in mind, onto what I liked and didn’t like.
I really enjoyed the Parkman/Molly stuff. The two are good together onscreen, and are given some of the best material from the episode to work with, especially their dinner scene. In a show as plot-driven as this is, it’s good to see some character moments, and I could watch Greg Grunberg all day. His fellow Alias alum, and the second best part of that show, NPH-lookalike David Anders is going to be great in Hiro’s "TMNT3"-meets-"The Last Samurai" storyline, even though it’s very tough to tell why this story is even being told in the first place and why Hiro can use his powers in old Japan, but can’t teleport out of there, or back to when he got in the middle of that fight. Maybe it was because of the eclipse, which lasted all of one minute and served no purpose besides looking cool. It’s no big deal, though, because I think this dynamic between the characters/actors could work, and I’m willing to see where it goes, even if it’s just some character growth for Hiro. The best “little thing� about the episode was when Hiro took his glasses off when Kensei asked if he was a scientist and then put them back on to make sure he wasn’t seeing things when the mask came off. I think I might like the Mohinder storyline this year, as he’s basically playing go-between for HRG and Stephen “Werner Brandis. My voice is my passport; verify me.� Tobolowsky. It really is a perfect fit for where he should be, and a natural progression from what happened at the end of last season, not to mention that the two more interesting characters/actors will be driving the story. I liked the mystery of the deaths of the elder heroes, even though I question how George Takei knew who hoodie-guy was, even though we never saw who he was. Although, we never knew what Takei’s superpower was anyway (seems like a waste), so maybe it was some sort of people identification power. It’ll be interesting to see whether this plotline is a tie-in to the Bogeyman story, the Sylar story (probably not), or the “Company� story.
What didn’t I like? Claire’s re-introduction to high school/HRG’s Office Depot job. I get that they’re trying to start a new life and be boring and low-key, but could they do it with some more realistic characterizations? I understand that I’m saying this about a superhero show, but it always seems like the normal people who are always the side characters, are the most unrealistic, ironically. Take HRG’s porn-star-mustachioed boss; I can’t imagine a guy working at a place like that taking his job so seriously. Not only that, but the whole story was kinda a waste of time, really, other than to have something for HRG to do for the episode. There’s no reason why it couldn’t just be casually mentioned that he has a job somewhere, if that’s even necessary. I didn’t buy Claire at school either. Maybe it’s just because I’ve always hated the completely unrealistic Hollywood portrayal of high school as this place where there’s only 40 people, and the cheerleaders always wear their uniforms to school for some reason and have practice during their gym class that only has one guy in it. Actually, was there more than one guy at the school in total? The only one I saw was the ridiculously-named “West� whose superpowers seem to be showing up at exactly the most convenient time, plot-wise, and super-stalking. I liked the robot vs. alien convo the first time, but thought the call-back was unnecessary. Also, while I’m at it, my high school was on the state “empowerment� (read:worst of the worst, academically) list, and even we knew who Darwin was. The kids at this school must not have watched season one of Heroes, because that’s all the narration ever talks about. Another issue about this show is that I can’t remember one side character, who has been focused on, even minorly, and who doesn’t have a power of some sort. It’s getting incredibly easy to guess that someone is going to be superpowered, and that totally blows the reveal, in this case, when he flew at the end. Maybe the twist is that he actually is an alien, and those questions were totally literal. Lastly, that dinner scene was probably the most bizarre, out-of-place segment I’ve ever seen on the show. It was like someone hired Terry Gilliam to do it, what with the strange tension, weird close-ups, and the mom bringing the dog to the table and talking to it.
The Honduras story I found to be kinda boring and one-note, and considering I just saw that superpower on The 4400 last week, it didn’t shock me as much as it was probably supposed to. This is another wait-and-see story.
Nathan’s story wasn’t really fleshed (HA! I KILL ME) out at all, but one presumes that his perpetual drunkenness, and playoff/get-over-my-breakup beard, along with the Man Without a Face vision will play into future episodes, so I don’t really have any opinion on this.
Lastly, the little things that are going to be important in the future: I think they’re overextending themselves with this symbology. That insignia is in every freaking shot now, it seems like. Even when Peter shows up at the end, he’s wearing a necklace with it on for some reason. It’s in Japan; it’s on Molly’s papers; it’s on the pictures of the Elders. This is the sort of plot point (much like Hurley’s numbers on LOST) which has never been given a specific meaning, and can just be thrown in in random places to make things seem mysterious, and in doing that, they run the risk never being able to answer it, leaving the audience completely unfulfilled. I already mentioned the Nathan’s mirror/scarring shot. Obviously, they keep mentioning this Bogeyman, and it, along with Mohinder’s taking down The Company, the Elders’ murder mystery, and the Virus story seem to be what will comprise the main drive of the season, much like last year’s was to stop someone setting us up the bomb. Hopefully, much like Teri Bauer, Peter’s amnesia will go away after three hours time.
Despite all of these criticisms, the show is still easily one of the easiest to watch on TV, as it’s generally well-shot, well-paced, well-acted, and has a host of diverse and mostly likeable characters. And thankfully, they gave time to the interesting ones this week and left Nikki and that "My Wife and Kids" kid off. We’ll see how long they can walk the fourteen-plotline tightrope for.
The End of Scrubs
Update 3 (1+ weeks later): The ad during tonight's SNL 90's retrospective billed this week's episode as "only three episodes until the season finale. I guess that's that.
Update 2 (four days later): So, it looks like NBC is advertising this week's Scrubs as being the first of "the last 3." Hmm. They even emphasized the "last 3" section. Heck, they made mention of characters making the "biggest mistake of their lives", then showing Elliot and Keith's wedding scene then JD looking emotive (as usual).
Update (ten minutes after posting): I guess I should check Wikipedia (of all places) before I start posting things I think are facts. Looks like NBC has yet to officially renew the show, but according to Zach Braff himself, ABC is willing to air the last season if NBC does not renew it. Media watchers, don't worry, I've added the "journalistic integrity" category to this entry. Regardless, I stand by my comments about this season.
I haven't seen this reported anywhere else online (yet), but during a teaser for tonight's episode of Scrubs during The Office, the voice over announcer said something like, "the first of the last four Scrubs episodes." It was said that the show's status was up in the air, then there were stories about NBC throwing huge sums of money at Zach Braff to get him to come back for one more year. Well, I guess that didn't turn out so hot. And that's a good thing.
You might remember my epic review of Scrubs last year as being one of three notable parts of "the current TV landscape," so me thinking that the show might be capital "O" Over might not make any sense. Simply, if you've watched the show at all this season, you understand. Not just "not quite the same as older episodes," the first 10 or so episodes were awful. Dreadful, painful-to-watch TV. Mind you, this isn't like the-Simpson's-were-better-back-when thinking, where old episodes are more thought of as a collective period of time rather than individual examples of the series strengths. Just last season could be considered "classic Scrubs." Who knows why, but this season didn't get watchable until about episode 13, with one of the first twelve episodes being a brutal clip show and the other being a show about the newer Iraq war which served only to get politically simple people to say, "Wow, they really brought a new voice to the argument." Oh yeah, one of the pre-13 episodes was a highly hyped musical episode. It was tedious, so say the best.
Last year, I wrote that with Turk and Carla's baby and JD's impending fatherhood, the characters and show were growing up, and the show wasn't about grown-ups who acted grown-up. This should've been an occasion to use this season to wrap things up, but instead, Carla got an after school special version of post-partem depression, recovered from it, then the baby all-but disappeared from the show (a fair move - the show's not about babies). Also, JD's impending fatherhood/implied-eventual marriage was thrown out the window with the good, old-fashioned "tell the long distance dad-to-be that mommy had a miscarriage, but actually lie about it" move. It's like putting drama in a piggy bank.
All that said, the recent episodes have been solid, but the show's been on since 2001 (yikes, that's a long time for a show most people have never watched), doesn't have many viewers, became self-aware about how limited the main character was last year, and gave a potential setup for a season-long arc about JD "growing up" at the end of last season, then blew it. Of course, Scrubs is practically the template for wrapping things up efficiently and poetically (with indie music playing in the background, of course), and the series finale would pack a doozy, I'm sure [not sarcasm]. Considering that the writers did one of the tidiest jobs ever of removing a "Ross/Rachel" relationship from a show in a gutsy, (female) viewer alienating move at the end of season three, the slight (maybe unintentional) tension between JD and Elliot was a bit out of place on tonight's episode, who knows if they'll go that route, though Elliot's boyfriend proposed to her to end of the episode.
The End of Scrubs gets four stars because it's about darn time, but loses a star because it could've been setup better considering how last season ended.
I'm thinking about it some more, and maybe the voice-over lady during the promo meant they were the last four episodes of the season, but one can hope. Still, the show is responsible for one of the best ever TV moments, so I guess they're entitled one more season...
Update 2 (four days later): So, it looks like NBC is advertising this week's Scrubs as being the first of "the last 3." Hmm. They even emphasized the "last 3" section. Heck, they made mention of characters making the "biggest mistake of their lives", then showing Elliot and Keith's wedding scene then JD looking emotive (as usual).
Update (ten minutes after posting): I guess I should check Wikipedia (of all places) before I start posting things I think are facts. Looks like NBC has yet to officially renew the show, but according to Zach Braff himself, ABC is willing to air the last season if NBC does not renew it. Media watchers, don't worry, I've added the "journalistic integrity" category to this entry. Regardless, I stand by my comments about this season.
I haven't seen this reported anywhere else online (yet), but during a teaser for tonight's episode of Scrubs during The Office, the voice over announcer said something like, "the first of the last four Scrubs episodes." It was said that the show's status was up in the air, then there were stories about NBC throwing huge sums of money at Zach Braff to get him to come back for one more year. Well, I guess that didn't turn out so hot. And that's a good thing.
You might remember my epic review of Scrubs last year as being one of three notable parts of "the current TV landscape," so me thinking that the show might be capital "O" Over might not make any sense. Simply, if you've watched the show at all this season, you understand. Not just "not quite the same as older episodes," the first 10 or so episodes were awful. Dreadful, painful-to-watch TV. Mind you, this isn't like the-Simpson's-were-better-back-when thinking, where old episodes are more thought of as a collective period of time rather than individual examples of the series strengths. Just last season could be considered "classic Scrubs." Who knows why, but this season didn't get watchable until about episode 13, with one of the first twelve episodes being a brutal clip show and the other being a show about the newer Iraq war which served only to get politically simple people to say, "Wow, they really brought a new voice to the argument." Oh yeah, one of the pre-13 episodes was a highly hyped musical episode. It was tedious, so say the best.
Last year, I wrote that with Turk and Carla's baby and JD's impending fatherhood, the characters and show were growing up, and the show wasn't about grown-ups who acted grown-up. This should've been an occasion to use this season to wrap things up, but instead, Carla got an after school special version of post-partem depression, recovered from it, then the baby all-but disappeared from the show (a fair move - the show's not about babies). Also, JD's impending fatherhood/implied-eventual marriage was thrown out the window with the good, old-fashioned "tell the long distance dad-to-be that mommy had a miscarriage, but actually lie about it" move. It's like putting drama in a piggy bank.
All that said, the recent episodes have been solid, but the show's been on since 2001 (yikes, that's a long time for a show most people have never watched), doesn't have many viewers, became self-aware about how limited the main character was last year, and gave a potential setup for a season-long arc about JD "growing up" at the end of last season, then blew it. Of course, Scrubs is practically the template for wrapping things up efficiently and poetically (with indie music playing in the background, of course), and the series finale would pack a doozy, I'm sure [not sarcasm]. Considering that the writers did one of the tidiest jobs ever of removing a "Ross/Rachel" relationship from a show in a gutsy, (female) viewer alienating move at the end of season three, the slight (maybe unintentional) tension between JD and Elliot was a bit out of place on tonight's episode, who knows if they'll go that route, though Elliot's boyfriend proposed to her to end of the episode.
The End of Scrubs gets four stars because it's about darn time, but loses a star because it could've been setup better considering how last season ended.
I'm thinking about it some more, and maybe the voice-over lady during the promo meant they were the last four episodes of the season, but one can hope. Still, the show is responsible for one of the best ever TV moments, so I guess they're entitled one more season...
2006-07 Academy Awards Nominations
This year, the movie that I chose to not see, but still complain about is "Dreamgirls", a movie that wasn't even nominated for best picture... and I'm not really even complaining about it... which makes me feel real strange.
The academy awards nominations came out this morning. And for some reason I decided that I don’t really care this year. It’s weird because I don’t know why. In fact, I wrote most of this review on Sunday, before they were even announced. I’ve become jaded to the whole celebrity scene this year, and I’ve stopped seeing this show as an affirmation that the movies that I enjoyed over the past year are good, and more as a means of keeping up the guise of celebrity importance. (review of the near future: celebrity feuds)
Maybe it was seeing people argue about which movies deserved which awards the way I used to, and thinking, “Wow, do these guys see how completely stupid they look, rooting for something that they think they have partial ownership in, just because they kinda liked it? Did I look that stupid, phony, and in over my head when I was complaining about how undervalued “The Man who Wasn’t There� was, or how that ridiculous “THEY MAKE THE RAIN AND SAY IT’S RAINING!!!� rant from Cold Mountain won good ole squinty-eyed Renee Zellweger her academy award? Well, chances are I did for the last one, because I totally used to do an impression of that was intentionally unintentionally hi-larious, and which has since failed the test of time, seeing as how nobody even remembers the movie a mere two years later. This also goes to show the unimportance of these awards, because I highly doubt that all the people that argue about these sort of things could even tell me without looking it up, who hosted the 2001 awards (held in 2002), let alone who won best actor and actress. Whoopi Goldberg hosted by the by, and I don’t even think I could tell you what movie won best picture ( Chicago maybe?) let alone the acting awards. The only reason I remember Whoopi is because my friends and I were watching in a TV lounge filled with people who actually thought she was funny. We couldn’t take it and ended up leaving in a huff. That’s beside the point.
All this is not to say that I’m not going to look and see who’s nominated or who wins. I’ll probably even watch the show. But at this moment, writing this review, do I think it’s worth having an Oscar "party" or doing an awards pool (in which I have participated numerous times)? Not really. Do I find that a little disheartening? Of course I do. Three years ago at this time, I was in the center of celebrity culture. I was in the bleachers for the Screen Actor’s Guild red carpet. I stood by the limo security checkpoint at the Golden Globes to get a glimpse of anybody relatively famous. I can’t say for sure if I would do it again. Maybe just to say I did it. Then again, I never really got “star-struck� to begin with. Most of the pictures I took of people were either for bragging rights, or because I knew friends might want them. But still, even the following year I went in on an Oscar pool.
What’s my point in all this? I’m not quite sure. All I know is that at this specific minute of this specific day, I’m thinking to myself “Don’t we have enough other things to be interested in or worry about than awards for millionaires (I know that the tech award winners are mostly non-millionaires, and the people who make the shorts and documentaries are probably even less well-off) we’ve never met and mostly think they’re better than us anyway?� I suppose you could argue the same of sports, but to me the difference is that football and baseball are designed to be competitions, and film isn’t, or at least shouldn’t. Why should it matter to us if a movie we like wins an award? Shouldn’t liking it be enough? Maybe it’s the validation that comes with being behind something that is regarded by professionals to be the best. Maybe it’s the ability to say to our friends “I totally knew Marcia Gay Harden was gonna win for Pollack, even though I’ve never even heard of the movie because it sounds boring and was only playing in 8 cities�, thereby coming off as knowledgeable, even though you just got lucky or read a newspaper article. Maybe it’s just that feeling that you know a lot about a subject, even if you really don’t, but just know a little bit more than your friends. Besides, ten years from now, "Saving Private Ryan" will be remembered even though it lost to the completely forgettable "Shakespeare in Love", which was lauded by the pretentious set.
This pretentiousness is something that the Oscars and other awards do spur on, and I guess this is where my whole complaint starts. Soon enough, the debates will rage over which arthouse movie that nobody was able to see was more overrated, which one deserves more attention etc. And all these people will be arguing over the fact that we love a movie that we haven’t even seen, just because of the talent attached to it. And that “you’re� (the royal “you�) stupid and less important because you’ve never even heard of it. And that’s just wrong. I really don’t want to do that again. (Update: I was flipping through the morning shows today to see if anyone was talking about the noms, just to prove my case, and the new FOX morning show had on their two Oscar Experts... two women who looked to be a mere few years older than I am. Of course there were raving about how great Helen Mirren was in "The Queen"... and to make matters worse, the audience erupted in applause. Now, you have to be sure that in this situation, maybe 25 percent of the audience at most has seen this movie, and the rest are either being egged on by the stage manager/audience warm-up guy, or just don't want to seem like they don't know anything about anything. Strangely enough, I'm looking at the box-office tallies for this weekend, and "The Queen" is actually playing in more theaters than "Children of Men", "Alpha Dog", and "The Good Shepherd".)
And maybe I'm upset that somehow I've grown to see something that I used to see as the Holy Grail of Film-making achievement now as a way to sell movies that otherwise wouldn't have an audience. I mean, would anyone have gone to see "The Last King of Scotland" otherwise? It's all part of the self-promoting hype machine, and I don't know if I'm still down with that. Maybe in a case like this, yes, but that silly red carpet image stuff always seems to undermine the gravitas of the "talent-based" awards.
As for the specific nominations themselves, they seem generally fine across the board, as far as the movies that I've gone to see, and those are really all that I can discuss.
The 2006-07 Academy Awards Nominations get two stars for being a way to generally promote smaller, higher-quality movies. As far as awards competition goes, I'm not really a fan of how devisive it makes people, including myself, about movies we like, versus ones we aren't planning on seeing, but dislike just for the sake of it . As far as this year's specific award nominees go, I've got no major complaints, other than the lack of "Children of Men", but I can live without it, knowing how the voting process, and awards campaigning go. Oh... and the fact that THREE freakin songs from Dreamgirls are nominated.... now that's something genuine to dislike... but still, does it really matter?
Calling Out Northwestern on National TV
It's not often that colleges get called out negatively on TV. Usually, writers namedrop the college they attended in passing: "These guys were frat brothers of mine from my time at Northwestern" (a sort of quote from an episode of Andy Richter Controls the Universe); it's not really an endorsement, but it is a type of plug, I guess the screenplayer writer's to hanging one's diploma on the wall at work. Anyway, aside from some Simpsons jokes making fun of Yale (because there was a time when many of the Simpsons writers had come from Harvard), college namedrops are neutral at worst.
Hollywood doesn't like you!
But, when watching tonight's episode of "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip", the following dialogue was exchanged:
note, this is more of an "I think this is what they said" than a pure transcription
Matthew Perry's Character: I'll write you a letter of recommendation.
Bradley Whitford's Character: Speaking of which, against my better advice, my nephew is applying to Northwestern, and he needs a letter of recommendation, too.
Not that big a deal, I know, but in a way, my non-donating-alumnus status just got a high five from Hollywood! Now, I guess it could be rationalized away by the writers by saying, they were getting at: "there are better such and such programs at some other college than Northwestern," but I feel like I'm part of higher educational history: The first(?) prime time dis'.
Calling Out Northwestern on National TV gets four-and-a-half stars for being the first negative namedrop of a college, with that 1/2 being deducted for the episode of "Studio 60..." being a perfect example of everything that's right and everything that's wrong with the show. *note: I don't really have any negative feelings towards Northwestern or anything like that, but considering how rarely it's brought up in pop culture, the fact that it was a negative (or pushing towards negative from neutral, at best) mention makes it quite newsworthy.
Hollywood doesn't like you!
But, when watching tonight's episode of "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip", the following dialogue was exchanged:
note, this is more of an "I think this is what they said" than a pure transcription
Matthew Perry's Character: I'll write you a letter of recommendation.
Bradley Whitford's Character: Speaking of which, against my better advice, my nephew is applying to Northwestern, and he needs a letter of recommendation, too.
Not that big a deal, I know, but in a way, my non-donating-alumnus status just got a high five from Hollywood! Now, I guess it could be rationalized away by the writers by saying, they were getting at: "there are better such and such programs at some other college than Northwestern," but I feel like I'm part of higher educational history: The first(?) prime time dis'.
Calling Out Northwestern on National TV gets four-and-a-half stars for being the first negative namedrop of a college, with that 1/2 being deducted for the episode of "Studio 60..." being a perfect example of everything that's right and everything that's wrong with the show. *note: I don't really have any negative feelings towards Northwestern or anything like that, but considering how rarely it's brought up in pop culture, the fact that it was a negative (or pushing towards negative from neutral, at best) mention makes it quite newsworthy.
16 Favorite TV Moments of the Year
"Remember the time when somebody put a big yellow bullseye in the middle of our living room?"
Alton Brown’s Feasting on Asphalt- Alton Brown is a certifiable genius. Just watch any episode of Good Eats . I feel smarter every time I watch his show, so to combine that knowledge with a wonderfully-shot and incredibly interesting motorcycle trek across the backroads of America in search of local specialties is extremely compelling, especially in the last episode when Brown suffers a broken collarbone in a nasty wipeout in the Nevada desert.
Craig Ferguson interviews Lauren Graham – I’ve lost my love for Conan O’Brien’s show for some reason. Not that it's not a good show, I just can't take it every night of the week. He just seems too wooden and it’s like he’s always forcing his conversations with the guests. Craig Ferguson however is naturally funny and conversational, even if nowhere near as slickly-produced. The opening monologues are probably the most obvious example of the difference, with Ferguson’s stream of consciousness rant, as opposed to Conan’s formulaic one line setup followed by one line punchline. Anyway, this interview is the best example I’ve seen of why Ferguson ’s show has become more entertaining, even if the production values are about one-tenth of Conan's.
Tim Russert interviews Barrack Obama on "The Tim Russert Show"– An hour and a half with the biggest “rock star� in politics, and probably the most universally admired since Kennedy (maybe?)… interviewed by Tim Russert? How can it go wrong?
Red Sox win the World Series on LOST- With all the season two cliffhangers and questions and all that, I still think this character moment is the best from the year. While being held captive, Jack is confronted by the former Henry Gale, who tries to get Jack to cooperate, promising escape from the island. When Jack doesn’t believe him, Henry tells him that since the time they crashed on the island (way back in fall of 2004, more than a month before the World Series for that year) the Red Sox won the World Series. Way back in the first season, Jack had explained that his dad had always said the Red Sox would never win a championship, as a way of saying that things could never change because fate ruled everything. Henry knew Jack wouldn’t believe him, so he played the footage of Joe Buck calling the last out of the final game. In addition to proving that the “others� have contact with the outside world, this is incredibly important as to Jack’s outlook on the world, and watching this magical sports moment (one from another network, no less) again just gave me goosebumps.
Edgar Dies on 24- In a year where killing off characters for ratings has become vogue (something that 24 managed to do countless times), this one is probably the second most shocking and well-done. (no, I’m not talking about the LOST deaths, see below). Granted, the guy who played Edgar had a clunky acting style, but the network handled it without blowing the surprise (something that promotions departments have forgotten how to do lately.... cough, cough, Heroes...cough), and it was emotionally resonant. The problem with it, like with all things that happen on 24, is that four weeks later in our time, it’s only four hours later on the show, and while we’ve totally put the death behind us, the people on the show shouldn’t have, but do, even though it’s not realistic…. Not that anything else on the show is realistic.
Zayra Performs on Rockstar:Supernova- I couldn’t decide whether to put this in the good section or the bad one, so I did both. I wrote about her in my review of Rockstar:Supernova, and placed video links in my worst 15 moments list. Just incredibly strange, yet compelling television.
Claire wakes up on the morgue table on Heroes- On a show known for its shocking endings, this was the best. A character who can heal herself fell and landed on some spike or something, and died temporarily. At the end of the episode, somebody takes the spike out of her head and walks away. Her eyes open up and the camera pulls out to reveal that she’s on the autopsy table with her chest cavity wide open. Great visual, and stunning end to an otherwise mediocre episode.
The Office- Jim kisses Pam- After more than a year of building to it, it was the moment we all were waiting for. This season, however, even though they handled the post-kiss stuff well, I find myself rooting for the other girl instead of Pam.
Lem Dies on The Shield- the single best death on TV this year. Hands down. Under investigation by the Internal Affairs Dept. and the crazy/awesome Forest Whittaker, one of Michael Chiklis’ team members goes into hiding, and eventually meets his tragic end. I won’t spoil how, but suffice it to say, Vic Mackey is gonna be on a rampage this season.
Colbert interviews Washington D.C. representative- Stephen Colbert interviews the D.C. congressional representative and proceeds to tell her that D.C. doesn’t count because it’s the United STATES of America . This segment is a fantastic example of how quick and brilliant Colbert is, and what makes this show so great.
30 Days goes to Mexico and India- The only socially conscious reality show out there (I don’t give credence to the manipulative Extreme Makeover: Home Edition), one episode had a border patrolling minuteman live with a family of immigrants. At one point he went to Mexico , to see where the family “lived� before they moved. Neither side was unlikable, and they both learned from each other and created a fantastic friendship. In another episode, a laid-off telemarketer travels to India to work there for a month. What makes this episode so unique is that they were there during the riots that ensued when an extremely popular actor died, a big story that nobody reported here in the states.
Fear Factor is cancelled – the most despicable show on TV (aside from Nancy Grace) finally saw the end of its run. Don’t fear, you fans of people eating horse anuses; you can still watch it in syndication somewhere.
Bill O’Reilly town hall on Oprah-It's interesting to see Bill O'Reilly in an environment where he's not just yelling at everyone, and where people aren't rightfully attacking him. Intelligent discourse is absent from his FOX NEWS show, and he's always calm and on the defensive when on Letterman, but can barely get a word in edgewise. When put in a townhall setting on Oprah (there were actually men in the audience), he actually had a few valid points, as did the audience members who disagreed, but most of the time it didn't devolve to a shouting match. I think that's because when he's out of his element ("on the attack" on his show) he knows that the best way to come out of an interview is to be low-key and let the other people look like idiots for their unwavering attacks on him. He's still a blowhard and sees everything in black-and-white, but it was actually interesting to see people in her audience (and not elite and/or trailertrash white people) agreeing and defending him against others in intelligent ways.
"Scrubs"- "My Lunch" I was gonna put the "Mac Bangs Dennis' Mom" episode of "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia", but then I remembered that my favorite episode of "Scrubs" aired this year. As a testament to how good this episode was, it has the highest amount of reviews of any "Scrubs" episode, on tv.com, and the second highest overall rating. The end of this episode just floored me, and it makes me wonder even more how John C. McGinley has never gotten ANY award nominations for the show.
Grammy Performances- Absolutely stunning performances at this years Grammys. From a brooding Springsteen, to Mary J. Blige somehow upstaging Bono in their duet, to Christina Aguelera proving why Britney will never be number one, the Grammy Awards managed to deliver the musical moments once again…. If we forget the awkwardness of seeing Paul McCartney perform with Linkin Park and Jay-Z.
South Park Cartoon Wars- South Park shows why it’s the best and smartest animated program on TV. In a forty-minute span, the show takes on Family Guy’s writing, the Muslims who got pissed off at those cartoons from Denmark, the people who got pissed off at the Terrence and Phillip special from 1998, the networks’ refusal to air anything that might offend somebody, the Hollywood types, the people who like family guy, and the fact that Bart Simpson used to be considered “edgy�. And they do it all with a completely organic story, and characters that react as they normally would in the situation. Oh… and manatees.
15 Least Favorite TV Moments of the Year
The first in a series of end of the year lists. Sorry for no star ratings, but all of these would fall between zero and one star.
"Are you aware that we have a sketch about Commedia dell'arte?"
"Sure. I love the works of Moliere and his contemporaries"
"Since most of them aren't familiar with 17th Century French theatre, we should maybe do something our audience might actually enjoy, or find funny?"
"It's Italian, and you know, you should really stop dangling your modifiers like that"
"HAHAHAHAHAHA. You're an hilarious writer who is a thinly veiled representation of our show's creator."
"God I hate reality shows."
Runners up:
Fox cancels 'Arrested Development'- Granted the ratings were bad, and viewership was leaking due to mishandled promotions/timeslots and the overall nature of the show, but it was still sad to see it go.
Oprah making a big deal over the fact that that guy's memoir wasn't real, even though it still was an inspirational story.
Megan Mullally upstages Meat Loaf - Megan Mullally has a talk show... a really annoying one, and when Meat Loaf came on to perform from 'Bat Out of Hell 3', she had to jump in and sing the last part of "Paradise by the Dashboard Light" with him. If it was anyone else, it might not have seemed that bad, but she did it in a way that screamed "it's all about me!". Talk shows should be about making your guest look interesting, not feeding your huge ego. It just came off as incredibly awkward.
The finalists... in no particular order.
'My Super Sweet 16'- The new king of hated television. Why should I watch rich, obnoxious people demand things of their parents in a manner worse than Veruca Salt? Because I’m supposed to root against them? It doesn’t seem that way, instead encouraging kids to be ungrateful and rude.
Nancy Grace- Any single show will do, but I’d go with the one where she accused someone of killing their own child during an interview (Nancy accused her during the interview; she didn’t kill the kid during it), leading the woman to shoot herself. Way to go Nancy . You inadvertently killed someone.
Gwen Stefani performs at A.M.A.s – From the moment they said she would be debuting her new hit, I knew there was gonna be trouble. Sure enough, there was yodeling, there were Asian girls in lederhosen with blonde wigs, there were sheep. Completely strange, and completely awful.
Chevy Chase on 'Law and Order' – RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES!! Chevy Chase plays a washed-up star of some sort who gets arrested for killing a Jewish person. The writing is awful, the story was awful, and even the acting was atrocious. Not only that but it made the Mel Gibson story out to be a lot more than it actually was.
Connie Chung Goodbye Song- Connie Chung and Maury Povich apparently had a show together. Take a guess how long it lasted. On her last show, she got up on top of a piano like a lounge singer and began to wail (and I mean wail) out a rendition of 'thanks for the memories'. It became a moderate internet phenomenon because of how awful it was.
Any episode of 'The War At Home'- Just plain awful… they took Arrested Development off for this?
Roger Daltry as the Makeup Killer on 'CSI'- On thanksgiving night, I watched CSI for the first… and hopefully last, time. Roger Daltry played a mobster who these four guys thought was dead. Then years later he got his revenge on them by dressing up in fat suits and disguising himself as women in order to kill them. Not sure why one of the greatest frontmen in rock history would decide to do this, but I guess the royalty checks he gets for them using his songs is probably a good bet.
'Celebrity Duets'- Take 'Dancing with the Stars' and mix it with 'American Idol'. What do you get? This craptacular hour of awful celebs singing awfully was thankfully over after only a few weeks. I guess that’s what you get when your judges are Marie Osmond and Little Richard
Tony dies on '24'- Unlike Edgar’s death, this one was handled incredibly poorly. Tony was the only character besides Jack Bauer left from the first season. He was universally loved by this point, as Jack’s right-hand-man. He spent half the season unconscious and then he gets up to try and kill the man who killed his wife. He lets up for national security reasons, and gets stabbed with a hypodermic needle of death. He falls over dead, and nobody mentions him ever again. Completely unnecessary, not as dramatic as it should’ve been, and ambiguous to the point where the audience doesn’t even think he’s dead. Why keep him alive but unconscious for all those episodes if you’re just going to kill him as soon as he wakes up?
Zayra on 'Rockstar: Supernova' – Strange vocals from someone who wants to be a rock star. I can’t believe the producers picked her over someone more qualified, even though she makes for great, yet horrible TV.
'Studio 60' tells us we’re idiots – It seems like every week, 'Studio 60' is talking down to the mainstream public and treating Hollywood like the be-all-and end-all of civilization. I’ve been to California . People there aren’t all that smart.
Dane Cook returns to 'SNL'- If you didn’t think his first time (a mere months earlier) hosting the show was funny, you won’t be surprised at the results of this show. Another long “stand-up� set as his monologue, more gay voices, and one of the worst sketches I’ve ever seen. It went so far as to try to explain away it’s awfulness at the end, with a self-aware “lantern�, but that’s like using a suction pump to stop the bleeding.
'Seventh Heaven' returns from the dead- it was finally cancelled. That awful show about the perfect and huge family with a one-parent income…. Until the CW executives saw the ratings for the series finale. Now, with almost the entire original cast having moved on, the Camdens have 4 random street-teens living with them for some reason. Just have the second series finale already.
WWE; Degeneration X drops feces on the McMahons- Wrestling fans have dealt with a lot of crap (no pun intended): The Katie Vick Story, The Gay Wedding Story, Al Wilson, Eugene, Paternity in a suitcase Ladder Match… but dumping a pile of feces on the boss’ family tops everything. When people ask me how I can defend that, I have no answer.
'High School Musical'- The biggest phenomenon in all of TV this year saw awful acting and writing manage to hypnotize “tweens� everywhere into making the soundtrack the year’s top-selling CD. Every time it airs, it’s in the top 20 cable shows of the week, even though these people have seen it 20 times each.
"Are you aware that we have a sketch about Commedia dell'arte?"
"Sure. I love the works of Moliere and his contemporaries"
"Since most of them aren't familiar with 17th Century French theatre, we should maybe do something our audience might actually enjoy, or find funny?"
"It's Italian, and you know, you should really stop dangling your modifiers like that"
"HAHAHAHAHAHA. You're an hilarious writer who is a thinly veiled representation of our show's creator."
"God I hate reality shows."
Runners up:
Fox cancels 'Arrested Development'- Granted the ratings were bad, and viewership was leaking due to mishandled promotions/timeslots and the overall nature of the show, but it was still sad to see it go.
Oprah making a big deal over the fact that that guy's memoir wasn't real, even though it still was an inspirational story.
Megan Mullally upstages Meat Loaf - Megan Mullally has a talk show... a really annoying one, and when Meat Loaf came on to perform from 'Bat Out of Hell 3', she had to jump in and sing the last part of "Paradise by the Dashboard Light" with him. If it was anyone else, it might not have seemed that bad, but she did it in a way that screamed "it's all about me!". Talk shows should be about making your guest look interesting, not feeding your huge ego. It just came off as incredibly awkward.
The finalists... in no particular order.
'My Super Sweet 16'- The new king of hated television. Why should I watch rich, obnoxious people demand things of their parents in a manner worse than Veruca Salt? Because I’m supposed to root against them? It doesn’t seem that way, instead encouraging kids to be ungrateful and rude.
Nancy Grace- Any single show will do, but I’d go with the one where she accused someone of killing their own child during an interview (Nancy accused her during the interview; she didn’t kill the kid during it), leading the woman to shoot herself. Way to go Nancy . You inadvertently killed someone.
Gwen Stefani performs at A.M.A.s – From the moment they said she would be debuting her new hit, I knew there was gonna be trouble. Sure enough, there was yodeling, there were Asian girls in lederhosen with blonde wigs, there were sheep. Completely strange, and completely awful.
Chevy Chase on 'Law and Order' – RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES!! Chevy Chase plays a washed-up star of some sort who gets arrested for killing a Jewish person. The writing is awful, the story was awful, and even the acting was atrocious. Not only that but it made the Mel Gibson story out to be a lot more than it actually was.
Connie Chung Goodbye Song- Connie Chung and Maury Povich apparently had a show together. Take a guess how long it lasted. On her last show, she got up on top of a piano like a lounge singer and began to wail (and I mean wail) out a rendition of 'thanks for the memories'. It became a moderate internet phenomenon because of how awful it was.
Any episode of 'The War At Home'- Just plain awful… they took Arrested Development off for this?
Roger Daltry as the Makeup Killer on 'CSI'- On thanksgiving night, I watched CSI for the first… and hopefully last, time. Roger Daltry played a mobster who these four guys thought was dead. Then years later he got his revenge on them by dressing up in fat suits and disguising himself as women in order to kill them. Not sure why one of the greatest frontmen in rock history would decide to do this, but I guess the royalty checks he gets for them using his songs is probably a good bet.
'Celebrity Duets'- Take 'Dancing with the Stars' and mix it with 'American Idol'. What do you get? This craptacular hour of awful celebs singing awfully was thankfully over after only a few weeks. I guess that’s what you get when your judges are Marie Osmond and Little Richard
Tony dies on '24'- Unlike Edgar’s death, this one was handled incredibly poorly. Tony was the only character besides Jack Bauer left from the first season. He was universally loved by this point, as Jack’s right-hand-man. He spent half the season unconscious and then he gets up to try and kill the man who killed his wife. He lets up for national security reasons, and gets stabbed with a hypodermic needle of death. He falls over dead, and nobody mentions him ever again. Completely unnecessary, not as dramatic as it should’ve been, and ambiguous to the point where the audience doesn’t even think he’s dead. Why keep him alive but unconscious for all those episodes if you’re just going to kill him as soon as he wakes up?
Zayra on 'Rockstar: Supernova' – Strange vocals from someone who wants to be a rock star. I can’t believe the producers picked her over someone more qualified, even though she makes for great, yet horrible TV.
'Studio 60' tells us we’re idiots – It seems like every week, 'Studio 60' is talking down to the mainstream public and treating Hollywood like the be-all-and end-all of civilization. I’ve been to California . People there aren’t all that smart.
Dane Cook returns to 'SNL'- If you didn’t think his first time (a mere months earlier) hosting the show was funny, you won’t be surprised at the results of this show. Another long “stand-up� set as his monologue, more gay voices, and one of the worst sketches I’ve ever seen. It went so far as to try to explain away it’s awfulness at the end, with a self-aware “lantern�, but that’s like using a suction pump to stop the bleeding.
'Seventh Heaven' returns from the dead- it was finally cancelled. That awful show about the perfect and huge family with a one-parent income…. Until the CW executives saw the ratings for the series finale. Now, with almost the entire original cast having moved on, the Camdens have 4 random street-teens living with them for some reason. Just have the second series finale already.
WWE; Degeneration X drops feces on the McMahons- Wrestling fans have dealt with a lot of crap (no pun intended): The Katie Vick Story, The Gay Wedding Story, Al Wilson, Eugene, Paternity in a suitcase Ladder Match… but dumping a pile of feces on the boss’ family tops everything. When people ask me how I can defend that, I have no answer.
'High School Musical'- The biggest phenomenon in all of TV this year saw awful acting and writing manage to hypnotize “tweens� everywhere into making the soundtrack the year’s top-selling CD. Every time it airs, it’s in the top 20 cable shows of the week, even though these people have seen it 20 times each.
The Concept of Prehistoric Park
This might be my last traditional review of the year, considering we're nearing the end of 2006. In this last month of the year, everybody likes to see best and worst of the year lists, so be prepared to be bombarded with those for the next few weeks, culminating with my Top 10 Lists of the Year. Ooooh meta-humor.
Ahhh the good old days when TV about Dinosaurs was relegated to them hitting each other with frying pans. If only Prehistoric Park had a little more of that.
Imagine, if you will, if Jurassic Park were a TV show. Wouldn’t that be exciting? Dinosaurs running around, tearing up each other and people, and all kinds of exciting action week after week. You could have park rangers dealing with all of the problems of running a park for dinosaurs, getting eaten while trying to feed them. I can’t really think of any good storylines, but this is dinosaurs and people in the same environment! This is like the holy grail of excitement... unless you count the Flintstones, and that horrible movie "Carnosaur"... god that was bad
So when I heard about this show, Prehistoric Park, that’s on Animal Planet (originally, it was made for British television, but I would bet that they had a deal with American TV before it was made for funding purposes), I just had to check it out. I was completely let down. There I am with my bowl of popcorn and my dino-pajamas, waiting to see an action-packed hour of dino-tainment, and I’m bored to tears. Why?
Well, “Prehistoric Park� is a documentary about an animal preserve where the curator goes back in time through some sort of timecube or stargate:atlantis or something and brings the dinosaurs back to his park, where he doesn’t do anything except keep them in pens and watch their health. That’s not entirely true. The last episode had a large “plot� involving saber-toothed tiger husbandry. You heard me. As a documentary on this completely real place, and the fact that it’s been made for educational purposes, obviously the main point is to tell us all about the behavior of these dinosaurs and how to medically and behaviorally care for them. And that’s about as exciting, as say, a documentary on real tiger husbandry, and who would really care about that?
I’ve boiled the conceptual problems down to three areas: First of all, since this park is entirely real (it is a documentary after all) are we to believe that these people have never seen or heard of Jurassic Park? You would think that if you were planning a dinosaur island theme park, Jurassic Park would probably be the first place you would look to do research. And you would realize that no matter how safely you think your T-Rex is kept, it’s not. Rule number 1 about having an island dinosaur preserve… No T-Rexes. Even if you have your giant electrical fences or in the case of Prehistoric Park, just giant wooden fences,he T-Rex is gonna get out. If we learned one thing from "The Lost World", it’s that San Diego is not prepared for a T-Rex attack. (granted, that was pre-9/11, but I seriously doubt that the D.H.S. has a plan for dinosaur attacks). I understand that it’s very unlikely and that The Lost World was a movie, but this is a documentary, so you’d think these Palienticians would be more responsible. They're just as bad as Cartographers
Secondly, haven’t they ever seen a time-travel movie? In fact there was one that came out about a year or so ago called "A Sound of Thunder" that dealt specifically to going back to the time of dinosaurs and hunting them. When the wrong ones ended up shot, the future (present) was entirely changed. Who knows, they could be abducting the dinosaur that brought their great-great-great etc grandparents together creating a time paradox that could rip apart the space-time continuum. Even if that didn't happen, think of the change to the animal food chain, what with humans being knocked down a notch... granted, there are a few too many Canadians for my taste. But still, that doesn’t sound like something I want happening on my watch. You people are supposed to be responsible scientists; get your act together.
For my third point, I have a confession to make. While this show is presented as a documentary, I’ve recently been informed that it really isn’t and that it’s just presented that way to tell you boring information about dinosaur life that you never had any desire to know. This doesn’t make any sense to me. Nobody was ever around when dinosaurs lived. How do we know that there weren’t McDino-lds walk-throughs, or that specific plants made certain dinos sick. The only evidence we have is bones, and some eggs. Everything in this show is presented so seriously that we automatically take every single word for fact. It’s like if the croc hunter went after velociraptors instead of stingrays…. well the result would still be the same either way. Anyway, they could really tell us anything about dinosaurs (say they all wore blue hats, drank horse urine, and were the largest exporter of human pubis in the world) and we’d believe them.
I always liked learning about dinosaurs because there were so many different kinds, all with their own special features and fighting styles. I wanted to see them fight each other and stuff like all kids do. This show totally de-mystifies the whole dinosaur idea, basically showing us the medical side of running a dinosaur theme park, and unless you’re one of the few people who are interested in paleo-veteranary-zoology you’ll be as completely bored as I was.
The concept of "Prehistoric Park" gets one star due to having a good idea to start off with and completely wasting it. This show is like watching people oil and polish Transformers instead of letting them do what they do best: shoot laser beams.
Ahhh the good old days when TV about Dinosaurs was relegated to them hitting each other with frying pans. If only Prehistoric Park had a little more of that.
Imagine, if you will, if Jurassic Park were a TV show. Wouldn’t that be exciting? Dinosaurs running around, tearing up each other and people, and all kinds of exciting action week after week. You could have park rangers dealing with all of the problems of running a park for dinosaurs, getting eaten while trying to feed them. I can’t really think of any good storylines, but this is dinosaurs and people in the same environment! This is like the holy grail of excitement... unless you count the Flintstones, and that horrible movie "Carnosaur"... god that was bad
So when I heard about this show, Prehistoric Park, that’s on Animal Planet (originally, it was made for British television, but I would bet that they had a deal with American TV before it was made for funding purposes), I just had to check it out. I was completely let down. There I am with my bowl of popcorn and my dino-pajamas, waiting to see an action-packed hour of dino-tainment, and I’m bored to tears. Why?
Well, “Prehistoric Park� is a documentary about an animal preserve where the curator goes back in time through some sort of timecube or stargate:atlantis or something and brings the dinosaurs back to his park, where he doesn’t do anything except keep them in pens and watch their health. That’s not entirely true. The last episode had a large “plot� involving saber-toothed tiger husbandry. You heard me. As a documentary on this completely real place, and the fact that it’s been made for educational purposes, obviously the main point is to tell us all about the behavior of these dinosaurs and how to medically and behaviorally care for them. And that’s about as exciting, as say, a documentary on real tiger husbandry, and who would really care about that?
I’ve boiled the conceptual problems down to three areas: First of all, since this park is entirely real (it is a documentary after all) are we to believe that these people have never seen or heard of Jurassic Park? You would think that if you were planning a dinosaur island theme park, Jurassic Park would probably be the first place you would look to do research. And you would realize that no matter how safely you think your T-Rex is kept, it’s not. Rule number 1 about having an island dinosaur preserve… No T-Rexes. Even if you have your giant electrical fences or in the case of Prehistoric Park, just giant wooden fences,he T-Rex is gonna get out. If we learned one thing from "The Lost World", it’s that San Diego is not prepared for a T-Rex attack. (granted, that was pre-9/11, but I seriously doubt that the D.H.S. has a plan for dinosaur attacks). I understand that it’s very unlikely and that The Lost World was a movie, but this is a documentary, so you’d think these Palienticians would be more responsible. They're just as bad as Cartographers
Secondly, haven’t they ever seen a time-travel movie? In fact there was one that came out about a year or so ago called "A Sound of Thunder" that dealt specifically to going back to the time of dinosaurs and hunting them. When the wrong ones ended up shot, the future (present) was entirely changed. Who knows, they could be abducting the dinosaur that brought their great-great-great etc grandparents together creating a time paradox that could rip apart the space-time continuum. Even if that didn't happen, think of the change to the animal food chain, what with humans being knocked down a notch... granted, there are a few too many Canadians for my taste. But still, that doesn’t sound like something I want happening on my watch. You people are supposed to be responsible scientists; get your act together.
For my third point, I have a confession to make. While this show is presented as a documentary, I’ve recently been informed that it really isn’t and that it’s just presented that way to tell you boring information about dinosaur life that you never had any desire to know. This doesn’t make any sense to me. Nobody was ever around when dinosaurs lived. How do we know that there weren’t McDino-lds walk-throughs, or that specific plants made certain dinos sick. The only evidence we have is bones, and some eggs. Everything in this show is presented so seriously that we automatically take every single word for fact. It’s like if the croc hunter went after velociraptors instead of stingrays…. well the result would still be the same either way. Anyway, they could really tell us anything about dinosaurs (say they all wore blue hats, drank horse urine, and were the largest exporter of human pubis in the world) and we’d believe them.
I always liked learning about dinosaurs because there were so many different kinds, all with their own special features and fighting styles. I wanted to see them fight each other and stuff like all kids do. This show totally de-mystifies the whole dinosaur idea, basically showing us the medical side of running a dinosaur theme park, and unless you’re one of the few people who are interested in paleo-veteranary-zoology you’ll be as completely bored as I was.
The concept of "Prehistoric Park" gets one star due to having a good idea to start off with and completely wasting it. This show is like watching people oil and polish Transformers instead of letting them do what they do best: shoot laser beams.
The Promotion of ‘Borat:Cultural Learnings of Ame’rica for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan’
Maybe this ridiculous outfit is what I need to get the womens. High Five!
This guy is everywhere! I mean it. I mean it. Not just the ubiquitous ads for the movie, either. He may very well be the first person I've seen promoting one thing on Letterman, Leno, Conan, and The Daily Show, and a half-hour appearance in Opie and Anthony, in less than two weeks. And not only has the actor, Sacha Baron Cohen, been on all of them, he's been on all of the as Borat, and done so in multiple segments on at least two of them. On Leno, he made a bed with Martha Stewart, and on Conan, he chased Conan around the stage with a pair of scissors, followed by one of the most bizarre musical performances I've seen on his show. In all four appearances the interview topics were different and fresh. Here's a compendium of all of the media appearances. The guy even had a "float" in the NY Halloween parade, which is basically just a costume showcase and giant party. The "float" consisted of about 20 Borat impersonators. Completely ludicrous. I'm sure he's got a myspace thing going as well. I have never seen an ad campaign for a film that was so in your face. The thing is, the movie was so inexpensive that it made up its cost in the first week. They can throw all kinds of money into the advertising, and it'll still come out on top. And it's an hilarious movie to boot. Congrats on getting everyone in the country's attention.
There isn't a person in the country who doesn't know about this movie. I'm nearly certain. Five stars.
Putting Things on Notice
I'm calling you out, Andy Dick!
I read on a semi-well-known TV blog that this guy created an internet page that generated Stephen Colbet-style "On Notice" lists. All you have to do is type in whatever you want to put on notice, hit a button and a picture will be generated that you'll be able to save. Not sure why you'd really want to save it; perhaps to post on your
Now don't get me wrong; I think the application created to do this with is pretty cool, and I like Colbert's list and the general idea of it, but I'm not quite sold on people creating their own lists. Stephen Colbert has a national show where showing off this list of things he's upset with will reach a wide audience. The only thing that making a list for yourself accomplishes is the sense that you now know where things stand, as in you have a concrete ranking of what you hate most, and in what order. Maybe your friends might appreciate it and you'll all get a laugh out of it. But it won't make a difference in the real world, and you'll only be left with the comfort of knowing that you complained about something, even though you did it to no one in particular. Kind of like bloggers. In fact, if I had another spot, I'd throw bloggers on there as well.
The whole "not being seen by anyone" thing is sort of worked around by being able to see on the site, the last 100 lists that were made. Of course, half the time, the people don't fill in all the boxes and many of them are just the defaults, and a lot of the lists are just excuses to throw profanity out there, but sometimes there are some good ones, like "planes without snakes", the WNBA, Billy Bush, Cut-off shorts, and strangely enough, Charlie Dent.
Just for good measure. By the by, don't you hate pants?
Three stars for idea and execution. Minus 2 stars for a lack of real purpose, including the usual internet "busying yourself" excuse. I do invite readers to create their own lists and post them for my viewing pleasure, even if it's not in picture form.