Showing posts with label tv. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tv. Show all posts
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Entourage Season 8
Looks like the new season of Entourage will be full of surprises. Hopefully one of them will be the show not sucking. Zing!
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Brotherly Love
Hip hop? No. Comic books? No. Brilliant? Yes.
When checking to see if Joey Lawrence has ever acted on Las Vegas my friend and I discovered Vanessa Marcil was Nick Cage's wife from The Rock. Isn't this crazy that that matters as much as the fact that she's on TV 3 hours a day on TNT?
When checking to see if Joey Lawrence has ever acted on Las Vegas my friend and I discovered Vanessa Marcil was Nick Cage's wife from The Rock. Isn't this crazy that that matters as much as the fact that she's on TV 3 hours a day on TNT?
Friday, April 10, 2009
Kanye Responds to Gay Fish
A week after an inexplicably disgusting (even for South Park) episode dedicated to queefing, Trey and Matt returned to form with a more sensible subject matter: Kanye West's ego. A lot of celebrities are quick to get bent out of shape when they're completely ridiculed by SP or SNL, but Weezy showed uncharacteristic humility on his blog:
In case you missed the episode in question:
I NEED TO JUST GET PAST MYSELF. DROP THE BRAVADO AND JUST MAKE DOPE PRODUCT. EVERYTHING IS NOT THAT SERIOUS. AS LONG AS PEOPLE THINK I ACT LIKE A BITCH THIS TYPE OF SHIT WILL HAPPEN TO ME. I GOT A LONG ROAD AHEAD OF ME TO MAKE PEOPLE BELIEVE I'M NOT ACTUALLY A HUGE DOUCHE BUT I'M UP FOR THE CHALLENGE.
In case you missed the episode in question:
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Heroes, Season 3
The new season of Heroes premiered last Monday with a ridiculous three hour block on NBC. I know it's typical for a network to hype it's own success, but a red carpet special? I consider myself as enthusiastic a fan as anyone, but even I had to wonder what NBC was thinking. Still, network self-promotion isn't exactly news, so I didn't let the extra hour of masturbatory television scare me away from the premiere.
A few things have struck me as the show has moved into it's third season. One, is how bad the show is by conventional standards. I've already argued that comic book movies must be judged by their own criteria. Still, the melodrama, the predictable "twists" and the sub-par acting don't make for the best combination. And yet, I find myself enjoying the show, and eager to see what happens next.
Secondly was something I noticed after a conversation with a friend who criticized the spread of Claire's healing power to other characters, essentially making it impossible for anyone important to die. This may be true, but just like the poor overall quality of Heroes relative to "normal" shows, it doesn't matter. In fact, it makes the show stronger in a way, because of one broader point I've decided about the show.
Heroes isn't trying to be the best show on television (at least, I hope it's not). I don't think it's really trying to be a "show" at all in the traditional sense. Really, it's just a comic book made for television. When you think about it, Heroes lines up pretty perfectly with the make-up of an X-Men or Justice League comic. The plot line of a comic, for example, is basically predictable, with just enough surprises thrown in. Furthermore, nobody in a comic book, whether hero or villain, ever stays dead (see Superman, Jean Grey, et al).
Traditional comic books (as opposed to weightier graphic novels like Watchmen) have always indulged in melodramatic plots that require a large degree of faith. If you demanded an answer for every plot hole/loop in a comic book you couldn't ever fully enjoy the reading experience. Heroes demands the same of its viewers. Comic books and Heroes as extension serve mainly as allegories or fables. The plots are flawed, filled with ridiculously beautiful characters doing really awesome stuff, but they're nothing more than a vehicle for a deeper message. Now does Heroes contain such a message? That remains to be seen. But in the mean time I don't mind watching incredibly attractive people run around blowing my mind with special effects-created powers.
A few things have struck me as the show has moved into it's third season. One, is how bad the show is by conventional standards. I've already argued that comic book movies must be judged by their own criteria. Still, the melodrama, the predictable "twists" and the sub-par acting don't make for the best combination. And yet, I find myself enjoying the show, and eager to see what happens next.
Secondly was something I noticed after a conversation with a friend who criticized the spread of Claire's healing power to other characters, essentially making it impossible for anyone important to die. This may be true, but just like the poor overall quality of Heroes relative to "normal" shows, it doesn't matter. In fact, it makes the show stronger in a way, because of one broader point I've decided about the show.
Heroes isn't trying to be the best show on television (at least, I hope it's not). I don't think it's really trying to be a "show" at all in the traditional sense. Really, it's just a comic book made for television. When you think about it, Heroes lines up pretty perfectly with the make-up of an X-Men or Justice League comic. The plot line of a comic, for example, is basically predictable, with just enough surprises thrown in. Furthermore, nobody in a comic book, whether hero or villain, ever stays dead (see Superman, Jean Grey, et al).
Traditional comic books (as opposed to weightier graphic novels like Watchmen) have always indulged in melodramatic plots that require a large degree of faith. If you demanded an answer for every plot hole/loop in a comic book you couldn't ever fully enjoy the reading experience. Heroes demands the same of its viewers. Comic books and Heroes as extension serve mainly as allegories or fables. The plots are flawed, filled with ridiculously beautiful characters doing really awesome stuff, but they're nothing more than a vehicle for a deeper message. Now does Heroes contain such a message? That remains to be seen. But in the mean time I don't mind watching incredibly attractive people run around blowing my mind with special effects-created powers.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Mad Men: The Bandwagon Review
I don't want to toot my own horn, but I'm usually pretty good at picking worthwhile TV. My addiction to A Shot of Love and Flavor of Love notwithstanding, I got into shows like The Wire and Deadwood at the ground floor and it gave me a certain sense of pride. But with Mad Men I took my time. I heard plenty of good buzz about it, but it wasn't until I was inundated by ads at every bus stop and subway station and I got a casual recommendation from a girl I was sharing drinks with that I finally took the leap.
In retrospect, it's fitting that a woman and booze got me into the show. The show draws it's inspiration from a bygone era - 1960 to be exact - when men were men, and by men I mean racist and chauvinist all the while passing off as suave. There's a strange appeal to the show that seems to combine nostalgia with voyeurism. When you're watching you find yourself asking, "
Could it really be like this?" Laughing at the same jokes that make you thankful for things like the Civil Rights Act.
The men of the show pass the time drinking, smoking, making off-color comments and occasionally thinking of slogans for products good, evil and benign (Lucky Strikes, Nixon, the Relaxeciser). At first they seemed like caricatures, but over time their facades give way to reveal complexity. The women are repressed, but wield power (often sexual) over their husbands and bosses in strange ways. Sooner or later it becomes clear the men are just as repressed, just by different rules.
A scene from last Sunday's episode explains the setting of Mad Men better than anything:
A young man who is coming on to Betsy Draper looks at her and says, "You are so profoundly sad." She responds by saying, "No, it's just my people are Nordic."
The dialogue is brilliant. The series is often surreal and hilarious, but filled with a cast of characters harboring unfulfilled desires. I may be jumping on the series after everyone else has already decided how great it is, but hopefully it will be around for a while longer. That way I can still look smart for watching it now.
Mad Men airs Sundays at @ 10 pm on AMC
In retrospect, it's fitting that a woman and booze got me into the show. The show draws it's inspiration from a bygone era - 1960 to be exact - when men were men, and by men I mean racist and chauvinist all the while passing off as suave. There's a strange appeal to the show that seems to combine nostalgia with voyeurism. When you're watching you find yourself asking, "
Could it really be like this?" Laughing at the same jokes that make you thankful for things like the Civil Rights Act.The men of the show pass the time drinking, smoking, making off-color comments and occasionally thinking of slogans for products good, evil and benign (Lucky Strikes, Nixon, the Relaxeciser). At first they seemed like caricatures, but over time their facades give way to reveal complexity. The women are repressed, but wield power (often sexual) over their husbands and bosses in strange ways. Sooner or later it becomes clear the men are just as repressed, just by different rules.
A scene from last Sunday's episode explains the setting of Mad Men better than anything:
A young man who is coming on to Betsy Draper looks at her and says, "You are so profoundly sad." She responds by saying, "No, it's just my people are Nordic."
The dialogue is brilliant. The series is often surreal and hilarious, but filled with a cast of characters harboring unfulfilled desires. I may be jumping on the series after everyone else has already decided how great it is, but hopefully it will be around for a while longer. That way I can still look smart for watching it now.
Mad Men airs Sundays at @ 10 pm on AMC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)