Hmmmatt

What Happened to the Leading Ladies?

2008-05-05T22:13:00.000-07:00

The New York Times had an article yesterday about the lack of leading ladies in this summer's movie line-up. But that's nothing new. And that's precisely the problem. The big leading ladies movies are: Sex and the City, Mamma Mia, The House Bunny, Wild Child, Kitt Kidridge, What Happens in Vegas, Wanted, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2, and X-Files 2. And how many of these will be in the top ten money makers' list for the summer? Any?

But it's not just in the splashy blockbuster movies that demand big numbers -- smaller more critical fare also lacks leading women -- as the article points out two of the best reviewed movies last year -- There Will be Blood and No Country for Old Men -- lack women even in supporting roles. I mean I didn't see most of the films that the Leading Actresses were nominated for during the Oscars because performances aside, the films were mostly badly reviewed. Even romantic comedies have the men playing the women's part -- Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Made of Honor. So what's a girl to do? Star in a movie with a princess (Enchanted) or pregnancy (Juno, Knocked Up, Baby Mama) or weddings (27 Dresses)? No wonder more and more talented actresses are starring on TV shows.

TV is female dominated with many shows and networks for them -- you'd think the movie business could try and capture what works for those shows and put it on film beyond straight forward adaptations (like Sex and the City). But could TV's popularity with the ladies simply be a result of the lack of fare for them at the theaters? Probably. But obviously films need to expand their categorical leading lady types and bring complex characters who have more than their sexuality to deal with if they want to get the vaginas in the theaters. While Hollywood is usually in the foreground with representing society, it seems like lately it's been lagging in the times, which is sad because look at the times we're living in.

LA Times Festival of Books

2008-04-28T17:55:00.000-07:00

Andrea and I took a stroll today to Westwood to the UCLA campus for the LA Times Festival of Books. I wanted to attend it last year, but unfortunately I had to work, at a book store, so I was excited to actually go this year. There were a lot of people there, lots of self publishers and well known authors. We wandered around some booths, browsed through some books, and met some people. Then we settled down at the culinary stage and listened to Top Chef's host, actress, model, and cook book author Padma Lakshmi.

Padma was friendly and personable and had good stage presence. She did a little cooking demonstration and read some personal essays that are included in her latest cookbook, Tangy Tart Hot & Sweet. She read an essay that was about her stealing a neighbor's roses to give to her mom for mother's day. It was really cute and very well written (she was married to Salman Rushdie.) All in all it was a fun trip to the book festival and I can't wait to go next year and spend more time there.

Baby Mama

2008-04-26T13:28:00.000-07:00

Baby Mama is the new female duo comedy from Tina Fey starring Fey as Kate Holbrook, the successful career woman (at an organic food company) who instead of getting pregnant gets promotions. But something clicked her her 37 year-old body and now she has baby fever and wants one. The problem is her uterus, which is T-shaped and gives her the odds of one in a million to conceive. With adoption taking too long, she turns to a surrogacy center where she is paired up with south Philly girl Angie (Amy Poehler). But when Angie's reckless personal life has problems and she ends up on Kate's doorsteps, Kate's plan to be a mommy faces more obstacles than she conceived.
The story for Baby Mama is relatively simple -- woman wants baby, meets a woman who can have baby, pays her to have the baby -- though the plot throws in some twists that keep the story somewhat fresh. The characters are typical from Fey, with Kate pretty much being a successful Liz Lemon though not immune from bouts of being pathetic. There were a couple of times it looked like she just wanted to shout Blarg, but then she would be Liz Lemon then. Poehler is funny and excels at pulling off the white trash, with her eyes bulging at the sight of a video game and her mouth contorting in every direction to indicate her simplicity when it comes to opening a locked car door. The supporting cast includes Sigourney Weaver as the woman running the surrogacy center, Steve Martin as Kate's boss, Dax Shepard as Angie's husband, Greg Kinnear as a love interest for Kate and Romany Malco as Kate's apartment complex's doorman, Oscar. They add small doses of laughs too, neither elevating the film nor providing too much distraction. The biggest problem with Baby Mama is it isn't that funny. Sure there's humor spread throughout the film, but they deliver mild chuckles instead of hearty laughs. While it strays away from satirizing motherhood and pregnant mommies, the film could have chalked up more humor, but instead followed the SNL path of one good laugh every fifteen minutes is considered success. That being said, the jokes do seem better fitted for the small screen. The film runs at 96 minutes but at times feels longer. Not to mention the ending which makes things work out better than it did at the end of War of the Worlds. All in all it's probably more enjoyable to rent -- and watch on your normal sized TV screen. B-/C+
As for the trailer... basically sets up the premise of the film and thankfully doesn't reveal the twist at the midpoint. Instead it showcases much of the gags and humor that is throughout the film. Unfortunately it's the funniest stuff. Without factoring that in the trailer spoils about 20 - 30% of the film.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall

2008-04-20T13:14:00.000-07:00

Forgetting Sarah Marshall is the new unromantic comedy produced by Judd Apatow and written by and starring How I Met Your Mother's Jason Segel. Segel stars as Peter, the guy behind the music of NBC's hit show Crime Scene and he happens to be dating the show's star, no not William Baldwin, Sarah Marshall (Kristen Bell.) Er... he was dating her, until he finds out that she's fallen for someone else, Brit rocker, Aldous Snow. Way beyond depressed Peter decides to take it to Hawaii and get away from LA and try and relax, but the hotel he goes to because it was the one Sarah talked about all the time happens to be the hotel that Sarah Marshall is staying in when Peter checks in. Fortunately he meets nice hotel receptionist, Rachel (Mila Kunis) and the other hotel staff, who help him forget Sarah Marshall.
Overall the movie is successful in executing it's premise with a fair dose of humor. While like most Apatow produced projects, the film lags a bit in the second act, but for the most there's enough going on that you won't grow restless. The inside jokes are probably the best part of the film, from Segel's character wanting to write a Muppet musical (Segel's writing a Muppet movie in real life) to Sarah Marshall trying to put the positive spin on her scary movie dud that sounds a lot like Bell's foray into the movies with Pulse. The actors all do a great job, especially Segel who literally bares all in his much reported penis flashing at the beginning of the movie -- the editing is retarded and flashes a long shot of him to make it clear you saw his penis but quick enough that it's like a blink, either show it or don't, it's a body part for goodness sake. Also what makes this film great is it doesn't fall back on romantic comedy or just-dumped movie cliches. It's refreshing, even if some of the humor seems to be recycled from Knocked Up, Superbad, and The Forty Year-Old Virgin. B/B-
As for the trailer... It sets up the first act, the break-up which isn't really spoiling anything since the title gives it away. While glimpses of scenes (and jokes) from throughout the entire second act the turning points remain unspoiled as does the entire third act. In all the trailer spoils about 25% of the movie.

This Week on the Newsstand, April 20th

2008-04-19T19:44:00.000-07:00

TIME to End Global Warming
TIME goes green for Earth Day and outlines a plan that would make the U.S. more eco-friendly without killing the GDP. The plan includes a national cap-and-trade system along with tougher energy efficiency mandates and new public and private investment in green technologies aided by grants and cuts provided by the government. The article cites many of the initiatives many states have undertaken on their own, especially California, and how it hasn't ruined their economies. The bottom line is worrying about the economy (as terrible shape as it is in) is short term thinking, long term thinking is investing in environmentally friendly technologies and thinking green -- which may cost money in the short term, but will be an investment that pays off in the long term.
Newsweek Deconstructs Martyrs
Newsweek looks at who the resistance fighters are after papers found in a raid suggested that many of them came from Libya and not Saudi Arabia. Even more shocking of the 112 Libyan fighters listed, 52 came from one coastal town, Darnah. So Newsweek goes to Darnah and talks to the relatives of the fighters. While no one reason can explain why all theses young men go off to Iraq, the jihadist recruits seem to have been driven by personal factors like psychological trauma, sibling rivalry and sexual longing. It's a fascinating article looking at the history of town and Libya and where some of the jihadists come from, showing them as troubled humans rather than simply evil monsters. EW... Summer Movies!
Entertainment Weekly ends the month with a double issue looking at all the upcoming summer movies. The movies I'm most interested in seeing are: Wall-E, The Dark Knight, Get Smart, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, and Speed Racer -- though 'm sure I'll see plenty more than these five. Interesting enough the preview ends with EW's predictions for the box office -- I don't doubt Indiana Jones will be on top, but they think Iron Man will make more than The Dark Knight? We'll have to see about that...

Lolita

2008-04-16T14:46:00.000-07:00

Continuing my reading of literature that somehow I managed to get through high school and college without reading, I finished reading Lolita today.

Obviously the most distinctive thing about the book is it's subject matter, with Humbert Humbert longing over the twelve year-old Lolita. Yet what struck me more was his obsession with her and other "nymphets" was rather unsettling -- let along the fact that the objects of his affection were pre-pubescent girls. I think what causes his obsession to stand out more than the pedophilia is the stylized and flamboyant writing complete with puns, allusions, and linguistic patterns -- many of which can be missed by a quick reader. The writing tends to mask the filthy nature with grandiose vocabulary and in turn tries to make Humbert a more sympathetic character. Yet the flowery prose, to me, seems to emphasize Humbert's obsession with Lolita which is beyond disturbing. It's like a crush that has taken over his life, not to mention it's on a child. It's also similar to Charlotte's bizarre obsession with Humbert (which is questionable since it's coming from Humbert himself) and how it's so unhealthy that one person can become so attached to another.

The fact the story is told by an unreliable narrator also complicates things. As he downplays his own infatuation -- even blaming it on the girls rather than himself -- that leaves questions to whether or not everything else is as accurate as he claims -- from his superior good looks to Charlotte's falling for him. Of course this is his "confession" so perhaps he's lying or exaggerating details more for himself than his jury, as an attempt to justify his actions, like his constant references to nymphets and man/child relations in history.

I'm glad I finally read this modern masterpiece, as it took a while to get used to the prose and syntax, but the eloquent and extensive vocabulary were worth reading first hand, not to mention the complicated plot filled with red herrings and other false clues. It's always good to read a novel that has been carefully crafted, and not just written.

This Week on the Newsstand, April 13th

2008-04-12T23:00:00.000-07:00

EW... It's Tina Fey!
Entertainment Weekly promotes Tina Fey (she's a mama now), 30 Rock (despite being funny, critically acclaimed and picked up for a third season the show's ratings are dismal) and her new movie, Baby Mama (she's starring in it and co-wrote it). Is it just me or do New Yorkers and Lesbians really love Tina Fey? I mean, she's funny but she's not the funniest out there. I guess because she's also smart and uniquely attractive in combination with her comedy it makes her so valuable.
TIME to Raise Obama
TIME profiles Barack Obama's mother, Ann Soetoro, the woman who raised him, who had anything but an ordinary life. She was born in 1942, five years before Hillary Clinton, and moved a lot through her childhood from Kansas to Washington to California to Hawaii. In Hawaii at the University of Hawaii she met Barack Obama Sr. in a Russian language class and married in February 1962 after only meeting a few months earlier in a wedding that no one was invited to; she was three months pregnant with Barack. Obama Sr. left to get a Ph. D. in Harvard, and then focused his attention on Kenya, she filed for divorce in 1964. She then returned to college where she met her second husband, Lolo Soetoro. They followed him to Indonesia where Obama attended a Catholic School. In Indonesia she became intrigued by the culture and cared deeply for the poor. To compensate for the lack of black people in his life, she brought home books about the civil rights movement and music from black artists. In 1971 OBama was sent back to Hawaii to live with his grandparents as he attended an elite prep school. A year later his mother joined him to work on her masters in anthropology. In 1980 she filed for divorce again and then she returned without Barack to Indonesia where she did fieldwork and worked for the Ford Foundation. Her work lead to her to help build the microfinance program in Indonesia. She passed away in 1995 of Ovarian and uterine cancer.

She shaped Obama's life in that she wasn't "ideological" and she was "suspicious of cant." While she moved constantly, Barack chose to put down his roots in Chicago, desiring for stability that he perhaps was missing. Just like his mother "gazed at different cultures" he figures out "how to move a crowd of thousands of people very different from himself." And while his mother was helping the poor in Indonesia he was a community organizer in Chicago. All in all it's a fascinating portrait of his mother and how her life and work helped shape her son.
Divorces in NEWSWEEK
Newsweek looks at alumni from Grant High School who graduated in '82 right when the divorce rate really spiked. The classmates recall their experiences and how they felt when their parents divorced -- ranging from being embarrassed to having to fill out forms and wondering if people are judging you because your parents have different last names to growing up too fast. But it seems like divorce is almost genetic and kids of divorced parents are likely to get divorced later themselves. Others that have gone to get married (and remain wedded) did so later in their mid to late thirties. As someone who doesn't plan on getting married and someone whose parents remain married (as well as my uncles marriages) I am fairly unfamiliar with divorce directly. It's just odd because speaking to several friends or peers and I hear about their parents it takes me a while to realize that their parents are divorced. I mean I don't object to divorce, if you're unhappy with who you are married to why would you stay with them, but on the other hand I think people tend to give up so easily these days because we're used to instant results. If something is broken instead of fixing it we throw it out. Better yet we don't think ahead enough and instead concentrate on the gratifications of the present. I think we thought about more about that than maybe people would think more before they make their vows.

My Blueberry Nights

2008-04-10T19:58:00.001-07:00

My Blueberry Nights is the new, and first English spoken, film from Hong Kong auteur Wong Kar Wai. Norah Jones stars as Elizabeth, a New Yorker trying to get over a break-up and her journey across America meeting new personalities. She first wallows at a neighborhood NYC cafe run by Jeremy (Jude Law) before disappearing to Memphis working day and night as a waitress at a diner and bar & grill. She meets alcoholic police officer, Arnie (David Strathairn) who can't get over his separated wife, Sue Lynne (Rachel Weisz). Still journeying away from NYC, Elizabeth lands in Nevada working as a cocktail waitress in Nevada where she meets the spunky professional gambler Leslie (Natalie Portman).
Visually the film is impressive and fits right in with Wong Kar Wai's previous films. The lighting, the sets and the soundtrack are all beautiful (even if the sets don't seem believable as existing in 2008 America.) However, in terms of story it lacks. The biggest problem is Elizabeth is boring; She's a passive protagonist. There's nothing wrong with her being passive, but with a pretty much nonexistent back story other than her break-up with her boyfriend, you really don't learn much about Elizabeth and without knowing more about her you don't really care for her. Norah Jones fails to bring anything else out of the character and so we see her stand and stare much of the film. Rachel Weisz and David Strathairn add to their characters as does Portman who steals the movie with her cunning fast-talking character, Leslie. Thematically I can see the connections between the different characters and Elizabeth, but it doesn't make up enough for the film's simplicity. All in all it's not a terrible film, just in comparison to Wong Kar Wai's previous work. Nonetheless the beautiful imagery, great soundtrack and strong supporting performances make the movie worthy to see, especially for fans of the director. B/B-
As for the trailer's spoil factor... It just shows off the cast and great cinematography without telling anything about the story, spoiling 0% of the movie.

Family Reality Shows

2008-04-08T23:28:00.000-07:00

Having worked on a reality show featuring a family and been in the house which is featured on the show in its normal day to day atmosphere (sort of), it got me thinking of how weird it would be if my family had a reality show. It would be weird because everyone would know what your house looks like on the inside and out. Where's the bathroom? Oh wait, I already know it's down the hall to the left. Plus they would think they know you and your family (and feel like they're apart of your family too), and they'd see where you work, where you shopped, and where you like to unwind. Essentially they'd see your life. Sure scenarios are thought up for the show, but its the glimpses of the day-to-day activities that just seems weird. Especially if you are in your house watching TV of you in your house.

Looking at many of the family-based reality shows I've noticed there are several common features:
1. They are super attractive. Sure they have a hair stylist and make-up artist to doll them up each morning, but even in the rare moments when it's really early or really late and we see them without their hair and make-up done most of the families on the reality shows look better than the families in my neighborhood.
2. They live in a huge house that we can only envy. It has to be huge so that it could accommodate a crew of cameramen, production assistants and producers and give them enough space to hide and get out of the shots without tripping over each other.
3. They have busy lives. They go to social events, charity events, parties, vacations, dining out, and other atypical activities that are fun to watch on TV and not just plain old work and errands. And when they do the normal middle-class activities, like grocery shopping, it's fun and funny because they often make humorous observations and mistakes.
4. They're rich. Sort of prerequisite to the previous points made. Plus they have to be rich enough so that even moderately wealthy people will envy their possessions, because TV is all about selling people things they can't afford and don't need but want anyway.
5. They are attention whores. It's not enough to just be extroverted, they crave attention, so much that they're willing to say and do things they normally wouldn't do, because it's those type of things that make good television. Plus they're comfortable in letting the whole world see and hear them do these crazy things -- at all times. Okay, maybe they're not all attention whores -- but there's got to be something in their personality and psychology that makes them comfortable showing off their lives to the rest of America (and the world.)

This Week on the Newsstand, April 6th

2008-04-06T22:43:00.000-07:00

Green Candidates in Newsweek
Newsweek reports on how the environment is becoming a hot issue of debate on the presidential campaign trail, or at least more people are interested in it this time around than last time around. The League of Conservation Voters ranks Obama and Clinton at the top for caring about energy efficiency and other green issues, while McCain is making efforts, they are just short of endorsing him. What makes McCain stand out is he's Republican, but he goes against his party on green issues. The reason they can't endorse him is because he missed all the votes on environmental issues (possibly to avoid upsetting certain interests.) But he does disagree with Bush and even introduced a bill to regulate carbon emissions a few years ago, though it didn't pass. One problem is he's pro-nuclear power which is a red flag to many conservationists. Obama and Clinton, meanwhile, are nearly identical on all the environmental issues. Why is important who is president? Because in 2009 a new international treaty on global warming is to be passed.
The Pope's TIME is Coming
TIME has a scattered report on the Pope as he prepares for his first Papal visit to the United States (Catholics make up 24% of the population.) Speaking to people who know the Pope, we learn that he likes New York City and how people can be "two things at one, like Italian Americans or Chinese Americans. He's interested in that idea of coexistence." He also likes how America is optimistic and diverse but "essentially pious society" thanks to the separation of Church and State. Ratzinger first met Americans as a defeated German solider and was impressed with witnessing the charity of rebuilding Germany. He then met more Americans in the Vatican Council in the mid 60s, with Americans arguing that "Catholicism could best thrive when the government could not play favorites." From then he went on to be very conservative with a reputation and new nickname: "God's Rottweiler." Though he loves much about America -- our plainspokenness, pluralistic piety, and applying moral principles to abtruse science -- the Pope thinks Americans watch too much TV, and secularization is increasing at an "accelerated pace."Overall they paint the Pope as optimistic and try scraping off some of that "God's Rottweiler" image, but overall it makes him look old-fashioned, especially his naive idealized version of the United States.
EW... TV Quiz
Entertainment Weekly has nothing new to report so they concoct a silly TV quiz to see if you are watching enough of it... because if you're only watching 5 hours a day that's not enough. What's worse is their music and book reviews were shrunk down to two two page spreads. Slow news week indeed.

The Ruins

2008-04-05T17:34:00.000-07:00

The Ruins is the new horror movie based on the book of the same name by Scott B. Smith about a group of college-aged American vacationers who meet a German tourist in search of his archaeologist brother. They agree to join him and travel off the beaten path to see an ancient Mayan temple where his brother is, only to have bad things happen.
The movie is a typical situational horror movie, where once the victims are plunked into the situation things go from bad to worse. But it's not that scary of a movie. There's a few moments of suspense but for the most part it's about trying to figure out how they can leave. And as always the first act of the movie is about them heading to the ruins, which I never understand why horror movies tease out this set-up -- people who see this movie have seen the trailer and commercials we know they're going to make it to the ruins, why not skip over some of this nothingness and get us to the ruins after like ten minutes? Now what works well for the film is the cast which includes Jena Malone, Jonathan Tucker, and Shawn Ashmore. While the characters aren't entirely defined there enough glimpses of their personality to give you an idea what they'd be like back home in the U.S. What prevents this film from being a way better than average horror film is the attempt to bring a bigger meaning to their situation is also skimmed over. Themes like group-dynamics in a perilous situation, or the result of decisions made under pressure, or the American lack of respect for another culture, or even the limits of self-mutilation when it comes to survival are all hinted at but not expanded upon. Instead the film settles into a standard horror flick fare where you expect all but maybe one person to die. Which leads me to the biggest flaw -- the film's rushed ending that has a solution that could have been achieved after not even a day on the temple. Nonetheless there's enough suspense, gore and squirmish sights for horror fans to be appeased. B-/C+
As for the trailer's spoil factor... It doesn't reveal too much about what's keeping them on the ruins nor does it mention what is so bad about the temple. Keen eyes will spot spoilers in the quick flashes of images including stuff from the the third act. Nonetheless much of the gore and surprises are remained buried. Overall it probably spoils 10-20% of the movie, much of which is the beginning and nonessential.

Predictably Irrational

2008-04-02T23:03:00.001-07:00

Predictably Irrational is the new book by Dan Ariely whose goal is to help the reader "fundamentally rethink what makes you and the people around you tick" and then shows the reader through chapters full of experiments how systematic mistakes are and suggests ways to help avoid them. To that extent he succeeds.

First up there's relativity and how we make everything relative even when it shouldn't matter, which he proves with experiments with decoys. Then there's how zero -- or calling something FREE! -- actually makes inclined to go with an otherwise wrong decision which is proven with a chocolate experiment with Hersey's Kisses and Lindor Truffles (yum!). He looks at social norms and how the blurring of the marketplace and the social sphere is not a good thing with an experiment involving a mundane task and comparing results when people feel like they are doing a favor to where the participants are compensated. Also he shows with a sexual fetish survey how when we're aroused -- either sexually or emotionally -- we are capable of doing things that we didn't think we were capable of. He also examines how we like to keep our options open even when it's not in our favor and likewise how ownership makes us hold on to things when it's no longer necessary and value them greater than they're worth. He ends with two chapters on honesty and shows on when you get even one step removed from stealing actual money people are more likely to steal -- especially worrisome for a world and country that wants to get ride of physical money.

While a lot of what Ariely shows is significant it is not entirely eye-opening. This book reminds me a lot of Cordeila Fine's A Mind of Its Own, published two years ago in which she looked at numerous studies and neurology research to find out how the brain tricks you and warps your perceptions to make you think you're better than you are in so many ways. The chapter about keeping your options open is very much like Paradox of Choice, and the chapter about social norms is akin to Mistakes Were Made: But Not By Me. But what makes Predictably Irrational different from these books I guess is that Ariely and his colleagues were forming and conducting the experiments. Having an interest in behavior economics some of the results were not that surprising to me, but Ariely's relation of the problems to everyday and life and society are point-on and his suggestions to correct these mistakes are insightful. I like A Mind of Its Own better, maybe because I read it first or maybe because it looks at neurology a bit more, but I think Predictably Irrational is probably more accessible. Regardless the books compliment each other nicely and it's always refreshing to read about how flawed we really are.

Stupid People on the News

2008-03-31T22:10:00.000-07:00

ABC News has been reporting a lot about the economy and the tough times that have hit middle class American families. And so they have been trying to put faces on the people drowning under mortgage payments or facing foreclosure. Tonight they featured a family in southern Florida, husband who is in human resources, wife that is in pharmaceutical sales and their two kids. They have a nice house too:
But in 2004 they decided to make an investment and because the stock market was not doing so well, and because everybody told them to, they invested in real estate and bought TWO condos with every intention of flipping them. But then the real estate bubble burst and now they're stuck with the two condos on top of their mortgage payments.

I don't feel sorry for these people at all. An investment is a risk and even with "careful planning" you can still face a loss. It's like playing blackjack and knowing when you should statistically hit or stay -- you can still lose even if you play it right. But the family says they don't want people to feel sorry for them, "No we're not looking for sympathy. I think what we're looking for is that, for, um, that we're not uncommon, there are a lot of people in our situation." The wife adds that she doesn't want people to view them as "people out to get a quick buck or who being greedy, because we weren't going out trying to be the next Trumps. We were just trying to, you know, jump a couple of steps to give our family a security, the financial security that we knew that just going to work everyday wasn't going to bring." Right... Did she even listen to the words coming out of her mouth? They weren't greedy when they decided to get TWO condos. And they're not trying to get rich quick, but "jump a couple of steps" -- she should just admit that they were trying to cash in quick and it failed.

What's worse is the news reporter takes a sympathetic approach to them by mentioning their family and how they wanted financial security -- something that everyone can relate to. But when the husband admits that they're still trying to live the way they used to -- even though his salary alone is less than the monthly payments of the condos -- he isn't questioned if that really is a good idea. So you have people in denial that they made a mistake in buying two condos -- they blame it more on the market -- and living beyond their means because not only do they want to admit that they made a mistake, they don't want others to see them as people who made a mistake. What's the problem with this? They won't learn anything from their mistake and are apt to repeat it. And what's sad is she's right -- they aren't alone; There are plenty of other stupid people in the same situation as them, bound to repeat again and again.

This Week on the Newsstand, March 30th

2008-03-29T23:37:00.000-07:00

TIME to Expose Clean Energy
TIME debunks some of the common thoughts around ethanol -- stating it "increases global warming, destroys forests, and inflates food prices." The article appears with a shocking full page picture of emerald green farmland, that used to be the thick jungles of the Amazon. With the demand for farm-grown fuels such as ethanol, crop prices have risen to record level highs, which accelerates the deforestation but also jacks up the price of food as those resources are going to fuel and not the dinner plate. Furthermore it's not even as clean as once thought -- studies show that corn ethanol is "environmentally disastrous." The need of land to grow fuel is the key problem and with Brazil and Indonesia chopping more irreplaceable forests their carbon emissions have ballooned as a result. Taking deforestation into account corn ethanol and soy biodiesel actually produce twice the emissions of gasoline. Despite this politicians in the U.S. support biofuels because they have to simplify things into half a sentence that the network news can air at the end of the day. Farmers in Brazil, meanwhile, are driven by market forces, pointing to the U.S.'s own deforestation over a century ago and so they say, "If you don't want us to tear down the forest, you better pay us to leave it up!" Yes, because having money is more important than living.
EW! Speed Racer!
The latest movie from the Wachowski brothers is the live-action upgrade from retro classic cartoon Speed Racer. The six page layout on the cover story offers a few pictures from the CG-heavy film which stars Emile Hirsch, Christina Ricci, and Matthew Fox. The accompanying article mentions the trippy effects, the eye candy images, and the complications in bringing the $120 million movie to life. Warner Brothers has had the rights for the movie for over a decade and went through many directors including J. J. Abrams, and stars, including Johnny Depp, but the Wachowski brothers won the project with a four minute mini-movie showing what they wanted to do. I am excited for the movie, not so much because of who directed it (though they are good at plagiarizing so I expect the transition from TV cartoon to film to be smooth) but because of the stellar cast and crazy effects. So what if it's going to be G or PG? Pixar's movies all fall in that category are doesn't make them any less awesome.
Surrogate Mothers in NEWSWEEK
It must be a slow news week if the magazine with the same name decides to look at just who are the hundreds of women who rent out their womb to somebody else's baby. Typically surrogacy agreements run between $20,000 and $25,000, but many states don't recognize surrogacy agreements (Europe doesn't either, which is why international couples turn to the USA for their surrogacy needs.) Estimates put surrogate births at only 1000 for 2007, many of which were military wives supplementing their income while their husbands are overseas. Plus with having to move around a lot the "job" gives them a way to contribute and takes less than a year. But those numbers are growing, in part because of better technology which can put success rate to 70-90% up from 40% ten years ago. Surrogates are often stereotyped as hicks, which seems to be the case with the upcoming movie Baby Mama starring Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, but one surrogate points out that many of those women wouldn't qualify at agencies. Many of the women interviewed feel like they are helping someone else, giving themselves a sense of purpose, and liken it to donating an organ, only you can live to see the recipient's happiness. But some of them feel a little lonely and helpless after giving up the babies they carried, saying its the hardest part of the job. Some remain in contact with the child, receiving pictures from the parents while others don't have any connection. Overall the article doesn't really give any eye-opening insight on surrogates, though it is interesting to learn that military wives are common surrogate candidates.

The Bank Job

2008-03-28T15:22:00.000-07:00

The Bank Job is about an amateur crew lead by Terry Leather and Martine Love pulling of a bank heist in London in the 1970s, targeting safety deposit boxes loaded with cash and jewelry, as well as scandalous photos that the government wants back in their possession and other secrets that law enforcement officials rather kept locked up.
The Bank Job is a smart, clever and very gritty heist movie. The plan is rather basic, unlike the scheming involved with the Ocean's movies and The Italian Job, but considering half the movie is the fallout from the heist it's probably better worked that way. Jason Statham is terrific as his down on his luck bloke, seeking a better life for his family. Saffron Burrows also does an excellent job of giving Martine Love additional layers beyond sexy-other-woman planning the heist. The story, whether it's based on real life events or not, offers a complex, but never too complicated, plot fine acting, with small doses of action and humor. It's a small movie so those expecting giant thrills, loads of laughs, or memorable action sequences may be disappointed, but the film's twists, realism and old-fashioned romp should suffice most audiences looking for a smart, adult movie. B
As for the trailer... it sets up the reason for the heist and quickly introduces the unlikely crew, but then goes on to show them in the bank and seemingly getting away with it. In the last 30 seconds of the trailer there are many flashes of scenes that appear near the end of the movie, including the climactic confrontation. Some surprises aren't ruined, but the basic plot of the movie is laid out. In all it probably spoils about 50% of the movie.

Snow Angels

2008-03-26T23:03:00.000-07:00

Snow Angels is the latest from David Gordon Green (All the Real Girls) about the intertwining lives in a small Midwestern town. There's Arthur (Michael Angarano who is in the upcoming The Forbidden Kingdom,) the young teenager who is experiencing his first romance with new girl, Lily (played by the talented Olivia Thirlby -- Juno's BFF in Juno,) while his parents are separating. His former babysitter, Annie (Kate Beckinsale), who works with him at a Chinese restaurant that lacks Chinese workers is unsure about her life with her separated husband and father of their child, Glenn (Sam Rockwell) and her co-worker, Barb's (Amy Sedaris), husband.
The beginning of the movie is so strong, right through the midpoint up until the final act where it tragically disintegrates. The strength of the movie comes from the performances, chiefly among them is Sam Rockwell who makes you fearful and sorry for Glenn, and how Annie might still try with him. Kate Beckinsale shines as Annie, a working mother struggling to balance her life and move up and on -- but who is not without flaws of her own, and Amy Sedaris is a nice ray of sunshine who gives scenes some comedy while remaining believable. Michael Angarano and Olivia Thrilby have excellent chemistry in their awkward teenage romance scenes that easily make up for the depressing drama that ultimately overwhelms the rest of the movie -- just hope that they don't end up like any of the adult couples around them. Another thing I really thought worked well was the way the back story was naturally and gradually revealed throughout the movie without it ever becoming stilted. While the devastating ending is foreshadowing at the beginning with the two gunshots, the conclusion is a little too dark and extreme to really fit with the rest of the movie. Nonetheless the small town drama and the connections between the characters, elevated by strong performances, is sure to captivate the audience, even if the ending doesn't. B+
As for the trailer... It reveals the midpoint with Annie's daughter going missing, but that isn't a huge spoil. It doesn't spoil any of the film's surprises or ruin any of the stronger moments made between the characters. So it that sense it gets a B, but it makes the movie look less entertaining than it is.
[Photo Credit]

Beauty Tips and Geek News

2008-03-25T21:03:00.000-07:00

Tonight's episode of the Beauty and the Geek was the last one where it is Beauty vs. the Geek. You knew it had to change -- I mean, the prize is for the pair that changes the most in the end.
While Tommy, the sweater vest enthusiast, is one of the least geeky guys, or so it seems, he really thought he was dating Amber and that they would see each other after the show airs -- that was no act. Hopefully he is not heartbroken now having first handedly learned the meaning of "showmance."
Tiffany really was going to pick Jonathan up until she called out Jim's name -- that was not clever editing at all. It was a surprise to all the girls and some of the guys. Jim figured he was either going to be with Tiffany or go be sent home.
And Jim, who is seriously as geeky as he is portrayed, was really upset with the football game (which they really did play on the entire field) and how other people besides Matt were injured, not as severely, but still with cuts and bruises. He also complained about how they were never given instructions and rules for football -- that's right information about football wasn't in their thick binders at all. The fact that this is episode three and they haven't caught on that their study materials are completely pointless tells you something.
Cara and Amanda pretty much ran around screaming the entire football game. Cara charged after Greggy a lot since he was more her size. Amanda had no idea how to play football. As much as they made it look like Tara didn't know about sports or football, she was one of the more athletic beauties.
Jillian had a funny laugh that you might have only heard once one the show, but everyone mentioned it when they talked about how they were going to miss her. The geeks were pretty upset with the way Jillian and the geek who wasn't picked were eliminated since it wasn't in the elimination room and no one could really save themselves from being sent home.

Greek

2008-03-24T21:14:00.000-07:00

Forget Britney on How I Met Your Mother (or even the superior Sarah Chalke), forget about The Hills and Mariah Carey, tonight was the premiere of the second half of the first season of ABC Family's hit show Greek.
Picking up where semester one ended off you've got Rusty still heartbroken over his break-up with Jen K., even though he was the one who initiated it; Casey is now interim president of ZBZ, but is still trying to get over Evan; Cappie and Rebecca are trying to decide what to make of their fling; Calvin is deciding if quitting Omega Chi was the right decision; and ZBZ and the rest of the Greek system is trying to overcome the fallout from Jen K.'s article. And the show picks up nicely advancing each of the storylines with a balanced mixture of drama and comedy and the young actors improving their acting. What works about the show is:
1. the character conflicts -- you've got love triangles entangled with each other with Evan - Casey - Cappie - Rebecca
2. it's about college age kids enjoying college life and it's still fun for the viewer replacing angst with a nice dose of humor (mostly whatever Cappie says) and music (Plain White T's performed again)
3. it's relatable, even if you were never in the Greek system -- I mean I've met my share of Dales in college.
In general it's a nice light hearted dramedy that doesn't really have any comparable competition on TV, at least not until the 90210 spin-off gets off the ground.

This Week on the Newsstand, March 23rd

2008-03-23T23:12:00.000-07:00

EW... Spring TV
This week Entertainment Weekly gets its readers excited for the return of the scripted network TV season. Here's the breakdown of how many episodes are left and when they start airing for the shows worth watching:
30 Rock - 5 episodes left, premieres April 10th @ 8:30 NBC
Back to You - 4 episodes left, premieres April 16th @ 8:30 PM FOX
Brothers & Sisters - 4 episodes left, premieres April 20th @ 10:00 PM ABC
Desperate Housewives - 6 episodes left, premieres April 13th @ 9:00 PM ABC
How I Met Your Mother - 7 episodes left since it premiered on March 17th @ 8:30 PM CBS
House - 4 episodes left, premieres April 28th @ 9:00 PM FOX
My Name is Earl - 8 episodes left, premieres April 3rd @ 8:00 PM NBC
The Office - 6 episodes left, premieres April 10th @ 9:00 PM NBC
Reaper - 4 episodes left since it premiered on March 13th @ 9:00 PM CW
Samantha Who? - 6 episodes left, premieres April 7th @ 9:30 PM ABC
Scrubs - 5 episodes left, premieres April 10th @ 9:30 PM NBC
Ugly Betty - 5 episodes left, premieres April 24th @ 8:00 PM ABC
Accepting Barak in Newsweek
Newsweek's cover story looks at when Barak Obama chose to be called by his formal African name instead of Barry or Bar. Having spent his life trying to fit in America, he chose to stand out. Other contributing factors include growing up, seeking acceptance, and naturally trying to be cool. The article then explores his childhood, growing up in Indonesia and Hawaii, through college at Occidental. The article then follows Obama to the mainland and how he became an expert at creating narratives and bringing people together. In essence it shows him growing up, from Barry to Barak.
Tibet's TIME
This week TIME adapts passages from Pico Iyer's book The Open Road and looks at the Dalai Lama, Buddhism, and the current violent confrontations. Of course the protests and violence raise questions regarding whether or not the world should boycott the summer Olympics, held in China -- but that is addressed minimally. Instead there is a crash course on the basic principles of Buddhism, the history of Tibet and the Dalai Lama along with Iyer's relationship with him.

Franny and Zooey

2008-03-22T16:44:00.000-07:00

I finished reading J.D. Salinger's Franny and Zooey today. It's an interesting structure -- the pairing of two short stories together in one novel, both of the short stories are nothing more than a few conversations between two people, Franny and Lane, Bessie and Zooey, and Zooey and Franny, yet despite all the talk and lack of action the story is intriguing and you learn so much about this bizarre family.

The central connector between the two stories obviously is Franny's breakdown. She has issues with conformity and the destruction of competition and so she turns away from the physical world to the spiritual world to try and remain uncorrupted. In the second part Zooey refreshes the lessons he's learned from their older brother Buddy by re-reading a four year-old letter that Buddy sent him and then addresses Franny in the living room. It is only when he goes in his older brothers' room and calls her on the phone that he channels their sage advice and helps her recover from her breakdown.

Having gone through college and being transplanted into Los Angeles and Hollywood I can relate to some of Franny's thoughts regarding the egos, conformity, destruction etc. -- it's frustrating how the world works, but if you want to change it in any way you can't escape it to the spiritual. I like how Zooey pointed out to her that her turn to the "Jesus prayer" is just as egotistical as what she was railing against because it's true. In part that's why I am so turned off by religion, when people thank God for the good things that happen, I find it really self-involved that (if you believe in there being a god) of the billions of people on earth that god would take the time to give you something good. Zooey's advice eventually boils down to "don't hate the player, hate the game" -- yes people who are phony suck, but we should respect them anyway. Which is good advice so long as their is something else real or genuine about the people to respect. And besides it's not like anyone can say they haven't been fake or "phony" at least one point in their lives -- which I guess is something else to remember. It's amazing that this book, almost fifty years later can still have relevance in the world today -- then again that's what it's dubbed a classic.

Introverted- Pod

2008-03-21T21:18:00.000-07:00

My iPod broke down on me. Four years, a few thousand songs, a dozen or so playlists, all gone -- except they're on my computer.

Being without an ipod is not necessarily a terrible thing. I go running without it now, which isn't too big of a deal, though I mostly used it to keep track of my time while I was running. When I drive I no longer have it to plug into my iPod adapter so my choices are now limited to whatever is on the radio or one of my two CDs or silence. The biggest affect it's had is now I have to go to work without it and I'm forced to listen to many of my stupid co-workers talk about the most ridiculously stupid topics. There's probably only a handful of people worth talking to at work, but they work less frequently so usually I keep to myself.

However I guess it's nice to get out of the iPod bubble, where you can go anywhere in public, stick in your headphones and instantly isolate yourself from those immediately next to you by blasting music into your ears. (Is that what the "i" in iPod stands for -- Introverted? Isolated?) It's actually sort of nice to go out and listen to what's going on around you -- even if it is absurd or downright dumb. Of course it would also mean that I could be more engaging with those around me in a given environment, but I'm not extroverted enough to make that kind of a leap. Oh well, I'll just buy an iPhone when my sprint contract runs out in August.

Did You Say AP or ET?

2008-03-20T17:15:00.000-07:00

According to Nikke Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily, the Associated Press is planning to increase its funding of entertainment coverage by creating a new entertainment division and hiring 21 new employees.

This is terrible that a news organization is expanding a division that fodders the publics distraction from real news with substance. There doesn't need to be another approach in covering celebrities and their relationships, scandals, and drunk escapades. There's too many already. I don't care if the AP is going to use their "standards" when covering about the latest It Girl's stint in rehab and chances are most people who follow celebrity gossip don't care about the "journalistic standards" used in acquiring information. Instead of telling the public what they should be worrying about the AP is going the shallow way of following the mainstream. It's bad enough that the news on TV has been covering more and more infotainment, now it's a shame that newspapers are going to put to rest without integrity either. Oh well, maybe this will be a boost to Reuters?

The Soul Thief

2008-03-19T17:45:00.000-07:00

I just finished Charles Baxter's latest novel, The Soul Thief, which follows Nathaniel Mason in the 70s, a grad student in Buffalo. On the way to a party he meets a fellow party-goer Teresa in the rain and at the party she introduces him to Jerome Coolberg, a "whiz-kid sage" who tells Nathaniel he knows everything about him. Just as Coolberg catches Nathaniel off guard, he catches the reader off guard and makes you want to learn more about him and the suspense builds whenever he's present with Nathaniel. His fixation with Nathaniel, a temperate, rather nondescript fellow remains unanswered, but by the time you finish the novel the answer proves itself unanswerable. Perhaps it's the very reason that he's somewhat of a generic guy that provokes Coolberg's curiosity and enables him to steal his "soul."

The theme of the book revolves around identity and whether it's possible to steal someone else's identity or borrow it for a while. It has a very Hitchcock vibe to it, which is evoked at the very beginning with the mentioning of Pyscho and surrounds the mystery involving Coolberg and Teresa. I liked the the first part of the novel the most because of the details of the '70s and the graduate student life, and probably because currently I'm around the characters' ages. Baxter's writing is impressive, full of his evocative metaphors and similes and featuring trademark character types of his without him ever feeling like he's stealing from his previous work. While the latter parts of the novel advance to around the 90s the details are not as plentiful, it naturally makes sense in the framework of the novel.

The book leaves the reader with a lot to think about in the end regarding Nathaniel's and Coolberg's relationship and who is responsible for the outcome of Nathaniel's life. Personally I think Nathaniel holds responsibility; instead of reacting and then pro-acting against Coolberg he places all the blame on him allowing for his lifetime of inaction and complacency. It's doesn't make what Coolberg did any less disturbing, but it doesn't warrant simply blaming the other guy.

Miss/Guided

2008-03-18T22:03:00.000-07:00

Tonight was the premiere of ABC's latest attempt at a half hour comedy, Miss/Guided.
Premise: Becky Freely is an optimistic high school guidance counselor who might not be as in tune with things as she thinks she is. She also longs after auto-shop-turned-Spanish-teacher Tim, while competing for his affection against her high school rival and now English teacher, Lisa. The show was created by Caroline Williams.
Review: Judy Greer finally moves into the starring role after stints as Lucy in 13 Going on 30, secretary Kitty on Arrested Development, and most recently Casey in 27 Dresses. She shines as the naive, desperate, awkwardly dorky, but still sweetly sympathetic Becky Freely. Chris Parnell plays the vice principal, Bruce, and adds a chuckle with his presence, while Brooke Burns excels as the hot "other woman" Lisa, and Kristoffer Polaha is good at pulling off that looking hot but still attainable thing. Despite the shows somewhat unoriginal premise, the pilot episode tackled it with fresh angles and humor. This show is comparable to ABC's one-episode then canceled Emily's Reasons Why Not in that it succeeds where that show fell flat. 1. The high school setting works to the premise's advantage as Becky still hasn't grown up herself; Emily was supposed to be a successful book publisher yet she acted like a child which made it quite unbelievable that she could have such professional success. 2. The show is actually funny -- the video clips of Becky in high school and my favorite line -- Becky (to a cheerleader carrying a banner): Gina, homecoming is spelled C-O-M.; Emily's Reasons Why Not was funny in how terrible it was. 3. Despite Becky being oblivious, the rest of the characters are grounded in reality, while Emily's Reasons Why Not was a completely unrealistic world including having a female rival named Glitter. That being said, Miss/Guided compares equally well to better series and is definitely worth checking out.
Bottom Line: Should be paired with Samantha Who? and then ABC will have half a comedy night right there.
Rating: * * * 1/2
Airs back-to-back episodes Thursdays at 8:00 PM and 8:30 PM.

FOX vs. the FCC

2008-03-17T19:21:00.000-07:00

Today the Supreme Court announced that it would look into foul language broadcast over the airwaves for the first time in thirty years. The case under review regards Fox violating decency rules when Cher blurted "fuck" during the 2002 Billboard Music Awards, followed by Nicole Richie swearing at the awards a year later. FCC is seeking to have authority over "fleeting utterances" of foul language to levy fines. The appeals court sided with Fox, agreeing that the FCC had "failed to articulate a reasoned basis" for its "fleeting" indecency standard.

The FCC under the Bush Administration has been out of control with their conservative and vague rulings regarding indecency all because of the Janet Jackson nipple slip of 2004. Swearing is not that big of a deal, nor is nudity, and considering how many cable channels there are chances are kids are busy watching Nickelodeon or the Disney channel. It all comes down to parents wanting the government to help parent their kids, which is ironic because conservatives are supposed to be favoring smaller, limited government. Those who complain to the FCC say things like they don't want a flood of profanity dumped in their living room -- as if the TV were a sewage pipe that they can't turn off or control. The most effective way to control what's on TV is through the use of a remote and hopefully the Supreme Court will see this.

This Week on the Newsstands, March 16th

2008-03-16T15:54:00.001-07:00

TIME to Change
This week TIME looks at ten ideas that are "changing the world." That concept is more hyperbole ployed to increase readership than anything else. Don't believe me? Take a look at what's changing the world:

1. Common Wealth -- The idea that instead of national interests we start looking at humanity's interests by creating global goals such as - sustainable land, energy and resource use, the end of extreme poverty by 2025, stabilization of the world's population at 8 billion or below by 2050, and cooperating among nations and the nongovernmental sector. To obtain these goals will require clear objectives, effective technology, clear implementation strategy and a source of financing. The problem? We're facing our problems the wrong way -- looking at them as insurmountable and too expensive. This can be changed though, even on an individual level by studying these issues, meeting and engaging with others, prompting businesses and social groups to become active in sustainable development, and demand more from our politicians. In other words it will require a lot of work and considering how self-interested Americans are many will not have the time or energy to effectively demand change. Hopefully there's enough of us who will.

2. The End of Customer Service -- More and more companies are opting for self-scanning kiosks and information booths in lieu of paying a real person to stand their and help you -- increasing efficiency and cutting costs. Problems with this is "separating services from the places where we are used to receiving them" and by shifting the work to the consumers we're adding more tasks to our daily routine which could lead to "overstressing ourselves and reducing our quality of life?" Scanning my groceries at the store is less stressful because I am faster than most of the clerks and know how to bag things properly. As more companies switch to virtual helpers I'm sure others will compete by promoting real people are in your presence for assistance.

3. The Post-Movie-Star Era -- Last year most of the top grossing movies didn't exactly have a marquee name attached. Aside from Will Smith, and Matt Damon and Adam Sandler (when they stick to their respected genres of action and comedy) there are few sure-things for a movie with a star attached. If TIME is only realizing this now then they are way beyond the times. Movie stars haven't been a big draw for audiences for several years now. There's no need to go to a movie to see a star when you have access to them on the internet (not to mention the week leading up to a film's release they're on pretty much every talk show promoting the movie.) Plus most big stars lose the characters to the person they've become in the public eye so why pay $9 to see Tom Hanks play Tom Hanks when you can see Tom Hanks promoting Tom Hanks for free on David Letterman?

4. Reverse Radicalism -- Instead of looking at why people are joining terrorist groups, experts are looking at why terrorists leave those groups in an effort to curb terrorism. And the reason they found? "They've been disappointed by the terrorist life." While one former terrorist talks to other's locked up trying to persuade them to work with officials, he mentions that "none are truly deradicalized. Disengagement is more realistic." Sounds like it'll work out well, just like promoting abstinence instead of condoms when it came to curbing teenage STD rates -- oh wait 1 in 4 teenage girl has an STD...

5. Kitchen Chemistry -- As less and less people cook for themselves the remaining few will be cooking in a more exact way with dry-weight scale, vacuum sealers, Crock-pots, and using chemicals like agar-agar and xanthan gum. Why? That question is never really answered other than saying approaching cooking with a scientific viewpoint generates more exact results. Considering Rachel Ray's and her 30-minute Meals popularity I don't think those cooking for themselves are going to take more time to get things exact.

6. Geoengineering -- Instead of trying to curb carbon emissions scientists are looking to other alternatives to stop global warming including "using orbital mirrors to bounce sunlight back into space, fertilizing the oceans with iron to amplify their ability to absorb carbon and even painting roofs white to increase solar reflection." I guess theorizing these sci-fi-like ideas is money better spent than trying to convince President Bush that global warming exists.

7. Synthetic Authenticity -- As our lives have become more and more virtualized there has been a demand for more of the "authentic." Consumers are basing many of their decisions on how they feel about a product, or its authenticity. Companies can respond by either being transparent and become exactly as they say they are (Chipotle, Honest Tea, Anthropologie) or they can openly fake it (Dave & Busters). This is why I hate people -- they make practical decisions based on emotions -- which is why this country is so retarded -- now let's take advantage of this because nothing will go wrong -- oh wait, look at the housing slump and credit crunch we're in -- let's not blame the sheer ignorance of the public and charge the companies of "taking advantage" of them.

8. New Austerity -- Given the recession we're in and how high people's debts have risen the not so new idea of living within your means is taking shape. I doubt this will catch on, I mean, a country that is half obese clearly shows that they have good judgment and can live within their means.

9. Mandatory Health -- The idea is that bosses may be telling their employees to get healthy or they're fired due to rising health insurance costs and increasing cost spending by companies -- and it will be legal too. The article cites that companies like Verizon Wireless, Microsoft, and Dow chemical offer bonuses to workers who lose weight and stop smoking. And what about people like me who don't smoke and is physically fit? Do we get paid more to begin with, or do we have to take up an unhealthy habit and kick it to cash in?

10. Re-Judaizing Jesus -- Some religious scholars and leaders are looking at the bible accepting that Jesus was a Jew and did "Jewish things" and that Paul "saw themselves as Jews even while founding what became another faith." I say who cares and how is this changing the world?
EW... SNL.
This week Entertainment Weekly goes behind the scenes of Saturday Night Live -- the show suddenly gaining importance after giving Hillary Clinton a boost with their essentially the same sketch repeated three weeks in a row. But there's no bias, it's all in the name of being funny. Given the show's lack of humor, I disagree.
Newsweek Looks at the Army in Iraq
The cover story talks about how the Iraq war has shifted gears under General Petraeus -- it's no longer about storming citadels but getting out on to the streets and winning over the people -- including working with people who have killed Americans (if only we had done that to begin with!) The article follows Tim Wright, a West Point graduate now a captain in Iraq and some of the tactics he's used in Iraq to help quell the violence including buying off insurgents and his deal with a shady Tony Soprano like Mr. X. With so much of the news talking about the troop surge and focusing more on the increased number of troops in Iraq this piece brings things into better focus by looking at the specifics -- at least through one captain -- of what's changed and what's being done to bring change.

The Age of American Unreason

2008-03-15T19:43:00.000-07:00

The Age of American Unreason is the impassioned, critical portrait of the dumbing down of America from author Susan Jacoby that makes the reader feel like the subject in Edward Munch's The Scream. In the book she chronicles anti-intellectualism from the founding of the country to the very present (the greatest examples are her first hand accounts) examining how we've come to live in a culture of distraction that leaves the majority of Americans unable to even identify the three branches of their government.

The statistics she evokes are chilling, including the one that most Americans lack an understanding of statistics. Even more disturbing are the number of religious fundamentalists -- people who actually believe the bible to be literal -- in this country and their impact on education, politics, and society. But the scariest thing in her book is how little this country values intellect and reason -- a.k.a. we're ignorant and proud of it -- and how this is a result of a poor education structure, the media, and disruptive technologies. She also blames American's fear of experts, which is most relevantly displayed with the issue regarding autism and childhood vaccines and how despite overwhelming medical evidence indicating no link between vaccines and autism, the public and the media are giving far too much time looking at other non-experts who believe otherwise.

Personally I was interested in how the college system has changed -- and not for the better. College used to about challenging oneself, broadening one's horizons, and being exposed to a variety of views and opinions. Now it's about reinforcing one's beliefs, which is reinforced by the lack of structure in course requirements and the specificity in major areas of study. I also found the moments when she talked about the lack of solid conversation as more of a rarity these days. One of the things I liked so much about senior year was when Salsa and I went to the bar on Tuesday and just had a few drinks and talked. While our topics may not have been entirely intellectual, they were distinct from distraction and a nice break from the multi-tasking that so much of days run on. It's nothing really new to point out that while technology enables us to stay connected to our friends and family, we fail at having stronger connections because we're distracted by the technology. I think I'm more affected by this because I tend to value the friendships I have more than others -- I will write long e-mails to friends and get short paragraph responses in return; when I make plans with people I have every intention of following through, though others will cancel as if nothing had been planned at all; and when we do follow through with plans it doesn't matter to me what they are because being in the company of friends and people I like is more important to me than what movie we see, what restaurant we eat at, or whatever we do together. Maybe that seems old fashioned or makes me to be overly sensitive, but if I gave in and cared less I would have even less to gain. I guess the Emerson quote she talks about left an impression me:

"The mind of this country, taught to aim at low objects, eats upon itself."

The Return of Jezebel James

2008-03-14T19:59:00.000-07:00

Tonight was the premiere of the newest comedy on FOX from the Gilmore Girls creator Amy Sherman-Palladino.
Premise: Sarah Tompkins, a recently single successful book editor, learns that she can't conceive a baby, so she turns to her poor, estranged sister, Coco, to carry her baby. (Jezebel James refers to Coco's imaginary friend, now turned into a book character by Sarah.)
Review: Where to begin? Parker Posey stars as Sarah and constantly overacts and her continuous rambling mangles not that funny jokes into even bigger clunkers. She makes Alexis Bledel look like an amazing actress.It doesn't help that her character is insane, self-absorbed, neuroic, completely unbelievable. It's a big stretch of reality to think that Sarah could be a successful book editor when she says things like her "baby parts are broken" or when her fertility doctor tells her she can't conceive her response is "conceive what?" Not to mention the whole question of why she would pick her sister to carry her baby when they haven't spoken in a year. Lauren Ambrose, who plays Coco, comes off much better, but she can't overcome this show's flaws. Rounding out the cast is Scott Cohen as Marcus, Sarah's potential boyfriend but current hook-up and Michael Arden plays her assistant, Buddy, who actually scores laughs. The writing is pretty terrible, the dialogue is nonstop monologues which drive over the jokes and the jokes, as I already mentioned, aren't funny. Much of the "humor" might have been cute on Gilmore Girls, but it fails in the sitcom world. If you're home on a Friday night, turn off the TV and read a book.
Bottom line: It makes as much sense as its title.
Rating: 1/2 a star

Why Top Chef is Better than Hell's Kitchen

2008-03-13T17:25:00.000-07:00

Last night marked the premiere of the fourth season of Bravo's culinary hit competition show, Top Chef. And coming in April is the fourth season of FOX's sensationalist, cooking circus known as Hell's Kitchen. Despite having a very similar premise the two shows couldn't be more different -- Top Chef is a four star Michelin rated restaurant, Hell's Kitchen is leftover McDonalds found in the trash. Not that anyone with a brain doesn't know this already, but here's why Top Chef is better than Hell's Kitchen:
The Cast -- Top Chef offers a diverse mix of highly trained and seasoned chefs and younger, ambitious chefs that have the skills to compete with the experienced talent. Hell's Kitchen goes for the personalities -- getting somewhat skilled cooks and chefs along with short order cooks from Waffle House -- but will yell and swear and cry at the camera on cue. And to suggest Top Chef's contestants might be more pretentious, polite or boring is ignorant -- I mean, just look at Andrew on this season.

The Judges -- Top Chef gives you Tom Colicchio, Padma Lakshmi, Gail Simmons from Food and Wine and occasionally Ted Allen with a mix of celebrity guest judges -- culinary experts who inspire and motivate the contestants including Anthony Bourdain. They critique the contestants articulately, constructively and pushing them to reach the highest of standards. Hell's Kitchen has Gordon Ramsey yelling and insulting his apprentices without explanation on how to correct mistakes. Sure it's funny to see what he's going to call each contestant next -- but even that appeal diminishes as half the stuff he says is bleeped out.
The Challenges -- With the challenges on Top Chef the contestants are actually challenged -- whether it's putting a new spin on an old classic or showing off their personalities in a deep dish pizza. With the variety of challenges the contestants never know what to expect and the same could be said of some of their results, the best of which combine creativity and risks. Hell's Kitchen's challenges are nothing more than endurance -- rushing to get orders out on a single dinner service while not going deaf from the British guy yelling in your face. While each week they twist the premise a bit, it still feels like cold leftovers.

The Food -- Week to week Top Chef delivers all sorts of food that are mouth watering even on the worst and tiniest of TV screens. Hell's Kitchen is the same menu rehashed week after week with the specialty being Beef Wellington.

The Presentation -- Top Chef exceeds in production values too with gorgeous shots of the food and superior camera work while running around the kitchen following the action. Hell's Kitchen relies on a lot of mounted cameras giving you the perspective of a security guard watching the tapes in the back. Not mention there's annoying voice-over guy who tells you the obvious and editing that dumbs down the audience by playing the last minute of footage before the commercial once again when the commercial is over -- just in case you forgot what happened.

There you have it. Top Chef is superior in more ways than one and even if it doesn't capture the same audience share as Hell's Kitchen, Top Chef's audience's IQ probably vastly outranks that of the Hell's Kitchen audience.

Hulu Launch

2008-03-12T19:22:00.000-07:00

Hulu, an online, video on demand website that allows American users to access hundreds of TV shows and movies for free launched today. The site, which had been running on beta since October 2007, is backed by $100 million from NBC Universal and News Corp and has Jason Kilar as the CEO (formerly from Amazon.) The site is supported by fifteen or thirty second ads in place of three minute TV commercials -- and users can even pick what types of ads they see.

Pros
- Free, guilt free viewing of your favorite TV shows... er... those that appear on FOX and NBC and their cable partners, as well as some classic shows and films
- Last nights shows should be up by this morning
- Mostly smooth, crisp video streaming and clean easy to use interface
- Users can share sections of a video -- a funny line for example -- with their friends

Cons
- Limited shows featured on the website
- Older shows "expire" and are replaced with new shows
- Unable to download the shows to a portable device
- Streaming can be jumpy at times, which is pathetic considering how much money was spent on this venture

I don't know what the entire point of this site is -- the networks pretty much have most of their shows available for streaming on their own websites already. If anything this further separates the product from the network "brands." Of course times have changed, CBS is no longer the Tiffany Co. with it's younger skewing Survivor, How I Met Your Mother, and C.S.I.s, FOX is no longer edgy and sexy with traditional or mainstream shows like Back to You and American Idol on its schedule, NBC is no longer the king of quality with The Biggest Loser, American Gladiators, One Hour Guessing Game -- I mean Deal or No Deal, and ABC is no longer just for Disney type families with shows like Lost, Desperate Housewives, Brothers & Sisters, etc. Cable networks have strengthened in both product and viewership by branding themselves -- Spike is for Men, Bravo is for women, gays and the bi-curious, TNT is drama, TBS is your stop for comedy, etc.

While the networks have always been about attracting a broader audience than cable, the lack of any identity certainly takes away from viewers tuning into their latest product. To say they don't have or need an identity for their brand would be suggesting that bulk stores such as Wal-mart and Target don't differentiate themselves from each other through their products. Now Hulu mashes the products together so that they don't have to be associated with their network or brand -- though users can browse shows by network, it's not the default page to look at. It'll be worthy to see if Hulu can catch any of those eyeballs dropping away from watching live television and how the rest of the industry reacts to it's success or failure.

Beauty and the Geek Premiere

2008-03-11T23:55:00.000-07:00

Tonight was the premiere party for the latest season of Beauty and the Geek and it was hosted at Mood, where "coincidentally" the beauties and the geeks had their first challenge -- trying to pick up numbers. The party was great for two reasons: Open. Bar. Anyway now that it's premiered here's who to watch for:
Tara -- She's not really ditzy, but she still says some funny and stupid things from time to time. But she's sincere in her reasons for being on the show and is always herself.
Leticia - Despite the talking head of her in the premiere episode, Leticia quickly proves that she's not on the show just for the money and is really there to help others before helping herself. Sure she can be a little odd at times, but her natural concern for others is worth rooting for.
Kristina - This spoiled child thinks she's smarter than she is, apparently not completely aware that the only reason she's going to law school is because of her daddy's money. If you don't notice any wrinkles on her face it's because she's already had botox. She's easily the beauty to root against.
Jim - Very, very, very, very awkward -- to say the least. He really is as geeky as he appeared on the premiere episode, but he's also very keen on things and blunt, two things to make him worth rooting for.
Joe - The self-proclaimed cowboy is odd and annoying (and I'm not just talking about his sparkling stars and stripes vest he wore into the elimination room) as he just doesn't know when to shut up. Don't root for him.
Greggy - The "gaysian" geek, who really isn't that geeky since he's not that smart and not nearly as awkward as the other geeks; He's just clumsy. While he comes off as sincere and nice, I wasn't entirely sure if he wasn't acting at least part of the time. Let's just say this wasn't the only reality show he applied to be on. Still he brings in a nice dose of diversity.

Canterbury's Law

2008-03-10T21:02:00.000-07:00

Premise: Juliana Marguiles plays defense attorney, Elizabeth Canterbury, who isn't afraid to push the limits to protect her clients and get her mind off her woeful private life.
Review: Juliana Marguiles plays the title character with full force, a devoted lawyer -- so much that she dives into her work head first to prove her clients' innocence -- or goes in the men's room to rant against her co-worker. Of course since she's a woman on TV she can't have it all so privately, she couldn't be more of a wreck. She cheats on her husband with her jury expert, Frank. Her son has been missing for three years, assumed dead though no body has been found. The case in the pilot episode involves a murdered child, whose body isn't found. Sound familiar? The family accuses a young man, Ethan Foster, who has a previous record, while Canterbury knows through medical records, that the father, Scott Jasper, has a history of abuse and probably accidentally killed his son. The only problem, she can't bring it up in court unless she has a witness to the abuse. The story then has some unbelievable twists and complications before getting to the inevitable conclusion. The cast includes Ben Shenkman as Russell Krauss, a doubting associate at the firm who is the0 first to point out the lines that Canterbury is about to cross. Keith Robinson and Trieste Kelly Dunn play two other associates, Chester Grant and Molly McConnell, and Aidan Quinn plays Canterbury's husband, who sticks with her despite how hard it is. The show's strengths are its characters, notably Canterbury, it's weakness is it falls into the been there down that category on many plot points.
Bottom line: Come for Juilana Marguiles, stay for-- don't expect a whole lot from anything else.
Rating: * * 1/2
Airs Mondays at 8:00 PM on FOX.

This Week on the Newsstands, March 9th

2008-03-09T18:46:00.000-07:00

Hillary's TIME
TIME's cover story reports about Hillary's big wins in Ohio and Texas, pinpointing the momentum began swinging in her favor when SNL did the sketch on the media being light on Obama. This coupled with a large women turnout and Clinton's policy details led to her victories. I love how the media simplifies things to the lowest common denominator -- women vote for the woman candidate, blacks vote for the black candidate -- never mind the issues. I also love how they rattle on and on about Hillary beating her healthcare plan into everyone's minds when in reality her plan probably wouldn't be able to pass Congress while something more along the lines of Obama's healthcare proposal would. But they've been too tough Hillary enough already.

Hurting Obama was his dealings with a "shady Chicago developer," his flap about NAFTA, and questions surrounding his patriotism, especially with his wife's comments about being proud of her country the first time in her adult life. In other words the media bashed Obama for nonissues because a sketch on an unfunny comedy show told them to.

The problem: this primary election might come down to the Superdelegates which could hurt the Democrats in the Fall election.
EW... Indiana Jones
Entertainment Weekly tells us to get excited for the new Indiana Jones movie even though it doesn't come out for over another two months. They gush about how Indiana Jones came to be, give pop-up video like facts about the first three movies, defend the often bashed sequels and over a new photo from the "The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull." It's amazing that just because the trailer for the new movie is a hit that they can come up with a five page cover story on the movie.
Hillary is making NEWS this WEEK
A reporter covers Hillary on the trail, and lamely like TIME, offers no insight on the election. Instead we get, "Perhaps she deserves to prevail simply because she's tougher—tougher than the media following ashen-faced in her wake, and clearly tougher than the other Democratic and Republican candidates who've already gone down in flames." Is this what they call reporting nowadays?

The reporter also mentions how women over fifty, a.k.a. the invisible women, are feeling like no one wants them -- "All over the country there are vigorous, independent, self-liberated boomer women—women who possess all the management skills that come from raising families while holding down demanding jobs, women who have experience, enterprise and, among the empty nesters, a little financial independence, yet still find themselves steadfastly dissed and ignored. Advertisers don't want them. TV networks dump their older anchorwomen off the air. Hollywood studios refuse to write parts for them [...] For all the invisible women, it's the only anthem they've got. And for their sake alone, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton should not give up the fight."

And to add insult to injury we get: "What saddens boomer women who love Hillary is that their twentysomething daughters don't share their view of her heroic role. Instead they've been swept up by that new Barack magic." Yes, so we have old women voting for an old woman because she is an old woman -- maybe they're subtly suggesting that she understands their needs better, but again the media simplifies the voter and voting process that eliminates the issues and focuses on what's on the surface. Could people be voting for Barak, not because his opponent is a woman, but because she is covered in political grim from her years in Washington and they're looking for someone with a clean slate and a fresh start? No, that's too much of a mouthful.

Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day

2008-03-08T20:07:00.001-08:00

Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day is a screwball comedy set in late1930s London, with the title character being a governess dismissed from her latest job. Deemed unemployable, she takes matters into her own hands and shows up for a job as a social secretary for American singer and actress Delysia Lafosse, whose bubbly personality and romantic dilemma involving three men throw Pettigrew for a whirl.
The film stars Amy Adams as the much sought after rising star, Delysia, and Adams plays her perfectly taking her role as Giselle in Enchanted and giving it a little more frantic bounce. Frances McDormand plays the frumpy, down on her luck Guinevere Pettigrew equally well, capturing the uneasiness Pettigrew feels in each uncomfortable social situation with detail. Pushing Daisies' Lee Pace plays a pianist with more spark and charm than his always nervous Ned on TV, Tom Payne plays a playwright Phil Goldman, Mark Strong is a hot-headed club owner Nick, and rounding out the cast is Shirley Henderson as Edythe Dubarry, Delysia's calculating friend and salon owner. The story is simple enough with Pettigrew proving herself indispensable almost immediately and Delysia unknowingly testing her limits throughout the span of a day. Much of the film's humor and fun comes from the talented duo. The set design and costumes are pure eye candy and the music swings things along. While not the funniest movie or even the most original, the sharp performances from the two leads is enough to leave audiences satisfied. B-
The trailer spoils very little, mostly setting things up by giving a synopsis of the first act, but there are some flashes of events near the end, not that the ending isn't that predictable any way. B+
[Photo Credit]

10,000 B.C.

2008-03-07T15:39:00.000-08:00

10,000 B.C. is about a young mammoth hunter, D'Leh, who journeys over the mountains and across the world with a couple other tribesmen to rescue Evolet, his love and the future of the tribe, from the "four legged demons" (guys on horseback.) It was co-written and directed by Roland Emmerich (Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow).
Where to begin? A movie such as this meant for the spectacle -- the special effects and the action -- yet both are severely lacking in the film. For a film to have the audacity to rewrite history the end result couldn't have been more boring and less inventive. Far too much of the film is wasted setting up a weak story that no one in their right mind could be invested in, and then instead of proceeding with what audiences expect -- action, extinct animals -- the film tries to develop that story and fails miserably. It's completely ridiculous how all the men want Evolet -- like she's the only hot girl in prehistoric times -- or maybe it's her blue eyes? And so much time is wasted on the characters talking about what they should do next instead of just showing us. Even the climactic end battle is a let down, both in it's sparsity and intensity (it doesn't help the leading up to it D'Leh announces, "when the sun rises we're going out and their and we'll CONVINCE our brothers to fight with us." Exciting. The film doesn't even justify itself as a pure eye candy movie either -- despite having half-naked actors and commercials boasting about the special effects -- most of the time the screen is just a boring frame. The acting, coming from lesser known actors (Steven Strait, Cliff Curtis, and Camilla Belle) is what you'd expect. The film's editing is horrible, mostly due to the fact that the story is stretched beyond what it should have been. And then there's a stupid voice over narration throughout the film which adds nothing and just makes the whole movie even more absurd. That being said, it's probably best to skip 10,000 B.C. and leave it in the past. F
As for the trailer... It pretty much spoils all of the stuff worth seeing in the film, including portions of the film's last ten minutes or so. But on the other hand, it doesn't spoil how boring the film is, you have to go and discover that on your own. D
[Photo Credit]

Users Versus Experts

2008-03-06T18:51:00.000-08:00

Newsweek.com posted a story today about how the expert is making a comeback on the internet. They cite the need for reliable, accurate information as the reason why experts are replacing regular netizen's user-generated content -- statistics such as 1 percent of Wikipedia's users make more than 50 percent of its edits, and scams and frauds such as certain scheming posts on craigslist and the fact that many of Amazon's book reviews were written by the author or others shilling for the publisher. What's part of this Web 3.0? They mention Mahalo, a people-powered search engine, as an alternative to Google; About.com has been hiring more free lance subject experts known as Guides to provide expert feedback, and advertisers -- as sites can charge more for advertising since it's a trusted web environment with premium users.

What does this mean? The internet is about information -- getting it, giving it, and sharing it -- abuses of the current free exchange of information is making creditable information a premium. Web 2.0 -- the populism, amateur and "wisdom of crowds" -- won't disappear, rather it will share the web with expert informed / edited sites. To become key players those expert and professional backed sites have to overcome the hurdle of the national distrust of experts since, as Susan Jacoby puts it, we live in the the age of American unreason. Naturally it seems these user-generated sites will do more to ensure the accuracy of their information -- which immediately raises the fear of censorship. Perhaps they could just offer their own expert sections or labeled material to retain and earn more regular users and fend off their competition, but will users who want informed and edited information turn to these populist sites? Like everything on the internet, it'll be interesting to see how this develops.
[Source]

New Amsterdam

2008-03-05T16:51:00.000-08:00

Last night New Amsterdam premiered on FOX. The show has done some reshoots for the pilot, which suggests FOX believes it has potential.
Premise: New York homicide detective, John Amsterdam, is immortal, at least until he can find "the one" -- his soul mate. In the mean time he solves murders with partner Eva Marquez, tries to recover from being an alcoholic, and has flashbacks to his long history.
Review: The show has a diverse cast led by Danish Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and British Zuleikha Robinson and Stephen Henderson who plays Amsterdam's friend and jazz club owner, Omar. The characters are fairly standard for a cop show though different enough that they don't entirely remind you of someone else and the premise is not really original (look at Torchwood, Highlander, or even Moonlight). The plots involve solving a murder and John still looking for "the One." After he has a heart attack in the subway he thinks he may have found her -- a doctor (Alexie Gilmore). All the talk of "the One" is a little ridiculous and the romantic storyline needs a little less cheese -- not to mention his whole back story of being granted with immortality by Native Americans after being killed trying to save one. Of course solving the murder mystery involves Amsterdam using his vast historical knowledge of the city -- which at times can be unintentionally funny -- and will probably be a theme throughout the city, but the main drive of the show is supposed to be Amsterdam. Amsterdam is still a little boring plus as you learn more about him it's hard not to be caught up in the plot holes involving his past, very public life and how no one has caught on to him and how he manages to get by being several hundred years old.
Bottom line: A step up from Journeyman.
Rating: * *
Airs Thursday night at 9:00PM and then Mondays at 9:00PM

The Wire at USC

2008-03-03T23:17:00.000-08:00

Last night was another night spent at USC and soaking up their TV symposium class with Jill. And last night's guest was none other than David Simon, creator of HBO's The Wire. The screening started off with an episode of Homicide: Life on the Streets, the famous Subway episode, followed by Sunday's episode of The Wire.

Then we had the Q&A and here's my recap from memory, or at least what I recall:
- He talked about his upcoming project on HBO, Generation Kill, based on the nonfiction book by Evan Wright. He described it as not a war movie or an anti-war movie, but about the boys who are off fighting in Iraq. He feels tonally it's something very different. It's tentative air date is July 13th.
- Regarding this season of The Wire, he pointed out the fact that many journalists who complained about this season of The Wire were complaining about small journalistic details and almost all, except maybe two, missed the big picture that this season and tackling the media was about how the paper was missing stories about their city -- big time drug dealer deaths weren't reported on or shoved back in the paper. And just as the reporters on the show are too focused on other things: accolades, readership, etc. the journalists who complained about the show missed the bigger picture -- sort of proving his point even further.
- In general he pointed to how in the '80s and '90s when the papers made huge profits, instead of investing the money back into the paper and making a high quality product, they gave it back to the share holders. Before they had journalists all over the streets to monopolize the market and now as cities have fewer papers there's no need for quality to capture the audience. Now papers keep making cuts and in doing so they know even less about their city, continuing the cycle of losing subscriptions. Newspapers used to be something that would tell you more about your city, your region, something that you didn't know, and now they're paper thin and with the focus on making money and pleasing people in Chicago, papers don't even know their own cities.
- He essentially said newspapers were a dying breed and points to the current model where they post everything online for free as proof. How can you make money when you're giving your product away for nothing?
- He talked about after the first season how they wanted to "create a city" out of the show, first with the blue collar workers, than with city hall, then the school system, and finally the media.
- When asked about the issue of race he said it was never an issue that he thought about. He thought Homicide: Life on the Streets paved the way for diversity and it was never really a concern on the show, if it had been he felt like it would have been redundant of Homicide.
- He talked about how though the show is fiction many of the stories and ideas come from real life, like using the 3rd grade test scores to justify an improvement in education even when everyone knew the numbers meant nothing, or stuff with Clay Davis. He said they did a lot of research, talking to people -- prosecutors, detectives, officers, etc. -- preparing for the show.
- He said that the show was set in Baltimore because that's where he's from, but more importantly it's the details and knowing the city that makes the show realistic and allows them to stretch reality when they do "over the top" dramatic stuff like McNulty staging a serial killer without it looking like it's being cheesy.
- When asked about the war on drugs he says he is "over it." The current system is failing and he sees civil disobedience as the only solution to get the government to change their ways -- if he's ever selected for jury duty he will not convict any one on drug related charges if there was no act of violence involved. He points to current statistics of 1 out of every 100 people in this country are locked up, and how putting those people away isn't doing any social justice.
- When he started writing for TV he didn't think of it as a permanent thing, rather he was going off to do this thing and learn this skill set, but loved the collaboration and everything involved with making a show and so he continues working in it.
- He doesn't hold anything against HBO for it's lack of advertising compared to The Sopranos, and was grateful his show was on the air. They never tried meddling with the show or offering any changes. He said that season 5, although only 10 episodes (10.5), it was what they needed to get the story done with, and had they wanted 11 episodes HBO would have given it to him.

All in all it was great night, very informative and insightful. I can't wait to catch the finale of The Wire on Sunday!

Unhitched

2008-03-03T13:17:00.000-08:00

Last night was the premiere of FOX's new comedy, Unhitched, from executive producers the Farrelly Brothers. Here's a review of the pilot.
Premise: Jack "Gator" Gately is new to the dating scene after recently getting divorced from his college sweetheart. He lives with his other recently divorced /dumped 30ish year-old friends -- Freddie, an east Indian surgeon and Kate, a lawyer, with friend Tommy, a brewer and childish womanizer, always stopping by. The show was created by Mike Bernier & Chris Pappas (according to IMDB this is the only thing they've written -- let's hope it stays that way.)
Review: The story lines include Kate (Rashida Jones) dating the perfect guy... only he's shorter than her, Freddie (Shaun Majumder) dating a prostitute on his birthday, and Jack (Craig Bierko) trying to make a good impression at a business dinner function even though he brought Tommy (Johnny Sneed) along with him. The show's humor includes Jack being violated by a monkey in the show's cold open, Tommy hitting on a sixteen year-old, and a Freddie falling for the hooker. In other words it's not funny, as none of the characters have enough heart for you to care about them and they're not funny enough for you to overlook their one dimension (like you do in Seinfeld and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia.) Plus it just feels like it's trying too hard (i.e. Freddie's accent) and the end results aren't really anything you haven't seen before. The cast lacks chemistry and it's unsure how they could possibly be friends as you don't really see them connect with each other -- not that they're together a whole lot. While Rashida Jones is funny and likable, she alone is not enough to keep tuning in.
Bottom line: Not worth the commitment.
Rating: * 1/2
Airs on Sundays at 9:30PM on FOX.

Weak Weekend Debut

2008-03-02T19:17:00.000-08:00

Will Ferrell's latest movie, Semi-Pro, opened this weekend with an R rating an even more shocking $15.1 million bow with a per theater average of $4830. Perhaps this might be a sign for the comedian to move on from doing stupid sports "comedies" where he plays the same character over again.

In last week' Entertainment Weekly he said: "For every person who says, 'I've seen you do that before,' someone else will say, 'I love when you do that thing.'" I don't know where he finds these people who say "I love when you do that thing" because pretty much everyone I know rolled their eyes when they saw Semi-Pro's trailer or commercials. Obviously I'm not a Ferrell fan (I can only tolerate him on the small screen in small SNL-like doses) but some of my friends actually thought Talladega Nights was funny and have no intention of seeing Semi-Pro. Maybe after this flop Ferrell will flip -- and start playing a real grown up. Or they all will just blame the R rating.

Resume: Impossible

2008-03-01T16:42:00.000-08:00

The other day Food Network announced it will not renew the contract of Dinner: Impossible host, Robert Irvine, after finding "embellishments and inaccuracies" in the chef's resume. The show depicts Irvine having to whip up gourmet meals for hundreds of guests under time constraints and other challenges. The main contentions with his work history were regarding statements that he had been knighted by the Queen, designed Princess Diana's wedding cake, and cooked for the White House. It makes sense that they would want to can him after finding this out because then it casts doubt on the plausibility of his achievements on the show, nonetheless some of the stuff he's done on the show was impressive.

This comes the same week when Belgian author, Misha Defonseca, admits that her memoir, Misha: A Memoire of the Holocaust Years is a hoax. She admits that not only is she not Jewish, but also "she did not trek 1,900 miles as a child across Europe with a pack of wolves in search of her deported parents during World War II." Which begs the question, who actually believed that last sentence in the first place?
[Image Credit, Source]

UPATE 3/4/08: Now reports are saying the new memoir, Love and Consequences by Margaret B. Jones is also fake. In the book she claimed to be raised by a black foster family in South Central L.A. and sold drugs to gangs. I remember reading the mini review in Entertainment Weekly which mentioned that her two foster brothers were Bloods and thinking that it sounded unlikely that a foster family would have gang members in it -- I mean the system is screwed up, but I didn't think it was that screwed up -- and fortunately it isn't.
[Source]

This is a Jeopardy! Taping

2008-02-28T18:02:00.000-08:00

Today Jill and I went to a taping of Jeopardy! over in Culver City. We arrived fifteen minutes early, parked on the top level of the shadiest parking structure this side of the Mississippi, and rode the shadiest elevator where we waited in line. We waited for a while down there with everyone and their mom telling us to put our cell phones away -- so much that Jill felt nervous having hers in a pocket in her purse and returned it to the car -- only for us to get into the studio and the first thing that is announced is if anyone has their cell phone, please turn it off.

Leading up to our walk through the studio we found a bus load of senior citizens were in attendance for the taping, which meant there were a lot of wrinkles, complaints, and hideous pant suit combinations. Jill and I had to be at least 40 years younger than 95% of the audience -- it was very surreal. (Side note:The seats in the studio are insanely comfortable, really thick and soft.) Once the old folks finally made it to their seats in the studio, clue crew member Jimmy came out and talked to us, as announcer Johnny Gilbert was "out sick," you know, just with a severe bout of the flu. Jimmy was friendly enough and talked about his job and Jeopardy! for a bit, though I'm not sure how many of the audience members had their hearing aids turned on. Then before you know it the contestants came out, taped their "hometown hellos" and the game started.

Like any TV taping the show goes by in a breeze. Jill and I tapped each other every time we knew an answer, which was often. I actually knew the answer to all three Final Jeopardy questions, which made me feel smart for not knowing other answers. During the commercials Alex talked to the crowd and fielded questions. He mentioned how Jeopardy! has the longest season of any game show -- about 40 weeks -- but mostly he seemed to have a big interest in American Idol -- commenting on how Randy Jackson always says "Dawg" etc. I think Jill and I were the only ones who knew what he was talking about. He was pretty funny though, not really geeky as you'd imagine him to be, but his energy just seemed out of place given the audience was so old. So we stayed for three episodes, leaving around 2:30 PM. The shows won't air until June 9th - 11th -- we're betting at least some of the audience members won't be around to watch them air.
[Image Credit]

Quarterlife

2008-02-27T18:21:00.000-08:00

Last night was the low watched premiere of NBC's re-editing of Myspace's Quarterlife.
Premise: Six twentysomething friends / roommates struggle with life (work and relationships): Dylan, the wallflower, editorial associate for Attitude magazine who dishes her innermost thoughts about her friends on her blog – Quarterlife, Lisa, a bartender and struggling actress who can’t emote when she performs, Danny, a wanna-be producer and big time flirt even though he’s dating Deborah, a former popular girl from high school who now works with her father and knows that Danny’s best friend Jud, a filmmaker artist, pines for her, and there’s Andy, the computer guy who lives in the basement. The show is created by Marshall Herskovitz and Edward Zwick, creators of My So-Called Life.
Review: As someone who is relatively the same age as the characters, lived in the same area as them, and am pursuing a similar career as them, I couldn’t relate to them at all. They all speak and say things that no one would ever say, particularly Dylan, who not only says almost whatever is on her mind, but then posts it on her blog without thinking her friends or roommates would mind. What’s worse is she justifies this by saying she’s a writer – but the blog is mostly video – so much for writing. Plus just seeing her at her job, stuttering at her boss made me hate her even more. Then there’s Lisa, the struggling actress, I feel bad for her, but I have no reason to really root for her; Jed (played by Scott M. Foster, who plays Cappie on the superior Greek) is probably the least annoying of the characters, but he’s trapped in a What About Brian? plot – being in love with his best friend’s girlfriend. What About Brian? did it better and with a much more attractive cast. The problem with this plot is we never really see Jed and Danny really be friends, instead they are seen more as dependent on each other for their work. Deborah is way too plain and nondescript for me to care about, and the fact that she recognizes she’s in the middle of a love triangle and fails to do anything makes me dislike her, and Andy doesn’t do anything but watch porn on the computer. The way the characters bluntly analyze each other’s feelings (without actual concern for them) is annoyingly fake, and their candid conversations about everything is something most people do only with their closest or best friends, not their roommates or public blog, not to mention they don’t have genuine concern for anyone other than themselves – well I know some people like that – but to have a series full of them is too much. So when you don't care about the characters to begin with it's even harder to give a damn about the romantic love triangles they're tangled in.
Bottom line: Maybe it’s not as annoying in eight minute intervals?
Rating: **

Ugly USC

2008-02-26T16:47:00.000-08:00

Last night Jill and I went to another TV Symposium class that neither of us are registered for, and it was for Ugly Betty. The show's creator, Silvio Horta (left in the photo above), production designer, Mark Worthington, occasional director, Victor Nelli Jr. (center), co-executive producer, Richard Heus (right), and editor, Shawn Paper, were all in attendance.

After screening the first season's finale they opened up the Q&A, with Silvio giving us the lowdown on the show and how it's so much a collaborative effort between everyone, how ABC had been working on it for a few years before he gave it a try, and what have you. They all seemed to really enjoy working for TV and how more people have a say and how it's easier to collaborate on an idea than compared with film. We also saw the same scene edited three times, once was the director's take, once was the editor's take and once was the final take -- and it was interesting to see how the small changes could make a big difference. Some other interesting tidbits raised were:

- How the Mode set was designed to really make Betty feel like a fish out of water and was inspired by Japanese and European design
- Silvio had to fight the network to not cut the funniest moment from season 2, Amanda singing Milkshake at Wilhelmina's wedding
- Silvio admits to hating the whole mysterious woman (who turned out to be Alexis) in season 1, as mystery writing was something the writers all didn't like doing
- Silvio has noticed that while the show has become funnier it's losing sight from being about Betty and her perspective and wants to change that (maybe we'll see that in the final five episodes of season 2?)
- Vanessa Williams replaced the actress who was playing Wilhelmina at the last minute as she just wasn't working out
- Originally in the pilot there was supposed to be a moment between Betty and Daniel where there was a potential spark between them, but was scrapped after the actors didn't think it would work (in the international versions of Ugly Betty, Betty has a relationship with her boss)

All in all the first season of Ugly Betty you could tell they were trying to find the right tone and playing with the characters (like at their attempts to try and make Wilhelmina human by giving her a daughter) and obviously some worked and some didn't, but they took what worked and really capitalized on it in the second season and now are trying to find the balance between the exaggerated tone and the reality of Betty's situation. It's impressive that they've been able to try so much and have made so much headway given the complexity of the show -- six acts, over a dozen characters, etc. It's just another one of those shows that I'd love to work on or be a part of, but I guess I'll just have to settle for being a fan, for now.
[Image Credit]

That's A Wrap!

2008-02-25T16:04:00.000-08:00

The Academy Awards last night were mildly entertaining. Jon Stewart did an okay job, but man, there were a lot of those clips (in case of the strike still going.) The winners have all become so predictable though, I mean the right people won, but it's so boring when you know who is going to win -- that's what happens when everyone has their best of lists at the end of the year.

So looking at the Oscars, SAG Awards, WGA Awards and Golden Globes, here's the final tally:

Best Picture: No Country for Old Men (Oscars, SAG (Cast ensemble is the equivalent)), Atonement (Golden Globes (Drama)), Sweeny Todd (Golden Globes (Comedy / Musical)),

Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis (Oscars, SAG, Golden Globes (Drama)), Johnny Depp (Golden Globes (Comedy / Musical))

Best Actress: Marion Cotillard (Oscars, Golden Globes (Comedy / Musical)), Julie Christie (SAG, Golden Globes (Drama))

Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem (Oscars, SAG, Golden Globes)

Best Supporting Actress: Tilda Swinton (Oscars), Cate Blanchett (Golden Globes), Ruby Dee (SAG)

Best Director: Joel & Ethan Coen (Oscars), Julian Schnabel (Golden Globes)

Best Animated Movie: Ratatouille (Oscars, Golden Globes)

Screenplay: Juno (Oscars (Original), WGA Awards (Original)), No Country for Old Men (Oscars (Adapted), Golden Globes, WGA Awards (Adapted))

Now that awards season is officially over, let the campaigning for 2008 begin.
[Photo Credit]

Vantage Point

2008-02-23T19:32:00.000-08:00

Vantage Point is the new action thriller about two secret service agents assigned to protect the President of the United States in Spain while he's about to begin a global summit on terrorism. However, the president is shot and bombs go off, creating chaos as they and other witnesses to the event -- a tourist and a news producer -- try to figure out what happened and solve the crime.
The film offers a Rashomon view of the events, replaying it over six times, each from a different person's perspective. Only it's not really from their perspective, it more or less just happens to follow that character and go on a little bit longer to reveal some additional information. It's disappointing because had the camera become more subjective under each character's eyes things could have been a lot different and the film won't feel so pedestrian. Instead we just follow several characters, not learning a whole lot about them let alone start caring for them, and seeing it from the new "perspective" doesn't complicate the plot, it sort of just let's more things happen with the inclusion of plot twists out of no where. The different takes even gets a little ridiculous with the inclusion of personal affairs (as if it were an episode of 24 -- we're on assignment, but let's make out first) stupid child actors, and having a tourist chase after the agents and the suspect with his camcorder. The cast includes Sigourney Weaver, Forest Whitaker, Dennis Quaid, Matthew Fox, and William Hurt, who do the best with what they're given though Forest Whitaker is more a nervous annoyance than anything else. That being said, the film does move at a swift pace, and even replaying the action from the start, over and over and over and over and over again doesn't become all that tedious with the third act becoming full action movie -- though none of the stunts really do anything new or different either. Still it gets the job done, sure there's quite a few plot holes, but it's an average flick that could have been worse. C The trailer roughly shows the event through the first perspective of the news crew, but spoils it by revealing some of the films later plot twists, including the fact that the President wasn't actually shot, who the villain really is, and a lot of the third act with the car chase. Pretty much it spoils a lot. D

Trailers Trashed

2008-02-22T18:16:00.000-08:00

So the last time I went to the movies they played trailers for two romantic comedies back to back. They were for Tina Fey's Baby Mama and Ashton Kutcher / Cameron Diaz's What Happens In Vegas... Noticeably both trailers feature one thing in common -- a repeat joke. Not only that but the joke is really highlighted in both of the trailers: Amy Poehler's character can't get the baby-proofed toilet seat up so she tinkles in the bathroom sink; Ashton Kutcher's character is locked out of the bathroom so he takes a whiz in the kitchen sink. So one of the funniest moments on both films (at least judging from the trailer) is something that obviously lacks originality, which seems to drive the point that neither of these films possess a whole lot of originality or will stray beyond a predictable structure (though watching the rest of the trailers prove that point.) Regardless, I'll still probably see Baby Mama because Amy Poehler is hilarious.

Smart and Dumb TV

2008-02-21T23:43:00.000-08:00

Today Mensa announced it's top ten smartest TV shows of all time. They were:

Frasier -- Characters of high intelligence with sensational repartee
The West Wing -- Fast and furious dialogue / repartee required high intelligence to keep up with it
Boston Legal -- Great characters and dialogue
Jeopardy! -- Tests intelligence not luck
Cosmos -- Scientist character able to communicate clearly
House -- House's personality plus issues dealing with science
CSI -- The way they use science to solve crimes is intriguing
All in the Family -- Dealt with social issues beyond its time
Mad About You -- Good characters and back and forth
MASH -- It had smart repartee and was so much more than a comedy

For the most part I agree with the list. I don't think Boston Legal's characters are that great, Jeopardy! seems to be skewing more into questions about pop culture nowadays, and I'm on the fence with Mad About You. While I may not be in Mensa, I did attend a school for gifted children and whether or not that qualifies me, here's three other smart shows that should be considered:

The Mole -- To throw a reality show into the mix, The Mole had brainy challenges plus the giant mystery of who was trying to sabotage them the entire time. The Mole will be coming back to TV (without "celebrities") and I'm looking forward to it immensely.
The Wire -- Deals with socio-economic problems in a modern, deteriorating urban environment and shows how the system is failing the public on numerous levels.
Lost -- Trying to sort out of everyone's relationships with each other, the island's mysteries, and what happened since they've gotten off the island will give anyone a headache.

And then Maxim Magazine listed it's ten dumbest shows (because we turn to Maxim for all things dumb). Surprisingly they did a decent job of sorting through the crap:

Mind of Mencia -- sketch-comedy borrowed from others and made worse
Growing Up Gotti -- Sets back Italian Americans a few decades
24 -- The focus more on personal relationships and bizarre terrorist plots ruined the show
MTV's Next -- Stupid dating show with one person going on multiple dates
Deal or No Deal -- A guessing game
Walker, Texas Ranger -- Character and plot developments were practically nonexistent
Saved by the Bell -- an "emographically engineered group of popular white kids and their vaguely ethnic friends"
Dinosaurs -- A family sitcom with people dressed as dinosaurs
Joey -- Having a dumb character try and carry his own show was dumber than it sounds
The War at Home -- Michael Rappaport is a real life Joey

I whole-heartedly agree with the majority of the list. 24's first season was complicated and intriguing, now the show has become predictable and almost a spoof of itself. The War at Home is terrible and I'm glad someone else is bashing it. I think pretty much all of MTV's programming (Parental Control, The Real World, Real World / Road Rules Challenges, Rob & Big) should be included on the list, as should American Dad and Family Guy for being rip-offs of The Simpsons only with jokes that don't matter and have no bearing on the plot whatsoever, and let's not forget about some of UPN's classics -- Shasta McNasty, The Mullets, and Homeboys in Outer Space.

Cookin With Coolio

2008-02-20T23:45:00.000-08:00

I'm not a big web video person -- what can I say, I don't really care to see a fifteen second clip of someone's cat do something stupid on YouTube. I've tried watching web videos -- I watched Making Fiends from the beginning (and await for the series to debut on Nickelodeon), I caught an episode of lonelygirl15 once (and decided to follow the star to Greek rather than watch any more episodes of the web series), I've seen one episode of Quarterlife (and didn't understand the hoopla after it), and that's about it. But when I heard about Cookin' With Coolio, I watched and laughed and came back for more.

Coolio, who has plans for a reality TV show on Oxygen (yes, Oxygen), stars as s a ghetto chef -- complete with his Sous Chef friend, two hot bitches in the background, and dime bags filled with salt, pepper and some other secret ingredients. But perhaps the funniest or most ironic thing about this web series is his recipes are probably as culinary (if not more) than anything you'd find on 30 Minute Meals with Rachel Ray. It's a pretty funny idea, simple, yet a little unexpected and the end result leaves me eager to see what Coolio cooks next.

Paradox of Choice

2008-02-19T22:53:00.000-08:00

I've been wanting to read Barry Schwartz's 2004 book The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less for quite some, so I finally I bought a copy and read it in the matter of two days.

His argument is simply that as the choices we face continue to grow, negative aspects of these decisions appear and will escalate as the choices expand, up until the point that "choice no longer liberates, but debilitates." Too many choices will produce a mental stress that can combine with regret, concern about one's status, adaptation, social comparison, and to maximize, or simply go for the best. Essentially we are less happier now because we have more choices -- even though we tend to equate the ability to choose as a freedom -- because with each choice and its options we'll always be left wondering if we made the right decision -- which isn't so liberating after all.

He argues that it's the maximizers (which differ from perfectionists) that face the greatest threat because the aim for the best and when you're inundated with choice it's hard to achieve the best in everything. His solution is to improve on your own personal standards rather than continuing to raise the bar on what's considered "good enough." His arguments are back up by loads of research and studies -- including poignantly one study that revealed most people would want to decide their treatment for cancer if they were diagnosed, yet most actual cancer patients rather have the doctor decide for them. Over the two hundred and thirty pages his arguments become a little repetitive, taking away some of the punch in the things discovered, and the final chapter looks like it is ripped from a self-help book, but interesting, legitimate issues regarding consumer culture are addressed and in raising awareness of always striving to be the best maybe people can cool down, be grateful for what they've got, and actually be happy.

Personally I'm not much of a maximizer and am much more a satisficer. Over the last year I didn't see my material possessions grow all that much and I don't think I would be happier if had more stuff or better stuff, like I still don't own a digital camera, my ipod has a black and white screen, and my computer is going on to it's sixth year (though, admittedly, my wardrobe is need of a face-lift.) I tend to value the experiences I've had and shared with the friends I have more and to me those won't depreciate in value, unlike some of the things I could have bought instead.

Degrassi: The Next Generation

2008-02-18T20:04:00.001-08:00

What better way to cap off a relaxing and fun filled weekend that included hiking, movie going, and quality time with friends than with the comfort of the Canadian export Degrassi: The Next Generation? In it's seventh season with a bulging cast of thirty or so actors, the series still remains fresh and fun.
The latest episode "Hungry Eyes" captures the epitome of the series -- there was a high school badminton tournament (told you it was from Canada) sponsored by an energy drink company that got students to be spokes models. Emma, upset that she's become predictable, tries out and becomes a model, only to be confronted with yet another body-image issue as she is criticized for being the "biggest" model and shouldn't be drinking the product that has 2000 calories. So she protests the drink and ends up taking her top off:
And that's why the show is so much fun -- not only does it address these type of social issues (or as The N likes to boast, "It goes there"), but it does so in proudly being Canadian beyond their adorable Canadian accents and with the minor details such as badminton tournament, Tim Horton's coffee, etc. The pretty and diverse cast actually does a fairly good job at acting and even the cheesiest moments can be overlooked often because it's more the dialogue than the actor's fault. And best of all, despite some soap opera type antics, the characters actually grow and learn their lessons; they remain flawed but still very much likable. So how about that, eh?

Definitely Maybe

2008-02-17T18:00:00.000-08:00

I have no problem with romantic comedies, at least not when they're done right. Definitely, Maybe, may not be flawless, but there's enough romance and comedy (two things many recent "romantic comedies" seem to lack) that it was thoroughly enjoyed. The film is about Will Hayes (Ryan Reynolds), an ad executive just served with divorce papers. Already separated, this act causes him to reflect on his love life, much at his daughter Maya's (Abigail Breslin) urging. So Will tells his daughter his love life's history, starting in 1992, changing the names so she won't know who her mother is out of the three women: Emily (Elizabeth Banks), his mid-western college sweetheart, April (Isla Fisher), a free-spirited Clinton campaign worker, and Summer (Rachel Weisz), an adventurous and budding journalist.
Overall the film's appeal is the romantic love mystery of finding out which one of the three women is Maya's mom. The twists and turns of his life seem real and grounded and the three women, all different with real virtues and flaws, make the movie refreshingly void of the typical structure of a romantic comedy and more realistic than so many other RomComs (even though there's quite a few chance run ins in New York City.) The cast is incredible -- Ryan Reynolds finally has a movie role that takes his charming good looks and natural knack at humor and utilizes them both to enhance the film even if his character is sort of nondescript and a little boring. Abigail Breslin does a good job as his sweet, overly curious daughter without ever getting annoying despite her tendency to whine. Elizabeth Banks, Rachel Weisz, and Isla Fisher all deliver solid performances as potential lovers, each managing to give you a reason to root for them. Most importantly the cast clicks together and when they're on screen you believe that these people would connect in life. One of my favorite moments is when April challenge Will to a smoke to prove that his cigarettes burn up faster. It's a spontaneous, unromantic (even disgusting to some) act that becomes romantic at once because of this very fact and connection you can see between the two characters. And while the film's ending goes more towards the cliché, it does the job done at making the audience happy. B
As for the trailer, it spoils very little of the plot in the way it introduces the different romantic choices, while highlighting the film's charm. B+
[Image credit]

Welcome to the Captain

2008-02-12T23:27:00.000-08:00

Premise: A young writer moves into the legendary Hollywood Apartment building, the El Captain. The series was created by John Hamburg (writer of Zoolander, Along Came Polly, and Meet the Fockers.)
Review: This single camera sitcom has no laugh track and I wonder if it's intentional or if it's because it's not funny. It's oddly squishy in CBS's all mulit-camera sitcom line-up and that's not the only problem. The wacky characters, Hollywood setting, boring story lines, and unoriginal premise (The Big Bang Theory's premise is oddly familiar) don't add anything new, neither does shooting it with a single camera, it could easily accomplish what it needs to as a multi-camera show. The cast includes the talented Jeffrey Tambor (20 Good Years, Arrested Development) who seems to be lost as The Captain's life long resident Uncle Saul, the underrated Joanna Garcia (Cheyenne from Reba) who is relegated to looking pretty and being sympathetic to Josh as his potential love interest Hope (what a clever name), the untalented Chris Kline who plays a slick accountant, Marty, who wishes he could be Jeremy Piven's Ari, Al Madrigal who plays Jesus, the doorman, who seems better fit for a multi-camera show, Racquel Welch who plays the building's cougar and despite her breasts is one-dimensional, and Fran Kranz who plays the lead, Josh, a wanna-be writer who is unbelievable as someone who has had success in Hollywood. Here's a hint to sitcom writers, writers are not interesting characters for two reasons -- if they're not writing they're not doing their job (making them unsympathetic) and if they are writing then they are boring.
Bottom line: If you thought any of the movies John Hamburg wrote were actually funny then you might find this "sitcom" funny too, but I doubt it.
Rating: *

Rom-Com Bombs

2008-02-11T22:05:00.000-08:00

So the Kate Hudson, Matthew McConaughey movie Fool's Gold topped the box office this weekend, proving once again that American women really aren't as smart as they claim to be. The film pairs the two lovely co-stars of 2003's How To Lose A Guy in 10 Days and places them as a divorced couple who are treasure hunters (or at least McConaughey's character is), and it turns out that they find more than gold in their quest, how original. Now I've seen neither of these two movies, but having seen Kate Hudson in snippets of Raising Helen and You, Me and Dupree and Matthew McConaughey in Failure to Launch (don't ask) I don't understand the appeal of these two actors individually, let alone paired together. Throw in the predictable plot, lame gags that are supposed to generate laughs, and a cutesy title and you've got a movie that the gals are all going to add to their favorite movies on their Facebook and Myspace pages.
Not to just pick on those two pretty faces, Katherine Heigl's critically panned 27 Dresses has accumulated more than $65 million dollars (and counting) (though at least her performance is well reviewed.) But still, watching the trailer pretty much connects the plot points for you, throw in some romantic comedy clichés and you've seen the movie. Yet still women, my friends included, want to (and have) see(n) this movie. Why? They know it's going to be predictable and drab and terribly average (and that's without reading the reviews), but still they'll fork over the ten bucks to watch it. You could argue the same thing with guys and their loud, action movies, but those at least have sounds and special effects worthy to see it on the big screen versus waiting for Lifetime to air it. It's a far cry from the great rom-coms of yesteryear with interesting male leads matched up with sassy female co-stars. Oh well. At least since I will never have a girlfriend I won't have to worry about being subjected to this fodder against my will (I hope not, anyway.)

Transcribing

2008-02-10T18:34:00.000-08:00

So my first week of transcribing is done, time for week two. Sitting there in front of a computer screen all day transcribing confessionals and interviews goes by pretty fast, which is good, plus it's more than mildly entertaining listening to the participants talk about everything -- which can't be said about other shows apparently. I can already surmise what stories they might make out of things and it'll be interesting to tune in (March 11th) and compare what actually makes the cut. It's pretty fascinating seeing how the participants view each other in comparison to how they think they're projecting themselves to the others. So I'm looking forward in seeing how it's edited -- we already have a few favorites of our own -- so it'll be interesting to see whether certain people are made to look dumber, smarter or more evil than they actually are. Overall it's a good learning experience. I'm definitely learning a lot about reality TV production. It's not scripted TV, but it's not all that bad either.

Super Bowl Ads

2008-02-03T23:48:00.000-08:00

What an unbelievable football game, well fourth quarter. The TV commercials -- not so much this year, still some managed to stand out.

Best:
- FedEx's "Pigeons" -- Giant pigeons are in.
- Diet Pepsi Max's "What is Love?" heading bopping commercial featuring many celebrity cameos, but the best one was by the smallest star -- Chris Kattan.
- Doritos's "Mouse trap" -- it's all about the ending.
- Coke's two commercials -- Bill Frist and James Carville, perfect for the upcoming Super Tuesday, and the parade balloons -- Underdog and Stewie fighting, only to have Charlie Brown win was cute.

Worst:
- Career Builder's heart tells the boss to quit -- it started off interesting with the heart jumping out of the woman's chest and failed to build off it, leaving us all to groan when it ended.
- Pepsi's ad "Justin Timberlake" -- considering all the news were broadcasting snippets of the commercial before it aired, it turned out to be quite lame in the end.
- Bridgestone's commercial "Headlights" where Richard Simmons doesn't get run over -- if he did it'd be on the other list. Though the Alice Cooper cameo was funny, it doesn't make up for it.
- Under Armour's ad -- three letters: WTF?
- Life Water's "Thriller" -- Naomi Campbell dancing to Thriller with a bunch of lizards. We were all waiting for her to start attacking them.
- The Salesgenie ads -- they paid money for this?

And of course the movie ads were great -- Leatherheads was hacked to pieces to appeal to a dumber, male audience, Iron Man looked sweet, the Chronicles of Naria still doesn't look like it's for me though it looks better than the first one, and Don't Mess with the Zohan looks like standard Sandler fare, though it looks like a step up from Chuck & Larry (but what isn't?)

It's Time to Get LOST

2008-02-01T20:01:00.000-08:00

It has become apparent after watching last night's episode of LOST that that show's shortened season is the greatest causality of the WGA Strike -- forget 24 not airing (as cool as the trailer made it look, but then again trailers can be deceiving.)
The premiere picks up right where we were left off and boy do they know what everyone's dying to know and what everyone is over with:
In: The Other Others, Flash forwards, Charlie's death, Wondering who the Oceanic 6 are, Wondering if they'll return to the island
Five Minutes Ago: The Others, Flash backs on the island, Mr. Eko's death, Wondering who the Others are, Wondering if they'll get off the island
Out: The Monster, Flash backs, Ana-Lucia & Libby's deaths, Wondering who the guy in the Hatch was, Wondering why the plane crashed onto the island
There was a great mix of reveals and mysteries (Hurley got off the island / who are the other three that got off the island); division among the characters (Locke vs. Jack); intensifying of the love triangle (Sawyer goes with Locke, leaving Kate and Jack together); adding of new characters (Matthew Abaddon and the new parachutist guy); and an event to look forward to (Some sort of clash that allows the Oceanic 6 off the island.)
Plus I like how everyone on the internet is going crazy searching for clues in everything from Hurley's drawing, to the stuff on the blackboard. It's crazy, but good story telling keeps people coming back for more.

Day 88

2008-01-31T16:54:00.001-08:00

Today Jill and I ventured back over to the Warner Bros. gate to strike with the sitcom writers. We arrived just after nine and there was already a good crowd, which grew a bit more. Fortunately it was sunny and actually quite warm.

There I met a couple Michigan alumni, the first guy graduated back in '89 (!). We talked about the Frieze building being torn down and randomly enough Pizza House, because he lived right near there and I used to work there. He works on Rules of Engagement, but did other jobs on Just Shoot Me and his advice was helpful, among it was to always consider writing a screenplay -- especially if you want to get into comedy. His other tip was when speccing to do something the show would never do -- like he and his partner wrote a Friends spec that involved something like Monica dating a black guy and Rachel macing him. The other Michigan writer was one of the former Disney Fellowship people who, along with her writing partner, is on Notes from the Underbelly. They did a My Name is Earl spec and we talked about how I was working on an Ugly Betty spec and how that show is hard because of all the characters, six acts, etc. They agreed with my decision to set my spec back when Wilhelmina was still at Mode. The other Disney Fellow we met was on Samantha Who? and also offered us some good advice.

We also met a few other wanna-be writers, a guy who went to NYU and just moved to LA four months ago and a girl who actually goes to USC, but is in the Masters writing program. After we walked for almost two hours, we paused and joined the crowd gathered around Everybody Loves Philip Rosenthal and Jay Kogen from The Simpsons while they dispensed advice and insight on all that goes into making a sitcom. I still didn't say anything to Phil -- maybe next time -- the third time is the charm after all.

The Bucket List

2008-01-29T22:04:00.000-08:00

Tonight I saw a movie with my parents who are in town visiting. The last time they saw a movie in the theaters was when they paid me a visit in August and we saw The Bourne Ultimatum. Just like last time, I had seen pretty much everything in theaters that I wanted to see, and so they chose The Bucket List because they're old. The basic premise of the film is two dying cancer patients meet at the hospital, one a blue collar mechanic Carter Chambers (Morgan Freeman) the other the billionaire hospital owner Edward Cole (Jack Nicholson) and so when they enter remission they decide to make the most out of the last 6 - 12 months of their lives and concoct a "Bucket List" -- a list of things they want to do before they die.
The movie it seems -- from the commercials anyway-- would be a comedy, but it's not, it's far too serious and not fun enough to laugh along with. The two stars play pretty much standard characters for themselves, which makes the predictable plot even more dull. Not only that, but the characters aren't even believable -- the billionaire gets stuck sharing a room in his hospital, I think he'd go to another hospital then and Carter, a mechanic for 46 years who never got the chance to finish his post-secondary education because he had to raise a family, is totally unbelievable. I find it impossible that someone as smart as him couldn't figure out a way to support his family and finish school. As for the predictable plot, at times it felt like I was watching a Lifetime movie that was remade with male leads. Not only was their bucket list rather cliché, but on top of that they film it all on sound stages with horrific green screens -- not that it matters since they don't really take advantage of the variety of locations the pair visit. In the end the movie comes across as something that seems like we've seen before -- from the characters and the actors who played them, from the story and list, if that was the best they could have done maybe it's time they kick the bucket. C-
The trailer pretty much sums up (spoils) the entire movie from the beginning to the end (plus some of the only funny moments) and if you can't figure out the ending from watching it you must have some sort of mental problem. F

It's Always Sunny in USC

2008-01-28T22:45:00.000-08:00

Tonight I was very fortunate to have been invited as Jill's "+1" to attend a USC class (which she isn't even in) -- Television Symposium. Tonight we watched three episodes of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia (after watching USC Professor Howard Rosenberg's clip of a Hard Copy story on him as well as an equally old clip of the Howard Stern Show making a shrine to him because he called the show an enema, which they took as a compliment) which was followed by a Q&A with the show's creators and stars -- Rob McElhenney, Glenn Howerton, and Charlie Day.

They were really funny guys and from their demeanor it seems like they care a lot about the show and making people laugh -- which they succeed at tremendously. The show is fairly unique in that they have a lot of creative freedom and aren't forced by the network to make a lot changes -- in fact they said the network (FX) told them to go a little further in the beginning. The show began as an idea for a scene -- a guy is in a room with his friend and his friend reveals a secret -- that he has cancer and is dying -- making the guy uncomfortable and wanting to leave. They actually shot a pilot themselves, using their apartments as the sets (originally it was supposed to be about struggling actors in LA who were waiters) and after everyone liked it, it was picked up and reshot and set in Philadelphia. They mentioned that they felt like they needed to shoot the pilot so they could capture the show's tone, which doesn't necessarily translate off the script. Originally they were going for a short film, but realized it worked better as a TV show and that's how one of the funniest shows on air right now came to be.

They talked about the process of their writing and juggling their other tasks -- they had about two and a half months to write season 3's fifteen episodes (so they enlisted the help of a few other writers) and then they went and shot the episodes and then they edited the shows, resulting in 10 months worth of work where they don't even know if it's funny any more. It sounds like a lot of hard work, but when it's something you're dedicated to and have fun doing it all pays off -- I wish I could have a job like that, or any job really. There were some comparisons made between the characters and Seinfeld, and of course people asked about the state of the sitcom. The traditional sitcom is slowly dying -- but How I Met Your Mother is a rare exception (Back to You still needs to improve and The New Adventures of Old Christine is too hit or miss.) They also talked about getting Danny DeVito to come on board (his kids were fans of the show) as well as how long they'd like to see the show run -- six seasons or so, enough to make it syndication. All in all you know they're having fun and passionate about the show and it comes across on the screen and in the product they deliver.

America's Guiliest Pleasure

2008-01-26T17:57:00.001-08:00

Another weekend, another ANTM (America's Next Top Model) marathon on MTV. Despite having seen each "cycle" and knowing what happens, despite the winners being rigged, and despite the fact that none of them actually go on to be "top" models -- in others despite the fact that the competition is a complete joke -- the marathons are addictive.

Chalk it up to several factors:
Formulaic. Each episode has a challenge, a photo shoot and then the judge's panel. There's a comfort in knowing what to expect and excitement to see how they vary up the predictable -- like what theme the photo shoot will take, etc.
Editing. The show isn't afraid to show how stupid the contestants are by showing some of the dumbest talking heads (i.e. all of Jade's or Natasha's), and when they try to lie or pass the buck they'll flashback to show you what happened (i.e. Brit blaming her taxi for not picking her up on the go-see challenge.)
Girls. There's a good blend of personalities from the stupid girls to the girls who think they are smart (but are really stupid) and seeing the pretty girls struggle through being "fierce" enough for the photo shoots and the ridiculous challenges is funny. Put all the contestants together and you have their catty personalities, constant trash talking, and the icing on the cake -- complete ignorance that winning the competition isn't going to advance their modeling career any more than coming in second.
Glamor. Photo shoots, make-overs, fashion, catwalks, Couture -- or at least a watered down version.
Tyra. For initiating and propelling the shame that is ANTM. Even better is when she tries to play Oprah Jr. and teach the girls that it's really on the inside that counts -- before dismissing them for reasons on the outside. Even funnier is when they drag girls into the final four or three and then dash their dreams based on an unchangeable reason -- either being too short or photo older.

Searches & Seizures

2008-01-25T20:25:00.000-08:00

Last year I read the wonderful book, Reading Like A Writer, and slowly, in between reading new releases and nonfiction, I've been making my way through the list of books in the back under the heading "Books to Be Read Immediately." This is how I ended up reading Stanley Elkin's collection of novellas from the 70s entitled Searches & Seizures.

As the title suggests in each of the three novellas the protagonist goes on a search -- for a criminal, a love, and the deceased, each search ending with a seizure of sorts that vie for some of the strangest plot twists ever. The three stories -- "The Bailbondsman," "The Making of Ashenden," and "The Condominium" -- have alienated protagonists, a Phoenician bail bondsman, a rich heir, and a struggling young man. All though each of the protagonists are very different men, at times they sound the same, but if anything it's a product of Elkin's swift and whimsical writing. The highlight of this work is Elkin's writing, particularly his amazing sentences. In addition each of the stories are injected with humor that never feels dated, including the most awkward conversation at a funeral and an encounter with a bear that goes in the last place you thought it would (I made the mistake of finishing The Making of Ashenden, where this incident takes place, right before going to bed.) Even with all this humor and and surprises, the stories are well crafted with genuine emotion and depth.

The stories are well worth reading for the lunatic scenarios, the surprising twists, inventive humor and of course those unbelievable sentences -- but will most likely be appreciated by those who are into reading and writing.

Day 81

2008-01-24T19:23:00.000-08:00

Jill and I headed over to Warner Bros. Gate 2 today for "MEDICAL DRAMA DAY." We paced back and forth while the threat of rain loomed over and after a hour or so we finally gained enough courage to talk to other people. We talked with Shannon from ER, who was extremely friendly and did the best in answering our lame questions. We also met two nice, wanna-be writers like us -- Will from UCLA and Julie from the west side. Among the topics of conversation were: me and my unbeliefs, Jill knowing Priscilla, me bombing my last job interview (and my subsequent running in the rain to get my mind off of it), the fact that I baked S'more cupcakes, apple turnovers and brownies this week, Jill's classes at USC, the truck that sped by and nearly hit us while we were standing on the curb, etc.

Halfway through the picketing there was a huddle where a strike captain mentioned how certain high profile writers might be urging the negotiating committee to accept an unfair deal so they can get back to work, and told us that we shouldn't like a vocal minority run things and to write the negotiating committee and be the vocal majority.

We stayed for over two hours; it rained near the end, so almost everyone huddled under the parking garage entrance and chatted. Jill was happy to get her celebrity sighting as Nia Vardalos came by with pizza provided by someone whose name I didn't catch (sorry). Then, like the light at the end of the tunnel, the sun came out of the clouds that were parting ways, like a married couple who decided to get a divorce and part ways, and we were able to walk back to my car without getting wet.* We plan on coming back next week to talk with the writers (and not be as lame when we talk with them) as well as strike elsewhere in our attempt to strike at all the locations.

*Intentionally terrible metaphors.

Who's Going to Fly This Thing Now?

2008-01-23T20:51:00.000-08:00

Yet another effect of the strike, NBC announced it will do away with the expensive pilots. "Networks like NBC have long relied on big-budget pilot episodes of television series in an effort to attract advertiser support for the rest of the season. But Mr. Zucker said the pilots, the first episode of a show and whose production cost has shot up to $7 million for an hour from about $3 million three years ago, were a poor indicator of the future success of a series and many never move beyond the pilot stage."

NBC isn't the only one doing this -- CBS has cut orders as did FOX and the CW. It is a hard and a little unfair to judge a series by its pilot, but on the other hand when they're spending $7 million on an hour of TV it better be damn good -- but then again look at how much they spend on movies and they still churn out crap. It makes sense that they'd want to get rid of this unnecessary expenditures, but then again they're the ones signing off on the bloated budgets in the first place. I guess when the strike is settled and a new scripted TV season is upon us we'll see the effects of this cost-cutting decision.

(I'm aware of how unoriginal the photo is.)
[Source]

Oscars!

2008-01-22T21:22:00.000-08:00

Here's the list of the nominations for the Academy Awards. For the first time -- ever -- I've seen all the films in the best picture category. I've all seen the majority of the films nominated in the acting categories (except leading actress, I only saw Juno)

Best motion picture of the year
"Atonement" (Focus Features) A Working Title Production: Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner and Paul Webster, Producers "Juno" (Fox Searchlight) A Dancing Elk Pictures, LLC Production: Lianne Halfon, Mason Novick and Russell Smith, Producers "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.) A Clayton Productions, LLC Production: Sydney Pollack, Jennifer Fox and Kerry Orent, Producers "No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage) A Scott Rudin/Mike Zoss Production: Scott Rudin, Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, Producers "There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax) A JoAnne Sellar/Ghoulardi Film Company Production: JoAnne Sellar, Paul Thomas Anderson and Daniel Lupi, Producers
Should win: Either Juno or No Country for Old Men (I saw both early in their respective releases -- so I was one of those people hyping them for everyone else.)
Will win: Either No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood.

Performance by an actor in a leading role
George Clooney in "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.) Daniel Day-Lewis in "There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax) Johnny Depp in "Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street" (DreamWorks and Warner Bros., Distributed by DreamWorks/Paramount) Tommy Lee Jones in "In the Valley of Elah" (Warner Independent) Viggo Mortensen in "Eastern Promises" (Focus Features)
Should win: Daniel Day-Lewis (he makes the movie.)
Will win: Daniel Day-Lewis

Performance by an actor in a supporting role
Casey Affleck in "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" (Warner Bros.) Javier Bardem in "No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage) Philip Seymour Hoffman in "Charlie Wilson's War" (Universal) Hal Holbrook in "Into the Wild" (Paramount Vantage and River Road Entertainment) Tom Wilkinson in "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.)
Should win: Javier Bardem (it's hard to be a creepy character.)
Will win: Javier Bardem

Performance by an actress in a leading role
Cate Blanchett in "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" (Universal) Julie Christie in "Away from Her" (Lionsgate) Marion Cotillard in "La Vie en Rose" (Picturehouse) Laura Linney in "The Savages" (Fox Searchlight) Ellen Page in "Juno" (Fox Searchlight)
Should win: I only saw Ellen Page's performance, but I hear Julie Christie was amazing.
Will win: Julie Christie

Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Cate Blanchett in "I'm Not There" (The Weinstein Company) Ruby Dee in "American Gangster" (Universal) Saoirse Ronan in "Atonement" (Focus Features) Amy Ryan in "Gone Baby Gone" (Miramax) Tilda Swinton in "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.)
Should win: Saoirse Ronan or Tilda Swinton (Ronan was amazing in Atonement, while I couldn't help going back and forth on whether or not I felt sorry for Swinton's character or hated her in Michael Clayton. Amy Ryan was great too, I just thought she wasn't in the film enough -- though she was in it more than Ruby Dee was in American Gangster.)
Will win: Cate Blanchett or (maybe) Tilda Swinton.

Best animated feature film of the year
"Persepolis" (Sony Pictures Classics): Marjane Satrapi and Vincent Paronnaud "Ratatouille" (Walt Disney): Brad Bird "Surf's Up" (Sony Pictures Releasing): Ash Brannon and Chris Buck
Should win: Ratatouille ( As good as Persepolis was, nothing beats Brad Bird and Pixar.)
Will win: Ratatouille

Achievement in directing
"The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" (Miramax/Pathé Renn), Julian Schnabel "Juno" (Fox Searchlight), Jason Reitman "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.), Tony Gilroy "No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage), Joel Coen and Ethan Coen "There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax), Paul Thomas Anderson
Should win: Either The Diving Bell and the Butterfly or No Country for Old Men (the former because it was really amazing how they captured the feeling of being paralyzed, the latter because the movie never felt as long as it was, something that can't be said for Michael Clayton and There Will Be Blood (as good as they were it's true). Juno was good, but nothing special in the directing category.)
Will win: Either There Will Be Blood or No Country for Old Men

Best documentary feature
"No End in Sight" (Magnolia Pictures) A Representational Pictures Production: Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs "Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience" (The Documentary Group) A Documentary Group Production: Richard E. Robbins "Sicko" (Lionsgate and The Weinstein Company) A Dog Eat Dog Films Production: Michael Moore and Meghan O'Hara "Taxi to the Dark Side" (THINKFilm) An X-Ray Production: Alex Gibney and Eva Orner "War/Dance" (THINKFilm) A Shine Global and Fine Films Production: Andrea Nix Fine and Sean Fine
I didn't see any documentaries this year. I wanted to see No End in Sight though and hear it was great.

Best foreign language film of the year
"Beaufort" Israel "The Counterfeiters" Austria "Katyn" Poland "Mongol" Kazakhstan "12" Russia
I saw none of these. :(

Adapted screenplay
"Atonement" (Focus Features), Screenplay by Christopher Hampton "Away from Her" (Lionsgate), Written by Sarah Polley "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" (Miramax/Pathé Renn), Screenplay by Ronald Harwood "No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage), Written for the screen by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen "There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax), Written for the screen by Paul Thomas Anderson
Should win: I missed Away From Her, but I'm going to say No Country for Old Men.
Will win: I honestly have no clue.

Original screenplay
"Juno" (Fox Searchlight), Written by Diablo Cody "Lars and the Real Girl" (MGM), Written by Nancy Oliver "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.), Written by Tony Gilroy "Ratatouille" (Walt Disney), Screenplay by Brad Bird; Story by Jan Pinkava, Jim Capobianco, Brad Bird "The Savages" (Fox Searchlight), Written by Tamara Jenkins
Should win: I only missed The Savages; of the rest the most original was either Lars and the Real Girl or Ratatouille.
Will win: No clue.
[Picture credit]

Breaking Bad

2008-01-21T16:11:00.000-08:00

AMC's second foray into the original scripted TV series is proving the cable channel has what it takes to make quality television with captivating characters and that Mad Men wasn't a lucky fluke. Here's a look at their newest show, Breaking Bad.Premise: High school chemistry teacher and part-time car washing attendant Walter White suffers a mid-life crisis after being diagnosed with lung cancer and decides to start a meth lab with a former student of his.
The show was created by Vince Gilligan (who also directed the pilot.)
Review: Bryan Cranston stars in a break-out role as Walter White, the nothing-left-to-lose loser who bakes the meth in his tighty-whities not wanting to get the stench on his regular clothes. He gives a remarkable performance that is worthy tuning into alone. Anna Gunn plays his wife, Skylar, who remains semi-detached; their romance is limited to her jacking him off with one hand and typing on her laptop with the other. Rounding out the Whites is their physically challenged son played by RJ Mitte, offering something different than the typical three member family. The show is filled with dark humor which has no fear testing its limits. Some of the funniest moments come from the verte -- the family eating breakfast which consists of band-aid smelly veggie bacon, Skylar and her sister talks Marie, talk about her writing, etc. Setting the show in Albuquerque also provides a nice change of environment with the location nicely symbolic of the barren wasteland that was Walter's life. The plot unfolds nicely in the pilot, teaming Walter with unsavory characters as his former student, Jesse, who failed in chemistry and other meth dealers -- though it runs close to crossing over into Weeds' territory. The show has great potential with conflicted and interesting characters that are worth caring about.
Bottom line: Break out performance, dark humor, and drama.
Rating: * * * 1/2
Airs on AMC on Sundays at 10:00 PM.

Cloverfield

2008-01-18T15:37:00.001-08:00

Today I went to an early afternoon showing of the J.J. Abrams produced movie Cloverfield. The basic premise is pretty obvious, but to state it again, a group of friends celebrate their one friend's (Rob) promotion on the eve before he takes off to Japan for his new job, which happens to be the same night a giant monster attacks New York City.
Overall it was a wildly successful film. The first act lags as Rob's best bud, Hud, films everyone's testimonials for a video of the party. Though it introduces us to the characters a bit and there's a dash of cheesy humor as Hud pines for Marlena, you still just want to get to the attack -- but I appreciated the approach as it makes it more realistic in that a large bunk of the tape would be of the party (what it was intended to film.) Once the action gets going it's a frantic rush of shaky camera shots with glimpses of the monster and total destruction. The first person perspective is effective in showing us something new in a tired premise of "_______ destroys New York City." The acting in general is spot on and very convincing aided by the fact that most of the actors are unknowns or little knowns. Since I watched an episode of "Carpoolers" I recognized T.J. Miller (Hud) who is the cameraman the entire time, but still hearing his dumb comments at times made me recall his really dumb character, Marmaduke, on the show. I also recognized the pretty and Canadian Jessica Lucas from TV's short-lived Life As We Know It, but that was a while ago so I didn't mistake her for a high school student at all; Lizzy Caplan (from CBS's major bomb The Class) also does a good job with her rather underdeveloped character. The story unfolds rather naturally though given the way it's presented (as a tape found in Central Park and now property of the Department of Defense) you can't be too certain on how things end, where the monster came from (did the government create it?) and in the end you're left with your imagination to fill in the blanks. While I have no problem with this approach, I'm sure others will complain of not being spoon fed. All in all it's a fun and exciting film that shouldn't be missed seeing on the big screen. B+
In case anyone has missed the trailer, it is probably the best trailer ever, giving away very little of the plot while building immense excitement. A

Politics Tackling the Media (Almost Literally)

2008-01-17T19:59:00.000-08:00

First Bill Clinton gets "heated" with a reporter -- after a reporter asked him about a lawsuit in Nevada challenging the caucuses being held in casinos. Bill denied the Clinton campaign had any affiliation with the lawsuit, argued that the voting in the casino caucuses will be worth five times other people's votes, and told the reporter he was taking an "accusatory tone" with him.
Then John Edwards attacks the media, saying they're inadequately and unfairly cutting him out of the presidential campaign picture. He stated the news is focusing on the "celebrity" candidates and ignoring his strong showing in Iowa and his competitive nature in upcoming elections in Nevada and his home state of South Carolina. His camp is even suggesting his low poll numbers are directly related to the lack of news coverage of his campaign.

And finally Mitt Romney, showing no bounds on how big of a tool he is, got in a verbal tiff with an Associated Press reporter after his campaign denied that no Washington lobbyists are running his campaign. To quote the Romster: "Did you hear what I said Glen? I said I don't have lobbyists running my campaign and he's not running my campaign. He's an adviser."

So there you have it, two legitimate blow ups at the media and Mitt Romney being a tool (in a Staples store no less).
[Source]

How Do You Spell 'Copyright?'

2008-01-16T17:12:00.000-08:00

Just today Hasbro and Mattel are asking makers of the popular Facebook application, Scrabulous to remove the application due to copyright / intellectual property infringement issues. The odds of this happening seem unlikely as on Sunday's 60 Minutes Leslie Stahl interviewed Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg who had added the application and mentioned he was even playing his grandparents in a couple of games.

Though it might be difficult for the makers to deny infringing on Scrabble, seeing as on their website they lazily listed the Wikiepedia entry for "Scrabble" as a link where players can check out the rules of the game:
Of course all they have to do is change the board around a bit, alter the tiles' scores, and modify the amount of tiles in the game and they'll be safe. I mean, it worked for Yahoo!'s Literati. But then again Literati isn't as fun as Scrabble. Also, how does Scrabulous have 30 employees?
Is there really that much to do?
[Source, Source]

Persepolis

2008-01-15T19:07:00.001-08:00

Persepolis is the mostly black and white French animated film from Marjane Satrapi about her personal odyssey as she spent her childhood growing up in theocratic Tehran amid the turbulent Iran-Iraq War, her adolescence in Europe struggling to fit in, and her return home to Iran in early adulthood to find the political situation even worse.The film works wonders as a simple animation with a natural blend of humor, heart-breaking tragedy, and ultimately hope. Much of theses strengths are a result of the way it's poetically edited in that the memories, whether it's a poignant turning point in her life or just a fond moment that stands out, are patched together to form a quilt of her life growing up. Despite being black and white, the characters are full of color, particularly Marjane's grandma guides Marjane with her advice, including putting flowers in her bra first thing in the morning so she can smell fresh. Marjane herself is a wonderful lead, an outspoken and free-spirited girl who loves Bruce Lee and hates ABBA. She's not a perfect person and isn't afraid to show her flaws. Additionally the film brings to light a first-person history of living in the anti-Western nation during a turning point in its history providing insight without feeling it's lecturing. B+ The trailer for the film doesn't spoil anything and showcases the humor and themes that you can expect to find in the film as well as the visual treats of the animation. A
[Images credit]

Faking the Story

2008-01-14T21:16:00.000-08:00

What happens when a political race gets boring? What will the news report on? The answer: They'll make their own story:
Without context: Former President Clinton called Barack Obama's campaign to be president a "fairytale."
With context: Former President Clinton said: "It is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war... There's no difference in your voting record, and Hillary's, ever since. Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."
What the news is reporting: "Some people" or "black radio, black blogs and cable television" are offended by Clinton's "Fairytale" remark, deeming it racially insensitive and are outraged.
What the news should be reporting: Ignorant people are erroneously taking offense to a sound byte that Bill Clinton said on the eve of the New Hampshire primary regarding Obama misrepresenting himself on the Iraq war, mistaking it for an insidious comment dismissing a black man running for president.
It's one thing for this type of editing to be in a "reality show" in the vein of America's Next Top Model, but for major news stations to waste so much time reporting on such a non-issue when there are many significant issues -- the failing economy, the war in Iraq, healthcare, etc. -- that should be the focus of the campaign, it is pathetic and loses the sense of integrity that these institutions should possess. Of course they rather focus on the ignorants' reaction rather than clarify, so this snowballs further by analyzing everything that is said with some sort of racial slant in mind:
Without context: Hillary Clinton said, "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964"
With context: Hillary Clinton said "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the President before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done. That dream became a reality, the power of that dream became a real in peoples lives because we had a president who said we are going to do it, and actually got it accomplished."
What the news is reporting: Hillary's remarks about MLK are angering "some members of black community," who see her as re-writing history and downplaying Dr. Martin Luther King's role in the civil-rights movement.
What the news should be reporting: Ignorant people are erroneously taking offense to a sound byte that Hillary Clinton said in an interview when she was attempting to distinguish herself as a "doer" like the experienced Lyndon Johnson and Barack Obama as a "sayer" like the young President Kennedy, mistaking it for a comment that downplays Dr. Martin Luther King's role in the civil-rights movement.

This licentious news coverage leads to the candidates having to comment on the issue since the media hounds them with questions, resulting in them trying to pin the blame on each other (because if they blamed the media then the media would only scrutinize them further) and allowing prominent figures to vocalize their own ignorance -- quoting Black Entertainment Television founder Bob Johnson: "As an African American, I'm frankly insulted that the Obama campaign would imply that we are so stupid that we would think Bill and Hillary Clinton, who have been deeply and emotionally involved in black issues when Barack Obama was doing something in the neighborhood that I won't say what he was doing, but he said it in his book." And the press furthers reports on this because it creates interesting headlines and makes it appear as though there was a division when there really isn't. Kudos for MSNBC's Dan Abrams for not falling into this trap and criticizing those who did. And all this because South Carolina is next for the Democrats and black people finally get to vote. You'd think with the word "change" on everyone's mind the media would change its approach and follow the issues; instead they stick with sensationalism.

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles

2008-01-13T13:21:00.000-08:00

Fox's heavily promoted big premiere of it's action series Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles premieres tonight, so here's my (early) review:
Premise: Picking up after Terminator 2, the series follows Sarah and John Connor in 1999 as they evade the government and terminators with the aide of a terminator sent to protect John all while they try to bring down Skynet. (I guess we ignore what happens in Terminator 3?) The pilot was written by Josh Friedman (writer of War of the Worlds and The Black Dahlia)
Review: Thomas Dekker (the sexually ambiguous Zach on Heroes) plays the teen-aged future hero, who struggles to come to terms with his fate. Lena Heady plays Sarah Connor, the butch, do-as-I-say-or-you'll-die mother who'll do anything to save her son (and the future.) Too often she's too intense and when she attempts to show emotion it's almost laughable. Summer Glau plays the good terminator, Cameron, who successfully evokes robotic mannerisms with her movements and dialogue: ""My dad sells tractors, what about yours?" As for the story, it begins with a gimmicky, clichéd dream-sequence opening that immediately lowers expectations. The plot never really advances -- Sarah's emotionless voice-over filling in the gaps between events. Those events in between are the action sequences, which the franchise is known for. They are at times impressive, yet this is reduced once you realize they are all chase sequences with the Connors running away from the terminator, all while shooting back at him, even though they know that it won't even slow the machine down. Not that you're ever worried about anyone dying since the series hinges on the mother-son duo. Can they throw in some other characters that we care about who could die? The other "dramatic" non-action oriented scenes are often ruined by basic daytime soap opera staging. In the end it's not terrible, but the show feels a little stretched in how things are arranged to transfer the terminator story into a television saga. Considering this is the pilot which is setting things up, it's best to be a little forgiving on the plot. Less forgiving is the dialogue, in which there are several on-the-nose and cringe-worthy lines (mostly from Sarah): "No one is ever safe" and "Half an hour. One bag. Plus the guns. I'll make pancakes." Maybe with more time a story will lay itself out there, the characters will be fleshed out, and the dialogue will improve (along with Lena Headey's acting).
Bottom line: The most interesting character is a robot -- take that for what it's worth.
Rating: * * 1/2
Premieres tonight at 8:00 PM on FOX and airs regularly on Monday nights at 9:00 PM starting tomorrow.

Impression Management on Facebook

2008-01-12T17:59:00.000-08:00

Everyday we change and shift our appearance or behavior based on the people, environment and circumstances surrounding us, a behavior otherwise known as impression management. It’s not just about creating the best “first impression” for a given situation; rather it’s also about strategically creating interpersonal relationships with other people by highlighting certain aspects of your life over others while still creating an accurate impression of who you are. Yet when a person takes their “self” online by creating a virtual profile on social networking sites there is only one impression they can make – a take-it or leave-it creation of the self that everyone who is a virtual friend (or even a stranger browsing through profiles) can see. While the sites do provide users the opportunity to make only certain information available to certain users, it still doesn’t provide the users an ability to modify the information; they can only block it. So users end up crafting their profiles, skewing things to shine a certain light on themselves, but problems can arise when people decide to leave everything out there: photos of underage college students drinking beer – they may impress one’s peers, yet leave a totally different impression to a professor or prospective employer; religious views may entice others of the same faith to share in one’s beliefs, yet put off those who don’t place the same value in religion or spirituality; listing one’s favorite media—music, TV shows, and films—may make one appear cultured, pretentious or shallow depending on what is listed. In a way unlike anything experienced in the real world, users must struggle with creating an identity of themselves that can appeal to multiple people all at once, effectively juggling their various personality traits and quirks, downplaying or omitting certain characteristic flaws, and highlighting universal strengths. The problem is what happens when one can no longer keep everything in the air? I think they’ll simply log out, permanently.

Facebook distinguishes itself from other “social networking” site by not referring to itself as a networking site. Rather it describes itself as “a social utility that connects you with the people around you.”[1] The difference between the two according to Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg is Facebook is about maintaining real-life relationships online not forging new ones: “That's a really big difference between Facebook and a lot of other sites. We're not thinking about ourselves as a community — we're not trying to build a community — we're not trying to make new connections.” [2] Social networking sites, like Myspace, then are about meeting people online—whom you may or may not have met in person—through shared interests, beliefs, and jobs, while Facebook is about keeping in contact with people that you first met elsewhere (possibly in person) and maintaining (and building) some sort of relationship or “connection” with them online.

So a user’s profile on Facebook is not meant for strangers to judge them, it’s about staying connected with people they already know; however, not everyone knows a person the same way. Too often news programs interview a criminal suspect's friends and family and they’ll say how they can’t believe that the suspect committed the crime and the person police describe is not the person they know. Yet when the police interview an accomplice, the accomplice will recognize the criminal suspect’s behavior as normal. This doesn’t just apply to criminals with double lives, but everyone – it could be someone who is quiet and independent during the work day, but boisterous and friendly on the weekends and hopelessly romantic with their significant other. Yet when you look at someone’s profile you learn about the person the same way as any else does; there is no context. You see the one side of them that they created their profile to show (even if that one side is a composite of multiple sides of them) through the photos they upload, which books they’ve (claimed to) read, what music they listen to, what their general hobbies are, and who else they know. What about the cute guy or gal you just added to your friends? They too will be able to see as much about you as your lifelong pal who you’ve known since the third grade.

Facebook’s answer to this is by blocking the information with the option of a “limited profile.” With the limited profile, users select individual friends or friends from an entire “region” or “network” and limit the parts of their profile they want them to see. If that football player doesn’t want his teammates to know that Oprah is one of his favorite TV shows then he can block his favorite TV shows from all his teammates and hide his embarrassment. The problem with the “limited profile” is it’s still an all-or-nothing component. One can’t simply limit anyone from seeing their favorite TV shows, let alone just “Oprah” from being listed under their favorite TV shows; they have to block all of their personal information, which includes their activities, favorite TV shows, movies, music and quotes. This doesn’t reflect reality, where in person if a teammate asked you what your interests you might omit a guilty pleasure from the list, while if a potential love interest asked you, you might be inclined to admit watching that estrogen-filled show, reading that overly sentimental book, or liking that emo music to show one of your more sensitive sides. Likewise you can’t block users from seeing individual photos, rather you have to bury the entire album; you can’t block that one hilarious drunk video you posted, you have to hide all of your highly regarded, cinematographic videos; you can’t block being “friends” with certain individuals, you have to reveal all of your connections or none.

There are other viable solutions for users faced with this all-or-nothing dilemma. One option is to simply omit the information in general or only post the information that you want everyone—from your mother to that one night stand—to know. Yet by taking this minimalist approach you will probably be participating less (you really liked National Treasure: Book of Secrets – oh wait, you’re “friends” with a Film School Graduate who’ll laugh at you – you better not post it), chances are you won’t be updating your profile as often, and the need to use the site – and for users to connect to you through the site – will diminish.[3] Another option is to create multiple profiles specific to certain friends with the information you want them to know about you contained within each profile. The problem with this is it violates Facebook’s Terms of Use, in which you agree not to “register for more than one User account.”[4] Furthermore it would be awkward to tell people to “friend” the profile of you that has the photo of you wearing a tie and not the one with the photo of you puking in the corner from a night of binge drinking.

This creates a dilemma for users when it comes to decide what information to share. One study even shows that privacy concerns are an important issue to the users of Facebook.[5] Given that waves of protests formed over privacy concerns when Facebook initially introduced the “news feed” as well as its “social advertising” program, Beacon, it shows the need to retain some discretion with virtual friends. The “news feed” provides time stamped updates of what users have been posting or changing on their profile (in addition to selected advertisements). The problem users had with the feature was they didn’t want all of their friends that they’ve added over the years to constantly be filled in with day-by-day or hour-by-hour changes in their lives. Accordingly the protests “drew an impressive 8 percent of users” and once Facebook provided users with options to select what information would be displayed in the news feed “they quickly subsided.”[6] Likewise, with the launching of Beacon, Facebook drew another round of protests. Under the program when users bought items from certain third-party sellers the information would be distributed in the news feed, meant to mimic a word of mouth endorsement, but ultimately looked like personalized ads with the user’s profile picture next to the product without requiring authorization. Naturally a user may want her sorority sisters to know she bought some panties at Victoria’s Secret, but she wouldn’t be telling her professor about the deal she snagged. The problem with this was the online boundaries that Facebook provided were dismantled as users’ Facebook identity was followed beyond the Facebook site, forcing users to have to maintain the one identity they crafted elsewhere on the web. Again after protests, which included moveon.org, the company changed the Beacon program from an opt-out to an opt-in system. This lack of ample solutions shows that users will have to make a choice on what they want to share, and when that choice becomes a burden the simplest solution will be blocking the information. But once the majority of the information is blocked or it becomes too difficult to balance the need to share information with concerns about one’s personal privacy, the only other solution is deleting the account altogether.

Through these privacy concerns it has become apparent that users would like to have some sort of impression management option online so they can manage how much certain “friends” know about them. The solution I see for Facebook would be to offer people more chances to modify levels of openness for their profile so that they can reveal all their information for their close friends or family, less for acquaintances, and selected information for co-workers or objects of affection – so that they don’t have to block out all the information, rather layer it. With the different levels of openness, or layers, users would be able to modify the specifics in their information, include only certain photos in albums, etc. and then select which friends would see this layer, much in the same manner users can place certain friends under their limited profile. For instance let’s say your favorite book is the incredibly sappy For One More Day, but you didn’t want your college literature professor—or any professor—to frown upon this choice because you would never admit this to them in person. You would then create a new layer for your profile, label it “professors,” add your professors (and anyone else who will (and should) judge you on your literary tastes) to this profile, and simply delete For One More Day from your favorite books and maybe put a more academic choice like Hamlet. (Likewise, I’m sure Rudy Giuliani’s daughter would have preferred only select friends knowing that she supported Barrack Obama over her father for President, or even more recently high school students in Minneapolis who were suspended from school probably wished only select friends saw photos of them at a party on Facebook.) Additionally users could have a specific “search” photo and profile that would appear in the search results regardless of who is searching for them, and when adding a new friend (or being added as someone’s friend) the user would have the option to select which layer of their profile would be visible to their new friend to view much in the same way that one can add “details” about how they met their friends. This way users can gradually let people they’ve just met know more about themselves using their own discretion, just like they would had they continually met up in person.

How individuals represent themselves in person varies upon which friend they’re with and which setting they’re in, but with Facebook you can only be one person. The potential problem Facebook may have with varying layers of one’s profile is the possibility to misrepresent oneself because the misrepresentation of oneself is actually a violation of Facebook’s company policy.[7] However, one study actually showed that people are honest about themselves and who they are on personal homepages with personal information.[8] Any lies or “misrepresentations” are more or less fibs with details modified to describe who they’d like to be or an ideal version of themselves. If people were to try and abuse this feature and lie about all their interests to certain people – and nothing is really stopping them from doing that now – it could create some controversy.[9] But unlike Myspace or social networking sites, Facebook is supposed to about maintaining connections with people you’ve previously met elsewhere (most likely in person), which means it would be much more of a charade to remain in contact with this person while misrepresenting oneself, not to mention you could have other Facebook “friends” call you out. A way Facebook could combat this issue could be by making certain “basic” or “contact” information not available to be changed in different layers of their profiles though allow the information to be blocked. For example if a user didn’t want certain friends to know they’re dating someone they would be able to block that they were “in a relationship,” but they would not be able to change that information to state that they were “single.”

If Facebook wants to be taken seriously as a social utility and not a “networking site” it needs to understand that not all connections are the same. With some friends we are more open to revealing personal information while with other “friends” we maintain for professional reasons, and even other “friends” require some sort of context. What Facebook is forcing users to do is either open all the way up or don’t open up at all. Users create profiles that they can share their information about themselves so that that chick you met last week knows just as much about you as your best friend of ten years does. The site lacks an accurate way of impression management that is common – and necessary – in everyday life. The way people connect to others they have met is by viewing each others profiles; however the problem with this is its all in one approach: you either share everything about yourself or don’t, and if you expect your “friends” to share you can’t remain private yourself -- to get information one must share information. This tacit exchange that now runs Facebook is what marks it as a transparent online community – which young people have no problem being apart of, until it prevents them from getting that job, gets them arrested, or makes them stand out against the social norm in any other way. Ironically Facebook initially stood out for being private, users had to be part of colleges to gain access, but gradually the site went more and more public, eliminating many of the distinctions it had between other social networking sites such as Myspace. Yes, Facebook has changed the way people communicate with each other, allowing people to stay connected to people they might not otherwise keep in touch with and creating connections with people by revealing information about oneself that might not come up in everyday conversation, but it’s also easy for the site to promote a transparent society because they’re the ones profiting off of it (with niche marketing, which is requires a post of its own.) As the site continues to move toward making more and more of the personal public, it will likely draw more protests, like the ones against the news feed and Beacon features and users will show that not everyone wants to be a part of a transparent society. When these boundaries fade away, users will make privacy their own way, by logging out for good.

[1] Facebook.com

[2] Laura Locke. “The Future of Facebook” TIME July 16^th, 2007. http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1644040,00.html (accessed January 4^th, 2008)

[3] The home page for users is a “news feed” which timely updates users on what their Friends have been doing on Facebook, from changes made in their profile to which events they are attending. Furthermore, when a user clicks on “Friends” at the top banner it takes them to a page that lists their friends in order of most recent profile updates while listing the sections that were updated in their profile. This suggests that the sharing and updating of information is a key component in connecting with others using the social utility as the friends who update their profile more often are more visible to you on either of these two pages.

[4] Facebook.com

[5] Alessandro Acquisti and Ralph Gross. Imagined Communities: Awareness, Information Sharing, and Privacy on the Facebook, Workshop on Privacy-Enhancing Technologies (PET) 2006.

The survey’s results (taken from college students, staff and faculty) indicate “’Privacy Policy’ was on average considered a highly important issue on public debate” and was considered “a more important issue in the public debate than the threat of terrorism” (8). While most users were aware of the reach of their profile a “significant minority” is unaware of “the visibility of their profiles” (21). It is significant to note that this survey was taken before Facebook opened its site for all users and before the infamous “news feed” protest, which may have raised awareness among users over their privacy on the site.

[6] Ari Melber. “About Facebook,” The Nation, January 7^th, 2008, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080107/melber (accessed January 4th, 2008).

[7] In Facebook’s Terms of Use under “User Conduct” users consent not to use “the Service or Site” to “falsely state or otherwise misrepresent yourself, your age or your affiliation with any person or entity.”

[8] Simine Vazire and Samuel D. Gosling. “e-Perceptions: Personality Impressions Based on Personal Websites”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 87, no 1. 2004.

[9] In Facebook’s Terms of Use under “Facebook Pages” the company admits that “FACEBOOK DOES NOT PRE-SCREEN OR APPROVE FACEBOOK PAGES, AND CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT A FACEBOOK PAGE WAS ACTUALLY CREATED AND IS BEING OPERATED BY THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF A FACEBOOK PAGE.”

Cashmere Mafia

2008-01-09T14:23:00.000-08:00

Cashmere Mafia debuted on Sunday after Desperate Housewives (it dropped 50% of Desperate Housewives' lead-in) and airs again tonight. So without further ado, here's a look at Sunday's pilot.
Premise: Four gal pals from business school -- now successful career women in New York City-- try to find that balance of friends, relationships, and work. The series was created by Kevin Wade.
Review: The cast of women is headlined by Lucy Liu who plays Mia Mason, a workaholic publisher, who will do anything to get ahead, even if it costs her her relationship. Despite her varied wardrobe her character offers nothing really new to the cutthroat workaholic woman and the resulting storyline ends with the stereotypical imbalance of work success and romantic failure. Miranda Otto (Six Degrees) plays Juliet Draper, a married COO who allows her husband to cheat on her because he gives up so much to be with her and she rather come home to someone than be a single mom. Her character has potential to be interesting and dynamic, but in the pilot she comes across a bit like Bree Van De Kamp in trying to uphold her image. And if this were Desperate Housewives then Frances O'Connor's (she was the mom in A.I.) Zoe Burden would be Lynnette, and like Lynnette she is given the weakest of storylines -- the new nanny they hired turns out to be a dud. The only odd ball in the group is Caitlin Dowd, played by Bonnie Somerville (Kitchen Confidential, NYPD Blue), who -- after being dumped at breakfast by her boyfriend -- realizes she might be a lesbian. The only problem I had with her was things seemed to be unfolding a little easy for her, but given it was only the pilot, I expect more complications to come her way. As a whole the show is better than Lipstick Jungle, though it does suffer from bouts of on-the-nose dialogue (at least none of it was unintentionally funny) and too many moments where the women come to gather and support each other (listen to each other complain). The main issue with both the shows is that it simplifies reality down to the equation of: successful career = one's romantic life will suffer or vice versa. In all it leaves an impression of familiarity, like having seen the story lines and the characters elsewhere; maybe it will shape up to be something better, but given it only has seven episodes filmed there's not much time to give it a chance.
Bottom line: Been here, done that.
Rating: * *
Premiered last Sunday on ABC and airs Wednesdays at 10:00 PM

Trailer Trash

2008-01-08T20:12:00.000-08:00

With so few new releases being unleashed on the public in the next couple months, there's always hope when checking out trailers for films to be released even more in the future. One of the worst trailers I've seen lately is the one for Pride and Glory. In it's trailer the viewers are asked, When the line is drawn...
I say: I won't be standing because if I see this movie, I will be sitting in the theater. And either side of the line I'm standing isn't going to change the outcome of the movie. So why bother asking the question? (Also when one side of the line is labeled good and the other is labeled evil, is anyone going to honestly answer that they'll be on the evil side?) So does directly asking the audience a stupid question whose answer doesn't matter really a good marketing strategy? I guess we'll find out in March.

Lipstick Jungle

2008-01-06T15:34:00.000-08:00

Tonight is the premiere of ABC's Cashmere Mafia from Sex and the City creator, Darren Star. In a month NBC will air a similar series about middle aged women in the city based on another book by Candance Bushnell (author of the book Sex and the City) , Lipstick Jungle.
Premise: We follow the lives of three of New York City's "50 most successful women" -- Wendy Healey, a married CEO of a movie production company who struggles to balance her work with her husband and three kids; Nico Riley, an ambitious editor of a celebrity, political and culture magazine looking to become CEO as well as more passion in her love life that her academic husband can't provide; and Victory Ford (yes, Victory) a single fashion designer who's Fall line debuted to rotten reviews, risking her international fashion line.
Review: The series has a fairly solid cast with Kim Raver (24) as Nico Riley, Brooke Shields (postpartum depression-less) as Wendy, and Lindsay Price (Beverly Hills: 90210) as Victory Ford. The pilot does an amble effort in trying to show the many aspects of the characters' lives, yet in the end there's a bunch of cliche scenarios that don't look like they're venturing anywhere television viewers haven't been before. Of course this wouldn't be a problem had the characters been likable -- but they're not. Victory whines like a dependent adolescent -- when she reads the nasty reviews she cries for a cupcake to cheer her up -- how old is she? When she ends up dating a billionaire she cries in front of him too, but has the nerve to tell him at the end that she doesn't need to be rescued and that she's her own hero. Who the hell is she trying to fool? Not to mention she just sounds stupid, Victory: Joe, how do you make a billion dollars? Nico is the most successful, brash and brazen (a bitch and proud of it) of the trio. She's my favorite out of the three, probably because she's played by Kim Raver, but she also has the most interesting character. Though Wendy has found a partner, they've lost the romance and passion so she seeks it elsewhere, and -- my problem with her character -- this somehow puts her on the defensive. Wendy is her opposite by being too nice. Whenever she fights with her husband she always apologizes and ends up supporting him despite the fact that he hasn't had solid work in the past twelve years. Not to mention she hugs people when she fires them. The eventual break-down in her personal life is just as unbelievable as how she could be an executive with her 100% nice approach. The problem with the show is that the women are all so pathetic in their inability to juggle having jobs and having romantic relationships -- not because they have the problems, but because they complain about them more to their friends than they do trying to solve them. Many of the issues raised are plots seen on Desperate Housewives only with characters we actually care about. These issues with the story lines, plus silly nods such as showing the women put on lipstick and lip gloss, and a chick-flick soundtrack which includes Kelly Clarkson's "Miss Independent" makes it clear that this is a show for girls (despite seeing each of the main characters in their bra and panties various times throughout the show.) The show's success will be determined as to whether women find these characters endearing, or as I do, annoying.
Bottom Line: Whiny Women and the City
Rating: * 1/2
Lipstick Jungle premieres on Thursday February 7th at 10:00 PM on NBC.

There Will Be Blood

2008-01-04T14:37:00.001-08:00

There Will Be Blood is the new Daniel Day-Lewis movie from director Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, Punch-Drunk Love) about a fiercely competitive oil tycoon, Daniel Plainview, and his quest to drill for oil in Texas while longing for a human connection that he denies yearning, roughly based on Upton Sinclairs 1927 novel Oil!
The acting in this epic film is top-notch with Daniel Day-Lewis famously becoming his character so that every twitch of the eye, every twisted grimace and the way his back slightly hunches over become real traits beyond merely acting. An equally gripping performance comes from Paul Dano (the silent son in Little Miss Sunshine) as he portrays Eli Sunday, a young evangelical preacher whose family comes to business with Plainview. When Eli gives his sermons and casts the evil demons out of his church Dano takes full force and thrusts himself into his character with such intensity. The other characters include Daniel's son, H.W. Plainview and drifter Henry, who are played by newcomer Dillon Freasier and and Kevin J. O'Connor are refreshing in their natural performances. The film's themes of corrupt capitalism and longing for family ring true and evoke memories of Citizen Kane. The minimalist and unique soundtrack adds even more to this original cinematic work. While the film is long it is really a portrait of the two ambitious men with their performances sustaining your attention throughout the film up to it's climactic scene that will leave you speechless. A-
The trailer showcases Day-Lewis's superb acting and exposes to some of the themes explored in the film while giving a brief plot summary without ruining or spoiling the best moments. A
[Image Credit]

Election Coverage

2008-01-03T18:29:00.000-08:00

Today was the Iowa caucuses and it being election year means the news channels are plastered with statistics, percentages and red, white and blue. Of course the highlight of election coverage are all those polls -- who is voting for whom, why, and what does it mean.

For instance why did a black guy win in a state that is 95% white? According to the polls he won the major issues -- the Iraq war, the economy, and health care, among Independents Obama had 41% of their support compared to Clinton with 17%, also the lower tiered candidates supporters deflected to Obama, and the younger voters actually turned out and voted for Obama (57%), while older voters supported Clinton -- according to the polls the older supporters are more than likely supporting Hillary for her health plan, while the younger voters are looking for a change. Why did Huckabee, a small state Governor who nobody heard of a couple months ago win the Republican nomination when he was outspent by Mitt Romney? According to the polls, lots of evangelical Christians came out to support the former pastor (about half of the Republicans showing up to the polls were "born-again" or evangelical Christians), Mitt Romney's attack ads (or as he euphemistically calls them "contrast ads") may have turned people off from the Tool, and many shared his views on illegal immigration (because Gay Marriage ban is so 2004.)

Looking at the TV channels CNN is the most flashy about the election with a bright and expansive red, white and blue set full of election analysts with a large ticker constantly updating the numbers as they come in and lots of large screens to project maps of Iowa with the voter break down and show the numbers, and Anderson Cooper's "magic pie chart." MSNBC has a smaller but equally patriotic set though less correspondents and not as bright. FOX news has a dark, somewhat tenebrous set, with an enormous ticker that flips between the Democrat and Republican votes -- it's like they don't even really care. Again on the websites CNN is most prominent election coverage with separate area for election stories and a prominent block with the percentages adding up:
MSNBC's election coverage is limited to a smaller ticker on their site to show the election results:
While FOX news has nothing really special for election coverage other than the banner on the top of their site:
But it's interesting to note that for their story they chose a key picture to display:
I'm sure they're savoring a Clinton loss, but at the same time their nerves might be rattled if this leads to Obama being the Democratic nominee for '08.
[Source, Source, Source, Source]

Eli Stone

2008-01-02T17:24:00.000-08:00

Premise: Eli Stone is a San Francisco lawyer, who has it all working for a large firm that likes to “screw over the little guy,” but things change when he discovers he might be a prophet...
Review: Jonny Lee Miller (Tom from CBS' short-lived Smith) stars as the main character, Eli Stone, the lawyer turned prophet. His acting his adequate -- he's believable but his performance isn't stellar. Loretta Devine plays Patti, his assistant, who offers some sharp sass and near lets her screen time go to waste (though she needs to do something else with that hair). Natasha Henstridge plays Taylor, Eli's fiancé and another lawyer, who happens to take an sympathetic approach to Eli's new visions. Her character is such a terrible cliché in that she bluntly calls him just short of insane. Yes, it's the approach most anyone would take hearing Eli's visions, but being his love interest you think she could be supportive, even if she doubts his sanity. In general it makes it hard to believe that the two characters could be in love and instantly casting her into the "bitch" character stock. Much to Natasha's credit the character could be a lot worse with another actress in the role and the end of the episode hints at a possible change in her. Victor Garber plays the head of the Eli's firm and Eli’s future father in-law -- Jordan Wethersby. Jordan is a mash up of Jack Bristrow on Alias and a toned down Ron Trott from Justice, which makes for an interesting character. James Saito plays Dr. Chen, an acupuncture therapist who definitely becomes fleshed out by the end of the episode. The great cast also includes Laura Benanti as Beth Keller, Eli's client and the woman whom he lost his virginity to in college, Sam Jaeger as Matt Dowd, another lawyer at the firm, and Matt Lescher as Eli's brother and doctor, Nathan Stone. Plus guest cameo Tom Cavanagh, as Eli's father (when he was young).
The pilot episode has Eli recounting the day he literally "heard the music" -- the music being George Michael's "Faith," which includes Eli having visions of the singer belting out the classic in his living room and at work. After a few signs Eli realizes he should flip sides on the case his big firm is working on, and decides to present Beth Keller and her son Ben, who she believes became autistic after taking a pharmaceutical company's flu shot with a questionable preservative. The show's balance of humor and drama seems a little forced, with much of the humor trying too hard and thinking it's funnier than it really is (though Loretta Devine's Patti is the exception.) The drama comes from the court cases which doesn't really offer anything new from the typical procedural, though really what more could one do to the genre? I guess, the main problem I had with the show in which it tries to "hang a lantern" on it's coincidences and chance happenings by explaining them as possible diving signs of faith, which just seems like lazy writing. True, the main theme of the show is faith -- whether it be in from something Above or in other people in general -- but the way it skews towards believing in the Divine is enough to make Dr. House want to roll his eyes (the line from one character -- "Everything has two explanations, Eli. The scientific and the divine." is a good example.) The show is also about morality and has a redemption theme similar to My Name is Earl. The appealing cast and interesting premise are the show's strengths; if in future episodes it can sharpen up the humor, lessen the coincidences and balance out the spiritual crap it might be a worthy addition to the schedule. Judging who the show is coming from I have faith it will.
The show comes from Greg Berlanti (Everwood, Brothers & Sisters, Dirty Sexy Money) and Marc Guggenheim.
Bottom line: Joan of Arcadia in a court room.
Rating: * * *
Eli Stone premieres Thursday January 31st at 10:00 PM on ABC

Go Blue!

2008-01-01T17:52:00.000-08:00

The new year marks the onslaught of college football bowl games and today happened to be the Capital One Bowl with Michigan against the Florida Gators and their Heiseman winning quarterback Tim Tebow. It was probably one of the best games for a bowl match-up in a while with the teams close throughout and the constant switching of the lead -- a much more fun game to watch than the blow-out known as the Rose Bowl.

Michigan made some pretty bad mistakes -- Hart fumbled TWICE and both were at the worst possible spots to fumble -- the one yard line. Not to mention Henne's two interceptions that happened in the red zone. Rather than focusing on the mistakes -- and also thanks to Urban's bad call to go for it on the fourth instead of punting -- Michigan held on and won. Arrington and Manningham also made some great plays to share the spotlight with Hart who also managed to score two touchdowns. It's especially pleasing since 91% of people polled thought Florida was going to win. A final victory for Carr and finally a bowl victory for the senior Wolverines to end a roller coaster year following the Maize and Blue. Hopefully Rodriguez can build on this momentum next year so we can finally beat OSU.
[Image credit]

That's a Wrap!

2007-12-31T13:48:00.000-08:00

Yet another one of those lame retrospectives that reflects on the year that passed, but I'll avoid the inveterate inclusion of any arbitrary ranking that try to compartmentalize the events of the year. Instead a chronological look at what happened in the year in media and multimedia from what I can remember:

March 9th: 300 hits theaters and makes an astounding $70.9 million in its first weekend. It goes on to gross over $200 million in the U.S. alone.

April 4th: Don Imus calls the Rutger's girls basketball team a bunch of "nappy-headed hos." In the fallout his radio show was canceled, but after a settlement was reached in a wrongful termination suit, Imus was back on the radio on December 3rd.

April 16th: Cormac McCarthy's The Road wins a Pulitzer for fiction. The book was previously selected by Oprah as a book club pick. The latter influenced an increase in sales.

May: Spider-man 3, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, and Shrek 3 are all released and end up making almost a billion dollars combined in the U.S. alone.

May 22nd: A Thousand Splendid Suns, a new novel by the author of the best-selling The Kite Runner is released and becomes one of the year's best sellers.

May 24th: Facebook opened up its platform to allow third-parties to develop content for the site. The social networking site gains in popularity as users can now define themselves (and others) beyond what media they favor as they can now grow an army of zombies. In May, Facebook also created a marketplace feature, allowing users to post classified ads instead of just going to craigslist.

June 10th: The Sopranos (finally) ends with it's now infamous fade to black and ambiguous conclusion.

June 29th: Apple unleashed it's iPhone to immense popularity. People can use their phones to go on YouTube and watch Ms. South Carolina talk about maps or something...

July 7th: Al Gore staged a bunch of Live Earth concerts around the world to increase awareness of global warming and other environmental concerns. Less than a year later and everybody forgot they happened.

July 21st: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows is published and sells more than 11 million copies in the first day. Now that the Harry Potter series is over kids can return to playing their video games.

July 23rd: CNN and YouTube host the first ever user-generated video debate with the Democratic Presidential candidates. Despite the new format, many of questions selected were conventional delivering the same packaged answers any other debate would.

July 31st: News Corp (a.k.a. Rupert Murdoch) purchases the Dow Jones, the publisher Wall Street Journal.

August: Jim Carrey posts an online video plea to shine attention on the failing political situation in Burma. After reporting on Jim Carrey's plea the media finally reports on the pro-democracy movement in Burma.

September 5th: Katie Couric marked her one year anniversary of anchoring the CBS Evening News. Despite the fact that she earns well over a $1 per viewer ($15 million / year) CBS says they're sticking with Couric for the long haul. They mark the occasion by sending Couric to Iraq. Subtle CBS. Very subtle.

September 11th: 50 Cent and Kayne West both release new albums and as a marketing plow turn it into a friendly album battle. 50 Cent vows to retire from rapping if Kayne wins, an offer he renigs on after Kayne sold 957,000 copies to his 691,000.

September - November: The new fall TV season came with new shows such as Pushing Daisies, Private Practice, Bionic Woman, Chuck, Cane, K-Ville, Back to You, Gossip Girl, and Reaper -- most failed to catch viewers' attention -- at least watching them live as the rise of DVRs begins to affect the live ratings.

September 25th: Halo 3 is released, making $170 million in the first 24 hours.

September 30th: Radiohead releases their new album, "In Rainbows" solely on their website and allows users to pay-what-they-wish. Many users find the album to "priceless" and pay nothing.

October 7th: Freerice.com launches allowing users to expand their vocabulary while helping the hungry. With each correct definition mentioning to a word users donate 20 grains of rice (up from 10) and feel better after filling a bowl or two. As of December 30th, 12,139,325,970 grains of rice have been donated.

October 15th: Ellen cries on her talk show after a dog adoption goes wrong, taking the crown from Rosie O'Donnell over the most meldo-dramatic talk show host and further showing how

October 16th: Madonna breaks away from traditional record labels and signs an unprecedented 10 year $120 million dollar deal with Live Nation, a tour promotion company (where my roommate works) that will give the company an all-encompassing stake in her music. The world collectively groans knowing we'll have to listen to Madonna for another 10 years.

October 24th: Microsoft buys a 1.6% stake in Facebook -- putting the site's value at $10-$15 billion.

October 28th & November 20th: Guitar Hero III is released, which is followed by the similar Rock Band. Millions are mesmerized by pressing buttons on a plastic guitar rather learning to play a real one.

November 5th: The Writers Guild of America goes on strike. Among the issues to be negotiated -- payment or residuals from the online streaming of episodes. The networks deny paying writers by claiming the episodes -- complete with commercials -- are used for "promotional" purposes only. As television and film writers march outside studios with picket signs, the majority of the shows end their "seasons" early. TV audiences brace themselves for more alternative programming in 2008 -- game shows, reality shows, and Big Brother.

November 6th: Facebook launches Beacon, an advertisement system that shares users' purchases with their friends as a way of targeted advertising. After privacy complaints the program was changed to allow users to approve before the messages were shared, yet more complaints forced the site in December to allow users to opt-out of the program altogether.

November 14th: The National Book foundation selects Tree of Smoke by Denis Johnson as the winner of the National Book Award for fiction.

November 16th: Beowulf was released in 3-D and IMAX 3-D. People begin to pine their hopes on 3-D films as the future of movie going -- if not for the spectacle, then for the higher ticket prices.

November 17th: NBC announces that it has picked up the online series Quarterlife to broadcast in 2008. This is a surprising change in direction for a series to be picked up by a network.

December 16th: Republican Ron Paul raises a record $6 million in a 24 hour time frame, surpassing his previous record on November 5th for $4.3 million. Much of the money comes from online donations, showing the importance the internet will play in the upcoming election.

December 18th: Despite opposition from across the board, the FCC, led by Kevin Martin, announces it will loosen the restrictions on media ownership in the 20 biggest markets.

December 19th: TIME magazine names Russian President Vladimir Putin as its Person of the Year. Had they waited for the year to be over they might have chosen Pakistan's former prime Minister and opposition party leader, Benazir Bhutto, who returned from exile to her country in an effort to promote democracy, only to be murdered by rebels.

December 31st: The year ends with an upswing in movie revenues, but attendance is still down from it's recent "peak" in 2002.

Enchanted

2007-12-29T16:41:00.000-08:00

Today I finally caught Disney's holiday film, Enchanted. It stars Amy Adams as Giselle, a lovely animated maiden, who is rescued by Prince Edward (James Marsden) after a troll wrecks havoc on her house. They instantly fall in love, much to the chagrin of Prince Edward's wicked step-mother, Queen Narissa, who hatches a plan to send Giselle away so she won't be able to marry Edward and steal the crown from her. So Giselle wakes up in a sewer in New York City as a real-life person where she meets divorce attorney, Robert Phillip (Patrick Dempsey), and his daughter, Morgan, who look after her as she waits to be rescued (again) by her true love, Prince Edward.The movie's strength lies solely in it's cast lead by the incredible Amy Adams, who gushes and giggles throughout the film without being annoying or seeming insincere. Her wide bright eyes and curious smile constantly light up the screen in what finally might be a mainstream break-out role for the actress. (Though her performance in Junebug is still my favorite.) James Marsden does an equally impressive job as the somewhat dim-witted Prince Edward, who successfully brings the cartoonish charisma of the animated Prince to life, though his character remains rather flat in the real world. Susan Sarandon is terrific as the wicked stepmother, but her role is limited and should have been bigger. That's the one of the problems I had with the film, was it didn't fully take advantage of everything in bringing stereotypical 2-d Disney fairytale characters to the real world (Speaking of which the first animated ten minutes weren't too bad). I liked the way they brought Pip the talking chipmunk to the real world, but everything seemed to flow together too easily in her adapting to New York City and Robert Phillip accepting her as someone not entirely crazy. The second half of the second act starts to drag, probably due to the absence of Susan Surandon, and the finale seems a little rushed. Nonetheless the film is frivolous fun elevated by Amy Adams amazing performance. B-The trailer for Enchanted hypes the animated meeting the real world premise of the film while showing glimpses of Amy Adams performance. It pretty much shows you what to expect and what you get from the movie. B
[Image Credit]