It is a fact, sad but true, that the majority of American TV watchers have very poor taste. How else do you explain reality television shows? Because of this poor taste in our nightly entertainment, many decent-to-awesome shows get cancelled before their time. This post is an homage to the fallen.
Touching Evil
Starring Jeffrey Donovan and Vera Farmiga
This show debuted on the USA Network back in 2004. Not to be confused with the British TV show of the same name, this series lasted for thirteen episodes. It was a fascinating show that followed David Creegan, a man re-entering his career as a serial crimes investigator after suffering a near-fatal gunshot wound to the head. As a result of this injury, a part of his brain was damaged, leaving him with virtually no natural inhibitions. As well as having a fascinating main character who was ever so slightly "off", this show also dealt with some pretty nasty serial crimes. Though Touching Evil garnered critical acclaim, networks are swayed by ratings, not intelligent TV. This show lasted only one season, and sadly, has not been released on DVD. (Fingers crossed, everybody!)
Due South
Starring Paul Gross and David Marciano
Due South was a late-nineties show about the ultimate in an unwilling partnership of opposites - at least at first. Constable Benton Fraser (of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police) travelled south of his country's border to Chicago on the trail of his father's killers. After joining forces with Detective Ray Vecchio of Chicago PD, Fraser secures justice for his father's murderers and ends up as a "liason" with the Canadian consulate. Thus, the straight-as-an-arrow Mounty partners up with the-ends-justify-the-means Italian-American police officer to solve crimes with equal parts politeness and cynicism. This show lasted for three seasons, but really only first two are worth watching. The actor playing Ray Vecchio left the show at the end of the second season, and a "replacement Ray" was written into the show in the most half-assed manner imaginable. If you watch it for nothing else, watch it for the handsome upright Canadian (and his pet wolf).
The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.
Starring Bruce Campbell
Those of you familiar with the Evil Dead films and the TV show Burn Notice surely realize how awesome Bruce Campbell is. He stars as Brisco County, Jr., a Harvard-educated lawyer who turns to bounty hunting after his well-known federal marshall father is murdered by an infamous gang of thieves. Though the show was set in the Old West, it was by no means bound by convention, frequently venturing into science fictional tangents (time-travel, mystical and mysterious Orbs, etc.). Sadly, this show met the same fate as many others that were shunted into the Friday night "death slot" on the Fox network, and lasted only one season.
Red Dwarf
Starring Craig Charles, Danny John-Jules, Chris Barrie, Robert Llewellyn, and Norman Lovett
Many (American) people who refuse to watch British TV blame it on the poor film quality and terrible acting. Both of these elements are present in Red Dwarf, but I still watch it, and that should tell you something. The Red Dwarf was a ship meant to establish a human colony in space, but hundreds of years after it begins its journey, lowly crewman Lister awakens from cryogenic sleep to discover that the rest of the crew perished soon after he went to sleep, and now his only companions are Kryten (an OCD android), Rimmer (a hologram of a former crew mate), Holly (a sarcastic ship computer), and Cat (the humanoid descendent of Lister's pet cat). This unapologetically cheesy series is watchable because of its very British space humor, fueled by the interactions of the characters and the crazy adventures in which they inevitably find themselves.
Mystery Science Theatre 3000
Starring Joel Hodgson, Mike Nelson, Kevin Murphy, and Trace Beaulieu
The ultimate cult series, MST3K (as it's known to those who love it) was driven by a flimsy plot to justify riffing on old and terrible movies. Joel (later replaced by Mike), an innocent but inventive maintenance worker, is shot into space by his mad scientist employer. After constructing companion robots with spare parts he could have used to return to Earth, Joel is forced to sit through awful B movies by Dr. Forrester and his henchman Frank TV (they're hoping to find a movie so bad that they could use it to take over the world). Fortunately, Joel's robot pals Crow T. Robot and Tom Servo join him in watching these films, and their comments make the movies more than watchable. Most movies, anyway. Some just cannot be saved. This show had very humble origins, but was picked up by Comedy Central, and then re-run on the SciFi channel after it was cancelled. And in my opinion, the DVDs cannot come out fast enough.
Believe me, there are many more TV shows that never got a fair chance (due to the aforementioned bad taste of the majority of viewers). If you're interested in seeing any of these series, I welcome you to join the cult of Netflix. Come to light! All are welcome!
Friday, December 11, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Frozen Chocolate Oranges
If you learn nothing from reading this post (which is probably an appropriate assessment of all of my posts), it should be this: chocolate oranges are best when frozen.
It's true. I have discovered this truth via extensive personal research. I've even considered submitting my work in writing to a few scientific journals. I defy anyone to refute my claim, and here's why:
1. Chocolate. Chocolate is God's way of saying that he loves us and wants us to be happy, if I may paraphrase Benjamin Franklin.
2. A hint of orange flavor. I am usually highly suspect of any product claiming to have an additional "flavor". For example: Vanilla Coke. I'm not opposed to vanilla flavoring in general, and I love Coke, but come on! Either we, as a society, have dulled our tastes to the degree that we must "crank up the volume" in our food products, or we have lost entirely the art of subtlety. I'd have to conclude the latter.
3. It's frozen. The delightful combination of my previous two points, arranged in a clever orange-like formation, is that much more enhanced by its frozen state. It's brisk, refreshing, and slower to melt all over your fingers. Also, the freezer doubles as an excellent hiding place from those would-be chocolate thieves who are not as enlightened as I.
And now to change the subject completely. The company at which I work has recently undergone a significant "restructuring". For those of you with no experience with corporate jargon, "restructuring" is usually a euphemism for "layoffs" - as in this case. Our company is relatively young, and therefore small. At the beginning of this month, we had thirty employees. Now we have twenty-one. Nearly a third of us.
I know that businesses must be cost-effective in order to succeed and make a profit. I know that sometimes that involves a reduction in personnel. I know how lucky I am to still have a job in this economy. But I believe, in our company at least, that layoffs are just as hard on the people who were not let go. Of course this situation affects us differently. The former employees now have to contend with finding new livelihoods. But we - the "survivors", if you will - now have significantly increased workloads, and additional pressure from our corporate management to meet the company's goals. It wouldn't be so bad if, along with the pressure, we also received corresponding support and encouragement from corporate, but that has most definitely not been the case.
The day that the layoffs occurred, the president of our company flew in to our facility to conduct a meeting with the remaining employees and explain the situation. Overall, I gave him two stars out of ten for consistency. The gist of his message was this: "We hated to do this. We're a family at this company. We should have done this a long time ago. We held off because we care about our employees. If you don't like it, we can replace you at any moment."
This was the last thing that we needed to hear. We were already trying to deal with the loss of many of our co-workers, but corporate's response/explanation was a thinly veiled threat. And in my capacity at the company, working in several different departments, I was privy to more information than the rest. I heard about how corporate had made the decision to cut nine people loose with little to no severance pay. I heard about how one of those employees, who had recently moved his family from California to join our company, had not even received any reimbursement for the cost of moving before he was let go, and now never would. I heard about too many things for me to ever extend corporate with any level of trust. These men are millionaires. If this is what it takes to make that kind of money - to make life-changing decisions for people you don't even know for the sake of the almighty dollar, then I take it as confirmation that business is not for me.
For some time now, I have been considering returning to school and obtaining a master's degree. This is not a decision that I'm rushing into. I want to carefully consider my strengths and weaknesses, conduct some self-exploration in an attempt to discover the optimal career path. I want a career that will allow me to comfortably support myself but also be something that I care about and keeps me interested. A certain degree of autonomy would suit me very well, but I don't want the responsibility of owning/running a business. In short, it's been something that I've been in serious contemplation about for some time, and I don't see myself making a final decision in the very near future. However, my recent experiences at work have driven home to me the knowledge that I must make a decision to point my life in a better direction.
In the meantime, however, there are always frozen chocolate oranges.
It's true. I have discovered this truth via extensive personal research. I've even considered submitting my work in writing to a few scientific journals. I defy anyone to refute my claim, and here's why:
1. Chocolate. Chocolate is God's way of saying that he loves us and wants us to be happy, if I may paraphrase Benjamin Franklin.
2. A hint of orange flavor. I am usually highly suspect of any product claiming to have an additional "flavor". For example: Vanilla Coke. I'm not opposed to vanilla flavoring in general, and I love Coke, but come on! Either we, as a society, have dulled our tastes to the degree that we must "crank up the volume" in our food products, or we have lost entirely the art of subtlety. I'd have to conclude the latter.
3. It's frozen. The delightful combination of my previous two points, arranged in a clever orange-like formation, is that much more enhanced by its frozen state. It's brisk, refreshing, and slower to melt all over your fingers. Also, the freezer doubles as an excellent hiding place from those would-be chocolate thieves who are not as enlightened as I.
And now to change the subject completely. The company at which I work has recently undergone a significant "restructuring". For those of you with no experience with corporate jargon, "restructuring" is usually a euphemism for "layoffs" - as in this case. Our company is relatively young, and therefore small. At the beginning of this month, we had thirty employees. Now we have twenty-one. Nearly a third of us.
I know that businesses must be cost-effective in order to succeed and make a profit. I know that sometimes that involves a reduction in personnel. I know how lucky I am to still have a job in this economy. But I believe, in our company at least, that layoffs are just as hard on the people who were not let go. Of course this situation affects us differently. The former employees now have to contend with finding new livelihoods. But we - the "survivors", if you will - now have significantly increased workloads, and additional pressure from our corporate management to meet the company's goals. It wouldn't be so bad if, along with the pressure, we also received corresponding support and encouragement from corporate, but that has most definitely not been the case.
The day that the layoffs occurred, the president of our company flew in to our facility to conduct a meeting with the remaining employees and explain the situation. Overall, I gave him two stars out of ten for consistency. The gist of his message was this: "We hated to do this. We're a family at this company. We should have done this a long time ago. We held off because we care about our employees. If you don't like it, we can replace you at any moment."
This was the last thing that we needed to hear. We were already trying to deal with the loss of many of our co-workers, but corporate's response/explanation was a thinly veiled threat. And in my capacity at the company, working in several different departments, I was privy to more information than the rest. I heard about how corporate had made the decision to cut nine people loose with little to no severance pay. I heard about how one of those employees, who had recently moved his family from California to join our company, had not even received any reimbursement for the cost of moving before he was let go, and now never would. I heard about too many things for me to ever extend corporate with any level of trust. These men are millionaires. If this is what it takes to make that kind of money - to make life-changing decisions for people you don't even know for the sake of the almighty dollar, then I take it as confirmation that business is not for me.
For some time now, I have been considering returning to school and obtaining a master's degree. This is not a decision that I'm rushing into. I want to carefully consider my strengths and weaknesses, conduct some self-exploration in an attempt to discover the optimal career path. I want a career that will allow me to comfortably support myself but also be something that I care about and keeps me interested. A certain degree of autonomy would suit me very well, but I don't want the responsibility of owning/running a business. In short, it's been something that I've been in serious contemplation about for some time, and I don't see myself making a final decision in the very near future. However, my recent experiences at work have driven home to me the knowledge that I must make a decision to point my life in a better direction.
In the meantime, however, there are always frozen chocolate oranges.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
The Ties that Bind
We live in an era of technology, and with that comes certain new challenges - ones that no other generation of humanity has had to face. In this age of instant gratification, there are people who are addicted to being "plugged in". There are people who become physically distressed if they do not have their means of communication with them, be it cell phone, laptop, etc. Does this distress go deeper than mere obsession or compulsiveness? Is this distress a symptom of some profound psychological fear of being alone? With the advent of the internet, connection to another human being is limited only by the wireless speed (who uses dial-up anymore?). A connection with someone on the internet may not be healthy, fulfilling, balanced, or even safe, but it is a connection. It is contact. I recently heard a poem in which the narrator said that even though relationships with others may hurt us in the end, we still pursue them, or others like them, because we are "creatures of contact". Though we make ourselves vulnerable in different ways when we start any kind of relationship, we are, in essence, telling that person "I am willing to risk letting you hurt me to a certain extent, because I don't want to be alone."
This brings me to something that I've been thinking a lot about lately. When one is already in an established relationship - one lasting years, or a lifetime - when and how does one decide to discontinue this relationship? I'm not necessarily talking about romantic relationships, though that situation comes up more often than not in romantic contexts. What do you do when you decide (or at least seriously consider) to cut off a relationship that involves certain ties? This is why technology has made this more complicated - at least for me. With all of the social networking applications that make the internet such an easy way to stay in touch with people, it is inevitable that the same applications present problems - essentially, that it makes it easy for people to find me. People with whom I'd rather not stay connected. Facebook has been a great tool for me to keep up on what is happening in other people's lives. It makes it easy for me to communicate with people that I don't have regular contact with. Unfortunately, I don't share the same philosophy about "friending" people that other people do. I only "friend" people that I know and want to continue some sort of relationship with. The "friend" option is not something that I use to stay connected with everyone I've ever known, including people that I'd rather forget.
I may as well get right down to it: recently, I received a friend request from an extended family member - an uncle, to be more specific. This uncle of mine has always been on the outs with some or other members of the family - relatively minor family disputes consisting of the usual infractions: careless and/or insensitive remarks, disputes about events that happened more than twenty years ago, general craziness, etc. It's not unusual for this kind of radio silence to last for years. None of my uncle's foolishness ever directly affected me personally however, so my relationship with him has always been civil, at least. I do my best not to get caught up in problems he may have with other members of the family, or problems that other members of the family may have with him. The last time he "disputed" with a family member, however, he crossed a line. I wasn't even present when this went down, but I was still very angry when I found out what had happened. So angry, in fact, that I never wanted to see him again - and this is saying a lot, because my uncle's track record is nothing to be proud of. The last thing I expected was for him to pop up in my life via Facebook, of all things.
I didn't accept his friend request, but I didn't ignore it, either. It's still on my Facebook notifications page, waiting for some sort of action. I feel foolish just thinking about it. I doubt he's even noticed that I have not confirmed him as a friend, or if he has, then he probably hasn't wondered why. I know that I'll probably never come into contact with him again, at least not willingly, but I still feel as though I would be breaking the "family rule" if I dismissed his friend request. You know the rule - the one that says that nothing is more important than family. The one that says that family comes first. "Family" means that there are people with whom you will always have a relationship, no matter what.
At what point can I say, "Enough is enough. You're out of my life, I'm out of yours", especially when it involves family? Does it depend on the type of family connection? He's only an uncle, after all. It's not as though he were my father, or brother. He's my father's step-brother, so really there's not even familial blood to consider. It's easier when these things are decided by, well, fate. It's easier when it's a gradual lack of communication, one that fades into a final and unspoken separation. It's easier when it's not a conscious decision, and the blame for breaking away cannot be laid at the feet of one person or another.
I'm not naive enough to think that severing family ties is an uncommon occurence. My own family history can attest to that. I suppose I just need to remember that relationships place certain responsibilities on the people involved, and between me and my uncle, it's obvious who the responsible one is. He failed in his familial responsibility, so I choose to fail in mine. That friend request will stay just as it is - a pathetic reminder to really consider what it means to make an end, but a small opportunity to possibly make a new beginning, however unlikely.
This brings me to something that I've been thinking a lot about lately. When one is already in an established relationship - one lasting years, or a lifetime - when and how does one decide to discontinue this relationship? I'm not necessarily talking about romantic relationships, though that situation comes up more often than not in romantic contexts. What do you do when you decide (or at least seriously consider) to cut off a relationship that involves certain ties? This is why technology has made this more complicated - at least for me. With all of the social networking applications that make the internet such an easy way to stay in touch with people, it is inevitable that the same applications present problems - essentially, that it makes it easy for people to find me. People with whom I'd rather not stay connected. Facebook has been a great tool for me to keep up on what is happening in other people's lives. It makes it easy for me to communicate with people that I don't have regular contact with. Unfortunately, I don't share the same philosophy about "friending" people that other people do. I only "friend" people that I know and want to continue some sort of relationship with. The "friend" option is not something that I use to stay connected with everyone I've ever known, including people that I'd rather forget.
I may as well get right down to it: recently, I received a friend request from an extended family member - an uncle, to be more specific. This uncle of mine has always been on the outs with some or other members of the family - relatively minor family disputes consisting of the usual infractions: careless and/or insensitive remarks, disputes about events that happened more than twenty years ago, general craziness, etc. It's not unusual for this kind of radio silence to last for years. None of my uncle's foolishness ever directly affected me personally however, so my relationship with him has always been civil, at least. I do my best not to get caught up in problems he may have with other members of the family, or problems that other members of the family may have with him. The last time he "disputed" with a family member, however, he crossed a line. I wasn't even present when this went down, but I was still very angry when I found out what had happened. So angry, in fact, that I never wanted to see him again - and this is saying a lot, because my uncle's track record is nothing to be proud of. The last thing I expected was for him to pop up in my life via Facebook, of all things.
I didn't accept his friend request, but I didn't ignore it, either. It's still on my Facebook notifications page, waiting for some sort of action. I feel foolish just thinking about it. I doubt he's even noticed that I have not confirmed him as a friend, or if he has, then he probably hasn't wondered why. I know that I'll probably never come into contact with him again, at least not willingly, but I still feel as though I would be breaking the "family rule" if I dismissed his friend request. You know the rule - the one that says that nothing is more important than family. The one that says that family comes first. "Family" means that there are people with whom you will always have a relationship, no matter what.
At what point can I say, "Enough is enough. You're out of my life, I'm out of yours", especially when it involves family? Does it depend on the type of family connection? He's only an uncle, after all. It's not as though he were my father, or brother. He's my father's step-brother, so really there's not even familial blood to consider. It's easier when these things are decided by, well, fate. It's easier when it's a gradual lack of communication, one that fades into a final and unspoken separation. It's easier when it's not a conscious decision, and the blame for breaking away cannot be laid at the feet of one person or another.
I'm not naive enough to think that severing family ties is an uncommon occurence. My own family history can attest to that. I suppose I just need to remember that relationships place certain responsibilities on the people involved, and between me and my uncle, it's obvious who the responsible one is. He failed in his familial responsibility, so I choose to fail in mine. That friend request will stay just as it is - a pathetic reminder to really consider what it means to make an end, but a small opportunity to possibly make a new beginning, however unlikely.
Friday, September 4, 2009
10 People Who Need to be Shot into Space
Let's just be clear - when I say that the following people should be "shot into space", I do not mean that I want them to die. What I mean is that they are so obviously unhappy here on planet Earth that it would be better for everyone if they would just go away and start anew. Hopefully their final destination would be made known to the world and written in history, so that some poor future space explorer doesn't accidentally land on their planet and suffer immediate and permanent cognitive deterioration. I apologize in advance if these selections seem too heavy on a particular group of people, but it's my blog. Next time, you can shoot me into space.
10. Dean Cain
Generations from now, when school children start to look up the definitions to naughty words in the dictionary, Dean Cain's picture will appear next to the word asshole. I admit to laughing at a very select few of his jokes, but prolonged obnoxiousness is not the same as being funny. Cain is comedy in its lowest form. In fact, I would go so far as to call it anti-comedy, because most of what he says cancels out anything in his act that may actually be funny. His movies alone would have put him on this list.
9. Paris Hilton
This woman embodies everything negative about the female gender. She's mean - any episode of that stupid show The Simple Life makes it obvious that she doesn't give two farts about anybody else in the world, except for maybe her dog. She's spoiled. She's never really worked a day in her life, and she never will. Neither will her children, should she have any, or her children's children. Hilton is so much of the opposite of who I am and who I'd like to be, that I can't even look at her. Besides, a person's body mass atrophies in space, and one slowly attains a more ball-like shape. I would love to see a Paris-balloon.
8. Michael Moore
It doesn't matter if I agree with someone's point of view or not - I'm not going to listen to a person who is preachy, smug, and belligerent. Michael, don't call out "Stupid White Men" before taking a good long look in the mirror.
7. Carrot Top
I really don't think an explanation should be necessary for this choice. I don't know of any other person in the world who gives me the shivers as much as this guy - and I include brutal dictators in that statement. In fact, we wouldn't be sending Carrot Top into space as much as we would be returning him.
6. Stephanie Meyer
I realize that this won't be a popular choice with some of you, but as I said: You're free to theoretically shoot me into space any time. Here's my reasoning: this is a woman who has single-handedly convinced a generation of teenage girls (and women who are old enough to know better) of the following untruths:
A. Falling in love at seventeen is wonderful, natural, and works out fine in the end.
B. There's nothing wrong with your boyfriend breaking into your room to watch you as you sleep - it's not creepy, it's romantic!
C. Vampires sparkle in daylight.
5. Michael Bay
This is the brilliant artistic mind that brought you the following cinematic gems:
Transformers (1 & 2)
The Island
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
The Rock
I could go on, but I'll spare you. I'll just leave you with this thought: there should be some sort of horrible, horrible punishment for putting truck nuts on a Transformer. Being shot into space is a mercy.
4. John Malkovich
As stated in a previous post, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Just say your damn lines, John! Quit waffling and just say the lines!
3. Michael Vick
As far as I'm concerned, his debt to society has not yet been paid - not to mention what he owes to the dogs who ultimately survived his cruelty. I know that Vick is not the first person to be busted for dog-fighting, and he won't be the last, but rather than let him back into the league, he should just be shot into space. Without a spaceship, if necessary.
2. Rush Limbaugh
It's hard for me to think of any radio personality I detest more than this man. I don't care what your political ideaology is - hate in any form is bad. This man embodies so many "ists" I can't even list them all.
1. Glenn Beck
I don't hate Glenn Beck. I pity him. His cognitive dissonance is so jarring that there has to be some sort of tragic underlying cause. I honestly think he'd be happier in space - I mean, he keeps bursting into tears on his program! The man is obviously unhappy here. In space, at least, he'd be able to make things up without looking like a complete idiot.
Wow. I sure was hard on the Michaels in this post. I can't be the name - I know several Michaels who are perfectly nice people.
10. Dean Cain
Generations from now, when school children start to look up the definitions to naughty words in the dictionary, Dean Cain's picture will appear next to the word asshole. I admit to laughing at a very select few of his jokes, but prolonged obnoxiousness is not the same as being funny. Cain is comedy in its lowest form. In fact, I would go so far as to call it anti-comedy, because most of what he says cancels out anything in his act that may actually be funny. His movies alone would have put him on this list.
9. Paris Hilton
This woman embodies everything negative about the female gender. She's mean - any episode of that stupid show The Simple Life makes it obvious that she doesn't give two farts about anybody else in the world, except for maybe her dog. She's spoiled. She's never really worked a day in her life, and she never will. Neither will her children, should she have any, or her children's children. Hilton is so much of the opposite of who I am and who I'd like to be, that I can't even look at her. Besides, a person's body mass atrophies in space, and one slowly attains a more ball-like shape. I would love to see a Paris-balloon.
8. Michael Moore
It doesn't matter if I agree with someone's point of view or not - I'm not going to listen to a person who is preachy, smug, and belligerent. Michael, don't call out "Stupid White Men" before taking a good long look in the mirror.
7. Carrot Top
I really don't think an explanation should be necessary for this choice. I don't know of any other person in the world who gives me the shivers as much as this guy - and I include brutal dictators in that statement. In fact, we wouldn't be sending Carrot Top into space as much as we would be returning him.
6. Stephanie Meyer
I realize that this won't be a popular choice with some of you, but as I said: You're free to theoretically shoot me into space any time. Here's my reasoning: this is a woman who has single-handedly convinced a generation of teenage girls (and women who are old enough to know better) of the following untruths:
A. Falling in love at seventeen is wonderful, natural, and works out fine in the end.
B. There's nothing wrong with your boyfriend breaking into your room to watch you as you sleep - it's not creepy, it's romantic!
C. Vampires sparkle in daylight.
5. Michael Bay
This is the brilliant artistic mind that brought you the following cinematic gems:
Transformers (1 & 2)
The Island
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
The Rock
I could go on, but I'll spare you. I'll just leave you with this thought: there should be some sort of horrible, horrible punishment for putting truck nuts on a Transformer. Being shot into space is a mercy.
4. John Malkovich
As stated in a previous post, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Just say your damn lines, John! Quit waffling and just say the lines!
3. Michael Vick
As far as I'm concerned, his debt to society has not yet been paid - not to mention what he owes to the dogs who ultimately survived his cruelty. I know that Vick is not the first person to be busted for dog-fighting, and he won't be the last, but rather than let him back into the league, he should just be shot into space. Without a spaceship, if necessary.
2. Rush Limbaugh
It's hard for me to think of any radio personality I detest more than this man. I don't care what your political ideaology is - hate in any form is bad. This man embodies so many "ists" I can't even list them all.
1. Glenn Beck
I don't hate Glenn Beck. I pity him. His cognitive dissonance is so jarring that there has to be some sort of tragic underlying cause. I honestly think he'd be happier in space - I mean, he keeps bursting into tears on his program! The man is obviously unhappy here. In space, at least, he'd be able to make things up without looking like a complete idiot.
Wow. I sure was hard on the Michaels in this post. I can't be the name - I know several Michaels who are perfectly nice people.
Friday, July 3, 2009
The Top Ten Worst Book-to-Movie Adaptations (That I have seen)
There have been a few movies released recently (and rumors of movies to come) that have made me ask questions - questions like "Why?! Why?! Oh God! Why?!" And it boggles my mind that any of these movies make any kind of money at all. And then I think of the of the level of intelligence of the people who would pay money to see these movies. After doing the math, I get horribly depressed. There are lots of astoundingly stupid people out there - and some of them are allowed to make movies. This introspection led me to make a list of one of the banes of my existence: book-to-movie adaptations. Bad ones. I apologize if you happen to like any of the movies in the following list. If you think it's a good movie, I urge you to read the book and reconsider. If you have read the book and still think it's a good movie . . . then I have no hope for you. Live in peace. Readers, I give you the top-ten worst book-to-movie adaptations that I have ever seen.
10. Sherlock
This 2002 made-for-TV movie made me want to cry. I love Sherlock Holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle created a fascinating character that the general public does not fully appreciate. I believe that this is because (in America, especially) he is seen as a stuffy, boring British ponce with a pipe permanently wedged between his teeth. Some of the film adaptations do nothing to dispel this perception, Basil Rathbone notwithstanding. Therefore I was somewhat intrigued when I saw that there was a post-1990's film adaptation, and unwittingly decided to add it to my Netflix queue.
It was terrible. Sherlock was not smart (Moriarty was kicking his ass, as far as mental acuity goes). Moriarty was not smart, and only mildly evil (he got Sherlock hooked on heroin and killed his love interest. That was all). Watson was not a veteran of Afghanistan, but a coroner. Mycroft was terribly disappointing. Sherlock had a love interest, and she was not That Woman (hopefully those of you familiar with the Sherlock Holmes stories will know what I mean).
Who's to blame for this? Director Graham Theakston and writer Piers Ahsworth. Don't be gentle on them.
9. The Adventures of Huck Finn
Elijah Wood child-stars in this 1993 bastardization of Mark Twain's classic. I don't blame him for it; he was just a kid at the time. I do, however, blame Stephen Sommers for writing and directing it. As I understand it, Mark Twain began writing Huckleberry Finn in much the same spirit as he had The Adventures of Tom Sawyer - but ended up with something much more significant than a mere coming-of-age young male adventure. It is a brilliant description of a journey from ignorance to awareness and an intelligent commentary on issues that are still important to us today. Perhaps I set my standards too high for this movie, but I was nine years old when I saw this movie and I still hated it. Enough said.
8. The Cat in the Hat
A problem that many book-to-movie adaptations face is that the people writing the adaptation sometimes have to make hard choices about content. It's difficult to compress the average novel into a two-hour film. That being said, the opposite problem should be avoided like the plague: having to stretch a children's picture book into a full-length movie. Don't try it! And if you absolutely must attempt it, do not depend on your lead actor(s) to carry the film. Those types of films are called "star vehicles", and are never a good idea. You can almost hear Mike Meyers' back breaking under the massive weight of the scenes that Alec Burg managed to squeeze into Dr. Seuss' wonderful little story. And the less said about the art direction of the film, the better. Bo Welch has enough to apologize for in this 2003 monstrosity.
7. Chicken Little
Please see my review for #8, but substitute Mark Dindal for Bo Welch and Alec Burg, 2005 for 2003, and remove any reference to star vehicles. There are some otherwise talented people inexplicably connected to this movie. Try not to hold it against them.
(See also: Polar Express)
6. Pride and Prejudice
Subtitled "A Latter-Day Comedy", this one actually made me throw up in my mouth a little bit - and I didn't even watch the whole thing. Jane Austen is one of my favorite authors, and while Pride and Prejudice isn't my favorite novel by her, it deserves more than this. Much, much more. I'm not even totally against the idea of shifting the story from the Victorian era to modern times, but this film makes me pray that it never happens again. It's a good thing that imdb.com doesn't give out contact information for writers and directors, or else I would feel honor-bound to send director Andrew Black and writer Anne K. Black (husband and wife, perhaps?) irate letters. And even that may not stop me. Again, I didn't watch all of this 2003 film, so I may have missed something. But I doubt it.
5. Troy
This film technically fills my requirement because it is based on Homer's Iliad. Loosely. I will say this: I appreciate the scale of this movie. Those massive battles between the Greeks and the Trojans are impressive, I admit. That being said, the one character I liked dies long before the end of the film, so everything after Hector's death is completely unbearable, rather than just marginally unbearable. Orlando Bloom plays whiner Paris, and inexplicably attractive Brad Pitt plays asshole Achilles. I recognize that it would be difficult to make such selfish characters remotely sympathetic, but I don't believe either of these guys even tried. This film was vomited upon the world in 2004 by director Wolfgang Petersen and writer David Benioff.
4. Bicentenniel Man
Some short stories can be made into good feature-length films. For that to happen, do not cast Robin Williams. Robin can be extremely good as part of an ensemble (see The Birdcage), but if his character is the focus of the entire movie, watch out. He'll pass in star vehicles, but not in an Asimov short story. And not when it's directed by someone who obviously doesn't understand Asimov, and has possibly never even read the story (I'm looking at you, Chris Columbus). This 1999 film was a strange modge-podge of Asimov and Robert Silverberg.
3. Eragon
This is a rare case. I didn't even really like the book this movie was based on, which makes its disappointment that much more terrifying. I was actually hoping that the so-so novel would make a more entertaining movie, and I couldn't have been more wrong. Also, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Although the baby dragon was cute. We can lay the blame for this 2006 travesty at the feet of director Stefen Fangmeier and writer Peter Buchman. And I'll lump Christopher Paolini in there, too, for writing it in the first place.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
I tried so hard to like this movie! I really, really did, but eventually I came to grips with myself and admitted it: the movie sucked. The casting was okay (except, of course, for John Malkovich), and the look of it was all right (except for Marvin's look - wtf?!), but it completely lacked the brilliance of Douglas Adams. All of his wit, his intricate plotline - it was somehow lost in this trans-media translation, and now there are people in the world who will never read the book because the movie was bad. And that is unforgivable. I'm going to blame this on the director, Garth Jennings, because Douglas Adams collaborated heavily on the screenplay before he died. Perhaps it would have been different had he been alive during production - he died in 2001, and the film was released in 2005.
1. Ella Enchanted
There was and is so much wrong with this movie, I don't know that I have the courage to go on. I will do my best, however. I read Ella Enchanted when I was in junior high, which was a difficult period in my life. This book made me happy. It won a Newberry award. It is a wonderful story about a girl just about my age (at the time) who overcomes a terrible curse and saves herself, her country, and the boy she loves. Ella (in the book) is an intelligent, independent, and irrepressible person who achieves her goals and richly deserves the happy ending that comes to her. Ella (in the movie) is Anne Hathaway, and stinks of Disney. Nothing is right in the movie. There's an evil royal uncle that should not be there. The evil stepsisters succeed only in being annoying. There is a bizarre and unexplanable romance between a giantess and an elf. Basically, the only thing that this film has in common with the book is the names of the characters, and sometimes they don't even get that right. A thousand curses upon director Tommy O'Haver and writer (I use that term in the loosest sense of the word) Laurie Craig. May they and all their children, and their children's children be bitten by fleas. Repeatedly.
Okay, I'm through it. Now for the dishonorable mentions: Dune (1984), War of the Worlds (2005), The Hobbit (1977), The Lord of the Rings (1978), The Black Cauldron (1985), Matilda (1996), and Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban (2004).
10. Sherlock
This 2002 made-for-TV movie made me want to cry. I love Sherlock Holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle created a fascinating character that the general public does not fully appreciate. I believe that this is because (in America, especially) he is seen as a stuffy, boring British ponce with a pipe permanently wedged between his teeth. Some of the film adaptations do nothing to dispel this perception, Basil Rathbone notwithstanding. Therefore I was somewhat intrigued when I saw that there was a post-1990's film adaptation, and unwittingly decided to add it to my Netflix queue.
It was terrible. Sherlock was not smart (Moriarty was kicking his ass, as far as mental acuity goes). Moriarty was not smart, and only mildly evil (he got Sherlock hooked on heroin and killed his love interest. That was all). Watson was not a veteran of Afghanistan, but a coroner. Mycroft was terribly disappointing. Sherlock had a love interest, and she was not That Woman (hopefully those of you familiar with the Sherlock Holmes stories will know what I mean).
Who's to blame for this? Director Graham Theakston and writer Piers Ahsworth. Don't be gentle on them.
9. The Adventures of Huck Finn
Elijah Wood child-stars in this 1993 bastardization of Mark Twain's classic. I don't blame him for it; he was just a kid at the time. I do, however, blame Stephen Sommers for writing and directing it. As I understand it, Mark Twain began writing Huckleberry Finn in much the same spirit as he had The Adventures of Tom Sawyer - but ended up with something much more significant than a mere coming-of-age young male adventure. It is a brilliant description of a journey from ignorance to awareness and an intelligent commentary on issues that are still important to us today. Perhaps I set my standards too high for this movie, but I was nine years old when I saw this movie and I still hated it. Enough said.
8. The Cat in the Hat
A problem that many book-to-movie adaptations face is that the people writing the adaptation sometimes have to make hard choices about content. It's difficult to compress the average novel into a two-hour film. That being said, the opposite problem should be avoided like the plague: having to stretch a children's picture book into a full-length movie. Don't try it! And if you absolutely must attempt it, do not depend on your lead actor(s) to carry the film. Those types of films are called "star vehicles", and are never a good idea. You can almost hear Mike Meyers' back breaking under the massive weight of the scenes that Alec Burg managed to squeeze into Dr. Seuss' wonderful little story. And the less said about the art direction of the film, the better. Bo Welch has enough to apologize for in this 2003 monstrosity.
7. Chicken Little
Please see my review for #8, but substitute Mark Dindal for Bo Welch and Alec Burg, 2005 for 2003, and remove any reference to star vehicles. There are some otherwise talented people inexplicably connected to this movie. Try not to hold it against them.
(See also: Polar Express)
6. Pride and Prejudice
Subtitled "A Latter-Day Comedy", this one actually made me throw up in my mouth a little bit - and I didn't even watch the whole thing. Jane Austen is one of my favorite authors, and while Pride and Prejudice isn't my favorite novel by her, it deserves more than this. Much, much more. I'm not even totally against the idea of shifting the story from the Victorian era to modern times, but this film makes me pray that it never happens again. It's a good thing that imdb.com doesn't give out contact information for writers and directors, or else I would feel honor-bound to send director Andrew Black and writer Anne K. Black (husband and wife, perhaps?) irate letters. And even that may not stop me. Again, I didn't watch all of this 2003 film, so I may have missed something. But I doubt it.
5. Troy
This film technically fills my requirement because it is based on Homer's Iliad. Loosely. I will say this: I appreciate the scale of this movie. Those massive battles between the Greeks and the Trojans are impressive, I admit. That being said, the one character I liked dies long before the end of the film, so everything after Hector's death is completely unbearable, rather than just marginally unbearable. Orlando Bloom plays whiner Paris, and inexplicably attractive Brad Pitt plays asshole Achilles. I recognize that it would be difficult to make such selfish characters remotely sympathetic, but I don't believe either of these guys even tried. This film was vomited upon the world in 2004 by director Wolfgang Petersen and writer David Benioff.
4. Bicentenniel Man
Some short stories can be made into good feature-length films. For that to happen, do not cast Robin Williams. Robin can be extremely good as part of an ensemble (see The Birdcage), but if his character is the focus of the entire movie, watch out. He'll pass in star vehicles, but not in an Asimov short story. And not when it's directed by someone who obviously doesn't understand Asimov, and has possibly never even read the story (I'm looking at you, Chris Columbus). This 1999 film was a strange modge-podge of Asimov and Robert Silverberg.
3. Eragon
This is a rare case. I didn't even really like the book this movie was based on, which makes its disappointment that much more terrifying. I was actually hoping that the so-so novel would make a more entertaining movie, and I couldn't have been more wrong. Also, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Although the baby dragon was cute. We can lay the blame for this 2006 travesty at the feet of director Stefen Fangmeier and writer Peter Buchman. And I'll lump Christopher Paolini in there, too, for writing it in the first place.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
I tried so hard to like this movie! I really, really did, but eventually I came to grips with myself and admitted it: the movie sucked. The casting was okay (except, of course, for John Malkovich), and the look of it was all right (except for Marvin's look - wtf?!), but it completely lacked the brilliance of Douglas Adams. All of his wit, his intricate plotline - it was somehow lost in this trans-media translation, and now there are people in the world who will never read the book because the movie was bad. And that is unforgivable. I'm going to blame this on the director, Garth Jennings, because Douglas Adams collaborated heavily on the screenplay before he died. Perhaps it would have been different had he been alive during production - he died in 2001, and the film was released in 2005.
1. Ella Enchanted
There was and is so much wrong with this movie, I don't know that I have the courage to go on. I will do my best, however. I read Ella Enchanted when I was in junior high, which was a difficult period in my life. This book made me happy. It won a Newberry award. It is a wonderful story about a girl just about my age (at the time) who overcomes a terrible curse and saves herself, her country, and the boy she loves. Ella (in the book) is an intelligent, independent, and irrepressible person who achieves her goals and richly deserves the happy ending that comes to her. Ella (in the movie) is Anne Hathaway, and stinks of Disney. Nothing is right in the movie. There's an evil royal uncle that should not be there. The evil stepsisters succeed only in being annoying. There is a bizarre and unexplanable romance between a giantess and an elf. Basically, the only thing that this film has in common with the book is the names of the characters, and sometimes they don't even get that right. A thousand curses upon director Tommy O'Haver and writer (I use that term in the loosest sense of the word) Laurie Craig. May they and all their children, and their children's children be bitten by fleas. Repeatedly.
Okay, I'm through it. Now for the dishonorable mentions: Dune (1984), War of the Worlds (2005), The Hobbit (1977), The Lord of the Rings (1978), The Black Cauldron (1985), Matilda (1996), and Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban (2004).
Monday, June 29, 2009
Little Green Bugs
Little green bugs are abundant where I live.
Tiny, short-range missiles of the insect world
Buzzing, crawling, sneaky little devils - what I wouldn't give
To get rid of them, all innocence with wings unfurled
Saying "Who could hate me? I'm so small and harmless."
Harmless, maybe, up to the point when one goes
Around and around my head, nothing is worse, unless
It's when it decides, after all, to fly up my nose.
Thank God for spiders, though not when they're inside
My home - No, when they craft their webs and set
Their traps. I can see the bodies of the bugs who died
Struggling in vain to free themselves, to glide
Up, up, and away. But the wise little spiders wait
Patiently, quietly, biding their time until bugs fly
Into their invisible, intricate snares made by eight
Clever legs - ready to suck them dry.
Thank God for the bats when they come out at night!
Little flying mammals navigating by the sound
Of squeaks and echos. I love the sight
Of them at dusk. I love watching them flit around
Darting this way and that. I never shared the fear
That these amazing nocturnal creatures change
Their taste for bugs into a taste for blood. It's clear
That they're happy with their diet, though it's strange.
Little green bugs are always landing in the pool
And drowning. On a long day when it's hotter than hell
I just want to come home, grab a book and cool
Off in the water - water filled with the bugs that fell
And couldn't get themselves out, but the silly things
Are at their most alarming when I'm asleep in my bed.
What are they doing when I'm unaware? A bug clings
To my hair, making its way to my ear to lay eggs in my head.
Or so I believe, when I wake up with a start.
I dig frantically at my ear, trying to get them out
Until I realize I'm dreaming, and my pounding heart
Goes back to its regular rhythm. I seriously doubt
Those insects intend to frighten me so.
They're just trying to live - the thought of them tugs
At my conscience. I feel sorry for them, though
I hate them. Damn those little green bugs.
Tiny, short-range missiles of the insect world
Buzzing, crawling, sneaky little devils - what I wouldn't give
To get rid of them, all innocence with wings unfurled
Saying "Who could hate me? I'm so small and harmless."
Harmless, maybe, up to the point when one goes
Around and around my head, nothing is worse, unless
It's when it decides, after all, to fly up my nose.
Thank God for spiders, though not when they're inside
My home - No, when they craft their webs and set
Their traps. I can see the bodies of the bugs who died
Struggling in vain to free themselves, to glide
Up, up, and away. But the wise little spiders wait
Patiently, quietly, biding their time until bugs fly
Into their invisible, intricate snares made by eight
Clever legs - ready to suck them dry.
Thank God for the bats when they come out at night!
Little flying mammals navigating by the sound
Of squeaks and echos. I love the sight
Of them at dusk. I love watching them flit around
Darting this way and that. I never shared the fear
That these amazing nocturnal creatures change
Their taste for bugs into a taste for blood. It's clear
That they're happy with their diet, though it's strange.
Little green bugs are always landing in the pool
And drowning. On a long day when it's hotter than hell
I just want to come home, grab a book and cool
Off in the water - water filled with the bugs that fell
And couldn't get themselves out, but the silly things
Are at their most alarming when I'm asleep in my bed.
What are they doing when I'm unaware? A bug clings
To my hair, making its way to my ear to lay eggs in my head.
Or so I believe, when I wake up with a start.
I dig frantically at my ear, trying to get them out
Until I realize I'm dreaming, and my pounding heart
Goes back to its regular rhythm. I seriously doubt
Those insects intend to frighten me so.
They're just trying to live - the thought of them tugs
At my conscience. I feel sorry for them, though
I hate them. Damn those little green bugs.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Don't-See TV
I promise that I'll try not to do this too often, but I'm going to have to rant - just a little bit. I promise that I'm not a major couch potato. I would rather read than watch TV, but I do turn the TV on for background noise while I'm cooking, and there are a few shows that I watch regularly. This posting is not about those shows - the good ones. This is about the bad shows. I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "Really? There are lots of awful shows on TV." Very true. I'm just going to focus on the ones that are particularly annoying to me at this time.
Jon and Kate Plus Eight:
I'm not ashamed to admit that I have never watched an episode of this show, but I sure am sick of hearing about it. I'm tired of all of the drama surrounding the parents on this show - did Jon cheat on Kate? What's the big announcement that the couple will soon make? How will this affect the show?
Can I respond with a question of my own? Thank you. Who the f*** cares?! These are people who took advantage of an opportunity - and who could blame them? Raising eight kids is no walk in the economic park. Still, they have brought this on themselves, and in my opinion have not considered the long-term effects of this stupid reality show on their children. I know that the children are reaping benefits indirectly, but I'm sure that no one asked their permission to appear in this show. What happens when they get older? If Jon and Kate do file for divorce, how are they going to be able to deal with that? My parents' divorce was bad, but it wasn't on national television.
Flavor of Love:
I swear to you that I'm not making this show up. Remember Flavor Flave, the guy who wears clocks around his neck and big Viking helmets? This show is all about him. It's like The Bachelor, with Flave as the Bachelor. This is a show that consists of Flave trying to choose from a bunch of pretty but psycho women, who obviously do not respect themselves or each other. It's cat-fight central. I only know about this show because it appears on the TV Guide channel, which also has the programming schedule, and I have to mute the channel whenever it's on - it's that bad. I assume that this ridiculous show is on the TV Guide channel because no other network would stoop so low.
Whale Wars:
I understand if none of you have heard of this show. Being the major geek that I am, I like to watch channels like National Geographic and Discovery. Whale Wars is on Animal Planet. It's a documentary show following the exploits of a group of activists who use every means short of outright violence to stop Japanese whalers from killing whales in the Antarctic. Please understand that I'm not expressing disapproval of their goals - I think that killing whales is a long-outdated and barbaric practice, and the Japanese whalers are using loopholes in the law in order to continue. They claim that they're conducting "scientific research". Killing whales for profit is obsene, okay? That being said, these activists are complete morons. They call themselves the "Sea Shepherds", and they were founded by a guy who was kicked out of Greenpeace. In fact, Greenpeace wants nothing to do with them at all. Basically, this is a ship full of idealists who are under the delusion that if they somehow manage to stop this particular whaling fleet, then whaling will be stopped, permanently, all over the world. Has the thought crossed any of their minds that there just might be more than one whaling ship in the world? And that's not even the worst part - for me, at least. The worst part is that most of these people have such a disdain for "the system" or "the Man" or any kind of authority that the way the ship is run is an absolute joke. In the first episode, three crew members were almost killed because the person who was lowering their small boat into the water had no clue what he was doing. If these people really cared about the whales, you'd think they would step up their game.
Okay. My rant is done now. Mostly. There will always be shows on TV that really suck. I'll just have to content myself with the good ones. I just had to rant a little in order to make myself feel better.
Jon and Kate Plus Eight:
I'm not ashamed to admit that I have never watched an episode of this show, but I sure am sick of hearing about it. I'm tired of all of the drama surrounding the parents on this show - did Jon cheat on Kate? What's the big announcement that the couple will soon make? How will this affect the show?
Can I respond with a question of my own? Thank you. Who the f*** cares?! These are people who took advantage of an opportunity - and who could blame them? Raising eight kids is no walk in the economic park. Still, they have brought this on themselves, and in my opinion have not considered the long-term effects of this stupid reality show on their children. I know that the children are reaping benefits indirectly, but I'm sure that no one asked their permission to appear in this show. What happens when they get older? If Jon and Kate do file for divorce, how are they going to be able to deal with that? My parents' divorce was bad, but it wasn't on national television.
Flavor of Love:
I swear to you that I'm not making this show up. Remember Flavor Flave, the guy who wears clocks around his neck and big Viking helmets? This show is all about him. It's like The Bachelor, with Flave as the Bachelor. This is a show that consists of Flave trying to choose from a bunch of pretty but psycho women, who obviously do not respect themselves or each other. It's cat-fight central. I only know about this show because it appears on the TV Guide channel, which also has the programming schedule, and I have to mute the channel whenever it's on - it's that bad. I assume that this ridiculous show is on the TV Guide channel because no other network would stoop so low.
Whale Wars:
I understand if none of you have heard of this show. Being the major geek that I am, I like to watch channels like National Geographic and Discovery. Whale Wars is on Animal Planet. It's a documentary show following the exploits of a group of activists who use every means short of outright violence to stop Japanese whalers from killing whales in the Antarctic. Please understand that I'm not expressing disapproval of their goals - I think that killing whales is a long-outdated and barbaric practice, and the Japanese whalers are using loopholes in the law in order to continue. They claim that they're conducting "scientific research". Killing whales for profit is obsene, okay? That being said, these activists are complete morons. They call themselves the "Sea Shepherds", and they were founded by a guy who was kicked out of Greenpeace. In fact, Greenpeace wants nothing to do with them at all. Basically, this is a ship full of idealists who are under the delusion that if they somehow manage to stop this particular whaling fleet, then whaling will be stopped, permanently, all over the world. Has the thought crossed any of their minds that there just might be more than one whaling ship in the world? And that's not even the worst part - for me, at least. The worst part is that most of these people have such a disdain for "the system" or "the Man" or any kind of authority that the way the ship is run is an absolute joke. In the first episode, three crew members were almost killed because the person who was lowering their small boat into the water had no clue what he was doing. If these people really cared about the whales, you'd think they would step up their game.
Okay. My rant is done now. Mostly. There will always be shows on TV that really suck. I'll just have to content myself with the good ones. I just had to rant a little in order to make myself feel better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)