Now I know the first time around I made this sound like this series of posts would mostly be positive in tone, but after watching last week's Community, I realized it didn't have to be. For this post I'll examine the issue with Community's theme song.
I love Community. it's been great to see the show grow over two season's from a mediocre sitcom that couldn't quite find its voice, to a consistently funny, if lowly rated, start to my Thursday nights. The cast is outstanding, the one liners superb, and story lines constantly inventive.
But if there is one thing that has always bugged me about this show, is its terribly theme song. My main problem is that a good theme song should match the tone of the show it's representing. In the olden days this meant summarizing the major plot points of a TV show and turning them into a jingle (see Brady Bunch). Since that time the TV theme song has undergone several different forms, from simple orchestral music introducing large casts (ER) to popular classic rock songs (CSI's), but if there is one theme song that ever truly encapsulated the show it was a part of, it was "I'll Be There For You" by The Rembrandts for NBC's Friends.
This song not only was a good metaphor for what the show was about, but embodied the optimistic feel of the 90's that the early years of the show now represent. Contrast this with the Community which has this light breezy theme song, for what is often a dark, bitingly funny, and cynical show. Now I don't have any suggestions for what would better represent the show, but this current song is just annoying, and it takes a lot of will for me not to turn the channel when it comes to that part of the show.
What do think expel this theme, or let it pass? (yeah how 'bout them college puns)
Monday, February 28, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Music Video Mayhem: Two Door Cinema Club
Welcome to my first repeat post wooo!
As I've said Music Video Mayhem comes about when I find a particularly appealing music video I'd like to share with you. This week's entry comes from a band called Two Door Cinema Club, who I had never even heard of until this morning.
They say cable doesn't play music videos anymore, but that isn't really true. They just don't play them all the time, and well, MTV doesn't really play them anymore, except to occasionally premiere something new from a popular artist after the Jersey Shore. But channels like Fuse play them quite frequently, and even VH1 does, if you know when to watch. VH1 is where I discovered this gem called What You Know from band Two Door Cinema Club this morning before class. VH1 has been doing a pretty solid job with their morning broadcasts of music videos, playing more than just the predictable standard of Top 40 hits by delving into the more obscure. Now I don't know exactly what the name of the program is, but I do know that while this video was playing there was graphic in the the corner telling me I "ought to know" this band, and I have to agree.
This video, and song have lots of appealing elements, from the twangy guitars to the dancers who seem to be choreographed by ballerina who works on bad SNL sketches. Throw in the optical illusion filed white set with splashes of prime colors and you have a pretty awesome little video.
As I've said Music Video Mayhem comes about when I find a particularly appealing music video I'd like to share with you. This week's entry comes from a band called Two Door Cinema Club, who I had never even heard of until this morning.
They say cable doesn't play music videos anymore, but that isn't really true. They just don't play them all the time, and well, MTV doesn't really play them anymore, except to occasionally premiere something new from a popular artist after the Jersey Shore. But channels like Fuse play them quite frequently, and even VH1 does, if you know when to watch. VH1 is where I discovered this gem called What You Know from band Two Door Cinema Club this morning before class. VH1 has been doing a pretty solid job with their morning broadcasts of music videos, playing more than just the predictable standard of Top 40 hits by delving into the more obscure. Now I don't know exactly what the name of the program is, but I do know that while this video was playing there was graphic in the the corner telling me I "ought to know" this band, and I have to agree.
This video, and song have lots of appealing elements, from the twangy guitars to the dancers who seem to be choreographed by ballerina who works on bad SNL sketches. Throw in the optical illusion filed white set with splashes of prime colors and you have a pretty awesome little video.
Monday, February 21, 2011
What I learned today: Ghazal
Every once and a while there is something I learn that I like to share with people. This sometimes comes from class, sometimes from life, often times from others, and occasionally by accident. Sometimes the thing I learn is practical, sometimes its more of a philosophical musing. Today I will be discussing the ghazal*.
Due to poor weather conditions, my classes today were delayed until 10 a.m. This meant all classes before 10 a.m. were canceled, which meant I would be missing my poetry workshop. So imagine my surprise when I fund myself learning about poetry in another of my English classes.
Since we only used half of the class period, my instructor suggested we take the remaining time to try writing a ghazal. A ghazal is an Arabic form of poetry consisting of couplets. The first couplet must rhyme, and the second line of all subsequent couplets should end in the same word or phrase as the second line of the first couplet.
Confused yet? So was I, to add to the disarray each line of the ghazal needs to have the same number of syllables, and none of the couplets should relate to each other in any direct way. Fially in the last couplet of ghazal, the author should try and evoke their own name. I have to say, for all the struggles I have been having with poetry this semester, I rather enjoyed the exercise because it was like trying to solve a very difficult word problem. Here is my effort (and yes I realize the syllables aren't all the same, but they are very close):
I went out into the night
Saw the snow falling so white
The people here are so bland
Their skin is pasty, pale, and white
Fireworks light up the summer sky
Flags fly true red, blue and white
I put my pen to the page
Across blue lines and sheets of white
How can you tell Chris from Chris?
They all seem so blank and white
And that's what I learned today.
* it might also be "a" ghazal, I'm not really sure.
Due to poor weather conditions, my classes today were delayed until 10 a.m. This meant all classes before 10 a.m. were canceled, which meant I would be missing my poetry workshop. So imagine my surprise when I fund myself learning about poetry in another of my English classes.
Since we only used half of the class period, my instructor suggested we take the remaining time to try writing a ghazal. A ghazal is an Arabic form of poetry consisting of couplets. The first couplet must rhyme, and the second line of all subsequent couplets should end in the same word or phrase as the second line of the first couplet.
Confused yet? So was I, to add to the disarray each line of the ghazal needs to have the same number of syllables, and none of the couplets should relate to each other in any direct way. Fially in the last couplet of ghazal, the author should try and evoke their own name. I have to say, for all the struggles I have been having with poetry this semester, I rather enjoyed the exercise because it was like trying to solve a very difficult word problem. Here is my effort (and yes I realize the syllables aren't all the same, but they are very close):
I went out into the night
Saw the snow falling so white
The people here are so bland
Their skin is pasty, pale, and white
Fireworks light up the summer sky
Flags fly true red, blue and white
I put my pen to the page
Across blue lines and sheets of white
How can you tell Chris from Chris?
They all seem so blank and white
And that's what I learned today.
* it might also be "a" ghazal, I'm not really sure.
What's the deal with...Owen Wilson being sidelined
What's the deal with...will be a series of post dealing with an aspect of pop culture (or life in general) that is perplexing me. I will try and analyze what the cause is and what a possible solution might be. This first post is dedicated to Mr. Owen Wilson.
When I was in the sixth grade I saw a movie called Shanghai Knights. A year later I saw a film called Behind Enemy Lines. For a long time these were two of my favorite movies for one reason: Owen Wilson. he was and still is one of my favorite actors. Owen Wilson , Jason Statham, and Paul Rudd are my triumvirate of see in anything movie actors. I don't care how bad critics trash a movie they appear in, I will go see it. But Owen Wilson is my number one.
After behind enemy lines, I watched his career continue to grow with a blockbuster role in Wedding Crashers. Soon after I discovered the films of Wes Anderson, and the pivotal roles he plays in those films. He is the all American sidekick, a man who lead any film as long as he has the right cast around him.
So it was distressing to me when I began to see the trailers for Wilson's new film Hall Pass that prominently featured Jason Sudeikis, and barely featured Wilson at all. Don't get me wrong, I think Sudeikis is hilarious, and I'm glad to see him getting a shot at a prominent role in a feature film. But I began to worry about what people thought was wrong with Owen Wilson, especially if he was, as I understood it, supposed to be the main character of the film. But I couldn't think of any specific reason that the studio would want to shy away from focusing the marketing around Wilson, I wrote it off as a fluke.
That is until I saw the new trailer for Cars 2, Pixar's latest endeavor. The new spot which aired during the Daytona 500 on Sunday, again puts Owen Wilson (Lightning MacQueen) in the background, instead choosing to focus on Michael Caine (in a new role as a British Intelligence...car...) and Larry the Cable Guy's Tow Mater. Again I found myself wondering why? What was it about Owen Wilson that was forcing him out of the spotlight of films that he was clearly the star of?
I started to back track and look at Wilson's filmography starting with Marley & Me, the first film he made after his suicide attempt. From there his film's leading up to Hall Pass were: Night at the Museum 2, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Marmaduke, Marmaduke, How Do You Know, and Little Fockers. Night at the Museum 2 and Little Fockers both raked in a lot of cash at the box office, but Wilson was playing second fiddle to Ben Stiller in those films. In Fantastic Mr. Fox he has a minute voice role (although one involving some of the best lines in the film). Marmaduke was a critical and commercial failure as was How Do You Know. To find the last blockbuster hit Wilson was the star of you would have to go back to the first Cars, and to find the last live action film he was the star of that was a box office smash, you need to go all the way back to 2005 and Wedding Crashers.
Now we have an answer, since his suicide attempt in 2007 Wilson's stock in Hollywood has slowly been on the decline. Like the rest of the Frat-pack he's going to need to figure out how to adapt in Hollywood as he continues to age. At least I can take solace in the fact that he'll always have Wes Anderson.
 |
| His eyes pierce the soul |
After behind enemy lines, I watched his career continue to grow with a blockbuster role in Wedding Crashers. Soon after I discovered the films of Wes Anderson, and the pivotal roles he plays in those films. He is the all American sidekick, a man who lead any film as long as he has the right cast around him.
So it was distressing to me when I began to see the trailers for Wilson's new film Hall Pass that prominently featured Jason Sudeikis, and barely featured Wilson at all. Don't get me wrong, I think Sudeikis is hilarious, and I'm glad to see him getting a shot at a prominent role in a feature film. But I began to worry about what people thought was wrong with Owen Wilson, especially if he was, as I understood it, supposed to be the main character of the film. But I couldn't think of any specific reason that the studio would want to shy away from focusing the marketing around Wilson, I wrote it off as a fluke.
That is until I saw the new trailer for Cars 2, Pixar's latest endeavor. The new spot which aired during the Daytona 500 on Sunday, again puts Owen Wilson (Lightning MacQueen) in the background, instead choosing to focus on Michael Caine (in a new role as a British Intelligence...car...) and Larry the Cable Guy's Tow Mater. Again I found myself wondering why? What was it about Owen Wilson that was forcing him out of the spotlight of films that he was clearly the star of?
I started to back track and look at Wilson's filmography starting with Marley & Me, the first film he made after his suicide attempt. From there his film's leading up to Hall Pass were: Night at the Museum 2, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Marmaduke, Marmaduke, How Do You Know, and Little Fockers. Night at the Museum 2 and Little Fockers both raked in a lot of cash at the box office, but Wilson was playing second fiddle to Ben Stiller in those films. In Fantastic Mr. Fox he has a minute voice role (although one involving some of the best lines in the film). Marmaduke was a critical and commercial failure as was How Do You Know. To find the last blockbuster hit Wilson was the star of you would have to go back to the first Cars, and to find the last live action film he was the star of that was a box office smash, you need to go all the way back to 2005 and Wedding Crashers.
Now we have an answer, since his suicide attempt in 2007 Wilson's stock in Hollywood has slowly been on the decline. Like the rest of the Frat-pack he's going to need to figure out how to adapt in Hollywood as he continues to age. At least I can take solace in the fact that he'll always have Wes Anderson.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
TV Tunes: Mr. Sunshine
In TV Tunes I will analyze either music that I have heard used in a TV show take a look at TV show's theme song. This Time we will analyze the theme for Matthew Perry's new ABC sitcom Mr. Sunshine.
Say what you will about Matthew Perry's new sitcom ( I personally am really enjoying it), but it has given one of the best TV theme songs in quite a while. While many shows have recently turned to the shortened theme format, no show has done it with quite as much charm as Mr. Sunshine. In six seconds the theme is able to be funny, while still instilling the audience with a tone of the show. What is it exactly about this them that makes it so appealing? The big sun with the so-so face, the acoustic backing, or perhaps the dopey monotone singing that accompanies it? Who knows, but it's delightful.
If you haven't had a chance yet, check out Mr. Sunshine Wednesdays at 8:30 p.m. on ABC or catch up with the first two episode on Hulu.
Say what you will about Matthew Perry's new sitcom ( I personally am really enjoying it), but it has given one of the best TV theme songs in quite a while. While many shows have recently turned to the shortened theme format, no show has done it with quite as much charm as Mr. Sunshine. In six seconds the theme is able to be funny, while still instilling the audience with a tone of the show. What is it exactly about this them that makes it so appealing? The big sun with the so-so face, the acoustic backing, or perhaps the dopey monotone singing that accompanies it? Who knows, but it's delightful.
If you haven't had a chance yet, check out Mr. Sunshine Wednesdays at 8:30 p.m. on ABC or catch up with the first two episode on Hulu.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Sports Stuff: Atlanta Thrashers
I don't fancy myself a sports guy, you can tell by the way I just used the word fancy to describe my affection for sports. However I'm not totally oblivious to sports either, I like the NHL and the Green Bay Packers, and I can pretty much get behind any Wisconsin team that's doing well. So every once and a while if something sports relevant comes up I'll throw up a post in regards to America's favorite pastimes. This first post regards the threatened existence of the Atlanta Thrashers.
Those of you who know me, know I played hockey for six years during grade school. It is hands down my favorite sport. I could never understand the aversion people had to hockey. It's as hard hitting as football, it's as face paced (if not faster paced) than basketball, and it isn't soccer. Yet people never really seem to take the sport seriously, and throughout the 2000's the NHL has been struggling to find a wider fan base.
Word coming out of Atlanta today suggests that their NHL team, the Thrashers (it's a bird), is in dire need of investors or they risk being sold and moved. This is especially sad news for me. Living around Milwaukee the closest NHL team was the Chicago Blackhawks, I had to get my hockey fix from the Milwaukee Admirals, the city's minor-league team. The only NHL game I have ever been to was in Atlanta during the Thrasher's 1999-2000 inaugural season. Now I really wanted to go to this game because they were playing my favorite hockey team, the New Jersey Devils, so I wasn't really there to root for the home team. Nonetheless it is so far the only NHL game I have ever been to and it holds a special place in my heart.
Atlanta has been robbed of a hockey team before, in 1980 the Atlanta Flames left the city for Calgary where they remain today. Some might think Atlanta is an odd city to host a professional hockey team, and they might be right, but it's certainly no stranger than a city like Phoenix or Sunrise, Florida. However with Atlanta's attendance ranking 29th out of 30 teams, and owner's that have been trying to sell the team for over six years without success, maybe Atlanta no longer wants a professional hockey team.
 |
| Yeah it kinda looks like that one Pokemon |
Those of you who know me, know I played hockey for six years during grade school. It is hands down my favorite sport. I could never understand the aversion people had to hockey. It's as hard hitting as football, it's as face paced (if not faster paced) than basketball, and it isn't soccer. Yet people never really seem to take the sport seriously, and throughout the 2000's the NHL has been struggling to find a wider fan base.
Word coming out of Atlanta today suggests that their NHL team, the Thrashers (it's a bird), is in dire need of investors or they risk being sold and moved. This is especially sad news for me. Living around Milwaukee the closest NHL team was the Chicago Blackhawks, I had to get my hockey fix from the Milwaukee Admirals, the city's minor-league team. The only NHL game I have ever been to was in Atlanta during the Thrasher's 1999-2000 inaugural season. Now I really wanted to go to this game because they were playing my favorite hockey team, the New Jersey Devils, so I wasn't really there to root for the home team. Nonetheless it is so far the only NHL game I have ever been to and it holds a special place in my heart.
Atlanta has been robbed of a hockey team before, in 1980 the Atlanta Flames left the city for Calgary where they remain today. Some might think Atlanta is an odd city to host a professional hockey team, and they might be right, but it's certainly no stranger than a city like Phoenix or Sunrise, Florida. However with Atlanta's attendance ranking 29th out of 30 teams, and owner's that have been trying to sell the team for over six years without success, maybe Atlanta no longer wants a professional hockey team.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Title Dissection: Sherlock Homes 2
Title Dissection will be a series of posts dedicated to trying to figure out as much about an unreleased movie as possible, simply by analyzing the title (and cast, and plot points, and anything else we may already know). Unfortunately these posts are really only fun if sequels end up getting subtitles, because usually plot points are kept under wraps, unlike one-offs which usually come with a plot synopsis. Today we look at Sherlock Holmes 2.
Let' be serious, no one honestly thought Sherlok Holmes was going to stick with a simple numbered sequel. So today's announcement from Warner Brothers and Comingsoon.net of the sequels official title should come as no surprise. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows will be released this coming Christmas.
I'd like to examine the choice to title it A Game of Shadows, and not some other article, or conjunction, or....something else. First The. A strong article, and a rather popular one this past year in film. The American, The Town, The A-Team, etc. However, it's also to specific. It's not A Town, it's The Town. See with the article A I would have no idea what the film producers were thinking, but by choosing The I now know exactly what town they're talking about. If it was Sherlock Holmes: The Game of Shadows, it would give away to much of the plot. I would know that the movie would consist of the Sherlock Homes playing the Game of Shadows. A Game of Shadows allows for a more metaphorical title, and that's what everyone's asking for, more metaphors.
But why not just drop the article all together? Because that would just be stealing from Michael Bay. See he beat Guy Ritchie to the punch by cleverly sub-titling Transformers 3, as Transformers: Dark of the Moon. That's right Michael Bay doesn't like articles, they cut down on explosion time. Plus if he added The, that subtitle would have been 5 words long, one over the max number of subtitle words allowed, as decided by George Lucas in The Empire Strikes Back (see 4). And, again, Game of Shadows is too specific. You might as well call it Sherlock Holmes Plays Flashlight Tag.
Then there's And. And poses a particular problem because you have to decide whether the movie will be And or ampersand. Personally I'm a fan of the ampersand but it's a point of heated debate best left for another post. It could have used And, but then it would have had to use an article which brings us back to A and The. If it uses And The it moves into Harry Potter territory. And in all honesty, Sherlock Holmes and a Game of Shadows, just sounds weak.
I'm not convinced this is best title choice, Game of Shadows does have a certain cheese factor to it, but there are certainly worse titles it could have used. What about you? Are you more or less excited now that Sherlock Holmes 2 has been officially subtitled?
 |
| The fun returns |
Let' be serious, no one honestly thought Sherlok Holmes was going to stick with a simple numbered sequel. So today's announcement from Warner Brothers and Comingsoon.net of the sequels official title should come as no surprise. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows will be released this coming Christmas.
I'd like to examine the choice to title it A Game of Shadows, and not some other article, or conjunction, or....something else. First The. A strong article, and a rather popular one this past year in film. The American, The Town, The A-Team, etc. However, it's also to specific. It's not A Town, it's The Town. See with the article A I would have no idea what the film producers were thinking, but by choosing The I now know exactly what town they're talking about. If it was Sherlock Holmes: The Game of Shadows, it would give away to much of the plot. I would know that the movie would consist of the Sherlock Homes playing the Game of Shadows. A Game of Shadows allows for a more metaphorical title, and that's what everyone's asking for, more metaphors.
But why not just drop the article all together? Because that would just be stealing from Michael Bay. See he beat Guy Ritchie to the punch by cleverly sub-titling Transformers 3, as Transformers: Dark of the Moon. That's right Michael Bay doesn't like articles, they cut down on explosion time. Plus if he added The, that subtitle would have been 5 words long, one over the max number of subtitle words allowed, as decided by George Lucas in The Empire Strikes Back (see 4). And, again, Game of Shadows is too specific. You might as well call it Sherlock Holmes Plays Flashlight Tag.
Then there's And. And poses a particular problem because you have to decide whether the movie will be And or ampersand. Personally I'm a fan of the ampersand but it's a point of heated debate best left for another post. It could have used And, but then it would have had to use an article which brings us back to A and The. If it uses And The it moves into Harry Potter territory. And in all honesty, Sherlock Holmes and a Game of Shadows, just sounds weak.
I'm not convinced this is best title choice, Game of Shadows does have a certain cheese factor to it, but there are certainly worse titles it could have used. What about you? Are you more or less excited now that Sherlock Holmes 2 has been officially subtitled?
Monday, February 14, 2011
Fashion Spotlight: Spidey's New Suit
This blog isn't as one dimensional as you may think. In my initial post I talked about movies, music, books, and television, but fashion is another essential part of popular culture, everything revolves around trends, and nothing is trendier than fashion. In this initial post we will examine Spiderman's new look.
Today it was announced that the new Spiderman reboot would return everyone's favorite wall-crawler to his roots by titling the film The Amazing Spiderman. The time to analyze whether or not this is a good decision will probably be subject for a later post but today let's focus on the other treat fans were given today, Andrew Garfield donning the full new Spidey-suit.
The most important part of any superhero, next to their name, is their costume. The costume is the physical embodiment of the alter-ego that which encapsulates all that they stand for, and what they are trying embody. It holds the logo with which they will be recognized. People always point to Batman's cape and cowl, but he's nothing without that big bat spread across his chest. The same goes for Spiderman. People know he's the guy with the spider in the middle of his chest, big eyes and webbing covering the rest of his suit. Marc Webb's redesigned Spidey-suit seems to keep all of these key elements while giving them slight alterations. Let's contrast with the previous Spidey-suit worn by Tobey Maguire in Sam Raimi's Spiderman films.
The first thing to look at is the much more modern look the new suit has. While Raimi went for a very classic Spiderman that clearly defined the red and blue elements of the costume, the new version blends the red and blue elements especially on the arms.
While we are looking at the arms, note specifically the black pieces of plastic his wrists. These are presumably Spiderman's webs shooters. One of the major criticisms of Raimi's films was how he decided that part of Peter Parker's mutation from being bit by a radioactive spider would allow him to shoot webs out of his wrists. This goes against the comics where Peter Parker invents a mechanical device and chemical that allows him to shoot webbing from his wrists. Webb seems to be going back to the source material and having his Peter Parker be the genius most fans recognize him to be.
Finally let's look at the eyes. this is the one part that does not necessarily concern me, but at least interests me. There seems to be a difference between the eyes on the new suit and old suit. The new suit seems to have eyes that are smaller, rounder, and have an odd golden glare to them. However looking back at old promo poster's for the first three Spiderman films, they all feature a Spiderman with "golden glare" eyes, even though they appear white in the films. So perhaps it's just a trick of the camera.
For now I'm on board with the new look, but what about you? Are you digging Spidey's new suit, or do you like the way Tobey wears it better? And what about that new title?
 |
| Before |
 |
| After |
The most important part of any superhero, next to their name, is their costume. The costume is the physical embodiment of the alter-ego that which encapsulates all that they stand for, and what they are trying embody. It holds the logo with which they will be recognized. People always point to Batman's cape and cowl, but he's nothing without that big bat spread across his chest. The same goes for Spiderman. People know he's the guy with the spider in the middle of his chest, big eyes and webbing covering the rest of his suit. Marc Webb's redesigned Spidey-suit seems to keep all of these key elements while giving them slight alterations. Let's contrast with the previous Spidey-suit worn by Tobey Maguire in Sam Raimi's Spiderman films.
The first thing to look at is the much more modern look the new suit has. While Raimi went for a very classic Spiderman that clearly defined the red and blue elements of the costume, the new version blends the red and blue elements especially on the arms.
While we are looking at the arms, note specifically the black pieces of plastic his wrists. These are presumably Spiderman's webs shooters. One of the major criticisms of Raimi's films was how he decided that part of Peter Parker's mutation from being bit by a radioactive spider would allow him to shoot webs out of his wrists. This goes against the comics where Peter Parker invents a mechanical device and chemical that allows him to shoot webbing from his wrists. Webb seems to be going back to the source material and having his Peter Parker be the genius most fans recognize him to be.
Finally let's look at the eyes. this is the one part that does not necessarily concern me, but at least interests me. There seems to be a difference between the eyes on the new suit and old suit. The new suit seems to have eyes that are smaller, rounder, and have an odd golden glare to them. However looking back at old promo poster's for the first three Spiderman films, they all feature a Spiderman with "golden glare" eyes, even though they appear white in the films. So perhaps it's just a trick of the camera.
For now I'm on board with the new look, but what about you? Are you digging Spidey's new suit, or do you like the way Tobey wears it better? And what about that new title?
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Completist: Quentin Tarantino
I like a lot of things, but if I find one particular thing I like I try and consume all things that are related to it. I like to watch all the movies by a particular director, or starring a particular actor. I like to read all the books in a series, and I like to get all the music by a certain artist. This series of posts will appear whenever I have completed a certain benchmark. For this post I will reflect on watching every film Quentin Tarantino has directed.
Last night I watched Jackie Brown with my friend Brian Curran. This marks a momentous occasion, as I have now seen every film directed by Quentin Tarantino. I wish I could say when or what first drew me to Tarantino, but I honestly cannot remember. I think maybe the first thing I saw was Grindhouse, his double-feature with Robert Rodriguez, on opening weekend back in April of 2007. Tarantino's contribution, Death Proof, was in my opinion, the weaker of the two films, but the concept of Grindhouse was what really impressed me. It displayed some of his genius, his willingness to collaborate, and the simple enjoyment he has making a film.
After Grindhouse, I really cannot even give an educated guess as to what films I saw or in what order. Each film I saw showed me another side of Tarantino's ability to tell a story. Every DVD extra I watched gave me greater insight into his creative process.
Ending my journey through Tarantino's films with Jackie Brown also provided me with an interesting perspective. Jackie Brown is Tarantino's tribute to blaxploitation films of the 1970's. It is not his most sharply written or edited film he has ever made, but it is still quintessential Tarantino. It has a stellar cast, and a twisted plot full of unsavory characters. The story is told in an almost linear fashion, something Tarantino fans might not expect, and the feel does feel as though it plods along at some points. While the dialogue always carries Tarantino films, here it just never seems to have quite the same impact as his other films.
No matter what your favorite Tarantino film is, I really would encourage people to see them all. Each film shows his progress as a writer and director. Each film shows him trying new things to see what works (Samuel L. Jackson who has a role in every Taratino film except Death Proof, since appearing in Pulp Fiction) and what doesn't (hopefully using David Bowie songs in WWII movies). If nothing else you are always in for a killer soundtrack.
The plans for Tarantino's next film are still up in the air, but when it comes out, I'll be there waiting to see what he's come up with this time around.
 |
| Looks aren't everything |
After Grindhouse, I really cannot even give an educated guess as to what films I saw or in what order. Each film I saw showed me another side of Tarantino's ability to tell a story. Every DVD extra I watched gave me greater insight into his creative process.
Ending my journey through Tarantino's films with Jackie Brown also provided me with an interesting perspective. Jackie Brown is Tarantino's tribute to blaxploitation films of the 1970's. It is not his most sharply written or edited film he has ever made, but it is still quintessential Tarantino. It has a stellar cast, and a twisted plot full of unsavory characters. The story is told in an almost linear fashion, something Tarantino fans might not expect, and the feel does feel as though it plods along at some points. While the dialogue always carries Tarantino films, here it just never seems to have quite the same impact as his other films.
No matter what your favorite Tarantino film is, I really would encourage people to see them all. Each film shows his progress as a writer and director. Each film shows him trying new things to see what works (Samuel L. Jackson who has a role in every Taratino film except Death Proof, since appearing in Pulp Fiction) and what doesn't (hopefully using David Bowie songs in WWII movies). If nothing else you are always in for a killer soundtrack.
The plans for Tarantino's next film are still up in the air, but when it comes out, I'll be there waiting to see what he's come up with this time around.
Music Video Mayhem: Atomic Tom Covers "Don't You Want Me Baby"
Music Video Mayhem is just a long winded way of saying I found a pretty awesome music video online that I want to share. Today's video is Atomic Tom covering Human League's one-hit wonder "Don't You Want Me Baby" for the upcoming film Take Me Home Tonight.
For those unfamiliar with them, Atomic Tom rose to popularity towards the end of 2010, when a video of them playing their single "Take Me Out" on their iPhones on the New York subway went viral.* Here they do little to change what made the original song so great, but someone manage to make it sound more modern, which is a good thing.
As I mentioned, this video is part of a promotional campaign for the upcoming 80's set movie Take Me Home Tonight. The movie stars Topher Grace, Ana Faris, and Dan Fogler (the guy from Balls of Fury). The music shows the stars at a party paying homage to a number of classic 80's films, and there are some pretty great bits, especially from Topher Grace. The sad part is that the actors seem to be having way more fun here, than in any of trailers I've seen, which doesn't bode well for the movie.
Take Me Home Tonight comes out March 4, 2011.
*A special thanks to Mr. Ian Kitchen for posting that video on his Facebook back in...I don't know, let's say November.
For those unfamiliar with them, Atomic Tom rose to popularity towards the end of 2010, when a video of them playing their single "Take Me Out" on their iPhones on the New York subway went viral.* Here they do little to change what made the original song so great, but someone manage to make it sound more modern, which is a good thing.
As I mentioned, this video is part of a promotional campaign for the upcoming 80's set movie Take Me Home Tonight. The movie stars Topher Grace, Ana Faris, and Dan Fogler (the guy from Balls of Fury). The music shows the stars at a party paying homage to a number of classic 80's films, and there are some pretty great bits, especially from Topher Grace. The sad part is that the actors seem to be having way more fun here, than in any of trailers I've seen, which doesn't bode well for the movie.
Take Me Home Tonight comes out March 4, 2011.
*A special thanks to Mr. Ian Kitchen for posting that video on his Facebook back in...I don't know, let's say November.
Commercial Break: Time to Retire the Old Spice Guy
Commercial Break is a series of posts commercials that are/have become annoying or irrelevant. we start with the Old Spice Guy ads.
Hello Readers, look at that video clip posted above, now back to this post, now back to the clip, now back to me. Weary of this format yet? Because I sure am.
When the Old Spice Guy burst onto the scene during last year's Super Bowl, he took the advertising and viral world by storm. never before had a commercial been so welcome by the masses, and celebrity born so quickly from an advertisement. Everyone wanted to know who this guy was, where he came from, and when we would see him do another one of these fantastic mind boggling ads.
The guy was Isaiah Mustafa a former NFL player turned actor who had played a small amount of episode spots on a number of TV shows, playing such interesting characters as Cleveland Cop, and Newlywed Husband. Now, don't get me wrong I like Mustafa, he's got a presence that commands the screen whenever he's on it. But these ads have got to stop.
Since first appearing last year the formula hasn't changed, which I suppose goes along the lines if it ain't broke don't fix it. But the ads have really lost their punch. The scene changes aren't as dramatic and the dialogue isn't as sharp.
Take for example the very first ad, people could quote that 30 second spot almost word for word, and we all knew how it ended. He was on a horse.
Now, he's just laying on a piano.
So what do you think? Is it time for Old Spice to move in a new direction? Or are you still digging the fact that he has two tickets to that thing you love?
Hello Readers, look at that video clip posted above, now back to this post, now back to the clip, now back to me. Weary of this format yet? Because I sure am.
When the Old Spice Guy burst onto the scene during last year's Super Bowl, he took the advertising and viral world by storm. never before had a commercial been so welcome by the masses, and celebrity born so quickly from an advertisement. Everyone wanted to know who this guy was, where he came from, and when we would see him do another one of these fantastic mind boggling ads.
The guy was Isaiah Mustafa a former NFL player turned actor who had played a small amount of episode spots on a number of TV shows, playing such interesting characters as Cleveland Cop, and Newlywed Husband. Now, don't get me wrong I like Mustafa, he's got a presence that commands the screen whenever he's on it. But these ads have got to stop.
Since first appearing last year the formula hasn't changed, which I suppose goes along the lines if it ain't broke don't fix it. But the ads have really lost their punch. The scene changes aren't as dramatic and the dialogue isn't as sharp.
Take for example the very first ad, people could quote that 30 second spot almost word for word, and we all knew how it ended. He was on a horse.
Now, he's just laying on a piano.
So what do you think? Is it time for Old Spice to move in a new direction? Or are you still digging the fact that he has two tickets to that thing you love?
Friday, February 11, 2011
Good Sport of the Week: Michael Rosenbaum
The Good Sport of the Week is designated to someone in popular culture (or otherwise, again first time I'm doing this so who knows) who has shown some degree of selflessness or humility is the past week.
This week's winner is Michael Rosenbaum for finally agreeing to return to Smallville for the show's series finale.
People who have watched the show know that it has never quite been the same since Rosenbaum decided to leave after the show's seventh season. The show has always been know for its wild swing from high to low points, but without Rosenbaum playing Lex the show had to rely on subpar villians to try and carry each seasons plotlines. While Rosenbaum left, the hope had always been that he would return for the Smallville's series finale to reclaim the role he so brilliantly played, and put a fitting end to the story that has redefined the Superman mythos.
However on Thursday, Entertainment Weekly published an exclusive report that talks between Rosenbaum and the show's producers had thus far been unsuccessful, and will only three episodes left to shoot, the chances that Rosenbaum would return were dwindling.
It was at this point I almost made a post with the purpose of blasting Rosenbaum for not returning to the show that had given him so much. My main reasoning stemmed from George Clooney. Two years ago when ER learned it would only be getting one more season, the producers announced they would try and revisit as many cast members as they could, which immeadiately had people speculating about whether or not George Clooney would reprise his role as Dr. Doug Ross. Fans were not disappointed, as with little fanfare or promotion, Clooney returned towards the end of the final season. My argument was going to be that Rosenbaum was certainly no George Clooney, and for him to turn his back on the show that had given him his break, was downright arrogant.
See, for me, Rosenbaum is my definitive Lex Luthor. He's not campy like Gene Hackman's version from the Christopher Reeve films. He's not played as methodically as Kevin Spacey's Lex from Superman Returns. And he's not played as seriously as Clancy Brown voice-acted him on Superman: The Animated Series. Rosenbaum's Luthor was played perfectly sinister with a good dose of naivety. His Luthor always had a plan, but a plan he carried out without believing he was doing any wrong. It was this fresh interpretation of the charater that made his portrayal so appealing.
Thankfully TVLine.com has reported the Rosenbaum will return and is excited to be part of the show's finale.
So for not turning your back on the show that has (so far) defined your career, thanks for being a Good Sport Michael Rosenbaum.
Smallville's Two-Hour Series Finale will air Friday May 13th at 7:00 p.m.
This week's winner is Michael Rosenbaum for finally agreeing to return to Smallville for the show's series finale.
 |
| He's back |
People who have watched the show know that it has never quite been the same since Rosenbaum decided to leave after the show's seventh season. The show has always been know for its wild swing from high to low points, but without Rosenbaum playing Lex the show had to rely on subpar villians to try and carry each seasons plotlines. While Rosenbaum left, the hope had always been that he would return for the Smallville's series finale to reclaim the role he so brilliantly played, and put a fitting end to the story that has redefined the Superman mythos.
However on Thursday, Entertainment Weekly published an exclusive report that talks between Rosenbaum and the show's producers had thus far been unsuccessful, and will only three episodes left to shoot, the chances that Rosenbaum would return were dwindling.
It was at this point I almost made a post with the purpose of blasting Rosenbaum for not returning to the show that had given him so much. My main reasoning stemmed from George Clooney. Two years ago when ER learned it would only be getting one more season, the producers announced they would try and revisit as many cast members as they could, which immeadiately had people speculating about whether or not George Clooney would reprise his role as Dr. Doug Ross. Fans were not disappointed, as with little fanfare or promotion, Clooney returned towards the end of the final season. My argument was going to be that Rosenbaum was certainly no George Clooney, and for him to turn his back on the show that had given him his break, was downright arrogant.
See, for me, Rosenbaum is my definitive Lex Luthor. He's not campy like Gene Hackman's version from the Christopher Reeve films. He's not played as methodically as Kevin Spacey's Lex from Superman Returns. And he's not played as seriously as Clancy Brown voice-acted him on Superman: The Animated Series. Rosenbaum's Luthor was played perfectly sinister with a good dose of naivety. His Luthor always had a plan, but a plan he carried out without believing he was doing any wrong. It was this fresh interpretation of the charater that made his portrayal so appealing.
Thankfully TVLine.com has reported the Rosenbaum will return and is excited to be part of the show's finale.
So for not turning your back on the show that has (so far) defined your career, thanks for being a Good Sport Michael Rosenbaum.
Smallville's Two-Hour Series Finale will air Friday May 13th at 7:00 p.m.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Top 3 Reasons You Should Be Watching Top Shot
For those of you unfamiliar with my writing for the St. Norbert Times, the Top 3 was a column I started to comment on various aspects of popular culture. Mostly the purpose was to let people there was more out there than what the mainstream wants people to see, hear, or read. It's something I hope to continue on this blog.
This past year History Channel has entered into the foray of reality television with shows like Pawn Stars, American Pickers, and well...I suppose pretty much anything on History could be considered a reality show right? I mean it all happened (minus the abundant amount of apocalypse shows). Anyway, this past summer History Channel offered up its first reality-competition show called Top Shot. I stumbled across it on Hulu one day over the summer and was immediately hooked, but quickly found it was a hard sell to some of my friends. The first season held solid ratings, and was renewed for a second season that premiered this past Tuesday. With the first episode of the second season available on Hulu, there's no better time than now to jump in. So here are my Top 3 reasons you should be watching Top Shot.
1. Guns
Imagine your favorite reality-competition show, and imagine the one thing that would make that show even better. For me, I'm thinking Survivor, and I'm thinking guns. Guns make everything more interesting, and it's a wonder that no other reality-competition show has exercised their 2nd Amendment rights to spice up the competition. But it's not just the guns, its' the explosions. What's that you ask? This show has guns and explosions? Why yes, yes it does. See instead of simply shooting at wood, or paper targets, contestants often are shooting at long range targets that explode the minute a bullet hits them. This combined with the wide variety of weapons, both new and historical (it is the History Channel after all) gives the show much of its punch, and sets it apart from the more common fare of reality-competition shows.
2. Colby
Every great reality-competition show needs a great host. Enter Colby Donaldson, man, myth, Survivor: Australian Outback runner-up. To put it plainly the guy simply owns the show. He tells the contestants what they need to do and how they need to do it, with minimal small talk. But the real sell comes from the fact that Colby actually seems to enjoy what he's doing. He's not a Donald Trump or a Tyra Banks who are doing a show for their ego, and he's not a Jeff Probst (although I like to imagine Jeff gave Colby some tips at a secret reality-competition hosting school, I want to go there someday) who's been doing the gig so long the thrill has worn off. He's fresh and he's loving it, and he gets to play with guns too, so who can blame him.
3. It's so simple, it's stupid
The contestants are divided into two team: Red and Blue. That's it, no silly tribe names, no funky bandannas, just people in plainly colored polo shirts. The show is divided into two parts, first the team competition. This usually involves the introduction of a new weapon and some type of target style shootout with a twist to increase the difficulty of the challenge. Whatever team does the best wins, the other team has to vote for two members to be eliminated. The losing team goes to the Nomination range, unlike Survivor where votes are secretly cast, the losing team goes to range where the find each of there names attached to a bulls-eye. Each team member takes a pistol and shoots the target of the person they think should be eliminated. Right in front of them! It's Awesome! Plus the best part is that these contestants are so impersonal, everything is about performance to them, there are no secret alliances, you know if you've sucked in the competition you're being nominated. The 2 contestants with the most votes then face off in a head to head elimination challenge. And that's it, the person who does the best gets to stay, the person who loses goes home.
Top Shot airs at 8:00 p.m Central on History Channel, and is available for viewing the next day on Hulu
This past year History Channel has entered into the foray of reality television with shows like Pawn Stars, American Pickers, and well...I suppose pretty much anything on History could be considered a reality show right? I mean it all happened (minus the abundant amount of apocalypse shows). Anyway, this past summer History Channel offered up its first reality-competition show called Top Shot. I stumbled across it on Hulu one day over the summer and was immediately hooked, but quickly found it was a hard sell to some of my friends. The first season held solid ratings, and was renewed for a second season that premiered this past Tuesday. With the first episode of the second season available on Hulu, there's no better time than now to jump in. So here are my Top 3 reasons you should be watching Top Shot.
1. Guns
Imagine your favorite reality-competition show, and imagine the one thing that would make that show even better. For me, I'm thinking Survivor, and I'm thinking guns. Guns make everything more interesting, and it's a wonder that no other reality-competition show has exercised their 2nd Amendment rights to spice up the competition. But it's not just the guns, its' the explosions. What's that you ask? This show has guns and explosions? Why yes, yes it does. See instead of simply shooting at wood, or paper targets, contestants often are shooting at long range targets that explode the minute a bullet hits them. This combined with the wide variety of weapons, both new and historical (it is the History Channel after all) gives the show much of its punch, and sets it apart from the more common fare of reality-competition shows.
2. Colby
 |
| Suck it Probst |
3. It's so simple, it's stupid
The contestants are divided into two team: Red and Blue. That's it, no silly tribe names, no funky bandannas, just people in plainly colored polo shirts. The show is divided into two parts, first the team competition. This usually involves the introduction of a new weapon and some type of target style shootout with a twist to increase the difficulty of the challenge. Whatever team does the best wins, the other team has to vote for two members to be eliminated. The losing team goes to the Nomination range, unlike Survivor where votes are secretly cast, the losing team goes to range where the find each of there names attached to a bulls-eye. Each team member takes a pistol and shoots the target of the person they think should be eliminated. Right in front of them! It's Awesome! Plus the best part is that these contestants are so impersonal, everything is about performance to them, there are no secret alliances, you know if you've sucked in the competition you're being nominated. The 2 contestants with the most votes then face off in a head to head elimination challenge. And that's it, the person who does the best gets to stay, the person who loses goes home.
Top Shot airs at 8:00 p.m Central on History Channel, and is available for viewing the next day on Hulu
Trailer Rundown: X-Men First Class
Another day, another summer superhero movie trailer. Just days after the onslaught of summer movie trailers that were released during the Super Bowl, comes the final piece of the summer 2011 blockbuster puzzle. X-Men: First Class a prequel/reboot of the X-Men film franchise, goes back to the beginning and explores the relationship between Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr, the man who will become Magneto.
Since this is the first time I'm doing this, let's take a look at what we see, what we don't, and I'll give a final verdict on how this trailer stacks up.
What We See
- Clips of the very first X-Men film, which seems to show that this film will be tied to the previous films, at least loosely.
- Some nifty new suits that hearken back to the traditional blue and yellow costumes of the comics rather than the leather getups of the first three films.
- James McAvoy taking over for Patrick Stewart and testing what appears to be a prototype Cerebro.
- Beast, and then a guy turning into Beast, a bit of an odd editing choice.
- A red looking Nightcrawler that is supposedly supposed to be Nightcrawler's dad
- The X-Men seemingly getting involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis, look for this to be the main action in the second act of the film, rather than the actual climax.
- A mutant with some bug wings in what appears to be some type of gentleman's club
- Kevin Bacon as the films villain, Sebastian Shaw, which is really quite disappointing, because, well who doesn't want to see Kevin Bacon play a super villain?
- Oliver Platt as the mysterious Man in Black character.
- January Jones in anything revealing.
- Any evidence of humor (I bring this up only because this film does not have someone like Wolverine in the wise-cracking tough guy role).
A promising first trailer that finally gives curious speculators an idea of the direction this movie is taking. While the trailer seems to primarily focus on the relationship between Erik and Charles, there is evidence that this movie could suffer from the too many mutants syndrome that plagued X3. Overall a solid mix of grand special effects and dialogue that sets up the story. Hopefully future trailers can give us a better sense of the 60's James Bond tech director Matthew Vaughn said he was shooting for, and better idea of the rest of the supporting mutants, instead of shots of their faces.
Welcome To My Blog
I've started this blog for a few reasons. First, this semester I have taken on the role of Co-Editor in Chief of my college's newspaper, the St. Norbert Times. I used to write in the entertainment section of this publication, but since approving my own articles seemed like a conflict of interest, I decided I would no longer write for the paper. However this left me without an outlet to comment on that which I am most interested, pop-culture. So that's the first reason.
The second reason is, that while I enjoyed writing for the paper, I was limited to only being able to write two 500 word articles every two weeks. This blog will let me write about whatever I want, and while it's primary focus will be popular culture (more on that in a minute).
Finally, my good friend Andrew Bray is off studying around Spain this semester and has a blog of his own regaling his reader's with his adventures in foreign lands. I figured if I'm interested in what he (and the rest of my friends who are abroad) are doing while they are away, perhaps they might be interested in what is going on over on this side of the Atlantic.
Which brings us to what I will be actually writing about in the blog. As I said its primary focus will be commenting on pop culture, specifically Movies and Television, but also music and literature. This will range from reviews, to continuing my Top 3 column I started in the St. Norbert Times. But I will also be commenting on things outside the realm of popular culture, like current events, things that have to do with college life, and maybe just some terribly self centered entries where I just run down my day. Who knows? This blog is about the freedom to do whatever I feel like, bookmark this page and check back periodically, I don't have a real schedule for posting stuff, but hopefully a couple posts a week.
And if there's anything you want to talk about let me know.
The second reason is, that while I enjoyed writing for the paper, I was limited to only being able to write two 500 word articles every two weeks. This blog will let me write about whatever I want, and while it's primary focus will be popular culture (more on that in a minute).
Finally, my good friend Andrew Bray is off studying around Spain this semester and has a blog of his own regaling his reader's with his adventures in foreign lands. I figured if I'm interested in what he (and the rest of my friends who are abroad) are doing while they are away, perhaps they might be interested in what is going on over on this side of the Atlantic.
Which brings us to what I will be actually writing about in the blog. As I said its primary focus will be commenting on pop culture, specifically Movies and Television, but also music and literature. This will range from reviews, to continuing my Top 3 column I started in the St. Norbert Times. But I will also be commenting on things outside the realm of popular culture, like current events, things that have to do with college life, and maybe just some terribly self centered entries where I just run down my day. Who knows? This blog is about the freedom to do whatever I feel like, bookmark this page and check back periodically, I don't have a real schedule for posting stuff, but hopefully a couple posts a week.
And if there's anything you want to talk about let me know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)