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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)