So...
Even though summer has officially started as far as Hollywood is concerned, I decided to post some thoughts on the 8 movies I am looking forward to this season. Originally, I was going to do 10, but I couldn't actually find 10 movies to get excited about this year. In fact, the whole month of May looks like a waste to me, so let's start with June.
1. Marmaduke. This movie is based on the beloved comic strip, where a dog moves with his family to their new suburban neighborhood home and subsequently gets into all kinds of mischief and mayhem. Sounds generic, but the preview is hysterical and the title character, a lovable, goofy dog, is voiced by the perfectly cast Owen Wilson, who cracks me up just by talking. Opens June 4.
2. The A-Team. Based on the 80s TV show, this movie follows a group of wrongly imprisoned American soldiers who escape and become soldiers for hire for lost causes. The safe bet is that this movie will be trash, but I'm really hoping to be surprised. And the preview is growing on me, especially the dialogue which seems to actually get funnier each time I hear it. And with Liam Neeson starring maybe, just maybe, The A-Team might be a kick-ass popcorn flick in the vein of Charlie's Angels, but with dudes. Opens June 11.
3. Toy Story 3. Do I really need to explain what this one is about? I love the first two and, like Marmaduke, Toy Story is a movie I can take my nephew to. I'm in. Opens June 18.
4. Knight and Day. Yes, it's got Tom Cruise in it. Yes, it's got Cameron Diaz in it. But despite that the previews are starting to look more and more exciting with each new one the studio releases. The stunt work has strong wow potential and the chemisty between the two stars looks legit. I love a good spy movie, and this could be a light, yet serious romp in the vein of True Lies. Opens June 25.
5. Inception. The story's got something to do with people being hired to invade other people's dreams and steal secret information from them. Think dream spys. I'm actually on the fence about this one, but a growing curiosity factor and the fact that Leonardo DiCaprio is in it make it enough of a draw for me. The special effects in the previews look totally mind-blowing, but it also looks a lot like The Matrix, only with dreams instead of computers. I'm also wary of anything revolving around dreams themselves, because there really are no rules or jeapordy when nothing is real. If Chris Nolan can overcome this problem with some actual stakes for the characters during the dreams and find a convential storyline to hang the visual mayhem on then this may be a winner. Opens July 16.
6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice. This film barely made the list. On the surface this movie's plot about a centuries old magician and his new apprentice trying to save the world from the dark forces of evil sounds dumb. And also the movie kind of looks dumb, but it's from the people that made National Treasure so I'm willing to go out on a limb and get my hopes up. If you can get past Nic Cage's awful haircut, he's actually not too badly cast for this role as he looks like something of an outcast, rather than the tough guy action hero he is so often miscast as. The downside is the same people who made this movie and National Treasure also made National Treasure 2. Also, the guy playing the new apprentice seems like a poor man's Justin Long. We'll see... Opens July 16.
7. Dinner for Schmucks. The only live-action comedy I'm looking forward to this summer. Paul Rudd plays a smug jerk who invites a loser played by Steve Carrell to a dinner party where he and his friends try to top each other by bringing the biggest schmuck they can find to said party. Steve Carrell is hit or miss with his movies, but Paul Rudd has been on a hot streak lately and the two of them together, with their personalities, is enough to get me into the threater despite the shaky premise. Opens July 23.
8. Salt. The preview shows promise for a nail-bitting spy mystery and some intense action-adventure. Angelina Jolie plays the title role, in which she is a Government operative mistaken for a Russian spy en route to kill the US President. She looks perfect in what was a role originally meant for a guy and this could be a smart summer film in the vein of the first Mission Impossible, only (fingers crossed) less confusing. Opens July 23.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Sex and the City? No thanks.
So...
There's a new Sex and the City movie coming out this Friday. Apparently, it sucks, but I could have told you that based on the last Sex and the City movie, which was also an unneccessary piece of garbage thrown together not because there was any kind of story left to tell with the characters, but simply to make a few people some cold, hard cash.
Now, I'm not some "SATC" hater here. I actually have seen many of the Sex and the City TV show episodes and can appreciate the show and totally understand why so many people like it. It's actually well done, well written, and has good, well-rounded characters. It's a little unrealistic, but then name me a TV show that isn't.
Here's my beef with the movies. The TV show had an ending! A pretty good one at that, if I recall. And then along comes the Sex and the City movie and basically craps all over that ending just so that there can be the thin pretense of a story to fill 100 pages of movie script.
Let's examine. The show ends with Carrie, the main character, coming to a realization that if you truly want to find love, you must first love yourself. Awww...how sweet. So what does the movie do? It shows us Carrie with her heart-broken, a total mess, lying in bed and depressed for half the film. I'm sorry, did the film's writer forget the how-ever many years worth of storytelling on the show where Carrie never acted like this? And, really, who wants to watch that anyway, especially when the entire reaction was based on a mis-communication between bride and groom on their wedding day that caused Carrie to runaway because she thought the groom wasn't coming to the wedding? Now, the audience knows that her fiance didn't just abandon her so it's just a really God-awful thing to sit through watching Carrie act like that.
In addition, they had to have one of Carrie's friends, Miranda I believe, learn that her husband is having an affair. Really, you have to crap all over their characters just to give Miranda a reason to be in the film. In the TV show stories were born from characters, but in the movie the characters are shoe-horned into a story.
I could go on and on, but I'll just say that it's nice to see critics finally catching on to the crappy film franchise that is Sex and the City. Hopefully audiences will stay away from this one, even though there is the nostalga factor, but Sex and the City fans, I should think, would want the series to be done with so that the movie studio stops taking a giant dump on it and ruining the legacy of the TV show.
There's a new Sex and the City movie coming out this Friday. Apparently, it sucks, but I could have told you that based on the last Sex and the City movie, which was also an unneccessary piece of garbage thrown together not because there was any kind of story left to tell with the characters, but simply to make a few people some cold, hard cash.
Now, I'm not some "SATC" hater here. I actually have seen many of the Sex and the City TV show episodes and can appreciate the show and totally understand why so many people like it. It's actually well done, well written, and has good, well-rounded characters. It's a little unrealistic, but then name me a TV show that isn't.
Here's my beef with the movies. The TV show had an ending! A pretty good one at that, if I recall. And then along comes the Sex and the City movie and basically craps all over that ending just so that there can be the thin pretense of a story to fill 100 pages of movie script.
Let's examine. The show ends with Carrie, the main character, coming to a realization that if you truly want to find love, you must first love yourself. Awww...how sweet. So what does the movie do? It shows us Carrie with her heart-broken, a total mess, lying in bed and depressed for half the film. I'm sorry, did the film's writer forget the how-ever many years worth of storytelling on the show where Carrie never acted like this? And, really, who wants to watch that anyway, especially when the entire reaction was based on a mis-communication between bride and groom on their wedding day that caused Carrie to runaway because she thought the groom wasn't coming to the wedding? Now, the audience knows that her fiance didn't just abandon her so it's just a really God-awful thing to sit through watching Carrie act like that.
In addition, they had to have one of Carrie's friends, Miranda I believe, learn that her husband is having an affair. Really, you have to crap all over their characters just to give Miranda a reason to be in the film. In the TV show stories were born from characters, but in the movie the characters are shoe-horned into a story.
I could go on and on, but I'll just say that it's nice to see critics finally catching on to the crappy film franchise that is Sex and the City. Hopefully audiences will stay away from this one, even though there is the nostalga factor, but Sex and the City fans, I should think, would want the series to be done with so that the movie studio stops taking a giant dump on it and ruining the legacy of the TV show.
Monday, May 24, 2010
LOST series finale reaction
So...
"Guys, where are we?" That was junkie rock star Charlie Pace's line at the end of the LOST series pilot oh so many years ago. It could easily apply to last night's series finale, which I'm still trying to make sense of... particularly the last 15 minutes of the show where (HUGE SPOILER ALERT) we find out that everyone has died and are all meeting up before "moving on" to... well, in true Lost fashion... that's open to interpretation.
The whole 2 1/2 hour finale flew by at breakneck pace and packed emotional wallop after emotional wallop... character arcs closed left and right. Jin and Sun together for good! Sayid and Shannon! Sawyer reunited with Juliet! Charlie and Claire and baby Aaron! The real John Locke back and walking again! Six years worth of journeys were coming to an end. So sad...
It was about halfway through this spiritual awakening of an episode that I began to realize that my initial theory that all the castaway's minds were jumping across time and space into the "sideways" universe post death so that there was, in fact, life after death proved only 1/2 correct. Initially, I thought that the sideways universe this season was actually the "real" universe and that the finale would show us how the surviving castaways were able to go back in time one last time; save the island by sinking it (as we saw in the season six premiere), so that no one could ever get to the light again (assuming the light didn't go out underwater) and that in sacrificing themselves and changing history so that they never even arrived on the island, the universe would "course correct" and give them back their memories of their island lives. To me, it would have been a best of both worlds scenario... where the characters die, but not really.
And then came the final 15 minutes of the show, which basically pooped on that theory and said that, instead, while everyone's memories were re-established, it wasn't in an alternate sideways universe that everyone was "awakening" with new lives, but rather in, for lack of a better word, purgatory.
At least, that's my interpretation of the final few scenes. And thank God for that. Half the fun of Lost is the debating, and this ending leaves plenty of room for various interpretations.
Now, I know the whole "purgatory," everyone is back together again ending is supposed to be a hopeful and happy one, but for whatever reason it just left me sad. I mean, no matter how you slice it, they're all dead! Jack and Kate didn't really get to LIVE happily ever after. And on top of that we get the final image of the show as Jack lying out in the jungle alone, in the same spot where the show began, this time dying, as the woman he loved - Kate - flew off on the escape plane overhead. Well, Jack wasn't totally alone... he had Vincent the dog to sit with him while he passed on. Tear.
Now that some time has passed - so glad I didn't jump on the internet last night to see what the masses were saying about this episode, but rather let it slowly digest in my brain overnight - I went from appreciating and respecting the ending, to understanding that it really is a happy one because everyone found their true loves, or, in Lost terms, their "constants," again and, really, who is to say what the next world will be like for these characters we see gathered in the church at the end. Heck, maybe they do get to live again on some other plane of existence. Such is Lost so anything is possible.
As for the mythology, yes, I wish there had been a few more answers about some oddities (just how exactly did the body of the MIB become a cloud of black smoke and why? Was it his black, corrupted soul released from the shackles of his body?), but the lack of them didn't detract from my enjoyment of the finale. Heck, for the most part, I appreciate that the writers stuck to the major character arcs and, not only in the finale but over the entire course of the series, didn't always spoon feed us the answers. Many times, we actually had to puzzle them out for ourselves.
On example of this is the iconic Lost polar bears. It boggles my mind when people still ask "why were there polar bears on the island?" It just goes to show you how challenging a show like Lost is for many viewers. It's told out of context, out of continuity and with long breaks in between seasons and sometimes even between episodes where answers to posed questions are often spread out over many different episodes and very often out of order.
Again, see the polar bears as an example, where in the pilot we saw Sawyer kill a polar bear, and then three seasons later we saw empty bear changes where they were kept, then in another episode we saw the skeleton of one in the desert (where a secret wormhole portal allowed island-dwellers to transport themselves from the island to the outside world), and yet in another we saw the entrance to the portal, which was located in an icy underground chamber suited for a... you guessed it, polar bear, before the characters eventually found and watched a leftover science video from the Dharma Initiative (the science cult that came to the island looking to study it's weird properties, like the wormhole) that told them (and us) that the Dharma scientists were using animals as test subjects... animals like polar bears. So, basically, if you are smart enough you would realize that the polar bears were being used as guinea pigs and sent through the wormhole to see if it worked before the Dharma folk sent a human being over, and at some point, some of the polar bears escaped from their cages, where, eventually, the characters encountered them.
Watching the finale you can see that, yes, the writers had the broad strokes planned out all along. Everything from episode titles like "dead is dead" and "happily ever after" to key catchphrases such as "see you in another life, brother" and "live together, die alone" to plot points like characters communicating with the non-living and the island itself being the source of life, death and rebirth, to character names like Christian Sheppard all the way to the mysterious four-toed statue: Tawaret, the Egyptian God of rebirth, as seen all the way back in the season two finale. All of these "clues" led up to this particular ending. There really was no other way to end it.
If anything, I almost feel that the writers stuck a little too close to their vision of Jack fulfilling his destiny, sacrificing himself to save the island (and the world), and arriving at a sort of staging area where he was able to meet up with his loved ones - all the people he had just saved and had ever cared about from the island - before being allowed to "move on" to the next life. By sticking so close to Jack's story, there was previous little room for other beloved characters in the finale, such as Sawyer. Even the MIB's final defeat was somewhat overshadowed by the "sideways" worlds' revelation as purgatory. At one point I actually expected the MIB to "wake up" in this "sideways" world still in Locke's body, having found yet another escape loophole.
The fact that I thought that shows both the beauty of Lost and the curse of Lost. In challenging our imaginations with so many cool ideas and story possibilities born out of constant plot twists, it's easy for the viewer to lose sight of what the writers are trying to really say... which can lead to disappointment when the viewer thinks they are watching one show, while the writer is telling a different show. But, really, I loved everything about Lost. All the divergent story paths it took, all the red herrings, all the misleads is what made Lost so special. It was the journey that made it so great and I'm just happy the final destination didn't erase 6 years worth of awesome storytelling.
The real question I now find myself with is what to watch next?
Namaste and aloha, Lost!
"Guys, where are we?" That was junkie rock star Charlie Pace's line at the end of the LOST series pilot oh so many years ago. It could easily apply to last night's series finale, which I'm still trying to make sense of... particularly the last 15 minutes of the show where (HUGE SPOILER ALERT) we find out that everyone has died and are all meeting up before "moving on" to... well, in true Lost fashion... that's open to interpretation.
The whole 2 1/2 hour finale flew by at breakneck pace and packed emotional wallop after emotional wallop... character arcs closed left and right. Jin and Sun together for good! Sayid and Shannon! Sawyer reunited with Juliet! Charlie and Claire and baby Aaron! The real John Locke back and walking again! Six years worth of journeys were coming to an end. So sad...
It was about halfway through this spiritual awakening of an episode that I began to realize that my initial theory that all the castaway's minds were jumping across time and space into the "sideways" universe post death so that there was, in fact, life after death proved only 1/2 correct. Initially, I thought that the sideways universe this season was actually the "real" universe and that the finale would show us how the surviving castaways were able to go back in time one last time; save the island by sinking it (as we saw in the season six premiere), so that no one could ever get to the light again (assuming the light didn't go out underwater) and that in sacrificing themselves and changing history so that they never even arrived on the island, the universe would "course correct" and give them back their memories of their island lives. To me, it would have been a best of both worlds scenario... where the characters die, but not really.
And then came the final 15 minutes of the show, which basically pooped on that theory and said that, instead, while everyone's memories were re-established, it wasn't in an alternate sideways universe that everyone was "awakening" with new lives, but rather in, for lack of a better word, purgatory.
At least, that's my interpretation of the final few scenes. And thank God for that. Half the fun of Lost is the debating, and this ending leaves plenty of room for various interpretations.
Now, I know the whole "purgatory," everyone is back together again ending is supposed to be a hopeful and happy one, but for whatever reason it just left me sad. I mean, no matter how you slice it, they're all dead! Jack and Kate didn't really get to LIVE happily ever after. And on top of that we get the final image of the show as Jack lying out in the jungle alone, in the same spot where the show began, this time dying, as the woman he loved - Kate - flew off on the escape plane overhead. Well, Jack wasn't totally alone... he had Vincent the dog to sit with him while he passed on. Tear.
Now that some time has passed - so glad I didn't jump on the internet last night to see what the masses were saying about this episode, but rather let it slowly digest in my brain overnight - I went from appreciating and respecting the ending, to understanding that it really is a happy one because everyone found their true loves, or, in Lost terms, their "constants," again and, really, who is to say what the next world will be like for these characters we see gathered in the church at the end. Heck, maybe they do get to live again on some other plane of existence. Such is Lost so anything is possible.
As for the mythology, yes, I wish there had been a few more answers about some oddities (just how exactly did the body of the MIB become a cloud of black smoke and why? Was it his black, corrupted soul released from the shackles of his body?), but the lack of them didn't detract from my enjoyment of the finale. Heck, for the most part, I appreciate that the writers stuck to the major character arcs and, not only in the finale but over the entire course of the series, didn't always spoon feed us the answers. Many times, we actually had to puzzle them out for ourselves.
On example of this is the iconic Lost polar bears. It boggles my mind when people still ask "why were there polar bears on the island?" It just goes to show you how challenging a show like Lost is for many viewers. It's told out of context, out of continuity and with long breaks in between seasons and sometimes even between episodes where answers to posed questions are often spread out over many different episodes and very often out of order.
Again, see the polar bears as an example, where in the pilot we saw Sawyer kill a polar bear, and then three seasons later we saw empty bear changes where they were kept, then in another episode we saw the skeleton of one in the desert (where a secret wormhole portal allowed island-dwellers to transport themselves from the island to the outside world), and yet in another we saw the entrance to the portal, which was located in an icy underground chamber suited for a... you guessed it, polar bear, before the characters eventually found and watched a leftover science video from the Dharma Initiative (the science cult that came to the island looking to study it's weird properties, like the wormhole) that told them (and us) that the Dharma scientists were using animals as test subjects... animals like polar bears. So, basically, if you are smart enough you would realize that the polar bears were being used as guinea pigs and sent through the wormhole to see if it worked before the Dharma folk sent a human being over, and at some point, some of the polar bears escaped from their cages, where, eventually, the characters encountered them.
Watching the finale you can see that, yes, the writers had the broad strokes planned out all along. Everything from episode titles like "dead is dead" and "happily ever after" to key catchphrases such as "see you in another life, brother" and "live together, die alone" to plot points like characters communicating with the non-living and the island itself being the source of life, death and rebirth, to character names like Christian Sheppard all the way to the mysterious four-toed statue: Tawaret, the Egyptian God of rebirth, as seen all the way back in the season two finale. All of these "clues" led up to this particular ending. There really was no other way to end it.
If anything, I almost feel that the writers stuck a little too close to their vision of Jack fulfilling his destiny, sacrificing himself to save the island (and the world), and arriving at a sort of staging area where he was able to meet up with his loved ones - all the people he had just saved and had ever cared about from the island - before being allowed to "move on" to the next life. By sticking so close to Jack's story, there was previous little room for other beloved characters in the finale, such as Sawyer. Even the MIB's final defeat was somewhat overshadowed by the "sideways" worlds' revelation as purgatory. At one point I actually expected the MIB to "wake up" in this "sideways" world still in Locke's body, having found yet another escape loophole.
The fact that I thought that shows both the beauty of Lost and the curse of Lost. In challenging our imaginations with so many cool ideas and story possibilities born out of constant plot twists, it's easy for the viewer to lose sight of what the writers are trying to really say... which can lead to disappointment when the viewer thinks they are watching one show, while the writer is telling a different show. But, really, I loved everything about Lost. All the divergent story paths it took, all the red herrings, all the misleads is what made Lost so special. It was the journey that made it so great and I'm just happy the final destination didn't erase 6 years worth of awesome storytelling.
The real question I now find myself with is what to watch next?
Namaste and aloha, Lost!
Friday, May 21, 2010
The CW upfront
So...
The CW (worst network name ever) held their upfront yesterday. They are bringing back "thanks for making Vampires cool, Twilight, so that we can now have a show" show The Vampire Diaries, as well as 90210, Supernatural and Smallville (why is this show still on?) for it's 10th and final season -- that is unless it does well in the ratings, in which case it will be back for it's 11th and (we mean it this time!) final season. There's some other crap, too, but it's not even worth talking about because it probably won't last the whole year.
Among the cancelled shows are Melrose Place - big surprise. When will the talking suits learn that putting a young female singer into a project doesn't mean anything. Off the top of my head I can't think of one time it has actually worked. And Ashlee Simpson can't even sing without a computer (as seen on SNL), so what makes anyone think she can act?
New shows include Hellcats, which is Bring it On set in the South, and Nikita, a remake of the syndicated TV show from the '90s, which itself was a remake of a French film. Okay, I'm willing to give Nikita a chance. The concept of a female assassin forced into working for the bad guys and trying to take them down from within has potential. It's a bit of a worn concept, so let's just hope it leans more toward Alias and Mission Impossible than Boronic... I mean Bionic Woman or the recent and utterly craptacular Dull... I mean Dollhouse. As long as Nikita steers clear of anyone who worked on either of those two stinkers it should be fine.
The CW (worst network name ever) held their upfront yesterday. They are bringing back "thanks for making Vampires cool, Twilight, so that we can now have a show" show The Vampire Diaries, as well as 90210, Supernatural and Smallville (why is this show still on?) for it's 10th and final season -- that is unless it does well in the ratings, in which case it will be back for it's 11th and (we mean it this time!) final season. There's some other crap, too, but it's not even worth talking about because it probably won't last the whole year.
Among the cancelled shows are Melrose Place - big surprise. When will the talking suits learn that putting a young female singer into a project doesn't mean anything. Off the top of my head I can't think of one time it has actually worked. And Ashlee Simpson can't even sing without a computer (as seen on SNL), so what makes anyone think she can act?
New shows include Hellcats, which is Bring it On set in the South, and Nikita, a remake of the syndicated TV show from the '90s, which itself was a remake of a French film. Okay, I'm willing to give Nikita a chance. The concept of a female assassin forced into working for the bad guys and trying to take them down from within has potential. It's a bit of a worn concept, so let's just hope it leans more toward Alias and Mission Impossible than Boronic... I mean Bionic Woman or the recent and utterly craptacular Dull... I mean Dollhouse. As long as Nikita steers clear of anyone who worked on either of those two stinkers it should be fine.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
MacGruber quick review
So...
I just saw the new movie MacGruber at a free screening tonight. My friend was kind enough to hook me up with tickets and another friend got me pretty good seats, not that it was very crowded at the screening... mostly just press with some "real folks" thrown in to ensure some laughs.
Well, MacGruber was stupid. That's not the issue. I bring that up because there were actually some people at the movie criticising it for being "silly and stupid." What do you expect (I mean, check out the ad photo above)? No, the real issue is if it was funny?
Sadly, no, not really. While it does have a couple funny lines and a few LOL scenes (usually centered around bathroom humor), most of the jokes just wiz by without much reaction. Thankfully, the story zips along, distracting you from the fact that a good chunk of the comedy feels like it was written as the writers were on their way to turn in the script. Though not the most original story (retired hero called back into service to stop some bad guy from detonating a nuclear bomb), good editing and directing keep it pretty lively. There's also a really great soundtrack if you are into '80s music that helps the movie along.
But comedy-wise, I was disappointed. Especially considering the basis for this thing is that MacGruber is a spoof of the TV show character MacGyver, who's show is so ripe for picking apart that the movie feels like a missed opportunity most of the time. The script tries to offer some decent set-ups that will later pay off, but 1/2 the time you see it coming, the other half it just fizzles out. Without giving too much away, the whole license plate subplot, for example.
I wanted more out of the movie and think with some better writing there could have been. For one, I hoped for a more clever parody, with less hit or miss random joke here or there. I'm all for low-brow humor, don't get me wrong, but you look at a movie like The Naked Gun and you can see that, yes, you can have your cake and eat it, too.
At least the actors threw themselves into the roles. Val Kilmer, specifically, offers a diabolical, yet deadpan turn as the villain, taking the part serious enough to be a threat to MacGruber, but never forgetting that he is in a movie based on a throw-away SNL skit that is itself a parody of a classic 1980's tv show. Ryan Phillipe also has some pretty great "is this guy for real?" reactions to MacGruber's special "moves" at the end of the film involving people's throats that help sell the joke.
Still, the comedy could have been stronger. There were a few scenes, in fact, where they were almost there.
Best viewed: on a slow Saturday afternoon on cable.
Conan O'Brien to fans "give me your money!"
So...
There's just something about Conan O'Brien that bugs me. Yes, I know I'm in the minority, but give me a chance to explain. First of all, I think he is VERY funny. As a comedian, he's genius. As a person, I'm not so sure. I used to really love this guy and even met him once at The Tonight Show when I worked over there. But there's a couple of things he has done since NBC announced his reign as host of that show was ending that made me question him. I think, one, he is a little less classy than people give him credit for. I think he thinks very highly of himself (fine, maybe he's earned it), but what I don't like is that he operates under the pretense of doing things because it is the right thing to do (such as, stepping down as host of The Tonight Show because he didn't want it to be damaged as an institution by moving back a half hour to accommodate Jay Leno's show), when in fact I think it was done for more personal reasons. He was hurt and angry and sort of bitter about being pushed back. Fine... that's fine... just be honest about it, don't fire off some letter about the morality of moving the Tonight Show back.
Also, his anti-NBC tirade was funny... and still is. But I have to question how hurt he really is considering he is still in big business with NBC and is, in fact, still developing shows at the network. One, Outlaws, is even coming out this fall. There's something dishonest and a bit tacky about taking shots at your business partner. And for taking shots at rival host Jay Leno, who went back to his old spot as Tonight Show host after Conan departed. Conan, if people tuned in to watch your show, then this wouldn't have been a problem. And, yes, Jay got more of a chance initially than you did, but it was a different television landscape back then and your style is way more outside the mainstream than Leno's. You know this. So if anyone is to blame, blame NBC for first putting you in the spot, blame yourself for insisting on it and waiting (never trust Hollywood, dude) and blame America and your fans for not tuning in soon enough. Truth be told, what NBC did to you did more for your career than hosting the show did in the first place. Look at your ratings after the announcement came. Look at how the fans rallied.
And then what did you do to those fans? You went ahead and ripped them off. That's right. This is the thing that truly bugs me about Conan; the way he took advantage of his fans following the demise of The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien. Legally, he was banned from going on TV for a short while following the end of his hosting run. So he decided to do a multi-city comedy tour. GREAT idea... a chance to reconnect with his fans in person, build some buzz for his inevitable return to TV, and work on some new material. The problem is that he knows that his loyal fan base will turn out en masse and support him. It would have been a great way to thank them for all of their support, too. Even though they aren't a large enough group to keep him as host of a network late night show, they are big enough to ensure that he will have no problem finding work again. So what does he do? He proceeds to rip them off! That's right, the big Conan fan fleecing. And how does he do this? He charges some $40 dollars and UP for tickets to his act. Kind in mind that $40 is for the cheap, back row seats of rather large venues. Front row seats... well, you can imagine. And then, on top of that, he is charging $45 bucks and upwards for t-shirts, $25 for a poster, even $30 bucks for a hat that says, simply, "Conan." That's just tacky. I mean, not even NBC charged that much for Conan merchandise at his show -- and I would know, since I worked on it.
It's not like Conan didn't get himself some 40 million dollars to walk away from NBC. It's not like his staff and producers didn't get millions and millions and millions of dollars when he walked away. So where is all this money from the tickets and merch going to? What Conan should have done is made the prices reasonable as a thank you to his fans, not as a "poor me, I'm out of a job, now give me your money" kind of thing. True, he has to raise money for putting on his shows, but this is ridiculous. It's not like he has a band and road crew the size of a Bruce Springsteen concert. He's a comedian. All he needs is a stage to stand on and a microphone to speak into. And as far as paying his crew is concerned, they are all going with him to his new show when it starts up in November on TBS, so they just got a huge pile of money to take a 7 month vacation. Awesome.
Of course, the media is all on Conan's side during the late night feud, so you would never hear them question this. But there it is.
Oh, finally, the reason I'm writing this today is because Conan just put out a Youtube video showcasing his favorite Youtube videos. I went to the website hoping to see something special, but all he did was link 5 already popular and widely-viewed videos to his page. Really? That's not exactly being on the cutting edge of comedy. It's almost like, wow, welcome to the bandwagon on those ones.
Anyway, I'll probably check out his new show, but he's got to work to win me back over with a few good jokes and, more pressingly, a few classy moves. And get off the pity-party train already, man!
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
The CBS Upfront
So...
CBS just unveiled their 2010 fall TV schedule at their "upfront" presentation in NY this morning. It's a risky schedule, with lots of changes. CBS is kind of known as the old folks network, something they have been working hard to change, so this is an interesting move because old folks don't usually like it when they can no longer figure out what night their favorite program is on.
Oh, and they are cancelling a whole heap of shows, which old folks don't like, either. Here's the list: The New Adventures of Old Christine, Ghost Whisperer, Gary Unmarried, Accidentally on Purpose, Cold Case, Miami Medical, Numb3rs. I guess CBS didn't have room for them with their hot new schedule. Too bad there wasn't a way for them to save money on making new shows that, let's be honest, will probably fail, and combine some of these just cancelled shows to create some new super-hybrid-hits. Think about it. The New Adventures of Gary Unmarried? I mean, aren't The New Adventures of Old Christine and Gary Unmarried basically the same show about newly divorced parents trying to retain custody of their kids, while navigating the dating world again, only one is with a man in the lead role and one is with a woman? Why not make it a show where we combine the two lead roles into one... so it'd be about a hermaphrodite trying to raise his/her kids, while looking for love in all the wrong places? Heck, you can still use Jay Mohr as the lead. Or how about Cold Whisperer, about a girl with a remarkable gift for understanding diseases, who is hired to help nurse an injured detective back to health following a tragic allergic reaction. Ghost Medical, anyone? I'd certainly watch a bunch of dead people trying to operate on the living.
On the returning side, CBS is moving Big Bang Theory from Mondays to Thursdays to try a little comedy out that night. Survivor then moves a day up to Wednesday nights. Perhaps most interesting is CSI: Miami moving to Sunday nights, to be replaced by the new version of Hawaii 5-0 on Mondays. Hawaii 5-0 is the hottest CBS drama pilot right now. I like the casting, but I hate that it's another remake.
Other new shows worth noting are Mike and Molly, another one from the guy who made Two and a Half Men and The Big Bang Theory, only this time it's more of a love story. There's also The Defenders, which has a terrible cast (Jim Belushi and Jerry O'Connell as "colorful" Vegas defense attorneys.) God that already sounds annoying. Blue Bloods is a Tom Selleck vehicle being put out to pasture on Friday nights. Hmmm... Friday seems to be heating up for scripted shows this year...
Oh, and last but not least is $#*! My Dad Says. That title is already a set-back. FYI, this is the show where William Shatner plays an eccentric father (big stretch) who says crazy stuff about his kid, who then tweets about it. They say the pilot turned out funny, but I haven't seen it yet.
Well, that's it for CBS. Anyone still awake?
CBS just unveiled their 2010 fall TV schedule at their "upfront" presentation in NY this morning. It's a risky schedule, with lots of changes. CBS is kind of known as the old folks network, something they have been working hard to change, so this is an interesting move because old folks don't usually like it when they can no longer figure out what night their favorite program is on.
Oh, and they are cancelling a whole heap of shows, which old folks don't like, either. Here's the list: The New Adventures of Old Christine, Ghost Whisperer, Gary Unmarried, Accidentally on Purpose, Cold Case, Miami Medical, Numb3rs. I guess CBS didn't have room for them with their hot new schedule. Too bad there wasn't a way for them to save money on making new shows that, let's be honest, will probably fail, and combine some of these just cancelled shows to create some new super-hybrid-hits. Think about it. The New Adventures of Gary Unmarried? I mean, aren't The New Adventures of Old Christine and Gary Unmarried basically the same show about newly divorced parents trying to retain custody of their kids, while navigating the dating world again, only one is with a man in the lead role and one is with a woman? Why not make it a show where we combine the two lead roles into one... so it'd be about a hermaphrodite trying to raise his/her kids, while looking for love in all the wrong places? Heck, you can still use Jay Mohr as the lead. Or how about Cold Whisperer, about a girl with a remarkable gift for understanding diseases, who is hired to help nurse an injured detective back to health following a tragic allergic reaction. Ghost Medical, anyone? I'd certainly watch a bunch of dead people trying to operate on the living.
On the returning side, CBS is moving Big Bang Theory from Mondays to Thursdays to try a little comedy out that night. Survivor then moves a day up to Wednesday nights. Perhaps most interesting is CSI: Miami moving to Sunday nights, to be replaced by the new version of Hawaii 5-0 on Mondays. Hawaii 5-0 is the hottest CBS drama pilot right now. I like the casting, but I hate that it's another remake.
Other new shows worth noting are Mike and Molly, another one from the guy who made Two and a Half Men and The Big Bang Theory, only this time it's more of a love story. There's also The Defenders, which has a terrible cast (Jim Belushi and Jerry O'Connell as "colorful" Vegas defense attorneys.) God that already sounds annoying. Blue Bloods is a Tom Selleck vehicle being put out to pasture on Friday nights. Hmmm... Friday seems to be heating up for scripted shows this year...
Oh, and last but not least is $#*! My Dad Says. That title is already a set-back. FYI, this is the show where William Shatner plays an eccentric father (big stretch) who says crazy stuff about his kid, who then tweets about it. They say the pilot turned out funny, but I haven't seen it yet.
Well, that's it for CBS. Anyone still awake?
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
The ABC Upfront
So...
Today was ABC's (or the Alphabet's, as it is sometimes called in the entertainment industry) 2010 upfront. Of the big networks ABC has the best shows on right now hands down. They do pretty well in the ratings, too. ;) I don't see that trend changing based on their schedule for next season, which (despite the huge loss of LOST) looks pretty solid.
First, here's a rundown of ABC's just cancelled shows:
Flashforward. It started out with a catchy concept and then by episode two just lost it's way - the kiss of death for a serialized show. The pilot, about what happens when everyone on earth blacks out for over two minutes and sees their future 6 months from now, ends with a mysterious figure revealed to have actually, gasp!, not blacked out during the blackout. And when do they follow up on that cool idea... the very next episode you say?? Nope. And I honestly don't know because I gave up watching five loooooong episodes into the series. Instead, in the 5 preceeding episodes we are treated to some Nazi (of course, this is Hollywood, after all) prison visit and a boring family plotline about a wife who may or may not cheat on her husband in the future. Also, one of the main characters "flash forward's" is of himself sitting on the toilet. Awesome! Hey, writers, I know that sounds funny, but doesn't that sort of limit the story possibilities with his character? Given that the show has just been axed, I guess the answer is yes.
Scrubs was also cancelled. Deja vu? And so was Better Off Ted - a semi-funny show that didn't stand out enough and got lost in the shuffle. Brothers and Sisters should have been cancelled, but instead received a reduced episode order. Instead of the usually 22 episode, it will get something like 13... and then probably fade out in time for next year's upfronts.
Returning:
We have the usual suspects (Desperate Housewives, a bunch of reality shows geared toward desperate housewives, and Grey's Anatomy.) There's a also Castle and breakout comedy hit that put ABC comedy back on the map - Modern Family. Left with no other choice it seems, ABC brought back V. I'm guessing it won't last long; ever since they put Scott Rosenbaum as show runner it's dragging its feet. It wants so bad to be Battlestar Galactica in terms of moral complexity, but everyone watching just wants it to be more like the fun action adventure that the original was. Also, the good guys never do anything to advance the story!
New shows:
No Ordinary Family. This is a live-action version of The Incredibles, with a great cast. I'll check it out for the cast, and hope it's not too much of a rip off. This is a show I actually would like to see explore a darker area than The Incredibles tackled.
Body of Proof stars Dana Delany as a medical examiner who gets involved with crimes. It's on Friday nights, which is usually considered the death slot, but CBS has had success there with both strong female lead shows (Medium and Ghost Whispered) and with crime procedurals (Numb3rs). Plus, Dana Delany's star is hotter than it's been in year's right now, so this could be a good time slot for it.
There's some more stuff coming mid-season, but since so much is subject to change I'll skip those shows for now. Anything not mentioned new show wise isn't, to me, worth talking about becuase I don't think it's going to stick around. Some of them even sound like "didn't that show already come out?"
That said, ABC does have a pretty good looking schedule for next fall. Basically, if you like ABC now you will like it next year.
Today was ABC's (or the Alphabet's, as it is sometimes called in the entertainment industry) 2010 upfront. Of the big networks ABC has the best shows on right now hands down. They do pretty well in the ratings, too. ;) I don't see that trend changing based on their schedule for next season, which (despite the huge loss of LOST) looks pretty solid.
First, here's a rundown of ABC's just cancelled shows:
Flashforward. It started out with a catchy concept and then by episode two just lost it's way - the kiss of death for a serialized show. The pilot, about what happens when everyone on earth blacks out for over two minutes and sees their future 6 months from now, ends with a mysterious figure revealed to have actually, gasp!, not blacked out during the blackout. And when do they follow up on that cool idea... the very next episode you say?? Nope. And I honestly don't know because I gave up watching five loooooong episodes into the series. Instead, in the 5 preceeding episodes we are treated to some Nazi (of course, this is Hollywood, after all) prison visit and a boring family plotline about a wife who may or may not cheat on her husband in the future. Also, one of the main characters "flash forward's" is of himself sitting on the toilet. Awesome! Hey, writers, I know that sounds funny, but doesn't that sort of limit the story possibilities with his character? Given that the show has just been axed, I guess the answer is yes.
Scrubs was also cancelled. Deja vu? And so was Better Off Ted - a semi-funny show that didn't stand out enough and got lost in the shuffle. Brothers and Sisters should have been cancelled, but instead received a reduced episode order. Instead of the usually 22 episode, it will get something like 13... and then probably fade out in time for next year's upfronts.
Returning:
We have the usual suspects (Desperate Housewives, a bunch of reality shows geared toward desperate housewives, and Grey's Anatomy.) There's a also Castle and breakout comedy hit that put ABC comedy back on the map - Modern Family. Left with no other choice it seems, ABC brought back V. I'm guessing it won't last long; ever since they put Scott Rosenbaum as show runner it's dragging its feet. It wants so bad to be Battlestar Galactica in terms of moral complexity, but everyone watching just wants it to be more like the fun action adventure that the original was. Also, the good guys never do anything to advance the story!
New shows:
No Ordinary Family. This is a live-action version of The Incredibles, with a great cast. I'll check it out for the cast, and hope it's not too much of a rip off. This is a show I actually would like to see explore a darker area than The Incredibles tackled.
Body of Proof stars Dana Delany as a medical examiner who gets involved with crimes. It's on Friday nights, which is usually considered the death slot, but CBS has had success there with both strong female lead shows (Medium and Ghost Whispered) and with crime procedurals (Numb3rs). Plus, Dana Delany's star is hotter than it's been in year's right now, so this could be a good time slot for it.
There's some more stuff coming mid-season, but since so much is subject to change I'll skip those shows for now. Anything not mentioned new show wise isn't, to me, worth talking about becuase I don't think it's going to stick around. Some of them even sound like "didn't that show already come out?"
That said, ABC does have a pretty good looking schedule for next fall. Basically, if you like ABC now you will like it next year.
Monday, May 17, 2010
The FOX upfront
So...
Part two of my upfront thoughts, this time on Fox. If you don't know what an upfront is, check out the previous post I did on NBC's.
First, the shows Fox canned:
There really isn't anything here except The Wanda Sykes Show.
Returning:
Pretty much everything, even Lie to Me and Human Target. Lie to Me is surprising in that it is back for the fall, and I don't see it sticking around too long past that... especially since the showrunner just left to do a new series for Fox (more on that in a minute). Lie to Me is a weird sell to begin with -- a man can tell whether people are lying and calls them out on it?? Human Target is a show that had some potential. I liked the Die Hard vibe to it and the concept of putting the lead in a different "cool" location each week, from a mountain top sanctuary to a foreign embassy to an out of control train, but it was too male skewed and needed a strong female on the team to break up the testosterone and give the boys a female voice to bounce off. There's word that someone from Chuck is coming over to help co-run the show, so there maybe be a chance of this happening. Or it could just screw the show up royally and make it too cheesy and inter-connected the way Chuck got. Still, it is a stand-alone, episode of the week type show with relatively no mythology, so should be easy to fix up and still attract viewers in it's sophomore season.
Now for Fox's new shows:
Lonestar. It's described as another Dallas. Doesn't excite me, so I have nothing to say there.
The Good Guys. Why is this an hour? Sometimes it just seems like they stretch it out to fill time. Still, the casting is enough for me to check out the comedy in hopes of a good buddy cop comedy. Bradley Whitford plays the burnt out loose-cannon, while Colin Hanks plays his rookie, by-the-book partner.
Running Wilde stars Will Arnett as a jerk trying to win back his childhood sweetheart. Now, Arnett is funny, no doubt about it, but he's a bit like Kramer from Seinfeld in that I wonder if he can hold a show on his own. And will this concept get old? Futher, will people tune in to see Will Arnett each week (other than his tiny, yet devoted following)? Time will tell.
That's about it for Fox. There schedule isn't very exciting to me. The real interest will be in the Spring when we see how American Idol fares without Simon Cowell (I'm guessing further decline unless they can get a huge presence to give them an initial ratings bump) and to see how X-Factor does with Cowell. X-factor is like Idol but with bands, not just individuals, competing.
Part two of my upfront thoughts, this time on Fox. If you don't know what an upfront is, check out the previous post I did on NBC's.
First, the shows Fox canned:
There really isn't anything here except The Wanda Sykes Show.
Returning:
Pretty much everything, even Lie to Me and Human Target. Lie to Me is surprising in that it is back for the fall, and I don't see it sticking around too long past that... especially since the showrunner just left to do a new series for Fox (more on that in a minute). Lie to Me is a weird sell to begin with -- a man can tell whether people are lying and calls them out on it?? Human Target is a show that had some potential. I liked the Die Hard vibe to it and the concept of putting the lead in a different "cool" location each week, from a mountain top sanctuary to a foreign embassy to an out of control train, but it was too male skewed and needed a strong female on the team to break up the testosterone and give the boys a female voice to bounce off. There's word that someone from Chuck is coming over to help co-run the show, so there maybe be a chance of this happening. Or it could just screw the show up royally and make it too cheesy and inter-connected the way Chuck got. Still, it is a stand-alone, episode of the week type show with relatively no mythology, so should be easy to fix up and still attract viewers in it's sophomore season.
Now for Fox's new shows:
Lonestar. It's described as another Dallas. Doesn't excite me, so I have nothing to say there.
The Good Guys. Why is this an hour? Sometimes it just seems like they stretch it out to fill time. Still, the casting is enough for me to check out the comedy in hopes of a good buddy cop comedy. Bradley Whitford plays the burnt out loose-cannon, while Colin Hanks plays his rookie, by-the-book partner.
Running Wilde stars Will Arnett as a jerk trying to win back his childhood sweetheart. Now, Arnett is funny, no doubt about it, but he's a bit like Kramer from Seinfeld in that I wonder if he can hold a show on his own. And will this concept get old? Futher, will people tune in to see Will Arnett each week (other than his tiny, yet devoted following)? Time will tell.
That's about it for Fox. There schedule isn't very exciting to me. The real interest will be in the Spring when we see how American Idol fares without Simon Cowell (I'm guessing further decline unless they can get a huge presence to give them an initial ratings bump) and to see how X-Factor does with Cowell. X-factor is like Idol but with bands, not just individuals, competing.
The NBC upfront
So...
NBC and Fox both announced their fall 2010 television schedules today. A lot of shows were cancelled, a lot of shows are actually coming back, and a lot of new shows were picked up. For those who don't know every year the big 5 networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC and The CW) get together and hold a big event for the press and advertisers and let them know what their schedules for the next year of TV will look like. It's called the "Upfronts" and it's where viewers generally get to find out if there favorite show isn't coming back or if that "cool new idea" (did you hear about the one with time travel and dinosaurs from Steven Spielberg?) is going to go from pilot to series.
Here's a few words on both the cancelled shows, the returning shows, and the new shows for Fox and NBC:
First NBC, who is looking to rebrand their image after having been in the ratings dump ever since Friends left the air (yes, it's really been that long). They've tried every which way to fix it, and this year they are going back to more scripted programming. They bid on the "hottest" scripts, i.e. the most expensive, and are promising a bold, new look for themselves. But when you are digging through garbage, it's not easy to make a diamond from a lump of coal -- especially with some of the nitwits they have in their development department. A prime example is the show Heroes, which had some pretty cool episodes in the first season when the characters were crossing paths so much, until about the middle of that season when things started to go down hill. Now there's a show that had a lot of potential, but bad writing and bad notes showed how you can take a hit show and totally flush it down the drain.
The show Chuck is coming back. Yay? For some reason it has a small, but loyal following. I watched it the first season and thought it was a B-. Fun, escapist, but a little forced. The second year it started with a whimper and then became completely unrealistic, with everyone who ever knew Chuck coming out of the cold as a spy, just like him, from his ex-girlfriend, to his ex-best friend, to even his dad! Come on!! Bringing it back for yet another season is a little like spinning the tires. It's probably not going to get any lower in the ratings, but in it's fourth season there's little chance it can get better ratings wise, especially when it is leading off Monday nights and not, say, following a hit show. Risky move having two brand new shows following it to boot.
Law and Order is done (cricket, cricket), but Law and Order: SVU will be back, as will "LOLA" a.k.a. Law and Order: Los Angeles - which is just like the original, now cancelled Law and Order, but with sunshine and movie stars.
The Office is back for another year (finally, a ray of hope!). What's that... Steve Carrel says this is his last year? Scratch the hope... Now, of course, NBC is already planning on continuing the show without him, but let me be clear, there is no The Office without Steve Carrel. Maybe a few years ago, but it's been on for like 7 years and the other characters just aren't dynamic enough to hold the show. Bringing on a new lead feels lame to me after this much time, as if they are trying too hard to keep it going (a la Scrubs) and we all know Jim and Pam, the other big characters on the comedy, are super boring these days. So no Carrel, no The Office.
It's counterpart, Parks and Recreations, is returning, as well. Finally finding it's voice in the second season, and with some good cross promotion scheduled for this summer, what does NBC do... pushes it back to the spring. Now, this seems like a hair-brained idea, and it is, but I'm willing to bet NBC did this because they think one of their new Thursday night comedies is going to fail and they want Parks and Rec around to replace it.
Speaking of new comedies, we have Outsourced, a good idea naturally stolen from somewhere else. This time idea is spun fron a movie, and like the original source, the TV show is about an American who is shipped to a call center in India and all the cultural misunderstandings that ensue. Has potential, but then again so did Heroes back in the day. I'm also nervous that this show will try to be too goofy with the call center being for a company that sells "bacon wallets."
Love Bites. With a mostly rotating cast, i.e. new faces each week (always a hard sell) and from someone that worked on Sex and the City (naturally). So far it reminds me of that show NBC already tried with Alicia Silverstone a few years ago. And like that show, it's an hour "dramedy" that really should only be a 1/2 hour.
Drama wise we have Chase, which at first glance sounds like a decent diversion on Monday's from Jerry Bruckheimer. It's described by the network as "a fast-paced drama that drops viewers smack into the middle of a game of cat-and-mouse as a team of U.S. marshals hunts down America's most dangerous fugitives." The main character is a cowgirl "boot-wearing deputy whose sharp mind and unique Texas upbringing help her track down the violent criminals on the run." Sounds like something already on TNT or USA with the Marshals and tough, female detective angle, but we'll see. Also troubling, it's up against CSI: Miami, which attracts the same crowd.
We also have the ultra-hush hush Event, about a guy who uncovers a... wait for it... "government conspiracy". ABC messed around with this territory a few years ago. Maybe NBC will have better luck.
And, finally, the new J.J. Abrams married spys drama Undercovers, which is essentially just "True Lies" and "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" except they cast an African-American man and woman in the lead roles to throw off the scent. It's "created" by the guy who created "October Road," also a childhood buddy of J.J.s, and if the guy who made October Road can't make this show work, well, darn it, I don't know who can. I guess it depends how much J.J. is involved (he's got a few movies to direct, after all) and how good he is, because, honestly, J.J. has had a few stinkers himself.
That's it for NBC. I'll come back later with the second half of this post on Fox.
NBC and Fox both announced their fall 2010 television schedules today. A lot of shows were cancelled, a lot of shows are actually coming back, and a lot of new shows were picked up. For those who don't know every year the big 5 networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC and The CW) get together and hold a big event for the press and advertisers and let them know what their schedules for the next year of TV will look like. It's called the "Upfronts" and it's where viewers generally get to find out if there favorite show isn't coming back or if that "cool new idea" (did you hear about the one with time travel and dinosaurs from Steven Spielberg?) is going to go from pilot to series.
Here's a few words on both the cancelled shows, the returning shows, and the new shows for Fox and NBC:
First NBC, who is looking to rebrand their image after having been in the ratings dump ever since Friends left the air (yes, it's really been that long). They've tried every which way to fix it, and this year they are going back to more scripted programming. They bid on the "hottest" scripts, i.e. the most expensive, and are promising a bold, new look for themselves. But when you are digging through garbage, it's not easy to make a diamond from a lump of coal -- especially with some of the nitwits they have in their development department. A prime example is the show Heroes, which had some pretty cool episodes in the first season when the characters were crossing paths so much, until about the middle of that season when things started to go down hill. Now there's a show that had a lot of potential, but bad writing and bad notes showed how you can take a hit show and totally flush it down the drain.
The show Chuck is coming back. Yay? For some reason it has a small, but loyal following. I watched it the first season and thought it was a B-. Fun, escapist, but a little forced. The second year it started with a whimper and then became completely unrealistic, with everyone who ever knew Chuck coming out of the cold as a spy, just like him, from his ex-girlfriend, to his ex-best friend, to even his dad! Come on!! Bringing it back for yet another season is a little like spinning the tires. It's probably not going to get any lower in the ratings, but in it's fourth season there's little chance it can get better ratings wise, especially when it is leading off Monday nights and not, say, following a hit show. Risky move having two brand new shows following it to boot.
Law and Order is done (cricket, cricket), but Law and Order: SVU will be back, as will "LOLA" a.k.a. Law and Order: Los Angeles - which is just like the original, now cancelled Law and Order, but with sunshine and movie stars.
The Office is back for another year (finally, a ray of hope!). What's that... Steve Carrel says this is his last year? Scratch the hope... Now, of course, NBC is already planning on continuing the show without him, but let me be clear, there is no The Office without Steve Carrel. Maybe a few years ago, but it's been on for like 7 years and the other characters just aren't dynamic enough to hold the show. Bringing on a new lead feels lame to me after this much time, as if they are trying too hard to keep it going (a la Scrubs) and we all know Jim and Pam, the other big characters on the comedy, are super boring these days. So no Carrel, no The Office.
It's counterpart, Parks and Recreations, is returning, as well. Finally finding it's voice in the second season, and with some good cross promotion scheduled for this summer, what does NBC do... pushes it back to the spring. Now, this seems like a hair-brained idea, and it is, but I'm willing to bet NBC did this because they think one of their new Thursday night comedies is going to fail and they want Parks and Rec around to replace it.
Speaking of new comedies, we have Outsourced, a good idea naturally stolen from somewhere else. This time idea is spun fron a movie, and like the original source, the TV show is about an American who is shipped to a call center in India and all the cultural misunderstandings that ensue. Has potential, but then again so did Heroes back in the day. I'm also nervous that this show will try to be too goofy with the call center being for a company that sells "bacon wallets."
Love Bites. With a mostly rotating cast, i.e. new faces each week (always a hard sell) and from someone that worked on Sex and the City (naturally). So far it reminds me of that show NBC already tried with Alicia Silverstone a few years ago. And like that show, it's an hour "dramedy" that really should only be a 1/2 hour.
Drama wise we have Chase, which at first glance sounds like a decent diversion on Monday's from Jerry Bruckheimer. It's described by the network as "a fast-paced drama that drops viewers smack into the middle of a game of cat-and-mouse as a team of U.S. marshals hunts down America's most dangerous fugitives." The main character is a cowgirl "boot-wearing deputy whose sharp mind and unique Texas upbringing help her track down the violent criminals on the run." Sounds like something already on TNT or USA with the Marshals and tough, female detective angle, but we'll see. Also troubling, it's up against CSI: Miami, which attracts the same crowd.
We also have the ultra-hush hush Event, about a guy who uncovers a... wait for it... "government conspiracy". ABC messed around with this territory a few years ago. Maybe NBC will have better luck.
And, finally, the new J.J. Abrams married spys drama Undercovers, which is essentially just "True Lies" and "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" except they cast an African-American man and woman in the lead roles to throw off the scent. It's "created" by the guy who created "October Road," also a childhood buddy of J.J.s, and if the guy who made October Road can't make this show work, well, darn it, I don't know who can. I guess it depends how much J.J. is involved (he's got a few movies to direct, after all) and how good he is, because, honestly, J.J. has had a few stinkers himself.
That's it for NBC. I'll come back later with the second half of this post on Fox.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
The Los Angeles Central Library
So...
As promised, here's the scoop on the Los Angeles Central Library (pictured below).
After braving the LA freeway system I finally arrived at my destination. Nestled between the moderate skyscrappers of downtown Los Angeles rests an other-wordly abode, looking more at place in the Nile of yesteryear than the urban sprawl that currently surrounds it. Much, much bigger than it appears on the outside, the downtown library is a marvel of architectural wonder, and highly recommended for anyone to visit regardless of your interest in literature, film, music, or comic books -- all of which the Downtown Library has in abundance. But if you do happen to like any of those things, then, seriously, this library is like Borders on steroids. No, wait, that sounds wrong... unclassy. A better description would be that it's everything Borders aspiries to be! In addition to all the books you could ever want, there is a very traquil garden -- an oasis from the clutter outside the metaphorical gates -- and an art gallery sponsored by the Getty itself. And if you get hungry browsing any one of the labyrinthine eight floors of books, there's a cafe on site, as well as a Panda Express (I know, weird!), a TCBY yogurt (perhaps even weirder), and a rather fitting (but expensive) sit down restaurant outside overlooking the gardens. The library even has it's own gift shop.
And did I mention the books? Everything from Ayn Rand to Zane Grey. Don't like to read? Check out the extensive audiobooks department, which is located on the first floor next to a small warehouse of DVDs and TV shows on DVD. Always wondered where I could find season two of Charles in Charge for rent! And when I say rent, I mean free rental, because, well, this is a library, after all.
On top of everything else, the staff is uber-friendly. In fact, I got into a long convo with a dude named Jeff, who recommended a few great movies to me based on my interests that day. We also ended up chatting about the Bataan death march, of all things, and how it overshadowed the far worse Massacre at Manilla, but how both of those were actually overshadowed by the Holocaust. Perhaps because of this, Jeff helped me get access to the top floor of the library, which is normally off limits without an appointment; it's where they house the rare books collection -- I guess they usually need 24 hours notice to do a background check or something before giving you access? LOL. Anyway, I had heard that the library had a copy of "The Long Walk" by Richard Bachman. In case you don't know, Bachman is the pseudonym of one Stephen King, who was forced to use it back in the day due to publishing fears about an author releasing more than one book in the same year. Since King was such a fast writer (must have been all the cocaine he admits to using then) he was prone to turn out two or even three novels a year... thus, Richard Bachman was born.
Surprisingly, "The Long Walk" is a super hard book to find. It's a cool story about a future society that decides to sponsor a marathon across the ultra-militaristic United States. Think "Survivor" meats "The Amazing Race"; Capitalism literally run amok, as the winner is basically given the keys to the kingdom, while the losers... well, I don't know because I've never been able to get my hands on it until now. Unfortunetly, you can't check it out since it's the only copy in any LA library, but it was cool just to browse through the text. Man, I sound like such a nerd, but just check out the cover!
Here's a few other pictures I snapped of things you wouldn't expect to find in this library. The quality is less than stellar, but, hey, they were taken on a cell phone with a cracked screen so I'm lucky they came out as well as they did, really.
If you take a close look at the rightside picture you can see various texts and hieroglyphics on the steps leading up to the library from the street. The whole place was actually like this, with Egyptian statues, paintings and symbols sprinkled throughout. At times, I felt like I was in an Indiana Jones adventure... or, more appropriately perhaps, an Allan Quartermann novel.
But why should I ruin all the fun? Check it out for yourself if you're in LA. Trust me, there's much, much more to explore. Just keep in mind, it's LA, so parking is expensive. They have to pay for the books somehow, right?
As promised, here's the scoop on the Los Angeles Central Library (pictured below).
After braving the LA freeway system I finally arrived at my destination. Nestled between the moderate skyscrappers of downtown Los Angeles rests an other-wordly abode, looking more at place in the Nile of yesteryear than the urban sprawl that currently surrounds it. Much, much bigger than it appears on the outside, the downtown library is a marvel of architectural wonder, and highly recommended for anyone to visit regardless of your interest in literature, film, music, or comic books -- all of which the Downtown Library has in abundance. But if you do happen to like any of those things, then, seriously, this library is like Borders on steroids. No, wait, that sounds wrong... unclassy. A better description would be that it's everything Borders aspiries to be! In addition to all the books you could ever want, there is a very traquil garden -- an oasis from the clutter outside the metaphorical gates -- and an art gallery sponsored by the Getty itself. And if you get hungry browsing any one of the labyrinthine eight floors of books, there's a cafe on site, as well as a Panda Express (I know, weird!), a TCBY yogurt (perhaps even weirder), and a rather fitting (but expensive) sit down restaurant outside overlooking the gardens. The library even has it's own gift shop. And did I mention the books? Everything from Ayn Rand to Zane Grey. Don't like to read? Check out the extensive audiobooks department, which is located on the first floor next to a small warehouse of DVDs and TV shows on DVD. Always wondered where I could find season two of Charles in Charge for rent! And when I say rent, I mean free rental, because, well, this is a library, after all.
On top of everything else, the staff is uber-friendly. In fact, I got into a long convo with a dude named Jeff, who recommended a few great movies to me based on my interests that day. We also ended up chatting about the Bataan death march, of all things, and how it overshadowed the far worse Massacre at Manilla, but how both of those were actually overshadowed by the Holocaust. Perhaps because of this, Jeff helped me get access to the top floor of the library, which is normally off limits without an appointment; it's where they house the rare books collection -- I guess they usually need 24 hours notice to do a background check or something before giving you access? LOL. Anyway, I had heard that the library had a copy of "The Long Walk" by Richard Bachman. In case you don't know, Bachman is the pseudonym of one Stephen King, who was forced to use it back in the day due to publishing fears about an author releasing more than one book in the same year. Since King was such a fast writer (must have been all the cocaine he admits to using then) he was prone to turn out two or even three novels a year... thus, Richard Bachman was born.
Surprisingly, "The Long Walk" is a super hard book to find. It's a cool story about a future society that decides to sponsor a marathon across the ultra-militaristic United States. Think "Survivor" meats "The Amazing Race"; Capitalism literally run amok, as the winner is basically given the keys to the kingdom, while the losers... well, I don't know because I've never been able to get my hands on it until now. Unfortunetly, you can't check it out since it's the only copy in any LA library, but it was cool just to browse through the text. Man, I sound like such a nerd, but just check out the cover!
Here's a few other pictures I snapped of things you wouldn't expect to find in this library. The quality is less than stellar, but, hey, they were taken on a cell phone with a cracked screen so I'm lucky they came out as well as they did, really.
If you take a close look at the rightside picture you can see various texts and hieroglyphics on the steps leading up to the library from the street. The whole place was actually like this, with Egyptian statues, paintings and symbols sprinkled throughout. At times, I felt like I was in an Indiana Jones adventure... or, more appropriately perhaps, an Allan Quartermann novel.
But why should I ruin all the fun? Check it out for yourself if you're in LA. Trust me, there's much, much more to explore. Just keep in mind, it's LA, so parking is expensive. They have to pay for the books somehow, right?
Friday, May 14, 2010
Rachel Uchitel.
So...
Rachel Uchitel. Yay! This skank is back in the news again. Surprise surprise, she was caught cheating with another married celebrity.
I think at this point it's pretty obvious she is preying on these guys, as much as they are trying to live out some pervy sexual release with her that they can't get or possibly feel comfortable exploring with their wife/mother of their children. Don't worry, Rachel Skankandtell is there for you!
Her celebrity stalker status should really come as no shock to anyone, given she has the online chat name of "cougar"... I mean "puma." And how do I know about her screenname being "Puma"? Well, she recently was kind enough to release to the media some of the text messages she exchanged with current prey David Boreanaz (of TV's Bones). How kind! This was no doubt done in an attempt to somehow show how David is really in love with her and not just using her for a good time, as seems to be the case. The problem is, these text messages just show her as the crazy, needy homewrecker she is. Case in point:
Puma (Rachel Uchitel): "I need you here so we can be together."
David Boreanaz: "This is not a good time."
Puma: “I can’t do this anymore…Just go... Just (bleeping) go and be with her.”
Boreanaz: “Why do u act like such a (bleeping) child!!!”
Okay, David is a HUGE a-hole considering his wife was pregnant with his second child at the time of their affair, but I almost have to LOL for him finally calling her out. She strikes me as someone with low self-confidence who needs to steal some other woman's man in a desperate bid for approval. And what's wrong with Tiger, David and who knows how many others. I mean, have you actually seen this trainwreck? All that's missing is a big black hat and a cauldron.
I'm still not convinced she isn't a tranny. Or possibly Dolph Lungren in a wig.
Additionally, check out the following texts in case you happen to think she is just a victim in all this cheating:
Boreanaz: "She is my wife."
Puma: “Oh, please!! You’re such a liar. ... You’ve wasted my time and I’m once again alone. I can’t (bleeping) be alone anymore. I’ve been alone my entire life.”
Boreanaz: “What the HELL are you talking about. We spend more than enough time together.”
And now we have the inveitable hiring of Gloria Allred to defend poor Rachel to the press. First Tiger, now David. Won't anyone leave their wife for this Puma?
Rachel Uchitel. Yay! This skank is back in the news again. Surprise surprise, she was caught cheating with another married celebrity.
I think at this point it's pretty obvious she is preying on these guys, as much as they are trying to live out some pervy sexual release with her that they can't get or possibly feel comfortable exploring with their wife/mother of their children. Don't worry, Rachel Skankandtell is there for you!
Her celebrity stalker status should really come as no shock to anyone, given she has the online chat name of "cougar"... I mean "puma." And how do I know about her screenname being "Puma"? Well, she recently was kind enough to release to the media some of the text messages she exchanged with current prey David Boreanaz (of TV's Bones). How kind! This was no doubt done in an attempt to somehow show how David is really in love with her and not just using her for a good time, as seems to be the case. The problem is, these text messages just show her as the crazy, needy homewrecker she is. Case in point:
Puma (Rachel Uchitel): "I need you here so we can be together."
David Boreanaz: "This is not a good time."
Puma: “I can’t do this anymore…Just go... Just (bleeping) go and be with her.”
Boreanaz: “Why do u act like such a (bleeping) child!!!”
Okay, David is a HUGE a-hole considering his wife was pregnant with his second child at the time of their affair, but I almost have to LOL for him finally calling her out. She strikes me as someone with low self-confidence who needs to steal some other woman's man in a desperate bid for approval. And what's wrong with Tiger, David and who knows how many others. I mean, have you actually seen this trainwreck? All that's missing is a big black hat and a cauldron.
I'm still not convinced she isn't a tranny. Or possibly Dolph Lungren in a wig.
Additionally, check out the following texts in case you happen to think she is just a victim in all this cheating:
Boreanaz: "She is my wife."
Puma: “Oh, please!! You’re such a liar. ... You’ve wasted my time and I’m once again alone. I can’t (bleeping) be alone anymore. I’ve been alone my entire life.”
Boreanaz: “What the HELL are you talking about. We spend more than enough time together.”
And now we have the inveitable hiring of Gloria Allred to defend poor Rachel to the press. First Tiger, now David. Won't anyone leave their wife for this Puma?
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Lost on the Internet (spoiler alert).
So...
Due to the controversial nature of Tuesday's airing of LOST, I want to say a thing or two (or three or four...) about the episode. First of all, I liked it. It wasn't my favorite episode ever, but certainly not a bad episode... nothing like the only truly unwatchable episode of the show... you know, the one with Jack's tattoos and Bai Ling. Tuesday's episode did exactly what it needed to do (provide crucial island mythology and backstory for both Jacob and the Man in Black) in a way that was compelling and downright interesting. And it set the finale up beautifully.
But to specifically address some of the complaints:
1. The Man in Black didn't get a name. So what? Keeps him mysterious, and, besides, does he really need one? On the call sheets it says he is called Samuel. Ohhh... big whoop. Personally, I just like that we can go on calling him the "man in black." It just sounds so much cooler than Samuel, doesn't it?
2. What's up with the light? I thought that was an awesome idea and made sense with how they have been setting up the stakes for the show. Man comes and tries to tamper with the light. Unable to remove it, they put it out. Darkness prevails. Also, it reminded me of the Force in Star Wars. Light side/dark side. A spark of light in all of us. Cool stuff.
3. What's up with the "other mother"? She's kind of like the Lady of the Lake, IMO. Guarding Excali... I mean, the light.
4. The "Adam and Eve" skeletons should have been Jack and Kate! Too predictable. Plus, that means our heroes ultimately die... together... so no Kate and Sawyer. Now, I understand some people have been postulating theories about the show for 7 years, but just because they don't incorporate your beliefs or ideas into the endgame, doesn't give you the right to go hating on it for having bad writing or crying "jump the shark!"
5. Why is this episode happening now? Would you rather it be in the finale? I like that they got it out of the way and now we can focus more on the core group of characters we all know and love for the ending.
I swear, Lost fans are a fickle bunch. They want answers, but don't like them when they get them (because they aren't the answers they thought they would be). Can't we just appreciate the beauty of Tuesday's episode for what it is? Half the time, I ask a Lost fan what they would have done different and they can't even tell me in a coherent way that would actually work for the show. For instance, Adam and Eve. What would you do, Lost fan #48332. "Ummm... just that the skeletons should have been so and so." And how would that have worked? "I don't know, I'm not the writer." Exactly, so let the writers write what they want to write. I seriously hope these haters don't watch the series finale because I just don't want to deal with their hating come Monday, May 24th.
Half the problem is the Internet. It's both been a wonderful thing for Lost and a curse. It's great because it gives people a community and an outlet to discuss their theories and speculate on what will happen next. But then people get possessive of their ideas, argue and finally complain that the show sucks because it didn't use their idea. Also, way too many people hop onto the web the second after the episode finishes (Matt, I'm looking at you) and see what the masses have to say about it, which without question influeces their opinion. I think the best way to watch the show is to let it breath, like a fine glass of wine. Open it, savor it, think about it, and then come in the next day refreashed and ready to discuss and see what the Net has to offer. That's how I plan to view the finale.
Now, I'm not saying the finale won't suck. And I'll be the first to say so if it does and bitch about how the showrunners didn't answer X and X, but I hope that the episode's strengths outshine any (at this point small) answers they fail to provide. But I will give it a few hours to reflect upon before jumping on Facebook and posting "amazing!" or "terrible!"
Due to the controversial nature of Tuesday's airing of LOST, I want to say a thing or two (or three or four...) about the episode. First of all, I liked it. It wasn't my favorite episode ever, but certainly not a bad episode... nothing like the only truly unwatchable episode of the show... you know, the one with Jack's tattoos and Bai Ling. Tuesday's episode did exactly what it needed to do (provide crucial island mythology and backstory for both Jacob and the Man in Black) in a way that was compelling and downright interesting. And it set the finale up beautifully.
But to specifically address some of the complaints:
1. The Man in Black didn't get a name. So what? Keeps him mysterious, and, besides, does he really need one? On the call sheets it says he is called Samuel. Ohhh... big whoop. Personally, I just like that we can go on calling him the "man in black." It just sounds so much cooler than Samuel, doesn't it?
2. What's up with the light? I thought that was an awesome idea and made sense with how they have been setting up the stakes for the show. Man comes and tries to tamper with the light. Unable to remove it, they put it out. Darkness prevails. Also, it reminded me of the Force in Star Wars. Light side/dark side. A spark of light in all of us. Cool stuff.
3. What's up with the "other mother"? She's kind of like the Lady of the Lake, IMO. Guarding Excali... I mean, the light.
4. The "Adam and Eve" skeletons should have been Jack and Kate! Too predictable. Plus, that means our heroes ultimately die... together... so no Kate and Sawyer. Now, I understand some people have been postulating theories about the show for 7 years, but just because they don't incorporate your beliefs or ideas into the endgame, doesn't give you the right to go hating on it for having bad writing or crying "jump the shark!"
5. Why is this episode happening now? Would you rather it be in the finale? I like that they got it out of the way and now we can focus more on the core group of characters we all know and love for the ending.
I swear, Lost fans are a fickle bunch. They want answers, but don't like them when they get them (because they aren't the answers they thought they would be). Can't we just appreciate the beauty of Tuesday's episode for what it is? Half the time, I ask a Lost fan what they would have done different and they can't even tell me in a coherent way that would actually work for the show. For instance, Adam and Eve. What would you do, Lost fan #48332. "Ummm... just that the skeletons should have been so and so." And how would that have worked? "I don't know, I'm not the writer." Exactly, so let the writers write what they want to write. I seriously hope these haters don't watch the series finale because I just don't want to deal with their hating come Monday, May 24th.
Half the problem is the Internet. It's both been a wonderful thing for Lost and a curse. It's great because it gives people a community and an outlet to discuss their theories and speculate on what will happen next. But then people get possessive of their ideas, argue and finally complain that the show sucks because it didn't use their idea. Also, way too many people hop onto the web the second after the episode finishes (Matt, I'm looking at you) and see what the masses have to say about it, which without question influeces their opinion. I think the best way to watch the show is to let it breath, like a fine glass of wine. Open it, savor it, think about it, and then come in the next day refreashed and ready to discuss and see what the Net has to offer. That's how I plan to view the finale.
Now, I'm not saying the finale won't suck. And I'll be the first to say so if it does and bitch about how the showrunners didn't answer X and X, but I hope that the episode's strengths outshine any (at this point small) answers they fail to provide. But I will give it a few hours to reflect upon before jumping on Facebook and posting "amazing!" or "terrible!"
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Random Picture Day!
So...
Thought I'd try a new thing and have every Wednesday be random photo day. The pix can be funny... beautiful... cool... weird... creepy... even a funky or out-of-place piece of art or advertisment... but no matter what it must be something abnormally awesome! You can even submit photos if you want, but please include the context. Here's the first pic to kick this thing off...
Context: this was taken with my cell phone inside of an underground Metro station. These life size "people" were scattered across the entire ceiling, as if they were falling. In total there were about a dozen of them that I counted. While I'm not sure it's the best idea to encourage commuters to think about jumping while inside of a train station, I do give the station points for creativity.
Thought I'd try a new thing and have every Wednesday be random photo day. The pix can be funny... beautiful... cool... weird... creepy... even a funky or out-of-place piece of art or advertisment... but no matter what it must be something abnormally awesome! You can even submit photos if you want, but please include the context. Here's the first pic to kick this thing off...
Context: this was taken with my cell phone inside of an underground Metro station. These life size "people" were scattered across the entire ceiling, as if they were falling. In total there were about a dozen of them that I counted. While I'm not sure it's the best idea to encourage commuters to think about jumping while inside of a train station, I do give the station points for creativity.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Where to get Pizza in LA - the top 5 list.
So...
At work today someone claimed there were no great pizza places in Los Angeles. Now while it's true there are NO great Chinese food places in LA (only servicable), the myth of there not being any truly outstanding Pizza joints here is simply false. There are at least five I have found in my many travels across this conrete jungle.
1. Mulberry Street Pizza in Beverly Hills. The perfect place to "do lunch" when I was working at a nearby Production Company and only had a few minutes to grab a quick bite. The pizza's not too greasy, not too dry... and very NY tasting. Friendly staff, too.
2. Ameci's. There's a few scattered across town, mostly in the valley. They have pasta, as well. My favorite is the one in Downtown Burbank, though it's small and looks a little rundown, it's always fresh. Admittedly, the slices occasionally come out a tad greasy, but nothing a good old fashioned napkin pat down won't solve. Besides, there isn't anything worse that a super dry pizza, IMO.
3. Michelli's. Great pizza and pasta place. Pizza is similar to the wood-fired style of California Pizza Kitchen, but they have a very unique and lively atmosphere which puts them a step above CPK's more well-known eatery. There's one in Hollywood and one in Universal City. Keep in mind, the staff all want to be actors, so don't be surprised if you walk in during one of the many song and dance routines they do throughout the night. Great place for a date.
4. Abbot's Pizza. Fun little hotspot perfect for hitting up on the first Friday of each month, when Abbot Kinney (the streets in Venice) have a special art walk on the entire block, including inside shops, museums, back alleys and even people's houses! You can walk in, shop, look at art and even get free wine! Plus, they have a few great local bands playing in their front yards. The pizza ranges from tradional to eclectic, but what else would you expect in Venice, California?
5. Sabarro's Pizza. Okay, so the slice is oddly shaped, it's way too greasy, and the service is usually indifferent (that is, if you can find someone who you can even understand), but it's cheap and the best of the fast food pizza joints. Can be found at almost any mall in LA, but my favorite is the Glendale Galleria because it's actually separate from the food court with it's own seating. I've been going to a Sabarro's since I was a kid, so admittedly it does hold a soft spot in my heart. But I still think it holds up. Oh, if you don't like it try again because you have a 50/50 chance of getting a good or bad slice depeding on who is making it and how much they care. But the reward is def. worth the risk!
I also hear Casa Bianca in Eagle Rock is divine, but I can't verify since I haven't been yet. Guess I'd better hurry on over...
At work today someone claimed there were no great pizza places in Los Angeles. Now while it's true there are NO great Chinese food places in LA (only servicable), the myth of there not being any truly outstanding Pizza joints here is simply false. There are at least five I have found in my many travels across this conrete jungle.
1. Mulberry Street Pizza in Beverly Hills. The perfect place to "do lunch" when I was working at a nearby Production Company and only had a few minutes to grab a quick bite. The pizza's not too greasy, not too dry... and very NY tasting. Friendly staff, too.
2. Ameci's. There's a few scattered across town, mostly in the valley. They have pasta, as well. My favorite is the one in Downtown Burbank, though it's small and looks a little rundown, it's always fresh. Admittedly, the slices occasionally come out a tad greasy, but nothing a good old fashioned napkin pat down won't solve. Besides, there isn't anything worse that a super dry pizza, IMO.
3. Michelli's. Great pizza and pasta place. Pizza is similar to the wood-fired style of California Pizza Kitchen, but they have a very unique and lively atmosphere which puts them a step above CPK's more well-known eatery. There's one in Hollywood and one in Universal City. Keep in mind, the staff all want to be actors, so don't be surprised if you walk in during one of the many song and dance routines they do throughout the night. Great place for a date.
4. Abbot's Pizza. Fun little hotspot perfect for hitting up on the first Friday of each month, when Abbot Kinney (the streets in Venice) have a special art walk on the entire block, including inside shops, museums, back alleys and even people's houses! You can walk in, shop, look at art and even get free wine! Plus, they have a few great local bands playing in their front yards. The pizza ranges from tradional to eclectic, but what else would you expect in Venice, California?
5. Sabarro's Pizza. Okay, so the slice is oddly shaped, it's way too greasy, and the service is usually indifferent (that is, if you can find someone who you can even understand), but it's cheap and the best of the fast food pizza joints. Can be found at almost any mall in LA, but my favorite is the Glendale Galleria because it's actually separate from the food court with it's own seating. I've been going to a Sabarro's since I was a kid, so admittedly it does hold a soft spot in my heart. But I still think it holds up. Oh, if you don't like it try again because you have a 50/50 chance of getting a good or bad slice depeding on who is making it and how much they care. But the reward is def. worth the risk!
I also hear Casa Bianca in Eagle Rock is divine, but I can't verify since I haven't been yet. Guess I'd better hurry on over...
Stupid 24 moment of the week (spoiler alert).
So...
Last week it was Freddie Prinze, Jr. as Cole Ortiz pushing Jack Bauer to the ground (yeah right, nobody pushes Jack Bauer to the ground). This week, it was Cole complaining that Jack killed his fiance after I don't know how much trouble said fiance got him into before double-crossing him on two different occasions and then finally nearly blowing him up, stealing his gun and shooting her way out of a bank. Stop defending her... not like she was innocent, Freddie Prinze, Jr.
Thankfully, this season has gotten MUCH better in the last few weeks since Dana Walsh (played by Katee Sackhoff) was revealed to be a mole and actually given a storyline that related to the show, uber-creep President Logan returned, and (sadly) Renee Walker was killed because even though her death sucked big time, at least it gave the show some much needed direction this year. Too bad the writers couldn't figure out a way to do that without resorting to killing off a main character, but such is 24.
Last week it was Freddie Prinze, Jr. as Cole Ortiz pushing Jack Bauer to the ground (yeah right, nobody pushes Jack Bauer to the ground). This week, it was Cole complaining that Jack killed his fiance after I don't know how much trouble said fiance got him into before double-crossing him on two different occasions and then finally nearly blowing him up, stealing his gun and shooting her way out of a bank. Stop defending her... not like she was innocent, Freddie Prinze, Jr.
Thankfully, this season has gotten MUCH better in the last few weeks since Dana Walsh (played by Katee Sackhoff) was revealed to be a mole and actually given a storyline that related to the show, uber-creep President Logan returned, and (sadly) Renee Walker was killed because even though her death sucked big time, at least it gave the show some much needed direction this year. Too bad the writers couldn't figure out a way to do that without resorting to killing off a main character, but such is 24.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Next time, take the Metro (a word on the LA freeway system).
So...
Today was my last day of getting to leave work early while still getting paid full time (don't worry, it's all legal) and I decided to take advantage of that fact by doing something extra special with my time off, something I've been wanting to do for a few months now but have been letting the almost certain hastle and frustration of doing such thing stand in my way.
Let me just warn you and say that, this thing I did, if you're like most people, probably won't sound too exciting - in fact, it might sound downright nerdy (or nerdish?), but I'm hoping at some point to change your mind through the wonder of word and picture.
That's right, I took pictures, and assuming I can figure out this blog thing enough to post them, you too may enjoy this super-special locale I went to almost as much as I did.
Normally, this is where I would tell you where it was I went to, but before I actually tell you the name of this place I ventured to, let's have a little fun. A guessing game if you will.
How to play? I give you a few clues, you see if you can figure it out. Simple, right? Okay, let's begin.
First clue: it's one the five largest of it's kind in America...
Second clue: it's located in the heart of downtown LA...
Third clue: has a crew of over 100, yet is still grossly understaffed...
Fourth clue: lies in the shadow of a California landmark (think Independence Day)...
Fifth clue: looks more like an Egyptian Temple than it's real purpose...
And finally: it makes Borders Booksellers look like the Taco Bell express to it's El Torito!
Still haven't figured it out yet...
It's the Los Angeles Central library!
Now if you don't think that's awesome that's simply because you've never been. Seriously, this place rocks. They have a DVD section that would make my local Blockbuster jealous; eight flights of books, including a rare book section that requires an appointment to view (my reason for actually going there) and a whole wing of graphic novels; as well as such non-traditional library features as an art gallery, a cafe, and one of the nicest gardens in all of So Cal.
Well worth the visit, which I plan to detail much more in my next post (pictures included, hopefully). My reason for going there, as mentioned above, was simple: I was on a quest to locate a rare and treasured book, which this particular library claimed to have a copy of. Of course, every journey has a beginning... and mine started on the 5 freeway just north of Griffith Park.
Now if you think that 1 o'clock in the afternoon is a pretty safe time to hit the highways, you obviously have never lived in LA. Ahhh, LA... the place where for no reason at all a freeway can get gridlocked on a Sunday night at 2 AM.
Such was the case as I was approaching the 110 freeway heading southbound on the 5 (I'm lucky, this trip only required one freeway change), when the 5 became jam-packed and I decided to get off on Stadium Way (my first mistake), and loop around to get past the traffic holdup.
But, sure enough, there was an accident right at the on-ramp I needed. A single car, brand new, had decided to take a left turn into the wall under the freeway overpass, causing the police to shut down the entrance I needed. In addition, there were 2 ambulances and, I kid you not, 4 firetrucks blocking off most of the lanes. Really, Los Angeles, 4 firetrucks? Is even 1 truck neccessary for this situation? Aren't you having some kind of huge budget crisis from over-spending. But I digress...
The real problem is that the police didn't even bother to put up a detour sign, they just forced drivers out into the surrounding neighborhoods to fend for themselves. Which is exactly where I headed, logically thinking that if I made a right turn and then another right at the next major street ahead it would have some kind of entrance onto the freeway. That would make sense right? Instead, I veered past a Church's Chicken and found myself on an access road running parallel to the freeway that, of course, had no access to the freeway itself!
Cut to: 20 minutes later and I'm in the middle of Eagle Rock (a few towns over) with no sign of the freeway. Sigh... Now, I'm not an idiot, but you almost have to be to drive in LA since it seems to require sheer blind luck to find the road you want. Finally, when I basically gave up and said, "F this I'll just enjoy the drive and see where it leads" I found an on-ramp! Located nestled between two heavily graffitied, but otherwise perfectly normal looking suburban houses!! Why do you taunt me so much LA freeway system? Did I ever throw a cigarette out the car window onto your cold, concrete surface? * No!
Five years in LA and I can tell you this is typical for traveling here, hence my hesitation in going to the Downtown Library in the first place. Luckily, the destination was worth the journey ($9 dollar parking included).
But more to come on that later. Right now, I need to lay down. Just thinking about the LA freeway system has made me exhausted again.
* I actually don't smoke, but you get my point.
Today was my last day of getting to leave work early while still getting paid full time (don't worry, it's all legal) and I decided to take advantage of that fact by doing something extra special with my time off, something I've been wanting to do for a few months now but have been letting the almost certain hastle and frustration of doing such thing stand in my way.
Let me just warn you and say that, this thing I did, if you're like most people, probably won't sound too exciting - in fact, it might sound downright nerdy (or nerdish?), but I'm hoping at some point to change your mind through the wonder of word and picture.
That's right, I took pictures, and assuming I can figure out this blog thing enough to post them, you too may enjoy this super-special locale I went to almost as much as I did.
Normally, this is where I would tell you where it was I went to, but before I actually tell you the name of this place I ventured to, let's have a little fun. A guessing game if you will.
How to play? I give you a few clues, you see if you can figure it out. Simple, right? Okay, let's begin.
First clue: it's one the five largest of it's kind in America...
Second clue: it's located in the heart of downtown LA...
Third clue: has a crew of over 100, yet is still grossly understaffed...
Fourth clue: lies in the shadow of a California landmark (think Independence Day)...
Fifth clue: looks more like an Egyptian Temple than it's real purpose...
And finally: it makes Borders Booksellers look like the Taco Bell express to it's El Torito!
Still haven't figured it out yet...
It's the Los Angeles Central library!
Now if you don't think that's awesome that's simply because you've never been. Seriously, this place rocks. They have a DVD section that would make my local Blockbuster jealous; eight flights of books, including a rare book section that requires an appointment to view (my reason for actually going there) and a whole wing of graphic novels; as well as such non-traditional library features as an art gallery, a cafe, and one of the nicest gardens in all of So Cal.
Well worth the visit, which I plan to detail much more in my next post (pictures included, hopefully). My reason for going there, as mentioned above, was simple: I was on a quest to locate a rare and treasured book, which this particular library claimed to have a copy of. Of course, every journey has a beginning... and mine started on the 5 freeway just north of Griffith Park.
Now if you think that 1 o'clock in the afternoon is a pretty safe time to hit the highways, you obviously have never lived in LA. Ahhh, LA... the place where for no reason at all a freeway can get gridlocked on a Sunday night at 2 AM.
Such was the case as I was approaching the 110 freeway heading southbound on the 5 (I'm lucky, this trip only required one freeway change), when the 5 became jam-packed and I decided to get off on Stadium Way (my first mistake), and loop around to get past the traffic holdup.
But, sure enough, there was an accident right at the on-ramp I needed. A single car, brand new, had decided to take a left turn into the wall under the freeway overpass, causing the police to shut down the entrance I needed. In addition, there were 2 ambulances and, I kid you not, 4 firetrucks blocking off most of the lanes. Really, Los Angeles, 4 firetrucks? Is even 1 truck neccessary for this situation? Aren't you having some kind of huge budget crisis from over-spending. But I digress...
The real problem is that the police didn't even bother to put up a detour sign, they just forced drivers out into the surrounding neighborhoods to fend for themselves. Which is exactly where I headed, logically thinking that if I made a right turn and then another right at the next major street ahead it would have some kind of entrance onto the freeway. That would make sense right? Instead, I veered past a Church's Chicken and found myself on an access road running parallel to the freeway that, of course, had no access to the freeway itself!
Cut to: 20 minutes later and I'm in the middle of Eagle Rock (a few towns over) with no sign of the freeway. Sigh... Now, I'm not an idiot, but you almost have to be to drive in LA since it seems to require sheer blind luck to find the road you want. Finally, when I basically gave up and said, "F this I'll just enjoy the drive and see where it leads" I found an on-ramp! Located nestled between two heavily graffitied, but otherwise perfectly normal looking suburban houses!! Why do you taunt me so much LA freeway system? Did I ever throw a cigarette out the car window onto your cold, concrete surface? * No!
Five years in LA and I can tell you this is typical for traveling here, hence my hesitation in going to the Downtown Library in the first place. Luckily, the destination was worth the journey ($9 dollar parking included).
But more to come on that later. Right now, I need to lay down. Just thinking about the LA freeway system has made me exhausted again.
* I actually don't smoke, but you get my point.
Finally... a blog!
So...
I just created a blog. The hardest part was actually coming up with a good display name. First of all, what is a display name? Is it the name I call my blog? Is it my URL (A.K.A. my web address... as in justpressdvr.blogspot.com)?
Why no, according to blogspot.com, it's actually the name I sign my posts with. Not wanting to be too cool for school, I simply went with my initials. Using my full name was a little too bland for my tastes, but signing out like some of those other bloggers do with such self-perceived clever monikers as "the TV guru" or "Washington Insider 411" seemed a little trite. So in the end... CJ it is.
Funny enough, I went into the office down the hall from me at work (NBC... or NBC Universal, technically, though it usually just confuses most people outside of entertainment), to ask for some suggestions on what to call my blog. There were 4 people in the office. I asked the girl closest to the door, knowing already that she has a blog. Sure enough, before she even has a chance to finish her sentence, everyone in the room chimes in with their opinions... seeing as how they all have blogs, too!! Even the guy from Africa who can barely speak a word of English preceeds to start telling me about his latest post on... something. Like I said, you can barely understand him. (Nice guy, though.)
Anyway, I now feel like I'm the last person on earth to start one of these, but as the saying goes, better late than never.
More to come.
I just created a blog. The hardest part was actually coming up with a good display name. First of all, what is a display name? Is it the name I call my blog? Is it my URL (A.K.A. my web address... as in justpressdvr.blogspot.com)?
Why no, according to blogspot.com, it's actually the name I sign my posts with. Not wanting to be too cool for school, I simply went with my initials. Using my full name was a little too bland for my tastes, but signing out like some of those other bloggers do with such self-perceived clever monikers as "the TV guru" or "Washington Insider 411" seemed a little trite. So in the end... CJ it is.
Funny enough, I went into the office down the hall from me at work (NBC... or NBC Universal, technically, though it usually just confuses most people outside of entertainment), to ask for some suggestions on what to call my blog. There were 4 people in the office. I asked the girl closest to the door, knowing already that she has a blog. Sure enough, before she even has a chance to finish her sentence, everyone in the room chimes in with their opinions... seeing as how they all have blogs, too!! Even the guy from Africa who can barely speak a word of English preceeds to start telling me about his latest post on... something. Like I said, you can barely understand him. (Nice guy, though.)
Anyway, I now feel like I'm the last person on earth to start one of these, but as the saying goes, better late than never.
More to come.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)