Fred the Online Journal

Teenage Dream: The Majestic Mystery of Kathryn Hudson

2011-08-31T17:41:00.003-04:00

As summer slowly starts its fade into fall, as the leaves begin to think about changing, as the sun fades, and the joy and lightness of summer inexorably give way to the depth and chill of winter one thing still remains, and will, apparently, always remain.
Seasons come and go; Katy Perry is forever.

--------------------------

If anyone ever seemed like a one-hit wonder waiting to happen it was Katy Perry. When “I Kissed A Girl” first appeared in summer of ’08 I would have bet my life savings on that being the only song we ever heard from the bland cipher with the bland name singing it. But here we are two years later, two years which by the way saw only a handful of weeks without a Katy Perry single in the top 10, and there appears to be no stopping the somewhat majestic mystery that is Kathryn Hudson. Majestic because she just last week tied the King of Pop by having five singles from the same album hit #1. And a mystery because, how? And why? And who? No , seriously, who is she? And who are her fans? Has anyone ever in history said – “Yes, a Katy Perry concert!!”? And if so, who? And why? I mean what is there to attach yourself to as a fan? Even Britney Spears at 17 had more of a persona and personal story than Katy Perry. So how in the age of individualism and personal expression did the non-descript sexpot win out? How in the era of over-sharing is, statistically speaking, the biggest pop star in the country someone we know almost nothing about? And WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT KATY PERRY??? And why aren’t we talking about her more? And, really, did we ever start?

Now that’s a lot of questions I know. More questions than anyone has likely ever asked about Katy Perry. But considering her latest album just achieved the distinction of having more #1 hits than Thriller and Rumours COMBINED, maybe we should start asking some questions. Like, for example, who the hell does she think she is taking over out pop charts like that?

Well since she’s not here to answer for herself, and since her answer likely wouldn’t be that interesting anyway (because nothing she says ever is), allow me to answer for her. Because I think I know who Katy Perry is: she’s a teenage dream.

-----------------------

Here is the complete list of things most people might even potentially know about the biggest selling and, technically, most popular pop star alive: she was raised in an incredibly sheltered environment by religious nut-job parents; she started her music career as a Christian act; she’s married to Russell Brand; she possibly had a brief dalliance with Elmo; and she has very, shall we say, supple bosoms. Oh, and her music is catchy as shit. I mean "Teenage Dream" makes "Party in the USA" sound like Wilco's "Less Than You Think" And that’s not even her biggest hit. But should the catchiness of her music make the complete lack of anything particularly interesting or noteworthy about her totally irrelevant? After all music is never just about the music. Especially pop music.

So what exactly is Katy Perry selling?

Well, her attractiveness for one. According to a possibly apocryphal story Ms. Perry (allegedly) first got together with Russell Brand by sending him a cell phone picture of her breasts after the VMAs. Which, if true, is I guess her way of acknowledging that she is well aware where her bread is buttered.

(Also, move over Jane Mansfield’s boobs, Dolly Parton’s boobs, Jennifer Love Hewitt’s boobs, and Scarlett Johansson’s boobs – there’s a new contender for Most Successful Boobs of All Time)

But there’s gotta be more to it than just being a more well endowed Zooey Deschanel with a better ear for pop hooks. After all there there are a million catchy songs on the pop charts all sung by relatively attractive people. And also Ke$ha. But what separates a huge #1 hit from a middle-of-the-road hit is that it provides us with something ephemeral to latch onto. To attach ourselves to. To reach Number One a song has to in some way tap into some collective emotion or experience, whether it’s joy or giddiness or just the acknowledgment that you too kissed a girl once, and, well, kinda liked it. This isn’t something we’re always conscious of, which is why we often find ourselves liking pop hits against our seeming better judgment. But it's always there in some form or fashion. And it's what the Svengalis of pop have spent years perfecting – the ability to make a song not just catchy but universally relatable. The Black Eyed Peas are the unquestioned masters of this, what with their massive hits about starting parties, and having good nights, and rocking that body. But Katy Perry isn’t far behind. She too has a song for almost every major human experience – young love, exploring your sexuality, accepting and embracing who you are, fucking an alien, etc.

(Can we all just take a second to acknowledge the fact that at one point in American history the #1 song in the country was about having sex with an extraterrestrial? Thanks.)

But where The Black Eyed Peas’ songs are laughably broad and general, Katy Perry has been able to make songs that while equally broad are yet also somehow specific. And more importantly personally relatable. See Katy Perry isn’t pretending to be a robot or a hologram or shouting L’Chaim for no reason. She’s just a regular girl with a relatable story who likes to wear funky wigs on occasion. Her life is the new American one: the troubled upbringing, the acting out phase, the flashy quick marriage, and an adulthood full of ephemeral disposable pleasures spent trying to hang onto your youth.

So while other stars are busy selling pimped out Maybachs or dancing sacrilegious motorcycle gangs Katy Perry is selling something more familiar and relatable. She’s selling real everyday life repackaged and gussied up. She’s not trying revolutionize music; she’s just trying to do what has always worked. She’s the CBS sitcom of pop stars, only if CBS was MTV. She’s the bland, less-empowering white Beyonce. She’s the more insidious Taylor Swift. She’s not selling fantasies; she’s selling reality remade as dreams. Dreams that teenagers have. And ones that she embodies all too well.

--------------------
Perhaps it's because Katy Perry had, by all accounts, an insanely sheltered upbringing that she’s so able to tap into the mindset of a teenager. Because so often as adults we get the teenage years all wrong. They’re not poetry and art and they're not salacious spectacle. That's not what kids really want. They want Grease and Saved by the Bell and Beach Blanket Bingo. They want American Pie and Annette Funicello and Dirty Dancing. There's a reason why Awkward has worked and Skins didn’t. Because as much as teenagers might think they want to wear a meat dress, or brush their teeth with a bottle of Jack, or have an on-again off-again romance with BMX star Carey Hart, really, they respond much more to things that seem real and possible and accessible. They don’t care as much about President of the United States as they do about being Prom Queen. And they don’t want a crazy adventurous life, as much as they, deep down, just want a conventional normal one just like their friends. Which means aspiring to a simple life of fleeting shallow pleasures and no real substance. A life full of the cultural signifiers of happiness and success with nothing behind them. They don’t want a challenge or hard work or hardship. They just a good time hanging with their friends. Friends like Katy Perry who, in the immortal words of Diane Court, has "glimpsed (their) future and all I can say is...go back”. And that’s where Katy Perry differs sharply from the aforementioned Taylor Swifts and Beyonces. She never hints at growing up or facing your fears or making something of yourself. She doesn’t want you to blow off your hometown; she wants to enjoy every minute you have in it. She’s hip to the true ambitions of kids.

For (most) boys, that means getting a girl. And not just any girl - The Katy Perry Girl. One who is, like, totally super hot, but not too slutty. One who wants to have sex but who isn’t too sexually intimidating. One who likes to party and have a good time, but whom they can still take home to mom. One who won’t bog them down with all her feelings and her drama and her deep thoughts, because basically she’s just there to make them happy. A girl who wont nag them or challenge them and likes farting and sports and beer because basically they are, to quote Katy Perry’s first album title, Just One Of The Boys. Katy Perry is Smurfette (no, literally, she is). She’s the All-American Girl 2011 style.

And for (most) girls, well, Katy Perry is exactly who they are all too often taught to be. Because you can wear your cone bras ladies, but if you REALLY want to succeed in this world they better be pink and shoot white foam out of them.

And that’s why Katy Perry isn’t going anywhere. She will always be with us because we will always at some time, on some level, collectively aspire to what she represents. Like religion or fear or corporate campaign contributions she’s what keeps this engine running. Even after Kathryn Hudson is dead and gone “Katy Perry” will always live on.

She must.

Because teens always need dreams.
And we all need realities.

The One Where Dan Harmon Doesnt Bite The Apple

2011-06-08T14:10:00.000-04:00

"But when you’re in your first season, your goal is to get a second season, and when you’re in your second season, you just don’t believe you’ll get a third. Nobody up top believes that statistics are on your side. This is where it usually ends. If we have to promise free ice cream to get to a third season, then we will and then we’ll deal with it." - Dan Harmon on Community

With apologies to Mad Men, Breaking Bad (two shows whose most recent seasons I haven’t seen), Boardwalk Empire, and Parks and Rec, Community is the best show currently on TV and the one that is doing the most to innovate and move the medium forward. So it’s surprising to hear its creator, a man who seems to come from outside "the system", echo the long-standing sentiment inherent to television production in this country - that deep down the core mission of his show is simply to stay on the air and keep people watching.

But also, it’s not surprising at all.

-----

The night before reading the Dan Harmon interview from which that quote was pulled, I saw The Tree of Life, or as the woman introducing it at the Arclight Theater called it - "Terrence Malick's Tree of Life". Throughout most of the running time of the movie I found myself acutely aware of the fact that I was in a theater filled with other human beings all watching this same strange, beautiful, challenging piece of ART unfold. How did something this ambitious, this innovative, this personal, this difficult, this uncommercial ever get made is the question I kept thinking to myself. But sure enough it did. And it filled me with hope and inspiration and joy that it not only saw the light of day but that actual people paid actual money to sit there and watch it with me. And whether they loved it, or hated it, or thought that the Sean Penn stuff was pretty unnecessary, and that the disparate parts of the movie weren’t integrated as well as they could have been, and that then ending was probably a little more drawn out than it should have been but that ultimately it was one of the most beautiful, original, ambitious, thought provoking, well-made movies they are ever likely to see, all that really matters is that The Tree of Life is a movie that exists. It was allowed to be made. And I can pretty much guarantee that at no point in its making did Terrence Malick ever think – “I hope this does well so that I can make another movie. In fact, what can I do to make sure that people will like this movie? Whatever it is, I will do exactly that.”

Now I realize that it’s unfair to compare an established director making an art house movie to a first time show runner making a network TV sitcom. And I also don’t mean this as any slight on Dan Harmon who in his own way is as creative and innovative and genius as Terrance Malick is. It’s not his fault that the “product for product’s sake” mentality is so deeply entrenched in the very fiber of American TV production that there is perhaps no way around it. With that in mind though, it is fair to ask if TV will ever be able to truly compete on the same artistic level with film. Because while there are a great many film directors who worry a great deal about the commercial success of their movies and make the audience their primary concern (probably most film directors do in fact) there are also plenty that don’t. Just down the hall from the theater showing Tree of Life was one showing Midnight in Paris. And if you think Terrence Malick don’t give a fuck about his audience or how his movies do commercially, Woody Allen makes him look like Ron Howard. And there are plenty of more directors like them. The film industry is massive soul-sucking corporate money-making machine, but it also still allows true artists to lurk on its fringes making their personal passion projects that aren’t remotely concerned with box office or audience approval. They make movies only when they want to and entirely on their terms or they don’t make them at all. The fact that these difficult, provocative, challenging, uncommercial movies exist is what makes film an art form rather than just an entertainment form. Visual art, dance, theater and music all have whole movements and styles and genres devoted to being, in addition to all of those other qualities, openly antagonistic towards their audience. But other than (occasionally) The Sopranos, name a TV show that could even be described as “difficult and challenging”*, let alone antagonistic towards its audience. Twin Peaks? John From Cincinnati? Homeboys in Outerspace?

There are certainly TV shows that have great artistic merit. And there are shows that are clearly labors of love for their creators. And there are shows that aim to provoke, to challenge, to push the medium forward. But as of yet there is no real TV equivalent to The Tree of Life.

For all their walking, they're not getting any closer to the light.

(*The Wire is of course the exception to all this. But it doesnt count because it's its own thing. Also because it would invalidate my whole arguement. So lets just pretend like it doesnt exist. Everyone involved in TV production seems to...)

2011: The Years the Oscars Died, And How Don Mischer Killed Them

2011-02-28T21:46:00.004-05:00

Dear Oscar Producer and Director Don Mischer,

You’re an idiot.

How did you think that any of that was going to be good?

And don't say that it was the hosts' fault. People today are saying that they were a disappointment. But they can’t be considered a disappointment if you didn’t expect anything from them in the first place. Unless of course you did. Which you must have. Which mean that you’re an idiot.

And your "journey" that you prepared us for? What was it? The image of old movies that you played in the background? Were we supposed to be impressed by a large screen that showed moving images? Isn’t that kind of the whole essence of why we were even there in the first place?

And other than that what was your plan for the night? Show clips from old movies and play music to underscore everything? Had you thought it out past that? No you hadn't. And so what you were left with was an abomination. An abomination that made last year’s boringness seem like a virtue. Because at least boring isn’t painfully, uncomfortably bad. Which is what this was. Believe when I tell you that this year’s show will go down in the annals of terrible Oscar lore. Rob Lowe and Snow White are offically off the hook. And all because you, Don Mischer, are a stupid fucking idiot.

Just to show you how easy your job is, I'll do it myself. I'll take every memorable or noteworthy element of your show and show you in one sentence how you could have EASILY made each one infinitely better with even a minimal amount of work or brainpower. And yes I realize some of these things were out of your control, but I don’t care. I’m blaming you for everything that happened. Because I feel like it.

And hopefully, in the future, perhaps people will stop and ask themselves "will this be good?" before they ask themselves "will people watch this?".

But as it’s Hollywood I’m dealing with, I’m not holding my breath.

---------------------------------------

Thing That Happened: No one wrote any jokes for the hosts.
I liked all of the jokes in that opening film spoof segment. All none of them. And then the hits kept coming. I mean James Franco standing there in drag telling a Charlie Sheen joke? Totally original and hilarious! What genius writes these things? And how DO they do it?

How It Could Have Been Improved: Let random people on the Internet contribute jokes.
The show was seemingly obsessed with new technology and the Internet, perhaps as a make good for its snub of “the facebook movie”. There were "jokes" about texting and apps and social networking. And James Franco was tweeting throughout the show. So clearly the show knows that the Internet exists. And therefore they must be aware that at this point people get way more entertainment from twitter and live blogs than they do from listening to the handiwork of Bruce Vilanch's corpse. So why not just have people tweet jokes at you and then use the best ones? I'll even show you how it’s done by sprinkling some jokes and comments from the Internet throughout the rest of this piece. And it will be better for it. Just you wait and see.

Thing That Happened: James Franco and Anne Hathaway hosted.
He may not have had great material, but wow, James Franco KILLED it out there. No, literally. He killed it. I think a few old ladies died from boredom. Also, I shot myself in the face.

Are we totally sure that he got the memo that he was supposed to at least try to be funny? Does he know that thats pretty much what his entire job description was? Does he even know what humor is? Like as a concept?

(BTW James, you can’t be six degrees of Kevin Bacon away from someone if that person is not Kevin Bacon. That’s not how the game works.)

I’m going to go out on a limb and make a crazy prediction here: James Franco will not be asked back to host the Oscars again. EVER. Ricky Gervais and Howard Stern will be asked to co-host before they ask James Franco back.

But he wasn’t alone in his badness.

Before I say anything else let me state for the record that I love Anne Hathaway. And when I say that I love Anne Hathaway I mean that I LOOOOVE Anne Hathaway. She’s probably my number one gal. But last night was not her finest hour. I mean, that musical number she did was…wow...it was…a thing that happened. And while I appreciate her trying to single-handedly save the show, she's not really a person who is equipped to do that. So while all the extreme vitriol other women in particular were throwing her way on the Internet last night really set off my women’s studies sensors and made me more than a little uneasy with its intensity, suffice it to say I too agree that future hosting gigs are not in her future.

How It Could Have Been Improved: Having Billy Crystal (or pretty much anyone else in the entire world) host.
This just in - young movie stars are attractive. They are not however, good awards show hosts. (Hugh Jackman excepted).

Billy Crystal however, is. His getting a standing ovation was a clear sign that we collectively as a people recognize that and really want him back. And he will be back. Next year in fact.

I promise.

And just remember when it's officially announced that you heard it here first.

Speaking of attractive people though...

Thing That Happened: Mila Kunis showed everyone up.
What were the odds during Season 1 of That 70s Show that Mila Kunis one day would be the most attractive person at the entire Academy Awards (narrowly edging out Kirk Douglas of course)?

I just hope she doesn’t go all Johansson on us. By which I mean that other than Lindsey Lohan, has anyone’s perceived level of attractiveness taken a bigger and more inexplicable hit in the past five years than Scarlett Johansson? At one point she was arguably the most attractive person in the world, and yet now I would actually think less of you as a person if you openly admitted to being attracted to her.

(Also, not to be rude, but that Natalie Portman sure has gained a lot of weight...)

How It Could Have Been Improved: Have Jennifer Connelly show up.

Thing That Happened: Kirk Douglas stole the show.
I think that might be a bad sign when your hosts get totally showed up in the comedy department by a 94 year old stroke victim. Thank goodness Kirk Douglas didn’t have a set scheduled last night at The Laugh Factory because I don’t know what the show would have done without him. I only hope that at 94 that I'm still awesome enough to be a trending topic on twitter. Speaking of which, my favorite twitter joke of the night was Alex Baze's "Kirk. See him again next year in montage form."

How It Could Have Been Improved: If Kirk Douglas had presented Best Foreign Language Film as well.
(Hey now at least I'll be able to keep Alex Baze company in hell)

Thing That Happened: Living Legend Roger Deakins inexplicably gotsnubbed for an Oscar for the ninth time.

This a fucking outrage.
Who does Roger Deakins gotta shoot to get an Oscar?
No really.
Who?

How It Could Have Been Improved: Three 6 Mafia finding him in the audience and laughing in his face.
(The essence of that joke courtesy of AV Club commenter Side Item)

Thing That Happened: Jack Nicholson wasn’t there.

How It Could Have Been Improved: He should never not be there until the day he dies. And maybe even after that. It should be a law.

Thing That Happened: Trent Reznor, Academy Award Winner
This is the most exciting thing that happened all night. I literally clapped and jumped up and down. And I could care less about Trent Reznor personally and would be hard pressed to name more than three NIN songs. It’s just really awesome in principle. Plus he’s now already halfway to EGOTing. And I have a feeling "The Downward Spiral: The Musical" is going to be a big hit at the 2014 Tonys.

How It Could Have Been Improved: Also giving Maynard James Keenan an Oscar.

Thing That Happened: Melissa Leo gave a terrible speech.
You knew you were probably going to win right, Melissa Leo? You’ve had at least three months to prepare, but really you’ve had your whole life. And that’s the best you could come up with? I never understand when people go up there and seem completely unprepared like that. It’s probably the biggest moment of your entire life - that’s not worth at least some modicum of advance preparation or thought? That’s just inexplicable to me. But then that’s why I’m not a crazy person.

How It Could Have Been Improved: Giving Christian Bale's speech instead.
I don't know how the speech she gave could have really been improved other when she said “Dick’s not in the room” having someone yell out “That’s what she said”. But what she could have done was just become a totally different person and give a totally different speech. Specifically Christian Bale. Because his was funny and human and touching and everything hers wasn’t. And that’s because, as everyone has always said about Christian Bale, he's such a nice charming young man.

Thing That Happened: Colin Firth was very, very British.
Colin Firth starting his Oscar acceptance speech by saying “I fear my career might have just peaked” is possible the most British thing that has ever happened. And yet somehow he only got more British from there.

How It Could Have Been Improved: If he had dropped a few F-bombs.
A verbose, articulate, witty, and self-deprecating speech? Hey Colin Firth, what do think this is, the BAFTA Awards? This is America, damn it. Start crying and make your speech rambling and incoherent already. Enough of your dignified charms. You're making the rest of us look bad.

Thing That Happened: Aaron Sorkin giving a boring speech.
WTF Sorkin?!? Just a list of people? No social statement? No quotable lines? No witty quips? Good lord man, Colin Firth showed you up with his verbosity. Hell, David Seidler showed you up. And he’s like a hundred and five. And he gave a shout out to stutters. Stutterers! What were people with high blood pressure and those with slight limps too controversial for him? And yes, I know his movie was about a guy with a stutter, but still…

How It Could Have Been Improved: Sorkin starting his speech by saying "An Oscar isn't cool. You know what’s cool? A BILLION Oscars." And then segueing into an unused Josiah Bartlett monologue.

Thing That Happened: No applause during the death montage?!?!?
Hey they got something right! And it only took them 82 years!

How It Could Have Been Improved: Have Adele sing under it.
Celine Dion is the Bob Hope of death montage underscoring. Adele will soon be its Billy Crystal.

Thing That Happened: The Academy coming off as overly sensitive about their perceived lack of racial diversity.
Lena Horne is certainly great and important. And it’s certainly a good thing to honor her. She deserves it. But it felt a bit like simply an obvious political ploy to address the lack-of-black-nominees pseudo-controversy.

Way It Could Have Been Improved: The Academy not feeling so guilty about its supposed lack of diversity.
It was an off-year for African American filmmakers and performers. I don’t want to say “it’s as simple as that” because whether it’s just an off-year or likely a broader problem with Hollywood as a whole and the way movies get made is a different and much more involved discussion. But as far as the Academy Awards are concerned, name one African American actor, actress, writer, director or producer who deserved to get nominated this year and then tell me whose nomination slot they should have had. The best I can come up with is Halle Berry for Frankie and Alice but that performance isn’t better than any of the five that were nominated (or even the unnominated Julianne Moore and Lesley Manville for that matter). And while the Academy at one point had a definitely deserved bad reputation for their shameful and embarrassing lack of diversity, those days are over, at least in the acting branch. Over the past ten years out of a potential 200 acting nominations, African American actors have gotten 22 of them, or 11%. And out of 40 acting awards, African American actors have won 7 of them, or 17.5%. Considering that during that time frame African Americans made up between 10-13% of the total population of the United States those percentages are certainly nothing The Academy should feel overly guilty about or apologetic for.

So sure, this year there were no African American nominees. On the surface that of course doesn’t look great. But there are deeper issues causing that. I mean, why are we still not seeing more diverse casts in indie, awards-season type dramas? Why has the entire African-American marketplace been apparently ceded to Tyler Perry and Ice Cube? Where is the next Spike Lee or John Singleton, and why have neither of them produced consistently good work in AT LEAST 10 years? Why are African American actors still largely not bankable oversees? When is the next novel by Sapphire getting turned into a movie? (Sorry, couldn’t help it.) These are all questions that should be legitimately discussed and examined. But viewing The Academy as latently racist or as having a poor track record of honoring worthy black performers? That ship has thankfully sailed.

Thing That Happened: Gweneth Paltrow sang a song.
So what, are we not allowed to have an award show without Gweneth Paltrow signing now? Who does she think she is, Neil Patrick Harris?

How It Could Have Been Improved: If she was backed up by Peacock Cee-Lo and the Muppets

Thing That Happened: Having Auto-Tune the News and PS 22 involved with the show.

How It Could Have Been Improved: Getting Sad Keanu involved as well.
(BTW, did anyone ask the PS 22 kids who they were wearing? I must know!)

Thing That Happened: Toy Story 3 won Best Animated Feature (of course).
To quote Todd VanDerWerff, "They're eventually going to just rename this award the Randy Newman Memorial Award for Pixar's Best Animated Feature Film."

How It Could Have Been Improved: Toy Story 3 NOT Winning Best Animated Feature.
The emperor is wearing moderately nice but not that impressive clothes people! Accept it. Deal with it. Move on. And start bracing for the inevitable reality that Cars 2 aint winning this thing next year.

(My Pixar Fan Club membership has now officially been revoked for heresy.)

Thing That Happened: Hillary Swank presented Best Director.

How It Could Have Been Improved: Hillary Swank presenting Best Actress.

Thing That Happened: Tom Hooper won Best Director.
Really Academy?!? Tom Hooper? Really? A plurality of Academy members thought that Tom Hooper was the best director of the year? To quote this Raphael Bob-Waksberg tweet “WTF IS A TOM HOOPER? I NEVER HEARD OF NO TOM HOOPER WTF”

Also, name one thing he brought to The Kings Speech that Luke Matheny couldn’t have brought to it. The Kings Speech is the very definition of competent yet personality-less. And you bypassed David Fincher for it? To quote Bill Simmons, “Hooper over Fincher was a travesty. I forgot how much I hate the Oscars. What a farce. And I liked King's Speech. But come on...”

No wonder Christopher Nolan didn’t get nominated. You apparently have no idea what a director is or what they do or how to evaluate them.

On the bright side though, now Red Dust can join Point Break and In Love and War as movies made by Academy Award Winning Directors. So there’s that.

How It Could Have Been Improved: Immediately after he got off stage introducing Tom Hooper to John G. Avildsen and Robert Benton

And lastly,
Thing That Happened: The Kings Speech won Best Picture.

How It Could Have Been Improved: The Academy properly understanding the meaning of the word "best".

What to Expect from The Bizarro Grammys: A 2011 Oscar Preview

2011-02-26T16:12:00.005-05:00

For years The Grammys and The Oscars were friends. They hung out together, had a lot in common and were viewed the same way: as prestigious and significant yet slightly corny, political, and behind-the-times crap shoots. But in recent years a funny thing happened. As The Oscars became more predictable, The Grammys became absurdly random and unpredictable. As The Oscars (with some notable exceptions) started to make more progressive, hipper, and culturally relevant choices, the Grammys slid even further and further into old fogey-dom. As The Oscars became less about who ran the best campaign and who spent the most money wooing voters, The Grammys seemed to do the exact opposite. And as the coverage of and seeming weight given to The Oscars has increased, people stopped caring about or even acknowledging the existence of The Grammys all together. Now instead of being Xerox copies of each other, The Grammys and The Oscars are mirror images. And that’s what makes the most results of the most recent Grammy Awards so interesting.

America is still buzzing about the Esperanza Spalding and Arcade Fire Grammy wins. They made The Grammys front page news. Just yesterday in fact, I found myself engaged in two separate conversations about The Grammys. And The Grammys were two weeks ago at this point. That’s an eternity in pop culture time. Especially for an event that in years prior no one paid even the slightest attention to. But this year The Grammys zigged where they were expected to zag and in doing so they captured the national conversation. Which raises the interesting question - how will the Granddaddy of Them All respond? Likely, not well. They’ve already announced that they’re doing away with the "five past winners/colleagues pay tribute to the five current nominees" gimmick they did the past two years which I was a very vocal fan of. And it’s hard to see James Franco and Anne Hathaway even at their very best transcending the level of "tolerably pleasant". Most interestingly though, after years of making forward thinking choices, The Academy looks like it might be falling back into old habits. Just as The Grammys threw us for a loop by making a good choice, The Oscars look set to do the same by making a bad one. Just when we thought we had figured out who they are they both go and change on us. And so the Grammy/Oscar dance begins anew. How are they alike? How are they different? And what would it be like if one was run by the other? To explore that I’ve chosen what the winner in every category should be. And then who the Grammys would likely choose if they were in charge. And then who the Oscars likely will choose themselves come Sunday night. Compare, contrast, and discuss the choices. Or likely do none of the above. Because ultimately there’s probably only one thing that matters to you. Only one reason why you’re here. And that’s to win your Oscar pool.

Good luck.

-----------------------

The Shorts:
Yes, this is the place that competitive Oscar pools are won or lost. It’s also the most random and unpredictable. And not just because no one has seen any of the nominees. In fact whenever I have seen the nominees I’ve found I’ve usually been more off in my predictions than when I just read the names off a sheet of paper. Trying to guess these things will drive you mad. It’s like the Best Pop Performance By a Duo or Group With Vocals Grammy category - so wide ranging and eclectic that's it’s like trying to choose between apples and oranges in a situation where the jury only eats meat. So while I can make my picks, who the hell knows who will or should win. It’s a nonsensical crapshoot, which I believe also describes the Grammys to a T.

*Animated Short
My Pick: The Gruffalo
I don’t have a whole lot to say about this one other than get your Mark Ruffalo/The Gruffalo jokes ready now. Also, yes kids, it IS possible to beat Pixar.

The Grammys Pick: The Gruffalo is filled with voice performances from well-known actors. And there’s no surer way to The Grammys' heart than as many big names as possible all collaborating on something. That’s why you can pencil in "All Of The Lights" for at least one Grammy next year. Pen it in actually.

The Oscars Pick: The Gruffalo

*Documentary Short:
My Pick: Strangers No More, you had me at "Israeli children".

"Learning about cultural diversity" "overcoming ethnic tensions" "Middle East" and "heartwarming" were just the icing on the Oscar-bait cake.

The Grammys Pick: Killing in the Name shares a title with a Rage Against the Machine song that topped the charts in the UK last Christmas. Seems like as arbitrary a reason as any to give something an award.

The Oscars Pick: Either Strangers No More or Killing in the Name

*Live Action Short
My Pick: Provided that Na Wewe is pronounced like it looks, it’s my pick. And if it is pronounced how I hope it is, then when it wins, the announcement of "and the Oscar goes to...Na Wewe" will be one of the greatest moments in Live Action Short Oscar history, just behind when the Music By Prudence woman pulled a Kanye on her co-director last year.

The Grammys Pick: The Crush
I’m guessing The Grammys would pick this category the way they pick most of their winners - by throwing darts at a dartboard. And in this scenario I’m saying that their hypothetical dart landed on the name The Crush. Simple as that.

The Oscars Pick: The Confession
It seems to be what people in the know are predicting will win. Which means it probably won’t. Or maybe it will. Whatever.

Visual Effects
My Pick: Inception
It may not win Screenplay or even be nominated for Director or Editing, but at least as consolation Inception has this esteemed category that has been won by the likes of Spider Man 2 and Death Becomes Her in the bag.

The Grammys Pick: Inception
Even the Grammys couldn’t screw this one up.

The Oscars Pick: Inception

Sound Mixing
My Pick: Inception
While watching Inception I often found myself thinking "Holy shit that sound was well mixed!" Or maybe I just dreamed that I did.

The Grammys Pick: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Inception is too confusing and highbrow for the Grammys. And people who listen to adult contemporary radio like Harry Potter right? And it’s been around forever so it feels safe and familiar. And it made a lot of money. And no one knows what Sound Mixing is anyway. Least of all The Grammys. I mean what do they know about judging the quality of sound? (Zing!)

The Oscars Pick: Inception

Sound Editing
My Pick: The only thing better than the way the sounds were mixed in Inception was the way that they were edited together. I mean, oh my god! Am I right?
(No really, am I?)

The Grammys Pick: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Don’t believe me that this would be their pick? Well, this Harry Potter book has actually already won a Grammy! So there.

The Oscars Pick: Inception
Giving it three Oscars on the night.
(Not for nothing, but these are three of the four Oscars that The Matrix won in 1999. The other being Editing which Inception would have won had it been nominated.)

Makeup
My Pick: Ah, Best Makeup. The category which allows Quest for Fire and Harry and the Hendersons to call themselves Academy Award winning movies. Which is my way of saying that this category sucks. I haven’t seen any of these nominees, but The Wolfman seems like it required the most work. So, um, I'll go with that.

The Grammys Pick: The Way Back
Because why not. ("Because why not" is a phrase that The Grammys say often)

The Oscars Pick: The Wolfman
It's makeup icon (there’s a phrase you don’t hear too much) Rick Baker. And he made a man turn into a wolf. (Although that man was Benicio del Toro so it’s debatable how much work that actually required...)

Art Direction
My Pick: If by “Art Direction” you mean “the sensation that my eyes are on fire” then I’ve gotta go with Alice and Wonderland. If “Art Direction” means something else then I have no idea.

The Grammys Pick: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
The hypothetical Grammy juggernaut rolls on. (If Harry Potter could somehow be turned into music you just know that it would cleanup at The Grammys.)

The Oscars Pick: Alice in Wonderland
This is a category that could easily get caught up as part of a Kings Speech sweep and I don’t feel good about this pick at all. But the look of Kings Speech was just so drab and dreary, and in this category, as with Costume Design, the flashiest nominee almost always wins. Speaking of which…

Costume Design
My Pick: The Tempest
Since Spiderman: Turn Off The Dark is probably the end of Julie Taymor’s theater career for awhile, her film career could use a little encouragement. And The Tempest did genuinely have great costumes. So she’s got that going for her. Which is nice.

The Grammys Pick: Black Swan
Black Swan’s costumes are like an album of similar sounding songs elevated greatly by one monster single. So I’m sure The Grammys love it. And so will half the girls you know next year for Halloween.

The Oscars Pick: Alice in Wonderland
Yes a Best Picture front-runner about the British monarchy would seem to be the obvious choice. But the British monarchy in question happens to be the dowdy 1930s version. And Best Costume Design is all about flash. And Alice in Wonderland has that in spades over The Kings Speech. Plus, as I always say, when in doubt go with either Colleen Atwood or Sandy Powell. So Colleen it is, to tie Sandy with three wins apiece.
(Note: I’m a huge nerd)

Editing
My Pick: Inception
Oh wait…

The Grammys Pick: 127 Hours
Just because it would thoroughly infuriate me. If there’s an option that would make me apoplectic if it won, then that’s the nominee The Grammys like to choose. Yes, it’s that personal.

The Oscars Pick: Inception’s loss is The Social Network’s gain. The Academy would definitely love to give this to The Kings Speech, but it all unfolds in a linear fashion in only a small handful of locations. That’s not the stuff Best Editing Oscars are made of.

Animated Feature

My Pick: I’m about to say something heretical: if I had a vote for Best Animated Feature I would vote for How to Train Your Dragon.

Please don’t shoot me.

Look, I love Pixar. Let me rephrase that. I LOOOOOOOOVE Pixar. Andy and Pixar sittin in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G. If Pixar was a religion I would enter the seminary tomorrow. But. I didn’t love Toy Story 3. I thought it was good, certainly. I very much enjoyed it. But I also thought it was a bit safe and predicable. After pushing the envelope with each of their past few releases Toy Story 3 felt like a bit of a retreat for Pixar into the easy and comfortable and familiar. And I don’t go to my 3D animated kids movies for comfort. I go to them to see robots in a dystopian trash-scape teach children about the dangers of unregulated capitalism. And so while Pixar was off talking about the sadness of death and the ennui of aging, I turned to the dreaded Dreamworks, of all people, for my moving and challenging exploration of cultural misunderstanding, racism, prejudice, and why war is wrong. Kids are innately gonna figure out the Toy Story 3 shit eventually. How to Drain Your Dragon though is truly important stuff, well told. It’s the perfect movie for the Age of Obama. So while I feel a bit like Fredo going against the family here, I gotta say that How to Train Your Dragon is more deserving of this award.

I hope that we can still be friends.

The Grammys Pick: Toy Story 3

“Safe Unthreatening And Familiar” is The Grammys’ middle name

The Oscars Pick: Toy Story 3

There’s no way it loses. But just to let you know that I’m not completely out of my mind for somewhat hoping that it does, I’ll let the great Raphael Bob-Waksberg have the last word here:

“What I have come to love most about Pixar is how fully they create brand new worlds with each movie, so revisiting these characters again felt like a wasted opportunity— especially with the knowledge that the next Pixar release will be Cars 2. We’re not getting another new Pixar world to explore until 2012’s Brave, the first Pixar movie with a female protagonist, which will be immediately followed by a Monster’s Inc. sequel.

Toy Story 3 covers a lot of ground already covered in the Toy Story series and I felt like I could see the strings more than I wanted to. But that’s nitpicking. I have no real complaints about Toy Story 3. It was great and hilarious and moving and terrifying and bold.

But when you’re talking about Pixar, just ‘great and hilarious and moving and terrifying and bold’ is kind of a disappointment.”

Score
My Pick: The Social Network
Why? Let Me Count the Ways:
1.) Not nearly enough people named Atticus have won Oscars.
2.) "Academy Award Winner Trent Reznor" is just too awesome of a phrase not to be true.
3.) Did I mention that his co-writer is named Atticus Ross?
4.) This is groundbreaking, cutting-edge, game changing work. It’s almost TOO good to be nominated. It’s the only nominee here that in 20 years will still matter.
5.) If The Social Network takes this category then that means that the best The Kings Speech can likely do is tie them for total number of Oscars. And hey, it may not be Best Picture, but it’s something.

The Grammys Pick: The Kings Speech
It's stately, old school, boring, and by an established name. Tailor made-for The Grammys.

The Oscars Pick: The Social Network
Here's the real test right here. The Oscars of 20 years ago would give this thing to The Kings Speech in a heartbeat. It's the Best Picture front-runner and this is exactly the type of category that gets thrown in as part of the Best Picture Sweep. And Alexandre Desplat is overdue. And his score sounds exactly what you'd expect an Academy Award winning score to sound like.

But.

In recent years A.R. Rahman has won this. Gustavo Santaolalla has won it twice. Eminem and Three 6 Mafia have won recent awards from the music branch. So the times they are (maybe) a-changin. Especially when a score this “important” is one of the nominees. And when Hans Zimmer’s Inception score will likely siphon some of the classical score vote away from The Kings Speech.

And so it seems that a somewhat minor category will somewhat fittingly speak volumes about not just how broad and enthusiastic support for The Kings Speech is but also the state of The Academy as a whole.

Here’s one for hope.

Song
My Pick: Randy Newman is, of course, the man. And while I may have been underwhelmed by the movie itself, I thought "We Belong Together" was real Pixar/Randy Newman delight. Also, the .0001% chance that Kanye might appear out of nowhere to interrupt Randy Newman's speech to say "Imma let you finish, but Taylor Swift had the best song called ‘We Belong Together’ of ALL TIME" makes want to root like hell for it to win.

The Grammys Pick: I've seen absolutely no one anywhere pick “Country Strong” or even mention it in passing. It's an afterthought with no actual prayer of winning. Which means of course that The Grammys are taking it all the way.

The Oscars Pick: No category on the ballot is tougher to predict this year than this one. On the one hand the Randy Newman song is, well, a Randy Newman song. On the other hand, those have a surprisingly poor track record at the Oscars. It’s from a great movie and is featured prominently in it, but you could say the same thing about "If I Rise". It’s from a Disney movie, which is often a good sign, except for the fact that in recent years that has been more of a hindrance than a help. Also it's probably going to suffer a good deal of vote splitting with the song from Tangled. Which means that the pick here would seem to be the perfectly fine "If I Rise" from past winner and music legend in his own right A.R. Rahman. Except for the fact that my gut still says "We Belong Together". And sometimes you just gotta go with your gut.

Documentary Feature
My Pick: This is also tough one. All good nominees, but with all due respect to Restrepo it comes down to a battle between Exit Through the Gift Shop and Inside Job. Exit Through the Gift Shop is probably the better film, but Inside Job is probably the better documentary, if that makes any sense. It's the movie Michael Moore wishes he made if he made better movies (and I generally like Michael Moore). I think about Exit Through the Gift Shop all the time, especially now that I live in LA, but I think people will still be thinking about Inside Job 30 years from now, probably even more than they do today. It’s the story of our times. And it’s probably our Hearts and Minds. So while I wish in an ideal world for a tie, Inside Job is getting my (hypothetical) vote.

The Grammys Pick: Inside Job is too good and too culturally vital, Restrepo is too critically acclaimed, and Waste Land is too indie which leaves Gasland and Exit Through the Gift Shop. Exit Through The Gift Shop sold the most tickets and is the most mainstream, two things the Grammys love, but Gasland would be a clear WTF choice here. Hard to say what’s more "Grammy". But since the mainstream no-nothing crowd is all picking Exit Through the Gift Shop, I'm giving Gasland the slight edge

The Oscars Pick: Inside Job
For the reasons I outlined above.

Foreign Language Film

My Pick: I hate to admit it but the only one of these nominees I’ve seen is Biutiful and suffice it to say I was not a fan. I’ve heard good things about Dogtooth, and it would be fun to root for a Greek movie, but that’s too uneducated of a reason to pick something in a major category like this. So honestly, I have to say I really have no opinion.

The Grammys Pick: Biutiful got terrible reviews, is in this category just based on the reputation and name-recognition of the people involved, and is the only nominee middle-America might have remotely heard of. A perfect recipe for Grammy success.

The Oscars Pick: This category is notoriously unpredictable as only a handful of people are actually eligible to vote on it. And the people that do vote have an average age of about 102. Which means if I had to guess I would probably go with In a Better World as it seems like the nominee most likely to appeal to the old-fogey set. But really anything could happen. Including the award not being given out at all on account of all the eligible voters killing themselves after sitting through Biutiful.

Original Screenplay
My Pick: Christopher Nolan - Inception
Film-related things people talked about this year: The greatness of The Social Network, the brilliance of Christian Bale, the beauty of True Grit, the lesbian-ness of Black Swan, and, most of all, the screenplay of Inception. People spoofed it, quoted its dialogue, discussed its meanings, and debated its ending. How confusing/challenging/interesting/original it was or wasn't was the pop culture conversation topic du jour of 2010. And I don’t want to live in a dream level where it doesn’t win Best Original Screenplay.

The Grammys Pick: Scott Sliver, Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson, Keith Dorrington - The Fighter
If there’s anything the Grammys love it’s as many people as possible collaborating on something. And since it’s taken four people to write each of the past two Songs of the Year, it seems like four might be an especially magic number.

(Semi-interesting Oscar fact: Although it used to be relatively common, The Fighter is only the 4th time in the past 40 years that four or more people have shared an Original Screenplay nomination. The three others? The Deer Hunter, Splash, and the original Toy Story which was written by seven people including Andrew Stanton, Pete Doctor, John Lasseter and Joss Whedon. Yes, that Joss Whedon. That’s like film equivalent of The Dana Carvey Show writing staff. Incredible.)

The Oscars Pick: David Seidler - The Kings Speech
Ah David Seidler, that great bastion of modern screenwriting. As future scholars write their dissertations on the deeper meanings of your legendary tomes they will look back on this Oscar win as the beginning of an artistic cannon the likes of which has never been equaled in the history of man. Or, more likely, your by-the-numbers screenplay will be a blip on the march to obscurity. But hey, a screenplay straight out of “How to Write a Populist Prestige Movie for Dummies” written by some nobody is certainly a good reason to pass up perhaps the crowning achievement and life’s work of one of our era’s great Oscar-less screenwriters. So good on you Academy. Good on you.

Adapted Screenplay
My Pick: Aaron Sorkin – The Social Network
As president of the Aaron Sorkin Fan Club this award will be the highlight of the night for me. And is also the lock to end all locks. Sorkin could have stopped writing this screenplay after the first ten pages, literally just stopped Sopranos-finale style, and he still would have won this thing in a walk. I only wish that they published the vote totals so I could know if this was the biggest margin of victory in Oscar history or not. But whatever. Cameron Crowe, Charlie Kaufman and now Aaron Sorkin. All my favorite writers will finally be able to polish their Oscars together in the circle jerk of my dreams. And in the end that’s all that matters.

The Grammys Pick: Aaron Sorkin – The Social Network
This is like when Sgt. Pepper won Album of the Year. Sometimes even The Grammys gotta reco'nize.

The Oscars Pick: Aaron Sorkin - The Social Network

Cinematography
My Pick: True Grit
Did you know that Roger Deakins has never won an Academy Award? How is that possible? That’s as big an outrage as Gordon Willis not having an Oscar.

Well fortunately that will be remedied this year. (The Roger Deakins thing that is. Willis is still shit out of luck.) And best of all it won’t even be a makeup Oscar. It’s one that will be earned entirely on its own merits. Because True Grit was fucking gorgeous.

The Grammys Pick: The Kings Speech
I’m pretty sure the concept of cinematography would be too complicated for Grammy voters. They would just go with the movie they liked the best.

The Oscars Pick: Although I found True Grit to be a bit slight, “slight” shouldn’t confused with “not good”. But even the movie’s most vocal detractors would admit that’s it’s a visual stunner. This fact cannot and has not ever been questioned. So while Danny Cohen’s work in The Kings Speech is fine, True Grit is just too good to deny. The Roger Deakins element may push it over the top, but the cinematography of True Grit would be honored even if Victor Hammer was the man behind it.
(And yes, I did just look up the name of the cinematographer of Billy Madison.)

Best Supporting Actor
My Pick: Christian Bale
Continuing with our theme of shocking Oscar facts, did you know that Sam Rockwell has never even been nominated for an Oscar? How is that possible? I know no one saw Conviction, but in most years his work in it would have been good enough to win this category. And yet he’s not even nominated. And while that’s a mild outrage I honestly don’t know who here I would bump for him. And that in a nutshell is why this is one of the strongest categories/group of nominees in Academy Awards history. Sound like a crazy statement? Then consider the fact that you could make a pretty strong a category just from the performances omitted - Sam Rockwell, Andrew Garfield, Armie Hammer, Matt Damon, Bill Murray. Other than maybe Bill Murray aren’t all of those performances better than any of the nominees from 2006? No one seems to be talking about this category much, but it can easily stand with 1992, 1994, and 2007 as one of the great Best Supporting Actor classes of all time. Any of these nominees would be a worthy winner in almost any other year. This year though it’s all about Christian Bale. And how far ahead he is of the rest of the pack, considering the strength of the competition, says all you need to know about the brilliance of his work.

The Grammys Pick: Geoffrey Rush
It’s the old fogey choice. Christian Bale is too out there and in-your-face and daring. Geoffrey Rush is like a nice warm sweater. His is a Supporting Actor performance just like they used to make ‘em in the good old days. I don’t mean that to be a criticism of his work per se, I just mean it to be a reason the Grammys would respond to it so well.

The Oscars Pick: Christian Bale
There is an outside shot, no matter how remote, that Geoffrey Rush could win. And in pretty much every other year he would be the runaway favorite. Because he’s fantastic. But this year, if he wins it would be an outrage of the highest order. And that’s a testament to the greatness of Christian Bale. And provided that he does indeed win, it should just be noted what an epic Best Supporting Actor run we’re on here. Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men, Heath Ledger as The Joker, Christoph Waltz last year, and now Christian Bale. All iconic, legendary, all-time great performances. This just might be the golden age of male supporting acting. Or it might be some strange fluke. Regardless though, it’s awesome and should be talked about more. Keep it going next year fellas.

Best Supporting Actress
My Pick: Amy Adams would seem to be just what Oscar wants - a hot, youngish leading lady uglying herself up and displaying a heretofore unknown range. That’s the recipe for like 20% of all Oscar wins. And yet for reasons unknown, Amy Adams is an afterthought this year. She’s not even the one who should be most upset though. This category was Julianne Moore’s for the taking, only she stupidly decided to campaign for Lead Actress rather than Supporting. Sure maybe voters would have thought her part was too big to be supporting, but maybe they wouldn’t have, and if she had been nominated she would have won easily. But instead her hubris, or her representatives’ hubris, likely cost her an Oscar.

Without Julianne Moore in the race in the race it allows to focus on the fact that Amy Adams, who pulled off a performance that even a huge fan like myself though there was no way she could do, will for the third time unjustly go down in defeat. Are people just taking her for granted at this point or something? You realize that the lead of the Disney movie Enchanted just played a poor, trashy, Masshole bartender and played her completely believably right? Just checking.

The Grammys Pick: Melissa Leo is old, an industry veteran, yet no one really knows or cares who she is, and her work in The Fighter is just a semi-repeat of work she's done better previously - sounds like a Grammy winner to me!

The Oscars Pick: Okay, here’s this year’s potential buzz and excitement. Melissa Leo has won all the precursor awards and is still the definite frontrunner according to most prognosticators. But coming from someone who has been studying these things a long time I just don’t see her winning and I never have. This category notoriously almost never goes to women over 40. And whenever two actresses from the same movie are nominated they almost always split the vote. And there’s another nominee in the same category who plays a variation on the exact same character thereby siphoning off even more of Melissa Leo’s potential votes. And I have yet to meet anyone who was passionate about her performance. She seems like the most buzz-free frontrunner ever. I just don’t feel any passionate support for her at all.

Hailee Steinfeld on the other hand, has a slew of very vocal supporters. The most common comment about True Grit, other than how beautiful the movie is, is how good the girl is in it. That’s a conversation I myself have had with friends, and that I have overheard many other people having with their friends. And there’s plenty of precedent for a young precocious girl winning this award. Much more than for an older character actress winning. Just ask Lauren Bacall, Gloria Stuart, Frances McDormand, or Ruby Dee how their Oscar nights turned out. So I’m predicting that it’s young Hailee Steinfeld here and keeping my fingers crossed that she doesn’t grow up and go all Paquin on us.

Best Actress
My Pick: Does Annette Benning deserve an Oscar? Yes. Of course. For this role, and for her body of work as a whole. She should have multiple Oscars already in fact. She is one of the great actresses of her generation and yet never seems to get the level of respect she dearly deserves. And am I generally a big Natalie Portman fan? No I am not. I think she’s way overrated as an actress and as a geek-boy dream girl. But when given the right project where she has to cry a lot and act frightened, she can knock it out of the park. (Thats a big part of the reason for her geek-boy appeal, but that’s a topic for another time...) And Black Swan is the definition of that project. As an actor myself I know I’m supposed to respect the subtle humanity of Benning's work over the flashy grandstanding of Portman's, but honestly I still found myself thinking about Natalie Portman’s work in Black Swan days afterwards. It resonated deeper with me than Annette Benning's work. Maybe that’s not fair or right, but it’s true. And while Christian Bale gave the best performance of the year, Natalie Portman gave what is likely to go down as the most iconic. So move over Hilary Swank, there’s a new Hilary Swank in town and her name is Natalie Portman.

The Grammys Pick: Annette Benning
Because she's the old, established, unhip choice who should have already won for better work years ago.

The Oscars Pick: Natalie Portman
When in doubt always go with most young, attractive, hot name. The dirty little secret of The Oscars is that the Academy membership is largely male. And the dirty little not-at-all-secret is that men generally like attractive young women. There’s a reason that only three actresses over the age of 40 have won Best Actress in the past 20 years (Sandra Bullock doesn’t count). And no, that reason is not "sheer coincidence". This "race" was over way before it even began.

Best Actor
My Pick: Colin Firth
We don’t actually need to spend time discussing this one do we?

The Grammys Pick: Everyone thinks it will be Colin Firth. He’s the only logical choice. He seems like a pretty mortal lock. You would probably bet your life on it if you could. That’s why The Grammys are gonna go with Jeff Bridges.

The Oscars Pick: Colin Firth

Best Director
My Pick: David Fincher
When I heard David Fincher was set to direct the Aaron Sorkin facebook movie I was confused. It made no sense. That didn’t sound like a David Fincher movie at all. And it wasn’t. But, then, ultimately, it was. Because he made it into one. He took a Sorkin script and turned it into a movie that had viewers on the edge of their seats in anticipation of a Winklevi finding a box with his brother’s head in it. For that he deserves the Oscar hands down. Plus he’s way overdue. So give him his Oscar already so he can stop making Benjamin Button (a movie I liked BTW) and go back to making straight-up David Fincher movies. Thanks.

The Grammys Pick: The question you always need to ask yourself with The Grammys is – who would a middle-aged housewife vote for? And I feel extremely confident that a middle aged housewife would vote for Tom Hooper.

The Oscars Pick: David Fincher
In pretty much every other category the Academy is willing to honor any fly-by-night American Idol reject who did good work; but when it comes to Best Director they are very protective of the category’s integrity. You almost always gotta have a proven track record to win this one. There’s a reason John Madden, Rob Marshall and Paul Haggis all lost Best Director the year their movies won Best Picture. And it’s the same reason Tom Hooper’s pleasant but undistinguished work is going to lose here this year. It’s because he’s a no name at this point who seems likely to never make another truly great film. Maybe he will, but maybe he won’t, and that possibility means that this is going instead to the big name who has never won. Maybe next time Mr. Hooper. If there is a next time.

Best Picture
My Pick: Here are some of the things critics said about The Social Network - "An American Landmark", "A Once-In-A-Generation Movie", and "Revolutionary. Absolutely emblematic of its time and place".

And here are some things that I just made up just now that critics said about The Kings Speech - "Very Enjoyable and Well Made", "A Quality Film", and "Thoroughly Competent".

And that, my friends, is the decision that Oscar voters are faced with. Do they make the fresh, forward-thinking, culturally relevant choice, or do they make the safe, predictable, out of touch choice. Sure it’s not like last year where the future of the independent studio system was at stake. And The Kings Speech is a perfectly fine movie and all. But still. What do we value? Pleasant entertainments, or culturally vital art? What kind of movies do we want there to be more of? Because if we go back to rewarding formulaic prestige pictures like The Kings Speech, then we run the risk of the indie studios producing nothing but a slate of movies where Meryl Streep has AIDS in the Holocaust. And sure some of those would likely be decent enough, but I thought we were past that. No Country for Old Men, The Departed, The Hurt Locker - these are all different types of movies than the Academy of old used to honor. Do they want to take a step backwards? What do they want to say about this year in film? What do they want to say about our cultural and artistic values and ideals? What is the statement they want to make for posterity? Who are they as an organization?

They are an organization that I hope will do the right thing. And I genuinely think that there’s a legitimate chance that they will. But if not, well, it’s exactly the kind of thing that…

The Grammys Pick: The Kings Speech
...the Grammys would do

The Oscars Pick: The Kings Speech

Here's to the Shorties: Thoughts on The Grammys and Other Things

2011-02-14T20:30:00.016-05:00

Dear Grammys,

Okay what the hell?

You really gone and done it this time.

Everything in our relationship was going so smoothly. I was composing my annual article about your hilarious irrelevance and you were complying as usual what with completely predictable awards for Train and Herbie Hancock and Lady Antebellum. You even got up to our old irascible tricks by giving Best New Artist to Esperanza Spalding. Esperanza Spalding! Because that’s the kind of thing you do. I know that about you. It’s who you are. It’s who you’ll always be. Or so it seemed.

Now I think maybe our whole relationship has been a lie. I don’t even know who you are any more. I feel like I just found out that my wife of 20 years is gay. Because you just gave Album of the Year to Arcade Fire. Yes, that Arcade Fire.

You realize don’t you that they’re actually really hip and good and relevant, right? And that unlike, say, Outkast or Lauryn Hill that they didn’t sell a lot of records or produce an album with big hit singles? And you are aware aren’t you that not only did they have by far the best album nominated, but that it might actually be the actual best album of the year? So then what the hell are doing giving them Album of the Year? How does that make any sense?

Black is white. Up is down. Lion is lamb.

Then as the icing on the cake you didn’t even have them win their genre category? They lost Best Alternative Album to The Black Keys? Which means you didn’t think Arcade Fire had the best alternative album of the year but you DID think they had the best album of the year in all of music?

WHO ARE YOU GRAMMYS?!?!?!?

Why do you treat me this way?

Enough!

In the words of Cee-Lo...forget you.
If only I knew how...

----------------------------------------------------------------

Other Thoughts:
*Okay so first things first: Hatching out of an egg is great. But then…nothing? Standing around in relatively normal attire while your backup dancers perform a choreographed dance? It was so, well, (shudder) ordinary.

Look, the Gaga backlash/"Born This Way" hate are completely predictable and I certainly don’t want to be cliché and pile on, but come on Gaga. When you’re not able to back up the stunts with the music and the performances that’s where you’re going to run into trouble. So I’m interested and nervous and excited to see how these next few months play out for you. I have high hopes and more than a few doubts. But mostly I just hope that you never let Cee-Lo Green show you up again.

(While we’re on the subject of Gaga though… before we start debating whether or not “Born This Way” is stolen from Madonna, can we finally determine once and for all whether or not Ace of Base is getting residuals for “Alejandro”?)

*If scientists got together in a lab with the sole task of coming up with the most Grammy-friendly track possible, I’m pretty sure they couldn’t do any better (worse?) than “Hey Soul Sister”. So congrats Train. Also, congrats to Pat Moynihan for being officially the whitest person to ever unironically use the term "gangsta". It’s your move Josh Groban.

*Can Janelle Monae just perform everything forever? And can her Grammy performance please, PLEASE, finally make her a huge star? Come on world, do the right thing for once.

*Justin Bieber playing a song on acoustic guitar?? What’s next, Katy Perry singing a dramatic, overwrought ballad? Oh wait….

*Okay, say what you will about Justin Bieber, but I really do think if he was just a little smarter that there’s legitimate Timberlake potential there. Unfortunately I don’t get the sense that he has the necessary mental acumen to make that transformation. But hey it’s not his fault – he’s Canadian. Everyone knows they naturally have smaller brains.

(The good thing about picking on Canadians is that the death threats are always so polite)

*What the hell – Jaden Smith is rapping/singing now? Does Child Protective Services know about this?
Speaking of which…

*Although they seem totally grounded and well adjusted, if I was a purveyor of hard drugs and/or alcohol I might nevertheless very soon look into hanging out in the vicinity of Willow and Jaden Smith. You know, just in case.

(On a related note: is Trey Smith now our generation’s Julian Lennon?)

*I spent at least 10 minutes trying to decide who Miranda Lambert looks like. I settled on a combination of Kristen Chenoweth and Kyra Sedgwick, but I bet you can do better.

*Hey Bob Dylan, mid-90’s Marlon Brando called and he wants his shtick back. Also, how many fingers am I holding up?

*I think it’s a good rule that whenever Jamie Foxx is introduced as “Academy Award winner” the introduction has to be underscored by “Blame It On The Alcohol”

*I heard a rumor, that I can neither confirm nor deny, that Elton John and Andre 3000 had a kid and that that kid watched Cee-Lo’s performance and thought it was a little too flamboyant.

*Holy shit…I’m not completely sure, but I think I might have just been sexually aroused by Gwyneth Paltrow. Hide your kids, hide your wives, the apocalypse is nigh.

*Now that we know that Academy Award winning actress and serious adult Nicole Kidman loves “Teenage Dream” is it okay to admit that I do too? Let’s face it, that Katy Perry really knows how to write a breast. I mean song…I meant to say song.

*If there was somewhere I could have wagered on the cutaway immediately following Katy Perry’s performance being of Russell Brand then I would have lost a lot of money.

*As I’ve always said, who better to pay tribute to Teddy Pendergrass than Lady Antebellum?

*It’s nice that the Grammys take the time to honor country music as it gives me a chance to go to the bathroom.

*Damn it! Someone announcing the winner of Song of the Year and/or Record of the Year as “The Song Otherwise Known as Forget You” was going to be one of the highlights of the year. Thanks for nothing Lady Antebellum.

*Double damn it! I swore that if I ever had to hear “Need You Now” again I would shoot myself in the face. And I like my life and all, but I can’t go back on my word. First you ruin my year, Lady Antebellum, and now you make me end my life. I hope it was worth it. On the bright side though, I’m really looking forward to an afterlife void of adult contemporary songs about drunk, horny housewives making booty calls.

*If I had to explain to an alien what the Grammys are I would simply show them the clip of John Mayer and Norah Jones presenting Song of the Year to Lady Antebellum. I’m pretty sure Neil Portnow was touching himself during that.

*I’m going to say something revolutionary here: Mick Jagger is good at performing music.

*So wait, what are the words to Solomon Burke’s “Everybody Needs Somebody to Love” again?
(See, that’s the great thing about the Grammys – they give me a chance to break out some of my good Solomon Burke jokes.)

*Esperanza Spalding: A big enough star to be chosen to accompany school kids while they provide the background music for a dry lecture about the state of the music industry.
(Also: Esperanza Spalding meet Paula Cole, Paula Cole meet Esperanza Spalding)

*Fun facts: Did you know that Phillip Michael Thomas is credited with coining the term EGOT? And that shockingly Barbara Streisand does not have one?

*Lady Gaga look long and hard at Nicki Minaj and see what you have wrought. I hope you’re happy with yourself.

*I couldn’t come up with a single thing to say about the Drake/Rihanna performance and I think says it perfectly.

*An interesting “what if”: What if Rihanna had been scheduled to perform at the Grammys two years ago?

*One more thought on Arcade Fire before we get on to some silliness. I'm obviously very on record as thinking that My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy was the best album of 2010. But as it came out after the end of the Grammy eligibility period, it's very arguable The Suburbs was in fact the album of the year. While that’s an open debate for another time, what’s not debatable is this: The experience of feeling like a song or an album was written just for you or perfectly captures your exact life expiernce is a common one. Creating music that feels that way is the real genius of a great musician and songwriter. But as The Suburbs is literally about Win Bulter's experience growing up in the suburbs of Houston, Texas in the late 80's/early 90's I think its safe to say that more than any other piece of popular music that will ever be recorded in the history of time, The Suburbs fits that description for me.

There has been a lot of talk today about what Arcade Fire's win means for the music industry, for the Grammys, and for the establishment. I don’t think it means a whole hell of a lot other than that there didn’t happen to be any other truly viable Album of the Year candidates nominated last night. But I know that for one shining moment, we got to see a true surprise, real shock and joy, and some great music get its rightful due. And I learned that the tangential circumstances of my youth are now officially the inspiration for award winning art.

~~Oscars~~ Cable Ace Awards, here I come.

*Lastly, although the Grammys are notoriously comprehensive in their award giving there are some music categories that went unawarded last night. Categories that I care about and think about far more often than Best Rap/Sung Collaboration by a Duo or Group with Vocals. So without further ado let me make up for those oversights by awarding the first annual Freds:

Verse of the year: Eminem - "No Love"

Sure Eminem has made some pretty big missteps that have lost him a lot of his artistic credibility. And by sheer virtue of his longevity he has lost much of his cache. But when people were calling Lil Wayne the best rapper alive he still should have know better than to appear on a track with Eminem. Ask Jay-Z how that worked out for him. Recovery as a whole, while not as strong as his early work, was nevertheless a nice return to form. But I doubt in a few years much of it will be resonant or even remembered. This verse though will always remain stunningly alive and proof that when Eminem is on his game there’s still absolutely no one who can touch him. More verses like this please.

Runner Up: Nicki Minaj - "Monster"

This award could be given out to a handful of different people on MBDTF alone, but with all due respect to Pusha T and company, Nicki Minaj is in class by herself. This is Eminem's "Renegade" verse for a new generation. Only instead of doing it with her words, the genius of the verse is all in the presentation. Sure, based on available evidence nothing she will ever do in the future is likely to approach the quality of this. But that doesn’t make it any less great.

Special Citation: Ludacris - "Baby"

I realize we can’t give awards to Justin Bieber songs. But just like Andre 3000's recently leaked guest verse on Ke$ha's "Sleazy", this is way better than it has any reason to be. It's like the rich man's version of Ma$e’s verse in "Take You There". And really, comparing something to the time that Ma$e rapped about The Rugrats is one of the highest compliments I can possibly give out. So in a sentence I was almost positive I would never say: well done Ludacris.

Worst verse of the year: Snoop Dogg - "California Gurls"

I don’t know what the worst thing about this verse is. The fact that it’s so lazy that I'm not entirely sure Snoop was even awake when he wrote it. The fact that its random assortment of unrelated rhyming words could double as a parody for what old people think rap is. Or that I’m pretty sure he stole part of it from the Slap Chop commercial. Regardless, this verse makes the rest of the song seem like the work of Bob Dylan. And bear in mind that the rest of the song spells Girls with a U.

Runner Up: Jay-Z - "Empire State of Mind"

I know this isn’t technically from last year but it won two Grammys last night so I'm including it here. It’s also worth including here because I think it needs to be stressed far more often that the Emperor here isn’t wearing any clothes. I mean how hard it is to come up with three verses worth of things related to New York City? This song should have been a gimme putt for Jay-Z and yet he took out his driver and shanked it 200 yards to the right. Okay maybe free-associative is a bold artistic choice on his part for a rapping style or something, but I fail to see how Dwayne Wade, Bob Marley, and BK being from Texas have anything to do with anything. And the randomness of it all would be fine if it was any good, but how is listing different types of cabs and rhyming "though" with "though" not complete lazy bullshit.

And then there's this:

"Catch me at the X with OG at a Yankee game,

shit I made the Yankee hat more famous than a Yankee can"

THAT DOESNT EVEN RHYME.

Can we all stop not calling this song on its lyrical shitiness already?

Best lyric of the year: Lil Wayne's "Real Gs move in silence like lasagna"

I'm not a big Lil Wayne fan but even I have to give it up for this one. Anytime you listen to a song just to hear one line that’s when you know the lyric is a winner.

(Even if technically "real Gs move in silence like in lasagna" would be a much better line)

Runner up: Kanye's "Too many Urkles on you team, that’s why your wins low"

Worst lyric of the year: The entirety of The Black Eyed Pea's "I Gotta Feeling"

If I told you "I Gotta Feeling" was a fake radio station promo song and not a Black Eyed Peas song you would believe me wouldn’t you? Although there's a certain genius in making a song about people about to have a good night, there’s a distinct lack of genius in listing the days of week as part of your lyrics. What’s the opposite of Mazel Tov?

Runner Up: Young Money's "call me Mr. Flintstone/I can make your bed rock"

(With a strong nod to the same song's "I'm attracted to her for her attractive ass")

Best Worst lyric of the year: Ke$ha

At this point I really hope I don’t need to tell you which one. Nor do I need to say any more about it.

Best Worst Lyric of the year indie rock division: Yeasayer's "Max Schmelling was a formidable foe”

Does it have anything remotely to do with anything? No it doesn’t. It just comes out of absolutely nowhere and sits there like a beautiful beautiful diamond. No other applicants even needed to submit this year. This race was over before it even began.

Person of the year: shorties

There were a great many people who made a great many contributions to music this year, but no one played a bigger role in the music world this year than shorties. Whether they were shawtys, shortys or just plain old shorties, they did it all this year. They were like melodies. They let people whisper in their ears. They were fire burning on the dance floor. They kept T-Pain in the ringtone. And most importantly they were eenie meenie miney moe lovas.

I can’t wait to see what they have in store for 2011.

The Top 20 Things of 2010

2011-02-01T17:17:00.013-05:00

Hey remember 2010? It was full of angry people, and economic depression, and a general malaise so thick that it seemingly sucked the hope and optimism out of anything it touched. It was also a terrific year for art and culture. It was packed to the gills with great things more so than any other year in recent history. When trying to compile lists of the year’s best albums and movies and shows and moments and pieces of cultural ephemera, in almost every case, I needed way more than ten slots. In fact it might have been the best year for "best things" ever. Both in quality and quantity. So while in many ways it might have been the worst of times, it was also the, well, you know…

But the whole thing was all SO a few weeks ago so I can’t blame you if you’ve already forgotten about it. So to help you remember the very recent past I've narrowed my "best of" lists down to one master list of the very best of 2010. And I’ve tried to rank it all from there. It’s an impossible task but I’ve never been one to shy away from a challenge. So here goes nothing…

The Top 20 Things of 2010

20.) Snoop Dogg

Trying to explain to our kids that Snoop Dogg was once a respected and feared gangsta rapper for the label Death Row Records will be like when our parents try to explain to us how Burt Reynolds was once the sexiest man in the world. It’s also similar to the problem we’ll have with Ice Cube. But while Ice Cube’s transformation seems tragic, Snoop's seems amazing. And that’s because Ice Cube’s selling out has happened in a very predictable, linear, and obvious way. Snoop Dogg’s has been all over the map. Because he doesn’t just make kids movies, he also tries to rent Liechtenstein. He makes raunchy sex jams about characters on True Blood and songs for Prince William. He pays top dollar for new tracks by Swizz Beats, and yet also submits guest verses like the one on "California Gurls" that to call phoned-in would be an insult to telephonic communication. He appears on shows on CBS, but gets banned from music festivals in The Netherlands (The Netherlands!). He runs a youth football league and is featured on a song called "Kush" and gets away with doing both at the same time with nary a complaint. And those are all things that happened just in the past year alone. At this point there’s literally no story I could read about Snoop Dogg that would remotely surprise me. He’s shattered the unintentional comedy scale, only its quite possible that he’s done it all intentionally. Because all he really cares about is making money, having fun, and being famous, and all of the things he did in 2010 can all be traced directly back to those three goals. So it makes sense of course that he’s way more famous now simply pursuing those few basic things than he ever was when he has making actual art. Because his goals are now our goals. He is The American Dream. And the fact that he personifies it so well makes him an absolute national treasure.

19.) Louis C.K. on Leno

I'm going to say something controversial: I didn’t care for Louie.
To make up for that I'm going to say something completely uncontroversial: Louie C.K. is the best standup working today.

I'll always have a place in my heart for Chris Rock, but no one is spitting more truth in a more public way these days than Louie C.K. There’s any number of talk show appearances I could have posted here, but for my money this was the best one of the year. While I may greatly prefer Lucky Louie to plain old Louie, I can agree with the masses that Louie C.K. is comedy at its finest circa 2010.

18.) Emma Stone in Easy A

Christian Bale in The Fighter was the best performance of the year. This is clear and indisputable. But with apologies to Mr. Bale (along with Colin Firth, Ryan Gosling, Natalie Portman, Jeremy Renner, Sam Rockwell, Geoffrey Rush, Amy Adams, and the entire cast of The Kids Are All Right) the performance this year that more than any other made me sit up in my chair, eyes glued to the screen, and say “holy fuck who the hell is this person I am watching?” came from a deeply flawed and only mildly popular teen sex comedy. Christian Bale’s performance was revelatory, but Emma Stone herself was more revelatory than anyone this year. And if she can’t get an Oscar nod for this then The Academy might as well just issue a decree stating that comedy is not a valid genre. But ultimately it doesn’t matter, because like Tom Cruise in Risky Business or Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman, Emma Stone’s work in Easy A transcended the labels of "good" "bad" and "award-winning" and moved to the level of "star-making". Hell, "supernova-making". Because if the 60’s and 70’s produced anti-establishment stars, the 80’s produced beefy action heros, the 90’s produced relatable everymen and women, and the 00’s produced idiosyncratic multi-ethnic actors, then hopefully the future of the 10’s has been revealed to us – funny smart women. And Emma Stone shall lead them. I just hope she remembers that with great power comes great responsibility. Something tells me though that she wont ever be able to forget that…

17.) Janelle Monae on Letterman
Speaking of "a star is born", when Janelle Monae stepped onto The Late Show stage to perform "Tightrope" on the night of May 18th, 2010 she was practically an unknown, but by the time she was done she was the biggest star in the world.

Okay so maybe that didn’t exactly happen per se, but if that old showbiz cliché were ever to be true, it would have been this performance that would have made it so. Apparently though delivering the year’s best album (non-Kanye division) and its best live performance (non-Kanye division) isn’t enough to make someone a huge star anymore. There is no justice in the world. But you already knew that.

16.) “Neil Young” on Late Night Jimmy Fallon
At first the idea of Jimmy Fallon hosting a late night show seemed Chevy Chase-level bad. And then the show premiered and it seemed like lasting six months would be a great accomplishment. Now, it’s not unreasonable to think that one day we'll be viewing this "Neil Young" video the way our parents viewed that clip of Ed Ames hitting the outline of a man’s crotch with his tomahawk on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. Because for all the Conan fever, no late night host owned the internet more in 2010 than Jimmy Fallon. And sure, David Letterman may not be jealous of this clip, but Antoine Dotson probably is. And these days isn't that more important. Speaking of which...

15.) The last week of The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien
There was a lot of debate this year over whether or not late night talk shows are still relevant or still matter. While they undoubtedly aren’t as relevant as they once were, as three of the four prior spots on this list can attest they certainly still matter. Matter enough for people on the internet to choose to rally behind and passionately fight on behalf of a not-that-attractive, awkward-seeming, smart, dorky, comedy nerd who was being bullied and picked on by slick mainstream hustlers. The people on the internet cared about The Tonight Show THAT much. Their efforts were motivated purely by their concern for the sanctity and importance of the show as an institution. And nothing else. And by responding the way they did they helped make The Conan Saga THE entertainment industry story of 2010. It was a compelling human drama, and almost as importantly, it made for a truly memorable and iconic week of television - Conan wasting NBCs money, his already legendary final speech, and a whole week of must-hear monologues. For a brief moment in time it was like it was 1964 again and The Tonight Show was the biggest thing on TV. Even somewhat tangentially related things like David Letterman’s jokes, and Jimmy Kimmel’s balls of steel appearance on Leno’s "10 at 10" segment probably could warrant their own spots on this "best of" list. And all of it was possible because of the efforts of Team Coco. So to anyone who says that the internet is a vapid wasteland that isn’t living up to its potential as a agent for activism, the spread of information, and social change, just know that this year it helped get Conan a new late night show and Betty White a hosting gig on Saturday Night Live. Also, it helped many people to become aware of the existence of breast cancer. So quit your bitching people of Haiti. It’s interfering with my blog writing and my enjoyment of this TBS talk show I’m not watching.

14.) BPGlobal PR Twitter feed
While we’re on the topic of big media stories and the internet, nowhere did those two things intersect more than the rise of the trashcan of thoughts that is twitter. 2010 will likely forever be listed in the history books as the year twitter officially took over. It likely signifies the beginning of the end for the human race, the canary in the coal mine of enlightened thoughtful discourse. But if you’re going to try and mount a defense of twitter then the BPGlobalPR feed is your exhibit A. Because it masterfully highlighted how the anonymity of the internet allows average citizens to go after powerful corporations in ways that would have seemed inconceivable a generation ago. And the immediacy and accessibility of twitter gives it power and cultural currency that something with the density of WikiLeaks lacks. Now true, twitter too often turns into a simple forum for jokes, but humor, when used correctly to speak truth to power, can be the most powerful tool we have at our disposal. And BPGlobalPR allowed us this year to hold that tool in a new way. I would say more about it but I’m almost out of characters.

13.) Michael Pitt in Boardwalk Empire
For a Sopranos-quality show, with Sopranos pedigree, Boardwalk Empire didn’t get anywhere near Sopranos-level love. Which I continue to find inexplicable. Did people for some reason just not watch this thing?

Remember how The Sopranos changed the face of mainstream television forever and remains arguably its finest product? Remember how one of the guys who made that show went on to create Mad Men, another critically acclaimed show that you absolutely love? And remember how a guy who was even more integral to the success of The Sopranos than that Mad Men guy announced that he was doing a show with Martin Scorsese, yes that Marin Scorsese, for HBO and how excited that made you? Well apparently not, because after the premiere it felt like this thing had almost no buzz. I didn’t hear or read people talking about it and it was almost an afterthought on critics' top 10 lists. Which is strange considering it was the best show on television in 2010 (full disclosure I haven’t seen the most recent seasons of Mad Men or Breaking Bad).

More egregious than a lack of buzz for the show itself though is a lack of buzz for Michael Pitt. His work in this show is absolutely electric. In fact it redefines electric. If his work here mated with Ryan Gosling’s work in Blue Valentine then everyone else in the world would have to stop acting because someone would have finally won at acting. Also, the earth might explode. Perhaps its self-preservation that people aren’t watching this show since when Michael Pitt is onscreen in it you can’t take your eyes off the screen. And sometimes we have to take our eyes off of the screen. You know, to check twitter. People should recognize though. Because this is some Marlon Brando-in-Streetcar level work Michael Pitt is doing and yet no one is talking about it. And that’s just the Pitts.

12.) The Pacific
Speaking of unjustly ignored HBO shows, why has The Pacific not been an awards show and year-end list juggernaut of John Adams-ian proportions? Perhaps because like last year's similarly brilliant Generation Kill it was somewhat slow and often hard to watch. Perhaps people saw the names Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg and thought, since when have they ever done anything good? Perhaps it’s because no one watches anything anymore that isn’t on AMC. But whatever the reason, The Pacific never seemed to permeate the popular consciousness the way it deserved to. Between this, Boardwalk, Eastbound and Down, The Life and Times of Tim, a flawed but great Treme, a buzz-worthy season of Real Time, great seasons of Real Sports and Hard Knocks, another great year of documentaries, the continuing brilliance of Curb Your Enthusiasm (and the impending end of Entourage) HBO is experiencing a mini second golden age. A few years back I considered cancelling my subscription. Now, other than live sports, HBO is the only reason I still own a TV. And part of why their resurgence has made me so happy is that they’re the only network with the resources and cache to make something as big and sprawling and well-done as The Pacific. I thought there was nothing left to say about World War II and no way to still make it resonant, but boy was I wrong. Cheesy as it sounds it made my love my grandfather even more and he had absolutely nothing to do with the war. But his generation, what they did, who they were, what they represent, it makes all of us that have come since look really bad in comparison. They really were the greatest generation, and the least they deserve is for us to watch this powerful and entertaining show about their sacrifices. Unless of course it's re-airing opposite Top Chef, in which case fuck it.

11.) Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson
After hearing hype about this show for years I had two thoughts immediately after seeing it at the Public Theater Off-Broadway this spring.
1.) There’s no way that thing is not transferring to Broadway
2.) There’s no way that it won't close there in less than six months.
Much like Passing Strange before it Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson is simply too smart and hip and young and good to sustain an extended Broadway run playing in front of families and tourists and nursing home groups. This of course is the problem with Broadway, and perhaps the whole of American theater, but that’s a discussion for another time. What we’re discussing here is the best show of 2010 and a major step forward for mainstream commercial American musical theater. Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson is hilarious, and moving, and extremely political and relevant, without ever being overly topical or partisan. Is it attacking the Bush years or the Obama ones or both or none of the above? Hard to say, and that’s a large part of its brilliance. The fact that many of the lines in the show have been in the script since well before the current events that they would seem to be referencing is a testament to the show and also to the cyclical nature of history. Above all its other virtues though, this show rocks. Rocks in a way that hasn’t been heard on a Broadway stage before. Rocks so hard that my seat was literally shaking. Rocks so hard that it made the 40 year old couple on the row in front of me seem like they were about 85. Rocks in a way that makes the songs in American Idiot and Passing Strange seem like hoary old Broadway chestnuts. For years Broadway has been producing so-called rock musicals. This is the first one that truly qualifies for the description. Who knew all it took to make history was simply to present it?

10.) Ke$ha's lyric “Don’t be a little bitch with your chit-chat / just show me where your dick’s at”
There are no words Ke$ha.
There are no words...

Okay, here are a few: This was such a great year for so-bad-they’re-good lyrics that it’s going to at some point warrant it own blog entry, but suffice it to say the lyric above was the very best of the best/worst bunch. It’s the Citizen Kane of so bad-they’re-good-lyrics. It's the Ulysses of shit. When Will.I.Am heard that lyric for the first time it was like the first time Brian Wilson heard Revolver, or the first time Clapton heard Hendrix play guitar. So thank you Ke$ha. Thank you for a lyric that will never be topped. A lyric that speaks to the great human truth that dicks, anatomically speaking, are indeed often hard to find. A lyric that will hopefully be engraved on your headstone. A lyric above all others. Blah, blah, blah.

9.) Winters Bone
In a year when 3D took over, it's ironic that that most fully-immersive movie experience of the year was a good ol’ fashioned 2D Ozark meth noir. The kind of noir about violent meth-cooking Ozark hillbillies your parents used to watch. Only difference is this one was superlatively good. It has a great script, great direction and a flawless cast. Jennifer Lawrence may be getting all the buzz, but John Hawkes and Dale Dickey were even better. And as 2011 already begins its overwhelming onslaught of sequels and remakes, it's nice to be able to reflect back on a movie that took us to a place and a culture and life that were all stunningly fresh and new and compelling. So put that in your pipe and smoke it. (Or actually, on second thought, don’t)

8.) Community - "Modern Warfare"
After an off-year, the newest season of 30 Rock has rebounded brilliantly. The Office has seen better days, specifically, all of them, but I can’t complain too much as long as Holly Flax is in my life. And Parks and Recreation has become the show it always was - perhaps the best half hour on TV. The fact that’s its entire cast doesn’t already have 200 million Emmys is an absolute travesty. But the first show I hulu every Friday morning is always Community.

If you wanted to attack Community for being a meta-, pop-culture parodying, too smug and cool for its own good, joke delivery machine you wouldn’t necessarily be wrong. But you would also prove that you don’t really watch Community. And that you definitely don't GET Community. Because while on a superficial level it is somewhat all of those things, it’s also an incredibly smart, deeply felt, character driven, old-fashioned sitcom. It also happens to be the funniest thing on TV. For those who don’t GET it perhaps it's because the world has never quite seen anything like it before. It's so close to being so many things and yet it's none of them. Ultimately it winds up feeling like the first network TV show created by and for the Internet Generation. And I mean that in best way possible. This is the past, redone for the future. And "Modern Warfare" is its finest hour.

7.) Old Spice - "The Man Your Man Could Smell Like"

Okay, okay, I hear your groaning. And sure I know that we're all sick of this commercial at this point. But that doesnt make it any less great. And if every drunken frat boy and their mom are going to being saying "Hello ladies" in a deep baritone for the next 10 years like its the new "WAAAAAZZZUP", well thats not Isaiah Mustafa's fault. He's just the man The Most Interesting Man in the World wishes he could smell like. And his charisma makes Billy Mays seem like Stephen Hawking. So maybe you're groaning at his commercial's inclusion here, but seriously, watch it again and then tell me - where's the beef?

6.) The Social Network trailer

It's hard to know whats more incredible - that a trailer this moving, this chill-inducing, this well-crafted exists, or that the movie it's advertising actually lived up to it's promise. If they gave out Academy Awards for trailers this thing would win in a landslide. But alas, they'll have to just settle instead for a well deserved Academy Award for Best Picture.

And a billion dollars (give or take nine hundred million).

5.) ESPN's 30 for 30
If you watched one basic cable sports documentary series in 2010 I hope you made it ESPN’s 30 for 30. Now granted I’m a non-fiction nut who would probably watch a documentary about paint drying if it got even halfway decent reviews, but the fact is that these documentaries made HBO’s sports docs seem bland and overly conventional by comparison. Which is really saying something. This series not only revolutionized the TV sports documentary, but it completely made me rethink ESPN as a network and even the nature and power of TV networks as a whole. I mean, who knew that “give talented people the means to make projects that they are passionate about and then get out of the way” might be a production model worth pursuing? Hopefully the artistic and critical success of these 30 sports documentaries from 30 different filmmakers will have a lasting impact on the way television and film projects are created, but even if not, at the very least they are guaranteed to forever alter the perception of their respective subjects. The Best That Never Was has given second life to Marcus Dupree, no one who sees Run Ricky Run will ever look at Ricky Williams the same way, and even something as seemingly familiar and tired as the OJ Simpson trial is given shockingly new perspective by the transcendent October 17, 1994. And it wasn’t just sports history these documentaries gave me new perspective on. By watching the series I gained great insight into the world of Columbian drug lords, the ethnic conflict in the former Yugoslavia, the national self-image of Canada, and the racial tensions in eastern Virginia (the mean streets of Virginia – who knew?). But above all, these are simply human stories. Stories about obsession, and friendship, and prejudice, and ecstasy, and community, and power, and love. More so than any other item on this list I strongly urge you to check out any and all of these you might have missed (other than the awful Marion Jones: Press Pause). The Two Escobars is indisputably the best and a great place to start, but the fact that’s its literally impossible for me to rank them from there is a great testament to the series. CHECK. THEM. OUT.

4.) Cee-Lo – “Fuck You”
There are certain seminal historical events that you’ll always remember where you were when they happened: 9/11. The OJ verdict. From what I’ve been told, the Kennedy assassination. And now you can add to that list the first time you heard "Fuck You" by Cee-Lo Green.

As I vidily recall, my first reaction was "that’s the greatest thing I’ve ever heard". And my second reaction was, "I can’t wait to see what happens with this song considering its clearly the best pop song of the year and should be a massive 'Hey Ya'-sized smash yet it can't be played on the radio. It could serve as a referendum on radio, on the way we consume music, on what popularity even means and how it is measured in today’s world. It could be a real turning point for our culture." And my third thought was "play that shit again!"

My highest hopes for the song as a cultural discussion point never really came to pass, but that doesn’t dampen the song’s brilliance. Because ultimately what kept it from being the "Crazy"-level smash it deserved to be was the very thing that made it so crazy good – its title phrase. Fuck You. Never before has a profanity seemed so inconsequential, yet simultaneously so integral to a song’s success. The radio edited "Forget You" topped out at #9 on the US Billboard charts, but it might as well have not even existed at all. It’s the exact same song with just one word changed, and yet it’s like they’re not even related. When "Fuck You" comes on I turn it up; when "Forget You" comes on I turn it off. The lesson, as always, is never underestimate the power of a good fuck.

3.) The Daily Show team
Publish a bestselling book? Gather thousands of people on The National Mall for a piece of political theater that is looking more and more prescient and seminal by the day? After ten years still be able to produce segments that are in the running for your finest ever? Get an actual piece of legislation, yes an important and life saving real-life law, passed by Congress?

All in a year’s work for the team at The Daily Show.

So thank you guys and gals. Because when the economy is in the tank, our hope is gone, and the world around us is going to shit, our nation turns its lonely eyes to you. And boy did you deliver.

2.) Landon Donovan's goal vs. Algeria in the World Cup

In maybe the best year ever for best things this is unequivocally the best thing of the year (non-Kanye division). It combines my three loves – the World Cup, the internet, and unbridled joy and enthusiasm. And I’m not ashamed to say that this wasn’t only the high point of the year, but one of the best moments of my life. I can only hope that 2011 holds something even half as wonderful as this.

1.) Kanye

Where to even begin?

For just the "Runaway" video alone he would have topped the list. The album itself would have topped any list ever. His awards show performances and his two songs on SNL completely transformed what those mediums and venues could be. As did his twitter feed. But combine it all and you have a year of achievement so over the top, grandiose, and completely insane that maybe only Kanye himself could comprehend it. And certainly he alone could pull it off. Because in our micro world, Kanye is macro. Singles are where music is at? Then he'll make an Album with a capital A. Songs are getting more simple and minimalist? He’ll add eight vocalists as many instruments and sounds as he can find, give it an intro and an outro, hooks on top of hooks, and make it all combined eight minutes long. Consensus is dead? He'll top the rankings of everything from Time Magazine to Pitchfork, from Rolling Stone, Vibe, and Spin, to USA Today, The Washington Post and Entertainment Weekly. Being indie is where it’s at? Kanye will try and get bigger than The Beatles. And it’s no coincidence that My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy and The White Album were released on the exact same day 42 years apart. This is the art we'll be telling our kids about.

In the end Kanye wasn’t just the best thing about 2010. He was 2010.

Comedy Night Done Right: The 2011 Golden Globes on NBC

2011-01-17T03:09:00.003-05:00

Every year the Golden Globes are about one thing: drunken Meryl Streep.
Meryl Streep giggling, rambling incoherently, and just generally being delightfully Streepian, is, as anyone who has ever read this blog should know, the highlight of the year nearly every year. But as Meryl Streep didn’t appear in a single movie in 2010 there was apparently no way the Hollywood Foreign Press could get her to show up to this year's awards. I firmly believe that all awards shows should be contractually obligated to include Jack Nicholson and Meryl Streep in some form or fashion, but The Golden Globes wont heed my advice. Luckily this year though there was something else to improbably take Meryl’s place. Something to dominate the Golden Globes conversation. And that little globe of golden goodness was Ricky Gervais.

I wasn’t alive to see Bob Hope or Johnny Carson, but my earliest memories of awards show hosting were of Billy Crystal – a man cut from their same cloth. A man who told clever and well-crafted jokes about the nominated films more so than the nominated people. And even when he did he rib the stars he did it with a loving wink. It was always fairly funny, but also fairly safe and insider-y. And that was fine for its time. But we’ve changed as a society, and awards show hosting has yet to really catch up. With twitter and facebook and live-blogging, now the jokes the hosts tell seem weak and soft compared to the jokes we’re reading on our computer screens. They’re too polite and safe and nothing like the jokes you are simultaneously making with your friends. They are jokes told by insiders for the amusement of other insiders with the only problem being that the show is being watched by outsiders. Outsiders who no longer find Bruce Vilanch style one-liners particularly hip or funny. The Oscars have at least in the past decade seemed to acknowledge this problem and tried to get hosts from outside the establishment who could tell edgier jokes and get away with more biting material, but whenever they would hire a Chris Rock or a Jon Stewart the “establishment” would get cold feet and would neuter them to the point that a joke slamming Jude Law seemed so out of place that it caused a minor scandal. These young hip cutting-edge hosts never seemed like themselves in these situations. They seemed tame and safe and overly concerned with the feelings of the people in the room, which completely negated the point of having them there in the first place. And which made Ricky Gervais’s hosting gig last night seem so groundbreaking and buzz worthy by comparison. Because Ricky didn’t give a fuck. He told the jokes that we would tell. Jokes from an outsider intended to entertain an audience at home rather than a bunch of privledged celebrities we don’t know and will never even meet. Jokes with teeth and with a contemporary sensibility. And jokes that weren’t concerned with being nice but rather with, you know, being funny. He drank beer on stage, openly rooted for his favorite movie to win, and he spoke truth to power. He was one of us rather than one of them and in the process showed us what an awards show host can and should be in the 21st century. In today’s Everyone’s A Star Universe we no longer aspire to be one of them as much as we aspire for them to be one of us. Last night Ricky spoke for us and turned a thankless job into one we’re all thankful for. And even more importantly, he salvaged a Meryl-less Golden Globes.

Yes, Virginia there might not be a God but there is a Santa Claus.

Now on with the show….

-------

*What the fuck Christian Bale? That speech was supposed to be a fucking train wreck and yet it totally wasn’t. It wasn’t fucking amateur. It was really fucking good. But I’m trying to fucking do my job here, and how am I supposed to write jokes with you fucking being all fucking sane and reasonable and coherent? What the fuck is it with you? What don't you fucking understand? You got any fucking idea about, hey, it's fucking annoying having somebody deliver a good speech when you already have a good joke ready to go regarding their speech being a train wreck? Give me a fucking answer! What don't you get about that? So you can deliver a good speech - ohhhhh, goooood for you. I hope it was fucking worth it, because my well crafted joke - it's useless now, isn't it? So get it right at the Oscars okay? For fucks sake.

*Speaking of speeches, I have no idea who you are Chris Colfer but your speech warmed the cockles of my cold cold heart.
(Also, you know you went to a performing arts college if as soon as Colfer’s speech was done your facebook news feed blew up like 9/11.) (What, too soon?)

*Why is Michael C. Hall’s beard a completely different color than the rest of his hair? Is it a cancer thing?

*I’m pretty sure that those people who came up to accept the award for Boardwalk Empire were associated with it in some way, but it was hard to tell because none of them were naked.

*I love how NBC acts like its relevant what time its shows air. It’s quaint.

*Lord knows I’ve been wrong with my predictions before, but I feel pretty confident that they should just start describing Perfect Couples as The Single Guy meets Inside Schwartz already. It would save us all some time.

*Only the Golden Globes president would still be able to personally remember a time when movies weren’t taken seriously or considered a respectable form of entertainment. You know because people were too busy with their gramophones and books of sonnets.

*I’m pretty sure that the existence of the Best Original Song category is how Burlesque got greenlit.

*I wonder if Michelle Williams is pissed that Diane Warren stole her haircut?

*Also, Annette Benning, you’re never gonna win and Oscar with hair like that. Only Al Pacino can win Oscars with that hair.

*Also: Bieber.

*Charming though he may be, absolutely nothing Robert Downey Jr. said made any sense.

*Whenever I listen to Nine Inch Nails I’m always struck by how much Trent Reznor sounds like a potential Golden Globe winner, so I’m glad that that’s finally come to pass.

*I don’t really keep up with celebrity news but I would venture to say that Sandra Bullock’s hair is probably the worst thing to ever happen to her.

*Aaron Sorkin has a way with words. And even though he used his speech to do the least necessary damage control ever, I loved every minute of it. Smart girls really do have more fun.

*Hey, does anybody know if Johnny Depp has an animated movie coming out any time soon?

*The new Green Hornet ads don’t really advertise the movie as much as they advertise how shockingly well “Gangstas Paradise” has held up.

*I love how Helena Bonham Carter seems to view fashion as a dare

*Robert De Niro – King of Comedy
also,
Claire Danes – Awards Show Juggernaut
(and User Of The Phrase “Holla”)

*Speaking of The Robert De Niro Comedy Hour, I’m glad he mentioned Awakenings as I was just thinking how’s that easily the most unjustly forgotten movie on his resume. You should really check it out.

*Time has not been kind to Tim The Tool Man Taylor

*At awards shows over the next month David O. Russell is gonna really start to hate sharing a first name with David Fincher

*By the end of February Natalie Portman is officially going to be able to claim the award for biggest disparity between weight when acting and weight when receiving awards for said acting.

*Gays, Jack Kevorkian, Jane Fonda, and atheism – it sure was a big night for all my fellow liberal pinko coast-dwelling elitists

*Congrats Social Network - well deserved. As Ricky Gervais said, justice prevails. And it’s nice that my favorite movie of the year is the Best Picture frontrunner for a change. I could get used to this.

*Lastly, now that the Big 8 categories other than Best Supporting Actress and Best Original Screenplay have been locked in, the next six weeks are about figuring out the nominees, bitching about the impending Winters Bone snub, giving the front runners time to work on their speeches, and writing jokes about James Franco and facebook. Fredtheonlinejournal likes this.

2 or 3 Things I Know About Her: 13 Thoughts on Ke$ha

2010-12-21T18:52:00.014-05:00

1.) When trying to sum up this year, when reflecting on “what it all meant”, when trying to find one piece of pop culture ephemera to encapsulate the state of affairs in America circa 2010 there are many directions you go could: The now forever intertwined twin towers of Taylor Swift and Kanye West. The twitter explosion. The Social Network and Mark Zuckerberg. Lady Gaga. The Old Spice guy. The undead. But to me, one figure towers above them all in their social significance. A figure who started the year as a joke, became a supernova-like force, and now is already fading into the ether from whence she came. An “artist” who was both born and killed off as a cultural force in the course of a year, not just because of their lack of talent and versatility, but because they so embodied 2010 that they could not exist outside of it. A person who twenty years from now will be lucky to be a pop cultural footnote, but who will in fact encapsulate and symbolize more of what the experience of being alive and in this country these past 12 months was like than any historian could ever hope to be able to convey. Because as is often the case with pop culture, long after the specifics and the details fade their essence remains. We may not know anything about what life was actually like in the 1920s and could name off the top of our heads only a very few of the key cultural figures of the period, but we all have an idea what it was like to be alive at that time. We can’t tell you who specifically sang its songs, but we know what they sounded like. And so it is with our age as well. Long after humanity has forgotten exactly who P. Diddy is they will still be able to relate to the essence of waking up feeling like him. And long after the name Ke$ha has ceased to haunt the nightmares of our collective unconscious, the popularity of her music on our pop charts this year will likely, more than any other cultural force that 2010 produced, best define the year that was in Pop Culture America.

2.) If nothing else, Ke$ha’s popularity this year has produced one great new term:
“Keshy” (adj.) a combination of catchy and trashy
ex: That new Pussycat Dolls song is really keshy

3.) Speaking of dumb terms, can we talk for a moment about the line “my steeze is gonna be affected if I keep it up like a love sick crackhead”? (Strangely “steeze” is not in my spell check.)

The urban dictionary defines steeze as “a combination of style and ease; straight up easy flow and mad unique style. You either got it or you don’t.”

I’m not “urban” so I’m no steeze expert, but if I may, I’d like to elaborate a bit on my understanding of the term. As I see it steeze is a fighting back against the metro-sexual crowd and the trying-too-hard bunch. Because it’s not trying at all. It’s DIY, emphasis on the Y. It’s not engaging at all with style or trends or fashion or the culture at large. It’s our default setting when we pop out of the womb. It’s what’s inside each of us. (Provided that, you know, it is.) It’s what makes some old bed sheets a dress and adorning yourself in craft supplies “accessorizing”. And it’s the perfect term for our economically depressed, lazy, and sedentary times. And it is of course one that Ke$ha pulls off with great élan.

So please don’t make her be too interested in real meaningful human connection with you because then she might have to try.

And that sounds exhausting.

4.) Is Ke$ha the most authentic pop star of all time? Although she lives in a corner of the music industry built almost entirely on artifice, there’s seemingly nothing fake or contrived about Ke$ha. Sure the dumb, trashy, party girl thing is a marketing hook, but it also appears to be completely genuine. From everything I’ve ever read or heard or seen (yes, I did do research for this) Ke$ha the person is really what she seems, or at least pretty close to it. Sure she wasnt born with glitter on her face, but I feel pretty confident that she would be wearing it whether she was a pop star or not. She may be selling a specific image and lifestyle, but it is, from all appearances, the lifestyle she really lives. The Rolling Stones could trash a hotel room, sleep with groupies, get hammered every night, and then let their music reflect that, but name a modern mainstream pop star who could do the same, especially a female one. Madonna perhaps, but she was always chasing trends, trying to stay relevant, constantly reinventing herself. I’d be shocked though if Ke$ha ever reinvents herself. Because she never invented herself in the first place. She just was who she was and that person happened to be something the zeitgeist could embrace. And when the zeitgeist moves on, as it almost by definition always does, I feel pretty sure that Ke$ha wont chase it. She’s just gonna keep doing what it is she does audience or market trends be damned. She’s not going to be doing MTV Unplugged (if that was still a thing) or making an art rock album with Grizzly Bear. She’s just gonna keep making overly dumb dance music about partying and boys and having fun. And if that’s not what people in the future want to listen to in their flying cars with their robot maids, then fuck it.

Ke$ha’s success may be an accident, a coincidence, a case of right person right place right time, but it's hard to say it isn’t founded on something real. And is that in its own way a breakthrough? A step forward? Is Ke$ha a trailblazer? Is she deserving of respect? It’s a moralish conundrum. But at least it’s a real one.

5.) Ke$ha may not win a lot of awards for her contributions to music this year. And by “a lot” I mean “any”. But in the greatest year ever for so-bad-they’re-good lyrics nothing even came close to “don’t be a little bitch with your chit chat / just show me where your dicks at”. I mean we’re dealing with a year where “I get ten thousand hugs from ten thousand lightning bugs” isn’t even cracking my top ten. And yet that Ke$ha lyric is so head and shoulders “above” anything else that I’m almost tempted to say that nothing in history is ever going to be able to top it. Although lord knows Will.I.Am is trying.

6.) While we’re talking about dumb lyrics, has anything ever made less sense than “kick ‘em to the curb unless they look like Mick Jagger”? Even in his younger sexual prime I don’t think anyone was really that into Mick Jagger for his physical appearance. He was a supremely confident and charismatic rock front man who oozed sex, carnal energy, and aggression, sure. But I don’t think the particulars of his physical appearance were exactly what he was most known for. Still, even if in theory he was a major looker back in the day, he’s now 70 years old. If a guy who looked EXACTLY like present day Mick Jagger approached Ke$ha at a bar and offered to buy her a drink I can almost guarantee you she would laugh in his face and/or be more than a little creeped out. When people say that leather is out I’m assuming they don’t just mean for clothing, but for skin as well. Maybe I’m missing something and hooking up with anorexic looking 67-year-old men with faces that look like they’re melting is all the rage, but I’m pretty sure that “we kick ‘em to the curb if they look anything even remotely like Mick Jagger” would be WAY more apt.

7.) Some people worry that Ke$ha will make young people think it’s cool to party all the time and drink and take drugs. Some people worry about the implications her popularity has on the future of intelligence and education and enlightened discourse. Some people worry that kids are going to start thinking its acceptable to walk around dressed in torn up garbage bags. Those might all be valid concerns, but me, I mostly just worry about her bad influence on our kids’ dental hygiene. I mean brushing your teeth with a bottle of Jack is not only unhealthy but outright dangerous. And if we don’t fight back against Ke$ha’s message, pretty soon we’re going to be faced with an entire generation of people with some pretty serious gum disease.

8.) The thoroughly bland and uneventful Rolling Stone profile of Ke$ha from a few months back (which I can’t link to because Rolling Stone still operates as though it’s 1972) posits that she is always making edgy and controversial comments, giving as an example her statement: “I like wiener”. Which indeed is very cutting edge and shocking. To a fifth grader. And that’s the thing - our standards for what we find outrageous and edgy have fallen to such a degree that bad fashion sense and studied stupidity now qualify as “edge”.

We used to fight things in this country. The system. The man. The safe, the plastic, and the status quo. We had real outrage and real sense of purpose. Thirty years ago someone like Ke$ha would have had place in the music scene. She could have been a punk. Her lack of polish and “talent” would have been an active choice and a statement. A statement against “the way things are”. It would have made us think and question our values and see the world in a new way. But as pop culture has ostensibly “loosened”, what with our sex and violence and foul language more omnipresent on the TV and what not, things in the actual day-to-day culture of life have actually grown more safe and provincial. Hell, even a decade ago there were people on MTV like Marilyn Manson who played with ideas of gender identity subversion and nihilism. Who would have thought I would ever be yearning for the days when nihilism was seen as an activist worldview? But I do, because even Marilyn Manson could never exist in anywhere close to the mainstream today, let alone The Sex Pistols. Now “I like wiener” is edgy and outré and punk bands have musicals on Broadway. And so instead of fearing that musicians are going to destroy our culture, topple our government, and forever change our safe placid way of life, now the only outrage they generate is “ugh, her music is stupid and she dresses tackily” or “man, he seems really egotistical and says crazy things on twitter”. And that seems to be enough for us. Is this the depths to which modernity has sunk us? Has the perpetual outrage machine really worn us down to this? No wonder the war in Afghanistan drags on with no end in sight…

9.) If in Europe Ke$ha’s name is not instead K€sha then that might be the greatest missed opportunity in branding history.

10.) I don’t know that Ke$ha’s love is my drug, but I’m pretty sure that it’s my syphilis.

11.) What’s with people keeping their best songs until their later singles? First, “Paparazzi” was the fourth single released from The Fame, and then “Your Love is my Drug” was held out until after “TiK ToK” and “Blah Blah Blah” had been released as singles off of Animal even though its CLEARLY her best song. And I’m using pretty much every word in that last sentence very loosely.

12.) If it’s true that every generation gets the artists it deserves then we truly have earned Ke$ha. She doesn’t write her own music, play any instruments, or even sing. And in our era of famous-for-being-famous celebutants, it’s fitting that arguably the biggest pop star of the moment is a singer who doesn’t sing. An artist who adds almost nothing to her art. A “talent” with no real discernable talents. She is exactly the pop star America deserves. She is our Warholian Age of Fame worldview sprung to life. She is what we think about when we don’t think at all. She is the us that has trouble sitting through YouTube videos because they’re too long, considers twitter heavy reading, and zones out every night in front of reality TV. She is us as we spend considerably more time reading celebrity gossip blogs than we do reading about the relief efforts in Haiti. Ke$ha is the vapid id to our Lady Gaga super-ego. She is who we R.

She is our steez.

13.) I like your beard.

The Quest for Aqua: My August in Spain

2010-11-15T19:40:00.006-05:00

Did I go to Spain by myself for two weeks in August? Yes I did. Did I spend most of my time there writing down my thoughts in my omnipresent pocket journal? Yes I did. Is it now November and I am just now getting around to sharing those thoughts? Yes it is. So sue me. I’ve been busy okay. But at long last I’ve finally been able to transcribe a sort of “best of” on the ol’ internet here. But be warned: It might take you longer to read all this stuff than my actual trip lasted.

(By the way, I wrote a not insignificant chunk of this in the courtyard of a 12^th century Moorish palace. Where do you do your blogging?)

-----------------------------------------

*I think there should be a TV show where they pit the wildest, craziest, most unhinged American college kids they can find against average Madrid residents chosen at random from the phone book in events like “drinking”, “staying out late”, “partying” and “general craziness”. I’d put all my money on the Madrilenos.

*If you’re eating dinner before 9:00 in Spain then you might as well wear a sign that says “I’m an American and I chose to stick to my normal lunch time and am therefore now hungry because I can’t be bothered to adapt to a foreign culture”

*You want some fucking pictures of Jesus? The Prado Museum in Madrid has got em.

(Speaking of which, were you lonely at home around August 11^th? That’s because all the Americans in the world were at The Prado. Seriously, it was like an apple pie NASCAR convention up in there.)

*Things I learned while looking at Picasso’s "Guernica":

-It is large

-War is hard

*While looking at mid-20^th century Spanish art I was struck by the fact that probably 95% of Americans have either forgotten or never knew in the first place that just forty years ago Spain was a closed country with no foreign relations or contact with the world outside its borders. I was struck by the same thing when watching Japan, our friend, ally, and worshipper of our culture, portrayed as our sworn enemy on The Pacific. Makes you wonder how our children and our children’s children will view Iraq, Cuba, North Korea, and Afghanistan.

*All you need to know about Palacio Real is that there is a room in it made entirely of porcelain. Is it a room of great importance you ask? No. It’s simply The Porcelain Room. Its entire purpose is to be made of porcelain. That’s its whole reason for being.

*As a follow up of sorts to that last point, I think the reason old buildings and art are so intricately detailed has more to do with how bored people used to be than anything else. I mean, of course people were willing to spend years intricately detailing thousands of individual tiles, what else did they have going on? The new season of The Bachelor wasn’t going to be on for at least 650 more years.

*I think the word “amazed” came from the experience of being in a really awesome maze.

*I feel very strongly that Toledo is the Venice of Spain. The similarities are uncanny. Well other than the canals. But who notices those in Venice anyway?

*Why do we take pictures?

To capture the uncaptureable.

To describe the undescribeable.

To share that which cannot be shared.

Pictures may be worth a thousand words, but they’re still worth very little. We spend so much time on our vacations, at places, during events, engaged in a futile activity. Yet we always try and we always will because to not do so is to admit defeat to the enormity and awesome power of the universe. And lord knows we can’t let the universe win.

*Ways to know you’re not in America:

-You see a man with a small child on his shoulders drinking a massive glass of sangria at a street fair after midnight on a Thursday night and no one seems troubled or remotely concerned.

-Two 60-plus year old women walk into a jazz club at 1:00am on a Tuesday and each almost immediately start chugging their own mug of beer.

-The uber-nerdy looking girl with frizzy hair, thick glasses, and high-water mom jeans can dance as good or better than Michael Jackson.

*There’s a very unique kind of awkward experienced when you start speaking Spanish to someone in Spain only to find out that they only speak French. What, my whole ONE other language isn’t enough for you?

(By the way, if you want to feel bad about your language skills, try talking to a trilingual homeless guy.)

*And speaking of knowing another language - were there times I ordered things in cafes that maybe I didn’t want simply because I had misunderstood the server or couldn’t totally read and understand the menu? That might have happened once or twice. But if in those situations I had at any point explained that to the server then they would have known that I didn’t totally understand the Spanish language and that therefore I was just another ugly American who wasn’t fluent in any other languages just like they thought I was. And therefore I would not have been able to heal the rift between America and the rest of the world, and then eventually there would be nuclear war. So, okay, maybe I ate some strange cuts of meat I didn’t necessarly want; at least we wont have nuclear war.

*How many times did I feel the urge to reach into my pocket for a phone that wasn’t there? 800,000,000. And that’s an exact count.

*Popular Spanish joke: To be or estar, that is the question

*Several times on the trip I saw places called "Museo de Jamon". Either something is lost in translation or ham is much more interesting than I realize.

*The Last Airbender hadn’t come out there yet. Should I have warned them? I decided against it because I was so impressed that the marketing department was able to make the cast so Spanish looking on the poster. On a related note, did you know that Selma Hayek was the lead of Grown Ups?

*Anyone who’s traveled with me knows that there’s nothing I love more than old churches. Which considering my views on organized religion is seemingly rather strange. But as I’ve always said, it’s because not only are churches usually the most beautiful and culturally important buildings in any given town, but because they’re also the best places to really feel history. And I think I’ve figured out why that is. It’s because churches are the only places of historical interest left that haven’t been “museumified”. You know how when you visit anywhere that’s even remotely touristy that place has become so overrun with signs and displays and exhibits that it no longer has the feel of authenticity? Like for example when Anne Frank was hiding out in her attic it didn’t have a bunch of plaques and shit everywhere. But when the Spanish royal family met with Magellan on his way around the world from The Cathedral of Seville, the chapel where they did that looked and felt almost exactly as it does today. And that’s not just because its still a functioning house of worship but because, just generally speaking, it ain’t kosher to fuck with God’s house in any way. So that’s the (reductive) reason I have such a hard on for temples to the baby Jesus.

*Speaking of which….

Come on Cathedral de Valencia, it’s like you’re not even trying! Where is your choir chamber decorated by one of Spain’s great painters and filled with individually carved figures made out of rare wood that indicate each and every seat number? Where is your ridiculously ornate organ made solely from precious metals? Where is your room that serves no other purpose than to house diamond encrusted treasures? The fucking Holy Grail and an old royal chapel? Is that all you got? You might as well slap Jesus in the face.

*And while we're here Valencia, renaming all your streets in Valencio is annoying and confusing. I know you're trying to reclaim your language and cultural heritage from years of oppression and death and blah blah blah but your maps are now hard to follow for visitors who are in your city for a single day. So you should really think about that.

*I’ve realized that my new goal in life is to be the kind of person who can pull off white pants.

*Other realizations I had while in Spain:

-Location is a temporary condition

-For better or worse tomorrow always follows today

-If you’re trying to get away from swarms of flying insects that have been attacking you all day, a dried out riverbed immediately after a rainstorm is not the best place to do that

*I’m going to start a restaurant where you can’t order a main course, you can only order small appetizer-sized portions, only I’ll price each of them between $8-$12 so you’ll spent $40 on a meal of snacks that won’t leave you feeling fully satisfied. I’ll make millions!

*By far the most popular word used in hostels in Spain is "tapas". Everyone is obsessed with saying tapas. And, sure, it’s a fun word to say, but it doesn’t mean some exotic type of cuisine. It just means "small portion". It indicates the exact same food you get as a main course or side dish, just a smaller potion of it. So all the hundreds of people in hostels who were saying things like "where can I get good tapas?" "where are there cheap tapas?" "where are all the tapas?" "tapas tapas of tapas" were basically only saying "where are the small portions of food?" Just sayin.

*Can someone who has stayed in a lot of hostels please explain to me the hanging out at the hostel bar thing. I guess it’s a cousin to hanging out at the hotel bar, which makes some sense if you’re staying in a boring city for work. But if you are paying money for the express purpose of traveling and experiencing a new place, then why are you sitting in a shitty windowless bar with strictly other tourists and no connection of any kind to the city at large. When I travel the main thing I want to do is get a real feel for the place and experience as many authentically local things as I can. And there are few things I can feel safer guaranteeing that locals NEVER do than going to a hostel in their own city and drinking at its bar. Plus, if I wanted to spend time in a small, cramped, dark space with too many people I could have just stayed in New York.

*In a “which country has the most beautiful people” contest I think Spain wins easily. Britain on the other hand…not so much. Although Emma Watson cutting her hair disqualified them anyway just on principle.

*When you think about it, The United States of America is a pretty terrible name for a country.

*As much as military time annoys me, I do have to admit that it is actually a better system. We Americans really can be such assholes what with our way of telling time that is unique to us and our measurement system that makes no sense and our temperature system where 32 is 0.

*Do people from other countries feel the need to represent their native country well while traveling abroad? For example, does a French person say to themselves while traveling “whatever I do, I need to be sure not to come off like a rude Frenchman”?

*I think applying spray-on deodorant is the easiest possible way of saying to people “I am a douche bag and you are hereby no longer required to take me seriously as a person”.

*The fact that when the walk signs turn green in Spain they also make a sound that can best be described as "someone shooting lasers at you" really put some urgency into my street crossings.

*Things I realized after the fact that I had mistakenly said in Spanish:

-“I’m very spicy”

-“Is this the hill where you use the bathroom?”

-“I would like one of the sandwiches traditional to your region”

-“I put the key in me”

*If you lived in Spain and your name was Cece you’d probably always think that someone was calling your name. And you’d slowly go insane.

*They say music transcends all nationalities, all cultures, all creeds. So apparently does waking up feeling like P. Diddy.

*Hey, you know what shockingly doesn’t sound good? A Spanish language cover of “The Reason” by Hoobastank

*How to know you’ve found the ghetto: when there’s a small child holding a baby and there are no adults in sight.

*Thought had while cursing in a church: Why does the Lord care if we take his name in vain? That’s a little sensitive for an all-powerful deity don’t you think? And is it just his name? What if I said “damn the all-powerful creator of the universe”? Am I allowed to take him in vain conceptually? And is this really one of the ten most important rules for life?

*If you have some free time on your hands you should really vote for Granada to be European Cultural Capital 2016. I don’t know what that is or what it means or even if it’s a real thing, I just know they REALLY want to be it. Like a lot. Like to the point where I’m a little embarrassed for them. So go on the internet and vote for them. Because they could really use it apparently. Plus their city is utterly charming and could use some more attention.

*In Spain there appears to be a very strong regional preference for certain beers. The ones I was able to pin down:

Madrid – Mahout

Seville – Cruzcampo

Barcelona – Estrella Damm (although San Miguel was a close second)

(Speaking of which, here’s some good advice for the kids: You know what’s fun to do? Drink lots of beer and then walk long distances uphill in 105 degree heat. Give it a shot some time!)

*Legitimate questions:

How often do Spanish people actually eat paella?

Why are there different electrical outlets in different countries?

Why are there different “regions” for DVDs?

How did the American restaurant tipping system develop?

Why in European bars do you turn the beer taps rather than pull them down?

How do foreign comic book nerds feel about Captain America?

*Observations had while watching basketball in Spain
-Rather than calling them "field goals" and "three pointers" they call them "tries for two" and "triples". A little wordy perhaps but I like it.
-Since they're so used to watching futbol they haven't figured out yet what to do with stoppages in time. During timeouts rather than go to commercial they broadcast the coach's huddle mic-ed up and everything. And the audience seems to think that what the coach has to say is VERY important. At the bar where I was watching the game some kid came in talking loudly during a timeout and the patrons all hushed him so they could listen to the coach. It was adorable.
-I'm pretty sure if Pau Gasol ran for president of Spain he would win in a landslide

*Sometimes you worry about your future. Your life. You want stability, security, passion, success. You want to be taken care of, provided for, loved. You want to understand the infinite wisdom of the universe. And sometimes all you want out of life is a strawberry Fanta.

*Lastly, after returning from Spain I moved to Los Angeles. I remember getting picked up at the airport the first night and feeling so full of excitement, of opportunity, so filled with the sense of holy shit I’m actually here, I’m actually doing this. This place I have imagined and dreamed about and planned for - this moment it is actually here. I didn’t know what to expect at first and everything from going to the grocery store to walking down the street felt new and exciting. And now a few months into living here I still love it and feel energized by it, but the feeling of newness and of the unknown feels like a million years ago. And part of me mourns that I can never not know this place ever again. I can never look forward to coming here in the same way again because I will always know what being here is. And that’s something I found myself thinking time after time in Spain. After reading about every city for months in books, imagining what they would be like, going to sleep at night dreaming of them, I would emerge from a train station or an airport or a bus station and see this city unfold before me for the first time and I would be giddy with anticipation. Every turn around every new corner was an exciting new adventure. But by the end of the day, when I could find my way around without a map and my feet hurt from walking so much and I had passed by the same plaza for the third time, I would experience the most common source of existential depression while on vacation: the sense that I can never not know this place ever again. And that’s the tragedy of knowing is that you can never unknow. The old can never be new again. You’ll always know what’s around that corner. You’ll never be able to erase from your mind the Albayzin at dusk so you can experience it again for the first time. You’ll always know how that book ends. Luckily life is long. And the world is large.

Until next time…

Dear New York,

2010-07-28T00:51:00.002-04:00

Hey, how are you? How’s it goin?
You been in any good movies recently?....
…Okay this is awkward, and not just because I’m writing a letter to a non-anthropomorphic entity. It’s because we’ve been through so much together and because I care about you so much that this is so hard to say. Or to write. Whatever. The thing is, I want to see other cities. And by “see other cities” I mean see one other city.
That isn’t you.
What I’m trying to say is...I want to break up. I’m just not so good with words okay? Which is just one of the many reasons I’m leaving you - You were always smarter than me. And you belittle me all the time and make me feel like I’m not good enough. And you make me angry. Oh boy do you make me angry. Just the other day you almost made me shove some old lady down the stairs because she was walking too slowly. Which probably had less to do with her actively trying to slow me down because she doesn’t understand that I have places, VERY IMPORTANT PLACES TO BE, and more to do with the fact that she was walking slowly because, well, she’s fucking old.

See, you you’ve turned me into someone I’m not. Someone I don’t like very much. Like, I swore I would never be one of those people who was defined by my relationship, but whenever I’m somewhere without you, you’re pretty much all I talk about. I’m sure I annoy people with how much I ramble on about you like you’re the only thing in my life worth talking about. Like you’re SO interesting. Like I’m SO much better than everyone else because I have a better city than they do. A city that is beautiful and charming and interesting and treats me well. But you know what? You’re not always as charming as you think you are, and honestly, you don’t treat me all that well. You rain on me, you hurt my feet, and you lie to me. Like when you claim there’s a sick passenger on your train, but really I know that you just don’t know how to fucking operate a simple mass-transit system. And not only can I not trust you, but you make me actively paranoid. Whenever any store clerk smiles at me or even acknowledges my existence I glance around everywhere, certain that I’m being punked. You’ve made me think that basic human decency is some sort of malicious prank. And yeah, sure, you inspired Annie Hall, and “Rhapsody in Blue”, and The Godfather, but, you know, you also inspired Small Time Crooks and The Real World: Brooklyn and the career of Ja Rule. So maybe you should stop thinking you’re all that. There are other fish in the sea okay? Other fruit on the tree. Other geographical locations on the map.

In fact, maybe this isn’t the best time to tell you this, but you’ll see the pictures on facebook eventually, so I might as well just tell you now. I’ve kind of been seeing someone else. Their name is Los Angeles. And it’s actually pretty serious. In fact I think we’re gonna move in together. Now, I don’t mean to hurt you. I really don’t. And I know you’d rather I rebounded with someone nice and unthreatening city like Chicago or Denver or Philadelphia, but this isn’t some rebound thing it’s pretty serious.

Now look, there’s no way any city will ever be able to hold a candle to you. You’re the best city I’ll ever be with, I understand that. But for all the wonderful things you have - unexpected adventures, wild nights out, a rooftop party with friends looking out over an amazing view - I know that these things rarely happen anymore. What once was fresh has gotten stale. And one night of passion a month isn’t enough to keep a relationship going. Sometimes no matter how much love you might feel for someone, circumstances, life, and reality get in the way. Things run their course.

Just today I was walking down the street, not paying any attention to anything as usual, annoyed with all the fucking tourists around when suddenly I looked up and I saw this building that a young man was taking a picture of. It was just a random building, nothing special at first glance, but then I looked at it harder and I saw it with different eyes. Younger eyes. And it took me back to a different time. The time when we first fell in love. When every building and every street and every moment felt so magical and alive. Walking around every day felt like a dream. The love I felt for you was almost surreal. I couldn’t believe this place was actually mine. Sometimes your beauty would literally stop me in my tracks. When you weren’t around all I wanted to do was be with you, and when you were around you automatically made everything better by the mere fact of your presence. Before I found you I felt so misunderstood, so alone, so incomplete, so out of place. But once I found the comfort of your arms I felt so alive, so at home. You understood me. You got what I was about. You saved my life. And I’ll be eternally grateful to you for that. But people grow and people change. And you start to see the cracks in the facade. The things you put on a pedestal become real and you have to deal with the reality instead of the fantasy.

And I looked at the man taking the picture of the building. This building that was old and interesting and utterly fascinating to this man. And I knew how he felt. I had been that person. I remembered what that was like. But that’s all it was - just a memory. Because I looked at that building and all I saw was a building. A building that was blocking my view of the sun.

And I thought, how could something that once was so powerful to me leave me feeling completely numb? How could something that was once so beautiful now simply be an annoyance? Is this how all love works? Does nothing last? Is lifelong monogamy valid or even possible? Is this why I never like to start things, because I know if I never start them then they never have to end?

Frankly all this thinking gave me a headache. And that’s why I’m moving to LA. Because they don’t have existential crises in LA. They don’t have much of anything really. Other than 3D movies about outer space. Well that and cocaine. Lots and lots of cocaine. Which is great because I hear it’s delicious. Also, I have no idea how cocaine works. But the point is LA is a simpler place. And I need somewhere simple after all the drama of you and me. I need somewhere where I can just lay around doing nothing all day. Somewhere I can stretch my legs and truly relax. Somewhere I can get Mexican food that’s not made by Asian people.

And don’t worry, I’m sure I’ll see you again. We’ll keep in touch. And I’m sure I’ll hear stories about you from friends. And, I’m not gonna lie, I’ll probably stalk you a little bit on the internet. But I know in the end, although I’ll always value what we had, we will be better off apart.

So don’t worry about me. I’m sure I’ll be just fine with my new love.

And I’m not too worried about you moving on either.

You always have been quite the heartbreaker.

Love always,
Andy

My Month of Soccer

2010-07-11T21:19:00.001-04:00

The World Cup is the greatest thing that mankind has ever created. And if you disagree with that statement then you are wrong. And you probably lead a sad grey passionless existence in which you pray every day for the sweet release of death.

Or maybe you just have an actual life.
Whatever.

Point is that over the past month I have experienced every possible human emotion at least ten times over. I lost sleep, hair, and my voice. I drank copious amounts of beer, hugged and slapped hands with complete strangers and got so filled with tension that I seriously worried that my heart might explode. And my level of soccer knowledge went from “I hope that one guy can kick the ball into the net soon” to “it’s the 85th minute and if they don’t fucking switch to a goddamn 4-3-3 soon then no amount of stoppage time is going to get them the equalizer”. But just enough knowledge of soccer to be completely obnoxious is not all I picked up over the past month. Theres more...

Things I Learned During The World Cup:

*US sports teams names are lame. The Falcons? The Eagles? The Reds? Try The Super Eagles, The Indomitable Lions, and La Furija Roja (The Furious Red). And it's not just the addition of adjectives either. The Greek team is called The Pirate Ship. That’s the greatest name for anything ever. Come on America, step your game up.

(Second place for best name for anything ever? Nigeria has a President named Goodluck Jonathan. No, I'm not making that up)

*Cardiologists must love The World Cup.

*Despite the success of this World Cup I feel certain that South Africa is never, ever, EVER going to be allowed to host a worldwide sports competition again. (Thanks a lot vuvuzelas)
Speaking of which…

*The amount of World Cup you have watched can be best defined by which of these quotes sums up your feelings on hearing a chorus of vuvuzelas:
1.) “What is vuvuzela?”
2.) “Vuvuzelas are the worst, most obnoxious thing in the history of the world!”
3.) “Oh, are thousands of people blowing on vuvuzelas at the moment? I didn’t even notice.”
4.) “I’ve started sleeping under a bees’ nest because I’m no longer able to be at peace in the world without the sweet dulcet tones of vuvuzela wafting through the air.”

*When you’re watching a sporting event that is not the World Cup if you yell out “come on, that’s a clear yellow card!” people will look at you funny.

*Apparently the players for Paraguay have no problem looking like escaped convicts from a jail for clowns.

*It's good to know that no matter what our differences might be, all nations in the world are united in our hatred of the French.

*Soccer is now officially the indie rock of American sports.

*Musically speaking all national anthems pretty much sound they same. And they all kind of suck.

*Both the best and the worst thing about soccer is watching a guy writhing in pain get carried off the pitch on a stretcher only to hop off and be perfectly fine the second he gets to the sideline.

*Whoever thought of the idea to give the New Zealand All-Whites an almost all black uniform is my new hero.

*Spain's David Villa is the first person in history to successfully pull off the soul patch.

*USA is without a doubt the most easily chant-able of all the country names in existence. Unless of course there is a BeatL.A.istan or a Republic of YankeesSuck somewhere I don’t know about.

*There are black people in Switzerland.

*There really need to be more occasions wherein it’s culturally acceptable to drink in a bar at 10am on a weekday.

*It's hard to take a man seriously when his name is Kaka.

*The World Cup can teach you a lot about your neighbors. For instance I had no idea so many people of Serbian descent live in my neighborhood.

*If you ever visit Portugal don’t ever accidentally graze past anyone on the street or they will fall into a heap on the ground and writhe around in agony like they have been shot. They are a fragile people. Also, they suck.

*Ian Darke is the Gus Johnson of soccer. But neither of them have anything on this guy.

*Soccer terminology is so much more sophisticated and classy than the language we use in American sports. Teams aren’t "playing well" they are "displaying good quality". The ball doesn’t get "stolen" it gets "dispossessed". And I'm not even taking into account the time an announcer called the Paraguayan defense "obdurate".

*Diego Forlan is very good at soccer. He is also very good at looking like the love child of Bradley Cooper and Sean Penn.

*Like the wannabe pseudo-hipster I am I have really fallen in love with soccer jerseys. (Or kits I believe they're called?)

My five favorites of the World Cup:
5.) Spain - Away
4.) Brazil - Home
3.) Mexico - Away
2.) Portugal - Home (which I would have bought if I didn’t hate Portugal so much)
1.) Australia - Home (which I might or might not have made a special trip to Niketown to buy)

*And finally, with all due respect to Paul the Octopus, Diego Maradona, the French team refusing to practice, and the heroic run of Ghana, the thing that will always be the highlight of this World Cup, this past month, this whole summer is of course Donovan's goal vs. Algeria. I will remember it for the rest of my life and it made every hour I spent watching these games totally worth it. So thanks for everything soccer. I'll see you again in four years.

Zombie People

2010-07-10T14:13:00.000-04:00

Hey do you like reading things I write? Then maybe you'll like watching things I act in. A friend of mine is trying to get his movie off the ground and we hope to film it in the fall. Its a great project with some great people invloved. You should really check out the site: Zombie People. Thanks.

What Would David Simon Do: How To Make Television Without Getting LOST

2010-05-28T19:34:00.003-04:00

“The ultimate goal has to be story” - David Simon on television

“This isn’t Lost. We have no idea where we’re going” – Chuck Lorre on Two and Half Men

Now that Lost has finally ended and we’ve spent the past few days analyzing and critiquing and opining about the finale we can finally step back and look at the series as a whole. And though we're all still sifting through our feelings and our thoughts, and though they are this point still subject to change as the days and the weeks and the years go by, I think we each have begun coming to our own semi-definite conclusions about the series as a whole and our feelings on it. And out of all the thousands and thousands of words that have been written about Lost I think my feelings are, at this point, best summed up by a quote from Noel Murray of The Onion AV Club:

“When you think back on the details of Lost—when you toss them around in your head, as opposed to watching them on the screen—the writers have really answered most of what’s important that they answer, to tell the story they mean to tell. But when Bearded Jack gets a dramatic close-up and shouts, “We have to go back!” it’s only natural for we fans to expect there to be more to that backstory than there ultimately turned out to be. And I could come up with dozens more examples (at least), where the intensity of the tease was out of proportion with the ultimate reveal. But that’s the nature of the show Lindelof and Cuse chose to make. They wanted to make the best use of the commercial breaks and the episodic nature of television, and the result was a show that was more viscerally exciting and entertaining, but often wildly inconsistent as sustained narrative storytelling....What made for an entertaining hour often worked against telling a cohesive six year story.”

I thought the finale itself showcased this quality of Lost almost more than any other episode. It was a hugely entertaining and emotional piece of television, but in the end it spent nearly half its running time on something that had absolutely nothing to do with the main storyline of the show, and it doesn’t really hold up to any close scrutiny as a work of narrative fiction. And thats a shame. Because Lost, when it premiered, seemed to offer a new type of show. An involved complex new type of story that TV had never before really attempted. All the pieces, it seemed to promise, were part of some sort of epic, sprawling narrative whole. And while it was a thrilling and well-done ride, and one that I'm glad I went on, the ultimate irony was that in the end Lost was just television as usual. It may have had a different wrapper - a wonderful, beautifully done, exciting new wrapper - but on the inside it was more of the same old thing.

The show we fell in love with and the things that that show focused on and wanted us to care about - Dharma, the hatch, The Others, infertility, etc. - ultimately had almost nothing to do with the show that we just watched go off the air. And that’s because for all the bells and whistles, for its complex plot and mythology, the show ultimately didn’t know what story it wanted to tell. But that’s the thing with television. Story always takes a backseat to entertainment.

I was just hoping maybe this time it would be different.

-----------

“We don’t start a story unless we know where it’s going” – David Simon

-----------

If The Sopranos finale was like watching a friend get killed in a random drive-by shooting, then the end of Lost was like watching a friend finally succumb to a long battle with cancer. The friend in both cases was story. And the cancer was the American television system.

I don’t blame the creators of Lost for becoming infected with the cancer. They ate right, exercised, had regular check ups. They did everything they could. The fact that 75% of Lost wound up having almost nothing to do with the main plot, and the fact that the story that was ultimately told had at least three seasons of unnecessary padding on it, wasn’t really Darlton’s fault. They did what exactly was expected of them in the paradigm of American television production. And therefore I cant lay all the blame at their feet.

We're also largely to blame.

It was all very much our fault.

The fault of the way we view television as a medium and what we expect from it.

And the fault of the way television in this country is produced.

----------

"Well, we weren’t cynical about having been given ten, 12, 13 hours—whatever we had for any season from HBO. All of that was an incredible gift. The Godfather narrative, even including the third film, the weak one, is like… what? Nine hours? And look how much story they were able to tell. We were getting more than that for each season. So goddamn it, you better have something to say. That sounds really simple, but it’s actually a conversation that I don’t think happens on a lot of serialized drama. Certainly not on American television. I think that a lot of people believe that our job as TV writers is to get the show up as a franchise and get as many viewers, as many eyeballs, as we can, and keep them. So if they like x, give them more of x. If they don’t like y, don’t do as much y."
- David Simon

-----------

Almost since the beginning television has been viewed primarily as a diversion. As merely a source of entertainment. An opiate of the people if you want to get extreme about it. In many cases nothing more than background noise or a distraction. You always hear that watching too much television is bad for you. You never hear that about watching too many movies or reading too many books. And as more and more people I know give up their televisions its becoming harder and harder for me to make a case in its defense. Sure it’s entertaining, but is that entertainment any more than empty calories? Sure candy tastes great but is it essential to my life? Does television add anything of real value?

Now of course all television doesnt need to provide me with rich fullfilling susbstance any more than all movies or all books or all theater or all of anything does. The problem with television isn’t really that mindless shows predicated around simply the idea of providing entertainment exist. It’s that they are all that exists. It’s as if in the film industry every movie released was a potential blockbuster. Not that there’s anything wrong with a big blockbuster if it’s done right. But there is also room for things like Greenberg, or Please Give, or Solitary Man just to name a few very recent examples that have no prayer of ever getting a large audience yet are still made anyway. Television shows like that are few and far between. And even when show creators attempt to create stories like that, they almost always wind up failing in the end.

Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Dexter, Friday Night Lights - there are many great shows on the air now that are striving for excellence. For complex storytelling, for complicated characters, for interesting plots. And they are all on the air even though their audiences might not be large because of the quality of their product. But ultimately each of them will (if they haven’t already) start introducing new characters without knowing what to do with them, begin plotlines that will go nowhere, introduce ideas that they don't know how to effectively develop, and generally do whatever they can to keep people watching whether it ultimately serves the greater story or not. They will eventually become less and less great until such time when their creators finally feel that they have completely run out of ideas or they lose enough of their audience, at which point they will go off the air. How do I know this to be true? Because it always has been. Always. (Almost). Lost seemed to promise that it would be different. But in the end it wasn’t. It ran into the same problems that all teh afermention shows will eventually run into as well despite the brilliance and best intentions of their creators. So what if it’s not the shows? What if it’s the system?

What if there’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the medium?

Look for example at the creation of Lost. An ABC executive wanted to have a show about people trapped on island. That was the whole idea. And then he commissioned people to develop that idea. And thus Lost was born. That story has been told a lot in the past few weeks as an interesting antidote. But it’s really a story that best illustrates the entire problem with American television development. It’s concerned with ideas, not with story. With concept not with content.

So is it any wonder that in an industry predicated on pitching ideas that the supposed most complex narrative of the medium wound up being nothing more than a bunch of interesting ideas strung together?

No one ever stopped to ask what all these ideas mean, what they all add up to, just will they engage the audience. “Should we tell this story” and “what is this story”, were revealed in the end to have been given a backseat to “can we tell this story in an interesting and entertaining way”? And though Lost had a set end date, that didn’t come until the show started hemorrhaging viewers. And even then, the show went on far longer than it needed to tell the story that it ultimately wound up telling. And that’s because when a show is going well no one ever stops to ask should it continue, simply how can it continue. Sure this is a problem in all artistic mediums but it’s most endemic to American TV production.

But what would happen if someone completely rethought the very concept of how a television series is created and produced?

What kind of show would someone make if they knew nothing about how television was supposed to work?

What if there was another way?

------------

“We were not interested in sustaining a universe merely for the sake of continuing to have a show”
-David Simon

-----------

One of my favorite books is Peter Biskand's Down and Dirty Pictures about the Hollywood revolution of the 1970s. A set of circumstances came about to create a major paradigm shift in the film industry and the types of stories that films could tell and how those stories were made. Blockbusters and spectacles and mindless entertainments weren’t abolished (in fact they ultimately became bigger than ever) but at last there was a system by which auteurs could fully realize the unique storytelling potential of the film medium and get these new types of stories made on their own terms and seen by audiences who were interested a better quality and more fulfilling product. And even if the movement ultimately imploded on itself, it paved the way for new types of movies to be made and for audiences to be able to change their expectations of what movies could be and possibly should be. It was a movement that seemed to come out of nowhere and happen almost overnight. But that isn’t entirely the case.

In 1940 a young man named Orson Welles who knew next to nothing about filmmaking decided to get many of his talented theater friends together to create a fictional movie about largely real people and real events. He wanted tell a story in a way that would only be possible in the specific medium of film. And in doing so he wanted to test its storytelling powers. And he wanted to use the tools of the medium in new and interesting ways. And he wanted to do it all on his terms. Combining concepts he had seen elsewhere and also inventing some new ones of his own he combined a fractured narrative structure with subtle acting, nuanced writing, and innovative lighting, camera angles, and visual compositions to tell a story in a way that only film could. It wasn’t a filmed play, or part of a serialized radio-style film anthology, or a film that played like a novel. It was something else entirely. It maximized the storytelling abilities of the still evolving new medium of film. And he had written, produced, and directed it himself all outside the traditional studio system. The movie was of course Citizen Kane, and it is generally accepted to be the greatest movie of all time. A title it holds not just because of its quality but because of the way it rewrote the rules of what a film could be and what the film medium could do. And ultimately the new rules it helped create were an inspiration and a large influence on the film revolution of the 1970’s. The auteurs of 70’s were only able to do what they did because Orson Welles had shown them not only how to do it, but that it could be done at all.

Which brings us, of course, to The Wire.

To anyone has ever seen The Wire (which really, at this point, should be all of you) it doesn’t seem like hyperbole to call it the greatest TV show of all time. In fact it would seem almost heretical to call it anything other than that. Because The Wire, it’s safe to say, is the Citizen Kane of television. It rewrote the rules of what a television show could be. It told a complicated and challenging story that at all times knew exactly where it was going and what it was trying to say. It never introduced a character or a plot point or a question if they didn’t have some ultimate purpose in the larger story at hand. It was a show that demanded a lot of its audience, but always respected that commitment. Because even if some episodes seemed to meander and even if it was somewhat boring at times and even if there wasn’t always a ton of action and things didn’t always make sense, it was always worth watching because everything would always pay off in it end. On The Wire everything mattered. Everything. And that’s because David Simon took advantage of the unique properties of TV as a storytelling medium to tell a new kind of story, one that wasn’t concerned with simply keeping people tuning in and helping them pass their time in an entertaining way. He used the visual nature of the medium and the amount of time that it affords to tell an important and relevant and richly layered story in a way that had never been attempted before on TV. And that sadly, despite appearances to the contrary, has never successfully been attempted since.

And that’s because television doesn’t really allow for shows like The Wire to get made. You cant reduce what The Wire is to a simple pitchable idea. Were it not for HBO and the success of The Corner, The Wire would have never seen the light of day. And of course once it did see the light of day it got terrible ratings and was shunned by the mainstream TV establishment, never winning or even being nominated for a single major Emmy (just like Citizen Kane didn’t win Best Picture). And that’s because it was too far ahead of its time. What The Wire offered isn’t what we demand from our television shows or even what we expect. We watch television shows that pose tons of questions, introduce tons of characters, open up tons of plot points without ever paying any of them off and then we say, "oh well, we can’t expect a television show to answer everything or have purpose behind everything they do or a reason for every decision that they make. It was an entertaining ride and that’s good enough. We can’t expect them to have had it all planned out from the start." But here’s the thing. The Wire has proved that we can. We can demand more from our television shows. There’s no reason they can't deliver on all of their promises. There’s no reason we can’t expect Wire-level greatness from people who are seeming to promise us just that. We've been to the moon. We can go back. We just have to change the way we approach TV. And the way it gets made.

And luckily for us that early 70’s-like window of opportunity to rewrite the rules of an artistic and entertainment medium is now upon us. Because we seem to be at a sort of crossroads now with television. It’s a medium and an industry that is changing at an incredibly rapid pace whether it wants to or not. From HBO and niche cable channels, to the advent of TV on DVD and Hulu and DVR, to independently produced series and series created strictly for the internet, seismic shifts seem to be hitting the industry constantly. And the type of content that is created, the way it is watched, how it is produced, and who it is produced for are things that are changing every day. Shows like 24, and Arrested Development, and, well, Lost would have never seen the light of day on network TV, or any TV really, just 15 years ago. And people forget that something as basic as a show starting its run in January so that it could run uninterrupted was unheard of even five years ago. The way that our grandkids consume television and think about television will likely be radically different than the way we do currently. So while we’re changing television, let's change it for the better. Let’s write better rules.

-----------

“We were building toward the last 15 minutes of the show—and doing so for a long time.”
– David Simon

-----------

Now I hear your complaints. Sometimes it’s good to have TV that doesn’t ask too much of me, you say. I like to have something that’s not too hard on my brain that helps me unwind after a long day. Or that I can watch with my friends. Or that I don’t have to stress about missing an episode of. Or that’s just good old-fashion fun. Well that’s cool. I agree. Television can still be all of those things. The existence of The Godfather didn’t mean that Jaws couldn’t get made. Television will always turn out shows that are entertaining for the sake of simply being entertaining. I’m just looking for a way that it can also make other shows. Shows like The Wire. Because right now there's no apparatus in place for shows like that to get made. And if we have an example like The Wire of what television can be capable of why not have an avenue available for pursuing that?
Also, I’m not just referring to strictly to dramas here. I could just as easily have used as my example of television storytelling perfection the British version of The Office. Or really most BBC comedies. Because we’re not about genre here. We're about making television be as good as it can be. Allowing it to realize its true potential as a medium. We've gone from viewing it as a collecton of vaguely related episodes to, at its best, thinking of it as a collection of loosely related seasons. I'm just looking for a way to allow television to take the next step.

So how does that happen?

Well, obviously it will require having a new structure in place. Guidelines for what these new types of shows should look like and how their creation should approached. Rules if you will. Rules which reality shows and competition shows and game shows and talk shows and all other non-scripted shows are obviously exempt from. And rules which do not have to be followed if network executives and a specific show’s creator BOTH agree that their show would be better served by disobeying them. These rules may not in reality be that practical, enforceable, or even reasonable. But they are rules that I think should be strived for and ones that are good points of reference for changing what think of as a successful television show. And also, they are rules that I have spent an absurd amount of time in my life thinking about. So without further ado I present…

The New Rules of Television (or, What David Simon Would Do)

*All shows must have a predetermined end date

Two of the biggest new shows this season are Glee and Community. Both of which logically should end with the graduation of their characters. But if both are still successful four years from now I would bet my life savings on the fact that the networks and producers of those shows will find a way to keep them going. Even though it makes no logical sense from a story perspective to do so. Because as we’ve established, people that create television view story as secondary to simply having a show. A television show just becomes this self-propagating entity. It keeps producing new ideas simply to sustain itself, whether those ideas will ultimately add up to a larger whole or not. When you don’t have an end date you start writing about the meaning of a character's tattoos. When you do have an end date you can bring in a bunch of new characters from a frigate who ultimate have nothing to do with anything and won’t even be in any way a part of the larger story at hand. Okay, so bad example, but you get my point. With an end date creators can decide what story they are going to tell and make sure everything adds up to a greater whole. Storytelling will get stronger and series will be tighter and more entertaining without all the needless filler and plot threads and characters that go nowhere. The value of this rule seems pretty obvious and the number of shows that would have benefited from it endless. And now that Lost has done it there's precedent for it. It’s been proven to be something networks are willing to consider. As they should. Because it makes as much sense for them as it does for show creators and audiences. As the ABC learned with Lost setting an end date kept the audience from fleeing in droves. And it kept the show relevant and it's quality high. And by maintaining the audiences of their existing shows it means that the networks will have less schedule holes to fill and therefore less new shows they have to develop and promote each season. In fact promotion cost across the board would go down because it’s cheaper to keep someone watching something they like than it is to try and convince them to watch something new.

Of course in this new system shows will end sooner than they likely would have otherwise, but since we live in a world now where nearly all new shows get canceled in one year or less, in the end having a television schedule full of somewhat limited-run yet successful and high quality shows that will likely do well in DVD sales is surely preferable and more profitable than a small handful of long running hit shows that slowly lose their audiences over time mixed in with a whole bunch of forgettable and quickly cancelled filler.

Seems like a win for everyone.

Now naturally all involved are going to want their shows to run for, like, 20 years and therefore claim that that’s how much story they have to tell. Which leads us to....

*No show’s run is to exceed four years unless a strong overwhelmingly compelling reason can be given as to why it should

Four years is not just the length of high school and college (usually) but it’s also a presidential term. And, if you do 24 episodes in a season, it's also almost exactly 100 hours. I can’t think of many stories that would need longer than that to be effectively told. I also can’t think of any show that wouldn’t have been better served by lasting four seasons or less. Sure I still enjoy watching The Office six seasons in, but it would have been an infinitely better show if it had ended after four. My life wouldn’t be in any way lessened if I hadn’t been able to experience Michael Scott working for Sabre. And if there are any lose ends or the creators feel overwhelming compelled to return to the characters and the material they can always make a movie, ala The Office Christmas Special. But even then be careful. Those almost never work. For example, there is at least a 90% chance the Arrested Development movie, if it ever gets made, will be woefully disappointing.

Now sure, The Wire was five seasons, but they would have been one of those special cases. They had a strong and compelling reason to have a fifth season. Even if it wasn’t their strongest season it attempted to tackle topics that still needed to be addressed to give the full picture of that city and the reasons for why it was the way it was.

And also the exemption allows for shows like Law and Order which are completely self-contained. Not every show has to be as serialized story. There still room on television for more episodic fare. We’re not trying to put an end to The Towering Inferno or Smokey and the Bandit. We’re just trying to create a world The Conversation or Dog Day Afternoon can also get made.

*All shows should only be the number of episodes that is necessary to tell that season’s story

With there now being both the cable and broadcast models I think we are all on board with the idea of television seasons of varying length. This idea seems pretty self explanatory in both its purpose and practicality, and in fact its pretty much already being implemented. I guess the only major change would be with the networks and their marriage to the idea of a twenty-something episode season. Time to let that go you old fogies. Sure you’d have to produce a greater number of overall series to fill your year-round schedule, but you’re already basically doing that now anyway. And if The BBC can do it so can you.

(Okay, okay, I realize that’s an apples to oranges argument but this piece is already running WAY too long so let’s just move on)

*Every season of a show must be shot in full before airing, including the first season.

It's key to mention here that an entire series doesn’t need to be written entirely in full before ever airing. Just each individual season should be filmed before that particular season begins to air. At the end of each season a show’s creator can assess things that aren’t working like he or she thought they would. They may want to change their mind about certain choices or certain elements. New ideas or ways to tell the story might occur to them. Television is a collaborative endeavor and one that for various reason needs to have some flexibility built into it. I get that.
But I do think that always filming an entire season before airing is valuable. If reshoots or tweeks are needed, fine, but if nothing else, that kind of commitment and faith by a network and a creator in a specific vision would certainly change television; likely for the better.

First of all, if someone had to make that kind of commitment to something they would think a lot longer about what it is they want to produce. They’d be less hesitant to put crap on the air. Like a GM in sports, people in television often make decisions with short term interests in mind even if those short term interests might be to the ultimate detriment of long term whole. I propose we call this concept the “Tail Section Survivors Theory” (Okay so maybe the “tailies” weren’t a detriment to Lost but ultimately they served absolutely no purpose whatsoever. It’s pretty much impossible to argue otherwise.)

And secondly with every show automatically getting a full season pick up writers can make smarter more long range, big-picture type decisions without having to constantly worry about simply keeping an audience tuning in. The worst thing that happens is that their show gets cancelled, and even then, since it will already all exist on film it can live on on DVD and lead to future jobs if it’s good enough. This also obviously benefits audiences and it benefits networks as well by allowing them to get at least some sort of return on their investment even for shows they wind up cancelling.

Also, by taping entire seasons in advance of their airings show runners wouldn’t be so susceptible to the whims of fans. In the age of the internet this is becoming increasingly problematic. As Chuck Klosterman has said, I do think that there’s something very detrimental about trying to be a creative person and constantly interfacing with the audience you’re creating for. And thats because listening to too many opinions and trying to please too many people never leads to anything good. You know what was created by committee? The atomic bomb. And I think we all know how that worked out. It bombed. (Cue rimshot)

So with Nikki and Paolo, for example, who gives a fuck if people don’t like them? If they are integral to the story you want to tell then it’ll all pay off in the end. If they aren’t integral enough to the story you want to tell then you shouldn’t have introduced them in the first place. I feel sure back when Season Two of The Wire was airing people on the internet bitched about the focus shifting from the drug trade to the dock workers. But David Simon didn’t give a fuck. Because establishing that world was key to the larger story he wanted to tell. Nikki and Paolo were the producers throwing ideas at the wall and seeing what sticks. I would say they didn’t have the power of the conviction but the real problem is they didn’t have any convictions. Only ideas.

Which brings us back to my original point- the supremacy of story.

(For someone so obsessed with story I’ve had a pretty hard time creating and maintaining a thru line)

----------

“Q: I’ve always wondered how much of a character’s ultimate arc was known to you and how early it was known. For instance, did (SPOILER) always have to die? Did (SPOLIER) always have to become (SPOILER)? Was it just built into their DNA as characters?

A: It was. It was built in. You have to know where you’re going and one of the things that television in particular, more than film, certainly more than prose, suffers from is that there’s so much money in the product that once you get an audience, once you achieve an audience, your job is to stay in that audience ad nauseam.”
– an interview with David Simon

----------

Now I know most of these rules will never be implemented or never even considered. And not just because no one reads this blog. But because the central problem with television, as with pretty much all things in this country, is money. The profit motive runs TV perhaps more so than any other artistic medium. And if the system they have in place now is able to produce the profits they desire then why mess with it?

Well because as I’ve said the old structure of how TV is produced is and consumed is changing radically. Whether they like it or not. And when the old rules no longer apply, its best to fall back on the oldest rule around – make a quality product and people will buy it. Now how to make that quality product or even what it should look like is certainly open to debate. It’s a discussion I’ve been having a lot this week when talking with friends about the Lost finale. And a debate that, as this insanely long blog post should demonstrate, I’m pretty passionate about. I’ve laid out my ideas here, but certainly my proposals don't have to be the ultimate answer. Nor, maybe, should they be. They certainly aren't or flawless or even necessarily realistic. In the end, they're simply a different way of thinking about television. They're the difference between looking at television as a story that you write as you go, and looking at it as a story you write largely in full and then slowly release in segments. The second method isn’t a perfect system, but it seems to me inherently better than the first. And if it seems impossible and radical and heretical then that's because we’ve never really looked at television that way. But if we want to hope for more Wires, more satisfying Losts, less of that gnawing feeling that the time we invest in our favorite shows is time that’s not being well spent, time that’s not being respected, time that could be better spent elsewhere, time that’s ultimately for naught, then these new rules would make a great jumping-off point. A great starting point for important discussion. A discussion about what we want out of our television programs.

Because ultimately it all goes back to the opening two quotes. To David Simon saying that the ultimate goal has to be story. And to Chuck Lorre admitting he has no idea what story he is trying to tell. And although we may disagree about how to tell stories using the medium of television, I think we can all agree with David Simon that stories are what it should be all about.

And also that Two and Half Men is a fucking terrible show.

Worst. Oscar. Telecast. Ever.

2010-03-08T22:30:00.003-05:00

Hey Oscars you just had your best telecast ever, what are you going to do now? Well apparently the answer was blow the whole thing up and start from scratch. Because one year after the show's artistic highpoint, the new Oscar producers decided not to follow the perfect blueprint that had been laid out for them, but to instead totally overhaul what was barely, if at all, broken. Why present the awards in a logical way that tells a story and is able to rapidly fire off several like-themed categories in quick succession when you can hand them out haphazardly with no rhyme or reason whatsoever with a ton of dead air as presenters walk on and off stage? And why have a touching segment where all the acting nominees are honored by past winners in their category, when you can have random people of widely varying degrees of connection talk about only the lead acting nominees and then have the tributes to the supporting acting nominees being nothing more than ridiculously long clips packages that in several cases give away the endings to their movies? Why give out the Lifetime Achievement Award on the telecast when you can do an overlong tribute to someone with no connection at all to the Oscars? And why perform the nominated songs when you can have people from So You Think You Can Dance do interpretive dance routines to the nominated scores? Because that’s never not been a good idea.

I could go on, but I just don’t have the energy. I love the Oscars more than anything and every year I feel like I have to defend them against the usual “overlong, boring, pointless, etc.” critics. And I always read the same negative reviews and am baffled as to how these people could have been watching the same wonderful show that I was. So it brings me absolutely no joy to say that the Oscars last night were a boring, overlong, terrible train wreck of an awards show. And if I'm saying that about them then what hope is there for anyone else? It’s like when Lyndon Johnson said he knew he had lost the country when he lost Cronkite. (And yes I did just compare myself to Walter Cronkite). Even some incredibly deserving and popular acting winners and one all-time great speech couldn’t save the proceedings. And those things are usually all I need. All the producers needed to do was just stay out of their own way and the show was perfectly lined up to be a massive success. And that's the biggest shame of it all. Not only did they have deserving winners but they had to know they were going to have one of the biggest audiences ever. It’s not every year you have Avatar, Up, District 9, and The Blind Side. They didn’t need to do anything other than not fuck up. And yet they did just that at every turn. They lost The Masters on a gimme putt. And now I have to wait a whole nother year for a shot at watching a decent telecast.

(And let me just say now that if Adam Shankman and Bill Mechanic are brought back as producers again next year, so help me God, I might have to write a very sternly worded letter to The President of the Academy’s personal assistant, or whoever opens his mail.)

Anyway, on to the details of and thoughts about the abomination that was:

*Morgan Freeman’s daughter is named Morgana Freeman? How did I never know this before? That’s amazing. Well done New James Earl Jones.

*Hey, what is Meryl Streep doing at the Oscars?!?

*I was just thinking, how can the Oscars get more gay? And then I saw the Neil Patrick Harris song and dance number.

(No offense to NPH, but do we all love him so much now that we’re not going to call bullshit on that thing? He did the best he could with it, but it was painfully unfunny and had absolutely nothing to do with anything. It wasn’t quite Snow White dancing with Rob Lowe but it wasn’t as far off as most people are pretending it was.)

*You know what the kids are into? Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin doing awkwardly silted stand up. Seriously, whose idea was this co-hosting thing? Steve Martin was great hosting by himself. Why pair him with someone with very limited live comedy experience. Hell, why pair him with anyone? And if you’re trying to make your show hipper and more mainstream, why Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin? What, were Dan Aykroyd and Christopher Walken not available? It never made any sense and it played out about as terribly as I thought it would. Just let Steve do it by himself next year okay and we’ll forget this whole thing ever happened. No really; we will. Trust me.
(Wow, I’m bitter. I’ll stop soon I promise.)

*Hey Oscars, Lawrence Welk called and he wants his bumper music back.
(You know what else the kids are into? Lawrence Welk jokes.)

*“That damn Helen Mirren” FTW

*“Uber Bingo” FTCENSW (For The Completely Expected Not-So Win)

*They’re not having performances of the nominated songs this year? What, was Beyonce busy?

*Wow, The Academy is really committed to this “Paris 36 is a real movie” ruse. They filmed a clip for it and everything.

*District 9 was inspired by events in South Africa? I thought it was inspired by “I couldn’t make Halo”.

*A Conversation
Sigourney Weaver to the Avatar Art Direction winners as she escorted them off the stage: “Hey remember that time when we just met for the first time right now?”

*Okay, playing “Don’t You Forget About Me" as the entrance music for Anthony Michael Hall, Macaulay Culkin and Ally Sheedy was unnecessarily cruel don’t you think?

*So just to recap:
Year of Marlon Brando’s death - no tribute
Year of Katherine Hepburn’s death - no tribute
Year of John Hughes’ death – seven minute long three-part tribute

Sure, it was a moving tribute and it made me want to go rewatch a bunch of John Hughes’ movies, but the man was never nominated for even a single Oscar. His tribute had absolutely no business being on that show. It was an inexplicable, unnecessary, and overlong bit of pandering to mainstream America that the Oscars should be better than. What’s next, a salute to Nora Ephron? Leave that shit to the People’s Choice awards. That was definitely a low point in my years of Oscar watching.

“Hey, Lauren Bacall I know you’ve waited fifty years to get your lifetime achievement award but we’re gonna have to limit your acceptance speech to clips from an off-site pre-taped dinner party so that we can make room for Judd Nelson to talk about what it was like to work on The Breakfast Club.” Speaking of which…

*Wow, Judd Nelson was available to come to the Oscars? Who would’ve thunk it?

*Damn it! The Coen Brothers screenplay snippet featured the word “equanimity”. I had “lugubrious” in my “Which Pretentious Word Will Be Featured In The A Serious Man Dialogue Snippet” office pool.

*You know what would be hilarious and unexpected? If one year Ben Stiller came out dressed in normal clothes and didn’t act like a total moron.
*Wow, major upset. Charlize Theron introduces a movie that’s not District 9. Did they choose her for Precious (based on the novel Push by Sapphire) because she’s African American?

*Something I actually said in all seriousness – “Why is Robin Williams presenting Best Supporting Actress? Where the hell is last year’s Best Supporting Actor winner? Was he too busy or something?"

*Sure Farrah Fawcett was missing, but to me the bigger question is where was Demi Moore’s career in that In Memoriam montage?

*Is James Cameron’s wife wearing blue on purpose? Please tell me she is.

*The Cove is the first Oscar nomination and win for Fisher Stevens? How is that possible?

*I didn’t see Burma VJ, but if its anything like Burma BJ then lemme just say that it got robbed.

*Hey, it’s Keanu Reeves introducing The Hurt Locker. I knew Point Break would someday be relevant at the Oscars.

*“Stay tuned for special guests”. More special than Tyler Perry? Not possible.

*Jeff Bridges: Now officially an Achiever

*It may have been my worst year ever for picks, but at least I won the “What’s the Forest Whitaker-Sandra Bullock Connection” contest almost instantly.

*Holy fucking spoiler alert Peter Sarsgaard!

*Okay Sandra, whatever I may think of the merits of your award, your speech was outstanding. Really. One of the best I can remember. Funny and touching and well written, but not overly written. And when you thanked your husband it was one of the realest moments I can recall ever seeing at the Oscars. The exact opposite of Mo’Nique’s speech which seemed like it had been test-marketed and rehearsed for weeks. So well done Sandra. Since you got an Oscar for in essence being a nice likable person, you at least came off exceedingly nice and likeable. I’m happy for you.

(At the same time – mothers never get thanked?? Don’t we have a whole day set aside for that very thing?)

*I was really praying that Barbara Streisand was going to follow up “The time has come…” with “for James Cameron to win a second Best Director Oscar!”

*Congrats Kathryn Bigelow. You’re now officially the best working female director who didn’t also ruin the Godfather saga.

*So the Best Director race really turned out the exact opposite of the 2008 Democratic Party Primary race didn’t it?

*Whoa there Tom Hanks, you didn't even have the condom on yet…

*Although part of me thinks we’ll look at The Hurt Locker in 50 years the way people look at Marty today, I’m certainly happy it won, and it was far preferable to the alternative, even if for only symbolic reasons. It was a good win for women, for art, and for the movie industry as a whole. May the art house movie live to see another day!

Oscar Preview '10

2010-03-04T19:55:00.002-05:00

In terms of unimpressive non-achievements, the fact that I have never lost an Oscar pool that I have entered is perhaps the one that I am perhaps most proud of. And now I'm here to share with you, for the first time, a complete Oscar ballot of mine. Get your snacks close at hand, use the bathroom now, tell your family you love them; it's gonna be a long 6,000 words.

The Short Categories (Documentary, Live Action, and Animated Shorts)
Okay I know this is where competitive pools are won and lost. But unlike years past I haven’t seen any of these nominees nor do I plan it. I just don't have the time. And the truth is, seeing the nominees in no way helps predict a winner. Because these are an absolute crapshoot. Often times the nominee that seems least likely to win prevails. And there is never a rhyme or reason or predictable voting pattern to these awards. So fuck it. Just draw a name out of a hat or something. I’m going with The Last Truck because it seems the most timely, A Matter of Loaf and Death because it’s by Nick Park, and The Door because I always like to root for movies about doors.

Best Visual Effects
Hmm wow, tough one. Hard to say really. The visual effects in Avatar were pretty decent I suppose. I guess I’ll go with that then.

Will Win/Should Win: Avatar

Best Art Direction
Here’s the thing. Everyone assumes that even if Avatar doesn’t win Best Picture it’s gonna clean up in all the secondary awards. But other than visual effects it’s hardly a lock in any other category. And other than that category and this one I don’t know where else it’s even the clear runaway favorite.

Will Win: Avatar
Should Win: Avatar

Best Sound Mixing & Best Sound Editing
So now just completely ignore that previous entry because here’s where Avatar picks up another two easy Oscars. Not because they are necessarily warranted or unwarranted, but because nobody really knows exactly what these categories are or how to judge them. So considering there’s no musical or music related movie in the race this year, and considering that The Hurt Locker is a pretty quiet movie, I think Avatar is the best bet since voters have history of just choosing the nominee that is the best movie and has the most sound. Because if it’s got the most sound then it probably had the most editing and mixing involved in that sound. So in this case that means Avatar. Because why not?

(That should really be Avatar’s Oscar campaign slogan - “Avatar. Because why not?”)

Will Win: Avatar (but don’t sleep on The Hurt Locker)
Should Win: Who knows

Best Cinematography
Okay after saying that Avatar wasn’t going to win anything I've now picked it in three straight categories. The lesson, as always, is not to listen to anything I say. But as much as I would like to pick against it here, even Avatar haters have to admit that it LOOKED amazing. And maybe that wasn’t the cinematography’s doing per se, but when looking at this category on a ballot a voter is going to ask themself “which of these movies looked the best”, and the answer to that question is for most people going to be Avatar. I‘ve seen many other pundits picking The Hurt Locker, and it could easily win, but I think its herky-jerky “you are there” camera work feels pretty standard issue and played out for that type of movie at this point. And the Academy is not going to give a semi-major Oscar to a Harry Potter movie. And Inglorious Basterds doesn’t really stand out from a cinematography perspective. Which leaves The White Ribbon. Which is the most deserving choice. Its camera work was distinct and beautiful and (film nerd alert!) its visual compositions really helped to tell the story and give the movie its tone and feel. But if the Academy didn’t give the legendary Roger Deakins an award for his black and white work on The Man Who Wasn’t There then they’re not giving some no name an award for his black and white work on a foreign film that no one saw.

Will Win: Avatar
Should Win: The White Ribbon

Best Editing
Alright, here's where we (I) actually do start picking against the Avatar consensus. I bet everyone’s going to pick it here, but I’m not so sure. See, The Hurt Locker is seemingly the Best Picture favorite at this point. And there’s a well-known link between Best Editing and Best Picture. In fact there’s only been six times in the past seventeen years that the two awards havent corresponded. And of those six times, most have either been for movies with iconic editing (Saving Private Ryan, The Matrix, The Bourne Ultimatum) movies with iconic editors (The Aviator – Thelma Shoonmaker) or movies that edited together several disparate stories into a unified whole (Traffic). And since three of those awards also corresponded with Best Director or the favorite to win Best Director (Saving Private Ryan, Traffic, The Aviator) there seems to be a correlation in voters’ minds between the best directed movie and the best edited one. And since no matter what happens with Best Picture Kathyrn Bigelow is the HEAVY favorite to win Best Director (we’ll get to that), it would seem that The Hurt Locker is a better bet to win Best Editing than Avatar. And that’s as it should be. Because for all of Avatar’s considerable achievements would you say its editing was really one of them? Yeah, neither would voters. I think.

(Oh yeah, and that sixth time that Best Editing and Best Picture haven’t matched up recently? (Wait for it)…Black Hawk Down. A war movie that creates its sense of chaos and tension largely through its editing. Sound familiar?)

Will Win/Should Win: The Hurt Locker

Best Costume Design
Colleen Atwood and Sandy Powell are the names here. (You know you’re an Oscar nerd when you think of costume designers as having name recognition.) Colleen Atwood won for Chicago, which on the surface seems very similar to Nine. But everyone hated Nine, and there’s sort of a been-there done-that quality to its costumes. And we’ll get back to Sandy Powell in a minute. Which leaves The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, Bright Star, and Coco Before Chanel. No one saw The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. Although I’d love the underrated Bright Star to get some love, its costumes are a little dowdy to win here. Plus no one saw it. Which leaves Coco Before Chanel. A movie about a fashion designer! Its gotta be the favorite right? Well that brings us back to Sandy Powell. Eight-time nominee. Associated with a more well know movie. And most crucial of all, her movie deals with royalty. Jackpot! In Costume Design, royalty trumps all. So as they always say - when in doubt go with the movie about royalty. It’s an Oscar pool rule. Look it up.
(editors note: Actually, you can’t. Because Andy just made it up)

Will Win: Young Victoria
Should Win: Hell if I know

Best Makeup
I’m pretty sure Il Divo is a made up movie so it can’t win. And Young Victoria doesn’t have anything as flashy as the work that was done on Eric Bana. He was so unrecognizable in Star Trek that it almost seemed like he could act. Maybe those makeup people could work with Orlando Bloom.

Will Win/Should Win: Star Trek
(And if the winners don’t say “live longer and prosper” at some point in their acceptance speech I’m gonna be very disappointed)

Best Score
It looks like before the run of the show is even done Lost will be able to boast an Oscar winner in its ranks. Because the creator of those occasionally comically overbearing strings and assorted strange sounds that make up the soundtrack of Lost is gonna waltz to an easy and well-deserved Oscar for his work on Up. In terms of people involved with Lost most likely to someday win an Oscar, I would have put Michael Giacchino several spots below JJ Abrams and Terry O’Quinn and about 80,000 spots above Emilie de Ravin. Just goes to show you never know. But good for him because Up deserves as many Oscars as it can get. And anything that might lead to the world potentially getting to see more of Dug the dog is something I’m all for.

Will Win/Should Win: Up

Best Song
Fun Fact: “The Weary Kind” was co-written by Ryan Bingham, which is the same name as George Clooney’s character in Up in the Air. Pretty crazy right? What are the odds?

And that’s not all.

Another nominee, “Loin de Paname” from Paris 36, has lyrics by Frank Thomas. I’m assuming that’s the famous baseball player Frank Thomas, but I haven’t bothered to verify that. If only there was an entire mini-industry devoted just to covering the Academy Awards and could tell us these things. Alas…

Anyway, Ryan Bingham the character is probably going home empty handed, but Ryan Bingham the person getting himself a real life Oscar is perhaps the surest bet of the night. His song was the most integral to the plot of its film and it is also by far the best song of the nominees. Which is good because now not only will we be able to declare a clear winner in the Battle of the Ryan Binghams, but it will mean that T-Bone Burnett will assume the title of Coolest Named Person to Ever Win an Oscar, narrowly edging out Juicy J and Crunchy Black.

Will Win/Should Win: "The Weary Kind"

Animated Feature
Yeah another Oscar for Up! That being said, don’t sleep on Fantastic Mr. Fox. I know it’s not nominated for Best Picture like Up is, but it’s got a ton of support. And there have been upsets in this category before. And Fox has a more high-profile director and a bigger name cast who are all well-respected and even beloved in the industry. I’m not saying I think it WILL happen, I’m just saying I wouldn’t be shocked if it did. I would however be upset.

Will Win/Should Win: Up

Best Documentary
I’m not as educated on this one as I should be, having only seen Food Inc., but I feel pretty confident that it’s going to win. There’s a strong history of this award going to the most high-profile and most widely seen nominee. And that’s definitely Food Inc. this year. Other than The Cove I’ve never even heard of any of the other nominees. And everyone I know who has seen The Cove says that although it’s good, it’s very disturbing. Almost too disturbing. And although it’s about an important issue, it’s not about one that affects our lives as clearly as the food industry. Enough people have said things about Food Inc. like “It changed my life” that I don’t dare bet against it here. Sure Super Size Me didn’t win, but Food Inc. is infinitely more eye- opening, powerful, and better made. So I say it crushes The Cove just like some fecal matter filled beef made from steroid injected inhumanly slaughtered cows. Which incidentally you probably just ate.
(Nausea. It’s hilarious!)

Will Win/Should Win: Food Inc.

Best Foreign Language Film
Here's another category where I'm not as educated as I should be. (Not the best of years for me.) Of these nominees the only one I’ve seen is The White Ribbon. And it’s great. It’s critically acclaimed. It feels important and lasting and memorable. And so all I know for sure about this category is that the winner won’t be The White Ribbon.

See, the thing with this category is that in order to vote in it you have to have seen all of the nominees in theaters. And not just any theaters, but at special Academy screenings. And so anyone who is actually still active in the industry, or, you know, has a life, isn’t voting in this category. So when choosing a winner for Best Foreign Language Film ask yourself “which nominee would a group of retired 75-90 year old Hollywood-types with a lot of time on their hands like”? There’s a reason that in the past seven years three of the winners were about people dealing with death and two others were about the Holocaust. And true The White Ribbon is in black and white (just like they used to make em!) and deals with the rise of fascism, but it's also three hours long, slower than molasses, and doesn’t have much of a plot or things that “happen” per se. And its artsy as hell. This is not what old people are into. Plus the Palme d’Or winner NEVER wins this category. So The White Ribbon is out. But beyond that it’s anyone’s guess. I want to say Un Prophete, since it’s the only other nominee here with name recognition and mass critical acclaim. But its gonna have a hard time fending off an Israeli movie about Arab-Hebrew relations, a movie about the systematic abuse of women and the rise of socialism in Peru in the 80’s, and a sweeping epic about social and political upheaval in Argentina. I’m gonna go with Un Prophete, but Ajami wouldn’t shock me. Nor would any of the other nominees. Except The White Ribbon. (That was the sound of The White Ribbon producers preparing their acceptance speech).

Will Win: Un Prophete?
Should Win: The White Ribbon (as uneducated an opinion as that might be)

Best Adapted Screenplay
I have a few questions about Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire. First of all, if the novel is called Push then why is the movie called Precious? Also who the hell is Sapphire and where has she been this entire awards season? And what are the odds that someone would name themselves Sapphire and NOT be a stripper? .002%? Even knowing for a fact that Diablo Cody was at one point a stripper, if you had me guess which recent Oscar-affiliated writer was a stripper I would have put everything I own on Sapphire. And lastly, is the Adapted Screenplay nomination for Precious the most redundantly worded Oscar nomination of all time? I cant imagine anything ever has or will top - “Geoffrey Fletcher for Precious: Based on the novel Push by Sapphire from Push by Sapphire”. Can we all just agree to cut off the last part of that statement on Oscar night?

Anyway, Up in the Air is winning here. And thank God. It was looking like my favorite movie of the year was going to get shut out, but luckily it ran up against a pretty weak field of nominees. I mean I love Nick Hornby and I love An Education, but outside of that, none of the rest of these are that noteworthy. District 9 is a fine film, but the screenplay is nothing to write home about. And as good as the screenplay for In the Loop is we can’t give it an award until David Mamet admits that Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci and Tony Roche are simply pseudonyms he came up with. And lastly, I have strict rules against giving Oscars to people named after precious metals, no pun intended. (Editor's note: none achieved). Yes I realize Sapphire herself isn’t actually nominated, but just roll with me here.

So it makes me tremendously happy to be able to tell Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner to prepare for a well-deserved Oscar win. And for a pretty awkward and strange acceptance speech considering they just met for the first time a few weeks ago. I can’t wait.

Will Win/Should Win: Up in the Air

Best Original Screenplay
The "Hurt Locker for Best Screenplay" movement seems to be gaining steam, which is great because I’m sure it was very hard to write a script where people stand around not talking. All that pithy non-repartee must have been a real slog to come up with. But you know what I think would be even better? If we gave Quentin Tarantino an Oscar instead. Come on, you know his speech is gonna be outstandingly over-the-top. He’s gonna make Cuba Gooding Jr. look calm and contained by comparison. You gotta be rooting for that. And then there’s his script itself. It's brilliant in terms of plot and structure, but mostly in terms of dialogue. Holy shit that dialogue is good. It’s funny, memorable, smart, and true. Plus it’s in like 18 languages (I might have made that up). What more could you want? Well other than boring people standing around silently diffusing bombs.

Will Win: Inglorious Basterds (barely)
Should Win: Inglorious Basterds

Best Supporting Actor
I’ve talked about my love for Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds previously so no need to rehash it all here. But just know that in any other year Woody Harrleson would win in a walk. In The Messenger he’s magnificent. He’s wonderful. He’s revelatory. And he doesn’t have even the slightest prayer of winning. Nor should he. Because this isn’t any other year. It’s Christoph Waltz’s. We’re just living in it.

(As a side note: would it have killed them to give Zack Galifinakis a nomination? I mean I know comedy isn’t valid and all, but he essentially was the highest grossing comedy of the year. And Hollywood types do love grosses don’t they? No one other than Christoph Waltz was winning this year anyway, what would the harm have been in throwing a harmless nomination Zack’s way? Matt Damon with a silly accent really needed an Oscar nod over arguably the breakout and most talked about performance of the year? Really?)

Will Win/Should Win: Christoph Waltz

Best Supporting Actress
I can guarantee you three things about the Oscars this year:

1.) Mo'Nique will win Best Supporting Actress

2.) She will take at least 10 minutes walking up to the stage

3.) Her speech will be praised by every media outlet and person you know, yet it will in actuality be pretty standard issue, unmemorable and lacking in any real substance

Look, I have no problem with Mo'Nique winning. She gave the best supporting actress performance this year and it’s hard to even make a case for any of the other nominees. Sure the fact that Mo'Nique has an Oscar will seem ridiculous in a few years but no moreso than a slew of other people who hold that distinction. And she’ll be carrying on a proud tradition of people who won an Oscar for basically one powerhouse scene (Beatrice Straight, Jennifer Connelly, George Clooney, Jennifer Hudson). Hell, probably my all-time favorite supporting actress performance (Kathy Bates in Primary Colors) is a one-note caricature that is redeemed by one powerhouse knock-out stunner of a scene. So I get it. But I just think Mo'Nique is getting a little over-praised. Much like the film itself, her performance up until the very end is so over the top and melodramatic and completely un-nuanced that it not only doesn’t seem realistic but it almost seems laughable. It’s not surprising that the group who once gave Crash their highest prize would seem tone deaf on issues of race and class in America, but here’s a hint for them: If a movie has both Oprah and Tyler Perry attached to it it’s probably not going to be an accurate or deep and probing look into any sort of reality that real people actually deal with. Unless of course they live in an overblown Lifetime movie/misery porn. I’m pretty sure no one is as purely and unequivocally monstrous as Mo'Nique’s character, but heaven forbid you ask audiences to accept shades of grey. (I really need to stop watching so much of The Wire. It's making me ask too much of my entertainment.) Anyway, it would be interesting to see what the reaction to Mo'Nique’s performance, and Mo'Nique herself would be if she had any legitimate competition. But while all the other nominees are fine (well, Maggie Gyllenhaal is badly miscast but whatever) none of them turned in work that I would even remotely classify as “Oscar worthy”. So Mo'Nique it is.
Whatever.

Will Win/Should Win: Mo'Nique

Best Actor
As (almost) always it’s a pretty strong year for Best Actor nominees. No slouches in this bunch. But Jeff Bridges has had this thing locked up for months. And I’m cool with that. It’s an “Oscar” performance. It’s a great character that feels both personal and a bit of a stretch for Jeff Bridges. He’s got some killer scenes and killer moments and he even does his own signing. Plus he’s well-liked and overdue, for what that's worth. And it’s hard for me to say he doesn’t give the best performance of the lot. But. If I had seen A Single Man back when I wrote my Best of 2009 entry, Colin Firth would have made that list for sure. He’s completely unrecognizable, and I don’t mean just in a physical sense. It’s just a stunning transformative piece of work, and the scene when he finds out that his lover is dead is by far the most underrated scene of the year. It’s magnificent. Still, passing the Best Actor torch from DDL to Sean Penn to Colin Firth doesn’t seem quite right. He just doesn’t have that Best Actor heft yet. As soon as he makes more than one movie of substance maybe it’ll be different. Maybe that seems silly and unfair, but that’s how these things work. It’s Jeff Bridges' turn, and there’s nothing Colin or anyone else can do about that. And oh yeah. Mr. Bridges gives a pretty damn great performance himself.

Will Win: Jeff Bridges
Should Win: (tie) Jeff Bridges & Colin Firth

Best Actress
It’s time to face facts. And one of those facts is that Sandra Bullock is about to win an Academy Award. And not just any Academy Award, but one for the The Blind Side. A movie so insipid and pandering and simplistic and insultingly reductive of complex social issues that of course everyone on my flight home from Houston absolutely loved it. (Oh how I love being a East Coast elitist asshole…) What separates The Blind Side from Remember the Titans, or Glory Road, or The Express, or Pride or any other Disney-fied "based on a true story" feel-good sports movie that makes complicated racial issues palpable and safe enough for white people who find Obama "too black" I don’t know. Well other than the fact that it's nominated for two major Academy Awards. And it's going to win one of them. Which means that future generations of Oscar completeists like myself are going to have to sit through it and think "Really? Really?!?" Which is a shame because I do like Sandra Bullock. She seems genuinely lovely and she's an underrated actress who is in and of herself not undeserving of awards recognition. And her work in The Blind Side is quite good. But sometimes the quality of your movie has to be taken into account. Right? It’s like in sports how the MVP of the league has to come from a winning team unless there are legitimately no other contenders and voters have no choice. Which is pretty much the case here. Helen Mirren is out because no one saw her movie and she just won a few years ago. And Gabourey Sidibe is out because the stuffy old white fogies of the Academy aren’t giving Best Actress to an overweight no-name African American woman. Maybe Best Supporting Actress but not Best Actress. They just aren't. (It's not right, but it’s true. So don’t blame me; like Ben Foster I'm just the messenger). Which leaves Meryl Streep and Carey Mulligan. Everyone is saying that Meryl is Sandra's biggest competition, and that may be, but I really don't see her winning. People didn’t really like her movie and it's barely more respectable than The Blind Side. Plus she's only in half of it. And I don’t know that her performance, as great as it is, ever truly transcends the level of impersonation. And other than one scene, it’s kind of a lightweight role, lacking in big "Oscar moments". For anyone else I could maybe see them wining with that part, but we grade Meryl on a different scale and expect more from her than she gave us in Julie & Julia. The movement to get her an Oscar this year feels a lot like the movement to get Martin Scorsese an Oscar for The Aviator. Sure she's overdue, but we've waited this long, why settle for giving her an award for something that’s merely good, when we know she’s capable of transcendence. I just don't sense that voter's hearts are really into Meryl this year no matter how much people might be saying otherwise. Which leaves us with Carey Mulligan. Her movie is nominated for Best Picture and its infinitely more respectable than The Blind Side. She carries pretty much the whole thing herself. She's young and attractive, which if you don’t think is a MAJOR factor then clearly you haven't ever looked at a list of the past winners of Best Actress. And she's British which is a major voting bloc within The Academy. And oh yeah, she also gives the best performance of the year. She has several emotional outbursts/"Oscar scenes". She has a complex role that has nuance and depth that other actresses could easily screw up, yet she handles it with aplomb. But sadly if Meryl is Julie Christie, then I think Carey is Ellen Page. She's too young and unproven, so great as she might be, voters feel like they can wait and will be able to vote for her again in the future. Which leaves Sandra Bullock as Marion Cotillard. But just know this. If someone upsets her its going to be Carey Mulligan not Meryl Streep. And Im rooting for it to happen. That's why my Oscar night chant is going to be "Remember Adrien Brody".

Will Win: Sandra Bullock
Should Win: Carey Mulligan

Best Director
Kathryn Bigelow is winning here. She’s won nearly all the relevant precursor awards, she’s got momentum, she’s the director of the Best Picture favorite, people seem to like her, and the fact that a woman has never won before is certainly working in her favor. Plus James Cameron has already won before and he’s a massive douche bag that no one in Hollywood likes. But here’s the thing. He took 11 years out of his life to pursue a strange and singular personal passion project. He invented entirely new technology just to make his vision a reality. He waited until it was possible for him to do it entirely on his terms. He made the decision to make it 3D back when 3D was seen as some sort of dated novelty gimmick. And he made it political and relevant and topical when there was absolutely no commercial reason to do so. And he took what on paper must have seemed to anyone who heard about it like an absolutely terrible idea and turned it into a legit Best Picture nominee. There’s absolutely no one else who could have made Avatar as we’re going to find out in the years to come when every director in Hollywood tries. And not that I care about box office results, but it has to be mentioned that James Cameron followed up the highest grossing movie of all time with…the highest grossing movie of all time. It’s impossible to overstate what an incredible and unlikely achievement that is. It's so remarkable that I think in this case, it is worth taking into account. And as strange as it may seem considering his predilection for blockbuster crowd pleasers, James Cameron may be the closest thing Hollywood has to a true auteur. He may be a gaping asshole, but he had by far the most impressive and awards worthy directorial achievement of the year. His movie may not have been the best, but the vision, effort, and ability it took to make it was certainly was. So as much as I would like to see a woman win, I don’t think gender should be at all be a factor in voting. That’s how equality works. But I dont think in this case that that will be how it works.
Will Win: Kathryn Bigelow
Should Win: James Cameron
(Hey, did you know they were once married? Someone should really mention that at some point...)

Best Picture

"If you’ve read about Avatar, you know by now that it’s the future of movies. And if you’ve seen it, you know that the future of movies apparently looks a lot like the present of movies – big, expensive, effects driven action." – Mark Harris

I’m going to come off as very anti-Avatar in what's to follow so let me just say up top that I enjoyed Avatar. It’s a good film and it deserves its nomination and its box office success. But what it doesn’t deserve is Best Picture. Because for all its virtues, if you don’t think that in 30 years once its technology is commonplace that Avatar won’t seem like The Greatest Show on Earth or Ben-Hur or any of the countless overblown spectacles that have been nominated for Best picture but didn’t wind up winning then you are sadly delusional. Is Avatar an important film and one that will change the course of film history? Yes, and probably. And I’ve written before about how much I support and am impressed by its politics. But as impressive as those politics may be, the reason the movie has had the success it has and the reason it has its Best Picture nomination is because of its technical achievements. Take the same movie and make it with mid-90’s technology and no one pays attention or cares. And if there’s any type of movie we need to supporting it’s not the overblown blockbuster spectacle with a weak story. Lord knows Hollywood doesn’t need any additional encouragement to pump those out.

Look, The Avatar effect is going to be felt in Hollywood regardless. Ten years from now there’s probably only gonna be like five movies a year featuring real life humans sitting around doing realistic human things in 2D. But still, there’s no need to give filmmakers even more incentive to make Avatar type movies by showing them that they can get Academy Awards that way too. The Oscars are half the reason why any halfway decent movie even gets green-lit by major studios. If the studios can start winning Oscars with blockbusters then the Up in the Air’s of the world never even get out of development meetings. Now as a passionate backer of Lord of the Rings back in the day I realize on the surface I seem a bit hypocritical, but there are a few key differences here. First, The Lord of the Rings movies were based on some of the most beloved and respected books ever written. Their story was rich and complex served to create an entirely new world and with scores of interesting characters in it. Avatar gave us Ferngully in space and characters that for all the film's 3D achievements were strangely two demensional. For example, it would be hard to come up with a more cartoonishly over the top villain than General Shouty McEvil Pants or whatever his name was. Also, in Lord of the Rings the technology always seemed to be in service of the story. In Avatar the technology overwhelmed it. The story seemed to exist only to show off the technology. And if you don’t think that’s true then ask yourself how well the movie is going to play at home on DVD in 2D. A great movie should be great in any setting, not just on an IMAX screen wearing silly glasses. So I'm not opposed to blockbusters or big budget spectacles, Im just opposed to ones that make those elements secondary to story, character development, dialogue, and exploration of the human condition. Don't forget, Lord of the Rings won Best Screenplay. Avatar isnt even nominated.

So this year’s Best Picture race isn’t just a battle for the title of Best Picture, it is, in many ways, a battle between competing ideologies. A battle to declare what we as a people value in our art. A battle for what type of movies should be made and should be rewarded. And that’s why it's so encouraging to see that The Academy is leaning towards The Hurt Locker.

Now The Hurt Locker is a movie I respect and appreciate more than love and enjoy. I much prefer Up in the Air. It’s better acted, better written, and better made, and speaks more clearly to our times and our lives. It’s the movie that will best serve as our representative to future generations of this year. Not just this year in film, but this year on Earth. But you’ll get no real complaints from me if The Hurt Locker wins. Anything but Avatar is my mantra. Which is why I'm revelling in the irony of the fact that The Academy’s wrongheaded decision to open the Best Picture race up to 10 nominees is going to ultimately be Avatar’s downfall. In their attempt to get more commercial nominees, The Academy ensured that its most commercial nominee ever is going to lose the top prize. Because with the switch in the number of nominees they also switched the voting system. Used to be that only 1st place votes really mattered. But now voters have to rank the movies from 1 to 10 and essentially the movie with the best cumulative score wins. It’s actually slightly more complicated than that, but for our purposes that explanation will do.

So with the new system the movie that has the broadest support will likely be the winner. Now this is the first time this voting system has ever been used so it’s hard to predict with certainty how it will play out, but it would seem that the movie that is not necessarily the most liked but rather the movie that is the least disliked will win. And that’s where the fact that the average age of an Academy voter is 57.7 years old comes into play. See there’s a reason that before this year only two (or three depending on how you view ET) sci-fi films have ever been nominated for Best Picture. There’s a reason it took Lord of the Rings three tries to win Best Picture, and why ET lost to Gandhi, and why The Dark Knight got snubbed last year. Oscar voters are OLD. And old people aren’t generally that into loud noisy action scenes or weird creatures doing sci-fi type things. Those types of movies don’t seem to carry the type of artistic heft that your typical older voter is looking for in their Best Picture. I can see a lot of people ranking Avatar very high, but I can also see a whole lot of 70 and 80 year olds ranking it dead last on their ballots. And I can see a whole lot of people doing the same thing just out of spite. The Hurt Locker is safe and inoffensive and hard to hate. Sure it had explosions and action, but not in an action movie sense. War movies have been around since the dawn of film and have won Best Picture on several occasions. Old people can deal with that sort of action. There is strong precident for that type of action winning. And even if The Hurt Locker wasn’t your FAVORITE film of the year you probably liked it. And you’re gonna rank at least a few of the other nominees below it. And in fact there’s a quite sizeable block of people that feel passionately that it’s the year’s best film. It’s nearly swept all the critics’ awards. And normally the movie that does that doesn’t win Best Picture. This year though we need it to. We need the critics’ darling to defeat the blockbuster special effects extravaganza. (Hyperbolic statement alert) The future of movies depends on it.

And since I opened this section with a quote from Entertainment Weekly I’ll let EW film critic and Hurt Locker backer Owen Glieberman have the last word here:

“It’s worth taking a moment to point out why, for Academy voters, the box office has always been such a crucial factor. The vulgar way to put it would be: Hollywood, in the end, is all about the bottom line, and so a movie that doesn’t “perform” isn’t eligible, according to the industry’s core values, for the most coveted of honors.

(But) if The Hurt Locker wins this year’s Academy Award for Best Picture, it will in many ways fracture that essential crowd-pleasing code. Sure, the movie swept the critics’ awards, but that’s never been such a dominant criteria for Hollywood. (If it were, the Oscar for Best Picture would likely have gone to GoodFellas, or Nashville, or Pulp Fiction.) To me, it would be fantastic if The Hurt Locker won, because it would effectively redefine the Oscars as an arena where a work of art, its (minor) success driven by critical praise, could compete on a level playing field. If The Hurt Locker wins, it will really be the culmination of a trend that began back in 1996, the year of Fargo and Shine and Secrets & Lies, when the Oscar nominations were, for the first time, dominated by “small” independent releases. Sure, a handful of indie films (like No Country for Old Men) have won Best Picture since, but before doing so they effectively crossed over and became modest mainstream hits.

I’d like to go back to the sole point I made in (an) earlier, myopic post that I think was accurate. I said that the battle between Up in the Air and Avatar would be the most symbolic Oscar race since Forrest Gump vs. Pulp Fiction back in 1994/1995. . . . Okay, Up in the Air, while a respectable hit, didn’t forge quite the emotional connection with a lot of the audience that I’d wanted it to. But even if I did have the wrong movie, I think I had the right point: With The Hurt Locker now having all but vacuumed up the year’s critical acclaim, and with Avatar having just this week become the top-grossing domestic movie of all time, Avatar vs. The Hurt Locker is an awesomely symbolic race. It’s a clash of size, values, popularity — of essential notions of What Movie Art Is in the 21st century. A Hurt Locker victory would open the door to a new definition of Oscar glory, a defiant celebration of artistry over commerce. A win for Avatar would be, in its way, a definitive assertion of the same old same old. That’s why, more than in quite a long time, I genuinely hope that Best Picture this year goes to the best picture.”

(I couldn’t have said it better myself. Although lord knows I tried.)

Will Win: The Hurt Locker
Should Win: Up in the Air

Keanu Reeves, Paris Hilton & Adrian Grenier Perform Hamlet

2010-02-25T16:00:00.000-05:00

Dramatis Persona
Keanu Reeves – Hamlet
Paris Hilton – Ophelia, Gertrude
Adrian Grenier – Ghost of Hamlet’s Father, others

Keanu: Whoa, I’m like the Prince of Denmark
Paris: That’s hot.
Keanu: Like, I think I love you
Paris: Hot. You wanna tape us having sex?
Keanu: Whoa, totally
(enter Adrian)
Keanu: Who are you?
Adrian: I’m stiff and awkward and not believable as human being.
Paris: Threesome!
Adrian: Also, I’m your father’s ghost.
Keanu: Whoa, that just blew my mind.
Paris: I’ll blow your cock.
Keanu: Father, I can’t decide if I should avenge your death or not. What do you think?
Adrian: I have no thoughts in my head. (exits)
Keanu: I do. I have many thoughts. Too many thoughts. They make living too hard. O, to be or not to be
that is the question.
Paris: What’s a question?
Keanu: A sentence in an interrogative form, addressed to someone in order to get information in reply.
Paris: I only understood about half of those words.
Keanu: Probably because at this point you’re suffering from mental illness.
Paris: Also, gonorrhea
Keanu: Whatever. You’re, like, done with that character anyway. You’re playing my Mom now.
Paris: Hot.
Keanu: I know. That’s the problem. And the subtext.
Paris: Did you say “have sex”?
Keanu: No. But let’s, like, have it anyway.
Adrian: Don’t forget about me. I’m playing Polonius. And I’m in the closet. (pause) Also, location wise,
I’m behind a big curtain.
Keanu: SHUT UP! I hate you so much. (stabs him)
Paris: OMG, you like totally killed him!
Adrian: But now I’m back as Laertes. Lets like fight and stuff.
Keanu: Ow, you stabbed me. Now I’m dead.
Adrian: I am also dead.
Paris: I’m like so totally dead too.
God: Yes!

(There is jubilation and dancing. Peace is achieved in the Middle East. A choir of angels can be heard. Pain and suffering cease to exist. All is right with the world.)

THE END

Songs for My Daughter

2010-02-15T22:46:00.001-05:00

Because the world can never have too many blogs (not true) I've started another one.

It's called Songs for My Daughter and I like to think that the title is pretty self-explanatory. I don’t, nor am I planning any time soon to have a daughter; but although the daughter may be hypothetical, the music is very real.

These are really the songs that I would (will) force on my daughter when she is young in order to ingrain in her positive messages about the female experience. I don’t care so much if the song is "good" per se; I mostly care about what it has to say.

With so many forces out there conspiring to send the wrong messages to girls, there should be at least one decently written music related blog out there sending them the right ones. And there should also be my new blog as well. So if you like my inane ramblings here then you should go check it out. Because what could be better than wasting time reading more of my inane ramblings? Well, other than mildly invasive dental work.

Gaga for GaGa : A Beyonce Manifesto

2010-02-11T11:20:00.001-05:00

I’ll admit it. I’ve never been more wrong about anything than I was about Lady Gaga. Much like when I tried to guess the end of Titanic (hey how was I to know the boat was going to sink) the statement “Lady Gaga is a one-hit wonder if I have ever heard one” has become a constant source of ridicule and embarrassment. How was I supposed to know that a song about being so drunk you don’t even know what club you're at, was in fact the anthem for our times? How could I have known that a "dance music" artist would be the person to capture the zeitgeist? And what on earth would have led me to believe that some ridiculously costumed person with a stupid name would be the best thing to happen to mainstream music since Kurt Cobain? (I feel like that’s not even remotely true, but I like the sound of it so just go with me here)

Before we go any further I should say that I am fully aware that writing about Lady Gaga at this late date is very passé, but it has come to my attention several times recently that there are still people who don’t know that it’s okay to fully and unapologetically embrace her. So let me set the record straight: Lady Gaga is not a guilty pleasure, she’s just a pleasure. We all love her. All of us. It’s a thing. Not since we all decided that it was okay to like Justin Timberlake has someone so united the masses. Young and old, Brooklyn hipsters and Midwest housewives, black and white, Ga and ga, we all love us some Lady G. And if there’s anything I’m into in pop culture it’s consensus. So you know I’m down with anything as universally embraced as Lady Gaga. But what exactly is everyone embracing?

Well, they are embracing, pretty much, a performance artist in pop star clothing. Because although the music is great, it’s almost secondary to the Gaga experience. What did she wear, what did she do, what did she say? This is what we talk about when we talk about Gaga.

They are also embracing decadence and sexuality that’s a little risqué. A female artist with something to say. An individual, a provocateur, and, dare I say, an iconoclast. More than just an evolutionary Madonna, Gaga is a pop star for our times. And maybe even more than Obama, that says something very good about our times.

Because times were that the bland and the test-marketed and carefully controlled and micromanaged were popular. Last time there was a pop music explosion at the turn of a decade it was led by boy bands and Britney Spears. And when someone like Christina Aguilera tried to take control of their career back from their handlers they were branded as a dirty slut worthy of derision. Acts of personal individual expression were to be worn like a scarlet A on your barely-there shirt.

No, we wanted pretty people doing pretty things that were completely safe and unthreatening. We wanted prepackaged, prefab pop stars that didn’t challenge us in any way.

We wanted Beyonce.

------------------------------------

As many words I have typed over the years about Beyonce I have never really laid out in explicit terms why she bothers me so much, other than a generalized “she sucks and I hate her”. But now I don’t have to. Lady Gaga can make my case for me. Because she is, in every way, the anti-Beyonce. And this year’s Grammys highlighted why.

Beyonce tried her hardest to appear edgy and dramatic, but in the end it came off as calculated and disconnected, just like everything else about her. Since she burst onto the scene Beyonce has tried to remain as bland and neutral about everything as possible. She never says or does anything controversial or noteworthy because she doesn’t want to alienate anyone. Not only because doing so might hurt her record sales and her “brand”, but because then she would no longer be a bland cipher onto whom we can project whatever we want to see or whatever we want her to be. Do we want to see her as a regal princess who can serenade the President on election night or sing at the Oscars? Do we want her to be a woman scorned who can take out her anger on her trifling man in “Ring the Alarm”? Do we want her to be a bootylicious (yet classy) sex object? She can be all of those things because by remaining as bland as possible you can project onto her whatever you want to see. It’s all a brilliant strategic calculation by handlers, albeit one that ultimately rings false since this calculation is never acknowledged. But because Lady Gaga admits up front that she’s calculating and contrived it comes off as authentic. Because she calculates and contrives it all herself. She is true to who she is and so it rings true even if it’s all “false”. But because there is no real Beyonce, or at least one that any of us can perceive, she can’t come off as authentic. It’s why she’s a terrible actress. She doesn’t know how to be a real person, so she can only play at being a real person. “Oh I bet this will make me seem edgy.” “This will give people a sense of empowerment.” “I can play at ‘strength’ here.” But Gaga doesn’t give a fuck what people think. She only cares about what she thinks. Because she has thoughts and a vision and has done it all herself. It hasn’t been her Dad’s vision, or her handlers’ vision or the vision of her songwriters. No one has to go out of their way to explain that “this is all Beyonce’s vision” or give Barbara Walters interviews where they talk about how they are “doing it all themselves now”. That’s just self-evident with Gaga. She didn’t come from the female equivalent of a boy band. She wasn’t driven to be a success at a young age by a father who put her through a pop star boot camp. She came from years of performing in small clubs and in the downtown music scene despite opposition from her parents. She hasn’t gotten anywhere on her looks; in fact she’s willfully obscured them. I still don’t know for sure exact what she looks like. And she’s most certainly not a bland cipher onto which we can project whatever we want to see. She is a very specific vision on which we can see only her, nothing of ourselves. Except in our embrace of her. And in that we can see that we are weirder than we let on.

Are we fully ready to accept that though? Lady Gaga’s success is encouraging, but Beyonce is certainly still around. Even if she herself is feeling somewhat divided. Her sister is performing with Of Montreal and recording Dirty Projectors covers while her husband is increasingly willing to shill for any organization that will have him. So in a sense Beyonce’s world reflects the world at large. Which side will prevail? What is truly in store for the next generation of pop music? What message are we ready to accept?

Beyonce says, if you like me at all then you should have given me a ring symbolizing your lifelong devotion and commitment. Lady Gaga says, I’m drunk and dancing in this club so leave me alone; I’ll ride your disco stick when I feel like it okay? Lady Gaga obliquely references Hitchcock for no apparent reason; Beyonce explicitly references Charlie's Angels for purely commercial reasons. Beyonce is a “Survivor”; Lady Gaga hopes you can survive her. Lady Gaga wears a dress made of Kermit the Frogs, Beyonce wears a dress made by her mom. Lady Gaga will bleed on stage; Beyonce wouldn’t want the blood to get on her dress. Lady Gaga plays many of her own instruments; Beyonce can barely even write her own songs. Beyonce will advertise for literally anything; Lady Gaga will…well she probably would too. But she would, you know, like do it ironically or something.

Even though they may have recorded songs together, their missions and statements (and mission statements) couldn’t be more different. So it was fitting that their two albums were the two top contenders for Album of the Year at the Grammys. It gave us a chance to consider the two of them head to head and side by side. And to ask ourselves as a people once and for all - in the battle for good and evil, the battle for the soul of a nation and the top of the charts, who do we choose? Who wins? Who wears the crown as the voice of the new millennium, the new era, the new age in pop music? There’s only one answer, even though it may be two words. And those two words are of course: Taylor. Swift.

Thoughts on The Grammys

2010-02-01T20:28:00.003-05:00

What has the world come to where I’m passionately rooting for Taylor Swift to win Album of the Year if for no other reason than to keep Beyonce from winning it? Is this a world where the only thing that keeps I Am Sasha Fierce from winning Album of the Year (yes the whole year) is a mainstream country music album written and performed by a teenager who can’t sing? Apparently it is. No offense to Taylor Swift, but is this really where we’re at as a people? Look, I realize the Grammys exist in some sort of strange alternate dimension, but even by their own ridiculous standards this year’s awards were laughably absurd. And worst of all, like the show itself, they weren’t even outrageously terrible enough to get outraged about. Usually I can count on something so egregious happening that I can get a whole half-page rant going the next day. And then I'll inevitably remember that the Grammys are completely invalid and irrelevant and that I’m the only person under the age of 50 who gives a fuck. But this year all the nominees were so completely mediocre that as long as I Am Sasha Fierce didn’t win Album of the Year I could literally not have cared less about what happened. And so, sure enough, right up until the last minute the one and only ridiculous thing the Grammys could do that would piss me off looked like it would actually happen. Somehow it didn’t, but the downside of that was that it meant that the proceedings were so thoroughly uninspiring that I barely had enough material to write a whole post. Even when the awards themselves blow the performances are usually compelling. Not so this year. But I knew the world would be outraged (outraged!) if I didn’t write something about an event that absolutely no one else cared about or watched. You would never forgive me. So I do this all for you....

Highlight: Pink
(Look, I think Pink should get more respect. I like what she's about. I’m a fan. But when Pink is the highlight of your awards show you might have a problem)

Lowlight: As always, Beyonce
(Or as I texted my friend: That might be my least favorite thing I’ve ever experienced in the history of my life)

Meh: Everything else
Okay, I guess I'll go more in-depth than that....

*Dear Lady Gaga and Elton John,
I have no idea what the fuck any of that was.
And I mean that in absolutely the best way possible.

*So what do the other two Black Eyed Peas do exactly? They don’t play instruments or sing and far as I can tell. What’s left?

*"Welcome to the future?" Really, Will.I.Am? So in the future people dance around on a stage unimaginatively singing their hit song at an awards show? Wow the future is CRRRRAAAZZZY.

*Very VERY high on the list of things I thought I’d never say: “Well done Jamie Foxx”

*And in an all-time great upset…Michael Jackson’s kids seem normal! How did this happen??

(Also, I’m pretty sure the Grammys just made up an award so they would have something to give Michael
Jackson. I think the name of the award was, no joke, something to the effect of The Michael Jackson Lifetime Achievement Award. Michael Jackson won the Michael Jackson Award? I did not see that one coming.)

*Man, that Quentin Tarantino is so understated. What a wallflower.

*Someone explain Drake to me. What’s next, Kenan & Kel becoming a respected rap duo who are taken seriously by the hip-hop community? Why is no one calling bullshit on this? Somewhere Tupac is rolling over in his theoretical grave. And by “somewhere” I mean “his house”.

*Continuing my regular uncalled for and unwarranted attacks on Stephen Colbert, he did a really weak job. Jon Stewart can host the Oscars and Colbert can’t even handle a few minutes of jokes at the Grammys. Check and mate my friend. (Stewart 4 Life!)

*In terms of things I look forward to every year, Neil Portnow at the Grammys is the exact opposite of Meryl Streep at the Golden Globes.

*YES! Bon Jovi gets to play not 1, not 2, but 3 songs. I can’t…wait?

*Remember that episode of Seinfeld where Jerry dates a woman who looks either great or hideous depending on the light? That woman was Katy Perry.

*I think my favorite part of the Dave Matthews performance was when he invited the kitchen sink up on stage.

*Man I really miss Kanye. It’s just not the Grammys without him. If he had appeared out of nowhere to storm the stage as Taylor Swift was accepting Album of the Year it would have definitely been the greatest moment in television history. It would have made the moon landing look like the 2005 NBA Finals.
Alas.

*Lastly: Maybe my high school experience was different than yours, so I could be way off base here, but in what high school is a statuesque blond with model good-looks who writes and performs her own music considered an undesirable dork? I mean who is this cheerleader that her friend prefers to her? Megan Fox? Is this the most attractive high school class in recorded history? I just don’t buy for a second that there’s some teenage boy who says to Taylor Swift, “you know, I know that we have similar taste in humor and music and that you’re really into me and all, but I’m sorry I’m just not attracted to you, what with your T-shirt and sneaker wearing and all.” Who is this boy? Teenage George Clooney? It’s all utterly implausible.“You Belong With Me” is to Taylor Swift what “Bad” is to Michael Jackson. And no one can tell me different.

Pseudo Live-Blogging The Golden Globes 2010

2010-01-18T00:51:00.002-05:00

8:06 - Pretty solid job, Mr. Gervais, but not outstanding. Still, always nice to have you around.

8:20 - So Mo'Nique gets an hour to speak, but Pete Doctor gets about five seconds tops? Maybe if he had taken 20 minutes to get to the stage...

8:28 - They're trying to break the world record for most shots of Penelope Cruz during a three hour telecast. They're going to obliterate it at this rate. I've counted 58 so far.

8:31 - MASSIVE UPSET ALERT! If you had Felicity Huffman in your "Most Embarrassingly Drunk" office pool, congrats! None of the rest of us saw that coming at all.

8:40 - I'm convinced that Al Pacino was so tired of being the obvious answer to the question "which formerly great actor has most lost his mind in old age?" that he decided to pay for Harrison Ford's lobotomy.

8:45 - After seeing Crazy Heart, I think T. Bone Burnett is an even bigger Oscar lock than Christoph Waltz. With that in mind, he really needs to work on his speech giving ability.

8:50 - Okay this night has officially turned into a Thank-Your-Spouse-Off. Thanks a lot, Mo'Nique...

8:52 - We can all agree on Amy Adams can't we?

8:56 - In terms of totally and completely changing your image from drug addled mess to family-friendly mainstream film star, Drew Barrymore is the female equivalent of Robert Downey Jr. isn't she? I mean does anyone even remember when she flashed David Letterman? That's all been swept under the rug at this point.

9:01 - Highlight of the year coming in 3...2...1...
"I wish my name was T-Bone"
JACKPOT!
Oh Meryl, I don't know how you do it (actually I do) but you never disappoint. All is right with the world for a whole nother year.

9:16 - Okay scratch that Drew Barrymore comment....

9:27 - So lemme get this straight Golden Globes: you knew Alec Baldwin wouldn't be there to accept if he won, and yet you still didn't give Best Comedy Actor to Steve Carell?
You knew Ricky Gervais was going to be hosting right?

9:34 - We're standing for Sophia Loren? Name a Sophia Loren movie other than Two Women (Nine doesn't count). You couldn't do it could you? So then why are we standing for her? Because she's not dead? I don't understand.

9:39 - If I played fantasy sports my team name would definitely be "Jon Hamm's Beard"

9:46 - Taylor Lautner how can you introduce (500) Days of Summer and not make some joke comparing it to you and Taylor Swift? There were at least three different perfect opportunities to do so. You're dead to me now. (Note: You were never alive to me)

9:47 - Rachel Dratch was in Hung? And she changed her name to Jane Adams?

9:47 - Chloe Sevigny I think that dress might be the most embarrassing and disgusting thing that has ever happened to you, and keep in mind that you once blew Vincent Gallo on film.

10:01 - Holy shit Marty, thats quite the imdb page you've got there

10:05 - I think Martin Scorsese might be the last person left on earth who still refers to movies as "pictures". It's endearing.

10:06 - So are we supposed to be taking Mel Gibson seriously again now? Is that a thing?
(Also, not to ruin Edge of Darkness for you, but it turns out that the Jews did it.)

10:17 - No more quoting from your own movie in your acceptance speeches James Cameron! Have you learned nothing?!?

10:19 - Holy shit. Who the hell is Olivia Wilde and where can I watch her do things?

10:25 - Hey it's Jodie Foster. See Lindsey Lohan, there is a classy way to be a former child star/questionable lesbian.

10:30 - Why is Ed Helms' song from The Hangover not considered a legitimate awards contender? Seriously, name five original songs from this year that are more memorable and important to their respective films than that one. You can't.

10:35 - Oh man, its good to have Mickey Rourke back in our lives again.

10:36 - Do we really live in a world where The Blind Side wins major awards? I don't know if this is a world I care to live in.

10:42 - Most underrated person in the world: Lauren Graham

10:47 - Ladies and gentlemen, your Best Actor Oscar race just got decided. George and Colin, thanks for playing.

10:57 - DAMN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ugh. I'm going to bed.

The Top 25 of 2009

2010-01-08T00:42:00.013-05:00

I know, I know, you're so over 2009. But I never understand why people do their end of the year wrap ups before the year is even over. What, do things that happen in December not count? Even waiting until after the official end of the year I didn’t nearly have enough time to experience everything pop culture had to offer in 2009. There are plenty of things (Mad Men, Glee, Adventureland, etc.) I feel almost positive would be on this list if only I had had the time to see/hear/read/do them. And I'm sure there are countless other things I’m not even aware of that I will look back on years from now as among the 2009’s best. But that being said, there was more than enough that I did experience in 2009 to fill a best of list and then some. But rather than ranking them and separating them by category I thought I’d highlight my favorite things of 2009 in one long rambling master list. Strap in, it’s gonna be a long 5,000 words.

First off though:
The Worst of 2009
I don’t want to harp on the negative because there's already too much of that on the internet, but lord knows there were some pretty awful things in 2009:

-“TiK ToK” – seriously who the hell wants a guy who looks like Mick Jagger, he’s like 70.
-the flannel revival – no one looked good in flannel the first time around okay?
-everything about the Twilight Saga – what am I missing here?
-“According To You” – don’t even get me started…

But definitely the worst thing about 2009 was death. As is true every year, death really sucked. But it sucked even worse than usual in 2009. And from Michael Jackson to Chris Brown’s career to Tiger Woods’ dignity it didn’t discriminate. It went on a wild rampage destroying everything in its path. By the time Britney Murphy died we were all so burned out that we didn’t even bat an eyelash. Here's hoping that death soon becomes “like, so 2009”.

Things that just missed the "Best Of" cut
I wanted to make this list things that everyone could have experienced. I had some great pop culture experiences in 2009 but if they weren’t potentially universal experiences what’s the point of commenting on them? Who wants to read a bunch of things that happened only to me personally? Nevertheless some things that didn’t make the “universal experience” cut that are worth mentioning:
-Jay-Z at APW opening his set with “No Sleep Til Brooklyn”
-Touching Thomas Mars at the Rumsey Playfield Phoenix concert
-“Hey Jude” at Citi Field
-And most importantly, this

So now without further ado:
The Top 25 of 2009 (in no particular order):
1.) Movie Trailers
A wise person (or possibly a Star Trek character) once said that having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. Well, while the last year in film was quite the year for having, having couldn’t hold a candle to wanting.

Sometimes the having lived up to the wanting:
Up in the Air
(500) Days of Summer

Other times not so much:
Watchmen

And in some cases we still have to wait for a few more months before a judgment can be made:
Greenberg

But regardless, this felt like the year that movie trailers got so good that they started to transcend the movies themselves. And if you don’t believe me then may I present exhibit A:

Others of note:
A Serious Man
Star Trek
Moon

2.) Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix
As a long time Phoenix fan I’m not quite sure how I feel about the past year. On the one hand, I’ve never understood why Phoenix wasn’t more popular. And it’s been shocking to see how many of the incredibly music-savy people I know weren’t even familiar with Phoenix until this year. I’m always at least a step behind on these things, so I had just kind of assumed Phoenix was already huge within the music snob community. But apparently not. So it’s good that they’re finally getting their due. Because they deserve all the love and accolades they can get. On the other hand, the Cadillac commercial, and the new douchebag fans coming out of the woodwork, and the having to share them with people who don’t even know all the words to “Consolation Prizes” (the horror!), is a new experience that I’m still working through. But believe me, I know it could be worse. I could be a long time Kings of Leon fan.

Regardless, none of this would have happened if Thomas Mars and the boys hadn’t put together their finest and most hit laden album yet. It’s great from begin to end. And it’s also the year’s best. By a wide margin. Well done boys. Merci beaucoup.

3.) The “Bad Romance” video

In the past five years I have probably watched a music video ten times. And eight of those times were me watching this video on repeat. There’s much (MUCH) more to come on Lady Gaga on this very blog in the near future, but for now lemme just say that, like all right thinking people, I am decidedly pro-Gaga. Just in this one song there are so many thing to love – the random French words, the inexplicable lyrical Hitchcock homage, the chorus of nonsense sounds, and the fact that she was somehow able to beat out “Wilco (the song)” for best song of 2009 to incorporate the artist's name into the lyrics (coming in dead last, as always: Fergie). But the video really takes the whole thing to the next level. Apparently music videos can still feel fresh and vital and exciting. Who knew? It’s like its 1983 all over again. (In more ways than one. But more on that next time….)

4.) Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds
I’d be hard pressed to come up with someone who deserves their Oscar more than Christoph Waltz deserves the one he is going to win this year. As far as supporting actors go, Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, Martin Landau in Ed Wood, Denzel Washington in Glory, and maybe Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men are the only ones from the relatively recent past that would be in the discussion. But regardless of where he ranks all time, Christoph Waltz was easily the best thing about easily one the year’s best movies. His performance left me giddy with excitement, inspired, and in awe. So while the movie as a whole is worthy of the highest of praise, Christoph earned a spot on this list all of his own. So well done sir. Now go out and buy yourself an “er”.

5.) Twelfth Night (Shakespeare in the Park)
I had to include at least one piece of theater and this one was not only one of the best, but also one of the most easily accessible in every way possible. It was a surprising production not just because Anne Hathaway seemed like she had been speaking verse her whole life, or because (theater nerd alert!) I felt certain I would never see a better production of Twelfth Night than Donmar Warehouse’s 2003 production at BAM, but mostly because in a cast with more Tonys than an Italian wedding, little known Hamish Linklater didn’t just steal the show, he committed grand larceny. I’ll never see a better Andrew Aguecheek. Or see a Twelfth Night with better music. If music be the food of love, then let Twelfth Night’s play on forever.

6.) NBC Thursday Nights
Even in the heyday of Must See TV NBC was never able to produce a solid two straight hours of comedy. So the fact that they have now been able to accomplish that feat is definitely worth recognizing. In fact let’s take a closer look:

Community – It may not be getting the most “best new comedy” buzz, but to me Community is way better than Modern Family.
(although to be fair, I’ve never seen even a second of Modern Family)

Parks and Rec – I’d just like to say that I’ve been on board since day one. I know everyone is clamoring to get on the bandwagon now, but lemme just say the show hasn’t changed that drastically since when everyone thought it was terrible and should be cancelled. I could say I told you so, but since I’m feeling magnanimous I’ll just say welcome to the party. It’s good to have you. And let’s all work to get Amy Poehler, Chris Pratt, and Louis C.K. their Emmys already.
(Also, if you haven’t seen Paul Schneider in Bright Star yet, you really should. The fact that he’s the same guy from Parks and Rec will blow your mind)

The Office – I know this started out as Michael Scott’s show, and then became Dwight’s show, and then became Jim and Pam’s show. And while all of them still have their integral place on the show, to me this is now clearly Andy Bernard’s show. You can pretty much gauge how good an episode is going to be by how much Andy Bernard it has in it. Also, he’s got to best one of the best/worst things to ever happen to Cornell.

30 Rock – Alec Baldwin = overrated, Jane Krakowski = underrated, Tracy Morgan = rated properly, the “30 Rock isn’t good anymore” contingent = needing to be punched in the face

7.) “15 Step” and “Swagga Like Us” at the Grammys
The Grammys are as terrible at recognizing great music as they are terrific at showcasing it. And it’s a shame that the former precludes most people from experiencing the latter. And since the Grammys are at least 20 years behind the times, they pull their videos from You Tube meaning I can’t rectify that problem for you. But you’ll just have to trust me that Radiohead performing “15 Step” with the USC marching band, and a seriously pregnant M.I.A. sharing a stage with Kanye, Jay-Z, Lil Wayne and T.I. for “Swagga Like Us” were both electric performances.

8.) The new presenter format at The Oscars
While the awards themselves were hit or miss (Sean Penn, Heath Ledger, Penelope Cruz – yea!, Kate Winslet, all things Slumdog Millionaire – meh) last year’s Oscars show was terrific. Of course I think that every year, but this time I don’t think I'm alone. The way past winners paid personal tribute to each of the nominees was touching and wonderful and heartwarming and so of course it will never happen again. There are new producers and they’ve already implied that they’re scrapping that idea. And since the James Cameron show ensures that ratings will be through the roof, whatever format the show has this year will be the one it will have for the foreseeable future. So thanks for coming nominees who aren’t Jeff Bridges, Monique, Christoph Waltz, and Carey Mulligan/Meryl Streep, but a short film clip is all the recognition you're gonna get this year. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted….

9.) Dug from Up
When I said in the summer “I guarantee you there won’t be a better movie this year than Up” I didn’t realize that I had forgotten to add “in the Air” to the end of that sentence. But no matter. Because plain old Up is still a solid second. And while the opening montage deserves all the props it has gotten, there’s nothing I enjoyed about the movie more than Dug. He's easily my favorite Pixar character since Dory in Finding Nemo, and his squirrel joke was the funniest thing I heard all year. But really almost anything he said could qualify for that distinction. I guess in the last year comedy really went to the dogs. (As that last joke should illustrate.)

10.) Eastbound & Down
If you put all performances by all actors from all mediums from the last year in one big contest, I'd rank Danny McBride’s behind only Christoph Waltz’s. I’m dead serious. And the fact that I’m not alone in finding Esatbound & Down overall to be a work of genius makes me feel good for the world. Now if only they wouldn’t fuck it up by coming back for a second season. But that’s a rant for another time. For now, bask in the truly fresh and invigoratingly new wonder that was season one. And then after that, write the producers a letter begging them not to mess with perfection.

(Oh human nature/money, why must you ruin art for all of us?)

11.) The first half of Funny People
There’s no bigger fan of interestingly flawed passion projects than me. But Funny People isn’t interestingly flawed; it’s just simply two completely separate movies stuck together for no reason. And it’s a shame because not only was Adam Sandler's best work ever completely forgotten about come year-end awards time, but each movie on its own could have been interesting. As it stands though, the first half is by far the best thing Judd Apatow has ever done and a huge leap forward for him, and the second half is almost painfully bad, not necessarily in and of itself, but just because it has absolutely nothing to do with anything that came before it. Look Judd, I love Leslie Mann, and I love the two of you together, but next time you write a movie that doesn’t have a part for her in it, just leave it be no matter how much she might beg. Oh, and also no more Eric Bana under any circumstances. I mean...he’s not even Jewish!

12.) The Highline
Every time you think you’re done with New York it does something to pull you back in. This year that something was The Highline. It may not be pop culture related, but it was too big a development this year for too many people for me not to mention it. And for me at least, it revitalized a city that already felt pretty damn vitalized. Some other cities in the world must have been starting to think they were pretty hot shit, because The Highline is clearly just New York’s way of putting them in their place. So suck it other cities; we got the motherfuckin Highline.

13.) “I'm on a Boat”

If you learned nothing else in 2009 I hope you learned that this boat is REAL! Look, “Lazy Sunday” will always be the best because it was first. And “Dick in a Box” and “Motherlover” are pretty damn great as well. But for my money I’ll never like a digital short (or Incredibad song) more than “I'm on a Boat”. Maybe it’s just my serious weakness for white boy rap parodies. Or that fact that it led to the creation of this Wikipedia page (the song reached #9 on the New Zealand singles chart, who knew?). Or the fact that it led to the strangest Grammy nomination of all time (and that really saying something). Or the fact that it’s just a legitimately great song. But probably most of all because from now until the end of time no one will ever be able to be on a boat without referencing this song. And when they do, it will always get a laugh. (I hope)

14.) Up in the Air
Whoever said “they don’t make ‘em like they used to” clearly hadn’t seen Up in the Air. And if someone wrote a review of it without including the phrase “timely, yet timeless” then they aren’t very good at their job. And they should be fired.

15.) “I Do Not Hook Up”
After “Since U Been Gone” I didn’t think it was possible for my level of love for Kelly Clarkson to go any higher. I was wrong. And despite the title of the song I don’t view it as a song about sex, but as a song about respect and empowerment. I love it so much. And I would totally hook up with it.

It’s a song that makes me feel good – for myself and for the world. It’s just what we need. And it is almost solely responsible for my newest blog/project (launching soon…)

I know everyone seems like they’re partial to another song in the “pop song of the year” sweepstakes, but if you ask me if I think "I Do Not Hook Up" deserves the title I’ll nod my head like yeah.

16.) The making of Charlie’s dating profile from Always Sunny

If Charlie Day doesn’t win an Emmy for his work in “The Waitress is Getting Married” (spoiler alert: he won’t) then there is no justice in the world. The whole episode is just stellar, but the answers Charlie gives while making his dating profile cracked me up harder than anything else on TV this year. Milksteak FTW.

17.) Eating the Dinosaur - Chuck Klosterman
Reading Klosterman is like getting to have the kind of conversations I wish I could have, if only having in-depth conversations about the deeper meaning of Chris Gaines was something that people other than me were interested in. Sure Eating the Dinosaur may not be Klosterman’s master work but any book that has an essay comparing In Utero to The Branch Davidians automatically gets a gold star from me. Especially when said essay contains a paragraph like:

“So in this way I suppose Cobain and Koresh are very different. The former failed at his attempt to separate his true followers from the rest of America, and he destroyed himself for that failure. The latter was destroyed by others for succeeding at the same goal”.

See, those are the kinds of thoughts I wish I had and also the kind of sentences I wish I could drop in casual conversation. Sadly that is not the world we live in. But it’s the world Klosterman’s writing allows me to escape to.
Oh, and also there’s this:

“(Sasha Fierce) did not make her personality more complex; mostly it reminded people that Beyonce doesn’t really have any personality at all. She loves Christ, she loves her husband, she sings reasonably well, and she’s beautiful. That’s the whole package. Becoming a different person only served to make that all the more obvious.”

Be still my heart….

18.) The Onion - “Nations Girlfriends Unveil New Economic Plan : Let’s Move In Together”

Nation's Girlfriends Unveil New Economic Plan: 'Let's Move In Together'

To take nothing away from the great folks at College Humor, but this was my favorite made-for-the-internet video of the year by a country mile. Much like I consider Annie Hall the perfect romantic comedy, this might be the perfect internet comedy video. The writing, acting, production values, content, and attention to detail are all flawless. I’ve analyzed this video the way some people have analyzed the Zapruder film and I just can’t find a single thing that I don’t absolutely love about it. But if I had to choose a favorite part it would be the way the anchor delivers the line “fine then”. Kills me every time.

19.) The musical number from (500) Days of Summer
If at gunpoint I had to choose my #1 favorite thing from all of 2009 this would probably be it.

(Why someone would ask me that question at gunpoint I don’t know. Perhaps I have an unrealistic idea of how much other people care about my opinions. But the fact that I write 5,000 word blog entries describing things I like should have told you that already.)

Who knew that Hall and Oates had written the “Singin in the Rain” of our generation? And if you think I don’t dance along to “You Make My Dreams Come True” whenever it comes on my iPod then you are sadly mistaken. What can I say, sometimes (okay a lot of times) it just feels good to be alive.

Alright, enough talking by me, just watch the damn thing:

(See there, I just made your day)

20.) Paul Rudd in I Love You Man
Sometimes you love something because of the talent and likeability of the creator. Other times you like something because it resonates with you on such a personal level that it feels like someone reached into you soul and then put it out there for all to see. This was both of those. Paul Rudd was playing a real life person, he just didn’t know it. (And he nailed the part by the way.)

21.) "Empire State of Mind II" on The Colbert Report
I've been very clear over the years about my status as a Daily Show guy. And The Daily Show had a typically great year including maybe their best moment ever in Jon’s takedown of Jim Cramer which I wrote about elsewhere. But with the possible exception of Jon’s segment on the Toy Hall of Fame, nothing in the TDS universe made me laugh harder than this Colbert clip.

Much like with “New York State of Mind” itself, it’s strange to me that this holds much appeal to anyone who doesn’t or hasn’t lived in the New York area. To anyone who doesn’t fit that description I don’t know how it would even be funny outside of “hey it’s Stephen Colbert rapping”. But to those who are, or have been, New Yorkers, it’s just a wonderfully smart, specific, and hilarious piece of writing. So as we on the coasts always say, fuck everyone else.

(Oh being an elitist East Coast snob, will you ever get old?)

22.) The lyrics to “Sexy Chick” by David Guetta
Anytime the Black Eyed Peas release an album and you can beat them out for Best So-Bad-They’re-Good Lyrics of the Year you know you’ve really done something special. And as a connoisseur of bad lyrics lemme tell you, David Guetta is really remarkable. If you haven’t had the pleasure (?) of hearing “Sexy Chick” watch this video and pay special attention to the chorus. For those who don’t want to do that much work, the chorus goes like this :

“She's nothing like a girl you've ever seen before
Nothing you can compare to your neighborhood whore
I'm tryna find the words to describe this girl without being disrespectful
The way that booty movin' I can't take no more
Have to stop what I'm doin so I can pull her close
I'm tryna find the words to describe this girl without being disrespectful

Damn girl
Damn you'se a sexy chick
A sexy chick
Damn you'se a sexy chick”

I mean there’s just so much to work with here I don’t even know where to begin. He’s refers to all the women in his neighborhood as whores and then literally one line later is trying to find a way to describe a woman without being disrespectful. As if this were an incredibly difficult task. And then after searching for that way, he apparently decides on “damn girl, you’se a sexy chick”. Because that’s generally the absolute most classy and respectful thing you can say to a woman. So objective achieved David Guetta.

But I think the thing I “like” best about this is that his come-on to this girl he finds attractive appears, in essence, to be “you’re so attractive that you make me want to not be disrespectful to women”. How romantic! If for some reason this compliment didn’t lead straight to a marriage between David Guetta and said sexy chick, then one of you single ladies out there needs to snatch him up. Because he is quite the catch. And if you’re lucky he might even describe you in non-disrespectful terms. (Insert swoon)

23.) VH1 Storytellers – “Kanye West”
It couldn’t be a best of the year list without a mention of Kanye. My love and defense of all things Mr. West is well documented. In fact “Kanye” is the most frequently occurring tag word on this blog. So there is really nothing left to say that I haven’t already said better somewhere else. But if you want to see/hear Kanye at his inscrutable, controversial, fascinating, and brilliant best then get the DVD/CD of this show. It comes out this month.

24.) South Park - “Fishsticks”
As a counterpoint to my Kanye love, there’s this

I always feel like I should like South Park a lot more than I do. While I have the utmost respect and appreciation for what they do in theory, in practice most episodes of the show leave me wanting. But at least once a season they put it all together and make an episode that is just about as perfect a piece of television as there will ever be. This was season 13’s. When you can actually humble Kanye you know you’ve done something special. Long live the power of comedy!

25.) The politics of Avatar
Speaking of things I respect and appreciate but don’t exactly love…

I think Avatar is a tremendous achievement, and I’m glad to see a mega-blockbuster that’s also a singular vision and a true passion project for its director. It doesn’t feel overly test screened or focus grouped or dumbed down. And it’s a tremendous step forward for technology and viewing it made for a surprisingly refreshing return to old timey event movie going where you got tickets in advance, got to the theater early, waited in line to get in, bought snacks, the whole nine yards. But despite its legitimate and considerable merits, sci-fi/action just ain’t really my bag personally. But radical left-wing politics on the other hand are most definitely my bag. And having the “bad guys” in the movie say things like “shock and awe” and “fight them here so they don’t come fight us where we live” warmed the cockles of my heart. You can 3D your CGI all you want, but to me what feels truly revolutionary is the fact that kids when they are playing with their Avatar action figures will be trying to kill the US military. The fact that James Cameron is getting all of America to sit through a three hour takedown of Bush era policies and American imperialism is nothing short of remarkable. I don’t know how he is getting away with it, or really even why he wanted to, but I love it with all my gay-marriage-abortion-state-run-health-care loving heart. Hopefully Cameron’s politics will one day seem as commonplace as his technology will.

And lastly, because 2009 is also the last year of the decade I’ll say this - you want to talk about how far we’ve come this decade? Nine years after 9/11 the biggest movie of the year is one that sides with the terrorists. Who’d have thunk it?

Potential Best of 2010
-Lady Gaga at the Grammys
-Meryl Streep’s acceptance speech at the Golden Globes
-Toy Story 3
-US v. England in the World Cup (aka The Revolutionary War II)
-Greenberg

Things That Are Exciting at Concerts and Not Exciting in Any Other Context

2009-11-11T15:58:00.000-05:00

Putting your hands up

Go ahead, try putting your hands up right now. Not that fun was it? Now wave them side to side. You just feel foolish don’t you? That because you’re not at a concert. If you were, then what you just did would have been the must fun thing that has ever happened. Well other than waving them like you just don’t care. That shit’s orgasmic.

Following directions

“Put your hands together”

Okay

“Get up”

Okay

“Get down”

Okay

“Go kill a hobo”

Sounds good

Being asked to sing

If I was walking down the street and you pointed a microphone in my direction and asked me to sing my reaction would best be described as abject terror. But at a concert, yes I will gladly sing a verse of any random song loudly and passionately in the direction of your outstretched microphone. And I’ll love every second of it.

Having bodily problems

“My feet hurt, I have no voice, and there’s a loud ringing in my ears. What a great night!”

Geography

Non-concert situation:

-Musician: (says out loud name of current location)

-Other people: Yes, we know where we are located. Why did you just say that out loud? Do you think we’re lost and/or idiots?

At a concert:

-Musician: (says out loud name of current location)

-Other people: HOLY SHIT!!! He just mentioned the name of the place where we are located! WOOOHOOO! That excites me!! Very much!!!!

And heaven forbid someone in the audience is from the same place as the band is. All pandemonium will break loose.

Cigarette Lighters

“Hey look, I’m holding a flaming object dangerously close to my fingers! It’s really the best way I can think of to express the beauty of this song. Isn’t it amazing?”

Hipster douchebags who are too cool to dance, scream, or generally show any emotion at all other than mild annoyance

No, actually they’re still pretty loathsome.

Things Were Simpler Back With The Dirt-Clods: Thoughts on “Where the Wild Things Are”

2009-10-18T22:43:00.004-04:00

This being the internet and all I know I’m required to share my feelings on Where The Wild Things Are. Other people will, I'm sure, be able to write more articulately about its quality. My basic thoughts were - it’s wonderful and magical and thrilling and all that stuff. But you already knew that. There are some other things I’d like to focus on instead. Like:

-Holy shit, that’s exactly what it’s like to be a 9-year old boy! The movie I mean. I know that was Spike and Dave’s (we're on a first name basis) goal in making it, and wow, well done gentlemen. If aliens landed and wanted to know what the experience of being a nine year old human boy is like then that movie would be all they would need. So interesting to know that the feelings and experiences I had at that age were pretty universal. And also that in retrospect I was a bit of a brat.

-I don’t understand the charges that it was too “hipstery”. I didn’t see that at all. Although I have to say I don’t remember that scene where Max goes to the Grizzly Bear concert in McCarren Park from the book.

-Sure enough, at my showing there were plenty parents with kids walking out less than halfway through. And people have already taken to the internet to complain that their kids were bored/scared/hated it. Well no shit. Clearly it’s not a movie for kids. Have you seen any of the trailers? Do you know anything about the people involved with it? Yes, it’s based on what is ostensibly a children’s book, but there is enough very strong evidence out there that this film adaptation was not going to be for kids that unless you are a complete moron then you should have known not to take them. (Unless you have like, you know, really awesome kids.) But we saw this phenomenon this summer with Bruno too. People who walk out of a movie they should have never been at in the first place. And then afterwards getting upset with that movie, when what they should really be getting mad at is their own willful ignorance. It’s like if you really wanted a banana but instead you decided to get an orange because, well, hey, it’s a fruit, it must taste like a banana, and then asking for your money back when your orange doesn’t infact taste like a banana. You don’t get to complain, when the basis for your complaint is that you’re a moron. It’s not the orange’s fault that it doesn’t taste like a banana. It tried to warn you by being orange, and, you know, shaped nothing like a banana. So it’s actually your fault for ignoring the basic facts of the fruit at hand.

Look, I understand not wanting to go into a movie with too much information or any preconceived notions. And I’ve felt burned and let down by plenty of movies I paid to see in theaters. Even actively loathed a couple. But ultimately, if you’re walking out a movie it’s probably not the movie’s fault; it’s probably yours.

-If there’s not a music store in Williamsburg called “Max Records” within 10 years then I will be very shocked and disappointed.

-I could (and someday will) write a lot about the experience of working with kids. But the main thing in the film that struck me as being incredibly authentic to the experience of being a kid is the incredible power of their imaginations. You could take almost anyone between the ages of 5-10 and put them in a completely empty room and they would find some way to entertain themselves. They see the possibilities in things. In everything. To us "grownups" a stick is a stick. To them, a stick can be a sword, a strange mutant creature, a dear friend, or anything at all really.

When I was in elementary school I participated in a competition called Odyssey of the Mind. Part of the competition was something called the “spontaneous competition” in which someone would name an everyday object and then your team would have four minutes to come up with as many potential uses for that item as possible. I remember one year the item was a light bulb. My team came up with something like 50 different responses in our four minutes. And we weren’t even one of the best teams that year. Coming out of Where the Wild Things Are I was reminded of that competition and I tried to see how many responses I could come up with on my own as a seemingly wiser 27 year old. I couldn’t come up with any uses for a light bulb other than “light a room”. Not a single other thing. I vividly remember our “coach” back in those days saying, “enjoy the power of your imaginations now because when you get older you won’t be able to do things like this anymore. You won’t be able to see all these possibilities.” I remember it so vividly because it seemed like such an absurd statement. If I can come up with 40 uses for a light bulb as a 10 year old then wouldn’t I be able to come up with 100 of them as a 30 year old? Turns out the only possibility I couldn’t see was the possibility that knowing more would ensure that I would be able to see less.

Sometimes I worry that our constantly wired culture will hurt the development of kids’ imaginations, but I think ultimately imagination is something so innate to children that nothing can harm it. Except for age.

- I don’t know about you but I got really invested in the James Gandolfini character. I was really engrossed in his storyline and I couldn’t wait to see what would ultimately happen to him in the end. Then right when I was about to find ou

The Referendum

2009-10-15T19:08:00.004-04:00

Usually spending large amounts of time reading random things on the internet makes my soul hurt. But occasionally it leads you to something great like this piece from the New York Times last month (propers to the always excellent Boxing Metropolis). It’s called “The Referendum” by Tim Kreider and you might have already read it as its been circulating the internet for a while now. But even if you have, I urge you to go read it again. It’s that good. Not only is it one of the best written things I’ve read this year, but it perfectly articulates so many things that I’ve been thinking about and feeling recently. There’s really nothing I can possible add to make it any better.

But I’ve never let that stop me before, so why start now?

Not to violate the basic rules I set up for this blog, but "The Referedum" has inspired me to get personal for a moment and talk about something that has everything to do with me and nothing to do, even in a tangential way, with pop culture or politics. I don’t know what it says about me that I can so personally relate to the struggles of a guy in his 40s, but I know that the ideas he addresses pretty closely tie into the three big lessons/ideas I'll take from this year.

1.) We are too closely connected
Shocking I know that I would have some issue with modern technology, but I really think human beings aren’t meant to be as closely connected as the internet now makes us. There are people I’ve never met in real life that I feel intimately connected to. I could write books about the lives of people I’ve met less than a handful of times. And with so much information about others at our finger tips it’s easy to write entire stories about the lives of others by simply filling in some blanks. The only problem is, those blanks are often massive gaping holes and the things we fill them with are pure invention. But we allow these stories we create to have the weight of fact and to have an actual affect on our being. But for every facebook or blog post about that Broadway play someone got cast in, or that piece they got published in The New York Times, or that summer they spent in the south of France, there are hundreds of posts they didn’t write about that audition they waited at for eight hours only to not even be seen, or that article they spent weeks working on that they never wound up feeling remotely good about, or those six months they spent living off unemployment checks. People mention the good and occasionally the mundane, but rarely the bad. But yet since we have a wealth of information seemingly available to us, those things that get mentioned take on the air of total truth. It seems like we have the whole story because we have 200 pages of the book, but in truth the book is thousands of pages long. And we were never meant to have that many pages in the first place. It’s dangerous and we‘re not evolved enough to handle it.

2.) People want to justify their life choices
Mr. Kreider’s main thesis is that there are so many choices available to us that we’re always wondering about the road not taken. The choices we didn’t make. That way of thinking can be overwhelming and lead to a deep existential crisis so we try as hard as we can to justify the choices we make as the correct ones. The superior ones. That’s why so many married people encourage others to get married, or so many people with kids talk about how great having kids is, or why I’m always trying to convince people that moving to LA is great idea that they should really consider. But that doesn’t mean getting married is really something everyone should do, or that having kids is a great thing, or moving to LA is a good idea. It doesn’t mean they’re not, it just means that most advice people give and most things people say are really as much about them as they are about you. We’re all self-interested beings and that’s not bad or good, it’s just human. So take everything with a grain of salt be tenacious with your questioning of all things. Listen to others but at the end of the day trust yourself and the choices you make. Your opinion is the only one that matters.

3.) You can’t compare yourself to others
When I was in high school there were few things I loved more than “Everyone’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)”. You know, the graduation speech full of little bits of advice that Baz Luhrmann set to music? It might, on an subjective level, seem cheesy, but still to this day rarely a week passes that one of its truisms doesn’t enter my thinking. (Lately “live in New York City once, but leave before it makes you hard” has really been resonating with me)

Anyway, since my high school days the part that I’ve liked the most has been “don’t waste your time on jealousy / sometimes you’re ahead, sometimes you’re behind / but the race is long and in the end it’s only with yourself.” I could have just saved myself about 200 words and simply said that since I think that’s the essence of what Mr. Kriedler is saying. But I think the other two points I’ve mentioned are also relevant. It’s all one.

It’s too easy now to get caught up in wondering about other people’s journeys, but we’ll never enjoy our own lives if we don’t enjoy our own paths. (Look at me auditioning for the next Baz Luhrmann scored advice “song”…)

As this year is winding down I’ve been really reflecting on the lessons that it has taught and what I’ll take away from it. And then something like "The Referendum" comes along and really speaks to the heart of what this year has been about for me. So thanks for indulging me in this little slice of self-seriousness. I’ll get back to trivial bullshit again next.

But until then - don’t forget to wear sunscreen.

Things I Don't Understand

2009-10-08T17:35:00.001-04:00

The expression “have your cake and eat it too”
Why would someone have a cake and not eat it? Has anyone ever ordered a cake so they could just look at it? Am I missing something here?

(And while we’re on the topic of strange expressions: Why do people say “kill two birds with one stone” like it’s a good thing? I mean why are we killing birds at all, let alone murdering them two at a time with rocks? That’s just cruel.)

Why there have been so many missed opportunities for synergy recently
-In the New York mayoral race I’m sure the candidates have things like “views on the issues” and “plans for the city”, but all I care about is the fact that none of them (to my knowledge) has made the song “Run This Town” a key element of their campaign. This is indefensible. Seriously at this point whoever is the first to use that song in a campaign ad or at a personal appearance has my vote. If no one uses it then I’m not voting. Simple as that. Now get to work, because through a strange loophole in the law my vote counts as 1,000 votes.

-Now that the book can be officially closed on the summer of ’09 it must be asked – how did we have a summer in which one of the most popular movies and one of the most popular songs were both about waking up hung over in Las Vegas and yet neither of them had anything to do with the other? Katy Perry’s CD came out like a year ago so that was plenty of time for the makers of The Hangover to incorporate “Waking Up In Vegas” into the movie in some way or at least add it to the soundtrack. It’s completely incomprehensible to me that this wasn’t done. I mean the song sounds like it was written for the movie. If they had commissioned Katy Perry to write a song specifically for the film there’s no way she could have done a better job. The fact that the music video isn’t one of those cheesy videos that features clips from the film amazes me. Whenever I hear the songs I can picture that video in my mind. How does it not exist? What kind of world is this? What, did Katy Perry and/or the makers of The Hangover have too much integrity? Did they not want to sell out? Someone explain this to me.

-The Noble Prize winners have been announced this week and none of the announcements have been accompanied by the playing of the song “Boom Boom Pow”? I mean wouldn’t any declaration of human greatness sound better if backed by that song? What expresses excellence in one’s field quite like a song with the lyrics “I’m on the supersonic boom/ Yall hear that spaceship zoom/ When when I step inside the room/ Them girls go apeshit, uh”? I mean the way he repeats the word “when” for no reason and then is unable to come with one more word at the end that rhymes with “room” – it’s genius. That is some good shit right there. Also, I may be confused as to the meaning of the word “good”.

The Parks and Recreation haters
Explain yourselves

Why I continue to watch Entourage
Our relationship is getting really abusive at this point. Next season I’m really expecting an episode entitled “Andy Stokan, Go Fuck Yourself”. And even then I think I would still keep watching. I haven’t been “involved” with something this bad since that time I dated Kirsten Dunst. I think next season I should just hit myself with a hammer once a week for 30 minutes until my brain starts hemorrhaging. It would be time better spent.

This

The David Letterman “Outrage”
Oh my God someone in the entertainment field was unfaithful to their significant other! A man in a position of power had a consensual sexual relationship with one of his subordinates! A clearly self-loathing and deeply insure person engaged in self-destructive behavior! Wow, I’m shocked. And, um, outraged or something? Seriously, how is any of this a big story? And how does the fact the he has made tons of jokes about infidelity over the years affect this in any way. That doesn’t make him a hypocrite, it makes him a comedian who was doing his job and will surely continue to do so. As Craig Ferguson said, "If we are now holding late-night talk show hosts to the same moral accountability as we hold politicians or clergymen, I'm out." And so am I. So back off and go back to being outraged about Jon and Kate or whatever. Because that shit is outrageous. Right? (I’m actually asking. Because I don’t know. They make my eyes bleed.)

Hooray for Television

2009-09-21T23:25:00.003-04:00

As some of you may know, while in college I used to write regularly in this here online journal. This was back when people still called them online journals, so you’ll have to bear with me as I transition into the 21st Century. Anyway, I’ve decided to start updating it regularly again and what better way to kick it off than with a good ol’ fashioned awards show round up.

I was supposed to be boycotting this year’s Emmys over the lack of outrage that Amy Ryan wasn’t nominated for Best Guest Actress in a Comedy Series, but there are too many questions that need to be answered for me to stay away. For instance, can someone who is waiting to start watching Mad Men until after the current season comes out on DVD watch an entire Emmycast without being exposed to any spoilers? Will this be the year people finally confess that they too think Alec Baldwin is overrated? What will Ricky Gervais do to further win America’s heart? Is Tina Fey the greatest person since Jesus? Will someone shoot Anna Paquin in the face? Answers to all these questions (hopefully) await at the 61st Annual Primetime Emmy Awards.

--------------------------------------------

-I haven’t been able to sleep for weeks, but the moment is finally at hand: “A tired boring old show that nobody cares about – next on CBS!”
(Just to be clear, I’m talking about the Emmys)

-Speaking of CBS, you know what’s hip with the kids these days? Musical numbers.
First the Oscars, now the Emmys. I wonder if the Grammys will follow suit….

-Shows that were not featured in the “Year in Comedy” montage: It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Eastbound & Down, Flight of the Conchords, Party Down, Better of Ted. Apparently they didn’t happen this year, even though one of them is nominated for Best Comedy Series.

-Aaron Sorkin used to date Kristen Chenoweth. This just needs to be said.
(On a related note, how small does one have to be to technically qualify as a “little person”?)

-Sarah Silverman’s mustache FTW.
(Note: I really just wanted an excuse to finally use the phrase FTW only two years after it became cool to do so. Now if only someone could explain to me what the hell a LOLCat is.)

-So apparently Tony Shaloub still exists. Who knew?

-HAHAHAHA oh my God, you’ll have to excuse me because I’m just laughing so hard at that Two and a Half Men clip. HAHAHA you see, HAHAHA Charlie Sheen is like this HAHAHA oh, hold on, hold on, I can do this….he’s HAHA a ladies’ man HAHAHA and he’s in charge of raising HAHAHAHA oh my god – in charge of raising a KID! LOLOLOLOLOL!! OMG that shit KILLS ME! It’s just too funny.

-Ummm, Jon Cryer just won an award...yeah, so that happened.

-Wow, a person playing a character with multiple personalities just won an acting award. I did not see that coming.

-Wow, the girls from Gossip Girl aren’t funny and can’t read. I did not see that coming.

-Wow, I really can’t come up with a way to keep this joke structure going. I did not see that coming.
(Actually, I totally did)

Phrases that would have sounded implausibly absurd 10 years ago:
-President Barack Obama
-Two time Emmy Winner Justin Timberlake
-Academy Award Winner Mo’Nique (oh just you wait…)

-Holy shit, what a year for death. That might have been the most star-studded dead people montage of all time. Death really did some phenomenal/terrible work this year.

(And just in case you were wondering, yes, we do live in a world where Patrick Swayze gets more applause than Walter Cronkite. And that’s the way it is.)

-You know what show I would watch? Tracy Morgan standing in front of a live open mike for 30 minutes. Tell me you wouldn’t watch that shit and be on the edge of your seat for every second of it.

-Wait, the three nominees for Breakthrough Performance of the Year are a scene from True Blood, a kiss on Gossip Girl and Kris Allen winning American Idol? Those are the three finalists? For the whole year? Who narrowed it down to those three options? Oh…random people who voted on the Internet? Remind me and my blog again why we take the opinions of random people on the Internet seriously.

-On the flip side, the thing from the Internet (Dr. Horrible) was the best part of the show. O Internet, why must I have such a conflicted relationship with you?

-You know what awards shows don’t have near enough of? Awards for Jon Stewart. Seriously, if the American Music Awards gave awards to Jon Stewart I would totally watch them.

-Between Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher, Will Farrell doing George Bush, Tina Fay doing Sarah Palin, and Obama doing Obama I was already writing that the variety show montage was a leftist’s wet dream and then they had to go and end it with Barbara Streisand blowing kisses to Sean Penn at The Kennedy Center.
I think I just came a little.
Free federally funded gay marriage abortions for everyone!

-Hey it’s Ben Schwartz! Winning an Emmy! It took a lot for me to root against “Motherlover” but Ben just made it worth it by drastically raising the bar in the Most Successful Person I know competition. So congrats on that. (The Emmy is nice too I guess.)

-You know what I like best about Dancing with the Stars (well, besides none of it) – the dancing when there are no stars involved.

Reasons Jon Stewart is God
-He let one of his writers give the acceptance speech for the writing award even though he himself is technically the head writer
-From hosting the Oscars he knows how hard it is to be an awards show host, so he devoted a good chunk of his limited speech time to giving Neil Patrick Harris support and encouragement
-He kept the rest of his speech short, funny and heartfelt

-Hey you know how you think it’s an outrage that no one watched The Wire back when it was on? And how the thought of its comically low ratings makes your heart hurt in all the sad places? And how you feel very strongly that if humanity can’t support a show like The Wire then maybe we should just give up as a species and pray that in our absence something better and more deserving will evolve to take our place? Well you can’t think any of that if you didn’t watch David Simon’s Generation Kill. It was challenging, complex, complicated, and often tedious and confusing. It was also probably the best meditation and examination of modern warfare since Apocalypse Now. And it just lost the Emmy for Best Miniseries to someone or something called “Little Dorrit”

-And the award for most terrifying awards show acceptance speech ever goes to…Michael Emmerson! I’m unsure whether he was thanking his agents or threatening to murder them. I’m also unsure if what he does on Lost can be categorized as “acting”.

-Remember the days when people used the terms “nerd” and “geek” like they were bad things? On some level I think we might have swung too far on the other direction. I guess what I’m trying to say is, every now and then I need a good wedgie. We all do, dammit.

-It’s ironic that Jon Hamm is never going to win an Emmy solely because of the exactly one other drama series on his own network.

-30 Rock had a wildly uneven year and Alec Baldwin was even more overrated than usual. The Office had its best season ever and Steve Carell did some of the best non-Gervais work ever on a comedy series. So naturally 30 Rock and Alec Baldwin won again.

-And in a category I know nothing about and have no opinion on, Glen Close once again beats Holly Hunter, Zoey Bartlett, and the monster that ate Kyra Sedgwick.

-Finally, with all the Kanye jokes being tossed around, I think its worth stating that I’m starting to think Kanye/Swift might have been an inside job. I mean think about it, other than that incident it would have been an incident and controversy free VMAs. Would MTV really allow that to happen? And they learned from the Bruno/Eminem stunt that if it leaks out that it was staged then no one cares anymore. So with the Kanye thing you don’t need to rehearse it, it doesn’t take much to pull off, and everyone wins. Taylor Swift wins because it gets her in the headlines and massive amounts of sympathy. Beyonce wins because she looks like a hero. And MTV obviously wins big time. Hell, even Jay Leno wins if you want to take it that far. The question is what does Kanye get out of it? Well a rapper who releases an album of strange songs about pain and heartbreak that feature him signing in auto-tune is clearly someone who doesn’t really care what others think. He’s been trying to cultivate a rep for a while now as an eccentric genius. And in a world where people on reality shows actively try to be as unlikable and hateful as possible we certainly live in a “there’s no such thing as bad publicity” world. I mean there’s not a person alive now who doesn’t know who Kanye West is. And you’re telling me when he releases a new album with some super catchy radio-friendly jams people won’t go out and buy it? I think maybe he didn’t realize how strong the vitriol against him would be, but I don’t think it’s out of the question that Kanye would have agreed to the stunt if MTV promised him massive promotion when his next album comes out. I’m not necessarily saying the whole thing was staged, but I am saying if it turned out that it was an inside job I wouldn’t be remotely surprised. Then again I had a dream last night that Toby Keith interrupted Jordin Sparks’ acceptance speech at the People’s Choice Awards so maybe I’ve been thinking about this whole thing way too much and maybe I’m turning into a crazy person. So it’s probably best to just disregard everything I’ve said.

I Hate Entertainment

2009-09-14T20:04:00.000-04:00

You know what I don’t want when I turn on fake awards shows that are known for being edgy and controversial? I don’t want anything edgy or controversial to happen. I especially don’t want anyone to be rude or discourteous to anyone else. I wouldn’t want anyone like say Chris Rock or Sarah Silverman or Russell Brand for example, to say or do anything disparaging about anyone else in attendance. Because I hate when people are “rude” to others. Everyone should be nice and civil above all else. Those are the qualities we all look for in our entertainment. That’s why no one likes Eminem or buys his music. Because he’s so rude. I mean thank God he has never said anything mildly disparaging at any point about any teenage female pop singers because then I would really be outraged and rant to boycott him. Because we all know that teenage girls are weak helpless creatures who cant possibly be expected to react well when someone interrupts them while they are speaking. They can sell out Madison Square Garden sure. Or headline a worldwide concert tour. But handle being interrupted and disparaged? No way! How Taylor Swift didn’t just curl up into the fetal position and start crying I’ll never know. Because she’s like a precious piece of very fragile glass. All teenage girls are. We shouldn’t expect anything else from them. I mentioned she’s a teenage girl right? So we should pity her and always be nice to her no matter what. I mean all she did was chose to show up to the VMAs. Its not like she signed up to be a part of some edgy and often uncivil event. Its not like she decided to come to a place where people have ever starting fighting in the audience or interrupted each other’s acceptance speeches before. And when you have Kanye West at an event as civil and classy as the VMAs how could she ever predict he would do something like what he did? It was shocking really. And you know who would never do anything like that? Beyonce. Because she is nice, or classy, or some other adjective that is in no way a polite way of saying “bland personality-less cipher”. She would never use her words or actions to entertain us in some spontaneous way that wasn’t choreographed and rehearsed and test marketed to within an inch of its life. She would never speak her mind to say that a video that was a cultural phenomenon and an iconic work deserved to beat a completely average and conventional video that no one even knew existed. Beyonce wouldn’t care about the right artistic works being properly recognized and she certainly wouldn’t advocate for her friend. Because she is a nice person. And thank God for that.

But you know who is not a nice person and would totally do all those things? Kanye West. And I really wish he hadn’t done them because then no one would be talking about him and certainly no one would be talking about an otherwise boring and meaningless awards show. Hey remember all those VMAs when no one did anything scandalous or tacky? Yeah neither do I. And that’s how I like it. So shame on you Kanye for keeping us from that. I really wish I could have heard all of Taylor’s boring, unentertaining reading of a list of names for an award that doesn’t mean anything and that no one cares about. Way to ruin a perfectly boring moment Kanye! I think we all as a nation agree that we wish as an entertainer you would stop doing things that are so entertaining. That’s not what being an entertainer is about after all. It’s about being nice at all times.

When it comes to entertainers, I only like the ones who seem like nice people who I can sit down and have a beer with. That’s how I decide whom to vote for in elections too. Not the best candidate, but the one that seems the nicest. And so it is with entertainers. I don’t like the ones who entertain me; I only like the ones who seem like nice, uninteresting people. Complex, controversial figures are really of no interest to me. In fact I hate them. Besides Kanye other celebrities I don’t like include anyone who has ever have cheated on their spouse, neglected their kids, broken the law, endangered the lives of others, or treated those around them terribly. Because those things are also not nice. And so I am equally as outraged by all of those activities as I am by Kanye West interrupting a speech at an awards show. Remember how I always tweet about my outrage whenever any of those other things happen? So while I am rightly angered by Kanye’s behavior, all of you heartless people who like being entertained by your entertainers, you can just save your outrage and indignation for something more important that you feel actually matters.

Like the Emmys.

A Fan's Dilemma

2009-09-10T16:20:00.003-04:00

The release of a new Third Eye Blind album a few weeks back has presented a major problem for me. See I’m a Third Eye Blind. And not in a nostalgic ironic way. I like their new stuff. I subscribe to their newsletter and visit at least three different websites related to their music on a semi-regular basis. I have every song they’ve ever recorded plus enough bootlegs and live recordings to fill three CDs. So yeah, I’m a FAN. So why is this a problem? Because, well, because they’re Third Eye Blind.

Look, as I’ve said here previously I don’t really believe in guilty pleasures. If something gives you pleasure then why should you feel guilty about it? I still believe this strongly. And I know I really shouldnt care what others think. And about most things I dont. But if you were to ask me to name my favorite bands I can pretty much guarantee you that Third Eye Blind would never come up.

And that’s a problem. I think.

Quentin Tarantino got me thinking about this problem right around when the new Third Eye Blind album came out. He did an interview in which he named his favorite movies from the past 17 years and it’s a stunningly strange list that includes things like Anything Else, Unbreakable, and Speed. When you’re Quentin Tarantino you can do things like that. In fact it’s pretty much expected. But if he were an up and coming director who hadn’t made Pulp Fiction and was trying to be taken seriously in the film industry would he be as willing to argue in defense of Anything Else? Would that make his facebook page? I don’t know. Maybe he wouldnt care, but I do. I do care what infomation is out there about me. Because you know what happens when I meet someone new? I friend them on facebook and then I make judgments and assumptions about them based on the things they’ve chosen to list on their facebook page. And I’m not alone in this. We all do to some degree. Because in the facebook age our like and dislikes are more than just that; they’re cultural signifiers.

And that brings me back to Third Eye Blind. I always mention to strangers my love for the Beatles. Not only are they truly my favorite band, but they also have the added benefit of being completely safe and universally beloved. Loving the Beatles makes me look good without saying too much else. And once I know you better I’ll talk to you about U2. They’re obviously a much more divisive band, but what they are about is such a strong signifier of what I am about, that my love for them says a lot about where I am coming from in the world. It's significant to understanding me as a person to know that I’m a U2 fan. But Third Eye Blind will probably never ever come up. Not because I’m necessarily embarrassed by it or because I feel guilty about it, but because I know how it looks from the outside. What they signify to the outside world. It would seem to me the equivalent of someone saying to me that they were big fans of Smashmouth. And I know what I would think about that person. And I don’t want people to think those things about me. Because what Third Eye Blind fandom seems to signify in popular culture is not what I am about. My Third Eye Blind fandom doesn’t signify accurately who I am. I am not “Third Eye Blind Fan”. I mean, yes, technically I am, but saying that just obfuscates the message. I can pick all the members of TV on the Radio out of a lineup no sweat, I’ve would describe Dan Deacon as the best concert going experience of my life, and I love the new Dirty Projectors album. And all of these things would seem to be equally as important and unimportant to understanding who I am as a person as the Third Eye Blind thing. But yet the Third Eye Blind “thing” is the signifier that most people would latch onto. Because it’s the ways that we’re different from the norm of those around us that are of interest to those trying to get a handle on us. Liking Star Wars doesn’t really say much about you, other than that you’re alive and possibly male. But NOT liking Star Wars, or never having seen Star Wars, would seem to say a great deal about you. And it would say things that you might not want said if, say, you were looking to meet a bunch of sci-fi inclined movie-loving males.

And so when I meet cultured, intelligent, hip young New Yorkers I mention The Beatles and Radiohead and Stevie Wonder. And then later I’ll mention U2 and Kanye West. But much like how I say my favorite movies are Annie Hall and Almost Famous, while knowing deep down that if I had to chose one movie to take with me to a deserted island it would be Primary Colors, the truth is that I haven’t listened to anything other than the new Third Eye Blind album in the past three weeks.

That’s who I am.

And also it’s not.

I just can’t decide.

Rejected Lyrics

2009-08-09T16:37:00.004-04:00

Rejected Lyrics For Taylor Swift’s Love Song Before She Decided On “You Were Romeo, I Was A Scarlet Letter”

You were Jay Gatsby, I was a red hunting hat
You were Huck Finn, I was the blood on Lady Macbeth’s hands
You were Guy Montag, I was a streetcar named desire
You were Gilgamesh, I was a red-armed prole woman
You were the Ministry of Truth, I was an allegory for the actions of the House Un-American Activities Committee
You were Tess of the D’Urbervilles, I was a profound sense of boredom

Lyrics Avril Lavinge Rejected In Favor Of “I'm the Motherfuckin Princess”
I’m the ass-kickin porcelain doll
Bitch, I’m the debutant
I’m the goddamn bunny rabbit
Rejected Follow Ups To “Birthday Sex”
Valentines Day Fellatio
Christmas Handjob
St. Patrick’s Day Dry Humping
Veterans Day Heavy Petting
Arbor Day Hug
Administrative Professionals Day Orgy
Names Rejected by Lady Gaga
Princess Gaga
Dutchess of Gaga
Queen Gaga II
3rd Earl of Gaga
Sovereign of the Distinguished Order of Gaga
Kajagoogoo

Lyrics 3OH!3 Reluctantly Rejected That Were Only Marginally More Offensive Than “Shush girl, shut your lips / Do the Helen Keller and talk with your hips”

I’m a German, you’re a Jew / Time to party like its ‘42
Is this another Nine Eleven? / Or have I died and gone to heaven?
Let’s have an orgy with Jesus / Cuz I know he can please us / Orally that is

Why A 59-Year-Old Man Losing A Golf Tournament Is What Sports Are All About

2009-07-19T23:39:00.007-04:00

As someone surrounded by artistic types, I frequently have to defend my love and passion for sports. And in defending my love for sports I often find myself trying to explain why they are important and why they matters. And sure there are plenty of reasons, both big and small why I’m a sports fan and why I think following sports is a legitimately good and worthwhile way to spend ones time, but one of the best arguments I can make was illustrated today by Tom Watson’s loss at the British Open.

For those who don’t know, The British Open is one of golf’s four major championships – like the Super Bowl, only there happened to be four each year. The legacy of a golfer is defined by how he plays in the majors. And major championships are events that are watched by the whole world. Well heading into the final hole of the British Open today an American named Tom Watson was in the lead. This might not seem significant until I mention the fact that Tom Watson is 59 years old. Yes, that’s right, 59. Many of his competitors hadn’t even been born yet when he won his first British Open. He had been a great player in his day, but he had been forgotten about, written off, and basically left for dead. And in a sports world where 40 is considered ancient, 59 is practically corpse-like. If he were to win this tournament he would become the oldest champion in any sport in American sports history by over 12 years. It would be almost beyond historic. Words really can’t do it justice.

So as Tom Watson strolled up the fairway of his final hole to thunderous applause it was one of the most beautiful and moving moments Id ever seen on a TV screen. I saw all the old men in the crowd, who seemed so hopeful and full of life and suddenly not so old after all. I thought of my Dad at home with his bad knees and bad back and chronically sore feet watching this man only a few months younger than himself about to win one of the toughest and most fiercely competitive sporting events in the world. I watched in awe as Tom Watson made his way to his ball, and as the power and beauty of the moment began to engulf me, my eyes started to well up with tears. All he had to do was make this simple 8-foot putt and the championship would be his. History would be made. It would be a moment I would one day tell my kids about.

And then he missed the putt. And he missed it badly.

And that’s why I love sports.

We spend so much of our free time consuming scripted entertainments of all types- movies, TV shows, plays, etc. – and yet no one ever really questions the validity of these “arts”. Their value seems clear – they provide entertainment and hopefully say something about life and the human condition. But when I was waiting for Tom Watson to make his putt today I was pacing around the room, palms sweaty, heart beating out of my chest and I couldn’t remember the last thing I watched that entertained and engaged me on such a strongly visceral level – well besides other sporting events. And more crucially, in almost any movie he makes that putt. But he didn’t. Because that’s how sports work. Sometimes the good guys lose. Sometimes the bad guys win. Sometimes beautiful moments fall apart in an instant and in other moments the mundane becomes sublime. Sports are often boring and almost always disappointing in the end. But then sometimes things happen that are so wonderful and incredible that they would be impossible to make up no matter how hard you tried. And there’s often no rhyme or reason for any it. All this sound like anything you know? It should, because its life. Life as it actually is, and not life as scripted “art” would have it be. It’s the reality that reality TV can only hope to be. But it never can because anything that is in any way scripted or controlled will always have a level of remove from real life. Whenever you’re watching a movie you know in the back of your mind that no matter how bad things get the hero won’t die, the boy won’t lose the girl, the world won’t end. And even if those things do happen, it’s okay - it’s not real. You have the safety of artificiality to guard you.

But if you want to experience entertainment without that safety net, entertainment where there is real heartbreak and real disappointment, real joy and real ecstasy, well I've got something for you.

Its called sports.

And it’s awesome.

Open Letter to the Academy

2009-06-25T14:32:00.001-04:00

Dear Motion Picture Academy,

So I hear that you’ve decided to expand the number of Best Picture nominees from 5 to 10.

On the one hand, it’s awesome that now Pixar has a guaranteed Best Picture slot every year. And maybe some of the foreign movies that are ineligible for Best Foreign Language Film due to the ridiculous foreign film rules will get some love.

On the other hand, everyone seems to be acting like it’s a great thing that now more popular films might be nominated. First of all, isn’t making a ton of money reward enough for popcorn films? And why is populism always treated like it’s such a great thing? All this really means is that now there’s even less motivation to make smart, challenging, interesting films for intelligent adults. The prestige of a possible Best Picture nomination was a key factor in getting many movies of that ilk greenlit, but now that studios can possibly get that same thing with some pandering popcorn films, why take a chance on an art house movie that might only make $5? Hasn’t the video game/comic book/sci-fi crowd taken over enough of pop culture already? Can’t I please just still keep my Oscars? Or are we now officially a nation of 12-year old boys? And sure, maybe more people will watch the telecast now, but who cares? Since when has bending to the will of the American public ever been proven to be a good thing? And also, if this means that any of those so-called "unimportant awards" will be bumped from the telecast...well I don’t even want to contemplate the length of the rant that that would inspire.

Look I realize I care too much (okay, WAAAY too much) about the Oscars, but we're all geeks about something. (Otherwise we wouldn’t be spending so much time on the internet.) And I'm just asking you to not mess anymore with the one thing in pop culture that I truly love. Thanks.

Yours truly,
fredtheonlnejournal

My Week With Morrie

2009-04-08T20:37:00.002-04:00

Thursday: random acts of vandalism
Friday: strip joint
Saturday: hookers
Sunday: arson
Monday: freebasing heroin
Tuesday: life lessons and spiritual uplift
Wednesday: death

Thoughts Had While Listening To The Radio III

2009-02-27T13:12:00.005-05:00

There are few things better than a day job that forces you to listen to a constant heady brew of Z100, kids songs, and other people’s iPod playlists, as it provides you much fodder for humorous (or not) thoughts and observations about music and a chance to do another installment of the feature that was the impetus for starting this blog.

(As always, thanks to Eryck Tait for his contributions.)

-I think a better song lyric than “put your hands up like you just don’t care” would be “put your hands up like you care very passionately about this song”. I just don’t understand why so many musicians are so pro-apathy.

-Okay, if you don’t understand a single word that somebody says and yet you have no qualms about drinking that person’s wine, then you’re just a dick. Even if that "person" might happen to be a bullfrog.

-Consider the fact that 1999 will for today kids always be a song about the past. Crazy huh?

-If Billy Joel is right and when you love someone you’re always insecure, then I guess I love everyone in the world.

-“I’m like a performer, the dance floor is my stage”? Um, Britney, I’m not sure you understand exactly how a simile works…

-Speaking of Britney…
I think it’s still a little ambiguous. Am I or am I not a womanizer? You really need to be more clear on that.

-Dear lead pussycat doll,
I’m a little confused by you using the words “hot” and “like me” in the same sentence. I don’t understand. What are you trying to say?

-Really though, who does give a fuck about an oxford comma?

-So that Chris Brown song No Air really takes on new resonance now does it?
(Too soon?)

-Seriously, why does the black one gotta be Scary Spice?

-You really haven’t lived until you’ve listened to edited versions of Nelly songs with 5-year olds.

-Like all right thinking people, I hate I Kissed A Girl. But my main complain with it isn’t that it’s too risqué, it’s that it’s too conservative. Seriously what world are you living in where your boyfriend would mind that you kissed another girl? The only thing he would be mad about is that it wasn’t videotaped. And “that’s not what good girls do, that’s not how they should behave”? What year is this, 1872? I guarantee you there’s not a girl alive over the age of 22 who hasn’t kissed another girl. That’s exactly what good girls do. It’s called sophomore year of college. What’s Katy Perry’s follow up single – I Crammed For My Mid-Terms?

-If Cruela De Vil doesn’t scare you no evil thing will? That might be overstating Cruella de Vil’s scariness somewhat. For example I would argue that Nazi Vampires would be scarier than Cruella de Vil, but maybe that’s just me.

-Finally here’s a fun activity for you. You know how you hate Bon Jovi’s You Want To Make A Memory so much that it makes you want to douse yourself with gasoline and light yourself on fire? Well no more! Because next time you hear it, listen to it as though it were written about Richie Sambora. Imagine that’s it’s secretly Jon Bon Jovi’s song for his lover, Richie Sambora, and it becomes maybe the greatest song ever written. If while listening to it in this context you don’t find Richie’s backing vocals to be the very definition of unintentional comedy then I really don’t know what to tell you. So really, give the song a listen with this thought in mind. You can thank me later.

My Reply To A Pro-McCain Letter From Someone Close To Me

2008-10-28T23:58:00.002-04:00

Dear (McCain Supporter),

You raise some really good points here and you’ve clearly thought this over thoroughly. I know that you have an open mind about these things and are willing to look at all sides. I certainly agree with you, that don’t know if Barack can deliver what he promises any more than I know that John McCain can deliver what he promises. If history has told us anything, the answer is “probably not”. Although Scott McClellan Bush’s former press secretary and someone who has been there and seen what it takes to be president first hand said in his endorsement of Obama that he “has the best chance for changing the way Washington works and getting things done”, its perfectly understandable and probably a little wise to be skeptical and cynical. You would be naïve not to be. I completely agree that Obama won’t be able to deliver exactly what he promises. And I say that as someone with his poster on my wall. But the real problems we will face, the crises that will arise, and the events that will transpire that will define the next four to eight years are likely things we have no inkling of now. In 2000 voters were asked to list the issues that were most important to them. Defense/national security came in 10th. That of course went on to be the driving issue of the entire Bush presidency. In 2004 there were no questions that I remember asked about how either candidate would respond to a natural disaster or what they would do if the financial market collapsed. Yet those are the events, along with the war, that will define Bush’s second term in the history books. We have no way of knowing yet what will happen in the next four years, what challenges will define this presidency. We do know a few things though.

We know that when the bailout crisis hit McCain famously suspended his campaign to head back to Washington right away (of course only after appearing on the CBS News that night, having a fundraiser dinner at the ritzy 21 Club in New York, speaking at a conference the next day, and then arriving in Washington AFTER Obama who had managed to both keep his campaign going and go to Washington). Once McCain arrived in Washington a deal that had seemed imminent immediately collapsed. Both Obama and McCain attended a meeting at the White House with President Bush. Obama dominated the conversation asking specific direct questions to a number of different people present and engaging in a vigorous back and forth. McCain didn’t say a single word until 43 minutes into the meeting and even then his comments were by all accounts minimal at best. Even though McCain had vowed to stay in Washington until the crisis was solved, he then left Washington with the crisis far further from being solved than it was when he arrived. Of course after he left, a deal soon came together and even though McCain called the deal a “disgrace” and even though he had vowed not to sign it if it was loaded with pork (which it was) he signed it anyway. In the major crisis of this campaign season did McCain demonstrate the leadership that this country needs? Did he show an understanding of and an ability to solve our financial crisis?

And as it continues to change and evolve who do you think has the better judgment to handle our complex financial crisis – someone who finished 894th out of 899 in their class in college and has said in the past year “the issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should” or someone who held the most prestigious position possible while at Harvard Law School (President of the Harvard Law Review) has written complex papers on economic theory and counts amount their advisers and supporters Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, and Warren Buffet?

Now, I hear that McCain understands the military better than Obama. But what is understanding the military? Is sign of understanding the military receiving the endorsement and personal guidance of Colin Powell, Wesley Clark and over 70 recently retired generals and admirals, or is a sign of understanding the military when people from your own party say things about you like “the thought of John McCain being commander and chief sends a cold chill down my spine” as Sen. Thad Cocharn did or “his temper would place this country at risk in international affairs, and the world perhaps in danger. In my mind, it should disqualify him” as former Sen. Bob Smith of New Hampshire said? Is understanding the military pushing for the country to enter an unnecessary war in Iraq and then claiming that in that war we will be “greeted as liberators”? Or is it opposing that war and saying from day one that it will be a quagmire that will be near impossible to control? For someone that understands the military so well McCain sure showed bad judgment in the run-up to the major military conflict of our time. Even Richard Clarke, Bush’s first counterterrorism czar, said, “the fact of the matter is McCain’s judgment about what to do in Iraqi was wrong. We’re at risk because of the mistaken judgment of people like John McCain.”

And if Obama would leave Iraq in a state of mass genocide as you say, then why do President Bush, General Petraus and the Iraqi President all support Obama’s plan for a withdrawal timetable?

And while we’re at it, what exactly is this change McCain has affected?
One example will suffice.

You say McCain is able to resist influence. If this is true then why in his running mate selection process after state GOP chairs said they would withhold funding and members of his campaign staff threatened to quit unless he changed his mind on choosing his personal favorite pick Joe Lieberman, did he do just that, and instead choose the exact person Karl Rove told him to pick even though he had only briefly met her once?
And if he is able to resist influence and his entire image has been built around standing up to lobbyists, why does he now employ 170 of them in his campaign?

You say McCain has a lot of character, but what is character? Is character leaving your wife after she suffered a deforming injury in a terrible car crash for a rich much younger woman you picked up at a bar while you’re still married, or is character sticking with your family through good times and bad? Is character continuing to run robocalls, calls McCain himself described as “hate calls” in 2000, even after numerous members of your own party have pleaded with you to stop saying the calls are “disgraceful” and “beneath your dignity”. Is character running a campaign that even Karl Rove (Karl Rove!) says has “gone too far” and whose ads he says “fail the truth test”? I always thought character was having integrity and principles. And if that’s what character is tell me how this story displays character - In 2000 after the South Carolina primary in which Tucker Eskew spread the stories about McCain’s wife’s pain killer addiction and tried to insinuate that he had fathered an illegitimate black child, McCain said “there’s a special place in hell for Tucker Eskew”. But who did McCain hire this time around as one of the senior officials of his campaign? That’s right – Tucker Eskew. Is that the “lot of character” you were referring to?

Look it’s a shame really. I used to love McCain. Back in 2004 I even claimed that I was going to vote for him in 2008 if the Democrats nominated Hillary. There’s proof of this online somewhere. But I can’t vote for McCain for the same reason I’ll never vote for Hillary – because he sold out everything he believed in just to be president.

In 2000 he called Jerry Fallwell an “agent of intolerance” and then in 2007 he went to speak at his college. He made a career out of opposing torture, for obvious reasons, but now he is in favor of it. He was famously risked his political future by being one of two Republicans to vote against Bush’s tax cuts and now supporting them is one of the key elements of his campaign. In March he told the Wall Street Journal “I’m always for less regulation” but told the same paper in September “We’re going to enact and enforce reforms and regulations to make sure these outrages never happen in the first place”. On September 16 he said “I do not believe the American tax payer should be on the hook for AIG” and then on September 18th he voted to bailout AIG. During the campaign he has also repeatedly renounced the McCain-Feingold Act and the McCain-Kennedy bill two of his signature achievements during his time in Washington. Two things he felt strongly enough about to not only write, but to put his name on. He’s also completely changed his stance since declaring his run for President about offshore drilling, the estate tax, storing nuclear waste, the GI Bill, hunting down terrorists in Pakistan, teaching intelligent design, funding No Child Left Behind, and immigration. It’s a shame the McCain I used to love isn’t still around because then this election would have been interesting

But in the end it doesn’t matter, because this election isn’t about McCain. And it isn’t even about Obama. It’s about a transformational moment in American history. Just like Kennedy and Reagan before him Obama is more than one man - he is the face of an entire political moment, a new chapter in American life. After living through eight years of an administration that promoted fear, mistrust and divisiveness, we now have the chance to be behind someone that promotes hope, inspiration, inclusiveness, and the best qualities that America has to offer. This is our chance to define our generation and to change the world. Will it work? I don’t know. But I do know one thing - you are planning to actively oppose it with your vote because you don’t “trust” it and you aren’t “convinced”. And that’s your right as a voter. And I understand. Change is never easy and great progress never comes without great risk. But safe and comfortable candidates only get you safe and comfortable results. Extraordinary times such as these call for extraordinary people. And extraordinary people are never going to seem safe. Barack is admittedly a risk. Sometimes though, as you well know, you just have to base your decisions on faith. And I can’t convince you of my faith any more than you can convince me of yours. I can’t know that Barack Obama wont be the worst president in history any more than you can know there is a God. Sometimes though in the absence of proof one way or the other you have to do the hard thing - you just have to have believe. And I believe Barack can be a transformative figure in American life. I believe he can bring people together. I believe he can make the world a better place. And I believe because I’ve seen it.

Two days after Hurricane Ike I was at the park here in Astoria. It was full of people of all ages and races and types. Now a while back I, like everyone I know, had donated money to Barack, so periodically I would get texts from his campaign about various events and such. Well this day, laying out in the park I suddenly began to hear phones go off all around me. It was like a symphony of phones. Bizarre and very surreal to say the least. And then sure enough I felt my phone vibrate as well. I looked down and it was a message from Barack. It said that if I would like to donate $5 to help hurricane relief all I had to do was text “yes” back to a certain number. I did and I had donated $5 for a good cause just as simple as that. I looked around the park and saw a sea of people all texting away on their phones doing the exact same thing. And I realized that scenes like that were happening all across the country at that exact moment. This story wasn’t mentioned anywhere in the media and I never once heard Barack bring it up. I have no idea how much money was raised that day and it doesn’t even matter. Because what I got to see that day was the best of America. Each of us doing our own little part to help our fellow man. I got to see our potential as a people and the better angels of our nature. That is what you can be a part of. That can be the legacy of our generation. You can make that happen. You can choose to doubt, or you can choose to believe. I can’t make that choice for you but what I can say is this - when I pull that lever on November 4th that will be the proudest moment of my life so far. That night when the results are announced I can guarantee you that every person I am with will openly weep tears of joy. There will literally be dancing in the streets. And there will be hope and joy and pride like we’ve never known before. These things are guaranteed to happen because of Barack. And I love you and care about you and I want all those things for you. I want you to be a part of history with me. It’s not too late.

Sex and the City: The 1998 Pitch Meeting

2008-05-30T21:15:00.002-04:00

As all of the attention of the world this weekend focuses on the second coming…of the “groundbreaking” social phenomenon that is Sex and the City I thought it would be interesting to read the recently discovered transcripts of the pitch meeting for the show.

HBO Headquarters 1998
Darren Star: I’ve got a great idea for a groundbreaking new female driven show! It’ll be about a modern 30-something single woman and her friends trying to balance career and relationships in the big city.

Chris Albrecht: So like The Mary Tyler Moore Show?

DS: But more about the women as a group

CA: So like Designing Women?

DS: But more about dating and relationships. And the main character writes a column about her experiences as a single woman in the city

CA: So like Suddenly Susan?

DS: But we’ll deal with other issues occasionally too, like pregnancy and cancer and stuff

CA: So like Murphy Brown?

DS: No…

CA: The Golden Girls, Kate & Allie, Felicity, Cybill, Ally McBeal, Friends…

DS: No, no, no…there’s going to be nudity and explicit language and stuff…its gonna be groundbreaking okay, don’t argue with me on this. Just take it as fact because I say so. Its gonna feature women in a whole new light. Like they’ve never been seen before - as catty materialistic socialites obsessed with men and fashion.

CA: Umm that sounds horribly offensive. And that’s actually the very stereotype usually pushed by the media that the modern woman has had to fight against for years.

DS: But I’m gonna get around that problem by calling this new show “post-feminist”.

CA: So you’re going to use the characters on the show as a way to deconstruct feminism and help define what it means in today’s world?

DS: Okay, I have no idea what any of those words are you just used, but I have a good feeling there wont be any of that as this show is gonna be a comedy.

CA: Oh that’s great! Who doesn’t love to laugh?

DS: Well its not gonna be a comedy in the sense that it has jokes and elicits laughter, but it’ll be a comedy in the sense that its not a drama and there will be wacky music.

CA: But the characters will still be written as nuanced and complex people and not just broad archetypes right?

DS: Whoa, with all the big words again! This is a show aimed at women. We can’t be challenging them like that. We just need to treat them how Hollywood always treats them - by pandering to them with clichés, cheap sentimentality, and bright shiny pretty things.

CA: That might be the most offensive thing I’ve ever heard, but I guess as long as this thing is well written…

DS: Oh it will be, cuz who better to write about a woman’s experience than a gay man?

CA: Umm, a woman?

DS: Yeah but other than that?

CA: No one

DS: Oh you shush. Soon there will be a whole generation of women aspiring to be clichéd versions of gay men and it’ll be fabulous. They’ll love high fashion, cosmos and meaningless sex with a multitude of partners. On the show, one of the characters in particular will be known for using her blatant love of sex to reclaim her sense of sexuality from the confines placed on it by a male driven society…

CA: Now that character sounds really interesting if done well. Who are you planning on getting to play her?

DS: The woman who agreed to star in Porkys

CA: (Bangs his head against desk) Frankly this show sounds beneath her. Plus she can’t act. Like not even a little bit. This pitch keeps getting worse by the minute. I am pretty desperate for a hit show though…Okay, I'll buy it. But on one condition: At some point one of the women needs to say something to the effect of, “How does it happen that four smart women can talk about nothing but boyfriends? What about us? What we think, we feel, we know? Christ! Does it always have to be about them?”

DS: (Sigh) Okay. But only if the very next scene features them shopping

CA: (Picks up hammer hits himself repeatedly in the face) Sure. Whatever. Sold.