Previously, we discussed the best episodes of "Next Generation" and memorable dialogue from The Wrath of Khan.
10.19.2008
May 8, 2009
The Cheese Fry is so there.
Previously, we discussed the best episodes of "Next Generation" and memorable dialogue from The Wrath of Khan.
Previously, we discussed the best episodes of "Next Generation" and memorable dialogue from The Wrath of Khan.
10.11.2008
"I need a CBC and chem-7, stat!"
It's been a long 14 years since NBC premiered a gritty little hospital drama called ER in September of 1994. Over three hundred episodes later, it's difficult to remember what couch potato life was like before the show became a Thursday night staple. While a smash success in its time, winning Emmys and big Neilsen numbers alike, the show has not aged well. Mercifully the proverbial plug will be pulled next spring amid much fanfare from the NBC promo people.
If you've caught ER in the last few seasons you'll see that it's very much stuck in the 1990s. You haven't missed much.
It's not the show's fault. There are only so many stories you can tell in Cook County General's emergency room (especially when you're juggling at least four subplots in every episode for 15 seasons) and this show has told them all.
Several times.
* Co-workers sleeping together and then breaking up, then getting back together.
* Doctors under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, which leads to Difficult Questions for coworkers regarding whether or not to blow the whistle.
* Ugly bureaucratic politics as unpopular doctors get promoted while the truly skilled doctors get the finger.
* Movie stars making a guest appearance to play a patient dying of a terminal illness. The hope for an Emmy nomination is painfully obvious.
* A very dire situation involving a lack of resources, whether it's beds, blood, or staff.
* Shootouts, explosions, virus outbreaks... in the hospital lobby where no security guard has ever proved useful.
* Train crashes, plane crashes, car crashes, all of them bringing in mass casualties and the frantic shout "We have to shut the ER down to triage!"
* Extreme weather that Makes Things Even Worse, from blizzards to heavy rains to heat waves.
* Messy domestic situations for the main characters, particularly those involving dying, crazy, addicted, or pushy parents. Immature siblings and bratty children also count.
* The tragic, unexpected (and ideally quite gory) death of a major character, typically in sweeps weeks. This is an emergency that has surely been marked with a gypsy curse.
* The miraculous recovery of a hopeless cause, reminding us that You Have to Have Faith...
* ...and the sudden demise of a seemingly simple case, reminding us that You Just Never Know.
* Patients in adjoining rooms that Share a Dramatic Connection (rival gangbagers, drunk drivers and victims, parent and child, husband and wife). Hopefully, one is worse off than the other so the one who's still conscious can look over through the glass doors and see the frantic, hopeless work being done on the other.
* Difficult personal choices involving mutually exclusive dichotomies (work-vs.-personal-life, following-hospital-rules vs. saving-the-patient).
* Dangerous procedures that have to be performed immediately (there's no time to get the patient to the OR) by a doctor who's Never Done This Before.
* An underage girl who's pregnant and can't tell her parents, the boyfriend, or both.
* The administering of a central line. Or the bungled administering of a central line.
* A strange object impaled somewhere strange.
* The arrival of a new doctor, who immediately rubs everyone the wrong way because of his/her A) incompetence or B) arrogance. Even better, this new doctor will be someone's new boss, thus adding to the friction.
It all sounds so familiar, huh?
Even the more shocking elements of the past have been recycled recently out of necessity. The 2002 twist in which Dr. Romano lost one arm in a freak accident thus becomes the 2007 "twist" in which poor Dr. Barnett's loses both legs. (I see your arm and raise you two legs.)
It's impossible to pick the best episodes, not out of a list of 300. But we can think back and remember the more memorable episodes, those that still stick out.
"Love's Labor Lost" (1995) - The one where Mark really screws up a baby delivery and the mother's dies. Still the best episode of the series.
"Hell and High Water" (1995) - The one where Dr. Ross finds some redemption for his self-destructive ways by saving a kid who's drowning in a culvert pipe during a flash flood.
"The Healers" (1996) - The one where Shep's paramedic partner suffers fatal burns.
"Ambush" (1997) - The gimmicky one that was shown live and had Dr. Ross watching a baseball game on TV in real time.
"Fathers and Sons" (1997) - The one where Mark Greene and Doug Ross go on a road trip together and deal with their strained relationships with their fathers.
"Night Shift" (1997) - The one where Dr. Gant dies and the only way they know he's dead is that they page him for help and the beeper sounds on the mangled patient on their gurney.
"All in the Family" (2000) - The one where perky little Lucy Knight dies on the operating table of her stab wounds moments after Dr. Romano actually shows some real emotion and promises her she'll be fine.
"Such Sweet Sorrow" (2000) - The one where Carol reunites with Doug and viewers get to see a special surprise return by George Clooney in the last shot.
"Damage is Done" (2002) - The one where Abby tries to help a battered neighbor and gets herself beat up by the abusive husband... which leads Luca to beat the hell out of him in a pool hall.
"On the Beach" (2002) - The one where Mark Greene dies of a brain tumor while sleeping in a bed in Hawaii.
Notice that none of these moments occurred after 2002. The death of Mark Greene is without a doubt ER's jump-the-shark moment. It's been all downhill from there. Just look at the character of Dr. Morris, the kind of goofy knucklehead that Ross and Benton would have taken out back and beat to hell had he dared to show his face in 1999.
That's not say the show was perfect pre-2002. With so big and sweeping a show, there were always imperfections. Case in point is the irritating surly character of Dr. Benton, who never met a patient or fellow doctor he didn't loathe. Special mention goes to the interminably tedious storyline involving his dying mother and his romance with nurse Jeanie Boulet.
And so the Cheese Fry bids a fond goodbye to ER. When it was good, it was great.
Now if you'll excuse us, we have a CT and C-spine to order.
If you've caught ER in the last few seasons you'll see that it's very much stuck in the 1990s. You haven't missed much.
It's not the show's fault. There are only so many stories you can tell in Cook County General's emergency room (especially when you're juggling at least four subplots in every episode for 15 seasons) and this show has told them all.
Several times.
* Co-workers sleeping together and then breaking up, then getting back together.
* Doctors under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, which leads to Difficult Questions for coworkers regarding whether or not to blow the whistle.
* Ugly bureaucratic politics as unpopular doctors get promoted while the truly skilled doctors get the finger.
* Movie stars making a guest appearance to play a patient dying of a terminal illness. The hope for an Emmy nomination is painfully obvious.
* A very dire situation involving a lack of resources, whether it's beds, blood, or staff.
* Shootouts, explosions, virus outbreaks... in the hospital lobby where no security guard has ever proved useful.
* Train crashes, plane crashes, car crashes, all of them bringing in mass casualties and the frantic shout "We have to shut the ER down to triage!"
* Extreme weather that Makes Things Even Worse, from blizzards to heavy rains to heat waves.
* Messy domestic situations for the main characters, particularly those involving dying, crazy, addicted, or pushy parents. Immature siblings and bratty children also count.
* The tragic, unexpected (and ideally quite gory) death of a major character, typically in sweeps weeks. This is an emergency that has surely been marked with a gypsy curse.
* The miraculous recovery of a hopeless cause, reminding us that You Have to Have Faith...
* ...and the sudden demise of a seemingly simple case, reminding us that You Just Never Know.
* Patients in adjoining rooms that Share a Dramatic Connection (rival gangbagers, drunk drivers and victims, parent and child, husband and wife). Hopefully, one is worse off than the other so the one who's still conscious can look over through the glass doors and see the frantic, hopeless work being done on the other.
* Difficult personal choices involving mutually exclusive dichotomies (work-vs.-personal-life, following-hospital-rules vs. saving-the-patient).
* Dangerous procedures that have to be performed immediately (there's no time to get the patient to the OR) by a doctor who's Never Done This Before.
* An underage girl who's pregnant and can't tell her parents, the boyfriend, or both.
* The administering of a central line. Or the bungled administering of a central line.
* A strange object impaled somewhere strange.
* The arrival of a new doctor, who immediately rubs everyone the wrong way because of his/her A) incompetence or B) arrogance. Even better, this new doctor will be someone's new boss, thus adding to the friction.
It all sounds so familiar, huh?
Even the more shocking elements of the past have been recycled recently out of necessity. The 2002 twist in which Dr. Romano lost one arm in a freak accident thus becomes the 2007 "twist" in which poor Dr. Barnett's loses both legs. (I see your arm and raise you two legs.)
It's impossible to pick the best episodes, not out of a list of 300. But we can think back and remember the more memorable episodes, those that still stick out.
"Love's Labor Lost" (1995) - The one where Mark really screws up a baby delivery and the mother's dies. Still the best episode of the series.
"Hell and High Water" (1995) - The one where Dr. Ross finds some redemption for his self-destructive ways by saving a kid who's drowning in a culvert pipe during a flash flood.
"The Healers" (1996) - The one where Shep's paramedic partner suffers fatal burns.
"Ambush" (1997) - The gimmicky one that was shown live and had Dr. Ross watching a baseball game on TV in real time.
"Fathers and Sons" (1997) - The one where Mark Greene and Doug Ross go on a road trip together and deal with their strained relationships with their fathers.
"Night Shift" (1997) - The one where Dr. Gant dies and the only way they know he's dead is that they page him for help and the beeper sounds on the mangled patient on their gurney.
"All in the Family" (2000) - The one where perky little Lucy Knight dies on the operating table of her stab wounds moments after Dr. Romano actually shows some real emotion and promises her she'll be fine.
"Such Sweet Sorrow" (2000) - The one where Carol reunites with Doug and viewers get to see a special surprise return by George Clooney in the last shot.
"Damage is Done" (2002) - The one where Abby tries to help a battered neighbor and gets herself beat up by the abusive husband... which leads Luca to beat the hell out of him in a pool hall.
"On the Beach" (2002) - The one where Mark Greene dies of a brain tumor while sleeping in a bed in Hawaii.
Notice that none of these moments occurred after 2002. The death of Mark Greene is without a doubt ER's jump-the-shark moment. It's been all downhill from there. Just look at the character of Dr. Morris, the kind of goofy knucklehead that Ross and Benton would have taken out back and beat to hell had he dared to show his face in 1999.
That's not say the show was perfect pre-2002. With so big and sweeping a show, there were always imperfections. Case in point is the irritating surly character of Dr. Benton, who never met a patient or fellow doctor he didn't loathe. Special mention goes to the interminably tedious storyline involving his dying mother and his romance with nurse Jeanie Boulet.
And so the Cheese Fry bids a fond goodbye to ER. When it was good, it was great.
Now if you'll excuse us, we have a CT and C-spine to order.
9.20.2008
You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
This may be the funniest clip ever from Adult Swim's "Robot Chicken," but only for those raised on Star Wars. If you're from Generation X and not watching it, you're doing yourself a disservice.
via videosift.com
via videosift.com
9.11.2008
Knee-jerk review: "The House Bunny"
1. Very cute.
2. But some might argue that the cuteness factor for the Cheese Fry is affected somewhat by the presence of many attractive actresses. Those people could have a point.
3. Even so, the Cheese Fry has always been fond of college comedies.
4. Anna Farris is way funnier than you'd expect.
5. Hugh Hefner, playing himself, however, is way worse than you'd expect. But give the old guy credit for being such a good sport.
6. But it's really Emma Stone who steals the movie, gawky and sexy at the same time in a way that seems very fresh and very genuine.
7. Cool soundtrack.
8. Where did the girls get the money needed for their extensive makeovers and that incredible Aztec party?
9. "The eyes are the nipples of the face."
10. Biggest laugh-out-loud moment comes when we learn how Farris' character remembers people's names. It's ridiculous, but completely believable.
11. Yeah, it's better than Tropic Thunder, but that movie swung for a home run instead of settling for the nice little double that is The House Bunny.
12. The movie goes a long way in suggesting that girls can only be popular and happy if they ramp up the sex appeal and act dumb... only to finally at the last minute pull out of its sexist dive-bomb to insist that its actually far better to Be Yourself. (Though a little eyeliner and a low-cut blouse can't hurt since you'll have a boyfriend.) There's a women's studies thesis paper in there somewhere.
2. But some might argue that the cuteness factor for the Cheese Fry is affected somewhat by the presence of many attractive actresses. Those people could have a point.
3. Even so, the Cheese Fry has always been fond of college comedies.
4. Anna Farris is way funnier than you'd expect.
5. Hugh Hefner, playing himself, however, is way worse than you'd expect. But give the old guy credit for being such a good sport.
6. But it's really Emma Stone who steals the movie, gawky and sexy at the same time in a way that seems very fresh and very genuine.
7. Cool soundtrack.
8. Where did the girls get the money needed for their extensive makeovers and that incredible Aztec party?
9. "The eyes are the nipples of the face."
10. Biggest laugh-out-loud moment comes when we learn how Farris' character remembers people's names. It's ridiculous, but completely believable.
11. Yeah, it's better than Tropic Thunder, but that movie swung for a home run instead of settling for the nice little double that is The House Bunny.
12. The movie goes a long way in suggesting that girls can only be popular and happy if they ramp up the sex appeal and act dumb... only to finally at the last minute pull out of its sexist dive-bomb to insist that its actually far better to Be Yourself. (Though a little eyeliner and a low-cut blouse can't hurt since you'll have a boyfriend.) There's a women's studies thesis paper in there somewhere.
Knee-jerk review: "Tropic Thunder"
1. Yeah, it's pretty funny in places. But it's also kind of a narrative mess, ping-ponging all over the place. For every broad, silly joke there's a more subtle and clever jab and that makes for a very uneven experience.
2. Why is Jack Black even in this movie? He's completely wasted and rather annoying at that. You cut him out and you wouldn't even miss him.
3. The same goes for the rapper-turned-actor character Alpa Chino. A sort of clever idea that never really pans out. The whole thing feels undercooked.
4. Robert Downey, Jr., however, is the man. You can't stop marveling that someone as good as him is in something as crazy as this.
5. "You m-m-m-m-make me happy." Hilarious. And anyone you tells you it's offensive needs to get over it. The trend of actors seeking awards by playing a handicapped character is what's offensive (see Sean Penn in I Am Sam, Juliette Lewis in The Other Sister, Rosie O'Donnell in Riding the Bus with My Sister, or really, even Tom Hanks in the ridiculously overrated Forrest Gump - all of them doing the kind of mentally handicapped voice that we all mastered in the third grade), not a comedy that mocks that kind of narcissistic pandering.
6. Matthew McConaughey needs to just go away. Don't we all have those secret lists of celebrities whom we'd like to give a one-way ticket to a deserted island? Put him at the top of our list. He no longer even tries to play a character. He's just being Matthew McConaughey, oily and half-stoned.
7. It could be argued that the fake trailers that open the movie are more clever than the movie itself.
8. Danny McBride is a genius.
9. Best sight gag involves a dead panda. Too funny.
10. We should also perhaps discuss Tom Cruise's "cameo" as a fat, balding, profane studio head. Get it? He's, like, totally playing against type! How clever! We can, like, totally forget about how creepy he really is in the real world! If it wasn't so smugly self-congratulatory, so transparent in its attempt to make Cruise seem hip and relevant, it might be halfway amusing. But it's not. Cruise's performance is way over the top and his scenes throw the whole movie out of whack.
2. Why is Jack Black even in this movie? He's completely wasted and rather annoying at that. You cut him out and you wouldn't even miss him.
3. The same goes for the rapper-turned-actor character Alpa Chino. A sort of clever idea that never really pans out. The whole thing feels undercooked.
4. Robert Downey, Jr., however, is the man. You can't stop marveling that someone as good as him is in something as crazy as this.
5. "You m-m-m-m-make me happy." Hilarious. And anyone you tells you it's offensive needs to get over it. The trend of actors seeking awards by playing a handicapped character is what's offensive (see Sean Penn in I Am Sam, Juliette Lewis in The Other Sister, Rosie O'Donnell in Riding the Bus with My Sister, or really, even Tom Hanks in the ridiculously overrated Forrest Gump - all of them doing the kind of mentally handicapped voice that we all mastered in the third grade), not a comedy that mocks that kind of narcissistic pandering.
6. Matthew McConaughey needs to just go away. Don't we all have those secret lists of celebrities whom we'd like to give a one-way ticket to a deserted island? Put him at the top of our list. He no longer even tries to play a character. He's just being Matthew McConaughey, oily and half-stoned.
7. It could be argued that the fake trailers that open the movie are more clever than the movie itself.
8. Danny McBride is a genius.
9. Best sight gag involves a dead panda. Too funny.
10. We should also perhaps discuss Tom Cruise's "cameo" as a fat, balding, profane studio head. Get it? He's, like, totally playing against type! How clever! We can, like, totally forget about how creepy he really is in the real world! If it wasn't so smugly self-congratulatory, so transparent in its attempt to make Cruise seem hip and relevant, it might be halfway amusing. But it's not. Cruise's performance is way over the top and his scenes throw the whole movie out of whack.
9.10.2008
Rewind: the Beijing Olympics
Ten things we learned this summer:
1. Michael Phelps is indeed a freak of nature, which was dutifully explained to viewers by NBC via some very cool "Six Million Dollar Man"-style graphics that zoomed in on his freakishly disproportionate arms, legs, and feet. (His oversize ears were not discussed.)
2. Nastia Liukin may be the best U.S. gymnast, but Alicia Sacramone is the hottest.
3. Badminton isn't for kids. It's a high-speed game that requires the sort of agility and fast reflexes anyone reading this probably doesn't have.
4. "I Got Soul but I'm Not a Soldier" is one groovy song that backed up the best Olympic-themed advertisement.
5. There's something elegantly compelling and simple about the footraces. At the Olympics you can't get much more basic than "which of you can run the fastest?"
6. Cheaters can win. Anyone with the vaguest sense of human adolescence could easily see that some of China's gymnasts were no more than 12, way under the age required by the rules. But China put them into competition anyway and the team won gold. Everyone complained, but the Olympics seemed reluctant to "embarrass" the host country with something so rude as an accusation of cheating. Even though the complaints grew to the point that officials finally had to admit that they were looking into it, the Olympics are now long over and whatever sanctions that come down to punish China won't really matter, will they?
7. We don't care at all about millionaire NBA players trying to win a medal in basketball. Whatever.
8. Mary Carillo's cutesy little Beijing human interest stories were cloying and took us away from the games. We tuned in for the athletes, not Mary's husky man voice or her forced interactions with Bob Costas in the NBC studios. This is supposed to be the Olympics, not "The Today Show."
9. High divers go straight to the showers after a dive because the shower water is warm and helps with their muscles.
10. The opening ceremonies were nothing short of amazing. When was the last time something as cheesy as an Olympic opening ceremony got you talking at the water cooler? Yes, there was something vaguely Leni Riefenstahl about the whole thing - the thousands of Chinese performers dancing and marching in perfect "don't mess with us, we have more people than you" unison. And there was also the requisite controversy about the little girl singer who was deemed ugly and replaced by a prettier child who would lip sync the song. But did you see the glowing red drumsticks or the last torchbearer running around the inside of the stadium's upper deck? Brilliant.
1. Michael Phelps is indeed a freak of nature, which was dutifully explained to viewers by NBC via some very cool "Six Million Dollar Man"-style graphics that zoomed in on his freakishly disproportionate arms, legs, and feet. (His oversize ears were not discussed.)
2. Nastia Liukin may be the best U.S. gymnast, but Alicia Sacramone is the hottest.
3. Badminton isn't for kids. It's a high-speed game that requires the sort of agility and fast reflexes anyone reading this probably doesn't have.
4. "I Got Soul but I'm Not a Soldier" is one groovy song that backed up the best Olympic-themed advertisement.
5. There's something elegantly compelling and simple about the footraces. At the Olympics you can't get much more basic than "which of you can run the fastest?"
6. Cheaters can win. Anyone with the vaguest sense of human adolescence could easily see that some of China's gymnasts were no more than 12, way under the age required by the rules. But China put them into competition anyway and the team won gold. Everyone complained, but the Olympics seemed reluctant to "embarrass" the host country with something so rude as an accusation of cheating. Even though the complaints grew to the point that officials finally had to admit that they were looking into it, the Olympics are now long over and whatever sanctions that come down to punish China won't really matter, will they?
7. We don't care at all about millionaire NBA players trying to win a medal in basketball. Whatever.
8. Mary Carillo's cutesy little Beijing human interest stories were cloying and took us away from the games. We tuned in for the athletes, not Mary's husky man voice or her forced interactions with Bob Costas in the NBC studios. This is supposed to be the Olympics, not "The Today Show."
9. High divers go straight to the showers after a dive because the shower water is warm and helps with their muscles.
10. The opening ceremonies were nothing short of amazing. When was the last time something as cheesy as an Olympic opening ceremony got you talking at the water cooler? Yes, there was something vaguely Leni Riefenstahl about the whole thing - the thousands of Chinese performers dancing and marching in perfect "don't mess with us, we have more people than you" unison. And there was also the requisite controversy about the little girl singer who was deemed ugly and replaced by a prettier child who would lip sync the song. But did you see the glowing red drumsticks or the last torchbearer running around the inside of the stadium's upper deck? Brilliant.
Another reason to hate advertising
Earlier this summer the Made to Stick dudes, Dan and Chip Heath, wrote a column in Fast Company about the way advertisers manufacture social stigmas to sell products:
A classic TV commercial for Wisk detergent opens with a housewife closing a suitcase she has packed for her husband. Suddenly, the suitcase springs open, and we hear, seemingly from within the suitcase as if it's possessed, a chorus of devil children shrieking, "Ring around the collar! Ring around the collar!"
Another Wisk ad of that time shows a man on a cruise. He is approached enthusiastically by the female cruise director, who tugs playfully at his collar -- you know, in the way cruise directors are always playfully tugging at your collar. But then she spots his Ring Around the Collar. She recoils, disgusted. Ad Age ranked the Wisk campaign No. 62 in the 100 top advertising campaigns of the 20th century. It's also despicable.
People are incredibly sensitive to social stigmas. The most serious forms -- aimed at a particular race, ethnicity, class, or sexual orientation -- are pernicious and destructive. Others, less serious but more plentiful, govern our day-to-day behavior. Think of the way you quickly judge a person who sneezes on a crowded bus without covering up. The Ring Around the Collar message creates an everyday stigma of this kind.
Marketers deliberately construct stigmas for the sake of selling you a solution to the ensuing embarrassment and disgust. They smack you on the head so they can sell you an aspirin for the headache. Why do we put up with this?
If Ring Around the Collar seems laughably old school, a relic of a more naive time, then consider one of the 2008 variations. A commercial in Visa's Check Card campaign shows a deli where people move through the line with elaborate, precise choreography, like a Broadway production number. Customers complete their transactions by swiping the check card, and they all seem delighted to be part of the capitalistic clockwork. That is, until the moment when one misguided schlub pulls out some cash. Then everything comes to a crashing halt. No more dancing, no more delight. The cashier looks disgusted.
Yes, Visa and its ad agency, TBWA\Chiat\Day, are trying to make you feel embarrassed for paying for your lunch with cash.
Folks, that takes gall, since for most of the past 30 years, it has been the cash people who have waited patiently for the credit-card people. Remember the guy in front of you a few years back who was trying to buy a 79-cent Fanta Orange with his Visa, and the clerk used the card-imprint machine to grind the raised digits onto the carbon, but the machine didn't work right, so he pulled out a Bic and began microscribing the 16-digit credit-card number into those tiny preprinted boxes? And then he had to call for an approval code. Sheesh.
Sadly, Visa isn't alone in making shame one of our leading exports. Get a load of this astonishing statement in a Strategy + Business article that advised companies how to grow faster in China: "Too often, companies focus on understanding only the current demand of the consumer," wrote Edward Tse, a VP with the consultant Booz Allen Hamilton. "A better course is to anticipate or even create demand. Through smart marketing, Procter & Gamble, for example, created the perception that dandruff -- traditionally a nonissue for the Chinese -- is a social stigma and offered a product (Head & Shoulders antidandruff shampoo) to 'solve' the problem."
Well played, P&G! And, quick, let's get a team from Gillette to solve the Arm Hair Problem in Ecuador! Other marketers should take notes on how to demonize the ordinary. Here's a suggestion for Coca-Cola: "Because who knows where your water has been." For Hallmark: "So he wrote you a love poem. Guess he couldn't afford a card, huh?"
You may be asking, What's the harm? A thoughtful paper from two Columbia University professors on this topic addresses that question. In "Conceptualizing Stigma," Bruce Link and Jo Phelan point out that while stigmatizing certain groups can lead to direct discrimination -- for example, against people regarded as "mentally ill" -- it can also have subtler effects. A depressed woman, for instance, who is aware of the negative perceptions of the mentally ill, may begin to act more cautiously for fear of the way others may respond to her. Stigmas breed self-censorship.
This is precisely the response that the sleazy Visa campaign wants to elicit. Picture yourself in a crowded checkout line. You reach for the cash in your wallet. At that moment, the folks at Visa and TBWA\Chiat\Day hope you'll feel a whisper of shame. The people behind you are cursing under their breath.
That's icky. Stigma should be reserved for people who violate community standards, like people who willfully park in handicap spots. It shouldn't be used as a too-cute-by-half way to peddle some dumb new product.
This is why we need one more stigma: a Ring Around the Collar for badly behaved marketers. Then the vast majority of people responsible for selling products wouldn't use tactics like these. It's time for the marketing community itself to be the first to turn up its nose at people who shamelessly use these techniques to sell creams and detergents and credit cards.
A classic TV commercial for Wisk detergent opens with a housewife closing a suitcase she has packed for her husband. Suddenly, the suitcase springs open, and we hear, seemingly from within the suitcase as if it's possessed, a chorus of devil children shrieking, "Ring around the collar! Ring around the collar!"
Another Wisk ad of that time shows a man on a cruise. He is approached enthusiastically by the female cruise director, who tugs playfully at his collar -- you know, in the way cruise directors are always playfully tugging at your collar. But then she spots his Ring Around the Collar. She recoils, disgusted. Ad Age ranked the Wisk campaign No. 62 in the 100 top advertising campaigns of the 20th century. It's also despicable.
People are incredibly sensitive to social stigmas. The most serious forms -- aimed at a particular race, ethnicity, class, or sexual orientation -- are pernicious and destructive. Others, less serious but more plentiful, govern our day-to-day behavior. Think of the way you quickly judge a person who sneezes on a crowded bus without covering up. The Ring Around the Collar message creates an everyday stigma of this kind.
Marketers deliberately construct stigmas for the sake of selling you a solution to the ensuing embarrassment and disgust. They smack you on the head so they can sell you an aspirin for the headache. Why do we put up with this?
If Ring Around the Collar seems laughably old school, a relic of a more naive time, then consider one of the 2008 variations. A commercial in Visa's Check Card campaign shows a deli where people move through the line with elaborate, precise choreography, like a Broadway production number. Customers complete their transactions by swiping the check card, and they all seem delighted to be part of the capitalistic clockwork. That is, until the moment when one misguided schlub pulls out some cash. Then everything comes to a crashing halt. No more dancing, no more delight. The cashier looks disgusted.
Yes, Visa and its ad agency, TBWA\Chiat\Day, are trying to make you feel embarrassed for paying for your lunch with cash.
Folks, that takes gall, since for most of the past 30 years, it has been the cash people who have waited patiently for the credit-card people. Remember the guy in front of you a few years back who was trying to buy a 79-cent Fanta Orange with his Visa, and the clerk used the card-imprint machine to grind the raised digits onto the carbon, but the machine didn't work right, so he pulled out a Bic and began microscribing the 16-digit credit-card number into those tiny preprinted boxes? And then he had to call for an approval code. Sheesh.
Sadly, Visa isn't alone in making shame one of our leading exports. Get a load of this astonishing statement in a Strategy + Business article that advised companies how to grow faster in China: "Too often, companies focus on understanding only the current demand of the consumer," wrote Edward Tse, a VP with the consultant Booz Allen Hamilton. "A better course is to anticipate or even create demand. Through smart marketing, Procter & Gamble, for example, created the perception that dandruff -- traditionally a nonissue for the Chinese -- is a social stigma and offered a product (Head & Shoulders antidandruff shampoo) to 'solve' the problem."
Well played, P&G! And, quick, let's get a team from Gillette to solve the Arm Hair Problem in Ecuador! Other marketers should take notes on how to demonize the ordinary. Here's a suggestion for Coca-Cola: "Because who knows where your water has been." For Hallmark: "So he wrote you a love poem. Guess he couldn't afford a card, huh?"
You may be asking, What's the harm? A thoughtful paper from two Columbia University professors on this topic addresses that question. In "Conceptualizing Stigma," Bruce Link and Jo Phelan point out that while stigmatizing certain groups can lead to direct discrimination -- for example, against people regarded as "mentally ill" -- it can also have subtler effects. A depressed woman, for instance, who is aware of the negative perceptions of the mentally ill, may begin to act more cautiously for fear of the way others may respond to her. Stigmas breed self-censorship.
This is precisely the response that the sleazy Visa campaign wants to elicit. Picture yourself in a crowded checkout line. You reach for the cash in your wallet. At that moment, the folks at Visa and TBWA\Chiat\Day hope you'll feel a whisper of shame. The people behind you are cursing under their breath.
That's icky. Stigma should be reserved for people who violate community standards, like people who willfully park in handicap spots. It shouldn't be used as a too-cute-by-half way to peddle some dumb new product.
This is why we need one more stigma: a Ring Around the Collar for badly behaved marketers. Then the vast majority of people responsible for selling products wouldn't use tactics like these. It's time for the marketing community itself to be the first to turn up its nose at people who shamelessly use these techniques to sell creams and detergents and credit cards.
9.09.2008
The Sarah Palin situation
Although reports today suggest John McCain's gamble on Sarah Palin may be working for now, last week L.A. Weekly's Marc Cooper looked at what the Palin nomination says about the GOP's predicament and what it might mean for the Republican ticket:
It might have beenthe waterlogged and vengeful ghost of Katrina, materialized in the form of Gustav, that came wisping into St. Paul, effectively shutting down the first night of the GOP's quadrennial multimillion-dollar propaganda show. But it's an uncontrollable Hurricane Sarah that threatens to blow the McCain campaign right into the deep, dark sea.
A rather shameless media swoon set in immediately after Sarah Palin's surprise appointment to the Republican VP spot last Friday. Reporters and anchors jostled each other aside in a race to celebrate the perky Governor What's-Her-Name's predilection for caribou stew, moose pie and children with screwball names. But the honeymoon was short-lived.
What began as a few breezy rumors on the Web soon congealed into a raging Category 5 storm of controversy. Sarah Palin was — within hours — revealed as a perfectly affable but totally laughable and supremely unqualified religious zealot from a three-stoplight town.
By day one of the truncated Republican National Convention, we learned that the governor had recently been a member of a fringe party seeking secession from the U.S.; that her God-fearing, fundamentalist 17-year-old unmarried daughter was carrying a baby; that far from being a Mrs. Smith–type reformer, she vigorously supported an earmark system she now supposedly opposes; that she supported the so-called Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it; that she has lawyered up to rebuff a state investigation into her ethics; that she served as a top official for a political action committee of Senator Ted Stevens, who was indicted on myriad ethics charges; that with the exception of one political visit to Kuwait, she may never have traveled abroad, and that John McCain had met with her just once or maybe twice before giving her the nod.
By day two, as news broke that McCain's vetting party had arrived in Alaska only a day or so before the choice was made, we learned that in the political futures markets, the odds were quickly rising that Governor Palin would soon be purged, packed off to political Siberia and replaced on the ticket.
The Republican Party — especially its ideologically sodden "base" gathered in red-white-and-blue sequined vests and elephant-ears hats in the St. Paul convention hall — was reacting to this catastrophe the same way the old Communist Party USA reacted to the twists and turns of the Hitler-Stalin pact. History aficionados and graying red-diaper babies will recall that back then, the CPUSA obediently parroted whatever the Kremlin line of the day was — no matter how much it zigged or zagged. One day, it was to oppose the Nazi takeover of Germany. Then it was to support Hitler as an ally against British Imperialism. Then it was to ally with the former Imperialists to crush the Nazi invaders. All you had to do was pick up the morning edition of The Daily Worker to find out what to think. Or believe.
So what, then, if Supreme Leader McCain has changed his mind about the whole "experience" thing? For the last six months, we were supposed to be scared witless by the very thought of a dopey Senator Obama picking up the phone at 3 a.m., a pre-convention Clinton argument that McCain happily picked up on. Now, we're supposed to feel secure when Governor Gidget answers the call, puts on her glasses and wakes her hubby to ask if he knows where this Pakee-stan place is that everyone's so worked up about?
No problem, Comrade. Just as there's no problem with this whole teenage-daughter baby thing. All these family-values types, who want to stigmatize and punish errant sinners, are now all lined up to give a beneficent pass to Bristol Palin, who at age 17 couldn't keep her pants on tight enough. Governor Mom says she's "proud" of her kid's decision to keep the baby and marry the father. As if the daughter had a choice. Her fundamentalist family doesn't believe in choice. Indeed, Governor Palin has publicly advocated the criminalization of abortion, even in cases of rape or incest. In short, the same people who scold us not to politicize young Miss Palin's pregnancy, the same people who tell us it is none of our business, are the very same people who want to make it their business, and that of the state and of the criminal justice system, if — God forbid — someone else's kid gets knocked up and wants to abort.
There's nearly a one in five chance that any sitting U.S. president will die in office. McCain, if somehow elected, will be the oldest candidate ever to serve in the White House. He's also had four bouts of cancer. McCain's choice of Palin, then, demonstrates not only a ragged recklessness but is an affront to the entire electorate. Mister Serious, as McCain likes to portray himself, turns out to be a clownish and incompetent fool who thinks the American people are stupid enough to buy the gimmick he's come up with.
I seriously doubt it. Indeed, I think it's time to buy right into that futures betting market, because I can't imagine Palin surviving into and through the scheduled October 2 debate with Joe Biden.
As for the GOP, they'd best take a few hours off from their partying to bone up on the history of the CPUSA. Blind obedience to ideology and unswerving loyalty to leaders turned the CP into little less than a holding tank for geriatrics and Stalinists. And then it quietly, completely unnoticed, disappeared into the darkest recesses of forgotten history.
It might have beenthe waterlogged and vengeful ghost of Katrina, materialized in the form of Gustav, that came wisping into St. Paul, effectively shutting down the first night of the GOP's quadrennial multimillion-dollar propaganda show. But it's an uncontrollable Hurricane Sarah that threatens to blow the McCain campaign right into the deep, dark sea.
A rather shameless media swoon set in immediately after Sarah Palin's surprise appointment to the Republican VP spot last Friday. Reporters and anchors jostled each other aside in a race to celebrate the perky Governor What's-Her-Name's predilection for caribou stew, moose pie and children with screwball names. But the honeymoon was short-lived.
What began as a few breezy rumors on the Web soon congealed into a raging Category 5 storm of controversy. Sarah Palin was — within hours — revealed as a perfectly affable but totally laughable and supremely unqualified religious zealot from a three-stoplight town.
By day one of the truncated Republican National Convention, we learned that the governor had recently been a member of a fringe party seeking secession from the U.S.; that her God-fearing, fundamentalist 17-year-old unmarried daughter was carrying a baby; that far from being a Mrs. Smith–type reformer, she vigorously supported an earmark system she now supposedly opposes; that she supported the so-called Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it; that she has lawyered up to rebuff a state investigation into her ethics; that she served as a top official for a political action committee of Senator Ted Stevens, who was indicted on myriad ethics charges; that with the exception of one political visit to Kuwait, she may never have traveled abroad, and that John McCain had met with her just once or maybe twice before giving her the nod.
By day two, as news broke that McCain's vetting party had arrived in Alaska only a day or so before the choice was made, we learned that in the political futures markets, the odds were quickly rising that Governor Palin would soon be purged, packed off to political Siberia and replaced on the ticket.
The Republican Party — especially its ideologically sodden "base" gathered in red-white-and-blue sequined vests and elephant-ears hats in the St. Paul convention hall — was reacting to this catastrophe the same way the old Communist Party USA reacted to the twists and turns of the Hitler-Stalin pact. History aficionados and graying red-diaper babies will recall that back then, the CPUSA obediently parroted whatever the Kremlin line of the day was — no matter how much it zigged or zagged. One day, it was to oppose the Nazi takeover of Germany. Then it was to support Hitler as an ally against British Imperialism. Then it was to ally with the former Imperialists to crush the Nazi invaders. All you had to do was pick up the morning edition of The Daily Worker to find out what to think. Or believe.
So what, then, if Supreme Leader McCain has changed his mind about the whole "experience" thing? For the last six months, we were supposed to be scared witless by the very thought of a dopey Senator Obama picking up the phone at 3 a.m., a pre-convention Clinton argument that McCain happily picked up on. Now, we're supposed to feel secure when Governor Gidget answers the call, puts on her glasses and wakes her hubby to ask if he knows where this Pakee-stan place is that everyone's so worked up about?
No problem, Comrade. Just as there's no problem with this whole teenage-daughter baby thing. All these family-values types, who want to stigmatize and punish errant sinners, are now all lined up to give a beneficent pass to Bristol Palin, who at age 17 couldn't keep her pants on tight enough. Governor Mom says she's "proud" of her kid's decision to keep the baby and marry the father. As if the daughter had a choice. Her fundamentalist family doesn't believe in choice. Indeed, Governor Palin has publicly advocated the criminalization of abortion, even in cases of rape or incest. In short, the same people who scold us not to politicize young Miss Palin's pregnancy, the same people who tell us it is none of our business, are the very same people who want to make it their business, and that of the state and of the criminal justice system, if — God forbid — someone else's kid gets knocked up and wants to abort.
There's nearly a one in five chance that any sitting U.S. president will die in office. McCain, if somehow elected, will be the oldest candidate ever to serve in the White House. He's also had four bouts of cancer. McCain's choice of Palin, then, demonstrates not only a ragged recklessness but is an affront to the entire electorate. Mister Serious, as McCain likes to portray himself, turns out to be a clownish and incompetent fool who thinks the American people are stupid enough to buy the gimmick he's come up with.
I seriously doubt it. Indeed, I think it's time to buy right into that futures betting market, because I can't imagine Palin surviving into and through the scheduled October 2 debate with Joe Biden.
As for the GOP, they'd best take a few hours off from their partying to bone up on the history of the CPUSA. Blind obedience to ideology and unswerving loyalty to leaders turned the CP into little less than a holding tank for geriatrics and Stalinists. And then it quietly, completely unnoticed, disappeared into the darkest recesses of forgotten history.
The hiatus is over!
In television, a "hiatus" refers to a short pause in a show's broadcast schedule when a network temporarily takes an under-performing show off the air for a few weeks. In reality, "hiatus" is code for "cancellation," a kind way of quietly removing a show from the schedule without the humiliation of announcing its been cancelled. It's only after audiences have forgotten about it does the bad news come out.
The good news is that the Cheese Fry has not been cancelled. It really was on an August hiatus.
But now we're back, leaner and meaner than ever. For those handful of people who expressed sadness at our lack of postings... thanks! We didn't know anyone was actually out there.
The good news is that the Cheese Fry has not been cancelled. It really was on an August hiatus.
But now we're back, leaner and meaner than ever. For those handful of people who expressed sadness at our lack of postings... thanks! We didn't know anyone was actually out there.
7.26.2008
Knee-jerk review: "The X-Files: I Want to Believe"
1. Strange subtitle, isn't it?
2. But a way cool poster.
3. It's a fairly low-key movie, more a character drama than a creepy supernatural thriller. No special effects really.
4. Then again, that's a good thing compared to the over-the-top, convoluted conspiracy mess that was the first feature film back in 1998.
5. There's not much humor, something at which the TV show excelled. The quirky episodes were always the best.
6. Nice surprise appearance of a fan favorite character at the end. Didn't see that coming.
7. Plenty of frustrating plot holes and logic lapses here. Coincidental moments where two characters cross paths at just the right time to advance the plot. But upon further review, those kinds of story contrivances were a big part of the TV show. Then more you think about it, the more this movie feels like an extended episode of the show. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on your expectations.
8. Gillian Anderson has aged very nicely. Wow. She looks better now than she did in 1994.
9. Some really great little moments here (especially when Mulder and Scully get into one of their great back-and-forths about the evidence and what it could mean), but also some very forced, rushed moments. Feels like sometimes the filmmakers are hurrying things along to keep things as brief as possible.
10. The big bad-guy secret isn't as shocking as it probably could have been. Also some disappointing parallels to things like Hostel and Silence of the Lambs.
11. For fans of the show, it'll certainly be enjoyable. But did it really need to be made? What could have been an enduring feature franchise may have paid the price for waiting too long to ramp up again (thanks in part to a nasty legal fight between Fox and creator Chris Carter).
12. There's also a considerable "ick" factor that involves pedophiles and deviant homosexuals.
2. But a way cool poster.
3. It's a fairly low-key movie, more a character drama than a creepy supernatural thriller. No special effects really.
4. Then again, that's a good thing compared to the over-the-top, convoluted conspiracy mess that was the first feature film back in 1998.
5. There's not much humor, something at which the TV show excelled. The quirky episodes were always the best.
6. Nice surprise appearance of a fan favorite character at the end. Didn't see that coming.
7. Plenty of frustrating plot holes and logic lapses here. Coincidental moments where two characters cross paths at just the right time to advance the plot. But upon further review, those kinds of story contrivances were a big part of the TV show. Then more you think about it, the more this movie feels like an extended episode of the show. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on your expectations.
8. Gillian Anderson has aged very nicely. Wow. She looks better now than she did in 1994.
9. Some really great little moments here (especially when Mulder and Scully get into one of their great back-and-forths about the evidence and what it could mean), but also some very forced, rushed moments. Feels like sometimes the filmmakers are hurrying things along to keep things as brief as possible.
10. The big bad-guy secret isn't as shocking as it probably could have been. Also some disappointing parallels to things like Hostel and Silence of the Lambs.
11. For fans of the show, it'll certainly be enjoyable. But did it really need to be made? What could have been an enduring feature franchise may have paid the price for waiting too long to ramp up again (thanks in part to a nasty legal fight between Fox and creator Chris Carter).
12. There's also a considerable "ick" factor that involves pedophiles and deviant homosexuals.
7.20.2008
Knee-jerk review: "The Dark Knight"
1. Sometimes too much of a good thing is a bad thing. This movie's about 30 minutes too long. Sorry.
2. Everything you've heard about Heath Ledger's Joker is true. That performance is a force of nature. Funny, feral, unpredictable.
3. Maggie Gyllenhaal is about a 300% upgrade over Katie Holmes, who was so hopelessly in over her heard in Batman Begins playing the same character. Gyllenhaal's a woman, whereas Holmes is a little girl.
4. The raspy voice Christian Bale uses when he's Batman works great when he's saying something bad-ass like "Drop the gun." But when he has to deliver long impassioned speeches that affected voice is just silly.
5. They flipped an 18-wheeler truck end over end. Wow. It's hard these days to see a stunt you haven't seen before.
6. Why would anyone want to work as a Gotham City cop? It looks like you never have a day off.
7. We didn't get the Harvey Two-Face character when Tommy Lee Jones played him in Batman Forever. But with Aaron Eckhart, we get it.
8. The problem with the movie is that there's too much of it. If you're looking at your watch and wondering if the movie will ever end, then someone somewhere has made a miscalculaton. Here, there's at least one action set piece too many and the final climax is so convoluted and over-the-top that it's hard to sometimes follow the action, much less care what happens. Part of the problem is a strange bit where Joker suddenly concocts an elaborate hostage situation (this is a movie full of hostage situations) straight out of a Saw movie.
9. You can only watch (and hear in Dolby Digital) so many explosions before it all starts to lose impact and you get numb.
10. Even so, this is probably the best superhero movie to so explicitly explore the fine line between vigilante and criminal, justice and vengeance, law and lawlessness. Thematically, the film is very sophisticated. How far can you push a just man before he snaps and becomes unjust? How much (or how little) would it take Batman to become the Joker?
11. It's fun to see Gary Oldman playing a bookish, mild-mannered hero.
12. "You complete me."
13. It must be nice to be a billionaire.
2. Everything you've heard about Heath Ledger's Joker is true. That performance is a force of nature. Funny, feral, unpredictable.
3. Maggie Gyllenhaal is about a 300% upgrade over Katie Holmes, who was so hopelessly in over her heard in Batman Begins playing the same character. Gyllenhaal's a woman, whereas Holmes is a little girl.
4. The raspy voice Christian Bale uses when he's Batman works great when he's saying something bad-ass like "Drop the gun." But when he has to deliver long impassioned speeches that affected voice is just silly.
5. They flipped an 18-wheeler truck end over end. Wow. It's hard these days to see a stunt you haven't seen before.
6. Why would anyone want to work as a Gotham City cop? It looks like you never have a day off.
7. We didn't get the Harvey Two-Face character when Tommy Lee Jones played him in Batman Forever. But with Aaron Eckhart, we get it.
8. The problem with the movie is that there's too much of it. If you're looking at your watch and wondering if the movie will ever end, then someone somewhere has made a miscalculaton. Here, there's at least one action set piece too many and the final climax is so convoluted and over-the-top that it's hard to sometimes follow the action, much less care what happens. Part of the problem is a strange bit where Joker suddenly concocts an elaborate hostage situation (this is a movie full of hostage situations) straight out of a Saw movie.
9. You can only watch (and hear in Dolby Digital) so many explosions before it all starts to lose impact and you get numb.
10. Even so, this is probably the best superhero movie to so explicitly explore the fine line between vigilante and criminal, justice and vengeance, law and lawlessness. Thematically, the film is very sophisticated. How far can you push a just man before he snaps and becomes unjust? How much (or how little) would it take Batman to become the Joker?
11. It's fun to see Gary Oldman playing a bookish, mild-mannered hero.
12. "You complete me."
13. It must be nice to be a billionaire.
Let's 86 number 4.
If you look at it honestly and objectively, the enduring appeal of Brett Favre really boils down to three rather cliched observations about him.
1. He's loves playing football. This is invariably uttered by sportscasters over video of Brett grinning after a play or horsing around with his teammates. Of course, there are also many infamous moments - too may to count, actually - when Favre would make stupid decisions on the field, heaving a ball into the air or forcing it into double coverage, that would result in an interception. And there would be Favre jogging to the sidelines, shrugging with a little smirk. We'll get them next time, coach. There's confidence and there's recklessness. Yeah, he's not always the most level-headed, consistent player... but he loves to play, by golly. It might have worked out better for the Packers overall if they'd had a guy who maybe hates to play a little, but does so with a smarter attitude.
2. He's a good guy. This stems mostly from his aw-shucks, Southern-fried personality, all laid-back charm and stubbled machismo. He's the kind of guy you'd want to buy a beer for, a perfect complement to the blue-collar town of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Of course, none of us really know Favre, so we'll have to just take at face value the many ESPN interview packages that help reinforce this notion that Favre's a guy's guy who chops wood and drinks Pabst. Albeit a guy's guy who makes millions and millions of dollars. Maybe he should buy the beer.
3. He's one of the most durable players in the NFL. Favre certainly earns this one, having made 253 consecutive starts at quarterback. In a league where every game is the equivalent of a multi-car accident, that is an amazing feat. Then again, consecutive starts don't necessarily equal wins. Why is this such a big deal again?
It's not fun, we know. It's practically an American requirement to love Favre. But look yourself in the mirror. Favre is a great story, but he's always been a very streaky player.
In fact, the time may be drawing nigh when we all have to re-evaluate Number 7. Because the escalating retirement/unretirement soap opera between Favre and the Packers front office is not only exhausting, it's threatening to completely undermine the Favre Myth. He's now seeming so petulant and whiny that you'd think he was an NBA player.
Submitted for your consideration:
* A recent network sports show interviewed a number of NFL quarterbacks, all of whom said something along the lines of "He's Brett Favre - he should do what he wants." So if you're a celebrated athlete, there's no reason to be bound by a contract, much less any sort of common courtesy? Okay, just checking.
* Favre recently claimed that the Packers "forced" him out. You can maybe force out the second-string safety you drafted out of Eastern Nevada State. No way do you force out one of the best-known QB brands in the NFL. The fact that Favre expects anyone to believe that line of crap is beyond belief. In fact, it's insulting.
* The Packers contend that they had arrangements with Favre to un-retire back in March, but he changed his mind. Read that sentence again. They were ready to take him back when he said never mind. And so now he's changing his mind back. Again. This unending vacillation is selfish in the extreme, as if Favre has some sort of twisted psychological need to be the center of attention. You'll surely recall that this kind of farce has played out the last two off-seasons as Favre cruelly left the Packers and its fans wondering for months if the Great Favre would come down form the mountaintop and deign to grace them with his 17 touchdowns and 32 interceptions. It's arrogant behavior that does not match the fuzzy PR image of Favre as the good guy who loves to play football. In fact, if this guy is so unsure what he wants to do, if you're in the huddle with him you have to be wondering if he'll suddenly retire again in the middle of the season.
* Favre recently also had the audacity to suggest he's upset with the Packers because they haven't been very welcoming or warm to him. Unbelievable. Why should they be? Can you imagine what might happen if any of us quit our job and then wandered back in three months later demanding it back... and then complaining about a lack of warmth when the red carpet wasn't rolled out? This isn't the real world, people. It's the Coddled-Star-Athlete-World. It's just sad that we're learning Favre is among its inhabitants, no different than crybabies like Terrell Owens or Chad Johnson or Randy Moss.
* Now comes word that the real reason Favre suddenly wants to un-retire might be the Minnesota Vikings, a Packer division rival, want to sign him. Favre surely figured he'd snap his fingers and get the Packers to release him to play wherever he wanted. I mean, come on. He's a good guy who loves to play football.
This sordid mess will have no happy ending, not for Favre, not for the Packers.
One thing is certain: if Favre plays again in the 2008 season, the Cheese Fry will now vigorously root against Brett Favre. You should, too.
UPDATE: An unofficial ombudsman of the Cheese Fry, Taco Salad, correctly pointed out that the original title of this post "Let's 86 number 7" made no sense as Favre's number is, in fact, number 4. The Cheese Fry regrets the error.
1. He's loves playing football. This is invariably uttered by sportscasters over video of Brett grinning after a play or horsing around with his teammates. Of course, there are also many infamous moments - too may to count, actually - when Favre would make stupid decisions on the field, heaving a ball into the air or forcing it into double coverage, that would result in an interception. And there would be Favre jogging to the sidelines, shrugging with a little smirk. We'll get them next time, coach. There's confidence and there's recklessness. Yeah, he's not always the most level-headed, consistent player... but he loves to play, by golly. It might have worked out better for the Packers overall if they'd had a guy who maybe hates to play a little, but does so with a smarter attitude.
2. He's a good guy. This stems mostly from his aw-shucks, Southern-fried personality, all laid-back charm and stubbled machismo. He's the kind of guy you'd want to buy a beer for, a perfect complement to the blue-collar town of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Of course, none of us really know Favre, so we'll have to just take at face value the many ESPN interview packages that help reinforce this notion that Favre's a guy's guy who chops wood and drinks Pabst. Albeit a guy's guy who makes millions and millions of dollars. Maybe he should buy the beer.
3. He's one of the most durable players in the NFL. Favre certainly earns this one, having made 253 consecutive starts at quarterback. In a league where every game is the equivalent of a multi-car accident, that is an amazing feat. Then again, consecutive starts don't necessarily equal wins. Why is this such a big deal again?
It's not fun, we know. It's practically an American requirement to love Favre. But look yourself in the mirror. Favre is a great story, but he's always been a very streaky player.
In fact, the time may be drawing nigh when we all have to re-evaluate Number 7. Because the escalating retirement/unretirement soap opera between Favre and the Packers front office is not only exhausting, it's threatening to completely undermine the Favre Myth. He's now seeming so petulant and whiny that you'd think he was an NBA player.
Submitted for your consideration:
* A recent network sports show interviewed a number of NFL quarterbacks, all of whom said something along the lines of "He's Brett Favre - he should do what he wants." So if you're a celebrated athlete, there's no reason to be bound by a contract, much less any sort of common courtesy? Okay, just checking.
* Favre recently claimed that the Packers "forced" him out. You can maybe force out the second-string safety you drafted out of Eastern Nevada State. No way do you force out one of the best-known QB brands in the NFL. The fact that Favre expects anyone to believe that line of crap is beyond belief. In fact, it's insulting.
* The Packers contend that they had arrangements with Favre to un-retire back in March, but he changed his mind. Read that sentence again. They were ready to take him back when he said never mind. And so now he's changing his mind back. Again. This unending vacillation is selfish in the extreme, as if Favre has some sort of twisted psychological need to be the center of attention. You'll surely recall that this kind of farce has played out the last two off-seasons as Favre cruelly left the Packers and its fans wondering for months if the Great Favre would come down form the mountaintop and deign to grace them with his 17 touchdowns and 32 interceptions. It's arrogant behavior that does not match the fuzzy PR image of Favre as the good guy who loves to play football. In fact, if this guy is so unsure what he wants to do, if you're in the huddle with him you have to be wondering if he'll suddenly retire again in the middle of the season.
* Favre recently also had the audacity to suggest he's upset with the Packers because they haven't been very welcoming or warm to him. Unbelievable. Why should they be? Can you imagine what might happen if any of us quit our job and then wandered back in three months later demanding it back... and then complaining about a lack of warmth when the red carpet wasn't rolled out? This isn't the real world, people. It's the Coddled-Star-Athlete-World. It's just sad that we're learning Favre is among its inhabitants, no different than crybabies like Terrell Owens or Chad Johnson or Randy Moss.
* Now comes word that the real reason Favre suddenly wants to un-retire might be the Minnesota Vikings, a Packer division rival, want to sign him. Favre surely figured he'd snap his fingers and get the Packers to release him to play wherever he wanted. I mean, come on. He's a good guy who loves to play football.
This sordid mess will have no happy ending, not for Favre, not for the Packers.
One thing is certain: if Favre plays again in the 2008 season, the Cheese Fry will now vigorously root against Brett Favre. You should, too.
UPDATE: An unofficial ombudsman of the Cheese Fry, Taco Salad, correctly pointed out that the original title of this post "Let's 86 number 7" made no sense as Favre's number is, in fact, number 4. The Cheese Fry regrets the error.
"Fists with your toes..."
Last week was the 20th anniversary of the theatrical release of Die Hard. The Cheese Fry remembers well his first encounter with that action classic: an employees-only, after-hours screening at the now-defunct United Artists Walnut Hill 6 movie theater. Suffice it to say, none of us had ever seen anything like it. So many movies over the years have ripped off, er, paid homage to Die Hard, it's easy to forget how revolutionary the film was back in 1988.
To celebrate the anniversary, Martians Attacking Indianapolis offers an exhaustive and insightful analysis of Die Hard.
To celebrate the anniversary, Martians Attacking Indianapolis offers an exhaustive and insightful analysis of Die Hard.
7.16.2008
Pixar Animation vs. Dreamworks Animation
Let's agree for the purposes of this discussion that the undisputed bronze medalist these days when it comes to feature film animation is 20th Century Fox. We'll stipulate that Robots was something of a charming mess and Ice Age was fun.
But the heavyweights - the George Foreman and the Muhammad Ali of CGI animation - are Pixar and Dreamworks.
So which one's Ali (the flashy, charismatic pretty boy) and which one's Foreman (the dependable, low-key workhorse)?
Let's look at the tale of the tape.
1. BOX OFFICE
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008, $171 million in grosses worldwide to date)
Ratatouille (2007, $621m)
Cars (2006, $461m)
The Incredibles (2005, $631m)
Finding Nemo (2003, $864m)
Monsters, Inc. (2001, $525m)
Toy Story 2 (1999, $485m)
A Bug's Life (1998, $363m)
Toy Story (1995, $361m)
* Nine releases, $4.48b - an average of $498m per release
Dreamworks Animation
Kung Fu Panda (2008, $357m to date)
Shrek the Third (2007, $798)
Flushed Away (2006, $177)
Over the Hedge (2006, $336m)
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, $192m)
Madagascar (2005, $532m)
Shark Tale (2004, $367m)
Shrek 2 (2004, $919m)
Shrek (2001, $484m)
* Nine releases, $4.33b - an average of $482m per release
At first glance, it seems close though Kung Fu Panda has about a three-week head start on Wall-E. Who knows how that head-to-head race will end up? Even so, one cannot overlook the muscle that is the Shrek franchise. A fourth one's on the way, of course. But what ultimately tips the balance in Dreamworks' favor is the mulligan that was its ill-fated venture with Aardman Animations. If you rightfully discount the Flushed Away and Curse of the Were-Rabbit flops (which forced Dreamworks to embrace Aardman's cutesy claymation look and dry British humor), then Dreamworks' seven releases average out to $567m per release. That's almost $100 million more per release than Pixar.
Advantage: Dreamworks.
2. ACADEMY AWARDS
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008) - nomination practically a foregone conclusion
Ratatouille (2007) - nomination
Cars (2006) - nomination
The Incredibles (2005) - winner
Finding Nemo (2003) - winner
Monsters, Inc. (2001) - nomination
* two wins, three nominations
Dreamworks Animation
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) - winner
Shark Tale (2004) - nomination
Shrek 2 (2004) - nomination
Shrek (2001) - winner
* two wins, two nominations
Dreamworks can lay claim to the first ever Oscar for animated feature with Shrek, but every one of Pixar's releases since the category was created in 2001 has been nominated or won. That's an impressive streak.
Advantage: Pixar.
3. ARTISTIC MERIT
Here's where things start to get subjective. It's tempting to look down your nose at Dreamworks Animation, especially in light of the painterly beauty of Pixar films like Ratatouille or Wall-E. But don't forget the detailed whimsy of Shrek or the kinetic energy of Kung Fu Panda. Every release, including those from the show horse 20th Century Fox, pushes the envelope and finds new ways to play with the CG toolbox. But, you say, what about how Pixar practically invented the whole medium with Toy Story? Good point, but don't forget the way Dreamworks' Shrek single-handedly created a subgenre - right or wrong - of animation with nudge-nudge self-awareness, droll irony, and winking pop-culture jokes.
Advantage: Draw.
4. PRODUCTION SYSTEM
Dreamworks Animation, it seems, works like old Hollywood. CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg is the boss and everyone else jumps through hoops to keep him satisfied and curry his favor. The scripts and storyboards are written and rewritten again and again, endlessly tweaked by a parade of interchangeable directors and writers. The important element in this system is the gag, the sequence, the payoff.
Pixar, on the other hand, seems to work more like a Wall Street firm. There are no freelancers at Pixar coming and going like Dreamworks' hired guns. There's a continuity there, a family atmosphere. The same artists and technicians and writers and directors work together for years at a time on several projects. The important element for Pixar seems more holistic as a result: it's all about the big picture, the story.
Advantage: Draw. It's hard to argue with the results of either system.
5. COMMERCIALISM
This is the big one. Dreamworks makes no effort to hide the fact that its animated films are conceived with an eye towards sequels. The name of the game is launching franchises - a long chain of DVDs, toys, TV shows, theme park rides, and breafast cereals. The studio found a goldmine with Shrek and will milk it for as long as it can. Dreamworks' only other big hit is Madagascar - and guess what? A sequel is coming to a theater near you very soon. Though all companies exist to make a profit, there is something dispiriting about the way Dreamworks seems so solely interested in big tentpole franchises. It seems like they make Shrek movies and little else. And even the movies that aren't Shrek feel like Shrek: overblown characters, snarky gags and one-liners, broad humor and slapstick. It's a formula.
Pixar has its Toy Story franchise, true, but it mostly seems curiously determined to not go back to the same well twice. Every movie is different. They may, like any story geared at least in part to kids, explore the same morals of Be Yourself, but they all have their own feel. Paris of Ratatouille feels wholly unlike the flat desert of Cars or the future world of Wall-E. This interest in exploring different looks and genres and characters give Pixar films an artistry. With few exceptions, Pixar films are masterpieces. Dreamworks films are, well, they're entertaining movies.
Advantage: Pixar.
It's close one, but for now, it's Pixar taking Dreamworks the distance, winning by a TKO in the final round, using finesse and footwork (a love of the game) to counter Dreamworks' powerful-but-limited combinations. But that's okay - Dreamworks didn't really want to win. It just wanted the big purse.
But the heavyweights - the George Foreman and the Muhammad Ali of CGI animation - are Pixar and Dreamworks.
So which one's Ali (the flashy, charismatic pretty boy) and which one's Foreman (the dependable, low-key workhorse)?
Let's look at the tale of the tape.
1. BOX OFFICE
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008, $171 million in grosses worldwide to date)
Ratatouille (2007, $621m)
Cars (2006, $461m)
The Incredibles (2005, $631m)
Finding Nemo (2003, $864m)
Monsters, Inc. (2001, $525m)
Toy Story 2 (1999, $485m)
A Bug's Life (1998, $363m)
Toy Story (1995, $361m)
* Nine releases, $4.48b - an average of $498m per release
Dreamworks Animation
Kung Fu Panda (2008, $357m to date)
Shrek the Third (2007, $798)
Flushed Away (2006, $177)
Over the Hedge (2006, $336m)
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, $192m)
Madagascar (2005, $532m)
Shark Tale (2004, $367m)
Shrek 2 (2004, $919m)
Shrek (2001, $484m)
* Nine releases, $4.33b - an average of $482m per release
At first glance, it seems close though Kung Fu Panda has about a three-week head start on Wall-E. Who knows how that head-to-head race will end up? Even so, one cannot overlook the muscle that is the Shrek franchise. A fourth one's on the way, of course. But what ultimately tips the balance in Dreamworks' favor is the mulligan that was its ill-fated venture with Aardman Animations. If you rightfully discount the Flushed Away and Curse of the Were-Rabbit flops (which forced Dreamworks to embrace Aardman's cutesy claymation look and dry British humor), then Dreamworks' seven releases average out to $567m per release. That's almost $100 million more per release than Pixar.
Advantage: Dreamworks.
2. ACADEMY AWARDS
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008) - nomination practically a foregone conclusion
Ratatouille (2007) - nomination
Cars (2006) - nomination
The Incredibles (2005) - winner
Finding Nemo (2003) - winner
Monsters, Inc. (2001) - nomination
* two wins, three nominations
Dreamworks Animation
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) - winner
Shark Tale (2004) - nomination
Shrek 2 (2004) - nomination
Shrek (2001) - winner
* two wins, two nominations
Dreamworks can lay claim to the first ever Oscar for animated feature with Shrek, but every one of Pixar's releases since the category was created in 2001 has been nominated or won. That's an impressive streak.
Advantage: Pixar.
3. ARTISTIC MERIT
Here's where things start to get subjective. It's tempting to look down your nose at Dreamworks Animation, especially in light of the painterly beauty of Pixar films like Ratatouille or Wall-E. But don't forget the detailed whimsy of Shrek or the kinetic energy of Kung Fu Panda. Every release, including those from the show horse 20th Century Fox, pushes the envelope and finds new ways to play with the CG toolbox. But, you say, what about how Pixar practically invented the whole medium with Toy Story? Good point, but don't forget the way Dreamworks' Shrek single-handedly created a subgenre - right or wrong - of animation with nudge-nudge self-awareness, droll irony, and winking pop-culture jokes.
Advantage: Draw.
4. PRODUCTION SYSTEM
Dreamworks Animation, it seems, works like old Hollywood. CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg is the boss and everyone else jumps through hoops to keep him satisfied and curry his favor. The scripts and storyboards are written and rewritten again and again, endlessly tweaked by a parade of interchangeable directors and writers. The important element in this system is the gag, the sequence, the payoff.
Pixar, on the other hand, seems to work more like a Wall Street firm. There are no freelancers at Pixar coming and going like Dreamworks' hired guns. There's a continuity there, a family atmosphere. The same artists and technicians and writers and directors work together for years at a time on several projects. The important element for Pixar seems more holistic as a result: it's all about the big picture, the story.
Advantage: Draw. It's hard to argue with the results of either system.
5. COMMERCIALISM
This is the big one. Dreamworks makes no effort to hide the fact that its animated films are conceived with an eye towards sequels. The name of the game is launching franchises - a long chain of DVDs, toys, TV shows, theme park rides, and breafast cereals. The studio found a goldmine with Shrek and will milk it for as long as it can. Dreamworks' only other big hit is Madagascar - and guess what? A sequel is coming to a theater near you very soon. Though all companies exist to make a profit, there is something dispiriting about the way Dreamworks seems so solely interested in big tentpole franchises. It seems like they make Shrek movies and little else. And even the movies that aren't Shrek feel like Shrek: overblown characters, snarky gags and one-liners, broad humor and slapstick. It's a formula.
Pixar has its Toy Story franchise, true, but it mostly seems curiously determined to not go back to the same well twice. Every movie is different. They may, like any story geared at least in part to kids, explore the same morals of Be Yourself, but they all have their own feel. Paris of Ratatouille feels wholly unlike the flat desert of Cars or the future world of Wall-E. This interest in exploring different looks and genres and characters give Pixar films an artistry. With few exceptions, Pixar films are masterpieces. Dreamworks films are, well, they're entertaining movies.
Advantage: Pixar.
It's close one, but for now, it's Pixar taking Dreamworks the distance, winning by a TKO in the final round, using finesse and footwork (a love of the game) to counter Dreamworks' powerful-but-limited combinations. But that's okay - Dreamworks didn't really want to win. It just wanted the big purse.
7.06.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Hancock"
1. Outstanding.
2. "I been drinking, bitch."
3. Ironman might be the better traditional popcorn kind of big summer action movie, but Hancock is far richer. It feels more important, more substantive. There are a lot of unexpected narrative and thematic layers here, the sorts of things that stay with you long after the lights come up.
4. Inexplicably, many critics are giving the movie bad reviews. Some think it's a sort of backlash against Will Smith, the suggestion being that it's time for him to have a flop. Luckily, moviegoers don't seem to be buying into that nonsense. The film made over $100 million in its first five days and will surely benefit from strong word of mouth.
5. A lot of critics are focusing on a whopper of a second act twist. If you're expecting Ironman or Batman or any of those other superhero "mans" then, yes, the twist can be hard to swallow. It changes everything. But it also kicks the movie into a higher gear that raises complicated questions about heroism, love, fate, and self-sacrifice. It's that twist that makes it so special. Without it, it's just a clever little superhero riff.
6. When it comes to movie stars, nowadays there's Tom Hanks and Will Smith and then there's everybody else.
7. It is a little hard to believe how Los Angeles' crooks think they have can actually tangle with Smith's Hancock (who can fly, has superhuman strength, and can't be hurt with bullets) and win. That inexplicable attitude may be the movie's weakest element...
8. ...As is the head-up-the-ass thing, which is funny but utterly impossible.
9. As a sidenote, Charlize Theron has never been sexier.
10. A lot of superhero movies seem studiously interested in portraying "how superheroes would really work in our society." But the way Hancock handles that puts those others movies to shame. It's very easy to imagine a superhero being threatened with lawsuits and arrests or relentlessly second-guessed and attacked in our selfish, coddled society. You saved my life, but you wrecked my car! It's also easy to see how that sort of reaction might make for one very miserable, misanthropic superhero.
11. Director Peter Berg is becoming the next Steven Soderbergh, willing and able to take on any and all genres. Berg's films are always interesting and far better than you might expect: the black comedy Very Bad Things, the action comedy The Rundown, the gritty drama Friday Night Lights, and now Hancock.
12. Nice career resurgence for Jason Bateman. He's solid as always.
13. Go see it.
2. "I been drinking, bitch."
3. Ironman might be the better traditional popcorn kind of big summer action movie, but Hancock is far richer. It feels more important, more substantive. There are a lot of unexpected narrative and thematic layers here, the sorts of things that stay with you long after the lights come up.
4. Inexplicably, many critics are giving the movie bad reviews. Some think it's a sort of backlash against Will Smith, the suggestion being that it's time for him to have a flop. Luckily, moviegoers don't seem to be buying into that nonsense. The film made over $100 million in its first five days and will surely benefit from strong word of mouth.
5. A lot of critics are focusing on a whopper of a second act twist. If you're expecting Ironman or Batman or any of those other superhero "mans" then, yes, the twist can be hard to swallow. It changes everything. But it also kicks the movie into a higher gear that raises complicated questions about heroism, love, fate, and self-sacrifice. It's that twist that makes it so special. Without it, it's just a clever little superhero riff.
6. When it comes to movie stars, nowadays there's Tom Hanks and Will Smith and then there's everybody else.
7. It is a little hard to believe how Los Angeles' crooks think they have can actually tangle with Smith's Hancock (who can fly, has superhuman strength, and can't be hurt with bullets) and win. That inexplicable attitude may be the movie's weakest element...
8. ...As is the head-up-the-ass thing, which is funny but utterly impossible.
9. As a sidenote, Charlize Theron has never been sexier.
10. A lot of superhero movies seem studiously interested in portraying "how superheroes would really work in our society." But the way Hancock handles that puts those others movies to shame. It's very easy to imagine a superhero being threatened with lawsuits and arrests or relentlessly second-guessed and attacked in our selfish, coddled society. You saved my life, but you wrecked my car! It's also easy to see how that sort of reaction might make for one very miserable, misanthropic superhero.
11. Director Peter Berg is becoming the next Steven Soderbergh, willing and able to take on any and all genres. Berg's films are always interesting and far better than you might expect: the black comedy Very Bad Things, the action comedy The Rundown, the gritty drama Friday Night Lights, and now Hancock.
12. Nice career resurgence for Jason Bateman. He's solid as always.
13. Go see it.
7.05.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Wanted"
1. You have to see it, if only to hear Morgan Freeman say a certain 12-letter curse word in that amazing sonorous voice of his.
2. The middle gets mushy with all the ridiculous training and expositional mumbo-jumbo, but the beginning and the ending are... like, wow.
3. Note to self: don't ever stand on an X someone else has put there.
4. The Cheese Fry didn't see the great act two twist coming. We should have, but we didn't. Nicely done.
5. Angelina Jolie is attractive, no doubt. But there's a coldness there, too. She's not warm at all.
6. The Loom of Destiny. That's pretty kick-ass. You have to admit, you've never heard of (or even thought of) anything quite like it.
7. The train scene is pretty frakking amazing.
8. We get that a high metabolism/heartrate could create faster-than-normal, superhuman reflexes. But how would a high metabolism/heartrate help you curve a bullet? Or fly through the air? Here's the answer: it wouldn't.
9. We had high hopes for the movie and wound up slightly disappointed. If only it were 20 minutes shorter.
2. The middle gets mushy with all the ridiculous training and expositional mumbo-jumbo, but the beginning and the ending are... like, wow.
3. Note to self: don't ever stand on an X someone else has put there.
4. The Cheese Fry didn't see the great act two twist coming. We should have, but we didn't. Nicely done.
5. Angelina Jolie is attractive, no doubt. But there's a coldness there, too. She's not warm at all.
6. The Loom of Destiny. That's pretty kick-ass. You have to admit, you've never heard of (or even thought of) anything quite like it.
7. The train scene is pretty frakking amazing.
8. We get that a high metabolism/heartrate could create faster-than-normal, superhuman reflexes. But how would a high metabolism/heartrate help you curve a bullet? Or fly through the air? Here's the answer: it wouldn't.
9. We had high hopes for the movie and wound up slightly disappointed. If only it were 20 minutes shorter.
A brief political interruption
The Cheese Fry isn't a political blog, but William Broyles just wrote a great essay on the Iraq mess for Texas Monthly that's worth a look. Broyles argues for an immediate withdrawal and he's no arugula-loving, draft-dodging liberal. He's a Marine and a Vietnam veteran (Broyles co-created the underrated 1980s Vietname drama series "China Beach"). Plus his son recently did several tours in Iraq. He's the kind of guy whose opinion on war we should all value.
Non-knee-jerk review: "Swingtown"
1. The summer series currently running on CBS isn't an amazing show. But it's a perfectly good show. And one that stands out amid the usual derivative programming that fills the airwaves. It's not a disturbing, bloody police procedural. It's not a loud reality show with preening contestants. It's not even a situation comedy in which everyone's witty and knows just what to say and how to say it. Which of course means "Swingtown" likely won't last long. It's too different. The ratings have declined each and every week for the show, so it's probably only a matter of time before CBS pulls the plug.
2. Yes, ostensibly it's about some couples in suburban 1976 Chicago who swap wives. But it's not nearly as racy as you might imagine.
3. Although it certainly often seems too racy for CBS. One just just imagine the sweaty palms of certain CBS executives watching the rough cuts. Drug use, implied nudity, pornography, promiscuity. In short, this is a show that probably would have thrived on HBO, TNT, or even AMC, places where smaller niche shows can thrive without the demand of big network ratings and audiences.
4. You really don't often seen shows that take so close a look at that awkward situation we've all found ourselves in when we change locations or social positions and have to balance the cool new friends with the slightly uncool old friends. It all feels very fresh.
5. Then again, the show also gives us the very unfresh subplot of a brainy high school girl and her blooming inappropriate romance with a young teacher. Been there, done that. And frankly, it was pretty boring then, too.
6. The three female leads - Molly Parker (our heroine), Lana Parrilla (the cool new friend), and Miriam Show (the uncool old friend) - are outstanding.
7. Clever idea for CBS to make available for downloading the show's 70s-infused soundtrack each week.
8. But all those disco-era songs are also an annoyance. The writing is often so strong that the show's frequent reliance on period songs seems somehow lazy. Does the episode about Molly Parker feeling the stirrings of the women's lib movement really have to end with Helen Reddy's "I Am Woman"? That's the kind of obvious, heavy-handed thing a junior film student would do. The show's better than that.
9. If you want to check it out, tune in before it's too late.
2. Yes, ostensibly it's about some couples in suburban 1976 Chicago who swap wives. But it's not nearly as racy as you might imagine.
3. Although it certainly often seems too racy for CBS. One just just imagine the sweaty palms of certain CBS executives watching the rough cuts. Drug use, implied nudity, pornography, promiscuity. In short, this is a show that probably would have thrived on HBO, TNT, or even AMC, places where smaller niche shows can thrive without the demand of big network ratings and audiences.
4. You really don't often seen shows that take so close a look at that awkward situation we've all found ourselves in when we change locations or social positions and have to balance the cool new friends with the slightly uncool old friends. It all feels very fresh.
5. Then again, the show also gives us the very unfresh subplot of a brainy high school girl and her blooming inappropriate romance with a young teacher. Been there, done that. And frankly, it was pretty boring then, too.
6. The three female leads - Molly Parker (our heroine), Lana Parrilla (the cool new friend), and Miriam Show (the uncool old friend) - are outstanding.
7. Clever idea for CBS to make available for downloading the show's 70s-infused soundtrack each week.
8. But all those disco-era songs are also an annoyance. The writing is often so strong that the show's frequent reliance on period songs seems somehow lazy. Does the episode about Molly Parker feeling the stirrings of the women's lib movement really have to end with Helen Reddy's "I Am Woman"? That's the kind of obvious, heavy-handed thing a junior film student would do. The show's better than that.
9. If you want to check it out, tune in before it's too late.
Knee-jerk review: "Get Smart"
1. Missed it by that much. It's enjoyable and often quite funny, but it's not as good as it should be. Not even close. Then again, the trouble the producers had with the adaptation shows how genius the TV show was. It was a satire, but also a action show, but also a situation comedy. It was like genre alchemy, turning lead into gold. The movie tries without luck to blend those elements, balancing big-budget action with broad, goofy comedy. It's painful to watch sometimes.
2. Steve Carrell is the perfect Maxwell Smart, of course.
3. And Alan Arkin is the man. The Cheese Fry would see him do anything anywhere. Here he gets some very funny lines, especially one involving a swordfish. Anyone else it's maybe amusing. With Arkin's wry stone face, it's hilarious.
4. But the whole thing is kind of a mess, especially a random act three twist involving Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
5. The filmmakers also make the bizarre decision to force some clumsy backstories onto Smart and Agent 99 to make their bonding all the more "plausible." He was fat, she just had her face changed. Weird. And even so, we're sad to report that there's just not a lot of chemistry between Carell and Anne Hathaway. Cutesy bickering doesn't equal romance, people.
6. The bathroom lavatory steel-dart scene is pretty good, though.
7. Nice use of the shoe phone.
8. The L.A. Dime called it: Anne Hathaway transcends the "hot" label. She, in fact, deserves the label "beautiful." It's ridiculous how good she looks.
2. Steve Carrell is the perfect Maxwell Smart, of course.
3. And Alan Arkin is the man. The Cheese Fry would see him do anything anywhere. Here he gets some very funny lines, especially one involving a swordfish. Anyone else it's maybe amusing. With Arkin's wry stone face, it's hilarious.
4. But the whole thing is kind of a mess, especially a random act three twist involving Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
5. The filmmakers also make the bizarre decision to force some clumsy backstories onto Smart and Agent 99 to make their bonding all the more "plausible." He was fat, she just had her face changed. Weird. And even so, we're sad to report that there's just not a lot of chemistry between Carell and Anne Hathaway. Cutesy bickering doesn't equal romance, people.
6. The bathroom lavatory steel-dart scene is pretty good, though.
7. Nice use of the shoe phone.
8. The L.A. Dime called it: Anne Hathaway transcends the "hot" label. She, in fact, deserves the label "beautiful." It's ridiculous how good she looks.
"We're back and we're bad, you're black and I'm mad!"
Top six lines from "Lethal Weapon 2"
6. "My dear officer, you could not even give me a parking ticket." - Crooked South African diplomat Arjen Rudd making it clear to Detectives Riggs and Murtaugh the ironclad extent of his diplomatic immunity. Made all the more scary in that exotic South African accent.
5. "After I shoot you through the door you can examine the bullet, now open up." - Riggs talking through the door to accountant-turned-government-witness Leo Getz (who just asked "Who do I know it's the police?"), which is the best role of Joe Pesci's strange career.
4. "Nailed 'em both." - Murtaugh's obligatory one-liner after he dispatches an assassin with an industrial nail-gun. You see, kids, back in the 1980s all movie heroes had to say pithy one-liners after killing their attackers.
3. "Have your brains ever seen the light of day?" - A chilling question from killer Pieter Vorstedt as he's screwing a silencer into the barrel of his gun.
2. "I'm not a cop tonight, Rog. This is personal." - It's a cliche now, of course, but it wasn't perhaps quite so stale a sentiment back in 1989. And few people can do steely, martryed determination like Mel "William Wallace" Gibson, so when he says this line in act three, we know he's about to get medieval.
1. "It's just been revoked." - The money line, the one that made audiences cheer. It's delivered by raspy-voiced Danny Glover moments after he puts a bullet through the forehead of Arjen Rudd. Rudd, you'll recall, just had the gall to shoot up A-list star Mel Gibson and then cry out "Diplomatic immunity!" to Murtaugh in the hopes of getting away with it.
6. "My dear officer, you could not even give me a parking ticket." - Crooked South African diplomat Arjen Rudd making it clear to Detectives Riggs and Murtaugh the ironclad extent of his diplomatic immunity. Made all the more scary in that exotic South African accent.
5. "After I shoot you through the door you can examine the bullet, now open up." - Riggs talking through the door to accountant-turned-government-witness Leo Getz (who just asked "Who do I know it's the police?"), which is the best role of Joe Pesci's strange career.
4. "Nailed 'em both." - Murtaugh's obligatory one-liner after he dispatches an assassin with an industrial nail-gun. You see, kids, back in the 1980s all movie heroes had to say pithy one-liners after killing their attackers.
3. "Have your brains ever seen the light of day?" - A chilling question from killer Pieter Vorstedt as he's screwing a silencer into the barrel of his gun.
2. "I'm not a cop tonight, Rog. This is personal." - It's a cliche now, of course, but it wasn't perhaps quite so stale a sentiment back in 1989. And few people can do steely, martryed determination like Mel "William Wallace" Gibson, so when he says this line in act three, we know he's about to get medieval.
1. "It's just been revoked." - The money line, the one that made audiences cheer. It's delivered by raspy-voiced Danny Glover moments after he puts a bullet through the forehead of Arjen Rudd. Rudd, you'll recall, just had the gall to shoot up A-list star Mel Gibson and then cry out "Diplomatic immunity!" to Murtaugh in the hopes of getting away with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)