As I age I become more hesitant to watch anything new that comes on my television. Work, love, family; these are just a few real-life factors that force us all to have less time for TV as we get older.
But there's another factor at play here: TRUST. Years and years of withering trust in the shows I watch to give an ending to building story-lines has made me very unwilling to give a new show a chance. Why should I waste my time on anything if they're not going to finish the story?
I don't stand alone here. There's not a single person out there who hasn't had this happen to them on multiple occasions. It usually happens in the form of struggling shows film a huge, game-changing finale, complete with cliffhanger ending, all in the hopes of drawing enough interest to save said show. Then the show gets cancelled. This is infuriating, but usually some time passes, the weather heats up, trips to the beach are taken and I've quickly forgotten about it.
Problem is, that's all fine and dandy the first few times it happens, but sooner or later, trust in the television industry to do right by me and all of the people who invested their time falls apart completely.
For some reason, when a show is cancelled a few episodes in, it feels even worse. Maybe it's because there's no summer to wash away the hurt, I don't know, but it feels worse nonetheless. Recently, a coworker invested her time in Zero Hour, and I begrudgingly invested my time in Do No Harm. Both of these shows were cancelled after only a couple of episodes. We can quickly and easily look back at the two, three hours we wasted and think of all the things we could've done instead, or all the other shows we could've put our time into instead. I still have four episodes of Shameless to catch up on. Damn, wish I would've done that instead.
I believe all of this is causing anger amongst the fans of television, and I'm pretty sure this is playing a role into lower-than-expected ratings for some of the network's biggest debuts. The networks were expecting big things from the previously mentioned Zero Hour and Do No Harm as well as the earlier debuts of 666 Park Avenue and Last Resort. All of them failed. But even in failure, at least 10 to 20 million different people invested some of their time in at least one of these shows, and stuck with them past their first and second episodes. That adds up to a lot of pissed off people who want to know what happens next.
To solve this problem, I propose that television networks do the following: first, if a show has failed in a prime spot in your schedule, burn off the remaining episodes on Saturday instead of four to six months later in the summer. Second, if a show gets cancelled without a chance to wrap up story-lines, allow the show to film a two-hour TV movie to please the fans and give them some closure. There is no third. This is simply about building that trust back, and if these two steps are followed, the fans will again have trust that their time won't be wasted because the stories they decide to invest in will be guaranteed to have an ending.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Saving Magazines
I have always been a lover of magazines. At one point in time, I subscribed to a dozen of them, and right now I have six subscriptions. I'm aware that the internet has decimated the magazine industry, but I also know there are other people out there that still love opening their mailboxes to find the new issue of whatever they are subscribing to. This blog is not intended to bring back all the people who have abandoned their love of magazines, nor is it intended to bring in all those youngsters raised on the internet that have never experienced the joy of reading a magazine on the toilet. This blog is intended to give suggestions to the magazine companies to not further annoy the people who still currently love the forum.
1. Many of us love to fold our magazines in half to read them. For the first half of the magazine, it's easiest to fold the left side, and for the second half, it's easiest to fold the right side. Advertisers have taken note of this and have demanded advertising on the half that doesn't get folded, making it impossible for the reader to easily fold their magazines in half. Let's stop this, it's annoying.
2. Some advertisers have decided it is best for them to use really thick construction paper stock to print their ads. The only way around this for the reader is to tear out the whole page and throw it away. It is annoying, so let's stop this.
3. Some magazines have decided that shorter articles are what the reader wants, so they then decided that the way around this was to cut the articles up in a "choose your own adventure" style format: to continue reading, turn to page 87. This is annoying, so please just print the whole article and put it in one place.
4. I don't know a single person who still subscribes to a magazine through those little cardboard mailers that the magazine stuffs into their issues, so why do two or three of them fall out of each issue I receive and another two or three are attached to the inside? Why is my bathroom floor littered with these things? If magazines are looking for any way to cut costs, how about just ONE in each issue, located in the first page.
If these four easy suggestions are followed, I promise that I would be less annoyed when reading a magazine. I promise that most people who still read magazines will have a much more enjoyable experience, so please, listen to my words and get it done.
1. Many of us love to fold our magazines in half to read them. For the first half of the magazine, it's easiest to fold the left side, and for the second half, it's easiest to fold the right side. Advertisers have taken note of this and have demanded advertising on the half that doesn't get folded, making it impossible for the reader to easily fold their magazines in half. Let's stop this, it's annoying.
2. Some advertisers have decided it is best for them to use really thick construction paper stock to print their ads. The only way around this for the reader is to tear out the whole page and throw it away. It is annoying, so let's stop this.
3. Some magazines have decided that shorter articles are what the reader wants, so they then decided that the way around this was to cut the articles up in a "choose your own adventure" style format: to continue reading, turn to page 87. This is annoying, so please just print the whole article and put it in one place.
4. I don't know a single person who still subscribes to a magazine through those little cardboard mailers that the magazine stuffs into their issues, so why do two or three of them fall out of each issue I receive and another two or three are attached to the inside? Why is my bathroom floor littered with these things? If magazines are looking for any way to cut costs, how about just ONE in each issue, located in the first page.
If these four easy suggestions are followed, I promise that I would be less annoyed when reading a magazine. I promise that most people who still read magazines will have a much more enjoyable experience, so please, listen to my words and get it done.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
New Year's Resolution
As a fan of horror movies, friends and acquaintances are often recommending titles they enjoyed. About a month ago, V/H/S came highly recommended by an extremely reliable source. I've been saving the viewing of it for just the right moment. Two days ago that moment came.
And now for my New Year's resolution: for one year, I will do absolutely everything in my power to avoid any movie that includes "found footage," is filmed in a "shaky cam" style, and all films where one of the characters in the movie is filming the footage.
We can all trace the scourge of this style back to Blair Witch and the phenomenon that followed. Studios fell in love with the low cost of making these movies and people flocked to see them (and even when they didn't, the low cost of making the film was quickly made back).
Mind you, not all of these films were bad. Project X, Chronicle, Cloverfield, Quarantine and more than a few others were enjoyed by me. But here's the kicker: all of those films, and all films made in this style would've been better if not made in this style.
I'm sick of the character running away and being forced to endure the picture bouncing around ferociously for way too long. I'm tired of the moment when the cameraman inevitably drops the camera and we're forced to see a sideways shot of nothing.
In case you haven't guessed by now, V/H/S sucked. It wasn't the worst movie of this genre though, that belongs to a movie so bad, I can't even remember the name of it. But here's the rundown of that movie. The shaky cam in this movie was the recorder mounded on a police car. An hour and a half of a police cruiser driving around on woodsy roads. That's it. There was one moment, after about an hour and fifteen minutes of fast forwarding when the police vehicle stopped, the policeman got out to investigate some sort of monster or alien. All action took place off-screen, and I was rewarded for my patience with nothing.
V/H/S was the straw that broke the camels back. It's the movie that made me finally want to stand up and say "Enough. No more found footage! No more shaky cam! No more!"
And now for my New Year's resolution: for one year, I will do absolutely everything in my power to avoid any movie that includes "found footage," is filmed in a "shaky cam" style, and all films where one of the characters in the movie is filming the footage.
We can all trace the scourge of this style back to Blair Witch and the phenomenon that followed. Studios fell in love with the low cost of making these movies and people flocked to see them (and even when they didn't, the low cost of making the film was quickly made back).
Mind you, not all of these films were bad. Project X, Chronicle, Cloverfield, Quarantine and more than a few others were enjoyed by me. But here's the kicker: all of those films, and all films made in this style would've been better if not made in this style.
I'm sick of the character running away and being forced to endure the picture bouncing around ferociously for way too long. I'm tired of the moment when the cameraman inevitably drops the camera and we're forced to see a sideways shot of nothing.
In case you haven't guessed by now, V/H/S sucked. It wasn't the worst movie of this genre though, that belongs to a movie so bad, I can't even remember the name of it. But here's the rundown of that movie. The shaky cam in this movie was the recorder mounded on a police car. An hour and a half of a police cruiser driving around on woodsy roads. That's it. There was one moment, after about an hour and fifteen minutes of fast forwarding when the police vehicle stopped, the policeman got out to investigate some sort of monster or alien. All action took place off-screen, and I was rewarded for my patience with nothing.
V/H/S was the straw that broke the camels back. It's the movie that made me finally want to stand up and say "Enough. No more found footage! No more shaky cam! No more!"
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Stumbling To The Alter
One of my favorite teachers ever taught me (and the rest of the class) that the best comedy comes from the "stumble to the alter" phase of a person's life. He meant that other than "family" sitcoms, the best time for comedy in a person's life is the time when they're old enough to potentially get married to the time that they're actually married.
This is why so many sitcoms have died or ended once it's "single" characters get married. This is why so many sitcoms have kept their characters in a perpetual state of immaturity.
In an ensemble sitcom, you can of course have one married couple, but as the other characters begin to pair off, the sitcom will sooner rather than later come to an end.
This is the looming fear of How I Met Your Mother. The whole premise of the show is leading up to the moment when Ted gets married. It can happen at any time. Now, on top of that, we have Robin and Barney paring off. Soon, the whole cast will be married.
Also, when characters in a sitcom begin to pair off, usually the "drama" starts to increase and the "comedy" starts to decrease. This happened to Friends. It's happening to HIMYM. However, it never happened with Seinfeld. Seinfeld was aware of where the comedy came from. He knew about the "stumble to the alter." He never messed with it.
The 2012 winter finale of HIMYM was really good. Despite Robin and Barney being officially paired off, despite the ramped up drama. I don't know why, but I really feel like HIMYM might just be able to break the mold and still be good after all their characters are married. With it's continued quality use of flashbacks we can always get a good dose of Barney running a ridiculous scam from his playbook, or Ted getting into ridiculous circumstances.
HIMYM has had its ups and downs as its characters have aged. There were times when I was really pissed off at the show and on the verge of giving up on it (hello three episode arc about Marshall's father dying), and yes it was in its prime during season 2 and 3 and hasn't been as consistently funny since. But dammit if I wasn't sold on the 2012 winter finale. I have hope that this show can do what no other similar sitcom has ever been able to pull off.
This is why so many sitcoms have died or ended once it's "single" characters get married. This is why so many sitcoms have kept their characters in a perpetual state of immaturity.
In an ensemble sitcom, you can of course have one married couple, but as the other characters begin to pair off, the sitcom will sooner rather than later come to an end.
This is the looming fear of How I Met Your Mother. The whole premise of the show is leading up to the moment when Ted gets married. It can happen at any time. Now, on top of that, we have Robin and Barney paring off. Soon, the whole cast will be married.
Also, when characters in a sitcom begin to pair off, usually the "drama" starts to increase and the "comedy" starts to decrease. This happened to Friends. It's happening to HIMYM. However, it never happened with Seinfeld. Seinfeld was aware of where the comedy came from. He knew about the "stumble to the alter." He never messed with it.
The 2012 winter finale of HIMYM was really good. Despite Robin and Barney being officially paired off, despite the ramped up drama. I don't know why, but I really feel like HIMYM might just be able to break the mold and still be good after all their characters are married. With it's continued quality use of flashbacks we can always get a good dose of Barney running a ridiculous scam from his playbook, or Ted getting into ridiculous circumstances.
HIMYM has had its ups and downs as its characters have aged. There were times when I was really pissed off at the show and on the verge of giving up on it (hello three episode arc about Marshall's father dying), and yes it was in its prime during season 2 and 3 and hasn't been as consistently funny since. But dammit if I wasn't sold on the 2012 winter finale. I have hope that this show can do what no other similar sitcom has ever been able to pull off.
Thursday, December 6, 2012
It's A DVR Word
For me, it has become a DVR world. And now, for millions and millions of others the television landscape has changed. We are no longer tethered to getting to our TV's at certain times or on certain days. We are no longer forced to program our VCR's or DVD recorders and then hope and pray everything works out perfectly. I still have a picture of me and my college girlfriend wearing the tape from a VHS on our heads from the night the VCR ate said tape in the middle of recording the new episode of Seinfeld. Never again does this have to happen!
But before DVR's started catching on, television networks started bumping the ending of one show to the beginning of the next show closer and closer. This my friends, has done nothing but screw with my DVR. The DVR cuts off the final ten to thirty seconds of a show week in and week out. If I don't tape the next show, I never get to see the ending, or if I watch the shows out of order, I see the ending before I see the beginning and middle.
Yes, I know the DVR has a nifty little function that allows you to continue taping a show for one minute after the show ends, but this doesn't work on days when I'm taping lots of shows, and that wouldn't solve the problem of watching shows out of order.
For me, the DVR has brought back the joy of great sitcoms on Thursdays. I watch New Girl, Happy Endings, Suburgatory and How I Met Your Mother. This is what makes the DVR so great. It allows the viewer to create their own television schedule and watch shows on their own time frame.
So please, for god's sake, can we just contain a show within the time frame it's scheduled for. Is this too much to ask for?
But before DVR's started catching on, television networks started bumping the ending of one show to the beginning of the next show closer and closer. This my friends, has done nothing but screw with my DVR. The DVR cuts off the final ten to thirty seconds of a show week in and week out. If I don't tape the next show, I never get to see the ending, or if I watch the shows out of order, I see the ending before I see the beginning and middle.
Yes, I know the DVR has a nifty little function that allows you to continue taping a show for one minute after the show ends, but this doesn't work on days when I'm taping lots of shows, and that wouldn't solve the problem of watching shows out of order.
For me, the DVR has brought back the joy of great sitcoms on Thursdays. I watch New Girl, Happy Endings, Suburgatory and How I Met Your Mother. This is what makes the DVR so great. It allows the viewer to create their own television schedule and watch shows on their own time frame.
So please, for god's sake, can we just contain a show within the time frame it's scheduled for. Is this too much to ask for?
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Entertainment Weekly Loves Twilight
No, there's nothing inherently wrong with loving Twilight, but what Entertainment Weekly did was absolutely ridiculous to the highest degree. They gave the credit to Twilight for everything that has ever happened in the world and more!
Hollywood's obsession with Young Adult novels? Thank you, Twilight. It had nothing to do with Harry Potter, nothing at all. Nope, it was all Twilight!
"Twilight created a tidal wave of interest in the paranormal-vampires, werewolves, zombies..."
Wow, what a sentence. So big and so flawed, it must be deconstructed piece by piece. Let's start with "vampires." First off, I guess we have to ignore the books here because if we don't, then EW crediting Twilight for Vampire Diaries would be all wrong because Vampire Diaries came out in 1991. But the real argument goes to a great show called True Blood. It debuted September 7th, 2008 and was a success for HBO. The first Twilight movie didn't come out until almost THREE months later. So, the credit for the vampire craze would belong to True Blood, not Twilight.
But don't forget, Twilight is not just getting credit for vampires, it's getting credit for ALL paranormal creatures here. So next up, we have zombies.The one-two punch of 28 Days Later and the remake of Dawn of the Dead in 2003 and 2004 ushered in the new age of zombies and began or reinvigorated many people's love affair with this paranormal creature. Over the next few years, a string of cool, new zombie moves came out in the theaters, but after four years, interest was beginning to wane and the zombie craze went underground for a while, living on in straight to DVD movies. Hollywood was looking for the next paranormal creature to bring back from the dead.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer had been off the air for three years by 2006, and continued to have a dedicated and loyal following. So let's just rip off Buffy, right? Central female lead? Check. Fall in love with a vampire? Check.
What I'm saying is that a strong and logical argument can be made that Buffy deserves the credit for Twilight, Harry Potter deserves the credit for the explosion of Young Adult novels in Hollywood, True Blood deserves the credit for the vampire craze and 28 Days Later/Dawn of the Dead deserve the credit for the new wave of paranormal creatures in the movies.
A strong and logical argument can't be made at all that Twilight deserves the credit for any of this. Unless, of course, you're Entertainment Weekly and you just say it is so.
Hollywood's obsession with Young Adult novels? Thank you, Twilight. It had nothing to do with Harry Potter, nothing at all. Nope, it was all Twilight!
"Twilight created a tidal wave of interest in the paranormal-vampires, werewolves, zombies..."
Wow, what a sentence. So big and so flawed, it must be deconstructed piece by piece. Let's start with "vampires." First off, I guess we have to ignore the books here because if we don't, then EW crediting Twilight for Vampire Diaries would be all wrong because Vampire Diaries came out in 1991. But the real argument goes to a great show called True Blood. It debuted September 7th, 2008 and was a success for HBO. The first Twilight movie didn't come out until almost THREE months later. So, the credit for the vampire craze would belong to True Blood, not Twilight.
But don't forget, Twilight is not just getting credit for vampires, it's getting credit for ALL paranormal creatures here. So next up, we have zombies.The one-two punch of 28 Days Later and the remake of Dawn of the Dead in 2003 and 2004 ushered in the new age of zombies and began or reinvigorated many people's love affair with this paranormal creature. Over the next few years, a string of cool, new zombie moves came out in the theaters, but after four years, interest was beginning to wane and the zombie craze went underground for a while, living on in straight to DVD movies. Hollywood was looking for the next paranormal creature to bring back from the dead.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer had been off the air for three years by 2006, and continued to have a dedicated and loyal following. So let's just rip off Buffy, right? Central female lead? Check. Fall in love with a vampire? Check.
What I'm saying is that a strong and logical argument can be made that Buffy deserves the credit for Twilight, Harry Potter deserves the credit for the explosion of Young Adult novels in Hollywood, True Blood deserves the credit for the vampire craze and 28 Days Later/Dawn of the Dead deserve the credit for the new wave of paranormal creatures in the movies.
A strong and logical argument can't be made at all that Twilight deserves the credit for any of this. Unless, of course, you're Entertainment Weekly and you just say it is so.
Saturday, November 3, 2012
I'm Tired Of...
I'm tired of babies and all baby related things. I think television is in a baby booming phase because it seems to me that every show has some sort of baby or pregnancy plot. New sitcoms are being made about new parents; old sitcoms are having characters get pregnant, dramas are having the "big dramatic twist" be a pregnancy. I'm just tired of it all. There's a whole world out there without children who just don't care, but even if you have children, how many new and original jokes or story lines can be created about this subject? The answer to that is none.
I'm tired of my favorite (or any) sitcoms injecting "heart" into the story and or characters. Yes, I realize that How I Met Your Mother's audience skyrocketed when they started injecting a lot more heart into the show, but fuck it, when I sit down to watch a sitcom, the last thing I want to see is a three episode arc about one of the characters parents dying. It's called a "sitcom," meaning a "situation comedy," which means you put a character or group of characters in a common situation or location and you make it FUNNY.
While I'm at it, I'm goddamn tired of advertising agents on TV and in the movies. You would think half the country were advertising agents, because they're targeting this demographic so often. Yes, I get it, when you have a character whose an advertising agent, it allows the writer to easily have life lessons learned throughout the show or movie give him or her the great idea for the advertising campaign they're working on. It also allows for new and famous guest stars week in and week out. And no, lets not modernize this by switching to sports agent, Hollywood agent, or any other kind of agent.
While they're at it, let's also do away with characters on shows or movies being producers of some sort of show, characters writing articles for a magazine or newspaper, interns who somehow have enough money for a nice apartment in New York...
...Characters in a high school show who are going off to college far away from where the show is set. I mean, come on. We all know they'll be right back on the show next year, so let's just not fake it. But for god's sake, don't make their reasoning be for their boyfriend or girlfriend; that just gives too many high school kids bad ideas.
If I have to talk about someone, or reveal to a friend something bad I did to another friend, I'm going to do it quietly and when I absolutely know that the person I'm offending is nowhere near where I'm talking. I also make sure to follow the same rules if the evil gossip of my friends is anywhere near. That way they can't threaten me with the juicy information they just overheard. So, can we please do away with all characters who are overheard because they decided to open their stupid mouths when the offended person is in the next room.
And finally, please, we do not need "this season on...." Just give me a 20 second teaser for next week's episode and be done with it. I don't want plot spoilers for the next nine months of the show. Just stop it already.
I'm tired of my favorite (or any) sitcoms injecting "heart" into the story and or characters. Yes, I realize that How I Met Your Mother's audience skyrocketed when they started injecting a lot more heart into the show, but fuck it, when I sit down to watch a sitcom, the last thing I want to see is a three episode arc about one of the characters parents dying. It's called a "sitcom," meaning a "situation comedy," which means you put a character or group of characters in a common situation or location and you make it FUNNY.
While I'm at it, I'm goddamn tired of advertising agents on TV and in the movies. You would think half the country were advertising agents, because they're targeting this demographic so often. Yes, I get it, when you have a character whose an advertising agent, it allows the writer to easily have life lessons learned throughout the show or movie give him or her the great idea for the advertising campaign they're working on. It also allows for new and famous guest stars week in and week out. And no, lets not modernize this by switching to sports agent, Hollywood agent, or any other kind of agent.
While they're at it, let's also do away with characters on shows or movies being producers of some sort of show, characters writing articles for a magazine or newspaper, interns who somehow have enough money for a nice apartment in New York...
...Characters in a high school show who are going off to college far away from where the show is set. I mean, come on. We all know they'll be right back on the show next year, so let's just not fake it. But for god's sake, don't make their reasoning be for their boyfriend or girlfriend; that just gives too many high school kids bad ideas.
If I have to talk about someone, or reveal to a friend something bad I did to another friend, I'm going to do it quietly and when I absolutely know that the person I'm offending is nowhere near where I'm talking. I also make sure to follow the same rules if the evil gossip of my friends is anywhere near. That way they can't threaten me with the juicy information they just overheard. So, can we please do away with all characters who are overheard because they decided to open their stupid mouths when the offended person is in the next room.
And finally, please, we do not need "this season on...." Just give me a 20 second teaser for next week's episode and be done with it. I don't want plot spoilers for the next nine months of the show. Just stop it already.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)