Popademic

I Promised Comic Book Film Reviews...

2011-08-04T01:15:00.000-04:00

I just realized that it's August. Which means I missed July entirely on this blog. So let's start out August right. Comic book movies!

Green Lanturn - W.T.F.!!! I'm very happy to report that on a friend's suggestion, I didn't actually PAY to see this film, rather ducked in after seeing another film I paid for (Super 8 - fantastic, should write a review on that). This film was the worst film I've seen since Johnny Mnemonic.

You're cute Ryan Reynolds, but NOT THAT CUTE!! Keanu barely saved his ass from that terrible film. My favorite part of Green Lanturn was sipping rum from a flask and bantering with my friends about the whole mask thing - moronic! You could totally tell it was Ryan Reynolds. Not like Batman at all. Lame sauce. Two thumbs down! Comic books are ashamed to be associated with you.

TV's Best and Worst of 2010-2011

2011-06-25T17:13:00.001-04:00

I finally have some down time today to compose my thoughts about last year’s TV season. Of course, I’m way behind here, and the fall line ups have already been announced – but for posterity, or perhaps just because I feel like it today, I’m going to pontificate about the many, many hours of TV I watched this past year. It’s going to be my own mini-Emmys.

BEST OVERALL SHOW – The Good Wife

HANDS DOWN the best show I’ve been following on TV this year. Superb acting by the entire cast, excellent writing, interesting cinematography.

MOST FUN – Castle

This is the show I looked forward to the most after The Good Wife. Stana Katic and Nathan Fillion have finally gelled, and the supporting cast has settled into their roles well. The writing is spotty week to week, but they clearly have fun with themselves and don’t take the plots too seriously. As a result, it’s easier to enjoy as a serial crime series than its competition. Tends to run formula - campy, campy, campy, SERIOUS episode, back to campy for a while etc., but it's been an enjoyable ride. Nice season finale too.

MOST IMPROVED – Big Bang Theory

This little gem had a quirky and interesting start, but last year fell into to what I like to call “The Sheldon Show” to the point it was getting pretty lame. With the introduction of larger roles for Melissa Rauch and Mayim Bialik, it’s gone back to the ensemble formula which is much, much funnier.

MOST GROSS – House

Beyond the schmaltzy House-Cuddy relationship that went down this season, you end by cutting tumors out of your own leg after ingesting experimental drugs barely tested on rats? Where has this show gone, really? It’s boring me a lot. Other than some interesting writing choices for Wilson and Cuddy centered episodes this season, it’s lost a lot of its initial magic.

JUST AIIGHT FOR ME – American Idol

While you can argue the talent was better this year, the judging pool was fairly worthless. I cannot believe that no one on this show uttered a single constructive criticism to Scotty the entire season when he clearly needed it. And no negative comments apparently means that you now win this show. I’m even more convinced the thing is rigged when the first year you let 15 year olds compete, the two that make the cut make it to the finale…in a large part because you didn’t critique them all season because “they’re young” yet rip apart the 20+ year olds.

GUILTY PLEASURES – Hellcats & Covert Affairs

It’s all about the eye candy. Terrible writing for the most part on both shows, but really, really nice looking people. And the production value of both have some flair - the dance scenes from Hellcats were fun to watch, and the action sequences in Covert Affairs look much better than you’d expect for TV stunt work.

MOST OVER-RATED – Modern Family

Don’t get me wrong, I dig Modern Family. It’s legitimately funny….sometimes. My problems with it lies in the way the characters sort out according to gender politics. The Pritchet crew is clearly the “masculine” force in the show, while their significant others are the “feminine” counterpoint. The fact that two of those SOs are men, and are frequently satirized for being too feminine makes me a little squeamish as a gender scholar. I should probably write a longer post on this at some point.

DOWNWARD SPIRAL OF SUCKAGE – Brothers & Sisters and Grey’s Anatomy

It’s a tie. I already ranted about Grey’s, so let me rant about Brothers & Sisters – a show that used to be an interesting character study in family dynamics has now become a trite construct whereby each episode revolves around people not being able to communicate effectively at all. And while it was interesting at first to think there was a “lost child” in there somewhere, now the lineage of the entire family just keeps getting called into question. It’s tired, and it’s clear the actors are tired of it…so, I was not particularly surprised to see it won’t be returning next fall. Unfortunately, Grey’s is. With the lamest season ever (and a terrible season finale – I know, I said I wouldn’t watch it, but I thought they might pull it out like last year. No luck.).

NEEDED TO BE CANCELED – One Tree Hill and Smallville

While I’m a bit nostalgic about the cancelation of two shows dear to my heart that have been a large part of my research on teen television, they really, really had worn out their welcome.

And that's all for now...next post (when I get around to it) will be the battle of more comic book movies.

The Battle of Two Comic Books (on Screen)

2011-06-07T21:38:00.000-04:00

Helllllllo all my readers – you thought I’d died, didn’t you? No worries. I am the first to admit that I am a completely sporadic blogger, prone to long hiatuses and silence should I be terribly busy, distracted, or simply not have much to say. But I’ve had some time to think the past few weeks, so I have a couple gems to kick out over the next couple days. The first will be my pro/con rundown of two major comic book films in the past month – Thor and X-Men First Class.

Now for those who don’t regularly follow Popademic, you should know that I am a comic book lover at heart – but I’m not really a comic book reader. How does that work? Well, as a media scholar, my interest in comic books is pretty restricted to how they are manipulated from print into mediated stories (via TV or film, which are more my specialty than print). So, that being said, here’s my take on two comic book blockbusters of the summer so far:

THOR (Pros & Cons)

PRO – It was really pretty. Loved the CGI imaginary worlds.
PRO – Chris Hemsworth & Natalie Portman. Eye-candy galore and super cute rapport. As a bonus, Anthony Hopkins didn’t totally suck. Liked seeing Stellan Skarsgård in something akin to his Good Will Hunting role, with a little less arrogance.
PRO – Some fun humor and quippy one-liners (as a result of Kenneth Branagh directing?)

CON – I was frequently bored. This is never a good thing for your film.
CON – The entire cast of supporting characters was under-developed and boring. In fact, I’m positive in the comic book Thor MUST be on Earth WAY longer than it seems like it takes in the film, because the whole romantic relationship with Natalie Portman takes all of a hot minute before he’s sent back home.
CON – As a counterbalance to the previous pro, the script as a whole pretty much sucked. Good actors saved some terrible dialogue from being generally abhorrent.

X-Men First Class (Pros & Cons)

PRO – I was mostly never bored. There’s one part (I won’t spoil it) that had me really bored. It had to do with the junior recruits.
PRO – I am a BIG fan of comic book films that tease out interesting and complicated relationships between men. James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender did an amazing job here keeping me glued to the screen.
PRO – Kevin Bacon was a FABULOUS bad guy! Really hit that line between crazy/evil/deranged yet thinks he’s rational quite well. And January Jones was pretty intense (and hot) too.
PRO – LOVED the cameo by Hugh Jackman as Wolverine.

CON – The kiddies. Most of them couldn’t act their way out of a paper bag.
CON – Plot holes…like a lot of them. Of course, I empathize with the fact that when you have to write Prof. X, it’s a fine line because really he could totally do just about anything he wants, but the film made him seem weak in ways I didn’t appreciate as an X-Men fan. Also, silly things like – we dropped the sonar kid in the water and never got him back but 20 minutes later he flies out of the water? How does that work exactly since in order for him to fly before he had to be pushed off a building? Or really, if you want to go there, why is Kevin Bacon even bothering with this stupid plan when really he could just absorb the nuclear bomb energy and wipe out the world – which is what he clearly wants to do, yet, in a convoluted fashion he waits for humans to do it? The same humans he’s anxious to annihilate?
CON – Whoever was on the Beast’s makeup team should have been fired. That weird Planet of the Apes in blue crap was so awful I audibly gasped in the theatre. And I was not alone. Two comic book nerds were with me and were like, “dude, that is UNCOOL.”

So there you have it. I’ll be interested to see what the rest of the summer comic book line-up has in store.

An Open Letter to the Writers of Grey's Anatomy

2011-03-25T18:26:00.003-04:00

Dear Grey’s Anatomy Writers,

You are dead to me. I mean it. I am through with your stupid show. There was a time it was near and dear to my heart, you know, back when it actually had some heart. Now it’s tired and lame. I thought by giving you a second chance after pulling out last season’s finale, you wouldn’t disappoint me again. But I was wrong. I was so, SO wrong.

Before you bemoan how difficult it is to write a TV show week in and week out, let me just say that I don’t care. Suck it up. This is what you signed up for, so quit making this show suck. Some of the things I suggest you fix immediately include (but are not limited to):

A complete moratorium on any storyline that involves a sick person and a doctor. It’s been done. Do you remember Denny & Izzy? I do. It was terrible. Why, oh why, are you wasting the beautiful, talented Scott Foley this season? “The season that changes everything” my ass. More like “the season that recycles as many previous storylines as possible so that we can take more smoke breaks.”

Quit making your strong female characters weak, insecure morons. Particularly Bailey. This whole thing with the new boyfriend saying “I’m the man”?!? REALLY!?! And her being insecure about her diagnosis because he questions her? Come on. It's pathetic. Chandra Wilson looked so embarrassed to be delivering this garbage, at one point I'm sure I heard her say “my acting career just died” under her breath.

While you’re at it, why don’t you have the male characters actually do something other than sit around and watch the women self-destruct (besides spout misogynist lines)? Remember when Derek went psycho? That was great! When Mark was a sleazy guy? When Hunt was battling PTSD? Also great! Emo doctor guys sitting back looking all puppy-dog-eyed while their significant others fall apart is a pretty terrible statement about how culture believes men should react to women’s problems/concerns.

On that note, can someone please date someone who DOESN’T work at the damn hospital? Seriously. At this point I’m starting to feel like the whole Grey’s crew is a weird sex colony – you need a medical degree to get in, but after that, anything’s good until someone says the safe word (which is probably “catheter” or “enema”).

Oh, lest we forget this show is supposed to be about a hospital, let me throw in for good measure that it would be really nice if you won’t maim/kill/harm/psychologically mutilate the main characters every time the ratings take a dip. At this rate, the Grey’s crew is such a disaster, I’m pretty their insurance carriers have dropped them.

Speaking of, the lesbians. Really? We had to go there? Sara Ramirez sings a song in the next episode to help launch her career as a singer-songwriter? Is this a sign that all the doctors need to be on the market for a new gig? It’s not Glee, it’s Grey’s Anatomy. I know they’re beating you in the ratings, but adding music isn’t going to help your crappy writing.

For all of these reasons and more, I insist as a loyal viewer that any writer currently still employed who participated in any of the above said atrocities be publicly flogged and stripped of their B.A. in creating writing or theatre, whichever took more credits to finish. Since that will most likely leave you with no remaining writing staff, I suggest hiring some actual talent in an effort to save your sinking ship. I, however, am deleting my season pass from TIVO.

Sincerely,
Popademic

Pop Culture Rewind: Scrubs & Gender Politics

2011-03-24T17:26:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, I spent a good half of my day watching back episodes of Scrubs on Netflix, wondering, “why was I never into this show as much as my friends?” I remember it fondly, enjoyed catching episodes here and there, directed several student projects about it – but yet, could not put my finger on why exactly I wasn’t crazy in love with this show. And yesterday I figured it out.

It’s Elliot. (Or perhaps more broadly, it’s Sarah Chalke since I hated her turn on HIMYM as well and was super happy when they wrote her off…)

This show did an amazing job playing with our contemporary understanding of masculinity, but nothing for our understanding of femininity. Elliot is an awful character who represents the worst of our culture’s obsessions with femininity. Every other joke on the show is about her ego, her body, or her obsessions with men. Even when she’s acting like a doctor, she’s always comparing herself to the men around her (a competition she apparently always loses in her head). 182 episodes, 9 seasons, and basically zero growth in her character. I find her so incredibly annoying it’s hard for me to bracket it and enjoy the hysterical male performances in the series.

I don’t think it’s an accident that in contrast, Carla’s character is endearing and interesting. This is a function of the positionality of the white, more educated doctor yet completely neurotic woman who can’t function in a relationship against the Latina, lower-status nurse who manages to keep her man in line and sustain a family outside of work. And in a culture where Bridget Jones caricatures reign supreme in how we frame contemporary white femininity, Elliot serves as a cultural marker for all that I hate about our culture’s obsession with women’s bodies, the devaluation of their intellectual capital/potential, and the correlation of women’s insecurities to insanity.

So while I think Scrubs offered us some important cultural moves (particularly the presentation of “emo” men, and how emo becomes racially coded as a white male phenomenon), it saddens me that Elliot is the type of character that sells to audiences because I don’t find her funny at all.

Happy (?) Thoughts about Daniel Tosh

2011-03-09T11:02:00.000-05:00

I’m a big fan of comedy, but I’m hard to impress. I don’t find much contemporary American comedy all that amusing – it tends to rely on standard tropes and forms (particularly racism, homophobia and misogyny), rarely exhibiting any intellectual social commentary. So when I caught Tosh.0 for the first time, I was skeptical. While I enjoyed some of Daniel Tosh’s stand-up, there’s also a running problem with Comedy Central shows where they take a good stand-up comic who’s worked on an act for a year or so, produce a couple good episodes and then demand they come up with new material for a serial program each week. Not a good formula, and as a result, very funny people typically tank their comedy shows. But, due in large part to a format much like America’s Funniest Home Videos, Tosh.0 is usually pretty amusing. I could probably write a whole post on that, but I have a different point to make today. Intro over.

This fall Tosh came through my hometown on the 2010 Tour, and I bought tickets to see the live show. Pretty funny stuff. Now that the tour is over, Comedy Central taped and packaged the stand-up special Happy Thoughts which broadcast this past Sunday. Since I’d seen the live show, it was fascinating to observe the changes once it was polished and repackaged for TV format. First, throughout the live performance, he had several spots where he inserted relevant social commentary (particularly on celebrity status, gay marriage, women’s rights), most of which was cut from the special. There were a few lines here and there that stayed in because they were embedded within the narrative of a joke, but the ones that weren’t – the ones that were asides or set-ups were mostly cut. As a result, several of the jokes that were hysterical live came off misogynistic, homophobic or racist (despite them leaving in the piece where he claims to be an equal opportunity offender crossing comedic lines wherever it seems fit) which isn’t what I think he’s trying to do as a comic at all.

Second, he had three bits I distinctly remember that were edited out – one about crazy fans, appealing to the audience to quit doing stupid things like stalking his mother at the hospital she works at and then doing trust falls into her; one about intellectual property laws, telling fans to peer-to-peer share whatever of his stand-up they wanted because he’s insanely rich now and doesn’t need the extra money; and one about the process of putting Tosh.0 together explaining the darker side of the internet (something like, “do you ever wonder if a horse fucked a guy how much horse cock would kill that guy? I don’t have to wonder, I know.”) As a media scholar, I’m not surprised that these were the pieces chosen to edit out since they potentially impact/reveal the economics behind producing Tosh.0, and ultimately amount of money Comedy Central can make in the process.

Overall, this picture sort of captures my reaction. I’m curious to see if they put those bits back in when they go to sell the special on DVD/Netflix or what have you. Perhaps it was edited for TV broadcast only, particularly since it was being aired on Comedy Central. On the other hand, it could be edited entirely – which is a shame because some of the smartest commentary was void from what aired Sunday night.

American Idol: TV's Juggernaut Hits Season 10

2011-03-03T17:43:00.000-05:00

Although it’s unprecedented, I believe I have to post twice in a single day. Don’t get used to it. Depending on how it shows up, I might even reverse time stamp my last post so as not to create any expectations that I'll follow through with blogging to this degree ever again. But it’s that IDOL time of year, and I do have to take stock of my addiction to all things Idol despite how it makes me die a little inside every year. Then I remember that when Idol returns, so do Jacob’s TwoP recaps, which are simply to die for and all is right with the world again. (Seriously, if you haven’t read them, and have any kind of snarky humor about TV, you should check them out).

So – big news this year, format changes and panel changes. The judging changes have actually been kind of fun. I’ve been enjoying Steven and Jennifer’s additions, at the same time wondering how Randy has suddenly become the Simon of this season. It’s clear, however, that the panel has two new judges when you put through double the number of people to Hollywood that you did in previous years. And thus, the auditions went on FOREVER and I was actually mostly bored. There’s only so many times Steven can creepily hit on under-aged girls before it’s simply not amusing anymore.

This is the second time in this 10-year process where I “know” one of the contestants that made it to the Top 24. [I use the term “know” loosely since there’s a difference between talking/acquainting with someone and being friends with them – so yeah. The only reason I made it through the audition rounds watching all of the footage was to see what happened to Tim Halperin. Go Nebraska! Represent!]

Now that we’re getting to the competition part, I’m excited again. And I kind of like this new format where they just cut people and get to the real stuff. I hated the painful weeks when it was clear that there was a top half/bottom half and people stuck around week after week. This way we can just cut to the chase. I’m interested to see how this online voting thing will play out – though I’m pretty sure it’s not REALLY going to change the voting demographic all that much.

Which brings me to my observations/predictions about tonight’s first elimination show. As I mentioned last year, I am constantly amazed at how many contestants fail to see the industry politics of Idol once the performances roll around. You’ve got one shot. The whole point is to give me a song that will convince me to buy an entire album of your music, or at least the single on iTunes. What was painfully obvious to me, but perhaps not to most viewers, is that through the production of the audition rounds, it seemed like they were picking individuals who were musicians rather than just singers. A bunch of the outtakes had contestants playing instruments, yet in this first round, my guess is they weren’t allowed to have them. This made it all the more awkward when people were criticized for “not being themselves” – if you’re a singer/songwriter type (like Tim or Paul), just singing a song doesn’t really show me what you can do.

That said, PREDICTIONS! Given what I know of this show’s history, what I think of the public’s ability to judge musical talent, and a variety of other industry audience factors (not the least of which includes the gendered, racialized politics of this show), I think there was a pretty clear top-half/bottom-half on both nights.

For the guys, I think James, Casey, Jacob and Scotty will sail through to the next round. I feel mixed about this because of those four, I can really only conceptualize one of them making an album produced by Idol that will make any money (I’ll let you guess which one). In the fifth spot, it’s a toss up. While I’d like it to be Tim, I think we’ll see Paul – though I wouldn’t count Brett out given the disproportionate number of tween girls who vote on this show and the large number of fans who enjoy voting for the worst contestant in an attempt to see more train-wreck reality TV.

For the gals, the performances were far more lackluster. That said, I think Pia, Thia, and Lauren A. are locked in to the next round. Personally, I thought Haley was the best of the night though the judges beat up on her, and I think she’ll make it through. In the fifth spot, I’m kind of hoping Lauren T. pulls it out because I like her voice, but if I know this audience at all, it will probably be Naima instead. I suppose I can also say not to count Karen out for a spot. If history is any indication, Latino performers never do well on this show – but with the addition of Jennifer on the judging panel, the viewing demographic might have changed slightly from previous years.

And that's it for this week. More on Idol in coming weeks, for sure.

Being Social About The Social Network

2011-03-02T11:50:00.000-05:00

I had a really good conversation about film last night, and thought I’d write a bit about it this morning as I’m still thinking about it. Post-Oscars there’s been a lot of wonder about why The Social Network didn’t come out on top (at least among the “younger” generation). After talking through the film with a colleague, I realized that at the core of this is probably the fact that most people just don’t get (or don’t WANT to get) David Fincher.

My colleague enjoyed the film, but questioned the rowing scene’s inclusion as he felt it had nothing to do with the storyline. I thought the scene made the film. Here’s why: it equated the struggle of intellectual labor to physical competition, illustrating how several people can be working at the same goal/problem but inches, days, hours, weeks can make the difference between who wins and loses. At any given point in time, a lot of smart people think very similar things – it never pans out to be the person who was thinking of something the same time as someone else who actually capitalizes on it first. It’s part of why academia has become even more paranoid about ideas and intellectual capital. I can’t even tell you the number of people who’ve told me I probably shouldn’t be writing this blog. Using crew as a metaphor, even from early on in the film, was one of the best parts of its construction – because at the end of the day, your average individual does NOT equate intellectual labor with physical labor, though it can be equally exhausting and requires similar training and discipline.

We also discussed at length our fairly different views of Jesse Eisenberg’s performance. Part of why I think the film gets mixed reviews is that David Fincher seems to specialize in characters (almost always male) that are narcissistic and highly unsympathetic. At moments in his work, you start to feel a bit for these ego-involved men, and at the end of the day, no one really likes to feel like they identify with that type of character. Audiences (particularly American audiences) like to identify with the underdog – the self-made individual who overcomes adversity. This is part of why Colin Firth’s role in The King’s Speech was so lauded, while Jesse Eisenberg’s role met with mixed reviews. And while I feel like he did a pretty good job playing Zuckerberg, I did feel myself wanting more from it. Perhaps I’m just annoyed that if this role were written for a woman, NO ONE would have seen this film. Smart men can be as pompous and narcissistic as they want, and their image conveys strength, determination, and vision. You can be an asshole and have redemption through intellectual labor. As an aside, I was surprisingly impressed by Justin Timberlake’s performance.

On another note, with all the talk of this film representing a “younger generation,” I don’t think it really captured the ambiguity of emerging adulthood. The film makes references to “not knowing” what they have going on throughout – the idea that any intellectual (particularly a young intellectual) doesn’t exactly know where an idea or a concept is going to take them. Yet, the direction of the film was so confident and self-assured it rarely allowed those moments of insecurity that every intellectual has – granted, most DO cover up those insecurities with the type of bravado and cockiness depicted in the film, but as a viewer, I need to see those insecurities more clearly to feel even remotely interested in your character. So, I think it works – I could point to a number of intellectuals who really are that unlikeable – but I guess I don’t see that kind of poise and self-assurance in the 18-21 demographic I work with every day. There’s a lot of faking it, but not actualizing it. I would have liked to see more contrast between the Harvard 2003 Zuckerberg and the post-Facebook Zuckerberg.

At any rate, it was nice to have a solid, intellectual conversation about film. I certainly don’t follow it as much as I follow TV (keep your eye out for my yearly first American Idol post – probably tomorrow after the results tonight…though I guess maybe I should make some predictions before that…okay, maybe I’ll be back later today).

Post-Oscar Recap

2011-03-01T12:46:00.000-05:00

As a media junkie and scholar, I feel like I should say something about the Oscars this year. Since it was perhaps the most boring experience of my life as a media scholar (I fell asleep twice it was that boring), this should sum it up:

1) The King’s Speech is evidence that you can win multiple Oscars by writing a screenplay that is primarily about White men, is completely formulaic in its relational progressions, then directing it in the most obvious fashion to highlight men’s accomplishments. Helena Bonham Carter’s role was paltry in comparison, even if she did get an Oscar nod for it (further evidence that women written in specific roles that don’t take too much of the limelight will get Oscar nods, especially if they have British accents).

2) The Oscars spent a lot of time pretending to care about a “younger generation” but a lot of time appeasing them with the equivalent of Halloween candy (here’s your best music score for NIN, congrats! Or, okay, we get you liked Inception, we’ll give it some technical awards no one really cares about).

3) The flippant inclusions of LGBT politics (“It’s been a great year for lesbians!”) made me cringe on multiple occasions. Sexuality is not the powerhouse social issue it once was when Brokeback Mountain or Philadelphia appeared. As a feminist scholar, I also have to ask, why in the year that you get a serious, thoughtful look at lesbian relationships do we spend most of the time making fun of it (except to say Annette Benning is beautiful) when the male counterparts were lauded as smart, edgy and critically worthwhile?

I could go on, but I really feel it would be a waste of effort at this point. I should be getting back to other battles.

RomCom Roulette!

2011-02-14T09:28:00.003-05:00

Anyone who knows me knows I have a soft spot for romantic movies, particularly romantic comedies. I’ll also fully admit it’s one of the most terrible genres in modern film – it plays on antiquated gender roles, is typically heterosexist, promotes unrealistic expectations of romantic partners, etc. But, I’m still a sucker for them, and since it’s Valentine’s Day, I thought I’d offer a bit of advice if you’re looking for a romantic comedy this year. It’s a Monday, not exactly the best night to go out – so instead, if you’re looking for something to watch in for the night, here are some very, very quick reviews of several romcoms (one at the theatre, the rest on NetFlix!).

No Strings Attached (in case you’re feeling like getting out) – Despite the terrible trailers for this film, it was actually really cute. Portman and Kutcher had great chemistry, and it’s written and directed by Ivan Reitman, so it’s pretty witty and well constructed, especially for a big budget romcom.

Love & Other Disasters – Tons of fun! Plays with the romcom genre affectionately and delivers strong performances from Matthew Rhys and (though I thought I’d never say it) Brittany Murphy.

When In Rome – When will Hollywood realize that Kristen Bell is a capable actress that needs more intricate roles? This film doesn’t totally suck, but there’s nothing special about it. Magic and Italy – an easy one to pick as background filler if you’d rather be doing other things.

Nights In Rodanthe – Has Nicholas Sparks ever written a book where someone doesn’t die? The editing in this film is so bad, even strong performances by the leads can’t save it.

Weather Girl – Super fun indie film. The protagonist isn’t likable at all as it begins, but she grows throughout the film, which is refreshing. The comic timing between Ryan Devlin and Patrick J. Adams is solid, and Mark Harmon is a great sleezeball character.

The Timer – A deep, intellectual piece that questions how and why we fall in love. If we could scientifically “prove” someone is our soulmate, would our experiences with others matter?

2 Days in Paris – Julie Delpy is one weird woman, but I kind of dig it. Her turns in Before Sunrise and Before Sunset are some of my favorite romcom moments. This film is hindered by Adam Goldberg though, and Delpy’s character is only barely likable. The film is more of a treatise on how people consistently settle for relationships that are less than they deserve because they are tired of reinventing themselves.

Did You Hear About the Morgans? – Oh Hugh Grant. What happened to you? And Mary Steenburgen, what happened to your career!? This film is god awful.

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Brendan James

2011-02-13T10:03:00.000-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#1 – Brendan James
And we’re finally here loyal readers (all three of you) – my top album pick for 2010. While I was perusing iTunes one day, this album came up as a suggestion. I went, “Holy crap! When did my brother find time to record an album?” I figured any singer/songwriter that shared a name with my brother was worth the risk (though I have a strict no-impulse buying rule on iTunes). Boy am I glad I took that risk! Technically his sophomore album, Brendan James captures the sweet spot of some of my favorite singer/songwriter music. First, I’m a sucker for guys who play piano. His style is reminiscent of older pop-piano players (Billy Joel, Elton John), but his vocal tone has a smooth contemporary R&B feel. His melodies are catchy with hooks that stick in your head for days. As a whole, the album comprises solid songwriting, introspective lyrics, and a wonderful journey through life’s ups and downs. It plays heavily on themes of nostalgia and memory (Coming Up, The Fall, Get It Right), with a strong emphasis on living in the moment, seizing the day (Nothing for Granted, Emerald Sky, The Lucky Ones). The tone is hopeful, seeing the past as a way to understand the present, looking toward the future – being able to see your place in relationships/life in a way that helps you learn and grow from experience. It will be a lifetime favorite, one that captures this moment (2010) of my life pretty accurately.

Favorite Lyrics

“Love your future, love your past, love your body it’s all you have/Love your secrets bottled up, but love them more when you give them up.”
“Love is never supposed to be a present under our tree, I do it because I believe.”
“Nothing like a storm in your heart to wake you up, someone by your side and you know they’re not enough.”
“Thinkin’ ‘bout what I could lose and what I should save. I’ll be the first one to say I was caught up in something, something so bad it was wasting our good life away.”

Favorite Tracks

Emerald Sky
Coming Up
Nothing For Granted
Let It Rain
The Fall

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Locksley, Be In Love

2011-02-11T19:26:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#2 – Locksley – Be In Love
I misplaced this album in my head because I associate it with winter, and the indie pop/rock turn in '09 to showcasing a “retro”-vibe for records. Most of these came up short for me, interesting for a time, but certainly not standing the test of it. Locksley hit just the right combination on their sophomore album (released early '10), Be In Love. I enjoyed parts of their first album, but was hoping the sound would gel more on their second effort – and it’s fantastic. It’s got up-tempo work that winks to old school British pop, classic punk, and some of the feel-good rock music of the 80s. One of the best parts of the album is taking the simplicity of the theme – love – and telling its story like a kaleidoscope. From the overly romantic, honeymoon period songs (Love You Too, Days of Youth), to day-to-day strains of relationships (One More Minute, On Fire, The Way That We Go) to more reflective songs capturing how love fits in with the rest of a life (21st Century, The World Isn’t Waiting). The textures and tones throughout the album are varied enough to be interesting, but not so erratic as to be sporadic. Should they come tour anywhere near me, I’ll be one of the first in line for a ticket.

Favorite Lyrics

“Nothing works out just like the plans we made – nobody gives, and if you want it you take.”
“I'm cut through, cut in two pieces of the people that would love to love you.”
“Take the sadness from your gaze and all the bad thoughts I'll erase, hold your body to the sun ‘til the sun has come and gone.”

Favorite Tracks

21st Century (brilliant)
The Whip (infectious)
One More Minute
It Isn’t Love

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Vedera, Stages

2011-02-09T11:26:00.000-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#3 – Vedera – Stages
Yes, yes, I know. I already did #3, but I realized about halfway through that there's an album that needs to be on this list (but in my head I'd placed it in 09 instead of 10) and 3 is my favorite number and it's my blog, so my rules. There. :o) Anyway, tying for third place is this amazing third album from Vedera. I had never heard of them until they opened for Jack’s Mannequin (one of my favorite bands) last spring. Their live show was gripping, so I bought the album. Little did I know it would become one of my defining albums of 2010. Kristin May’s voice is enticing and engaging, and the album functions as a diary of songs that chronicle the stages you go through when moving on from a relationship. From the first song, “Greater Than,” you get the sense that there are two people who love each other desperately, yet as the album progresses, it shows that love is not always enough to bridge those gaps in relationships that keep us holding on, hoping for something better. It's an amazing journey that I think most everyone can relate to. It completely consumed the first part of my year, and I’m looking forward to more from them soon.

Favorite Lyrics:

Use your favorite photograph to play the recent memory back.
I must confess the air I breathe and paths I tread are making me less aware of what I am to do.
I don't wanna deny my heart its chance to feel, I don't wanna deny my soul something real.

Favorite Tracks:

Forgive You
Greater Than
Goodbye My Love
The Rain

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Laura Marling, I Speak Because I Can

2011-02-07T13:05:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#3 – Laura Marling – I Speak Because I Can
I enjoyed Laura Marling’s first album, but it didn’t sell me. This album is a completely different story. Marling’s voice is haunting, reminiscent of other folk artists like Joni Mitchell, and the lyrical prowess is unmatched. The production is simple, allowing Marling’s narrative to drive the album. Each song illustrates how she struggles to find her place within culturally drawn feminine roles (daughter, maid, girl – these terms crop up frequently). It brilliantly interrogates the lines between past and present, placing women’s identities in contested, confusing cultural space. These musings are painted on the backdrop of romantic ideologies, expectations of love spoken and implied. Ultimately, the album is about finding voice outside of these constraints.

Favorite Lyrics:

"My life is a candle and a wick, you can put it out but you can’t break it down, in the end we are waiting to be lit."
"I believe we are meant to be seen and not to be understood."
"It’s hard to accept yourself as someone you don’t desire, as someone you don’t want to be."
"I wrote an epic letter to you, and it’s 22 pages front and back but it’s too good to be used."

Favorite Tracks:

Goodbye to England
Darkness Descends
Devil Spoke
Rambling Man

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Grace Potter & The Nocturnals

2011-02-04T10:18:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#4 – Grace Potter & The Nocturnals – Grace Potter & The Nocturnals (self-titled)

I’ve been a fan of Grace Potter ever since I first heard her vocals on Nothing But the Water, and then on tour with This is Somewhere. Those early efforts showcased a strong blues leaning with some big female vocal classic rock (think Janis Joplin-ish), but the sound hadn’t quite gelled. This album brings it all together, perhaps because of the addition of a second guitar and a new bass player. From the first note, you get the impression that Potter knows what she wants and knows how to get it. This is not your typical female lead vocals pining after men and feeling victimized – the songs are strong when they need power and wistful when they need to be introspective. The album moves through up-tempo and slower tracks with ease, the blend of the two reaching a balance in sound and style previous albums seemed to struggle with. The production of the CD is key here – the tracks sound and feel like live work, not studio recordings, which makes all the difference in those transition moments. Potter’s vocals are sexy and raw with solid imagery in the lyrics, and the music sticks to that blues/pop sweet spot. The intensity of the music will grab you and hold you through the entire ride.

Favorite Lyrics:

“Don't let your bones turn to stone cause you're feeling so alone, just keep on walking.”
“And I can feel you from the inside, prowling like a devil that I try to hide. I can feel your heart beating closer than the poison of my pride.”
“Take away this sense of regret, take the things I need to forget. Take the mistakes I haven't made yet, they're all I have left.”

Favorite Tracks:

Hot Summer Night
Low Road
Money
Colors

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Ryan Star, 11:59

2011-01-31T08:48:00.004-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#5 – Ryan Star – 11:59
I’ll admit, I wasn’t crazy about this album at first. Perhaps it’s because I was introduced to Ryan Star at a live show in 2009, and bought Songs from the Eye of an Elephant, which captured a lot of that year for me. That album had a dark and twisty singer-songwriter vibe, so when I first heard 11:59, I wasn’t a big fan of the shift to a more pop-radio style. I’ve outed myself as a lover of depressing music on many occasions, so after thinking about it, it’s no surprise that my first reaction was “What happened to the dark & twisty!?” The neat thing about this album is that it’s still there – Star’s voice has a smoky intensity that keeps the songs serious and anchored. The imagery is consistent, building a cohesive vacillation between the past and the future with a reminder to live in the present. The production additions alter the songs to be more radio friendly and actually make the overall album more hopeful – narratives about love, loss, relationships, memory, and time aren’t new to music, but they are certainly themes that can get depressing. I appreciate the approach to nostalgia the album embodies as it reminds us that we are a sum of our experiences – that every experience with love and loss is a chance to find what we’re looking for and become the person we’re meant to be.

Favorite Lyrics:

"Let the life that you live be all that you need."
"I’m throwing rocks at your window, you’re tying bedsheets together. They say we’re dreaming too big, I say this town’s too small."
"Lying on the grass now, dancing for the stars, maybe one will look on down and tell us who we are."

Favorite Tracks:

Start a Fire (I seriously can't get enough of this song)
Losing Your Memory
11:59

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Honorable Mentions (part two)

2011-01-27T17:22:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

HONORABLE MENTIONS –
Continuing from yesterday, a couple more for the honorable mentions list.

HM#1 – Punch Brothers – Antifogmatic
A friend of mine recommended this album, and I wasn’t quite sure if it would be my speed. It was described to me as a “bluegrass” album, which is fun once in a while, but certainly not my normal musical landscape. But Antifogmatic isn’t so much bluegrass as classically inspired. Fantastic arrangements with solid instrumental touches throughout the tracks. Lyrically, it’s interesting with clever turns of phrase on the theme of the things that keep our brains in a fog – love, lust, alcohol, work, life, etc. It skips around with strong variance of style between tracks, which makes for a bit of a disjointed listening experience. Other than that, it’s musically fascinating.

Favorite Lyrics:

"Keep your feet wet, and your eyes dry, ‘cause you’re only as good as your last goodbye."
"Forming a ring round a bonfire built on a line in the sand between me and us."
"But it seems that whoever has thrown her away has forgotten the trash under the sink, or was it a joke meant to buy her some time?"

Favorite Tracks:

You Are
Rye Whiskey
Don’t Need No

HM#2 – The Young Veins – Take a Vacation!
I was a big, big fan of Panic at the Disco! – even when their second album took a bit of a trippy Sargent Pepper turn. It wasn’t much of a surprise then when two Panic members (Ryan Ross and Jon Walker) left the band to form the Young Veins and embarked on a 60’s throwback album. This was probably my favorite bubble-gum beach album this summer, probably because the songs are reminiscent of The Beach Boys or early Beatles pop. The songs are short and to the point with simple hooks (and even simpler guitar work). For that reason I like it and tire of it at the same time – the songs don’t have much staying power and start to sound the same after repeated listening. It’s pretty accurate for the time period they’re going for, so if you like that style, you’d enjoy the album. As a fan of the story approach to songwriting, I’d prefer there be a more consistent narrative theme throughout the album which is why it appears here in the honorables.

Favorite Lyrics:

"A wedding ring is just a thing that weighs you down and occupies your finger."
"Euphoria is a risk on the floor."
"I swear this like a sailor – love is not a favor, I find it's just a concept that we live inside."

Favorite Tracks:

Take a Vacation!
Change
Lie to the Truth

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Honorable Mentions (part one)

2011-01-26T10:35:00.004-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

HONORABLE MENTIONS –
As I said in the opening post, this year has been an embarrassment of riches for me in the music department. So many good albums, so little time to listen to them! Given the rules/parameters of this task that I self-impose every year, there are several albums I want to give a shout-out to that didn’t make the list. Each of these has been on constant rotation this year, but the album cohesiveness, production, narrative just isn’t as solid as the top five list.

HM#3 – The Weepies – Be My Thrill
I’m a long time Weepies fan (Hideaway probably falling in my top ten albums EVER), so I was saddened that this album was a bit of a let down. It’s over-produced in places and seems to vacillate between emotions in a way that doesn’t quite gel together. The lyrical construction is elementary at best, with few of the poetic turns of phrase I’ve come to love so much about their first three albums. The songs that do jump out have melody and rhythm that carry them, several I tend to skip through when listening. Regardless, in terms of sheer playing time, it’s definitely a favorite of 2010 – and their concert for the album was great (several of the songs were stripped of the production additions, which made it more consistent to what I enjoy about their sound in the first place, but the lyrical simplicity was then even more evident).

Favorite Lyrics:

"To never regret means you have to forget and I don't think that I could."
"Where we live men are women, women are teenage boys, and everyone wants to look like them, but be like men."
"Found a book you gave me when we were first in bloom, when I thought that you might save me from the dark side of the moon."

Favorite Tracks:

Hard To Please
I Was Made For Sunny Days
Add My Effort

HM#4 – Sam Tsui – The Covers
For those of you who haven’t yet gotten on board with Sam Tsui, you should. His multi-part cover of Don’t Stop Believin’ made him a viral sensation, which I talked about last year. He’s an amazingly talented vocalist, and his re-imagination of pop music is refreshing. Of course, since this album is a collection of covers, it doesn’t really have the power/narrative/theme that it would if it were original music. Still, it’s worth putting these tracks in your library:

Lady Gaga Medley
Fireflies
Down

Top Five Albums of 2010 - Intro

2011-01-26T09:53:00.001-05:00

I’m a little late getting to my yearly review of music, mostly because I’ve been debating the finalized list. This year has been an embarrassment of riches in the music department for me, and narrowing this list to five is all but impossible. BUT - the Grammys are soon approaching, and I wanted to get this out before all that goes down. For those of you looking for Grammy noms on this list, you'll be woefully disappointed. Justin Bieber - sorry, dude. You don't make the cut. The nominees this year just don't have the quality they did 30 years ago (seriously, check this list of noms out).

In general, for me to consider an album one of my best of the year, it must meet some criteria: A) it has to be released in the year I’m reviewing and B) I have to like the WHOLE thing – appreciate the story the artist is trying to tell and fall in love with it. I’m an album purist. You might have a track or two that isn't the greatest, but if it works with the story okay, none of this cutting out singles with crappy lyrics that don't make sense together (I’m looking at you Sarah McLachlan – how could you be so disappointing?). Or situations where there is clearly a single or two that makes no sense with the tone or style of the rest of the album but is marketable enough to sell your album (Sara Barellis, you are the quintessential example of this in your sophomore effort this year).

After working on it for a week, it’s way too long for a single blog post, so I’m breaking it up over a series of posts. Here we go!

Oh Crap! I'm a Virgo! (or My Thoughts on the Zodiac Panic)

2011-01-14T10:41:00.000-05:00

Apparently, there’s a bit of a viral panic going on over the Zodiac. I’m highly amused by this. For those who haven’t see the story, a few links to get up to speed – basically, an astronomer pointed out that if you’re tracking where the Sun is at any given point in time, there are 13 constellations through which it travels, including the 12 traditional Zodiac constellations and Ophiuchus. Taking that observation to an astrological conclusion – viral panic dictated there should be 13 signs instead of 12.

What’s interesting to me about this story is, like most viral panics, it is oddly misinformed. First, it’s being presented as this “new” thing. Anyone who follows astronomy and astrology knows that the debate’s been around for quite some time. It’s basic science – yes, the Earth is a moving body and it’s path and pattern changes. But astrology is not science, it’s more a study of human nature. Empirical vs. humanistic if you will. Modern zodiac signs are merely generalizations about groups of people based on relative proxemic place in a system – and like most generalizations, there’s something to them, though they can’t be taken as hard and fast rules. Saying “people born in Pieces are generally quiet people” is the same as “people from New Jersey are loud and rude” – a generalized statement based on a group of people around a particular claim. Are there exceptions to both claims? Yes, of course. But grouping people for any purpose will never be entirely accurate (unless of course you want to parse out the empirical data, and even then, it’s limited by the number of people you’re able to sample which then limits your ability to generalize).

Second, and perhaps more importantly, what is getting lost in this fury is the notion that your Sun sign is the be all end all. People who actually follow astronomy know that your astrological sign is made up of a complicated series of placements of the planets based on the year, date and time of day you were born. While our modern Zodiac follows the Sun sign as our “primary guide,” your “true” astrological reading is a combination of the placement of all the planets at the time you were born. You can get a chart of this activity from this website. Here’s mine:

As you can see, I’m pretty solidly in Libra – Sun, Moon, Mercury, Pluto AND my antecedent node, all Libra. An important aspect of my chart is the placement of Venus (the planet ruling relationships), which is in Virgo. As a result, this placement implies that my relationships tend to enact patterns more associated with Virgo than Libra. I also have masculine planets of Mars and Jupiter in Cancer, which can be read as an attraction to the highly introverted, loyal types of men. And my antecedent is in Sagittarius, which can indicate the best type of friend to balance my energies. So the charting function of the Zodiac is not merely based on your Sun sign. As most viral news goes, it’s been boiled down to one talking point.

Now, whether or not you “believe” in the Zodiac is an entirely different story. I think it’s fun to see what’s going on up there in the skies - and generalizations about personality from those observations are also fun. Can people create self-fulfilling prophesies for themselves from the Zodiac? Sure. You have to take it with a grain of salt. People are complicated amalgamations of influences throughout their lives, and the Zodiac isn’t going to “predict” someone to a T. At the same time, I don’t think that everything is coincidence in some cases. There are things in this world that science is not able to explain. If there’s anything I do believe with absolute certainty, it’s that there will always be more to know and discover about our universe and ourselves.

Killing Time (and My Patience)

2011-01-12T20:01:00.003-05:00

I’m alive! Long hiatus, I know. Basically summer distracted me, and then my fall was probably the busiest of my life so far. I’m surprised I got any sleep at all. Now that the weather has cooled off and there are less things to do outside the house, I’m getting back to my little project here at Popademic. In the next few days, keep an eye out for Film Roulette of 2010 and of course, my very important (yet slightly behind schedule) Top Five Albums of 2010.

To kick off my return, I’d like to offer some comments on Dexter. I’m very behind since the show is headed into its sixth season – but I wasn’t all that interested in Dexter as a series. First, it’s about a serial killer. Second, it’s about a serial killer that the audience is supposed to empathize with. Third, other than Michael C. Hall, the acting is generally atrocious and fourth, I have a thing with gore/blood/creep-factor stuff. It’s just not my thing. But, as any good TV critic does, I did keep tabs on the first season, and while I liked the dramatic turns, I also tired of the above four issues. And at some level, I feel like when you (as the audience, most of whom I assume are NOT serial killers) start to think, “wow, that wasn’t very smart – why didn’t he do it this way?” there’s only a short line from there to interrogating your own mental sanity. I question my mental sanity on a daily basis enough. I don’t need a TV show helping me along.

Enter the winter dilemma: I have a fondness for romantic comedy (which, admittedly, is generally terrible) and subject my partner to many a terrible film/TV show as a result of this fondness. Sailor happens to be fond of gore, so I agreed to indulge curiosity and hop back into the series. We’ve now watched through the end of season four and decided that after that, we need a break. I’ve had trouble sleeping since the end of that run (trying not to spoil the shocker for people, though I’m sure you can find out on the internet if you want). Lithgow was amazingly creepy and I can certainly see why he deserved the accolades he received.

So – my thoughts on Dexter: besides the issues mentioned above, which are all still quite prominent (seriously, the acting gets worse by most of the supporting characters as they move on, though Deb has a couple episodes in season four where she pulls out a solid performance), I simply can’t stand the narrative incongruity. Sailor is always complaining about this when we watch Glee. It’s just as bad in Dexter. From one episode to the next, they introduce threads and drop them. Between seasons, they leave a lot to the audience’s imagination. And from the rate at which Dexter continues to make terrible choices about his “dark passenger,” I’m appalled that he's been getting away with killing people this long. How frustratingly ineffective can police detective work be on homicide cases? And why do all these serial killers show up in Miami? It’s like they never really address the fact that apparently Florida is attracting them like flies. I know it’s TV, so there is supposed to be some suspension of disbelief or whatever, but if you base the narrative on a serial killer (and one who is represented as a methodical control freak), I expect you to at least be logical with your narrative to a degree that it makes sense with the pathology. But then again, I've come to realize I care much more about narrative consistency than most people.

Signing off for now - but good to be back in the game.

End of an Era (or two)

2010-05-25T11:31:00.002-04:00

My week of eminent loss as a television scholar continued last night with the series finales of Law & Order and 24. Both shows redefined narrative television and are cultural landmarks. I was not nearly as attached to these series as I am to so many others, but I did follow them pretty closely at different moments throughout their runs.

Law & Order has been on the air since I was in grade school. That’s INSANE in today’s contemporary television marketplace. In terms of storytelling (technically, it’s the second longest running scripted primetime American television drama next to Gunsmoke), Law & Order brought a new element to the already well-established crime serial – the “law” part. Several shows explored the police end of the chase and capture of criminals, and a few had dabbled with the courtroom, but none had successfully paired the two together. Series creator Dick Wolf wanted something that depicted the justice process optimistically, and thus, more often than not, the criminals captured at the beginning of episodes were successfully prosecuted at the end. For that reason, it’s never been lauded as a realistic representation of the justice system, but it obviously served an important cultural function – fulfilling the needs of enough viewers to keep it running this long.

My take is that it’s a combination of the feel-good message of justice with the episodic nature of the show. As technology permeated the 90s, we started to have more outlets vying for our attention, and following complicated narratives series (say, like Lost) takes quite a bit of emotional and time investment. I guess you could say Law & Order is sort of like the after dinner mint of television – if you’ve ever watched the Law & Order marathons on TNT, you can probably understand the correlation as after several hours of that, it’s the equivalent of a candy high that makes your stomach sick and keeps you from sleeping.

24 holds a soft spot in my heart – it’s a series I followed fairly closely until the sixth season, but never in real time. I much preferred to view it all at once when the DVDs came out. Why? Well, it’s a bit of a patience thing, a bit of a time thing and a bit of a recording thing. I don’t have a lot of patience for extended periods of suspense because it produces too much anxiety; during the semester, my viewing time is almost always limited to shows I’m currently writing about; and recording technology didn’t used to be what it is today.

Point being, 24 appeared at a moment in our cultural history where we were still reeling over the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and Jack Bauer filled a void where viewers felt helpless – who was working against these terrorist agents? And why did it seem like they weren’t doing their jobs? 24 offered answers, with Jack’s character almost universally knowing the right approach to terrorist threats, yet demonstrating his struggles with government bureaucracy, cover-ups, and ill-advised foreign diplomacy. In a lot of ways, the series functioned similarly to Law & Order in that sense, giving us solace that justice would prevail. The series also changed the way we think about crime serials by filming in “real time,” using the ticking clock to count down the moments of a day where a terrorist attack was imminent. In that way, it also helped pull in viewers as the reality television craze boomed in the early part of the decade.

24 made some mistakes, but it also did some things well. Unfortunately, I think the duration of the series, coupled with continually killing off key characters hurt its overall narrative form. Jack started the series by working *slightly* outside the confines of established protocols, and evolved to full-on vigilante. Personally, I found the on and off again moments of rebellion more compelling than the know-it-all Jack Bauer. Ending the series with the president realizing that Jack Bauer is right was kind of key to exposing the outrageousness of how the plots have progressed since its inception. But I also did like the signing off part, though I would have much preferred Tony or Michelle to still be around for it than Chloe.

So farewell to both series. I wouldn’t be surprised to see either resurface in another form - Law & Order still has its spin offs, Jack Bauer is probably headed to the big screen. Both will continue to influence our understanding of pop culture in the next decade.

Farewell to Lost

2010-05-24T11:39:00.007-04:00

It has finally come to an end – and while I wasn’t going to make a big deal out of it, I feel like I need to put in my two cents on Lost and it’s place in TV history as a way to “let go.” Also, I’m a little frustrated with the buzz going on around about the finale not providing “answers,” the failures of season six, and the hatred surrounding the series. I’m not going to delve into issues with the smoke monster or polar bears, but there will be spoilers, so if you haven’t seen it and want to, you’d best stop reading now. So as not to repeat much of what you can find elsewhere on the Internet, I’m going to stick to a couple main points and then offer some critical analysis that bugged me enough last night that after sleeping on it, I still want to talk about it.

First off, to all those who thought that Lost would give them answers to all the mysteries it set up – what were you thinking?? I understand that a lot of people watch television in a narrative contained vacuum, meaning, we attach to specific series and programs and follow the narrative, searching for some sort of narrative consistency. What many people seem to have forgotten is that Lost was the brainchild of J. J. Abrams. If you expected narrative consistency, you hitched your star to the wrong wagon. Let me count the ways:

Anyone remember Felicity? Brilliant set up about a girl who goes to college following her high school crush, then four years of narrative convolution to make sure they ended up together in the finale. Of course, this was as a result of Noel’s sacrifice of realizing Felicity would never love him like she loved Ben. Lesson? College is a consistent struggle, a journey to find yourself (which almost always includes massive changes to your hair if you're a woman), and really, at the end you already knew where you should be.

Or perhaps Alias is more your speed? Secret double-agent spy spends five years chasing random fringe organizations, culminating in defeating the ultimate bad guy/mastermind. The main romance between Sydney and Vaughn underscores the action (and is even impacted by a time shift!) and they end up together in the end with two kids, retired from their time in the CIA. Oh, yeah, and there’s a big show down between Jack (Sydney’s father) and Sloane (the big bad) where Jack traps Sloane in a cave after he becomes immortal.

Over on Fringe, in case you haven’t been watching, we have a narrative quite similar to the X-Files with alternate universes and a budding romance between Olivia and Peter destined to be screwed up by his alternate reality origins. And again, the pairing of two halves of male counterparts – Walter and Bell…of course, Bell (Leonard Nimoy) sacrificed himself at the end of the second season in order to send people back to their universes (and because he publicly announced his retirement from acting, so look for there to be some kind of replacement big bad here in future seasons).

Is it any wonder that Lost went down the way it went down? The similarities are uncanny and show the same narrative preferences – Abrams creates a general world, one where romance and relationships are key, and then fumbles around with general narrative confusion ala Pulp Fiction for as many years as the television networks that sign his series will let him. AND in each of those cases, the final seasons of those series suffered when his creative attention was diverted to other outlets (the final season of Felicity was panned almost unilaterally, the last two seasons of Alias were woefully sub-par once he started working on Lost, and now Lost is catching flack for a lackluster sixth season while Fringe is getting all kinds of props for kicking up their second season). If you went into Lost looking for answers, you were duped. Abrams’ narratives are all about the journey, the underlying message that relational connectedness is what makes us human, even in the face of the most inhumane, random, odd occurrences.

So, Lost ended the only way it COULD end – with a montage of narrative connection, illustrating that each of these characters was ultimately “lost” when they arrived at the island – none of them trusted anyone, they were generally shrouded in secrets, and all of them were fundamentally flawed. Their journey was what they needed in order to truly connect and trust others, ultimately saying that without human connection and trust, the soul will never be whole. I dig it. I honestly don’t care all that much about picking apart the narrative for inconsistencies – because doing so in a J. J. Abrams series is sure to give you a migraine, and honestly, think about it. As someone who writes for a living, I can’t tell you what I wrote word for word five years ago – and half the writers working on the series probably don’t even remember some of the narrative arcs they started at that point. On one hand, you could argue it’s their job to know, on the other, have you ever tried to kick out scripts for a series that needs 20-24 new episodes in a year on a timetable fast enough to shoot it (especially with Lost being on location in Hawaii and the scenic elements of the series) over a six year period?

In terms of the haters, I get it. You probably dislike narratives that don’t wrap up neatly. You are probably fans of more serial series scripted by CBS (aka anything that Jerry Bruckheimer touches). And that’s okay. But allow us tortured souls to enjoy our convoluted romps in peace.

That being said, my only problems with the way everything ended were problems I had very early on in the series. I’ve actually started to see these as specific patterns in Abrams’ work, so I’m not surprised, but it’s still disappointing.

1) I’ve actually commented academically about my malaise surrounding the “internationalism” Lost became acclaimed for – when in reality, the “international” characters simply serve as postcolonial templates (though a bit more interesting than have appeared in the past), and ultimately are the characters that all die so that the white people can escape. While I loved the beauty of the moment between Sun and Jin, it was more heart-wrenching that they ultimately sacrificed themselves so that Jack and Sawyer could live. And with all the awesomeness of Sayid, the fact that he got taken out by a bomb trying to save everyone was really unfulfilling given his development over the past several seasons (besides, wasn't he already dead?). Plus, the other black characters were killed/written off long ago (sans Rose, but she's always been more of a sage/wisewoman archetype, so see below). Now, I get that in the end, they're all dead. Fine. But the narrative consistently sacrifices characters of color at the expense of furthering the white characters' personal growth/journey. Again, I shouldn’t be surprised here – in Alias and Fringe, the black characters pretty much serve similar functions that support the white persons’ quest for the “truth.”

2) While Abrams is often lauded for creating interesting female characters, his work is always about the relationship between two men. The role of women, though more prominent than in perhaps other sci-fi narratives, leaves much to be desired, relegating fans to interpreting the narrative in ways that bolster the women’s images. (Aside: I commented here on how fans of Alias tried to reclaim the narrative power of the series from the predetermined romantic arc with Vaughn through fan fiction.) The main struggles are between Noel and Ben, Jack and Sloane, Jack and Locke, or Walter and Bell. The only thing Lost did was mix it up a bit because sometimes in the middle of the series, it made itself about Jack and Sawyer. The women are almost entirely reduced to their romantic attachments, and ultimately their roles as mothers. I actually sort of screamed at my television when Jacob told Kate she was crossed off the wall because she became a mother! She can’t take a job saving the world because she had a kid? Seriously!? And why is it that Juliet is the mother of Jack’s kid in alternate land? Is that because she was the only main female character NOT to have one (as a result of her being unable to have kids, if I remember correctly)? It’s amazing to me how much of a six year narrative on an island where women apparently can’t give birth revolves around ways for them to get around it so that they can have children and ultimately become mothers. The only one who doesn't fall into this trap is Rose, and that's because she fulfills the wise old woman/sage role, and is clearly past the age of childbearing.

So, farewell Lost. I enjoyed you immensely. I fell in love with your characters and appreciated the ride.

Pop Culture Tidbit: Karaoke Excellence!

2010-04-21T20:46:00.000-04:00

It's true dear readers. The end of the semester is near, which means I've had little time to compose my thoughts on pop culture the way I'd like. I have a running list of topics that are set to be developed as soon as I dig myself out of my piles of grading and admin work due before May 1st. Until then, I turn the debate over to you Popademic followers!!

Since I'm participating in a karaoke flash mob in about 15 minutes, I'd love to hear your most entertaining karaoke stories -- who you've seen, what they sang, etc. Leave them in the comments, and I'll put together a post of "best of" including my top five karaoke experiences throughout the years.

Pop Culture Tidbit: Fashion Fads from Japan

2010-04-11T10:13:00.002-04:00

In an effort to explain some of the cultural difference between Japan and the United States during a guest lecture this week, I used the following image. Test your PhotoHunt skills to see what’s wrong with it:

If you’re interested in seeing what all the fuss is about, go read this New York Times article. I used the example to illustrate different cultural orientations to appropriateness in public contexts, and as a way to understand approaches to conflict (attack vs. retreat) as culturally bound. I think it worked pretty well. :oD And in case you want another point of reference, here's a fun little video.

Book Club! - The Help

2010-04-07T17:07:00.000-04:00

Completely shifting gears from where I’ve been lately, I should disclose that I have, in fact, become a little old lady in my mind. I joined a book club. I am by far the youngest member, but so far I’ve quite enjoyed it! Perhaps this is a result of being in a profession where I am always about 10 years younger than my peers, so I’m used to it. I actually missed the last meeting where we discussed our latest read The Help, so I thought I’d talk through my thoughts here instead. Technically, New York Times bestsellers count as pop culture, right?

The Help is a series of blended narratives exploring life in the South during the 1960s, with an emphasis on African-American housekeepers and their relationships with the white families they care for. Although the layered narrative approach had the potential to alienate and further exacerbate racial stereotypes/tensions, I thought the author did a good job of balancing those issues in a way that brings in a casual reader. Perhaps my favorite moment of the book was when one of the African-American women explained very carefully how you never, ever crossed a white woman. The series of events she articulates align tightly with our cultural understandings of “mean girl” behavior among white women – passive aggressive ways of controlling the behavior of other women, particularly with respect to the relationships they build and sustain with men. I also enjoyed the undercurrent of education throughout the book – one of the main characters teaches the white children in her care to think in “colorblind” terms, in a sense, emphasizing that the progress we make on race relations (or any other kind of social acceptance for marginalized identities) begins in educating the young to think outside the boundaries of what society currently defines as acceptable within any cultural moment.

It really is a wonderful read – I picked it up here and there before bed for several weeks. There were plenty of places to pause if I needed to, and plenty of spots to keep me glued to the page if I had more time to invest. If you’re looking for a well written text with poignant social themes without the heavy-handedness of a lot of social commentary fiction, this book is for you!

Film Roulette

2010-04-05T10:12:00.000-04:00

I’ve been sick lately, so I’ve had quite a bit of downtime to catch up on pop culture stuff. I’ve had less time to write about it because in between watching things, I’ve been sleeping. So here’s a quick Monday run down of some short, under-developed thoughts about films I’ve seen in the past several days.

The Ugly Truth – Terrible script that reinforced awful gendered stereotypes of dating. Decent chemistry between Katherine Heigl and Gerard Butler. I just about cried when I saw the news that Heigl will star as one of my favorite crime novel characters Stephanie Plum – if there was a worse casting decision ever in the history of Hollywood, I’m not sure what it was! Oh yeah, that’s right, Hayden Christensen as adolescent Vader.

Where the Wild Things Are – Kind of brilliant. Dark. Twisty. Not at all what I was expecting, and it now makes sense why so many people disliked it. Certainly not a film for young children. I need to watch it a second time because I’m still not sure what to make of the sand scenes.

2012 – Here’s an idea. For every scene in this film that is completely and totally unrealistic or implausible, take a drink! You’ll be through a six pack before the first half hour is over, AND you’ll still have over two hours of film to look forward to! Try not to black out. Seriously, John Cusack. Fire your agent.

Love Happens – On a related note, Jennifer Aniston, what happened to you? This film should have been a drama about people dealing with grief and loss, which would have been great with Aaron Eckhart as the lead. Layering in a terrible romantic comedy B-line with a parrot was just ridiculous.

I have a bunch of random TV things too, but I need to get moving to catch up with everything else I’ve missed the past few days. So, wander back over here later this week.

Pop Culture Rewind: Stand By Me, River Phoenix

2010-03-30T08:59:00.002-04:00

When I think of films that completely defined the 80s for me, several come to mind. It’s a sign that I’m getting old when I mentioned one of my favorite films, Stand By Me, to a couple different students last week who stared at me blankly. Then to say, “you know, with River Phoenix and Wil Wheaton?” and hear, “Who’s River Phoenix?” – it sort of just makes me cringe. Granted, I shouldn’t hold this against them. After all, several of them weren’t even born when the film came out. Sailor hadn’t even seen it, so we dialed it up this weekend while I was couch-bound with a stomach bug. I love coming back to pop culture at different moments in your life – it almost always retains some of the original impact, offers a sort of nostalgia for the past, and can shed light on what you’re experiencing now.

Quick recap for those not in the know – Stand By Me is a film released in 1986 based on the Stephen King short story “The Body.” Directed by Rob Reiner (who most recently directed The Bucket List, and whose credits include other classics like Misery, A Few Good Men and The Princess Bride), it’s a coming of age drama about four boys growing up in a small town in Oregon. The main characters are played by River Phoenix, Wil Wheaton, Corey Feldman and Jerry O’Connell with other significant roles played by Kiefer Sutherland in his hoodlum/punk phase pre-Jack Bauer awesomeness and John Cusack back when his career wasn’t a farce that needed a time machine. When the boys learn the location of a dead body, they embark on a two-day journey that helps them learn about life and death.

What I remember about the film from my first experience is that a) I was in love with River Phoenix, b) the dead body was a lot scarier, and c) I felt kind of sad that I was a girl, because boy bonding looked way cooler than girl bonding. I guess that makes sense if I’m watching this in middle school. What interests me about it now in retrospect, after years of critically analyzing media, is how timeless the story is – the trials and tribulations of growing up, defining identity from adolescence to adulthood, and the pain of loss that never goes away. We also have a kind of cultural obsession with childhood friends, though this nostalgia may be tempered by today’s technological ability to remain “in touch” with so many from our pasts. The performances turned in by Phoenix and Wheaton fill the screen and perfectly capture tortured youth searching for ways to define existence. Phoenix explained his experience on the film saying, “I realized that what I was creating was going to live on far longer than anything of me as a person. The characters are more powerful than the person that creates them.”

Also, revisiting River Phoenix is spooky. He spoke to a lot of people, and saw things about culture that went largely unnoticed at the time (check out this interview where he claims the celebrity culture of Hollywood is out of control). Halloween of 1993 was crazy. The news of Phoenix’s death surprised a lot of people, but I distinctly remember feeling numb – numb from the shock and from the eerie sense that it made sense at the same time. From everything that surfaced both before and after his death, it’s a strong possibility that Phoenix was bisexual – or if not, at least sexually experimental in ways several youth didn’t have language for in the 80s – and in several public appearances in the early 90s, it was clear he was into drugs. And maybe that’s why I always had this strong affinity for him – seeing something behind the eyes that produced riveting performances, knowing that something darker was underneath.

Substance abuse, suicide and depression are rampant among LGBT youth, and the prevalence of drug or alcohol use among bisexual youth is 340% greater than the rate among straight teens. Though rates of addiction and depression have decreased for LGBT youth in recent years (which I firmly believe is linked to increased media representation and language to talk about sexuality), those youth growing up in the United States obviously still live in a cultural climate that is hostile to any non-heterosexual identity. It’s hard. It’s a terribly hard existence, and it’s little wonder that Phoenix (or any other young person living in that time period) would look for ways to escape. Everyone does stupid things in their teens or 20s, but for youth struggling with depression, substance abuse or self-abusive behavior, there are a series of double-binds in place that make it hard for things to ever feel any better. I lost a family member, a friend, and saw many other people I knew go through these issues. It’s a constant barrage of wanting to help, feeling helpless, hoping for understanding, and encountering judgment in return. It affects your life every day, even after those people aren’t part of it any more.

So, I never KNEW River Phoenix – this is entirely my speculation/narration as to what his presence meant to me and how I make sense of it in retrospect. And I do feel the absence of his presence a little bit each day, the same way I feel the absence of so many other wonderful people who touched the world in ways they probably never knew. It’s fitting that Phoenix’s character’s death is what prompts the retelling of the story in the film – that those stories will always “stand by” us as part of a cultural legacy, a legacy I hope youth can learn from to make their lives better today.

(Because I touch on some pretty weighty issues here, I wanted to make sure the following information was available – if you are (or someone you know is) struggling with depression, addiction, or other self-abusive behaviors, please check out the resources available through organizations like Hopeline or TWLOHA.)

Reading Old Navy and Verizon Commercials

2010-03-27T10:54:00.001-04:00

I don’t generally talk much about advertising because it’s not really my area, but in my recent run of catching up on TIVO, I noticed two commercials that really got under my skin as a critic for very different reasons.

The first was actually brought to my attention by a feminist media critic, who in passing asked if I’d seen the latest Old Navy commercial (I hadn't seen it at the time, and just now caught it). They’ve been doing these commercials with “modelquins” which have bothered me on and off.

Not that Old Navy’s advertising has ever been a model of ethical responsibility, but this particular ad is REALLY disturbing. I understand it’s a spoof on America’s Next Top Model or whatever. I get it. But what is really being represented here? A “real” girl wants to be judged and accepted by the “fake” modelquins? And told she’s not good enough? Given the barrage of images shown to women advocating that they look like supermodels, is it any wonder we went one step further to say, “we really don’t want you to look real at all – please figure out how to pose and stand like a mannequin.” The biggest “secret” among most tween and teen girls is that they are all on diets of some sort, many of which lead to full blown eating disorders as a result of the way media continually makes women feel as if their bodies are unworthy of occupying social space. So, Old Navy. Not funny.

The second commercial that’s really irking me is this Verizon commercial. The point of the commercial is to highlight Verizon’s coverage AND your ability to stalk people! It shows a mom who is “letting her daughter go shopping alone” for the first time, only to then show that her daughter is not actually alone because the mother can use the Verizon network to track her. Now, I’m not entirely against having such a feature for an emergency, like if your daughter doesn’t come home that evening – but the image presents woman as being a good mother by micro-managing her daughter, and implies that if you don’t track your children, you’re probably not being a good parent. I hate how this dovetails into a culture of helicopter parenting where kids are taught that they don’t need to be responsible in a sense because parents are always going to be there to bail them out. At the same time, any parent who tells their kid to explore the world without this micro-management is a lunatic for allowing their child that much freedom. If you’ve done your job teaching your child to make good decisions, is shopping at a mall (especially the clearly upscale, suburban mall represented in the ad) really a situation where you’d need to stalk your daughter? And what's more, it's not used for a son. It's used to track a daughter, implying the patriarchal notion that women need to be hovered over and cared for (and perhaps that we can't make good decisions).

Yes, these are the things I think about when watching television. Sometimes I wish I could turn my brain off!

Sam Tsui & College Musical

2010-03-25T11:25:00.003-04:00

Well now. This blog did more traffic with my random pop culture tidbit than any other entry, and it took significantly less time to develop than other posts. This is either because Sara Ramirez is hot, or I need to use pictures more often. From now on, I’ll be cribbing more images from the net.

In a completely unrelated follow up, I wanted to bring some attention to a talented guy I discovered randomly on the Internet: Sam Tsui!

Actually, Sailor discovered him when bored at work and looking for something that would make me laugh. Given my interest in pop culture, my obsession with Glee, and general love of all things college, he found this little gem – HYSTERICAL! A great blend of the High School Musical narrative codes with satirical college humor. I was so impressed with Tsui’s voice that I decided to find out more about him (read, research/stalk him on Google, which is how all good pop culture junkies do it).

Apparently, Sam is a student at Yale, and his musical exploits are chronicled by his friend Kurt Schneider. This interview gives a bit of background on the guys – basically, they were messing around like most college students do, but given that both are ridiculously talented, their musical covers of popular songs have gone viral. Part of what makes them awesome is that Sam sings a number of parts – often times five or six harmonies – and Kurt layers them together in video montages that are really quite well done. Some of my favorites include the Glee version of “Don’t Stop Believing,” an awesome rendition of “Fireflies” (that I actually enjoy much more than the original), and a wicked fun melody of Michael Jackson songs. The guys recently released an album on iTunes (which I downloaded the first week it went live) that includes all of these tracks and more.

Their work is definitely a Broadway/theatrical style of singing/production, but it has solid pop appeal. Its success is most likely related to its ability to capitalize on a cultural moment where traditionally campy, theatrical representations are anchored to kid's culture and youth movements. But that's as far as my theoretical read is going today, so, if you’re looking for a fun distraction, check them out!

Pop Culture Tidbit: Sara Ramirez Before Grey's

2010-03-23T13:04:00.002-04:00

A funny thing happened this morning, and it made me decide to start another mini-feature of this blog in addition to the Rewind section: Tidbit of the Day. Sometimes I notice random pop culture things that aren’t really worth me delving into an entire post about, these Tidbits will simply present an observation without (too) much of the critical long form you’ve come to expect from Popademic.

So, this morning I caught a few scenes from You’ve Got Mail. Beyond the dated (1998) painfully obvious “What happened to you AOL?” irony, I was shocked to see one Sara Ramirez playing the (Indian?) cashier Rose! Would I have remembered this casting choice? No way!

Oh, how your career has improved since joining the crew of Seattle Grace – instead of playing the cashier with the thick accent, you’re now cast as a beautiful Latina doctor/lesbian whose girlfriend recently surprised her with the news that she doesn’t want children!

I <3 Pop Culture!

Ask Me Anything! The Rise of Formspring

2010-03-22T21:44:00.001-04:00

For the last several weeks, I’ve been posting random updates on Facebook and Twitter soliciting people to “Ask Me Anything!” For those not in the know, Formspring is one of the latest Internet fads floating around. Several of my students started accounts, so I thought I’d check it out. The premise is this – a platform where people can ask whatever question they want, and you can choose to respond. They can ask anonymously or with their user information, and given the platform, most opt to ask anonymously. I thought it might be a fun experiment to see what types of things would be asked and see whether or not the platform had anything interesting to offer in terms of pop-culture value.

After several weeks and 30+ questions, I don’t think it’s valuable for the most part. Sure, if you are interested in asking someone something but you’re intimidated by them or you aren’t sure how to ask, it helps you out. But I find the system a way to passive-aggressively deal with issues that would be better dealt with in person. I didn't get a whole lot of that in terms of questions asked of me (sans bitch question), but I did find myself thinking, “Oh! I should ask so-and-so this question!” only to start to type it into the box and then think, “Why ask it here when I’m going to see him/her in an hour and I can ask them then?” So, I think there’s potential in this being a useful tool if people are geographically estranged or aren’t entirely familiar enough to ask what they perceive to be sensitive questions. But more often than not, I found myself staring at a blank screen thinking, “What if I have nothing to ask you?” Which, ironically, was one of my favorite questions asked of me. :o)

BUT, I’m not entirely ready to scrap the system. I think a lot of people use technology as a social buffer – we used to ask friends to do recon for us if we thought someone was interesting or wanted to know if they had a problem with us, and now we use these public forums as a way to screen individuals to see whether or not they are interpersonally interesting to us. So, in that sense, I think the platform offers quite a bit – but it has to be matched to the audience, and for the most part, Formspring only works for people asking questions to those who are friends enough to know the person in some kind of technological context (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) to get the link to Formspring. So perhaps I’ll leave it open a bit longer as this blog has a different kind of traffic and see if any interesting questions pop up. If not, I’ll probably scrap this and move on to some new pop culture fad – all those who want to know things about me will just have to figure out how to ask without the veil of anonymity!

So if you feel like saving it, “Ask Me Anything!”

The One Where I'm a Luddite (or Music and Technology Meet)

2010-03-20T22:23:00.000-04:00

In grad school, I read a book on diffusion theory and quite enjoyed its discussion of how new ideas and technologies infiltrate culture(s). Even at the time, I was the first to admit that I’m not an early adopter. Early adopters are defined as those who want to be in on something before everyone else – so, in terms of my life, I’m typically an early adopter when it comes to music, but nothing else. I love finding new artists before anyone else, camping out for concerts when people aren't massively popular, and getting that one-on-one kind of relationship feel with particular bands/artists. Technology – I’d rather people work the bugs out before I have to deal with it since I really just want things to WORK if they are essential to my productivity. So, it’s no great surprise that I’m not entirely on-board with the tech revolution so to speak. I find myself participating in it and seeing great potential, but also wary of some of the consequences of technological saturation. To illustrate, I’d like to blend my love of music with the newest changes in technology.

I am a complete and total concert junkie. Every year when spring turns around, I get excited about the potential concerts I can attend – scouring Ticketmaster and following updates on iTunes about what albums are being released. Usually, concert season doesn’t get into full force until May or so, but this year, I had the opportunity to go to three concerts so far to kick off this year’s season, and I have to say, this year has really tuned me in to the different realities of concerts than even ten years ago. Ten years ago, you couldn’t bring a cell phone, camera or other recording device to a concert venue. Now, this is sort of expected. And while this gives us awesome You-Tube footage of the concert, it also means that half the people at the concert don’t actually EXPERIENCE the concert. They spend it recording through a camera lens rather than actually engaging.

For example, at one of the concerts I attended recently, the lead singer went crowd surfing at the end of the concert. It was perhaps one of the most awesome moments I’ve experienced in a concert venue – it evolved from his connection to this particular crowd, this place, and the vibe of the evening. When he announced that he was going to do it, I screamed like a little fan girl and got myself in prime position to help the surf (and yes, got to touch him in the process – so cool!). I was amazed that half the people around me backed away from the opportunity to engage this and instead turned on cameras to record it. On one level, I feel bad that they were there – experiencing yet not experiencing something at the same time – but on another level, I LOVE that I can look up that video on You Tube and relive the moment for myself. At another concert, several of the people around me spent more time texting about the concert than actually engaging in the performance and the music. I get it – sharing the experience with people who cannot be there – but on another level, isn’t the experience worth containing in a sense? I like being able to say, “this was my experience, this is mine. I own this.” Certainly, I’ve texted at concerts, so I’m not totally un-implicated in this technological change – but I don’t send more than a couple, and usually during breaks in the concert rather than during the performances.

So, I guess I’ve been interrogating what it means to be part of a concert experience. It certainly seems to have changed to me in even my short span of life. A lot of scholars have been talking about how this new generation of teens/twentysomethings is so used to technology that to them it is transparent – where to me it might seem intrusive or obstructive, to most people, it's just another aspect of experience. Perhaps my love of being “in” a moment keeps me from really understanding the benefits and pleasures of being connected relationally through technology at all moments. Perhaps there is a social distance perpetuated by technology under the guise of being more relationally connected, we’re actually disengaging with day-to-day realities in a way that constitutes experience differently.

Nothing all that crazy theoretical here – just some thoughts I’ve been pondering during a very busy week. Looking forward to some more concert goodness in the near future! Feel free to leave a favorite concert story – particularly if it deals with the intersection of concert experiences and technology use.

Pop Culture Rewind: Aviator

2010-03-14T00:32:00.001-05:00

Ah, this is terrible. I totally meant to move on from film at this point and into other pop culture terrain, but I can’t help it! Here’s the thing. I LOVE Leo…not surprising as a child of the 90s Growing Pains, Gilbert Grape thing. But, for real. And, I’m now grown up enough to be skeptical of his twists, especially since he really just attaches himself to directors he thinks are good vs. scripts that are good for him. Fine line there, and I’m one of the few who can see it, but I do. So, anyway.

I meant to see this film three times before now. The first time, I was on my way to the theatre and told that my partner’s mother had cancer, so…we didn’t go. The next time, I was on my way to the theatre and was in a car accident. The third time, I tried to rent it and the disc was messed up. If I try to see a film three times and some higher power seems to think this is not a good idea three times, I give up and say it wasn’t meant to be.

But tonight, I finally watched this film and I can say, it was brilliant. I know that Hollywood has undertaken the OCD kind of character a lot, but this was SO real. The thing I really enjoyed about the film was that, despite the whole history behind it, the OCD issue was kind of downplayed. Which really, if you watch it, it doesn’t seem like it’s downplayed. But I enjoyed the tension between the OCD and reality – that the best moments of an OCD persons’ life are when they are ON with other people, but the majority of those around them don’t know what’s going on underneath.

So, although this is YEARS late – I feel bad that Leo didn’t take the Oscar for this role. I saw Foxx in Ray, and I thought it was good, but not THIS good. Which is sort of a change I guess in how we expect media bio-pics to be…Foxx was good at being Ray – the exact replica of an image we have seen in a variety of forums, but Leo was creative in bringing something to Hughes that made it REAL beyond the media pictures. There’s a book (Speaking Into the Air by John Durham Peters) that interrogates the notion of “speaking to the dead” – that media, in a way, have made it possible for us to live/relive the experiences of those long gone, ghosts in a sense, in ways that make it relevant and timely for ourselves. I think about that theory a lot when watching this kind of film, because my impulse is to ask “is this real?” – did Hughes really go through this? – as opposed to “how am I supposed to understand this person?” – which is a creative question, rather than a realistic question. And it makes me sad that we ultimately rewarded the actor with the closest representation to the original rather than the one who pulled something from the original and made it into something creative and translatable.

Valentine's Day the film (a bit late)

2010-03-11T13:12:00.001-05:00

I am WAY behind on writing about this, so I'm posting it today and then will move on to more recent issues in the near future. I try to avoid Valentine’s Day like the plague. I don’t like it’s cultural place as the heteronormative reinforcement of traditional conceptualizations of relationships AT ALL. That being said, I am also an utterly unapologetic romantic, so I love any excuse to express feelings that might not be kosher in a day to day kind of setting.

I mentioned to Sailor I might want to see this film, but only as a date kind of thing. He took this as a sign that, although he thought it would be terrible (he expressed this on at least three separate occasions), he should take me anyway. Thus, I was kidnapped from working on Valentine’s Day to go see this crappy, terrible film. And, here’s the thing. I really wanted to like it. I wanted it to be like a Love Actually kind of thing that I could pull out every year and enjoy. But, in reality, it is not that kind of classic. Certainly entertaining for the short term, but longevity it does not have. And it was clear the writers KNEW that going into to it.

My big issues were the following – this kind of film works when you anchor it to a singular storyline with solid leads. Ashton Kutcher and Jennifer Garner were NOT that. Their “we’re friends but more” storyline was so undercut by other lines that it didn’t even make sense. How did he encourage her to fly to San Francisco, from LA, after she gets done teaching classes (like 3 p.m. for most schools), stop her at the airport but she goes anyway, finds out her boyfriend is married and a cheating liar, to then show up in LA for dinner reservations he has at 6 p.m.? Is that even possible? Time-wise, that’s insane. Totally shot for the dramatic airport scene, followed by the dramatic restaurant scene (which really was the kind of scene any woman with a cheating partner dreams of enacting).

Then, the terrible, terrible role of George Lopez as the “Magical Latino.” I had a student several years back who was convinced that there was a “Magical Negro” role in film, where the African American character existed only to serve the white protagonist’s quest to become whatever…and I was skeptical at first, until he made me re-watch The Legend of Baggar Vance and I was like, okay, you’re on to something. Well, Hollywood totally recycled that stereotype and now we have the magical Latino who knows anything and everything about love – ironic given that we have a cultural conceptualization of the Latin Lover? I think not.

And here is my big sticking point – several critics got all in a twitter about the “de-gaying” of the film’s advertisements, saying Eric Dane’s character was denied equal promotion time in the posters and trailers. And normally, I’d be all over that saying “dude, you can’t do that!” but then I saw the film, and seriously, he’s in like 10 minutes of the film. The “gay” story line is only a brief suggestion. It’s not the purpose of the film, and omitting it from the advertising was not a misalignment of resources given the narrative of the film. If they had a serious storyline that wasn’t mentioned, yeah, but it was superfluous at best. As a media critic devoted to issues of sexuality, I would be the first to jump on this bandwagon if I felt this claim had any merit AT ALL. But really, it’s people getting their panties in a bunch over something that is not important. Sure, it’s a story line. But if you want to be incensed about it, why not be mad that the main story couldn’t be about a gay couple navigating Valentine’s Day? Seriously. It probably would have been a better plot!

Sappy Romantic, 0 – Culture Industry, 1

And the Winner IS...

2010-03-07T12:33:00.004-05:00

Well, tonight’s the Oscars! I look forward to this every year, but not nearly with the fervor of my youth. I used to be SO on top of this stuff that I would have seen every single film nominated in every single category prior to the awards just so I could make my own judgments about who should win. Of course, that was in the days of having a valid student ID and living in rural Midwest America where tickets to films in the theatre were $3 a pop and there really wasn’t anything better to do on a weekend night if it seemed too early to hit the bars.

Then I went and started studying film for a living, and I can now safely say, some days the LAST thing in the world I want to do is see another film. I’ve gotten to the point that I can tell, regardless of accolades, whether or not I will like something from trailers and buzz, and I simply just don’t care to see things that I’m not going to like. For example, Sailor was shocked that I had never seen No Country For Old Men, to which I replied, “Why would I? I saw Fargo. I didn’t like it. It’s like Fargo, with Tommy Lee Jones.” After months of arguments about the cultural value of this film, its amazing direction, etc., I finally sat down to watch it and guess what? Yes, I get it. Yes, I appreciate the acting. The directing is pretty much what I expected (kind of a slower more methodical version of Tarantino), which is fairly over-indulgent and gory for the sake of proving the point that mankind is vicious and that death is meaningless. Fine. I GET IT.

So, I have not seen all the films up for Oscars this year, but I have seen most of the ones I actually want to see. Inglorious Basterds? No thank you. See above. And yes, I understand that Quentin Tarantino did Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction and I still think his directorial style can be compared to that of an over-eager puppy. Precious? A film about incest and abuse involving a 16 year old? I’d rather sleep through the night. I almost passed on The Hurt Locker simply because I’m not a big fan of war films, but decided to give it a shot since I’ve liked Kathryn Bigelow’s work (Point Break is amazing, and I really liked K-19 even though it didn’t get the greatest of reviews). And it’s REALLY good. Like, wicked good. Better than Avatar good. And that’s from someone who’s not really into war films. My guess is that it will win tonight, if only because people are still a little miffed at the year that was Oscars 1997 and this film is sort of like the Platoon of our generation. But then again, the Oscars of 1997 DID happen, so it's anybody's game.

But what I’m really dreading is the AFTER…especially if it’s anything like the lead up has been. How many times have media outlets referred to Bigelow as James Cameron’s ex-wife? Why aren’t they calling James Cameron Bigelow’s ex-husband? Don't believe me? Type "James Cameron's ex-wife" into Google News and see just how many times the term is used (it's over 1000 stories, try the reverse and you get only 500 hits, most of which aren't even about Bigelow). It really irks me. As if she wasn’t anything before marrying Cameron, and now that she’s not married, she’s defined by it – like, the reason you’re a good film-maker now is that you had time to sit at the hand of a god like Cameron, so really in a way, The Hurt Locker is kind of Cameron’s film and it’s a win-win for him. But the reverse is not assumed. She gets no implied credit for Avatar. That’s just Cameron being brilliant. So, if the film wins tonight, all the stories tomorrow (or even later tonight) are going to be about how Cameron’s ex-wife nabbed the Oscar from his awesome film that made way more money, and there will be quotes about how he’s “so happy” for her and “always knew she had amazing potential.” If Cameron wins, watch the war metaphors that will appear...clash of the spouses, humble deference, requests for peace.

This is the kind of stuff that frustrates me when I hear students and even colleagues say they are not feminist because women are equal and we don’t need to be political about this stuff any more. If that’s the case, why is it that a woman directing an amazingly brilliant war movie is constantly referred as an ex-wife? Her ex-husband and her relationship to him define her accomplishment. And even in the places where the press isn’t fixated on her former relationship with Cameron, they laud how “humanized” the film is, implying that a woman’s view of war is more empathetic and caring. I could link to a ton of stories using this kind of rhetoric and they all make me sick. Not to say that there isn’t value in a standpoint – or that standpoints aren’t essential to understanding gendered experience – but when the standpoint is defined by sex and marginalization and then used in a way to uphold traditional patriarchal values (it IS a war movie after all), it crosses the line into this complex grey area that Americans are easily willing to dismiss as apolitical, thus, reifying their beliefs that feminism is no longer really useful or necessary.

Phew! That was a lot to get off my chest on a Sunday morning! Feel free to comment my few dozen readers. Also, feel free to chime in with your Oscar favorites since that’s what the purpose of the post was to begin with before I got all worked up about media.

The Industry & Idol (and all the things people should already know when auditioning for this show!!)

2010-03-04T19:56:00.000-05:00

It’s March, and while for most that means basketball madness, for me it means weeding out the losers on American Idol! The making of the top 24 this year was an interesting process to watch. First, there was such a backlash the past couple years about picking talent that wasn’t “raw” – more seasoned performers were making the cut, and as a result, we started to see some very polished performances. Next, FOX was charged with favoritism by promoting some contestants strongly in the audition rounds while ignoring others – and then when put to the American vote, it was SO shocking that people voted for the those who had the most previous air-time!

This season it seems that AI has taken this into account, because the performances so far have been…pretty pathetic. Raw talent it IS – and we’ve gotten stories on most of them (though still some more than others). The more that I watch this show, the more I’m surprised at how the contestants don’t seem to GET it. Like, the largish, emo African American guy didn’t understand why he didn’t make the top 24? I was yelling at the TV, “Dude! You’re a large black guy, and they already took the guy whose wife had a baby during Hollywood week! There’s a quota!” And that continued. White girls lamenting that they are awesome and why didn’t they get picked? Because there are four other blonde girls that look just like you! That’s why! And you were like #5, we can’t put in another cute blonde girl or America won’t be able to differentiate between them!

Another issue I have with contestants is how they do NOT seem to get, no matter the YEARS of footage available to them, that this show is about BEING A BOX. America wants you to be something standard, packaged and easily digested every week. Until we get bored with you. Then we want you to do something "daring" and "creative" and "original." Seriously. I really think people who to be on American Idol should hire me as their coach on what to do with the package and whatnot. I know they have people there to coach you, but they are all supposed to be impartial and crap. I'll support whoever wants me to represent them.

What we learned from round one – the Hispanic community does not watch American Idol. Pour Joe. He was actually pretty good. Probably my second favorite of the night, and alas, no one voted for him (perhaps because he spoke in Spanish at the end of his montage?). I felt less bad about Latino girl, who really DID suck, so that’s not America’s fault, but you’re gorgeous and you should have given us a reason to keep you around. My read – girls, it’s a toss up and mainly a popularity contest at this point unless you're Crystal. Guys, it’s a clear top half/bottom half scenario and I don’t expect too many surprises there, other than the young awkward guys will probably put themselves in a position to be the Elliot or the Chris R. of this season.

Let’s see who goes home tonight…my guess is Haeley, Lacey (who both deserve it) or Michelle (who I don’t think deserves it…just what I think America will do…) and one the guy’s side, I’m pretty sure John and Jermaine are gone, though it could also be Tim since he got the reverse Simon mojo this week.

And what’s with all the weird sexual innuendo this season? Ellen comparing a male contestant to an unripe banana, and Simon saying a performance was limp and unmemorable, kind of like our host? It’s a new level of catty. Bring it on! Plus, this whole cougar thing with Kara kind of disturbs me in ways I can't yet put my finger on, but more on that later.

Seriousness...just for now

2010-02-28T21:17:00.000-05:00

So, it’s been a while…February was an incredibly crazy month for me – between work, trying to keep up with a life outside of work, and all the other drama, I haven’t had much time to reflect on pop culture. But now it’s time to jump back in. I’ve been working on several ideas over the last few days – jotting down concepts and themes I’ve been thinking about over the past month and making them reality this month.

I’m going to start with something a little morbid, and surprisingly it’s not Shutter Island (I know it’s probably awesome, but I can’t get into horror, even when Leo is the face of it). You’ve been warned. Leave now if you’re already in a bad mood, because this is not a happy-go-lucky post.

One of my favorite television series is Brothers & Sisters, which unfortunately, has been all over the place this season. The plots have been contrived and ridiculous, summed up as “Oh no, I can’t tell my family that, but oh they found out anyway, and now I’m going to make a big fuss about how I didn’t want anyone to know but really I did want people to know, so now I’m just going to whine about it.” Not that families don’t actually do that on occasion, but unlike previous seasons where those tensions were nuanced into interesting family communication dynamics, they've devolved into campy banter that rarely hits its mark.

So I wasn’t entirely surprised by the crazy turn of Rebecca’s pregnancy, Kitty’s cancer, Kevin's issues, Nora's man-crush and all the other dramatic silliness. It was kind of an escape, a way of saying, hey, my family communicates oddly sometimes, but we’re not that bad. I guess since the show falls in that landscape for me, I wasn’t prepared for it to hit home as closely as it did with the Valentine’s episode – Rebecca loses the baby, and Emily VanCamp brilliantly conveyed the isolation and frustration of the situation in painfully accurate terms (despite some poorly written dialogue). Her desire for comfort is contrasted with a need for “something to go as I plan,” her inability to talk about loss, though not written particularly well, captured the struggle many women face after the loss of a child.

Last year at this time, I lost a child. It was one of the most devastating, life changing events I’ve endured. And the sad thing is that one in four pregnancies end in miscarriage, but miscarriage is so rarely conveyed in public contexts, it continues to be a silent struggle for millions of women who have difficulty expressing their experiences in a culture surrounded by representations of healthy pregnancy and birth. Culturally, we understand grief when it is attached to a person – there are traces of that person that can be understood after loss – but when the person has yet to be, the only person they were “real” to in a sense is the future mother (and to some extent the future father). Support networks are essential in dealing with grief, but often an individual’s interpersonal network might not know how to support grief associated with the loss of a vision of how life was supposed to be, or might have been.

Not to be entirely morose, I think the experience put me in a much better place today, as terrible as it was at the time. But I think it’s important that popular culture takes up these hidden, yet serious, issues as part of a fictional landscape. There is something to be said for an image, beyond statistics, an embodiment of grief, that is missing from our cultural lexicon of images. Grief in popular culture is momentary, not pervasive; a narrative catalyst to move characters forward in particular way, not an event that forces one to look at life like a kaleidoscope, seeing every angle of what might have been, or what could be. The good part is that grief can warp things out of focus or pull them back into clarity you never thought possible. I’ll be interested to see how they finish the line – and I hope it’s not some trite write out that basically ends with Nora solving everything by being super mom.

Guess I needed to get that off my chest and start there. I promise the next post will go back to silly pop culture stuff with less personal stuff – still working on finding a balance of those voices for this venue.

Pop Culture Rewind: Groundhog Day!

2010-02-02T15:23:00.000-05:00

It’s Groundhog Day! And apparently, the breaking news is that Phil saw his shadow this morning, meaning more winter ahead. But, Phil isn’t the most accurate forecaster, so I hold out hope for sunnier, brighter days ahead.

While I’m bundled up with my hot chocolate, fire and dread of the next six weeks, I figured what better way to kick off the holiday than by doing a pop-culture rewind to one of my old favorites Groundhog Day! It is amazing to me how much has changed since 1993. Here are four random bullets/observations about this film seventeen years later (older and perhaps wiser):

In this day and age, I’m pretty sure you couldn’t sell a romantic comedy pitched on leads like Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell. They both seem so painfully average looking in comparison to what flies as a romantic lead these days (that, or we simply need more than two pretty people to entertain us with the turn to large star-studded casts like Valentine’s Day is boasting).

Although lauded for its “originality” in terms of narrative, the film still always reminds me of Sure Thing.

It’s pretty sad that in the end, MacDowell only starts to take Murray seriously and fall for him when he puts her on the backburner. For much of the script, he tries to be the man she wants and needs, and then when he decides to put everyone else first (including himself), THEN she falls for him. I get frustrated with the repetitive representation of women in romantic comedies, always wanting the mysterious guy rather than the one that’s in front of their face and trying. I know it makes sense and sells tickets, but it bugs me in terms of gender expectations in romantic attachments.

No one is better at depressed, pathetic, life contemplation than Bill Murray. Except maybe George Clooney.

Going Up?

2010-02-01T21:33:00.000-05:00

I meant to go see Up when it came out in theatres, but it was summer and I had beaches to go to. Since then, I’ve had so many people talk about how wonderful this film is, I figured it was time to see it. Plus, one of my students lent it to me, so I didn’t even have to spend money at Blockbuster.

Boy am I glad I didn’t go to the theater for this one! Up?! They should call it Down! A handful of barbiturates probably would have seemed like an upper in comparison. It was only about three seconds into the movie when I was bawling like a three year old when the film is saying “I regret being old and never doing anything remarkable with my life!” And later bawling again when it’s all like, “life together with someone I loved was all the adventure that I needed!”

I guess it probably hit me harder than others who were able to see the more positive aspects of these messages. A few days ago, a student asked me what my biggest fear was, and I said failure, because that always seems like it’s the right answer (especially to over-achieving, stressed out students). But after watching the film, I don’t think that’s right. Because I’ve come to accept that failure has an element of control. I don’t really feel like I’ve FAILED something unless it was within my control and I screwed it up. If I don’t succeed at something as a result of factors beyond my control, I don’t really conceptualize that as failure (I used to, but I guess I grew out of it). What really scares me is loss. I’ve dealt with a lot of loss in my life – albeit not very well – and it’s never a feeling that I want to repeat. And that kind of loss, the loss of the one person who truly gets you? Gets all the crazy silly things about you and still doesn't want you to change? I just don’t know that I’d want to go on and have adventures after that. So I had to admire the main character, and worry about myself the whole time. Not exactly a fun way to spend 90 minutes.

My own psychosis aside, I did like the animation of the Paradise Falls region, and the DVD bonus feature about the art direction and their trip to South America made it even more interesting. In the grand scheme of things, it’s a cute film. Not one of Pixar’s best – the main character is interesting, but beyond that, most of the secondary characters are fairly one-dimensional (which was apparently the goal of the production team given their discussions in the bonus features, so I guess they accomplished what they set out to do…).

Psychopaths and Philosophy (otherwise known as House M.D.)

2010-01-27T21:01:00.000-05:00

I’m a big fan of House, and although its “case of the week” format can be repetitive at times, I like the way the writers use the cases to talk more concretely about philosophical issues. This week we were introduced to a psychopath who apparently had a copper deficiency (to which I say, can we cure all psychopaths with copper? For real?). At one point, House is talking to said psychopath and in the middle of typical House/patient banter, the psychopath says something to the effect of “a conscience is just an instinct.”

Now, if the following ranting doesn't prove my brain works way too much on pop culture, I don't know what will, but my brain has been stuck on this random line of dialogue for two days. Because, if a conscience is an instinct, why does it seem like I’m often surrounded by people who don’t have one? Is it some weird genetic deficiency (that can be cured with copper!)? And if it is an instinct, that doesn’t mean I have to act on it, which means I could act against it. But when challenged, we revert to instincts, so wouldn’t everyone naturally act with a conscience if that was that case?

I guess I’m having trouble getting my head around this because I had a conversation with someone recently that went, “yeah, I made this choice because and in the end it was the wrong choice and hurt a lot of people but I don’t feel bad about it.” And I just don’t get that. I feel bad about choices even when I make the right choices, let alone the wrong ones. So either I have some weird biological makeup that makes me interpret the world this way, or it’s the Catholic guilt thing socially constructed over time. Or I could be an alien. It’s possible.

Sorry this is SO not like my usually insightful and directed posts. It’s Wednesday, and my brain hurts. If you can help me clarify any or all of the above randomness, please comment.

American Idol is Back!

2010-01-23T20:54:00.001-05:00

At this point in pop-culture history, I’m apparently really, really old. American Idol is consistently appealing to 30+ year old people like me and 8-12 year olds. Anywhere in between, and this show just doesn’t register on the radar. Which is a little odd for me, because I’ve always been able to talk AI with my students, and now they are oddly curious as to why I watch what they perceive to be an antiquated bunch of nonsense for old people. Because, at some level, they still think I’m cool, and not old. Which is sweet, and not entirely accurate – because I am old, and I am a dork.

Anyhow, audition season is back. I rarely watch the audition section of AI because in the past few years, it has continued to disappoint in disastrous proportions. It started as a way to introduce major players to the competition, but in the last few years, the “let’s make fun of idiots” took full control of these shows to the point that you were lucky to see one good audition in an entire hour. And in many ways, let's make fun of the queerest of the odd balls, which really, really irked me. I think after the criticisms last year, they’ve adjusted by cutting the tapes more equally – so we’ve seen some fairly balanced coverage of the fantastic and the abhorrent, most of whom are not exhibiting what we would call stereotypically queer mannerisms.

So far, my take is this – Paula is not missed at all. Kara is less annoying and makes sense sometimes because she doesn’t have Paula to look equally annoying and crazy with. Simon is being nice…maybe because he’s out of here? Randy is losing more and more vocabulary by the year. There seem to be an awful lot of country singers making it through with golden tickets – time for the show to find Carrie Underwood #2? And next week Neil Patrick Harris guest judges, but apparently splits time with one of the Jonas brothers. I cannot, cannot quite get my head around how that’s going down.

But my favorite part of AI coming back is not the show, the competition, or whatever else FOX tries to cram down my throat – it is my folks over at Television Without Pity who never fail to disappoint by providing hysterical recaps on the show. It’s a carefully balanced love of pop-culture and all things fandom with a critical, cynical vision of the entertainment industry and what it does to people. Needless to say, I can spend hours enthralled on that site, but the AI recaps are by far my favorite. I look forward to them every season! Check them out - see if they recap your favorite shows.

To Twitter or Not to Twitter?

2010-01-18T09:25:00.000-05:00

I finally got my first official invite to Twitter -- from my sister-in-law, a woman who rarely answers her cell phone and doesn't use the internet for much other than email. It's odd she would be the first person to ask to "follow" me. But here's the thing - I don't have a Twitter account and it just seems like one more thing to keep up with that I will ultimately fail at...so, dear readers, what's the point? What benefit do I get from Twitter that I don't get from blogging or Facebook or email or any of the other technologies that have taken over my life? Discuss.

Holiday Films: Take Three!

2010-01-15T10:49:00.003-05:00

Finally, after weeks of waiting through this “limited release” crap, Up in the Air appeared in theatres. I’ve been looking forward to this film for several reasons – most notably, it’s directed by Jason Reitman (who also directed Thank You for Smoking and Juno) and okay, sue me, George Clooney’s in it. The man is too charming for words when he’s on screen. And if you haven't seen it yet, there are major spoilers in this review.

The film chronicles the life of Ryan Bingham, a “terminator” (or career transition counselor), who spends his days flying into companies to deliver the bad news about layoffs to a variety of American workers. Given the current economic recession, it’s a timely topic that most viewers will be able to identify with. In the process, he trains a young protégé, Natalie, who is the HR director you’d never want to have – completely dependent on technology as a crutch to distance herself from interpersonal interaction. He also meets Alex Goran, a charming business woman who lives a fairly nomadic existence and seems to speak his language.

From the trailers, it looked like another romantic comedy in the vein of Juno, but this film is about romance sort of like Schindler’s List was about hope. It’s incredibly cerebral. The narrative conveys an omnipresent postmodern sense of alienation in an age where interpersonal relationships are messy and untrustworthy. Clooney’s character spends the film in pursuit of flying 10 million miles so as to reach elite customer status, the underlying tone of which screams “corporate America is the only entity that values honor and loyalty in relationships!” But just as you’re drawn in by this message, Clooney is out on prowl to downsize more people, most of whom weep about their loyalty to a company and its caviler dismissal of their self-worth.

I get the sense that Reitman is maturing or becoming more cynical, take your pick. His previous efforts offer at least some semblance of redemption for his leads (though not always for his supporting characters). There is no redemption for Bingham – he constructed his life with a series of choices, all of which led him to this particular path, and when he tries to break free of it, finds there is no exit ramp. He’s trapped within the confines of an existence separated from true emotional connection, and at the end of the day, instead of offering yet another representation of a man in crisis who is able to rise above and change, Reitman says, “you can want to change, but really, you probably never will.” It's a far more realistic take on understanding ourselves as actors within a social context. I mean, who hasn't spent hours or days or years thinking about changing to find that even if and when you do make changes, those around you already have fixed perceptions of you that are outside your realm of influence?

The film also functions as a metaphor for the ways we use technology to hold others at bay by culturally distancing ourselves from “unpleasantness” in relationships through whatever means possible. The characters routinely use technology to deliver to their bad news rather than dealing with the situation in person - breaking up or quitting a job through text messages, videoconferencing with employees you're firing, etc. It says a lot about conflict resolution in an age where interpersonal skills are lacking and in a culture that is over-litigious.

Certainly, there are criticisms – perhaps the biggest being the showdown scene between Ryan and Alex. It’s oddly cut for some reason, and given the chemistry between the two actors in all of the other scenes, doesn’t quite ring true. Granted, Ryan doesn't ask a single personal question of Alex the entire movie, so you can sort of see the bad news coming - but it also doesn't make a whole lot of sense that she rearranged her schedule to go to his sister's wedding. The only thing that really saves it is that neither party is really to blame (though the film, or just Clooney's likability, seems to paint him as the victim) – Ryan is led on, so we blame Alex, but really, one could say that Alex chose him because of the person he was...and Ryan at the beginning of the film was absolutely the cute guy you have an affair with, no strings attached. One person wants to change, the other doesn't. At the end of the day both parties are to blame. Oh, and that conversation takes place over a cell phone. Not in person. Go figure.

There are also some editing issues near the end of the film that simply don't work - it seems like they cut 15 minutes that seemed like it was a good idea, but in reality probably wasn't. The scene where Jason Bateman asks Clooney about a termination that results in the death of one of the employees let go was awkward and forced. And then of course, you have the suspension of disbelief thing – 10 MILLION miles? You assume he's working in the U.S., so stays in the U.S., and at best, a flight from New York to LA racks up about 3000 miles. He's stationed in Omaha, which is about equal distance from either, meaning his average flight can't be more than about 1500 at a time, one way. So if we work with the 3000 number (being generous), and assume he flies at least one round trip a day (which isn't realistic as most of his meetings must take a day or two), he'd need a good ten years to amass that number of miles. It's within the realm of plausible, but hard to fathom at the same time. As long as you go into it knowing it's metaphorical, it's enjoyable, but if you spend too much time thinking about the nuts and bolts of Clooney's supposed job, you'll end up seeing the trees and not the forest as it were.

In all, it’s worth seeing. It will have you thinking long into the next day about the current state of our culture and wondering what choices you've made that cause alienation in your own life.

Top Five Albums of 2009 – #1

2010-01-13T08:52:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#1 – David Gray: Draw the Line

A lot of waiting, but here we are at the top of my list for 2009! Words simply cannot describe how much I am in love with this album. I’m by no means a die hard David Gray fan. I was enamored with White Ladder and somewhat underwhelmed by his subsequent albums, which seemed more one note and less complex in terms of a holistic narrative. Draw the Line explores memory, time, relationships, and the connection we feel to the present even when we’re bound by the past. The songs are serious narratives about the dangers of relying too much on ones' own perception, the joys and heartaches of living for the moment and the potential for transcendence. In a way, each song functions as a turn of the kaleidoscope - Gray is always looking at the same end, but the paths leading toward and around it are varied, depending on the moment. It’s the kind of album I can listen to five times in a row without being bored of the material, and every listen provides a new turn of phrase or interpretation.

Favorite Lyrics:

“I am a sudden and quite unexpected twist.”
“Moses had his tablets, yeah. Noah had his ark. But all I’ve got’s a haystack needle, stabbin’ in the dark.”
“We can rise above our pettiness and love like we ain’t loved before. Free on this earth as the surf that rolls, crashing on the shore.”
“Names beneath the lichen on these cemetery stones, and carnivals of silverfish waiting to dance upon our bones.”

Favorite Tracks:

Jackdaw
First Chance
Breathe
Stella the Artist

Top Five Albums of 2009 – #2

2010-01-12T08:01:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#2 – Train: Save Me, San Francisco

I’ve always had a soft spot for Train, but I’ve always wanted them to make an ALBUM – not trade on several good singles with some so-so filler. This album is what I always thought they could do from the brilliance of popular singles like Drops of Jupiter and Meet Virginia to lesser known gems like I Am and Save the Day. Through a variety of styles (from simple acoustic guitar in Marry Me to the brilliant mash up with the Doobie Brothers’ Black Water in I Got You), it paints the many facets of love on the canvas of San Francisco – the bay, the food, the wine, the cable cars. Maybe that's why it rose so high among my favorites this year since I'm convinced that San Francisco is the most romantic place I've ever been (screw Paris, they got nothin' on San Fran).

Favorite Lyrics:

“An open bar can open your mind.”
“We were way before our time, as bold as we were blind. Just another perfect mistake, another bridge to take on the way to letting go.”
“I never knew all that I had, now Alcatraz don't sound so bad…at least they'd have a hella fine merlot.”
"You throw me in the fire just to save my life a pretty little liar, when I call you out you'd rather put up a fight than just come clean."

Favorite Tracks:

This Ain’t Goodbye
Marry Me
You Already Know
I Got You

I <3 Neil Patrick Harris

2010-01-11T08:22:00.003-05:00

It’s hard to believe my favorite little sitcom is airing it’s 100th episode tonight. Here's to many, many more!

*updated after viewing*

Brilliance. Sheer brilliance. I do feel bad for Hannigan since she's clearly NOT a vocalist (it's not really Radnor's cup of tea either), but how awesome was it to see the Glee influence here?

Top Five Albums of 2009 – #3

2010-01-08T08:49:00.000-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#3 – Dave Matthews Band: Big Whiskey and the GrooGrux King

To be honest, I thought DMB was over. Absolutely defined a lot of my undergraduate years (Under the Table and Dreaming, Crash and Before These Crowded Streets were party favorites regardless of the personalities in attendance), but recent efforts after the turn of the century like Busted Stuff and Stand Up failed to capture the "GrooGrux." So, I wasn’t going to buy this album, but then after a couple reviews from trusted music friends, I did – and boy am I glad. DMB is back in true form on this album, with emotionally charged lyrics and complex musical layering. Tim Reynolds returns for the first time since Before These Crowded Streets, and it's obvious his presence impacts the quality of what shows up on this album. The energy and passion in upbeat tracks such as Shake Me Like a Monkey and Why I Am is carefully balanced with the soothing comfort of the slower tracks like Lying in the Hands of God and Dive In. It’s a wonderful tribute to LeRoi Moore, who is missed but not forgotten as part of this collection.

Favorite Lyrics:

“I like most liquor, but I don’t like gin.”
“Confess I'm not quite ready to be left, still, I know I gave my level best.”
“Though we would like to believe we are, we are not in control, though we would love to believe.”

Favorite Tracks:

Alligator Pie
Dive In
Time Bomb

Top Five Albums of 2009 – #4

2010-01-07T10:03:00.000-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#4 – Kate Voegele: A Fine Mess (Deluxe Edition)

Like many, I discovered Voegele through my obsession with One Tree Hill. Her first album, Don’t Look Away, released in 2008 was one of my favorites – perhaps because its messages about messy relationships, struggling to find oneself, and inevitable heartache spoke to where I was at that point in time. She captured the same with this album, a smooth transition from the angst of the first album into a more detailed look at relationships gone wrong and the identity crisis that ensues in their demise. The upbeat pop tracks are fun, but Voegele is at her best when the bluesy tone of her voice shines through in the tracks that will clearly never make it to radio play. It's introspective about the past, mournful of what we've lost, while at the same time hopeful for the future and what it might hold.

Favorite Lyrics:

“If fear was money you’d be a millionaire, all alone in a leather swivel chair counting stacks of gold.”
“This is so you, this is what you do – You'd rather make do than make a move.”
“Those who get to know our hearts the most, they always seem to be the ones we'll never hold.”

Favorite Tracks:

Manhattan from the Sky
We the Dreamers
Sweet Silver Lining

Top Five Albums of 2009 – #5

2010-01-06T07:17:00.001-05:00

*This is part of a series of posts, please refer to the parent post for context*

#5 – Patent Pending: Attack of the Awesome

I happened on this album from a student recommendation – we were chatting about music and I mentioned that I like what I call "pop-punk" to which he said, have you heard of these guys? I hadn’t, but I’m SO glad I know about them now! This little album runs under 30 minutes, but it’s a great 30 minutes. Patent Pending reminds me of some of the earlier pop-punk bands that had something to say, cut out a sound and ran with it (think early Fall Out Boy before they entirely sold out to mediocre writing designed for the lowest common denominator of radio play). It’s fun, catchy music that has something personal to say about life in your early 20s without being glossy and overproduced. I really enjoy how they tell emo stories in a way that transforms generic anger and angst into something upbeat and sarcastic (Dear Stacy I Hate You is probably the best example of this).

Favorite Lyrics:

"You always let me down with such grace and precision."
"She's giving up her motivation for a black backpack full of her frustration."
"So what's another word for I hate you? What's the right pronunciation for complete abomination?"

Favorite Tracks:

The Way You Make Me Shake
Hey Six
Anti-Everything

Top Five Albums of 2009 – Intro

2010-01-06T07:07:00.001-05:00

I’m a little late getting to my yearly review of music, mostly because I’ve been debating the finalized list. In general, for me to consider an album one of my best of the year, it must meet some criteria: A) it has to be released in the year I’m reviewing and B) I have to like the WHOLE thing – appreciate the story the artist is trying to tell and fall in love with it. I’m an album purist. You might have a track or two that isn't the greatest, but if it works with the story okay, none of this cutting out singles with crappy lyrics that don't make sense together (I’m looking at you Kris Allen – how could you be so disappointing?). Or situations where there is clearly a single or two that makes no sense with the tone or style of the rest of the album but is marketable enough to sell your album (Duffy, you are the quintessential example of this).

I was going to do this in one installment, but after working on it for a week, it’s way too long for a single blog post, so I’m breaking it up over a series of posts. Here we go!

Holiday Films: Take Two!

2010-01-04T10:04:00.001-05:00

Everyone’s talking about it. It was all over Facebook updates. Of course, I’m talking about Avatar, James Cameron’s first full-length feature film since Titanic – which, no joke, is pretty awesome. It’s taken me a few days to think about what I want to say critically about the film. Here are the basics – it’s Dances with Wolves in space. Not that I expect much from Cameron in terms of dialogue and story…in fact, the story was probably better on the whole than I expected. There are guys searching for something called “unobtainium” which they find on a planet with an indigenous people. Of course, the largest deposit of this mineral is underneath the site where they live. High-tech battles over the resource ensue, issues about biology, the environment, technology and humanity are called into question. The ending is feel good, and leaves itself open for a sequel. Basically everything an action film is supposed to do – this film does it REALLY well.

The film is enjoyable and impressive. Up until now, I’ve sort of taken the whole 3D thing as a gimmick to impress kids and jack up ticket prices. Now I’m thinking it might actually go somewhere. It’s not perfect, and it still gave me a headache afterward, but several scenes were enhanced by the depth perception. I also sort of want to see it again to see if your placement in the theater impacts this (I went with my seven-month pregnant sister, which meant we had to sit on the aisle). The acting was pretty good given the confines of the script, with Giovanni Ribisi turning in what I thought was one of his best performances ever. The second to last new episode of Bones this fall made WAY more sense when I realized that Joel Moore is in the film.

My qualms are minor – but of course I have them, because I can’t just enjoy a feature film for what it is. I think my biggest issue was that I wanted more information. There are scenes that talk about the biology of the planet and what not, but don’t go into depth (I mean, seriously, “unobtainium”? Apparently I'm not the only one that thought this was ridiculous...). Similarly, the technology behind the avatars isn’t quite fleshed out, but couldn’t have been written the way it was even five years ago with the increase in avatar gaming and what not. My sister’s biggest problem was the, “how are they going to write their way out of this?” – but the scene where Grace is presented to Eywa solves the problem (she turned to me at this point in the film and said, “Oh! I know how this ends. We can go home now.”)

Overall, it was a great film experience. I would be shocked if this film doesn’t totally sweep every technical category at the Oscars this year. I feel bad for J.J. Abrams. Star Trek probably won’t win any special effects awards against this film…which is unfortunate, because it really was one of the better films of the year in that respect.

Searching the Stars

2009-12-18T13:05:00.001-05:00

A friend of mine recently got dumped, and I’ve been solicited for dating advice. I guess I should preface this with the fact that most of my friends are male, and most of them are younger than me, so whenever one of them gets dumped the conversation goes the same way: “Why do I always get dumped? You’re a girl. And you’re older. And you have a PhD. What’s going on?” And so as not to be blacklisted from my little group for sounding too academic, I resort to pop culture to solve these problems. My latest answer: astrology.

I’m not the biggest believer in superstitious things, but astrology seems to fall into the same category as stereotypes for me – they exist for a reason because of patterns of behavior, and while not definitive, can offer some clarity and piece of mind (no matter how frivolous). I often find interesting patterns across astrological signs, to the point that I can often guess a student's sign just by a series of classroom behaviors (yes, I know how weird that sounds). So, I looked up my friend’s sign and found out a lot of interesting things about myself in the process.

There are lots of theories about this stuff – in general, the basic zodiac signs (or Sun signs) have matches that work and matches that don’t. I’ve always looked to these, but in my quest to find some fun conversation starters, I stumbled onto a piece of information I hadn’t considered before: while your Sun sign can determine basic attraction and compatibility, the sign that Venus occupied when you were born is actually a stronger predictor of intimate compatibility. Who knew?! So, I decided to look up my Venus sign, and lo and behold, it’s in Virgo. Which explains my obsession with Virgos for pretty much all of my 20s. Even though Virgo and my Sun sign are totally incompatible. The universe seriously screwed me on this one!!

Anyhow, it’s a fun little distraction if you’re bored at work and ready for it to be the holiday season already. Check it out and see if you learn anything about yourself and your patterns of attraction (good, bad or indifferent)...and of course, feel free to comment!

Holiday Films: Take One!

2009-12-16T11:12:00.001-05:00

It’s that time again – holiday movie season, leading up to Oscar contenders for the year! Beyond my obvious obsession with waiting for Avatar, I’ve been looking forward to a few releases. The first was Invictus, which I saw last night.

I figured, the film has a lot of things going for it – Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela? Awesome! A movie about rugby? Double Awesome! Clint Eastwood directing? Okay, so not entirely awesome, but not entirely bad. Matt Damon as hot lead rugby guy who will inevitably have his shirt off and be physically beat up half the film? Seriously, I didn’t really need to be convinced to go to the theater.

So, it’s okay. The film tries to be a sports movie AND an interesting biographic sketch of an international icon. On the first front, there wasn’t much different than any other sports movie. Perhaps they thought, well, rugby is sort of novel and setting it in South Africa is novel. There is one message – sports is a great cultural unifier. Well, … duh. Every sports movie ever made has that message. And the racial twist isn’t even that interesting – I mean, this guy designed a whole class on it (check out CES 222)!

On the second front, I’d honestly rather have seen a dramatic piece on Mandela. The film didn’t even feel all that Eastwood – he’s known for long, drawn out characters, and you really didn’t get much in the way of developing Mandela as anything more than a brilliant saint that saved his country (which, I’m not arguing he didn’t do – but people are more complex than that). The only scene that struck a chord was when the rugby players visit the prison Mandela was in…and, unfortunately, I spent most of that scene waiting for Morgan Freeman to say “Andy Dufresne - who crawled through a river of shit and came out clean on the other side.”

I got the feeling Morgan Freeman REALLY wanted to play this part, and that’s why it happened. He might get an Oscar nod, and maybe even win it if the category is weak this year…but I certainly don’t think it’s his best work by any means.

Gleek Out!

2009-12-14T10:44:00.002-05:00

Well fans, it’s a long haul ‘til April. And now that I have some down time, it’s long over-due for me to post some thoughts about Glee – my latest and greatest television obsession. I’ve been a fan of Ryan Murphy’s work for quite some time, and Glee artfully blends teen melodrama, “high school musical” culture, and sarcasm into sugary-pop goodness that is addictive like saccharine or nicotine. Despite my love of all things Glee, there are a few things now that the fall season has ended that continue to irk me about the series from a critical perspective (I just can’t help it – I’m too tainted to enjoy media on its own ever again).

1) Minority Representation – So, at least there ARE some minorities in the glee club. But their characterizations are so trite they continue to grate on my nerves. Mercedes, while incredibly talented vocally, is a TERRIBLE actress. That and they won’t let her be anything other than a crazy large black diva, which bothers me on a lot of levels. Those who have stood through my rants about American Idol and body image know that large black diva women singers are acceptable caricatures in pop culture, but not larger white women, and not thinner black women. None of the glee club women would be considered “overweight” except Mercedes. The show was a bit better to the Asian women in the final few episodes, but the random black guy and random Asian guy didn’t even have NAMES until the last episode. It was sort of a game Sailor and I would play every time they did a full number, “Who is the random dancing Asian guy for the love of god!?”

2) Musical Staging – I love the music in the show. They’ve done some great mash-ups and re-arrangements of pop standards that are catchy and fascinating. I also like the continual homage to Broadway (which makes sense given that half the cast had a career there before joining the show). What I don’t get is the random musicians that always seem to be available – at glee club practice, or just hanging out (again, nameless people). I’d almost prefer you just layer the tracks over the singing without the random shots of piano guy and string quartet who apparently have nothing else to do at all hours of the school day than burst into song. It’s very distracting, which makes the music less impactful.

3) The Schue Thing – First off, let me clarify that I absolutely adore Mr. Schuester as a character. I empathize with his teachable moments – I mean, seriously, watching him listen to the kids perform through the phone at sectionals brought tears to my eyes. I get the whole “I’m 30 and I didn’t think my life would be here” kind of thing that warrants rethinking yourself and your life goals. What I don’t like is that basically, he’s framed as the innocent bystander to his life. He’s portrayed as a guy who got into a relationship with a horrible person (Terri), thus encouraging all of us to root for the nice girl (Emma). I don’t even disagree that Schue and Emma should be together. What I don’t like is that the whole season basically made excuses for Schue emotionally cheating on his wife while she was pregnant (at least to his knowledge, and to Emma’s as well). It’s frustrating to me as a gender scholar that in the end, Schue comes out of this squeaky clean while Terri is the manipulative, backstabbing bitch, and Emma is the perfect, naïve girl. We’re supposed to interrogate them, not question Schue’s actions throughout the series. Really, if he’d been honest with himself and others from the beginning, then there would have been a lot less hurt going around. So while the romantic in me was like, oh good, they're supposed to be together, the cynic in me is annoyed by the emotional games Schue played with both womens' hearts.

It's a long haul to April, but I guess Idol coming back will keep me in my music fix for now. Super excited that Ellen is replacing Paula (whose commentary over the years has proven to be worthless on so many levels, it was about time to get someone else in here).

Slapsgiving!

2009-11-26T09:49:00.001-05:00

Two years ago, the writers at How I Met Your Mother delivered Slapsgiving – “It’s the one day we set aside each year to gather together and give slaps” – which was by far the funniest holiday episode of a sitcom since the one where Joey got his head stuck in the turkey. This year, they brought back Slapsgiving (or Slapsgiving 2, Revenge of the Slap), and while not nearly as funny as the first one, it still delivers the same lovable goodness. I like Lily’s father as the failed boardgame designer, and the “you’re dead to me” look reminded me a lot of Evil Willow. But really, writers, let’s step it up a notch. Here’s what I want to see for the last slap – write it in somehow:

Marshall, trading on Barney’s fear of slaps, agrees to barter his last slap on a new wager whereby if Barney wins, he will not get slapped the fifth time. Shenanigans ensue, the stakes escalate, and Marshall wins back his slap in addition to being able to place a personal ad in every newspaper and on every dating/social networking site about Slapsgiving 3 “Return of the Slap"

Anyone slept with Barney Stinson and want to slap him? COME ON OVER!

Thanksgiving would be interrupted by a barrage of women slapping Barney. That would be awesome. Even more awesome if Marshall used Barney’s 200+ (it is plus at this point, yes?) list as a “bouncer” to check them off as they come in. How funny would Jason Segel be saying things like, “Ah yes, Heather, number 168. Proceed.” Get on that writers!

Happy Slaps(I mean Thanks)giving everyone!

Pulling a Braid

2009-11-23T23:47:00.003-05:00

I consider myself a connoisseur of several things that would be considered part of popular culture – television and wine being my favorite. But recently I’ve tried to make my way back into video games. I don’t quite get it – I liked games in the 90s when we had Atari and Nintendo, but somewhere in the transition to X-Box and Playstation, I lost the love. Of course, it could have been college. And grad school. Anyway –

I think my big problem is that a lot of modern video games are FPS or MMO or RPG. To be frank, I don’t have time for that shit! Okay, I could get into FPS if I liked shooting people in the face, but I really don’t. I’m a non-violent kind of gal. And I liked RPGs in the 90s when it involved actually bonding with people (most of what I did was narrative writing RPGs online), but it got to a point in a grad school where I just didn’t have time to keep up with it anymore.

So – my dream game is one that has all kinds of intellectually challenging puzzles, isn’t too difficult to navigate (as I’m not too swift with the fingers on modern controllers), and doesn’t involve a ton of violence. Braid brought it in spades! I realize this is probably late, as I’m a late-comer since I only have Playstation and it was released a year ago on X-Box, but seriously. This game was AWESOME.

I love the 2D platform, though I know that makes me old-school, but the real selling point for me was the story line – it’s all about the complicated relationship between time and memory. The main character is remembering that he has to do something related to a past relationship, and the quest is all about that. In each level, he gets to manipulate time to a different degree, which I read as part of his nostalgia and memory related to the relationship in question (though others have posited this is about the atomic bomb despite other commentary). I like the idea that you can have a “shadow self” who will still do the same things you did before even if you rewind time, or having a “hesitation” point where you can stop time for a moment and make things move more slowly. Who hasn’t had a relationship or a moment where you wanted to stop time, reverse, and start over? Or where you wanted someone else to do the leg work for you so you could reap the benefits? Or where you wanted to pause time enough to take back something you said that can never be repealed? The themes were so salient that in addition the beautiful graphics and artwork, I would have been amazed. But the puzzles! Oh the puzzles! They were so intellectually interesting. And the ending – I was so in shock that it took me a few hours to process. Since I don’t want to give it away in case you play it, I won’t elaborate. But seriously. The BEST game I’ve played since I was a little tyke and first got Zelda.

Leaving the Dollhouse Behind

2009-11-19T22:26:00.000-05:00

By now, the Whedonite universe has had time to process their recent crushing blow with the cancellation of Dollhouse. I must admit, although a long time Whedon fan and a serious fan of Eliza Dushku (albeit more for her incredible hotness than her ability to act), I’m not surprised. And it’s not for the reasons that most Whedonites would cite – FOX being idiots (ala Firefly), the downfall of narrative storytelling on television in multiple season arcs (fewer and fewer series make it into a second season), or a general inability of new sci-fi to really snag enough of an audience to sustain a series (Heroes anyone?).

At the risk of being shot, lambasted and skewered – Dollhouse was canceled because it kind of sucked.

Okay, okay. So I liked the premise – but the series lacked all of the things I’ve come to know and love about Whedon pieces. Here are three issues that made Dollhouse non-essential viewing material:

1) BAD CHARACTERS: Whedon’s strongest writing comes in developing interesting characters. Topher was the only interesting character on this series because he’s the only one who was stable long enough to develop into something more than a caricature. Boyd, Adelle and Paul were fairly flat with only brief moments of interest. And really, when you hinge the narrative to the idea that the majority of your characters become new people every week, it’s difficult to sustain narrative fidelity.

2) CREEP FACTOR: While I’m a big fan of more progressive ways of thinking about sexuality and morality, there were TONS of scenes that I was uncomfortable watching. Given real modern day issues with sex trafficking, rape, and government conspiracy, I couldn’t feel good about life after any episode. The episode more recently about how Sierra came to the Dollhouse was so incredibly disturbing I didn’t sleep for two days. And that was AFTER the narrative arc about her basically being raped and molested inside the Dollhouse!

3) REALITY CHECK: Beyond the “wow, check out what we can do with technology and should we really be doing that to peoples’ brains?” there wasn’t really a larger narrative about how this would relate to normal people. Buffy and Firefly were easier to read into as an audience because you could relate to the themes of high school and post-apocalyptic war (probably more with the first, but the later has been enough of a subject in sci-fi that it’s an easy transition – plus, they were space pirates, and everyone’s been in a situation where they haven’t had everything they needed). The clientele of the Dollhouse are all wealthy, privileged douche-bags that think they can do whatever they want. The only client that was remotely sympathetic was the guy whose wife died in a car accident the day he bought her a house. Given that Whedon draws your average geek loving marginalized audience, my guess is that many viewers followed in my cries of “Seriously? Why do the wealthy get away with this shit?” or "Yes, that douche-bag deserved to die." Neither of these is a fun way to spend a Friday night.

I hope that Whedon returns to his roots when developing his next project and offers up a series of strong characters with significant relationships. Sci-fi discourse? Sure! Just make it something we can feel good about watching.

Thoughts on Surveillance

2009-11-04T23:26:00.000-05:00

Today in one of my classes we were talking about the concept of surveillance – both asymmetrical and lateral. For those less familiar with work in media studies, asymmetrical surveillance occurs when you are watching someone who is watching someone else. Think Punk’d or other such shows. Lateral surveillance occurs when both parties can watch each other simultaneously, such as Facebook or Twitter. My students were fascinated with the different facets of surveillance, both impressed at what it can do for them (coupons and free stuff!) and creeped out by the sheer lack of privacy in today’s mediated world (people should just ask me out rather than look me up on Facebook first).

While the world has definitely changed, I find myself in instances of lateral surveillance asking myself very serious questions such as, “if this were someone’s diary and I knew it was their space, would I open it?” This pertains a lot to Facebook and other mediums where I feel like people carve out a niche – sometimes I feel fine looking at peoples’ pages, sometimes I feel like I’m crossing a line that might move me into weird, stalker mode. But I’m not sure how to occupy a space where the boundaries are consistently transitory – you have to be comfortable with some level of self-disclosure, while at the same time cautious about the information disclosed. Especially when your “friends” network includes anywhere from people you knew marginally in high school, to close friends, to colleagues, to family members, to students. The power dynamics across that range are such that it’s hard to figure out how to “be” in a space.

I've been working to reduce the dissonance between my identities, making them more transparent in ways I never used to be comfortable with. So, for example, I was feeling a bit snarky today, and I thought, I’ll change my Facebook status to something silly like 'In an Open Relationship with Michel Foucault'. That's something weird that I would do and people who "know" me would get. But while I know some people would get the joke, others would be highly confused without the contextual cues. And is it then worth it for me to make the joke if I have to explain it to an entire network? There are some days I feel like fighting that fight and others I feel like deleting my entire page and boycotting the whole performative aspect of my identity. It's hard to be yourself when "yourself" changes based on the monitoring you need to do in particular moments in particular parameters.

Halloween!

2009-10-31T23:06:00.001-04:00

It’s no secret to those who know me well that I adore Halloween. It’s my favorite holiday – which is probably odd since I don’t particularly like creepy, scary things. What I love about Halloween is the element of control. You can generally choose your own costume (within parental parameters), and then you proceed to travel around to various houses whereby simply knocking on the door and saying “Trick or Treat” gets you candy. Then you get to go back to your house and eat it all until you make yourself sick. In all of this, you have more control than say Christmas where you have to ask Santa for things and then labor under intense surveillance for a period of time, and no matter how well you pass these tests, the things on your list might not materialize. Halloween is an instant gratification, sugar-high holiday where you don’t have to be yourself, or some version of a perfect angel. You can be a rebel-rousing hellion and it’s okay. In fact, it’s rewarded!

Perhaps it was my inability to rebel much as a youth that fostered my love of Halloween. When you do crazy things on Halloween, it doesn’t matter because everyone else is doing crazy things. Every other holiday is about doing things to please other people to create the eventual reward (don’t get me started on Valentine’s day and its traumatizing effects on my psyche with relation to popularity), but Halloween is that one space where you make the rules and no one can stop you.

Fantasy and Reality...or something.

2009-10-26T23:26:00.002-04:00

It's no secret that I have been into fantasy sports for some time. I've played several difference rounds -- but mostly I like sticking to the NFL. I only have to pay attention once a week, and the rest of the week I have time to do other things. When you play baseball, basketball or hockey, you need to pay WAY more attention to sports than is my normal M.O. This is part of why I feel football is our "national pastime" in this day and age. Baseball might have been it in the day, but technology has completely changed the way we live life in relation to sports.

I digress. Fantasy football. So, the first year I played fantasy was in grad school when I told some guys in my class I actually knew shit about football. They didn't believe me, so I challenged them to a fantasy match. I tore it up, and won for about five consecutive years. Since then, my fantasy dominance has waned. This year I'm not doing poorly, but I'm not doing great either. Bad luck all around. Last week, I was up against our league leader and lost by 2 points. 2 points! And Peyton Manning is my QB and of course it was his bye week. This week, my guys seriously over produced, and a rogue defensive score from the opponent is usurping me. I've lost my mojo.

While it's probably completely irrelevant, I blame my lack of fantasy productivity on the fact that I'm happy and wonder whether or not this applies to other fantasy gamers. I seemed to hit stride when I was the most unhappy - playing the game made me happier, so I did it and was good at it. Now that I have more interpersonal happiness, I find I often forget it's Sunday until about an hour before kickoff. I will say, I have spent more time investing in college football, which might be detracting from my ability to accurately play pro-fantasy. It's fun, but it might be one of those things I give up. I got into it because people where all in my face about "you're a girl and you don't know anything about football" which I've proved is false and don't see much of a reason to continue it. It's not as fun as it used to be for some reason...maybe fantasy sports have reached their peak with casual fans like me? It seems everything with serious fans is about money and keeper-leagues these days. Definitely not the expert here, just making some observations.

Diggin' It!

2009-10-23T12:05:00.000-04:00

Creat Studios recently released an enhanced remake of the classic video game Digger for the PlayStation 3. I was pretty excited to discover that Sailor had downloaded it for my birthday. Digger was one of our first family games on our first PC (this would have been mid-80s). My parents fought over playing it, we all tried to beat each others' high scores, and ultimately, it fell to the wayside when we got an Atari and my parents started getting into PacMan instead.

Anyway, point being, Digger is a kind of video game nostalgia for me as I'm not really into modern gaming. I like simple games that I don't have to think too much about. Playing Digger for the past couple weeks in the vintage mode has made me realize some things about the game that I never knew back in my childhood. First, you can shoot! I never knew Digger could shoot. I just ran away from the goblins and pushed gold bags onto them. The game is so much better when you can shoot! Second, I never realized that you scored more points if you completed the tonal scale while eating the emeralds. Try it. You end up getting more for each emerald after you finish the scale. Doesn't help much on the first couple levels, but it makes a big difference when you get to level four and five.

On the downside, I really don't like using the PS3 controllers when playing this game - the key pad isn't as sensitive as I'd like and the joystick is too sensitive, which means I dig a bunch of things I don't mean to (of course, this is probably just another way of saying my hand-eye coordination kind of sucks). Also, it sucks to be playing this game with someone as adept at video games as Sailor because within a week, my chances of ever appearing on the high scores lists has greatly diminished. I'm still on there right now with one score of almost 30,000 - but I didn't actually score that. Sailor put it there to make me feel better (as if I would forget that I have yet to break 25,000), but I haven't let him know I'm on to his secret. :o)

Beach Week!

2009-10-21T21:51:00.000-04:00

I’ve been a bit MIA because I took a vacation to the beach for a week, and while I should have theoretically had time to work on blogging, I decided to enjoy the beach instead. Now that I’m back to reality (which is a pain the ass since there have been many, many issues diverting my attention from things I love such as pop culture and art), I figured I’d pay homage to my love affair with the beach by citing my top five beach influenced pieces of pop culture!

5. Forgetting Sarah Marshall – one of the most brilliant comedies in the past few years takes place in Hawaii, so beach scenes abound. It was the first DVD I watched on blue-ray with my new entertainment system and it really made me want to go to Hawaii.

4. Saved By the Bell the Malibu Sands summer episodes – does anyone remember what I’m talking about here? There were six episodes of SbtB where Lisa hooked up the rest of the gang with sweet jobs at the Malibu Sands Country Club. What teen girl working at this place wouldn’t be into Zack Morris? Guilty.

3. Any song from Jack’s Mannequin – lead singer Andrew McMahon’s experiences growing up in California frequently make their way into songs with imagery of the beach (such as Holiday From the Real or Miss California) or of the water (Swim or Dark Blue).

2. The final scene of Titanic –since the whole film takes place on a boat, how am I connecting this to the beach? Well, in the final scene when the camera pans across all of the pictures of the life that Rose led, one shows her riding a horse on the beach while this eerie music is playing. That scene inspired me when I traveled over seas to ride a horse at sunrise on the beach. It was one of the most amazing experiences of my life.

1. The beach scene in From Here to Eternity – while I’m not a big fan of old films (it drives Sailor nuts), if I ever would cop to a romantic sexual fantasy, it’s this scene.

What are your favorite beach references in pop cultures my handful of readers? Chime in.

Technology, Science and "Belief"

2009-10-07T11:27:00.002-04:00

Sailor and I were catching up on TV last night and had a chance to watch the newest episode of Fringe. Sailor isn't too keen on this show, because in his assessment "it's a big rip off of the X-Files." In a way, I get that - it's not like J.J. Abrams is above ripping off just about any science fiction narrative and repackaging it into convoluted plot lines that are supposed to be "intelligent" because they keep people "guessing" when really, they ceased to make logical sense long, long ago. Anyone who keeps tabs on this knows what I'm talking about.

On the other hand, he has also proven to be somewhat of a master at capturing the heart of a particular science fiction story while transforming it into something that is more culturally relevant (though Star Trek fans all over may completely disagree with me on this point). Having been a total XPhiler, I have to say that while there are striking similarities, Fringe differs in format with its respect to the concept of "belief" and the importance of technology. The X-Files generally interrogated the idea that there were things in this world that we, as human beings, were incapable of understanding and comprehending (unless of course you were a crazed lunatic like Mulder, or a rational person in love with a crazed lunatic like Scully). Key to your acceptance of the narrative was its insistence that "the truth is out there," that one must believe in the potential of science, and that really, if something was going to mutate, there wasn't anything you could do about it. Mulder and Scully were often asked to accept their fate, acknowledge that they couldn't change things about their situation, and ultimately let scientific progress take its course.

The narrative in Fringe is far less optimistic about our technological future. The questions they explore are not, "wow, could this really be happening?" - it's almost assumed that it IS happening, and the questions interrogated become, "how is this technology potentially harmful, and what can we do to stop the evil people who have it?" In that sense, it's much more like procedural cop dramas than the X-Files was, and often you feel quite hopeless about the current state of technological warfare at the end of the episode. I think this functions well in a post-9/11 society where technology has rapidly advanced in the last 10 years, and plays upon our general fears of scientific progress (see popular discourses regarding genetic mapping or cloning to get a sense of the uneasiness the general public has with technological change). The cast also functions as more of an ensemble, so while Olivia and Peter are the focus most of the time, the secondary characters actually have personalities beyond the "monster of the week" kinds of plots the X-Files sported for several years before developing additional characters. As a result of these changes, the emphasis is more on what we can DO to stop/alter/influence technological and scientific change rather than acceptance of its inevitable progress. It doesn't seem like a big distinction, but I think it says quite a lot about where our culture has been and where it's moving.

Green Lantern Fake Out

2009-10-06T10:28:00.000-04:00

So, I got pretty excited when I saw this because who doesn't love Nathan Fillion, but then figured out it wasn't real. Ryan Reynolds is actually starring. And to make matters more interesting, Greg Berlanti (most recently known for Brothers & Sisters, though he also wrote for Dawson's Creek and Everwood) is in on the screenplay. I'm not entirely sure how to process this...

Karaoke Junkie

2009-10-04T18:08:00.001-04:00

I am something of a karaoke enthusiast. This baffles many of my friends as I'm actually quite a good singer. I found out early on that there were few things you could count on in a career in music, but musicians being sort of unreliable was the #1 lesson that deterred me from pursuing fame and fortune as a singer. Well, that and the fact that I sort of have a perpetual fear of being continually "in the spotlight" -- not that I don't like it here and there, but I like to be able to retreat to my introverted lair when I feel like it, and let's face it, in today's culture with the way we use technology surveillance and our obsession with celebrity culture? I'd be one step away from a mental breakdown after every concert.

But I digress. Karaoke. It's the perfect blend of being able to fulfill my desire to perform, meet interesting people, and still remain largely unknown. Everyone in a karaoke bar is a character. I could tell you a bunch of stories on this point, but if you're interested, Rob Drew's book Karaoke Nights is a fabulous, smart analysis of this subculture. A fellow enthusiast recently explained his own obsession as being "like I'm addicted to crack," and while I have no base of crack addiction for a comparison reference, I'm pretty sure it's an accurate simile.

So, I used to frequent karaoke on a weekly basis. In the last few months, I haven't gone as often because of a number of factors: a) my normal karaoke spot changed the night they have karaoke, b) I mostly used karaoke night as a means to escape the confines of my home/loneliness/relationships, etc., which is somewhat pointless when you're in a happy place and c) the last six weeks have been hell as far as my job is concerned. Last night was the first time I was able to go out in a long time on my own terms. I had a great time at a new little dive place that does karaoke. It's off the radar of most locals (and more importantly, students) so I can actually relax and feel okay kicking back. I sang some good stuff, I sang some stuff that I should never sing again. I got my foot trampled by a drunk girl from Minnesota. I'm kind of lucky she didn't break my toe(s). But I certainly wouldn't trade the experience for anything...and I look forward to going back in a few weeks.

My obsession has me wondering about the importance of performance in contemporary culture. I'm not sure why I continually complain about feeling like I'm "performing" within the confines of my job (and of my former relationship, though this is not the case now), yet when I have a chance to get out and do something, performing is often my first choice? In some sense, I'm not sure today's generations know how to live a life without performance, without surveillance. And while I like to think nostalgically that this wasn't the case ten years ago, I'm sure there were similar trends on local scales that were the equalvalent of today's YouTube or blogging. I seem to remember calling in to a lot of radio talk shows during that period of my life...

On Being Awesome

2009-10-03T11:00:00.000-04:00

No, I'm not writing about HIMYM again, though Barney's approach to life would probably help out the cast of today's show of choice. Despite the continued melodramatic, over-wrought writing, I continue to keep tabs on Grey’s Anatomy. Perhaps it’s the similarities between medical training/hazing/the academy sorts of things, or perhaps I’m just a sappy person. Either way, the show sometimes hits a nerve in one sense or another. The first two episodes of the season have not been great in any sense, but I find myself thinking about some of the issues they raised.

This week our cultural fixation on “the economic crisis” hit home for the doctors at Seattle Grace as they all start competing with each other to establish their relevance (and hopefully save their jobs in the wake of an impending merger with Mercy West). As I’m watching these people be borderline ridiculous (at the expense of their patient’s best interests for the most part – an annoying facet of the show that I guess must be there in order to advance any kind of relational plot), I started thinking about my own experiences in the academy and how I often feel trapped in the same kind of “paranoia” the characters find themselves in. There are simply certain jobs in our culture that produce excessive demands on physical and emotional resources. There are always going to be sick people, at every hour of the day, so you always need to be working. My job is certainly not as stressful as medicine, but there are always students/administrative concerns/articles to be written that can eat up every minute of your free time if you let them. I personally suck at drawing boundaries, but I’m aware of that and working on it.

One of the characters this week voiced why I think I have a hard time finding time for myself – “I am not awesome yet!” In a profession that demands constant surveillance and performance, it is hard to gage whether or not you’re performing at the standards expected. The standards also change as the general body of knowledge changes (new research = new methods = more work kind of thing), so it’s hard to keep tabs on something that works in one year and suddenly doesn’t work the next year. It’s a profession that spends a lot of time telling you that you’re not good enough – from teacher ratings, to article reviews, to peer reviews, etc., ultimately concluding that you will never be good enough and need to get back to work to prove your relevance. Of course, that’s part of the gig when you sign up, so complaining about it is sort of a moot point, but it can breed unrest as to whether or not one is up to snuff.

So most days, despite a very large number of accomplishments, I don’t feel “awesome” yet even though I have data that clearly indicates that I should. Perhaps it’s part of occupying a space that many don’t think I should be occupying, (yesterday a tenured faculty member dismissed a comment I made in a committee because “I’ve been teaching longer than you’ve been born”) and perhaps it’s because I don’t often feel like I embody the archetype of “professor” very well. I’m not pretentious (at least very rarely so), not wedded to any particular body of knowledge (interdisciplinarity is pretty much a reality that I feel most people should embrace, especially given the rise of technology and the availability of research), and I’m sort of a cool person (as opposed to the socially awkward nerd who prefers books to the company of people). So at some point, I should start feeling like I’m awesome. It’s just a massive intellectual shift to make, and it’s taking me a while to adjust.

Stripping and HIMYM

2009-10-02T12:37:00.003-04:00

I just got my DVDs of the fourth season of How I Met Your Mother, and so I feel like it's worth starting this journey by writing about one of my favorite shows on television. I picked up the series in the first season during reruns in the summer and immediately fell in love with it. In many ways, the series mimics the Friends model, but is, in my opinion, superior in character development and humor. Instead of sitting around sipping coffee, they're always sitting around drinking. Of course that's more my kind of show.

The show is largely successful because of the ensemble cast -- Neil Patrick Harris is phenomenal. In fact, I'm pretty sure I have never wished a gay man straight, but in Neil's case, I make an exception. I loved Doogie Howser, and lesser known but equally awesome Dr. Horrible. If I'd had the money, I would have packed up with other Rent-heads and rushed the LA show when he played Mark Cohen. I am also in love with Allison Hannigan who won me over a long time ago on Buffy.

So this week, Barney discovers "stripper Lily" -- which Lily eats up like crazy. Hannigan's comic timing is pretty awesome, and the entire episode seemed a throwback to the "Evil Willow" story on Buffy where Willow discovered her alternative universe vampire self as "I'm so evil, and skanky. And I think I'm kind of gay." I think part of why I love Lily's character so much is that she sees herself as kind of boring for being somewhat stable in a long-term relationship with Marshall, but she has dreams of being "more interesting" in one way or another. I kind of relate to that -- I sometimes think I'm a boring sort of person at heart in terms of what I want out of life, and it's taken me a while to meander around to find that out. But I still like to break out of the mold once in a while and embrace that crazy side of myself. Not that I'm saying I have an inner stripper...okay, who am I kidding? Don't we all have an inner stripper?

Clean Slate

2009-09-30T13:37:00.004-04:00

Welcome to Popademic. I’m starting over. This should not be news to those of you who have been following my escapades in blogging over the past seven years, but while I feel those years are important, I feel as if I’ve taken a definitive turn. I really want to start focusing more on my observations about pop culture, and while I can’t guarantee I won’t digress into the more diary-style form you’ve come to see from me in the past year or so, I don’t know that I need that outlet any more. And if I do, I think I'm going to hide it somewhere else since I like the concept behind this blog so much! :o)

So – a brief rundown of the history of the blog so that new readers aren’t lost if I reference things. I started blogging as a way to help cope with the pressures of my job (professor) and my relationships (crappy). It's gone through several iterations from sappy long-form diary style posts to random tidbits of pop culture to artistic endeavors. This blog will focus predominantly on my observations about popular culture. I'm hoping this will help me hone some ideas I have about larger research projects and give me an outlet for chatting about the kinds of things that fascinate me on a daily basis. Enjoy!