This is just a random thought post. I refuse to watch the entire director's cut of Lord of the Rings because I couldn't deal with that amount of content, which is about 10 plus hours (maybe closer to 12). What I can do is watch one guy for six hours straight as he goes through his entire BluRay and DVD collection, and he's got about three hours to got. I'll probably quit in half an hour and finish it tomorrow. My point is this is infinitely more boring by definition that Lord of the Rings and I'm not giving up for anyone. He rants and bitches about editions and region codes and different versions and the lack of a BluRay edition or a region free edition. He feels my pain so succinctly. I still maintain that if you put me in a court room to defend myself over digital piracy my entire defense would be: I have money and you refuse to let me give it to you. Series aren't re-released in BluRay if the DVD versions undersold. I've had to ask for US versions to finish TV series collections because this country only bothered to release the first one or two, and based cutting off the rest on the fact people wanted box sets so they wouldn't buy the individual seasons.
Saturday, 20 June 2020
Sunday, 14 June 2020
Degrassi bought me here. And now I feel like a tool
I decided to binge the newer seasons of Degrassi recently, subsequently stumbling upon their very active Reddit page. Long story short, people ask for other recommendations, and there's been a few mentions of actors from the show who went to do other stuff. I wasn't that interested in seeing another of their actresses don a bald cap and fake cancer, but apparently the creator of the show decided to try and do a series set in LA about struggling actors, featuring Manny Santos, the struggling actress from Degrassi. The LA Complex.
It's total trash but I have a few notes. I don't know why you would let a character wear the same shirt for the first two episodes which happen over two days, other than he's forced to sleep elsewhere. Just like Melrose Place, you have the resident older bitch (only Amanda kinda came on the scene later from memory, I don't think she was part of the spin off pilot), played by Jewel Staite, and she pulls it off. Her arc is more interesting as a recovering alcoholic (her denial is pretty big) washed up actress who may or may not be scamming a rich dentist out of seed money for some proto-Cohen Brothers to make a movie. The dentist doesn't care she's doing this and later on the proto-Cohen Bros don't even seem to give a shit they lost funding for the movie that may or may have not starred Ellen* Page (who was still big in 2012, but barely - she got done dirty). Apparently it's mentioned in season 2 and they got Ellen but you don't see much of these two again so they were background characters. They lose Ellen, of course. But you don't much care about this storyline since it's so C tier. Later drunky's washed up enough to get a role on a Sharknadoesque movie, which she's also fired from to have to take a celebrity rehab role even though she's not really an addict (according to her). She's smart enough to keep control of her own narrative but she still bails when she realises nobody gets real help there. She ends up filing for bankruptcy to get out of being sued and actually becomes a waitress. Then she goes back to try and make the Cohen kids' movie in the complex, so they suddenly matter as characters. Washed up alcho manages to skim money at her new job while guerilla filming the project with no money and the Cohen's filming it in single takes. Which is illegal as fuck but funny as fuck too. They pull it off to make a cool artsy trailer by the end of the show.
I like it's an ensemble but I don't like everyone I guess. It's not trash. The gay closeted rapper storyline has more depth to it than what's going on with the rest of the cast and it ends real bad by the end of the season. It's a 2012 show so you're going to have to put up with a lot of words that you can't say now. Plus self-hating violent gay man is getting old now too. It's what happens if you binge shit like this from that period but at least he's more developed than that. He has to keep the role of straight gangsta rap artist who can't finish his album while he's forced to go ultra straight and marry a good Christian girl rather than the intern love of his life he beats the shit out of. He tries again with some lawyer instead, gets all aggressive again. It's not handled badly. The lawyer says he has to go back to the poor intern kid who was like a main character season 1 and suddenly just gets written out because he wasn't interesting enough compared to the gay rapper. The intern kid just wanted to cut beats and produce. For like Drake and shit (YES they MENTION DRAAAAAAAKEEEEE). Manny flies all the way to Montreal with gay rapper to see kid and of course she comes back and says "he doesn't want to see you" because we couldn't get the kid back. Oh but wait they do. (I forgot the kid has another boyfriend on the IMDB list). Gay rapper apologises, it's touching. Then you're left wondering if Manny and Gay rapper will get home without crashing. Manny's fine and has a new hunky guy she picked up at an extras beach shoot, who turns out to be a pilot who can't talk about his job. Sounds like a set up for a bigger plot in the non-season. And Gay rapper ends up okay in the end. Hooray for him. He works it out with the lawyer boy, it's all cutesy but wow way to fuck over the poor intern kid who taught him how to love. Then his dad's in a coma and he keeps stroking out and dies. He gets more story time considering he's not technically a main character, the intern is, but he has more going on that's worth exploring, I guess. Another Degrassi alum BLT (Dayo Ade), comes back as the rapper's record producer.
The kid comedian/writer is amusing and dorky, he gets shat on by Paul F Tompkins which is great, who pops up later. Man's a good sport. Comedian kid also manages to end up to his neck in pussy when he's struggling to get laid initially. He plays dumb a bit too much and it's annoying. The Australian first time actor on the ER/General Hospital plays a dropkick drunk self-abuser pretty well but he's harder to feel sorry for. I don't know if I buy his backstory as much. The dancer/porn star's probably more my favourite, I like she's not bitchy and we get to see the good side of porn, it's a literal candy land. You think she's going to get screwed by another washed up drug addict actor after they make a sex tape to launch their careers, then she agrees to the porn stuff then stuffs up another audition. Sorry, now I dislike her. The drug addict actor comes back where they follow through on him getting a job on the same rehab show and he plays off Straite's character as well, he was pretty good value for how little he's used.
They have a "house band" so to speak, a band who lives in the titular complex, which is a shitty motel so it's great they're not livin' large. But this band kinda provides music for the scenes and parties but they're living there rehearsing a lot so you wonder if they get real actual gigs, because the drummer looks WAY too happy to be playing parties in a shitty motel for I'm assuming room and board?? I can't really give that any more crap than Lynch having acts at the end of Twin Peaks the Return to promote them. And they don't suck as a band either, later on they kinda have a Pixies vibe with a bald male lead who does great harmonies with the brunette Kim Dealish girl.
It's a fun show, it's relatively interesting, you don't necessarily hate the fact they're struggling in LA, you give enough of a damn. It's calling out the industry on how stupid it is. Bad Momagers get shit to for forcing their lactose intolerant kids to eat dairy. And guess who shows up as one but DREW'S Torres's FUCKIN' MOM. Who's like a bigger bitch in this. Cassie Steele brings her A but she was actually good in Degrassi against a lot of people. Meanwhile she cuts a backing track for the gay rapper but somehow still winds up with no fucking money, there's no mention of her being paid at all. She even goes commando again! And sits in her bra in front of Alan Thickie. Check out those blurred lines. She's great pulling off the religious BS for a part and teaming up with the "incest" twins on the show to cover their offscreen banging, which is fun, especially when it goes into threesome mode. And of course they gang up on her and get her fired (but she does more work in that area instead of shutting up). There are some predictable moments but these ones are fun at least.
They nix the porn angle since the dancer gets the gig she doesn't think she was going to get for six entire episodes. She's replaced with some homeless kids who stumble on a commercial being filmed in the fucking woods and of course the younger one gets a moment onscreen. The sister is only 18 but that's only an issue when the wrong older man is hitting on her, mainly the director of the commercial who was not remotely interested in helping her or her brother. Otherwise some other kid's dadager (I don't know if they were a thing) is fair game after one free lunch. She's kind of interesting as she's navigating the hell of child auditions which is better than doing it from a momager angle, but the kid seems to figure out how shit works way faster than she does, plus she's fucking it up for him by not letting him act (which involves a kidnapping scene with a "pedophile"). She's still stupid quitting - they sue you for that, you know. So her character is more obnoxious considering she's got no Plan B if this fucks up. So she thinks she's protecting him when she's basically fucking up his whole life. You need the money, dumbdumb. And him screaming at her is like completely justified. Of course he runs off and freaks her out and she has to have a learning curve. Which she doesn't actually learn from and seems to be less responsible than her brother that ran away because she's sleeping around kinda. They make friends/boyfriends with the proto-Cohens and that kind of justifies them all being there still. The dad comes back after she begs him and he shows up the moment they don't need him of course, so he's deadbeat dad. Her getting mad and refusing to go is ridiculous considering it's kinda her fault he's there. He basically attempts to kidnap the boy in front of the whole complex and they all have to step up and stop him. Sis gets a 1900 on her SATs but can't afford college (I thought you had to pay for the SATs too I think one of the Cohen's pays). Of course dada takes him anyway because reality and the law so of course she may as well just stay. Which kind of disqualifies her since she's not gunning for a movie career which is the premise of the show. But she decides to go so that makes sense.
The comedy writer gets a gig on the team for Paul's talk show where the ruthless girl he stole the jokes from is still riding him but it's getting absolutely stale and she can't shake him anyway, and it's a fucking kink with them in the end. He's still annoying but you're more on his side. Plus, again, you have to factor in the transphobic he/she bullshit too. After the back and forth and duking it out for the job they wind up together even though he wanted Manny to begin with. Most of their stuff is funny especially with the head writer asshole on Paul's team and Paul coming back (decidedly trimmer than he started) to fire the kid when he takes a coke bullet for the head writer guy. The girl turns out to have kinda griffted her dad out of money to be a comedian instead of going to med school so she gets cut off and she has to live with comedy writer. Because they're good for each other really. You know those couples. Him and Manny make nice. Then she marries pilot boy but she doesn't know him and wants to annul the Vegas wedding they have after he proposes. I don't really understand how you can do this there seems to be some kind of money making scam here in quicky weddings and quicky annulments. The comedy duo wind up living together and she has to move to another state and why are we even setting that up - last episode. She won't take him with her despite porno dancer tells him over the phone to do it, he needs to stay or he won't get work.
The Australian manages to burn down his house but you're still waiting for the insurance agency to catch him, which doesn't come up again until near the end. Some celebrity signs him up as a rent-a-boyfriend, the washed up alcho telling him to do it then getting jealous because they end up boyfriend/girlfriend after casual shit. While he's rented out the husband of the celebrity comes back and they all end up buddy buddy where she's there controlling the shit out of both of them, but of course she reconciles with the husband and the Australian can't leave because abandonment issues. His self-harming arc is still believable. Someone shows up claiming to be his sister to the point she gets a DNA test.
Scientology even gets a drive-by dissing, because again, 2012, that was a banger year for their publicity team. And UUUGGGHH the sister is with the church and the Australian's dumb enough not to know, so I think they have to set up his indoctrination and the washed up aging actress will have to bail his ass out but I don't think they get that far because the show was canned after 19 eps and I think it'll end on a cliffhanger at this rate with 3 eps left. It's more than watchable. But she calls it the Church of Scienetics which is like what a portmanteau of Dianetics and Scientology? So they want the actor because he's supposed to have money and that's their demographic. Idiots with money. He falls for the sales pitch after the bogus evaluation so it's all stacking up so far. But he's smart enough to see the cost is stupid so he comes in with some reasonable doubt, which is nice so I'm hoping maybe he goes haha no and the sister fucks off. Boy needs family but not that kinda family. He breaks because the they break him. Washed up doesn't want him on Cohen Bros movie. And people laugh at him. I think they had to call it Scienetics to not get sued. Least dumb complex landlord clues him in and he trashes the sister. A book mentions this show in particular using the name. I'm thinking they wanted to avoid any possibility of glorifying or showing it in an positive light. There were shows doing this in the 90s that were way too fucking soft about it. They plant another famous actor to bait Aussie boy. And they even boast about that whole "We beat the IRS" slant. That's a selling point for them. He agrees to drunky's movie deal it's kinda sad but they hint at them reconciling at the end. The insurance people FINALLY catch up with him so I'd love to see how his new cult buddy pals get him outta that one. He gets ARRESTED oooh boy. And drunky starts to panic about the skimming credit cards, well same ballpark. This all doesn't come out how I expect they get bailed out by the Scientetics people then the sister macks him anyway and he leaves the cult because they want to kick her out and distance him from her and she gets "abducted" by a guy in the suit. He kinda just leaves the church and you see the sister at the end but you don't know where it's going (nowhere) So that blew my theory.
Of course we get a couple of cliffhanger moments you wouldn't give enough of a shit about if you really wanted a season 3, most of the main lines are tied up. I don't even know where you'd go with the rest of it anyway. It's trying to subvert those ol' expectations at points
but some of it's a bit ham-fisted. The story lines have some uniqueness
to them, even if they are kinda beat for beat. But obviously everyone's complex and the situation's equally complex (and it gives you a complex) so it's playing into its title well. I guess it had enough originality and enough of what was cool at the time to get picked up but I don't even know if they were thinking long term. I can't remember if six episode first seasons are kind of cursed to do badly, they give you 13 more as a caution and then look at the numbers halfway and go yes or no. It was serviceable. It kept me interested enough to pause it or go back over parts I missed. But it wasn't worth watching again.
*Post published prior to Elliot Page announcing transition.
Monday, 4 May 2020
High Fidelity and the Pointlessness of Reimaginings
I do have a certain love for the movie High Fidelity, I prefer it over the book on some levels (Rob is more sympathetic, has some dimension and isn't falling too heavy on the side of unlikable curmudgeon. In the book he's more of a typical Englishman bred to be devoid of emotion). I have a stupid history of trying to get a decent copy of this movie on DVD and failing three times, including when I got it in a double set with Grosse Pointe Blank. Every copy I bought skipped in the same place. I ended up ringing the Australian Disney distribution number and spoke to some asshole suit who said to just watch it on another player. So, of course, I got this via other means. I'm sure if I bought the Bluray the issue wouldn't be there, or it's possibly on one streaming service. But I do watch it every now and then as my goto feelgood romcom with the level of snark and sophistication I don't get from other romcoms.
The movie adaptation works. So why in the fuck has someone from Hulu decided to greenlight a "female reimagining of this, where Rob isn't just turned into a straight white woman with the same issues, but she has to be a black queer woman who resembles Marie De Salle? And why does Barry's character have to be replaced with an obese black woman. And Dick's character is just a gay guy (I think). And they're just pop culture nerds working a used record store in America instead of the UK (PS I know the movie is set in the US as well, I don't have an issue with this). The author is a producer of this series (possibly just EP in name), but I watched the trailer and just asked "Why?" for nearly two minutes. "Why does this exist? What purpose does it serve? Did we ask for this? Was there a cult following of the book/movie that were hitting Twitter demanding a reboot in series format?"
This is how I felt when they rebooted Heathers for the "modern era" and I have refused to this day to fucking touch it. It might be amazing, I just cannot, just as I cannot with the musical.
I'm reading reviews about High Fidelity so I can fill myself in without watching, and I'm bummed Parker Posey plays the role of the forgotten woman looking to offload her husband's impressively expensive singles collection for next to nothing out of revenge. That'd be a fun scene to watch on its own, I guess. I'm not going to sit through the rest to see it.
These reimaginings seem to exist to correct perceived mistakes in the originals. Disney's doing it, does this mean everyone else has to? Are writers going to lose their integrity because they want to redo their work and make it fit a current or mainstream audience. Sometimes it was to correct grammar. Why? Why didn't you get an editor to do the job properly the first time? Or you just wanted to have "fun" gender swapping and you made a bigger mess than what you started with. Plus, isn't there an inherent issue with doing this? "Swapping" implies you subscribe to the two gender notion. You can't "swap out" female for nonbinary. Or you can, but it's not technically the same. Maybe it is, but gender swapping still suggests you're swapping opposites. Binaries. (you're sort of sounding more like someone who still uses the term "genderbender"). Aren't we meant to be post-gender now? Aren't we meant to stop this? Does every woman's story get to be retold from the position of a man? You want a role-reversed Pride and Prejudice? I'm sure it exists but you can hear people crying foul on this because how fucking dare you try to tell a woman's story from a man's perspective? But you can gender swap any male character in history, reexamine their make up from a feminist perspective whilst still maintaining the original "flaws", and that's supposed to be okay? Or celebrated? Or encouraged? We don't need this, there's an article making this argument exactly but still somehow speaking favourably of the show regardless.
I'm so fucking confused. And I'm also tired of it. What you're saying to writers or any creators of anything, your art is out there to be reimagined, rebooted, retold, resold in a different package whether you like it or not. (I won't go into a fanfiction rant because its problematic nature). Of course if you're doing this properly and legally, permissions are required unless you're good and dead for the prerequisite amount of time. Of course you're in the position of power where you can go full Salinger and say "no and get off my lawn", you could even put it in a will that your estate can't grant permissions until the law overrides your decision. (I don't know if you could make a perpetuity clause from a legal standpoint). Or you could say, yes but I want in on this and you can steal some creative control so the other party doesn't have a fuckin' free-for-all.
Thankfully the author wrote his own piece on it for Rolling Stone. He sold the TV rights with the movie rights and this piece is positive and supportive and that's fine. I'm glad. But I don't have to like this or its existence or watch it. A lot of the time I don't and that's when people like me get strung up for having ignorant opinions because we never absorbed the material in its entirety. It's why Game of Thrones detractors who didn't watch much or any of the show were derided so vehemently. There's no law that states you must consume all art to voice an opinion. You're supposed to sit through Wagner's Ring Cycle before you can say, yeah I know that one song from all those movies and shows but the rest, meh. If the artist in their efforts failed to engage you with the art and your opinion is "I don't like it, I won't engage fully, I'm not interested, I'd prefer not to", it's a valid response. It's how I ended up hate-reading certain books because of the tiresome accusations of "you can't voice a negative opinion of something you haven't even read". But me learning about its contents and reading a part of it and hating it, I've attempted to engage and I don't want to continue. Forcing people to just sit through this shit, to read it out of spite, to listen to it before they can form any opinion, it's not fair and it's not how art should work. I don't want you sitting beside me in a theatre watching a movie you don't want to see because I forced you to see what I perceived as a brilliant or worthwhile movie. I write and I can't make you read my books. I simply can't. I'd rather you say no thank you than hate read it, resent me and say negative shit about it. If your trailer doesn't get me to watch your show, I'm never going to watch it. I have a dissonance in doing this with reboots anyway, my brain will just make constant comparisons, constant criticisms. I'm a puritan when it comes to original texts. If I loved it as it was, changing it will make me hate it. You took something I saw little to no fault with and made it faulty. And you thought you were making it better too, sooooooooo...
No.
I would like this to stop. I thought by making original things that weren't entirely derivative (that is hard, I grant you, all art now is technically derivative) that I would be noticed or appreciated for trying to be unique. It's actually the worst thing you can do, it seems. Deviate from the familiar and expect to be disregarded. Regurgitate it and reap the rewards.
The movie adaptation works. So why in the fuck has someone from Hulu decided to greenlight a "female reimagining of this, where Rob isn't just turned into a straight white woman with the same issues, but she has to be a black queer woman who resembles Marie De Salle? And why does Barry's character have to be replaced with an obese black woman. And Dick's character is just a gay guy (I think). And they're just pop culture nerds working a used record store in America instead of the UK (PS I know the movie is set in the US as well, I don't have an issue with this). The author is a producer of this series (possibly just EP in name), but I watched the trailer and just asked "Why?" for nearly two minutes. "Why does this exist? What purpose does it serve? Did we ask for this? Was there a cult following of the book/movie that were hitting Twitter demanding a reboot in series format?"
This is how I felt when they rebooted Heathers for the "modern era" and I have refused to this day to fucking touch it. It might be amazing, I just cannot, just as I cannot with the musical.
I'm reading reviews about High Fidelity so I can fill myself in without watching, and I'm bummed Parker Posey plays the role of the forgotten woman looking to offload her husband's impressively expensive singles collection for next to nothing out of revenge. That'd be a fun scene to watch on its own, I guess. I'm not going to sit through the rest to see it.
These reimaginings seem to exist to correct perceived mistakes in the originals. Disney's doing it, does this mean everyone else has to? Are writers going to lose their integrity because they want to redo their work and make it fit a current or mainstream audience. Sometimes it was to correct grammar. Why? Why didn't you get an editor to do the job properly the first time? Or you just wanted to have "fun" gender swapping and you made a bigger mess than what you started with. Plus, isn't there an inherent issue with doing this? "Swapping" implies you subscribe to the two gender notion. You can't "swap out" female for nonbinary. Or you can, but it's not technically the same. Maybe it is, but gender swapping still suggests you're swapping opposites. Binaries. (you're sort of sounding more like someone who still uses the term "genderbender"). Aren't we meant to be post-gender now? Aren't we meant to stop this? Does every woman's story get to be retold from the position of a man? You want a role-reversed Pride and Prejudice? I'm sure it exists but you can hear people crying foul on this because how fucking dare you try to tell a woman's story from a man's perspective? But you can gender swap any male character in history, reexamine their make up from a feminist perspective whilst still maintaining the original "flaws", and that's supposed to be okay? Or celebrated? Or encouraged? We don't need this, there's an article making this argument exactly but still somehow speaking favourably of the show regardless.
I'm so fucking confused. And I'm also tired of it. What you're saying to writers or any creators of anything, your art is out there to be reimagined, rebooted, retold, resold in a different package whether you like it or not. (I won't go into a fanfiction rant because its problematic nature). Of course if you're doing this properly and legally, permissions are required unless you're good and dead for the prerequisite amount of time. Of course you're in the position of power where you can go full Salinger and say "no and get off my lawn", you could even put it in a will that your estate can't grant permissions until the law overrides your decision. (I don't know if you could make a perpetuity clause from a legal standpoint). Or you could say, yes but I want in on this and you can steal some creative control so the other party doesn't have a fuckin' free-for-all.
Thankfully the author wrote his own piece on it for Rolling Stone. He sold the TV rights with the movie rights and this piece is positive and supportive and that's fine. I'm glad. But I don't have to like this or its existence or watch it. A lot of the time I don't and that's when people like me get strung up for having ignorant opinions because we never absorbed the material in its entirety. It's why Game of Thrones detractors who didn't watch much or any of the show were derided so vehemently. There's no law that states you must consume all art to voice an opinion. You're supposed to sit through Wagner's Ring Cycle before you can say, yeah I know that one song from all those movies and shows but the rest, meh. If the artist in their efforts failed to engage you with the art and your opinion is "I don't like it, I won't engage fully, I'm not interested, I'd prefer not to", it's a valid response. It's how I ended up hate-reading certain books because of the tiresome accusations of "you can't voice a negative opinion of something you haven't even read". But me learning about its contents and reading a part of it and hating it, I've attempted to engage and I don't want to continue. Forcing people to just sit through this shit, to read it out of spite, to listen to it before they can form any opinion, it's not fair and it's not how art should work. I don't want you sitting beside me in a theatre watching a movie you don't want to see because I forced you to see what I perceived as a brilliant or worthwhile movie. I write and I can't make you read my books. I simply can't. I'd rather you say no thank you than hate read it, resent me and say negative shit about it. If your trailer doesn't get me to watch your show, I'm never going to watch it. I have a dissonance in doing this with reboots anyway, my brain will just make constant comparisons, constant criticisms. I'm a puritan when it comes to original texts. If I loved it as it was, changing it will make me hate it. You took something I saw little to no fault with and made it faulty. And you thought you were making it better too, sooooooooo...
No.
I would like this to stop. I thought by making original things that weren't entirely derivative (that is hard, I grant you, all art now is technically derivative) that I would be noticed or appreciated for trying to be unique. It's actually the worst thing you can do, it seems. Deviate from the familiar and expect to be disregarded. Regurgitate it and reap the rewards.
Friday, 10 April 2020
The Breakfast Club is a stupid movie
I'm betraying my 14 year old self saying this because I cried like a baby when I watched it back then, even though you can barely hear it (even now the sound mixing is atrocious and you can't hear some of the lines clearly at all. Like how was this not considered proto-Mumblecore?) The soundtrack is fun but you don't know any of the bands outside of Simple Minds. It's an original movie that's been over-parodied. But it's stupid and makes no real sense.
Characterwise it works, sort of. You like the characters, you root for Bender. The confession scene is still raw and delivered with genuine emotion. But it's pretty contrived. Vernon's a control freak on a dumb power trip, Bender doesn't have to rise to his bullshit and it gets violent; Vernon should be sacked for locking a kid in a storage room. Or drinking beer on school premises with the janitor, even if he is coerced. You don't get why they all have to go with Bender to get the weed. But that's the real punchline, none of these characters are good. They're all flawed. (You never get the punchline to the naked lady joke). Oh, and how does Vernon not hear them playing records, unless you're led to believe at this point he simply doesn't care. This movie makes no sense.
There's a lot of subtler emotional moments interspersed between the drama, mainly Bender's reaction to Vernon goading him into striking him. It's part screwball comedy, part character drama. You can't really have a narrative, just incidents that draws everyone together to a point of mutual understanding. It's compelling for having nothing but a thin premise to hang itself on. Rich Evans saying all John Hughes movies are about rich kids complaining about how rich they are isn't entirely true. You assume Ferris Bueller is loaded but because the man's getting him down he's worthy of sympathy. But in this case, Claire's the only rich one and you still feel bad for her.
I had a whole theory mapped out in high school that the letter is true, every character has a moment they reflect another character, just by them getting wasted or Allison stealing shit, or Andrew assaulting another kid (criminals), Bender playing with Claire's make up (princesses) them all sprinting around the halls and Bender "trying out for a basketball scholarship" (athletes - yeah I'm stretching here), Claire proving she knows Molière despite shunning the nerds (brains) and they're all fucked up on some level from their parents and their bullshit (basket cases: "We're all pretty bizarre. Some of us are just better hiding it, that's all."). It's a very longwinded way of saying everyone's alike in some ways.
This was a movie I taped onto a cassette by holding up my radio mic to the TV speaker. I know it pretty much back to front, save for the scenes with Vernon and Carl in the basement, for some reason I didn't tape those because I was obsessed with the main characters, I guess. (Yes, I even know Brian's social security number). But getting to physically watch this on TV was harder. I had to rent it repeatedly or have my brother let me sit on the floor of his room and watch it when it was broadcast. Hardly ever getting to watch your favourite movies made them somehow precious. Netflix and DVDs kinda take that away; when you can have what you want when you want, the sheen comes off it.
Even if it's still a stupid movie that makes no sense. But you could pinpoint a moment that foretold the millenials vs boomers war:
Vernon: Now this is the thought that wakes me up in the middle of the night... That when I get older, these kids are gonna take care of me...
Carl: I wouldn't count on it.
Characterwise it works, sort of. You like the characters, you root for Bender. The confession scene is still raw and delivered with genuine emotion. But it's pretty contrived. Vernon's a control freak on a dumb power trip, Bender doesn't have to rise to his bullshit and it gets violent; Vernon should be sacked for locking a kid in a storage room. Or drinking beer on school premises with the janitor, even if he is coerced. You don't get why they all have to go with Bender to get the weed. But that's the real punchline, none of these characters are good. They're all flawed. (You never get the punchline to the naked lady joke). Oh, and how does Vernon not hear them playing records, unless you're led to believe at this point he simply doesn't care. This movie makes no sense.
There's a lot of subtler emotional moments interspersed between the drama, mainly Bender's reaction to Vernon goading him into striking him. It's part screwball comedy, part character drama. You can't really have a narrative, just incidents that draws everyone together to a point of mutual understanding. It's compelling for having nothing but a thin premise to hang itself on. Rich Evans saying all John Hughes movies are about rich kids complaining about how rich they are isn't entirely true. You assume Ferris Bueller is loaded but because the man's getting him down he's worthy of sympathy. But in this case, Claire's the only rich one and you still feel bad for her.
I had a whole theory mapped out in high school that the letter is true, every character has a moment they reflect another character, just by them getting wasted or Allison stealing shit, or Andrew assaulting another kid (criminals), Bender playing with Claire's make up (princesses) them all sprinting around the halls and Bender "trying out for a basketball scholarship" (athletes - yeah I'm stretching here), Claire proving she knows Molière despite shunning the nerds (brains) and they're all fucked up on some level from their parents and their bullshit (basket cases: "We're all pretty bizarre. Some of us are just better hiding it, that's all."). It's a very longwinded way of saying everyone's alike in some ways.
This was a movie I taped onto a cassette by holding up my radio mic to the TV speaker. I know it pretty much back to front, save for the scenes with Vernon and Carl in the basement, for some reason I didn't tape those because I was obsessed with the main characters, I guess. (Yes, I even know Brian's social security number). But getting to physically watch this on TV was harder. I had to rent it repeatedly or have my brother let me sit on the floor of his room and watch it when it was broadcast. Hardly ever getting to watch your favourite movies made them somehow precious. Netflix and DVDs kinda take that away; when you can have what you want when you want, the sheen comes off it.
Even if it's still a stupid movie that makes no sense. But you could pinpoint a moment that foretold the millenials vs boomers war:
Vernon: Now this is the thought that wakes me up in the middle of the night... That when I get older, these kids are gonna take care of me...
Carl: I wouldn't count on it.
Wednesday, 8 April 2020
Pretentious.
I didn't so much watch Knight of Cups as have it on in the background while I was doing random shit. Even with my lack of attention I wasn't lost that much about the plot. I don't know enough about Pilgrim's Progress to remark on the similarities, I just found the film to really highlight the pretentiousness of LA celebrities.
Each chapter encapsulates Bale's involvement with various women, passing through a disagreement with his estranged brother and the disconnection from his addled father. There were references to Twin Peaks (which I completely missed - apparently it's a song that samples Major Briggs's retelling of his dream about Bobby, which is actually one of my least favourite scenes in the show) and tarot cards, stuff I find interesting, and Dan Harmon has a tiny cameo, Erin wasn't as evident. I don't think I could appreciate stream of consciousness as a device in film. It doesn't capture me in book form, either.
There was too much of a detachment from Bale and his lovers, one of them just some girl who drags him down what I thought was Venice Beach, in a scene that was way too reminiscent of LA Story, where Sarah Jessica Parker convinces Steve Martin to go get a colonic. Dumbly enough, I think that movie did a better job taking the piss out of pretentiousness in LA. I've seen it a few times, though I can't remember if it was genuinely good. (I had a problem when I watched the same videos I also had a habit of watching some of the trailers instead of fast-forwarding them, so I wound up knowing them better than the movies themselves - LA Story was one of them).
This is the only Terrence Malick film I've seen, I saw the trailer for Song to Song, thinking by the plot it was interesting. But the floating camera work and disjointed dialogue is distracting. I get a sense he constructs a scene then just casually films it from multiple weird angles, which looks really creative until you think it might make you nauseated, like being on a ship at sea. Some of those scenes happen to be lavish parties hosted by one celebrity (whether you're meant to believe Antonio Banderas has K-parties or this is just a lot of people pretending to be high, I'm not sure), or raves or rock concerts. I was more fascinated by the dancers suspended from the ceiling in the rave scene, one being stuck in what looked like a kind of windsock that could be stretched to cover her legs like a mermaid's tail then used to suspend the dancer from an enormously high ceiling. I wanted to stop the movie and ask her how the fuck she was doing that. Can we make a movie about her, please? She's riveting.
I appreciate directors who try to show dreamscapes and how we would see images in our minds, much like Gondry's Eternal Sunshine, the creativity involved in the visual representation of something as fractured and abstract as memory itself is so effective at points. While Hal Hartley might basically choreograph a scene and be deliberate with his framing, Malick refuses to be so regimented. He allows the actors to frolic or pace rather than remain still, but there's no sense of them being directed as such. Bale's character falls to the whims of excess and debauchery, losing focus on finding the pearl of meaning, and as you follow him, you would be forgiven for losing focus too, which seems to be intentional. But the broken narrative of disparate voices don't really succeed in engaging you fully. I wasn't drawn in or captivated or moved; or even satisfied with the conclusion. It felt pretentious for pretentiousness's sake. Genuine art for art's sake.
Each chapter encapsulates Bale's involvement with various women, passing through a disagreement with his estranged brother and the disconnection from his addled father. There were references to Twin Peaks (which I completely missed - apparently it's a song that samples Major Briggs's retelling of his dream about Bobby, which is actually one of my least favourite scenes in the show) and tarot cards, stuff I find interesting, and Dan Harmon has a tiny cameo, Erin wasn't as evident. I don't think I could appreciate stream of consciousness as a device in film. It doesn't capture me in book form, either.
There was too much of a detachment from Bale and his lovers, one of them just some girl who drags him down what I thought was Venice Beach, in a scene that was way too reminiscent of LA Story, where Sarah Jessica Parker convinces Steve Martin to go get a colonic. Dumbly enough, I think that movie did a better job taking the piss out of pretentiousness in LA. I've seen it a few times, though I can't remember if it was genuinely good. (I had a problem when I watched the same videos I also had a habit of watching some of the trailers instead of fast-forwarding them, so I wound up knowing them better than the movies themselves - LA Story was one of them).
This is the only Terrence Malick film I've seen, I saw the trailer for Song to Song, thinking by the plot it was interesting. But the floating camera work and disjointed dialogue is distracting. I get a sense he constructs a scene then just casually films it from multiple weird angles, which looks really creative until you think it might make you nauseated, like being on a ship at sea. Some of those scenes happen to be lavish parties hosted by one celebrity (whether you're meant to believe Antonio Banderas has K-parties or this is just a lot of people pretending to be high, I'm not sure), or raves or rock concerts. I was more fascinated by the dancers suspended from the ceiling in the rave scene, one being stuck in what looked like a kind of windsock that could be stretched to cover her legs like a mermaid's tail then used to suspend the dancer from an enormously high ceiling. I wanted to stop the movie and ask her how the fuck she was doing that. Can we make a movie about her, please? She's riveting.
I appreciate directors who try to show dreamscapes and how we would see images in our minds, much like Gondry's Eternal Sunshine, the creativity involved in the visual representation of something as fractured and abstract as memory itself is so effective at points. While Hal Hartley might basically choreograph a scene and be deliberate with his framing, Malick refuses to be so regimented. He allows the actors to frolic or pace rather than remain still, but there's no sense of them being directed as such. Bale's character falls to the whims of excess and debauchery, losing focus on finding the pearl of meaning, and as you follow him, you would be forgiven for losing focus too, which seems to be intentional. But the broken narrative of disparate voices don't really succeed in engaging you fully. I wasn't drawn in or captivated or moved; or even satisfied with the conclusion. It felt pretentious for pretentiousness's sake. Genuine art for art's sake.
Thursday, 2 April 2020
Interview...
The young adult reading market had yet to be saturated with subpar, badly edited fare. But even if it had in 1996, I'd have ignored it, as I've always maintained. Interview With the Vampire weirdly became my favourite book back then, and something of an escape from the bullshit I was enduring that year. My teen angst was really being tested. I'd picked up a copy of the Vampire Lestat my brother had borrowed, and was sucked in by the beginning. But I can't remember exactly when I got a copy of Interview. It may have been after Christmas, or for Christmas in 1995. Getting a hold of certain books at that time required trips to Dymocks in Perth, where I had to harass some crotchety bitch to order in a book, then wait months for us to make another trip up to collect them. I can't remember why I couldn't just make a bookstore in Bunbury to get me the Last Unicorn. (I thought I'd lost my first Eerie Indiana book, turns out it was just sitting in the cupboard down south with the spine facing inwards and I never bothered to pick it up- they're harder to get now they're out of print). But I could get the Vampire Chronicle books in town. I didn't even know one existed until I saw it on someone else's bookshelf.
I was in the middle of reading the Interview the book when I saw the movie. I could watch it alone at home on the condition I stopped it when the Bill was on, took the tape out and recorded that show. Only then could I finish watching the movie. And I think it was the goddamn Guns and Roses cover of Sympathy for the Devil that really riled me up, but I basically loved the movie. I was 14, didn't know dick about film, and was growing obsessed with vampires. The point was, Rice's brand were the definitive to me. They were original enough they didn't adhere to common myths. I still think her basic idea of them is still pretty cool, considering her lore has gone off the deep end.
But since then, the movie's gone from a love to a hate then to a love, back to an appreciation for what it was capable of achieving at the time. My brother told me stuff about it after he'd seen it in a theatre, his descriptions standing out to me as fascinating. Meanwhile, it's still riddled with issues. We couldn't have the cherub Armand represented as such, Antonio Banderas had to be brought in to play to the gothic aesthetic modern audiences comprehended, since the movie needed to have appeal outside the book. Louis's brother and his traumatic death are reduced to a dead mother and child Louis briefly mentions at the beginning to explain his malaise. The harrowing trip through Europe in search of other vampires is dropped. All of these decisions make sense. Casting Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt would've been for commercial reasons. Introducing Kirsten Dunst, a pre-teen* somehow managing to really embody Claudia from age five to her mental age of 70, you can't say that was a bad decision, she does the part justice. But it wasn't until many viewings later I realised she was faking playing the piano by lightly dancing her fingers over the keys. I don't think Cruise was playing, I'm sure he had a hand double, but you could cut away from Claudia's imitations and still make it convincing. They used animatronics to replicate Lestat's death, that look a lot less convincing now. The special effects haven't drastically aged but they're not up to today's standards. So now I have mixed feelings about it. I thought Rice loved it and contributed to the script, and was so overcome at the premier she was left giddy. Then later, I heard she hated it. Oh, and River Phoenix died and had to be replaced by Christian Slater, which again was a good choice but I think it's probably much older than the nameless boy Rice envisioned (later revealed to be Daniel in Queen of the Damned - his intro chapter referred to him as "the boy from Interview" and the penny failed to drop for me right away). I think I could watch it now and basically just be annoyed by its flaws more than its achievements. Now I'm rereading the book, most of the scenes depicted in the movie are in my mind's eye now. And that's not a bad thing.
I don't think she went overboard with descriptions, however I think this book was subjected to heavy editing that the later books really needed. I liked the Egypt mythology/origin explanation. I like we don't get this until book three. I think on its own, the first book could've been a simple masterpiece that needed to be left shrouded in mystery. I haven't read the original short story for years, I have it in the compendium piece which is a tome I have stashed in a box in a cupboard. It's probably online somewhere. That had a more comedic tone. I'm pissed I also can't find an older documentary about Rice which I have on VHS and remember way too succinctly since I watched it a heap of times. And I can't think of any comparable books to Interview, you could argue it has shades of Lolita but there's nothing overly grotesque about Louis's connection with Claudia. Once she has a woman's mind you get what's going on, if you're grossed out by it, you're missing the point. And if you didn't know who she represents in Rice's life, she makes less sense. I also have the graphic novel of Claudia's story which I've only glossed over. I tend to collect these books as gifts now and don't spend much time with them. (I could now I'm confined due to that virus people won't stfu about).
The Chronicles were the closest thing I had to an obsession with an IP. I could spend ages crapping on about the terrible adaptation of Queen of the Damned. I thought there was some series now she'd gotten back the rights but Hulu dumped it, so now it's being shopped as a bigger package along with the Mayfair series. So this could go either way. I would watch it provided it stopped before things got shitty with the book series. I think I'd rather she and her son focus on making this good than her churning out more novels. I'm not psyched about it though. Like I'm not dying (pun intended) to see what they do with it. I think she wants some Game of Thrones level mastery to resurrect (pun not as intended) the interest in the series. At least there's something more complete about her book series it wouldn't go off the rails because of outside influences. She's capable of doing that on her own.
Either way, I'm loving reading Interview now but I'm not sure if this forced downtime will lead me further in. I can rationalise the revisit given I know the people I tried to garner interest from won't be wrested from their beloved book series. But then I had a better book series to read as a teen than all y'all did.
*I keep finding out a whole bunch of people I think are older than me were born the same year, including her. So yeah, she really did get to mack on Brad Pitt at age 12.
I was in the middle of reading the Interview the book when I saw the movie. I could watch it alone at home on the condition I stopped it when the Bill was on, took the tape out and recorded that show. Only then could I finish watching the movie. And I think it was the goddamn Guns and Roses cover of Sympathy for the Devil that really riled me up, but I basically loved the movie. I was 14, didn't know dick about film, and was growing obsessed with vampires. The point was, Rice's brand were the definitive to me. They were original enough they didn't adhere to common myths. I still think her basic idea of them is still pretty cool, considering her lore has gone off the deep end.
But since then, the movie's gone from a love to a hate then to a love, back to an appreciation for what it was capable of achieving at the time. My brother told me stuff about it after he'd seen it in a theatre, his descriptions standing out to me as fascinating. Meanwhile, it's still riddled with issues. We couldn't have the cherub Armand represented as such, Antonio Banderas had to be brought in to play to the gothic aesthetic modern audiences comprehended, since the movie needed to have appeal outside the book. Louis's brother and his traumatic death are reduced to a dead mother and child Louis briefly mentions at the beginning to explain his malaise. The harrowing trip through Europe in search of other vampires is dropped. All of these decisions make sense. Casting Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt would've been for commercial reasons. Introducing Kirsten Dunst, a pre-teen* somehow managing to really embody Claudia from age five to her mental age of 70, you can't say that was a bad decision, she does the part justice. But it wasn't until many viewings later I realised she was faking playing the piano by lightly dancing her fingers over the keys. I don't think Cruise was playing, I'm sure he had a hand double, but you could cut away from Claudia's imitations and still make it convincing. They used animatronics to replicate Lestat's death, that look a lot less convincing now. The special effects haven't drastically aged but they're not up to today's standards. So now I have mixed feelings about it. I thought Rice loved it and contributed to the script, and was so overcome at the premier she was left giddy. Then later, I heard she hated it. Oh, and River Phoenix died and had to be replaced by Christian Slater, which again was a good choice but I think it's probably much older than the nameless boy Rice envisioned (later revealed to be Daniel in Queen of the Damned - his intro chapter referred to him as "the boy from Interview" and the penny failed to drop for me right away). I think I could watch it now and basically just be annoyed by its flaws more than its achievements. Now I'm rereading the book, most of the scenes depicted in the movie are in my mind's eye now. And that's not a bad thing.
I don't think she went overboard with descriptions, however I think this book was subjected to heavy editing that the later books really needed. I liked the Egypt mythology/origin explanation. I like we don't get this until book three. I think on its own, the first book could've been a simple masterpiece that needed to be left shrouded in mystery. I haven't read the original short story for years, I have it in the compendium piece which is a tome I have stashed in a box in a cupboard. It's probably online somewhere. That had a more comedic tone. I'm pissed I also can't find an older documentary about Rice which I have on VHS and remember way too succinctly since I watched it a heap of times. And I can't think of any comparable books to Interview, you could argue it has shades of Lolita but there's nothing overly grotesque about Louis's connection with Claudia. Once she has a woman's mind you get what's going on, if you're grossed out by it, you're missing the point. And if you didn't know who she represents in Rice's life, she makes less sense. I also have the graphic novel of Claudia's story which I've only glossed over. I tend to collect these books as gifts now and don't spend much time with them. (I could now I'm confined due to that virus people won't stfu about).
The Chronicles were the closest thing I had to an obsession with an IP. I could spend ages crapping on about the terrible adaptation of Queen of the Damned. I thought there was some series now she'd gotten back the rights but Hulu dumped it, so now it's being shopped as a bigger package along with the Mayfair series. So this could go either way. I would watch it provided it stopped before things got shitty with the book series. I think I'd rather she and her son focus on making this good than her churning out more novels. I'm not psyched about it though. Like I'm not dying (pun intended) to see what they do with it. I think she wants some Game of Thrones level mastery to resurrect (pun not as intended) the interest in the series. At least there's something more complete about her book series it wouldn't go off the rails because of outside influences. She's capable of doing that on her own.
Either way, I'm loving reading Interview now but I'm not sure if this forced downtime will lead me further in. I can rationalise the revisit given I know the people I tried to garner interest from won't be wrested from their beloved book series. But then I had a better book series to read as a teen than all y'all did.
*I keep finding out a whole bunch of people I think are older than me were born the same year, including her. So yeah, she really did get to mack on Brad Pitt at age 12.
Saturday, 28 March 2020
Community Vs Parks & Rec: The Reasons I Should Stay
I got another streaming service to watch Better Call Saul (one I'd had previously but ditched from lack of use) and forgot this had Parks and Rec, something I'd wanted to rewatch for a while. I didn't remember huge chunks, just key moments. And a lot of it was laugh out loud funny from the beginning. I think every character is lovable and fleshed out perfectly, there seemed to be genuine affection between the actors by the end of the show. I think that was what appealed to me over the Office or Always Sunny, since they appear to depend on more deplorable characters that you warm to much further down the track.
So when I was done, the service recommended Community, and I just clicked on it since I was like, yeah okay. I have it on DVD but that requires effort (which we need to exert now we're all trapped inside because of the virus). And I just wasn't digging it. I wasn't laughing, I was probably thinking too much of Dan and the fans and how I'm supposed to feel about the show now Harmontown is over. Going over old Harmontown shows is weirdly painful. Listening to the fans begging him to "stop talking" and risk being fired, and how much certain people believe they're the reason he was rehired, it's cringey. They're basically acting like that weird group of Firefly fans who believe they were the ones responsible for getting Serenity off the ground. The crew that awkwardly sang the theme to Joss at one convention that's on the DVD extras. (I heard they were from Perth, I can't find proof). And the issue is those people need more validation and assurance they matter to creators. I don't think they should be considered any more important than a casual fan who's come to the con for an autograph, or even someone who just enjoys the show. The internet's played a part in these people having intimate relationships with the creators of a show to the point they feel they're owed something. They're not. I don't know any Parks and Rec fans who call themselves the "real" insert character name here. Maybe they exist but having watched it again, even while napping, I've still found that more enjoyable than Community. I know the pilot was flat and it gathered its stride relatively quickly, I just wasn't sucked in for a new viewing. And Parks had more solid episodes in succession than Community did, it's a fact. When you have one notoriously bad season, and final season that's lacking and forced, as opposed to one shaky first season and then six solid ones, it's obvious which show is superior.
The fourth-wall breaking in Parks weirdly never gets old. They didn't break too far from the faux interview/fly on the wall format with the camera crew, you never meet this crew but you don't really question the straight-to-camera delivery. The drama towards the end of the series isn't that forced, pitting Ron and Lesley against each other still comes off as genuine. I don't remember really enjoying Community by the sixth season. I can live without a movie. There was just so much rabid, misguided love from the fans that made them act so entitled, they're not as bad as Rick and Morty fans, but they were pretty shocking. (I don't know the cross-over).
Maybe it's also because I know nothing personal about Amy Poehler, like whether she has a crazy sex fetish involving nylons and mannequin legs, or a drinking problem and chronically low self-esteem. I don't see how Rick and Morty fans who have no reference to Harmontown can claim they have a full, deep lore understanding of the show. The show being so much of its creators laid bare, sometimes it's great sometimes you wish you didn't know. Community may not have been as heavily slathered in references, it was still a part of Dan. I'm sure Parks was Poehler's love but there's something from everyone in that show. It didn't come off as too much of a vehicle for one person's opinion. It had its moments of this but it was subtle. Poehler also does more to prove women are funny, her sense of humour is less dark and more adorable but no less genuine (and throwing Megan Mullally to play against Nick Offerman didn't get tired either). I think every actor was given a chance to really shine. I know Community does too but you know as well as I do how painful Pierce is before he leaves, how much he slows the whole thing down whenever he's there. I don't really want to watch Community to see if it'll make me laugh more. I wasn't thinking of it while watching Parks. I was thinking of Parks while watching other shows.
To add to this, I finished the pilot and remembered the good stuff but yeah, I think Abed gets a bit much from time to time. And why did they make Britta gradually dumber by the end of the series. Like she was a child by the end when she's meant to be Winger's maturer counterpart. She kind of devolves while Annie inversely grows up. And Pierce doesn't get truly insufferable until further on. But I might stay now.
(PS Fuck watching anything new, when you're in lockdown with a mild existential depression, nostalgia is your best friend).
PPS: I stuck this out to watch with the fiancee while we continue to be relatively housebound and having someone unfamiliar helped me like it more and remember what I loved. Chevy still slows everything to a grinding halt. You can tell he was more pissed off in some of the bloopers. And the irony of him using the n-word to complain about his character becoming too racist was only something I recalled recently. Same time, it gets so hard for me knowing so much about Harmon and all the shit he complained about on the podcast not to say anything whenever a particular scene or character comes on. Like nobody in my friend group would ever fucking care about Dino's (Starburns') weird sex hang ups. Like you think you know trivia about a show? Try knowing intimate details about the creator and random cast members. But I'm still having fun. It's also kinda harder to binge without getting tired from laughing.
So when I was done, the service recommended Community, and I just clicked on it since I was like, yeah okay. I have it on DVD but that requires effort (which we need to exert now we're all trapped inside because of the virus). And I just wasn't digging it. I wasn't laughing, I was probably thinking too much of Dan and the fans and how I'm supposed to feel about the show now Harmontown is over. Going over old Harmontown shows is weirdly painful. Listening to the fans begging him to "stop talking" and risk being fired, and how much certain people believe they're the reason he was rehired, it's cringey. They're basically acting like that weird group of Firefly fans who believe they were the ones responsible for getting Serenity off the ground. The crew that awkwardly sang the theme to Joss at one convention that's on the DVD extras. (I heard they were from Perth, I can't find proof). And the issue is those people need more validation and assurance they matter to creators. I don't think they should be considered any more important than a casual fan who's come to the con for an autograph, or even someone who just enjoys the show. The internet's played a part in these people having intimate relationships with the creators of a show to the point they feel they're owed something. They're not. I don't know any Parks and Rec fans who call themselves the "real" insert character name here. Maybe they exist but having watched it again, even while napping, I've still found that more enjoyable than Community. I know the pilot was flat and it gathered its stride relatively quickly, I just wasn't sucked in for a new viewing. And Parks had more solid episodes in succession than Community did, it's a fact. When you have one notoriously bad season, and final season that's lacking and forced, as opposed to one shaky first season and then six solid ones, it's obvious which show is superior.
The fourth-wall breaking in Parks weirdly never gets old. They didn't break too far from the faux interview/fly on the wall format with the camera crew, you never meet this crew but you don't really question the straight-to-camera delivery. The drama towards the end of the series isn't that forced, pitting Ron and Lesley against each other still comes off as genuine. I don't remember really enjoying Community by the sixth season. I can live without a movie. There was just so much rabid, misguided love from the fans that made them act so entitled, they're not as bad as Rick and Morty fans, but they were pretty shocking. (I don't know the cross-over).
Maybe it's also because I know nothing personal about Amy Poehler, like whether she has a crazy sex fetish involving nylons and mannequin legs, or a drinking problem and chronically low self-esteem. I don't see how Rick and Morty fans who have no reference to Harmontown can claim they have a full, deep lore understanding of the show. The show being so much of its creators laid bare, sometimes it's great sometimes you wish you didn't know. Community may not have been as heavily slathered in references, it was still a part of Dan. I'm sure Parks was Poehler's love but there's something from everyone in that show. It didn't come off as too much of a vehicle for one person's opinion. It had its moments of this but it was subtle. Poehler also does more to prove women are funny, her sense of humour is less dark and more adorable but no less genuine (and throwing Megan Mullally to play against Nick Offerman didn't get tired either). I think every actor was given a chance to really shine. I know Community does too but you know as well as I do how painful Pierce is before he leaves, how much he slows the whole thing down whenever he's there. I don't really want to watch Community to see if it'll make me laugh more. I wasn't thinking of it while watching Parks. I was thinking of Parks while watching other shows.
To add to this, I finished the pilot and remembered the good stuff but yeah, I think Abed gets a bit much from time to time. And why did they make Britta gradually dumber by the end of the series. Like she was a child by the end when she's meant to be Winger's maturer counterpart. She kind of devolves while Annie inversely grows up. And Pierce doesn't get truly insufferable until further on. But I might stay now.
(PS Fuck watching anything new, when you're in lockdown with a mild existential depression, nostalgia is your best friend).
PPS: I stuck this out to watch with the fiancee while we continue to be relatively housebound and having someone unfamiliar helped me like it more and remember what I loved. Chevy still slows everything to a grinding halt. You can tell he was more pissed off in some of the bloopers. And the irony of him using the n-word to complain about his character becoming too racist was only something I recalled recently. Same time, it gets so hard for me knowing so much about Harmon and all the shit he complained about on the podcast not to say anything whenever a particular scene or character comes on. Like nobody in my friend group would ever fucking care about Dino's (Starburns') weird sex hang ups. Like you think you know trivia about a show? Try knowing intimate details about the creator and random cast members. But I'm still having fun. It's also kinda harder to binge without getting tired from laughing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)