I'm more than halfway through the second season of "Lost" now. It's kind of bugging me how so many of the characters have behaved out of... character... all season. I don't get it. And I'm getting tired of the moony-eyed stares and people shooting people randomly and multiple inexplicable plotlines still hanging unexplained and muddled... I completely understand why my brothers both gave up after the second season. I will continue on, though, as recommended by so many fans. I will give it a fighting chance by sticking with it into the third season. It had better improve, though...
I still like the characters and the story is still mostly compelling. In fact, the show reminds me of a rather long novel. There are sections that make me have to keep reading, and sections that are weak and less interesting. I keep coming back for more with the hope that it will return to the enjoyment of the first few chapters...
Monday, September 5, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
Obsessed much?
I've been watching an average of two episodes each day. I can't stop, because I need to know what comes next. It's compulsive... I'm addicted... I can't stop!! I'm about 4 episodes into season 2 and although I wasn't as taken with this season as the first, it is still very compelling TV. I care about these characters and I HAVE to see what happens next. This must have been extremely frustrating to fans of the show during its run, because they couldn't watch 2-3 episodes in one sitting (as I can... while doing chores, but still...). They had to wait a week between episodes and months after a season-ending cliffhanger. Oy. I would have given up. :) So, although I'm not nuts about Netflix raising their prices, I'm still a fan of theirs for having all of "Lost" on streaming for me. Now... do I have time for just one more???
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
"Lost" and Found
Dare I write down who I think will be the next to die? I am trying not to assume anything by the fact that certain characters aren't featured in photos from future seasons. I am also trying very hard not to look online for spoilers... I'll be good.
My Ipod Made Me Do It.
Today my ipod took me to the past with the music of Michael Jackson. I have a few of his albums from when I was young, I don't really like his last few, but I have a soft spot for "Off the Wall", "Bad" and especially "Thriller".
I was 7 years old when "Off the Wall" was released, and I didn't become aware of it until years later, when in 1984, "Thriller" hit the radio stations and tape (yes, children, tape) players of my friends and sister. I was 12 years old. That's the time I began my pop culture education, probably like most of you. I hadn't really been into music before that, just listening to my dad's records, mostly ABBA, Herman's Hermits and whatever he had on the record player.
When my sister bought "Off the Wall", we must have only played a couple of the songs over and over. I am not a big disco fan, and much of that album is deeply disco-style. I do remember "Don't Stop Till You Get Enough", nearly word for word, as well as "Rock With You" and "Off the Wall". These were songs my sister and I probably sang along to and really loved. But nothing came close to how much I loved the album "Thriller".
Michael Jackson led the way for other artists with his smooth transition from the disco of the 70's to the rock/pop of the 80's. It's very different from what Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Doors, etc. were singing during those years. It's completely different from hard bands like Rush, AC/DC, Kiss, etc. as well. His music has a definitive "pop" feeling to it. It's also very different from the 50's and 60's bubbly popular music. It was unique (in my opinion) and almost every teenager in the 80's embraced it, sending "Thriller" rocketing to #1. We loved it. The album uses various musical styles, including what could be called "post-disco", in "PYT", R&B, but mostly pop.
The title song on the album "Thriller" is unique, nothing like it has ever come along that is quite as effective, and the music video, which we all tuned in to MTV to watch. It was mesmerizing, scary, and very fun. I loved it! I even went so far as to record it (yes, children, you used to record TV) on the VCR (you remember those, right?) and play the zombie dance sequence over and over to learn the moves.
The best memories, though, are of sitting in the bedroom I shared with my older sister and listening to the tape over and over again. I remember that with such a warm feeling of camaraderie and friendship with her. It wasn't too many years later that she went to High School and we decided we didn't much like each other any more, so I'm so glad we had those years together, sharing music. (We are now very good friends again, lest you think we never got over our teenage nonsense.) She had a box of memorabilia that she stored under her bed-- a couple of commemorative pepsi cans, magazines, etc. (I wonder where that stuff went?) that I used to covet.
I also liked "Bad" (1987) quite a bit, though it never captured my heart the way "Thriller" did. It was good, but it didn't have the sweetness of "Thriller". It does, however, have some excellent dance numbers and in the show number "Smooth Criminal", it's obvious that Michael was enjoying living out an old-time movie fantasy, so it's fun to watch and listen to.
I never fully believed he had a skin condition, though I suppose it was probably true. It was very odd to watch this man who was born black with normal features morph into a pale, plastic, broken-beaked man. His nose became a tragedy of plastic surgery, and the rest of his face was incredibly strange as well. It was heartbreaking that the young man I thought was so cute in the early 80's had disappeared, mutilated by well-paid plastic surgeons (not that I see him as a victim of his surgeons, though- it was a tragic addiction that I watched in horror over the years.)
It was very sad for me when Jackson started acting bizarrely (well, more bizarrely) in the late 80's and 90's, taking vacations with Macauley Culkin (who was still quite young), showing his Neverland Ranch (which was kind of fascinating in a sad, I-wish-I-were-a-child way), supposedly fathering a few oddly-named children, marrying and divorcing the daughter of Elvis Presley, marrying again, divorcing again, and of course, being accused of child molestation. He was never convicted, but no one ever looked at him the same. It was very sad; regardless of whether he did it or not, people were hurt and his life and career would never quite be the same. It's possible he was guilty, it's also possible that these people saw an opportunity for a settlement from one of the wealthiest people in America and jumped on it. I think he was looney, but I don't dare really even have an opinion as to his guilt.
I will always love those 80's albums by Michael. I was sorry he died the way he did, so young and leaving three children behind, but in the end, it's probably just as well. Would his face have deteriorated until we were watching a skeletal MJ sing and dance and try to defend unusual behavior? Would he have had more legal trouble? They say he was out of money; his career was declining; he was becoming not much more than a sideshow freak. Then again, maybe he's still alive and living in South America with Elvis...
When my sister bought "Off the Wall", we must have only played a couple of the songs over and over. I am not a big disco fan, and much of that album is deeply disco-style. I do remember "Don't Stop Till You Get Enough", nearly word for word, as well as "Rock With You" and "Off the Wall". These were songs my sister and I probably sang along to and really loved. But nothing came close to how much I loved the album "Thriller".
Michael Jackson led the way for other artists with his smooth transition from the disco of the 70's to the rock/pop of the 80's. It's very different from what Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Doors, etc. were singing during those years. It's completely different from hard bands like Rush, AC/DC, Kiss, etc. as well. His music has a definitive "pop" feeling to it. It's also very different from the 50's and 60's bubbly popular music. It was unique (in my opinion) and almost every teenager in the 80's embraced it, sending "Thriller" rocketing to #1. We loved it. The album uses various musical styles, including what could be called "post-disco", in "PYT", R&B, but mostly pop.
The title song on the album "Thriller" is unique, nothing like it has ever come along that is quite as effective, and the music video, which we all tuned in to MTV to watch. It was mesmerizing, scary, and very fun. I loved it! I even went so far as to record it (yes, children, you used to record TV) on the VCR (you remember those, right?) and play the zombie dance sequence over and over to learn the moves.
The best memories, though, are of sitting in the bedroom I shared with my older sister and listening to the tape over and over again. I remember that with such a warm feeling of camaraderie and friendship with her. It wasn't too many years later that she went to High School and we decided we didn't much like each other any more, so I'm so glad we had those years together, sharing music. (We are now very good friends again, lest you think we never got over our teenage nonsense.) She had a box of memorabilia that she stored under her bed-- a couple of commemorative pepsi cans, magazines, etc. (I wonder where that stuff went?) that I used to covet.
I also liked "Bad" (1987) quite a bit, though it never captured my heart the way "Thriller" did. It was good, but it didn't have the sweetness of "Thriller". It does, however, have some excellent dance numbers and in the show number "Smooth Criminal", it's obvious that Michael was enjoying living out an old-time movie fantasy, so it's fun to watch and listen to.
I never fully believed he had a skin condition, though I suppose it was probably true. It was very odd to watch this man who was born black with normal features morph into a pale, plastic, broken-beaked man. His nose became a tragedy of plastic surgery, and the rest of his face was incredibly strange as well. It was heartbreaking that the young man I thought was so cute in the early 80's had disappeared, mutilated by well-paid plastic surgeons (not that I see him as a victim of his surgeons, though- it was a tragic addiction that I watched in horror over the years.)
It was very sad for me when Jackson started acting bizarrely (well, more bizarrely) in the late 80's and 90's, taking vacations with Macauley Culkin (who was still quite young), showing his Neverland Ranch (which was kind of fascinating in a sad, I-wish-I-were-a-child way), supposedly fathering a few oddly-named children, marrying and divorcing the daughter of Elvis Presley, marrying again, divorcing again, and of course, being accused of child molestation. He was never convicted, but no one ever looked at him the same. It was very sad; regardless of whether he did it or not, people were hurt and his life and career would never quite be the same. It's possible he was guilty, it's also possible that these people saw an opportunity for a settlement from one of the wealthiest people in America and jumped on it. I think he was looney, but I don't dare really even have an opinion as to his guilt.
I will always love those 80's albums by Michael. I was sorry he died the way he did, so young and leaving three children behind, but in the end, it's probably just as well. Would his face have deteriorated until we were watching a skeletal MJ sing and dance and try to defend unusual behavior? Would he have had more legal trouble? They say he was out of money; his career was declining; he was becoming not much more than a sideshow freak. Then again, maybe he's still alive and living in South America with Elvis...
Saturday, August 13, 2011
If I don't return in three days, send help...
Yesterday, I had my first day of my new job. I will be working at the local city library, as a technician. Whatever that means. :) I will soon find out, I'm sure. Much to my amusement, when the other new employee and I met with the three heads of departments today, in a meeting peppered with laughter and humor, we were told that our first assignment is to go home and start watching "Lost". Apparently, among many of the library staff, that show and "Dexter" are extremely popular. Steve, the IT guy and supervisor, said, "Everyone here either loves "Lost" or hates it. Those who hate it haven't watched it, they just get sick of hearing about it."
And I've decided I should probably check out the show, so that when my co-workers exchange meaningful glances at certain words (or numbers...) then I won't feel... well... lost.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Here's lookin' at you, Netflix.
We'll always have Paris.
Well, sort of. As anyone with a Netflix account or a computer or an ear probably knows by now, Netflix is raising prices on the accounts of its current customers. Not only are they raising them, but it's a 60% increase, for people like me, who have streaming and single-DVD service. Right now I pay about $10 a month for both. At the end of August, Netflix would like to begin charging me $16.
I realize it's only $6. I recognize that is a small amount of money and it isn't such a bad deal, but I am bothered by the arrogance of the company. Jesse Becker, blogger for blog.netflix.com wrote this about the decision to un-bundle DVDs and streaming: "At the time, we didn’t anticipate offering DVD only plans. Since then we have realized that there is still a very large continuing demand for DVDs both from our existing members as well as non-members. Given the long life we think DVDs by mail will have, treating DVDs as a $2 add on to our unlimited streaming plan neither makes great financial sense nor satisfies people who just want DVDs".
This quote makes me crazy. They are using "great financial sense" as an excuse to raise prices on a service they "didn't anticipate" would be as popular as it is? What? When a pen company sells a lot of purple pens to regular customers, more than they anticipated selling, do they then raise prices on those pens for their current customers, justifying it by saying that they didn't realize those purple pens would be so popular? That it's just good fiscal sense to charge you more for something we've been providing at an affordable rate for so long? That bundling purple and green pens isn't a good deal for the company any more, so we're going to split the deal and charge you 60% more if you want to continue getting purple?
Stupid move, Netflix. As evidenced by the 5,000 comments (this maxed out the allowable comments, and you can no longer add your thoughts, but most of the people commenting hit it on the nose anyway.), most of their customers are incensed by this. Many are promising to cancel, come August 31st.
Had they come out with "we will now be streaming more new releases" and given us a list of newly added and upcoming shows to be added to streaming, it wouldn't have been so bad. Had they said, "we'll still offer a bundle price of $12" or something reasonable, it wouldn't have been as painful. But this is not the case. Less and less of what I actually want to watch are available to stream, and sometimes I've been partly through a TV series when Netflix decides to pull it-- leaving me only the option to wait for the DVDs to come.
I don't want to see Netflix put out of business. I have really enjoyed what they offer, recommending it to friends and family and even quitting our satellite because we knew we could count on Netflix for our entertainment. I just want them to realize this was a stupid move. They raised the price too high, too fast and with a stupid justification for doing so. Basically, they are just saying, "We realized we could make a ton more money (60% more) for our service. So we want to." I am a fan of capitalism, on the whole. I like the idea that the market decides how much companies can charge people for products and services. I don't like greed, however. It makes me angry. This just reeks of greed.
I will be canceling my DVD service from Netflix. Redbox, my dad's collection, my friends and families' collections and purchasing on Amazon will have to suffice for those many, many shows not streamed on Netflix. There are other ways to see what I want to see. Though, I will be sorry that the ease of my queue will be gone. That the fun surprise of the movie arriving in the mail will be over. We will be keeping our streaming, for now. Our children use it a lot, though, with school (and the new TV season) starting, they may not use it as much, and maybe I'll cancel that in September as well. We shall see.
To give credit where credit is due, the image above is from the following location: http://netflixartkomenda.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
British comedy, nerds and computers.
My dad recently told me about a TV show that I could watch on my Netflix streaming, that he said he and my step-mom love. He said they have laughed out loud at things in every episode, even on multiple viewings, so I thought I'd better check it out. I'm so glad I did!
There are three main characters, Roy, played by Chris O'Dowd (love that Irish accent!!), Moss, played by Richard Ayoade, and Jen, played by Katherine Parkinson. Roy and Moss make up the IT department, with Jen as the "Relationship Manager" and their supervisor, in the company 'Reynholm Industries'. They occupy the cluttered, dark basement (relegated there, because no one cares about IT), only to surface on the upper floors for computer repair calls.
Roy's character wears funny t-shirts, such as a black one with the word "meh." in white on it, and various techy-type shirts. He's slobby, doesn't like to eat healthy or exercise, and like any good computer geek, is too clingy and emotional, doesn't know how to deal with other people (especially "manly" men) and gets himself into all kinds of awkward situations. I liked him a lot.
Moss, on the other hand, took some getting used to. I felt like Ayoade was too stiff, too "I'm now delivering my lines" in his acting at first. A few episodes in, however, I got used to his style and came to really like Moss. Moss wears a shirt and tie every day, cusses with words like "flipping" and is socially backwards. He is hilarious! He is also naive and brilliant.
Jen is pretty funny, she has a lot of great physical comedy bits, and she doesn't know a thing about computers, so what she's doing in IT is anyone's guess.
One of the funniest episodes had Jen convincing Moss and Roy to write a speech for her to give after she's been elected Employee of the Month. They didn't want to, feeling resentful that she was nominated rather then either of them, but Roy convinces Moss that they could write anything in the speech and Jen wouldn't know the difference-- she works in IT, but knows absolutely nothing about computers! They write a funny speech, which she doesn't understand, but the best part is they give her a small black box with a little red light on top and tell her it's the internet, and that they got special permission for her to use it as a visual aid in her speech, but to be very careful with it, because if anything happens to it, the world will fall apart-- the internet will be lost! Instead of laughing her off the stage, however, the other Reynolm Industries employees believe her! Roy and Moss are outraged, they can't believe that no one in the room knows enough about computers to know it's a joke. It's a great scene, with a very funny ending.
Another great running gag is that every time they answer the phone, they say, "IT, have you tried turning it off and then on again?"
I recommend this show with a few caveats. It is British comedy, and on Netflix, not all the cuss words are beeped out, so there are some s- and f- words. Again, it is British, so there are also a lot of naughty situations and jokes as well, but no more than our American "The Office" and probably a lot less than "Big Bang Theory", of which this show is reminiscent.
There are three main characters, Roy, played by Chris O'Dowd (love that Irish accent!!), Moss, played by Richard Ayoade, and Jen, played by Katherine Parkinson. Roy and Moss make up the IT department, with Jen as the "Relationship Manager" and their supervisor, in the company 'Reynholm Industries'. They occupy the cluttered, dark basement (relegated there, because no one cares about IT), only to surface on the upper floors for computer repair calls.
Roy's character wears funny t-shirts, such as a black one with the word "meh." in white on it, and various techy-type shirts. He's slobby, doesn't like to eat healthy or exercise, and like any good computer geek, is too clingy and emotional, doesn't know how to deal with other people (especially "manly" men) and gets himself into all kinds of awkward situations. I liked him a lot.
Moss, on the other hand, took some getting used to. I felt like Ayoade was too stiff, too "I'm now delivering my lines" in his acting at first. A few episodes in, however, I got used to his style and came to really like Moss. Moss wears a shirt and tie every day, cusses with words like "flipping" and is socially backwards. He is hilarious! He is also naive and brilliant.
Jen is pretty funny, she has a lot of great physical comedy bits, and she doesn't know a thing about computers, so what she's doing in IT is anyone's guess.
One of the funniest episodes had Jen convincing Moss and Roy to write a speech for her to give after she's been elected Employee of the Month. They didn't want to, feeling resentful that she was nominated rather then either of them, but Roy convinces Moss that they could write anything in the speech and Jen wouldn't know the difference-- she works in IT, but knows absolutely nothing about computers! They write a funny speech, which she doesn't understand, but the best part is they give her a small black box with a little red light on top and tell her it's the internet, and that they got special permission for her to use it as a visual aid in her speech, but to be very careful with it, because if anything happens to it, the world will fall apart-- the internet will be lost! Instead of laughing her off the stage, however, the other Reynolm Industries employees believe her! Roy and Moss are outraged, they can't believe that no one in the room knows enough about computers to know it's a joke. It's a great scene, with a very funny ending.
Another great running gag is that every time they answer the phone, they say, "IT, have you tried turning it off and then on again?"
I recommend this show with a few caveats. It is British comedy, and on Netflix, not all the cuss words are beeped out, so there are some s- and f- words. Again, it is British, so there are also a lot of naughty situations and jokes as well, but no more than our American "The Office" and probably a lot less than "Big Bang Theory", of which this show is reminiscent.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Cowboys, Aliens and Indians
The movie, as you probably know, is a fascinating blend of the science fiction and western genres, based on a comic and graphic novel, starring Daniel Craig (I really enjoyed him as James Bond) and Harrison Ford (who doesn't like him?) as old west near-stereotypes. Craig's character awakens in the desert, not sure who he is, and after easily dispatching a trio of bandits, makes his way into the nearest town. Ford's character doesn't make an appearance right away, but when he does, he is the initial antagonist to Craig's protagonist. He is a bully, a rich, stubborn, mean old man and it takes the alien invasion and kidnapping of his son to change his ways.
I liked the story, even the parts that were simple or reflective of previous films. I read here about the detail that went into the clothing and guns and some other interesting facts about the film's casting and background. Check it out.
I liked the involvement of the Native American Indians, it was (of course) a bit contrived, but it would have to be... there are aliens in the movie!
My husband and I had a couple of amused questions during the alien attack scenes. Mine was "Why are aliens always able to move so much faster than humans? And horses?" and his was "And why do aliens always come with so much goo?" The aliens in this film were reminiscent of the creatures in the 1979 movie "Alien", but unique. They had an inner set of hands that came out of the chest (where a large two-chambered heart visibly beat), dripping with slime. Of course, they bled green and screeched and popped up unexpectedly (yes, I leaped a few inches more than once...). So, they were a bit cliche, but I was okay with that.
The movie was good, but I think I prefer super heroes to aliens... then again, I do like Craig... wonder when they'll find him a latex suit. His pants in "Cowboys and Aliens" were nearly as tight as a Superman or Spiderman costume...
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Summer=MOVIES!!!
I have seen two movies in the theater in the last 2 weeks-- that's a new record, I think! Here are my thoughts on them:
Pirates of the Caribbean 4 (something about "stranger tides")
I went into this movie with very low expectations. Let me go back a little and explain myself. I loved the first Pirates movie, it was fun, swashbuckling, Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom goodness. It also made me crave going to Disneyland.
I really loved the second film, which I saw 3 times in the theater-- also unprecedented. It was such fun to watch and funny and the special effects were amazing, and the music was breath-taking and the story was even good!
I went to the third film VERY excited to see it, with way-too-high expectations. I was severely disappointed. It had some good things, but I thought the whole Calypso storyline was stupid, and I DESPISED the ending... stupid Flying Dutchman... anyway, I didn't like it very much. I only saw it the one time, until a few weeks ago when we had a Pirates marathon in advance of seeing the newest installment in the film series.
Going in, I thought, "Well, I'll give it a look, hopefully it won't feel like a waste of my money..." but I was pleasantly surprised. I really enjoyed Penelope Cruz as Blackbeard's daughter. I loved the Ian McShane as Blackbeard, he was excellent-- perfectly cast. I liked Barbossa's storyline, his affiliation with the British Navy and where that went. The mermaids were fascinating-- vampirish beauties with magical tears. I did miss the old crew of the Black Pearl. The only one who returned (besides Jack Sparrow, obviously) was his first mate, Gibbs. All in all, a good, stand-alone movie. Lots of fun!
Today I went to see "Thor" with my sisters.
It was also very, very good. I am not a comic book fan, and I don't even pretend this is the best movie out there, but it was a lot of fun to watch and, I think, VERY well directed. For one thing, when the film flips from Earth to Asgard, it is perfect. I wasn't left feeling like I wanted more of one or the other storyline, nor did I feel like the scenes were too short. It was very well cast as well, I haven't really enjoyed Natalie Portman since her dull, boring performance in the Star Wars movies, but she was cute, funny, honest and likeable as Thor's mortal love interest, Jane. The script was tight, the acting believable and the direction (by Kenneth Branagh) was clean and moved the story along quickly. I've always liked Branagh.
My one complaint about this movie (and I know, DC Comic fans probably have more than one) was that Thor's change from an arrogant, loud, war-seeking brute to a peaceful, loving, giving, selfless man was a little too fast. That being said, however, if they had taken time to have his character development move slowly, the film would have been too long and the action scenes too far apart. It's fine as it is, for what it is supposed to be: an action-super-hero movie with some seriously blue, blue eyes... Probably digitally enhanced... My brother in law was teasing us about 3 married women going to see "Thor" together, but we really didn't go to look at Chris Helmsworth. I don't really know that I find him all that attractive, but he was great as Thor.
It took me a while to wrap my head around the whole DC Comic character of Thor, because I had heard some small amount of Norse mythology in my youth, and I couldn't quite reconcile in my mind a God becoming a super hero. But it worked. It worked very well. For me. Like I said, I'm not really a comic book reader, so I didn't have a lot of background on this story, so I enjoyed the film a lot!
Pirates of the Caribbean 4 (something about "stranger tides")
I went into this movie with very low expectations. Let me go back a little and explain myself. I loved the first Pirates movie, it was fun, swashbuckling, Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom goodness. It also made me crave going to Disneyland.
I really loved the second film, which I saw 3 times in the theater-- also unprecedented. It was such fun to watch and funny and the special effects were amazing, and the music was breath-taking and the story was even good!
I went to the third film VERY excited to see it, with way-too-high expectations. I was severely disappointed. It had some good things, but I thought the whole Calypso storyline was stupid, and I DESPISED the ending... stupid Flying Dutchman... anyway, I didn't like it very much. I only saw it the one time, until a few weeks ago when we had a Pirates marathon in advance of seeing the newest installment in the film series.
Going in, I thought, "Well, I'll give it a look, hopefully it won't feel like a waste of my money..." but I was pleasantly surprised. I really enjoyed Penelope Cruz as Blackbeard's daughter. I loved the Ian McShane as Blackbeard, he was excellent-- perfectly cast. I liked Barbossa's storyline, his affiliation with the British Navy and where that went. The mermaids were fascinating-- vampirish beauties with magical tears. I did miss the old crew of the Black Pearl. The only one who returned (besides Jack Sparrow, obviously) was his first mate, Gibbs. All in all, a good, stand-alone movie. Lots of fun!
Today I went to see "Thor" with my sisters.
My one complaint about this movie (and I know, DC Comic fans probably have more than one) was that Thor's change from an arrogant, loud, war-seeking brute to a peaceful, loving, giving, selfless man was a little too fast. That being said, however, if they had taken time to have his character development move slowly, the film would have been too long and the action scenes too far apart. It's fine as it is, for what it is supposed to be: an action-super-hero movie with some seriously blue, blue eyes... Probably digitally enhanced... My brother in law was teasing us about 3 married women going to see "Thor" together, but we really didn't go to look at Chris Helmsworth. I don't really know that I find him all that attractive, but he was great as Thor.
It took me a while to wrap my head around the whole DC Comic character of Thor, because I had heard some small amount of Norse mythology in my youth, and I couldn't quite reconcile in my mind a God becoming a super hero. But it worked. It worked very well. For me. Like I said, I'm not really a comic book reader, so I didn't have a lot of background on this story, so I enjoyed the film a lot!
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Food similes, spoilers, TV and other nonsense.
Most of the time, the TV episodes and movies I watch slide across my subconscious like melted butter-- they slide across and fall off and don't stick. So it's a pleasant surprise when one sticks. Like a marshmallow. This week, I watched the season finale of one of my favorite shows: ABC's Castle.
Over the last 3 seasons, I have enjoyed watching Nathan Fillion spar with his co-star, Stana Katic as author Richard Castle, and homicide detective Kate Beckett. He is charming, funny, handsome, and compelling onscreen. I have always liked him, so this show was easy to watch, but it has turned into quite a good TV show, as well. I like the characters, and the actors (with the exception of the police captain) are all quite good. Suspending reality, Castle follows Beckett around as she solves murders, supposedly to feed his muse so he can write crime novels. Their relationship has become complicated, however, as they are both crazy about each other, but she keeps him at arms length, the timing is never quite right, etc.-- pretty much standard love-interest fodder for prime time TV show characters. I have enjoyed the developing relationship quite a lot, familiar formula or not, and I was looking forward to this finale, thinking surely this will be a game-changer for the two of them. It certainly was.
I don't want to issue a spoiler alert, so I won't tell about what happens, but it was dramatic, compelling, and had me locked on the screen right up until the very end. What bothered me at that "very end", however, was the back-to-basics end-of-season cliff-hanger. OY! I feel like I've seen it before, done this all before and didn't expect that again. Which I guess is a good thing, that it surprised me, but it's one of those obvious situations that would end the show if it isn't resolved in a certain way, blah blah blah... I kind of hate that...
I will watch in the fall, happy to see the situation resolved, anxious to see how it will be resolved, and to revisit these characters I like so much again. But I have a feeling I know how it will go.
Okay, SPOILER ALERT. I can't continue writing this without telling a few things.
Beckett gets shot in the last scene, and Castle (finally) holds her and tells her he loves her, as her eyes close and the scene goes black. Here's what I predict will happen in the fall: First of all, she will be in the hospital, coma, maybe, but at least in a hospital bed. Castle will be there, and when she wakes up, he'll hesitate to tell her again that he loves her, and as he's waffling, her "boyfriend" will arrive, sweep her into his arms and blah blah blah, you know the rest... so we have another season of Castle and Beckett not admitting what they feel and the sexual tension can build some more. We'll see...
I hope they prove me wrong and do something new and original. What I would love to see would be Beckett coming to in the ambulance, Castle holding her and she grabs him in a kiss; they profess their love, she's lucid and knows what happened, they get her to the hospital where she is admitted for emergency surgery, etc. etc...
I know that in the past it's been scary for shows to have the two leads actually get together. There have been many shows that having this occur, but smart writers manage to give the viewers what they want (i.e., Jim and Pam finally get married, etc.) and still have good tension in the writing. I hope this is what they do with Castle.
I don't want to issue a spoiler alert, so I won't tell about what happens, but it was dramatic, compelling, and had me locked on the screen right up until the very end. What bothered me at that "very end", however, was the back-to-basics end-of-season cliff-hanger. OY! I feel like I've seen it before, done this all before and didn't expect that again. Which I guess is a good thing, that it surprised me, but it's one of those obvious situations that would end the show if it isn't resolved in a certain way, blah blah blah... I kind of hate that...
I will watch in the fall, happy to see the situation resolved, anxious to see how it will be resolved, and to revisit these characters I like so much again. But I have a feeling I know how it will go.
Okay, SPOILER ALERT. I can't continue writing this without telling a few things.
Beckett gets shot in the last scene, and Castle (finally) holds her and tells her he loves her, as her eyes close and the scene goes black. Here's what I predict will happen in the fall: First of all, she will be in the hospital, coma, maybe, but at least in a hospital bed. Castle will be there, and when she wakes up, he'll hesitate to tell her again that he loves her, and as he's waffling, her "boyfriend" will arrive, sweep her into his arms and blah blah blah, you know the rest... so we have another season of Castle and Beckett not admitting what they feel and the sexual tension can build some more. We'll see...
I hope they prove me wrong and do something new and original. What I would love to see would be Beckett coming to in the ambulance, Castle holding her and she grabs him in a kiss; they profess their love, she's lucid and knows what happened, they get her to the hospital where she is admitted for emergency surgery, etc. etc...
I know that in the past it's been scary for shows to have the two leads actually get together. There have been many shows that having this occur, but smart writers manage to give the viewers what they want (i.e., Jim and Pam finally get married, etc.) and still have good tension in the writing. I hope this is what they do with Castle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)