90210

Turns out the CW is rehashing an old, popular television series, Beverly HIlls, 90210, and calling it 90210. Unfortunately, they did this without completely thinking this one through, as they're only now starting to realize that what might have been a really popular show in the past does not translate to a really popular show in the present. First off, the cadre of people who loved the show has grown up. The people they are trying to attract for the show are young people who have never, or rarely, ever seen the show, and certainly never watched it while it was airing. So, you don't have a new generation of people just dying to know whta happened to Dylan and others (I think that was one of the characters...to be honest, I never watched it, so I'm just going on memory of a show that aired during my time but never attracted me).

So, CW is now just realizing it needs to attract young people to its show. Then, once they realized this was not going to be an easy task because unlike the old 90210, this show is competing directly against some pretty popular shows that do exactly what their show is going to try to do. First off, you have shows like Gossip Girl that seem to attract that demographic they are seeking, and unlike the past when Beverly Hills, 90210 aired, you have a ton of reality shows that ironically have the exact plot lines that you'd get in a 90210 show (that's kind of what made those reality shows where people live in the same building for a year so attractive).

Therefore, CW is trying to attract its old cadre of fans by bringing back some of the heroes of the old show. They say the show will be about both the kids and the adults, unlike last time when it was just about the kids. Well, I got news for them, but that's a really bad idea. The show takes place around a high school and involves very, very wealthy kids who seem to have the world handed to them on a silver plate. That means that in order to really place an old character into this environment, they have to do what they're planning to do: Make them a teacher. Now, I don't know about you, but if I was a fan of the old show where it was all about one-upping the others and showing how wealthy you are, coming back to a show where you're now a high school teacher seems like a pretty low blow for your character. In other words, you didn't make it big, you weren't the great success you were planning to be, but you're in one of the most disrespected occupations in US history. You're a high school teacher. Even if actors came back as city leaders, it woiuld still be akin to watching someone play one of the joke leaders in Weeds, where Kevin Nealon probably has mastered that role of someone in city government who really shouldn't be there.

So, what's to see in 90210 that's going to attract anyoine? Literally, they're selling the idea on the actors/actresses coming back without realizing that people aren't there to see the actors, but to see the characters, and if those characters are placed in the positions that they're already claiming, they're going to have a hard time selling this show.

I'm not saying they can't succeed, but they have a lot of work ahead of them. What they really need to do is focus on the question: Why would someone in high school TODAY feel a desire to watch this show? And what makes this show any better than the numerous alternatives that are already available?

Stumble It!

Turns out TV stars don't actually watch TV themselves

The CNN story can be found here.

I remember when I was sending out short stories, and every now and then some magazine I sent a short story to would send me a nasty letter, stating that they have no incentive to publish me if I don't actually subscribe to their particular publication. Some years later, I came to the conclusion that actually subscribing to their publications didn't EVER win me a publishing success, so I decided they could fend for themselves like every other magazine out there. I'm a writer, not a subscriber. And pretty much the ENTIRE writing population tends to feel the same way.

That's kind of what came to mind when I read this article that indicates that TV stars don't actually watch television. I don't mean just their own shows, but ANY television. Supposedly, they're above television, and they don't want to be caught in any circles that might hint they're part of the low brow Americans who would be stupid enough to admit they watch television. This would be more like me stating that not only don't I read a particular magazine, but I don't read at all, because I wouldn't want anyone to think I was stupid enough to be caught reading ANYTHING.

And supposedly, TV stars don't care. They want us to watch their shows, but they don't "have the time" to watch television themselves. There's some kind of communication paradigm here that needs exploitation, but as I'm an unemployed writer these days, I'll have to leave that to the currently being educated folk.

Stumble It!

Star Wars and the Wrong Direction of Storytelling

Star Wars used to be a great franchise that told a great story that caused its fans to really examine and explore the ideas of good and evil. The first three movies (the original three) really took that exploration and exploded in a great way for all of the fans. Sure, good triumphed over evil, but evil was REALLY evil, and you knew it.

Then these three prequels came along that told the story of Anakin Skywalker (Darth Vader), and to be honest, other than the moment where he becomes Vader, the three movies are really lame and pretty much destroy the very foundation of the mysticism behind Star Wars. The Force, an ever-present, omnipotent fabric of dimensional existence quickly gave way to a genetic defect (at least that's how they explained the Force with the young Anakin Skywalker..."he's got lots of mytowhoziwhats in his blood, which makes him the greatest potential jedi of all time"). And Anakin was just Luke Skywalker, Jr., except you knew there would be no redemption for this character; he would only have to get worse and more evil as the storyline continued. I had a really hard time "cheering" on the worst hero of science fiction history. I found his brooding, passive-aggressive disposition to want me to learn how to be a jedi just so I could kick his complaining ass.

Now, a new movie is being released as a cartoon, which is supposed to "fill in the gap" called the Clone Wars. I'm sorry, but I don't really feel there's much of a gap here. I don't really care about the Clone Wars. And I really don't care about a series where Anakin Skywalker is to be seen as the "hope" of the Republic. I'm sorry, but Anakin is the death of the Republic; no amount of cartooning is going to make him into the good guy again, no matter what time line they interject this story.

Star Wars actually has a rich, mystical history that needs to be explored, but they keep coming back to this overdone storyline. I don't care anymore about Darth Vader. There is a whole Knights of the Old Republic era that is hinted at in the series, and has been seriously developed in lots of the Star Wars media (not the movies). The birth of the Sith sounds like so much more interesting than brooding action heroes who complain about their girlfriends. Honestly.

When I was doing the old computer game work, there was a project that was started at Lucas Arts that never really saw the dawn of light, but it should have. It was about a rebellious colonel during the Star Wars era (think "Empire Strikes Back" time) that was fighting a mysterious revolution against the empire during this time. There was so much rich information coming from this particular thread, and then it just died away so that we could focus on brooding, complaining young jedi.

I regret that all we have to look forward to is a cartoon movie and a potential television series (cartoons) of the Clone Wars. What a horrible choice to develop. I would love to see something way prior to the whole Star Wars saga (like tens of thousands of years before), or hundreds of years AFTER Return of the Jedi. But instead, we'll get nothing but product placement shows and movies that will try to sell us a cute robot toy or stuffed ewok, or whatever stupid "in" toy that comes from the next kiddie series that sadly fills the gap that doesn't need filled.

Stumble It!

Californication and the life of a writer

There's this show on Showtime called Californication, which stars David Duchovny (of X-Files fame). It is kind of interesting, in that the main character is a New York writer who is living in Los Angeles, and he can't stand California. He's suffering from writer's block for reasons never really explicit, although the show hints that his rationality involves the fact that they turned his introspective third novel into a Tom and Katie love story, and he's upset. He's generally upset all the time. And he womanizes women all of the time.

I watched the first five episodes of the show before it finally dawned on me why the story seemed so familiar. No, it's not my story. Yes, I'm a writer, and yes, I had an interesting past involving a number of "interesting" women over the years, but that's about it when it comes to the comparisons. So, I often found myself watching the show and really not identifying with the main character, even though we both have problems with our writing and the state of California itself. And yet, I often find myself wondering why I'm drawn to the character.

And then it dawned on me. The main character doesn't remind me of me. It reminds me of Charles Bukowski. And the more I thought about it, the more I realized they practically ripped off the style of Bukowski and claimed it as their own. If you've ever read a book or a series of poems by Bukowski, you know instantly that this is the exact same story that would have been written about his life. This is the guy who attended a reading of his own work at a girls' college, and because he was still drunk from the night before, he walked out and onto the lawn. Then he found a nearby tree and vomited on it. A young woman remarked to him: "Man, you're fucked up" to which he responded: "Finally, a woman who understands me."

I guess that's why I find myself interested in this show. Even though the idea and inspiration is not original. But then, in Hollywood, what is original anymore?

Stumble It!

Living without cable

After I moved from my previous apartment to this new studio apartment, I didn't bother to bring Comcast cable over with me. Instead, I signed up for AT&T's Internet service. I've since discovered that where Comcast goes out of its way to force you into cable television service, AT&T goes out of its way to force you into overpriced telephone services to get Internet. An example: I signed up for a $5.00 measured line. That $5.00 measured line, after taxes and bizarre charges, costs about $35-40.

I had bought into AT&T thinking I might add satellite service later through them as well. I've completely changed my mind on this. I switched completely to Clearwire (a wireless service), and we'll see how that works.

But this post was about cable TV. I guess I chose the right time to do this because with the writers' strike going on in Hollywood right now, television really sucks. There's nothing original coming out other than what was canned originally and then brought back out because they have nothing else filmed. Who needs that crap? Certainly not me.

So I've been managing on a rabbit ear antenna and Netflix since then. And it's really not that much different.

Stumble It!

TV shows with bizarre hidden agendas

I'm sure we've all given thought to how certain shows have specific agendas, some political, some social. Like the show Weeds, which I happen to really like, obviously has a pretty strong agenda that tends to be pro marijuana. Not necessarily pro drug, but pro marijuana and anti rules against marijuana usage. One could quibble about that, but for the most part, I think it tends to go in that direction.

But this isn't my essay today. No, I was watching another show recently from the 1980s, Battlestar Galactica 1980, which is the follow up series to the original, in which the space traveling migrants find Earth and begin to work their way towards settling and revealing their presence in the galaxy. Well, they often come against the US Air Force that is constantly investigating them. But what I found really, really interesting is that at the end of EVERY episode, there is a text statement that the US Air Force discontinued its search for extraterrestrials back in the 1960s. There's no reason why they would put that as the show takes place in the 1980s, and for some reason that's just really bizarre to include that. I first started wondering if they're trying to state a snide comment of "they're still doing it, but it's just not official anymore." Or are they stating that "they still need to do it because who knows what they're going to find" as I ran across an episode where the evil Cylons landed on Earth and forced Wolfman Jack to help them transmit their signal to Cylon Headquarters. It's kind of funny because Wolfman Jack was HUGE in the 1980s. I doubt most people have a clue who he is, or was, today.

So, is there some kind of point to be made by making this last little notification at the end of the episode? Are they addressing something that people suspect, or are they priming Americans for something that they believe we should be ready for in future governmental-alien behavior? I was thinking about using this little notification as an artifact and analyze it using different rhetorical criticism strategies. The priming effect seems most evident to me, although I could also see a couple of other alternatives. Any thoughts?

Stumble It!

Why Hollywood pisses me off

I'm a big fan of the show NUMB3RS, but every now and then they do something that completely destroys my ability to give my suspension of disbelief. The pilot show started off with one such example. The FBI was trying to figure out a series of murders, so out of nowhere the investigator's brother suggests using mathematics to determine if there are a series of connections between murders. Why this bothered me back then was because the FBI already does this. So does every police department that isn't run by Sheriff Buford T. Justice (Jackie Gleason in the greatest role of his life).

But what bothered me was a plot point that has been growing this season. Charlie, the mathematician, submitted his old work (when he was young...um, how old is this guy anyway, as he still seems like he's about 25) on relationship dynamics involving game theory. Fine. I can live with that. Then the story decides that out of nowhere he gets a publisher (on the first try). Then it gets published, and he's already becoming a rock star of the literary world with his ground breaking mathematics that involves...(wait for it)...taking a cost benefit analysis using game theory to decide if your future mate is worthy of continuing your attention. Or something trite like that.

But what bugs me is that he's already got rock star groupies showing up to his book signings, and the very first book he ever wrote has JUST hit the shelves. While this is fiction, it drives some people completely nuts, specifically people like me who have been struggling to be a successful author for MANY years, where selling a few books is a challenge, and I have yet to run into a groupie at a book signing, nor any book signings where people actually showed up.

When they do these sorts of stories, they give the impression that success is really that easy, which immediately causes those around me to ask me why I'm still taking so long to be successful. We're held to standards that aren't real, and it drives me nuts. Especially when it happens on shows that I really like.

Stumble It!

Smallville

Smallville has been one of my favorite shows for a long time. I believe this is the beginning of the 7th season, and it's still going strong. I was discussing this series with someone who didn't like it because she doesn't "like science fiction or that kid stuff", meaning she figured that because it was based off of a comic book, Superman, that it was obviously not as "important" a show as something else that might take up her television time.

I hear that kind of argumentative analysis all of the time, and I usually just brush it off, but it's been one of those things that's always bugged me because there's an elitist attitude to it that in so many cases is unwarranted. And yes, I've been guilty of it myself in the past.

But I'm talking about Smallville, and here are some thoughts that I felt were necessary for me to say. First off, the writing is extremely well constructed. As a writer, I often find myself taken aback when I come across writing of this level. There are several metaphorical allusive processes that take place with Smallville. First off, the writers have to deal with the actual plot itself, which is based on a rich literature of events that have been speculated about within both the Superman and Superboy universes. And there is also the mythology of the Superman legend that has to be dealt with but unfortunately you can't just keep telling the same story every other TV show and movie has done in the past. And then there is another completely unique level, and that's the realization that the audience has knowledge of what this young man is going to become, so all of the allusive references to his future became that much more significant.

As a writer, I can only imagine the wonder of working within such a rich universe of ideas. There are times when a story arc will run its course, and you'll see a reference to something that will be so damn important concerning Superman, but is dealt with as a proto-Superman would have to deal with in his childhood, like when the conversation comes to the future importance of this young farmer from Smallville. In only the last episode, there was a discussion at the end between his sister Kara (the future Supergirl who has appeared for the first time in this season) about how she tells him he can't hide in the farm his whole life, that he's going to have to leave and stop trying to hide those powers from the rest of the world. And someone who is watching this can only take a step back and realize the impact of those words, as this person to whom she is speaking is destined to one day be the savior of the entire world so many times that it's probably not possible to count. And then you can see the complexity in the actor's face as he takes in her words, almost as if he sees events that may happen in the future, but just isn't ready to face such responsibility that you know he will one day have to face.

And the whole dichotomy between Lex Luthor and Clark Kent is just wonderfully designed. There is a reference in the Superman comics that Luthor and Superman used to be friends, and that's pretty much all you really get out of that (other than some speculative renditions of this legend), so the show takes that friendship and shows how twisted it is and how that friendship is somewhat responsible for leading one of them to greatness and the other to complete vindictive evil.

Whenever someone tells me they dislike these kinds of shows because they're based on comic books, I just shake my head and realize what great dramatic elements they will forever miss.

Stumble It!

The fine line between the actor/actress and how authentic is the character

I recently started watching Sci Fi channel's Flash Gordon. It's a cheesy type of show, and to be honest, I'm not really convinced it's all that good enough of a science fiction serial, which is what it's based on. It seems more a rehash of "can we tell the neighbors about our secret", the "we like this police officer, but we have to keep him/her in the dark about what's really happening", the "I really like my female co-star, but she's got a boyfriend" and "Oh yeah, there's this other world where we do some science fiction stuff". Personally, I think the show hasn't decided if it wants to be authentic science fiction, which Friday night stuff on Sci Fi generally is (like Battlestar Galactica and the two Stargate shows), or it wants to be camp. It hasn't defined itself yet.

But what actually got me thinking was this bounty hunter character they have who comes from the evil other planet who is always on the run from the people in power. She's one of those "I do things my way" and she knows all about living out in the rough part of society, constantly on the run from those who are out to kill her. Well, at one point, she was changing clothes in Flash's place, and as she raised her hands over her head, I noticed she shaves her armpits. And this really got me thinking. Would a woman like this from an alien society (although she's human) who is constantly on the run living out in the wilderness, really shave under her arms? And then I started to realize that this is because the actress is a TV star who most likely does so because TV society demands it of her. And I'm sure viewers don't even notice, although they would notice if she was actually authentic, and then they'd probably not like it.

Anyway, it was an interesting thought at the time.

Stumble It!