Sunday, March 30, 2008
Taking the big leap
I love pretty much everything I've seen at the Signature, so when they had a new musical, Glory Days, I wanted to check it out. Unfortunately, I never got around to it. The show got pretty good reviews, but it closed before I had a chance to see it. (Plus, theater-going is expensive, yo.) And now it looks like it's transferring to Broadway! That's something that rarely happens; it's been 40 years since something from DC transferred to Broadway (The Great White Hope jumped from the Arena Stage in 1968). It's pretty exciting. They haven't announced the cast. It'd be neat if they brought in some of the guys from the Signature run, but I can understand if they don't. But can you imagine how much that would suck for those actors?
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Ouch!
At the height of my Beatles obsession, my sister and I rented All You Need Is Cash, a mockumentary about the Rutles (Dirk, Barry, Stig, and Nasty). It was quite enjoyable, and it held up when I saw it again a few years ago. (I actually enjoyed it more than This is Spinal Tap).
So I was obviously delighted to hear about a Rutles tribute band, of sorts, that's been playing in New York. A band playing onstage as the movie airs? Awesome! As the article says, the movie's more enjoyable if you know a lot of the details about the Beatles, but it's pretty fun even if some of it goes over your head.
Plus, it's from Monty Python alum. Definitely worth checking out.
So I was obviously delighted to hear about a Rutles tribute band, of sorts, that's been playing in New York. A band playing onstage as the movie airs? Awesome! As the article says, the movie's more enjoyable if you know a lot of the details about the Beatles, but it's pretty fun even if some of it goes over your head.
Plus, it's from Monty Python alum. Definitely worth checking out.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Plus, teachers are hot
I have found myself really enjoying Miss Guided. At first I wasn't too sure; it seemed cute, but the main character, Becky, seemed a bit too cheerful. (Also, do many adults still go by "Becky"? It's like still being called "Billy" when you're 30.) But she, and the show, have grown on me. I guess in some ways I feel like I relate to Becky; I absolutely love her awkwardness around her crush, Tim, and how she tries to act cool around him and the English teacher. And she doesn't like beer. Awesome.
Tonight just cemented it. Breakfast Club shout-out and Edie McClurg as Mrs. Pool? It was too perfect.
In another one of those "You know you're growing up when..." moments, I thought to myself, Tim's cute. I'd date him. And then I knew I was an adult, because even though I certainly crushed on guys like Tim Daly in Wings (still do; I watch it every morning as I get ready for work), it was more like, When I get older. And now I am older. I know that seems obvious, but every now and then, stuff like that catches me off-guard.
Anyway, it's a cute show. I recommend checking it out.
Tonight just cemented it. Breakfast Club shout-out and Edie McClurg as Mrs. Pool? It was too perfect.
In another one of those "You know you're growing up when..." moments, I thought to myself, Tim's cute. I'd date him. And then I knew I was an adult, because even though I certainly crushed on guys like Tim Daly in Wings (still do; I watch it every morning as I get ready for work), it was more like, When I get older. And now I am older. I know that seems obvious, but every now and then, stuff like that catches me off-guard.
Anyway, it's a cute show. I recommend checking it out.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Mrs. Jim Halpert
I was watching a first season episode ("The Alliance") of The Office (thanks, TBS!) and it really struck me how John Krasinski/Jim looked that early in the show. It was really seeing him talking to Dwight (picture) that made something in my brain click, and for a minute, I saw him as I saw Jim when originally watching the first season. I enjoyed the first season OK when I first saw it, but every episode made me want to pull out my DVDs of the British Office. It wasn't really until the second season that I stopped thinking of the characters as Not!Tim and Not!Dawn and Steve Carell.
Looking back at that picture, I remember when I wasn't all caught up in the Jim-Pam story. I think my perceptions of characters change once I've spent a lot of time reading about them online; I've spent way more time on TWOP, reading about Jim, than I've spent actually watching the show. Looking at the Jim in that picture...he looks like a normal guy. Which, really, is part of the point of the show. But when I think of Jim now, he's all idealized and dreamy.
I guess that's kind of how it works in real life, too. You kind of stop seeing people as they actually are, and how they look is colored by your relationship with them. And Jim? Jim, to me now, is just about the cutest boy in the world. I can't remember the last time I watched an episode of the American Office and wanted to watch my British DVDs right afterward.
Looking back at that picture, I remember when I wasn't all caught up in the Jim-Pam story. I think my perceptions of characters change once I've spent a lot of time reading about them online; I've spent way more time on TWOP, reading about Jim, than I've spent actually watching the show. Looking at the Jim in that picture...he looks like a normal guy. Which, really, is part of the point of the show. But when I think of Jim now, he's all idealized and dreamy.
I guess that's kind of how it works in real life, too. You kind of stop seeing people as they actually are, and how they look is colored by your relationship with them. And Jim? Jim, to me now, is just about the cutest boy in the world. I can't remember the last time I watched an episode of the American Office and wanted to watch my British DVDs right afterward.
Music to doze to
I've been doing a lot of work on my computer at night lately, mostly copyediting. (When I'm not playing Cake Mania, that is.) While I'm doing that, I like to have my "Mellow" iTunes playlist going. I need some sort of background noise, but anything much more than instrumental music or Michael Bublé distracts me. A good chunk of that playlist is movie scores.
It's been a while since I've listened to a lot of these, and I keep noticing the Gladiator soundtrack. I used to have to have music playing as I fell asleep (ironically, now I can't have music playing when I try to fall asleep), and I spent the summer after college graduation listening to that CD as I lay in bed. So every time I hear certain songs on that soundtrack, it brings me back. Like, I usually got partway through "The Battle" before I dozed off, and would vaguely hear it as it crescendoes. For some reason, "Now We Are Free" stands out to me, too.
It is a really good score.
It's been a while since I've listened to a lot of these, and I keep noticing the Gladiator soundtrack. I used to have to have music playing as I fell asleep (ironically, now I can't have music playing when I try to fall asleep), and I spent the summer after college graduation listening to that CD as I lay in bed. So every time I hear certain songs on that soundtrack, it brings me back. Like, I usually got partway through "The Battle" before I dozed off, and would vaguely hear it as it crescendoes. For some reason, "Now We Are Free" stands out to me, too.
It is a really good score.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Barb takes on contemporary fiction
I finished reading Nineteen Minutes by Jodi Picoult yesterday. It's the story of a high school shooting where the shooter is taken alive and put on trial. The point of view jumps around, but the main characters are the shooter and his mom, a girl who was friends with the shooter when they were little and her mom, a detective, and the shooter's lawyer. We get snippets here and there from others, and it alternates between the aftermath of the shooting and what led up to it--from when the shooter was born.
I was discussing it with a friend and I was trying to figure out what I thought of it. Part of my problem is that for the most part, the only contemporary fiction I read is chick lit. I feel like I have very little to compare it with. And with that subject matter, it's not like I enjoyed it.
I do think it was well done. The characterization was good, and I felt like I could relate in some way to all of the characters. In some ways, it felt a bit clichéd, but at the same time, they're clichés for a reason, you know? Similarly, I don't feel like she necessarily said anything new (Tragedies affect everyone! The shooter was a victim, too!) but I thought she told it well.
Whenever I hear about these stories of kids being horribly, horribly bullied in high school, I always wonder. In my experience, middle school was way worse than high school, but maybe I just lucked out. I don't know. I'm glad I don't know.
This was the first Picoult I've read. Honestly, I was more interested in the concept than anything else. Would I recommend it? Sure. For a 450 page novel, it goes fairly quickly. It won't blow your mind, but it's good enough. Maybe eventually I'll read We Need to Talk About Kevin, and then I can compare the two.
And the bonus? I bought it in an airport bookstore, and I can take it to another bookstore in any number of airports and get half my money back! It's win-win-win, people.
I was discussing it with a friend and I was trying to figure out what I thought of it. Part of my problem is that for the most part, the only contemporary fiction I read is chick lit. I feel like I have very little to compare it with. And with that subject matter, it's not like I enjoyed it.
I do think it was well done. The characterization was good, and I felt like I could relate in some way to all of the characters. In some ways, it felt a bit clichéd, but at the same time, they're clichés for a reason, you know? Similarly, I don't feel like she necessarily said anything new (Tragedies affect everyone! The shooter was a victim, too!) but I thought she told it well.
Whenever I hear about these stories of kids being horribly, horribly bullied in high school, I always wonder. In my experience, middle school was way worse than high school, but maybe I just lucked out. I don't know. I'm glad I don't know.
This was the first Picoult I've read. Honestly, I was more interested in the concept than anything else. Would I recommend it? Sure. For a 450 page novel, it goes fairly quickly. It won't blow your mind, but it's good enough. Maybe eventually I'll read We Need to Talk About Kevin, and then I can compare the two.
And the bonus? I bought it in an airport bookstore, and I can take it to another bookstore in any number of airports and get half my money back! It's win-win-win, people.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
And shalt be what thou art promised
On Friday night I saw Macbeth at the Folger Theatre. After the show, I was trying to remember how long it's been since I've seen Shakespeare performed; in digging around, it looks like it's been about 5 years, since I saw As You Like It at the Kennedy Center. And while I obviously knew the story, I was glad that I had taken the time to reread the play before I went. It's nice not having to try and process the language while taking in the show.
And it's definitely an enjoyable production. It was most definitely creepy; the atmosphere was perfect (particularly at the Folger, which is teensy-tiny). The production was co-directed by Teller (as in, "Penn and") and there were some cool magic effects, but nothing that took away from the production.
I loved the interaction between Macbeth and his Lady; it was all raw energy and sex. Ian Merrill Peakes as Macbeth was captivating; I actually liked Macbeth, though I'm not sure I'm supposed to. (He was kind of cute, too, with great arms. He reminded me a bit of Simon Pegg, from Shaun of the Dead--check out a picture here.) (Sadly, you don't see his arms in that, but there's a lot of sleeveless shirts, and kilts!, in the play.) At the end he was clearly insane, which is always fun to watch.
And there was a lot more comedy in it than I expected. There's a scene with the porter that Shakespeare clearly threw in as comic relief, but the actors also read a number of lines for a comedic effect. And it was needed; a show like that leaves you tense a lot of the time, and laughter is always a good way to release some of that energy.
I wasn't a fan of Macduff. I may have been colored by reading an interpretation that evening of how Macduff sucks for leaving his family behind. Or it may be that Cody Nickell, who played him, had wild hair and crazy eyes and was really intense and stared in my direction during a soliloquy that totally freaked me out, so I had to stare at Malcolm (Scott Kerns), who was cute and not at all scary. Because Macduff totally reminded me of Charles Manson, and I can't cope with that. Much less root for him to kill Macbeth, who came across as eminently likable, except for that whole "killing lots of people" thing.
The weird sisters were dealt with well, I think; I feel like it's such a fine line there between being scary and being comical, and they came across most definitely as scary. Though the masks did impede the line reading a bit; you could tell that at least one of them was wearing a mask.
I'd also say something about a couple of the young actors being a bit hard to hear, much less understand, except that a) they're young, and b) no microphones = awesome.
I will also take this moment to admit that because I've seen the Reduced Shakespeare Company's Complete Works of William Shakespeare (abridged) so many times, when I think of Macbeth, I usually picture this.
And it's definitely an enjoyable production. It was most definitely creepy; the atmosphere was perfect (particularly at the Folger, which is teensy-tiny). The production was co-directed by Teller (as in, "Penn and") and there were some cool magic effects, but nothing that took away from the production.
I loved the interaction between Macbeth and his Lady; it was all raw energy and sex. Ian Merrill Peakes as Macbeth was captivating; I actually liked Macbeth, though I'm not sure I'm supposed to. (He was kind of cute, too, with great arms. He reminded me a bit of Simon Pegg, from Shaun of the Dead--check out a picture here.) (Sadly, you don't see his arms in that, but there's a lot of sleeveless shirts, and kilts!, in the play.) At the end he was clearly insane, which is always fun to watch.
And there was a lot more comedy in it than I expected. There's a scene with the porter that Shakespeare clearly threw in as comic relief, but the actors also read a number of lines for a comedic effect. And it was needed; a show like that leaves you tense a lot of the time, and laughter is always a good way to release some of that energy.
I wasn't a fan of Macduff. I may have been colored by reading an interpretation that evening of how Macduff sucks for leaving his family behind. Or it may be that Cody Nickell, who played him, had wild hair and crazy eyes and was really intense and stared in my direction during a soliloquy that totally freaked me out, so I had to stare at Malcolm (Scott Kerns), who was cute and not at all scary. Because Macduff totally reminded me of Charles Manson, and I can't cope with that. Much less root for him to kill Macbeth, who came across as eminently likable, except for that whole "killing lots of people" thing.
The weird sisters were dealt with well, I think; I feel like it's such a fine line there between being scary and being comical, and they came across most definitely as scary. Though the masks did impede the line reading a bit; you could tell that at least one of them was wearing a mask.
I'd also say something about a couple of the young actors being a bit hard to hear, much less understand, except that a) they're young, and b) no microphones = awesome.
I will also take this moment to admit that because I've seen the Reduced Shakespeare Company's Complete Works of William Shakespeare (abridged) so many times, when I think of Macbeth, I usually picture this.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
That's Sheriff Vanlowe
Last week I managed to not only forget to record Lost, but I also missed that Reaper would be back. Fortunately I did record this week's, and boy am I glad that I did, because it guest starred Michael Ian Black and Ken Marino. I knew I recognized the name, but it wasn't until I saw him on screen that I started sputtering "Veronica Mars!" at the screen. Unfortunately, I couldn't remember his character's name. The show continued and I started frantically pawing through my DVDs, but none of the brief episode descriptions included his name. And my muttering of "Members Only jacket!" wasn't helping. All I could think was Cliff, but that was the wrong recurring character. It actually wasn't until just now, when I looked him up on IMDb, that I figured out the name (Vinny Vanlowe). I'm just happy because it looks like he'll show up at least in next week's episode, as well. Apparently my imploring, "Recurring!" at the screen did help.
And for some reason, I kept looking at Ray Wise and only seeing Leland Palmer which, as you can imagine, was more than a bit unnerving. The last thing I need before I go to bed is to think of anything that reminds me of Bob. (Spoiler alert, I guess, for anyone who doesn't know about Twin Peaks.) (Also, I just did a search for that, and I saw the images and my stomach just fell. Holy crap, Bob still freaks me out.)
And for some reason, I kept looking at Ray Wise and only seeing Leland Palmer which, as you can imagine, was more than a bit unnerving. The last thing I need before I go to bed is to think of anything that reminds me of Bob. (Spoiler alert, I guess, for anyone who doesn't know about Twin Peaks.) (Also, I just did a search for that, and I saw the images and my stomach just fell. Holy crap, Bob still freaks me out.)
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
The state of the art
I saw the Roundabout Theater production Sunday in the Park With George on Saturday. Holy crap, people, it was awesome. I got discount tickets through Goldstar (which offers tickets to theater, sports events, tours--whatever requires tickets, really--in most major cities, and they send out a weekly e-mail of what they offer; you can check it out here), and they wound up being front row center. The actors were so close. It was crazy. I was actually making eye contact with the actors and felt weird; like, They're looking at me! That's not how it's supposed to go! It was somewhat disconcerting.
Anyway, the show itself was great. Daniel Evans and Jenna Russell were fantastic (though her accent was a bit random in the second act). I'm having problems even articulating how great I thought they were. I don't know if it was being so close...being able to see them all the time. Watching the tears fall silently down their cheeks as they still managed to sing.
Sunday is one of the shows that gets me choked up just listening to it, so seeing it was just incredible. There were a number of moments, but the one that got me was at the end of the second act, after the reappearance of the subjects of the painting. I don't want to spoil it, but it put me completely over the edge. I managed to hold myself together at "Sunday" in the first act, but couldn't get through its reprise.
Which is not to say that it was a perfect production. As I mentioned, Jenna Russell couldn't quite figure out where she should be from in the second act (England? American South?). I'm still not sure I feel about the use of projections during "Putting It Together," though overall, I enjoyed the projections. The girl playing Louise kept hitting notes oddly--which was actually fortunate, because it kept me from totally blubbering at the end of the show.
But seriously, even the make-up was impressive--that is, not noticable even from the front row.
Anyway. Then, after the show, they announce that there's going to be a Q&A with some of the cast. Crazy! Naturally, we stuck around. Sadly, neither of the two leads took part, which is understandable (though I found out they did the one two weeks earlier!). But it was like the day just got better and better. There weren't really any huge revelations. My favorite question was when one person started talking about the "paradox" of George relating to his art, but not to the people in his life, and what did the actors think about that?
I've obviously worked myself into a state of blathering inarticulateness about this. My apologies. (I do recommend checking out this piece on Good Morning America about it.) I'll just say that if you can, go see this. Totally worth it.
Anyway, the show itself was great. Daniel Evans and Jenna Russell were fantastic (though her accent was a bit random in the second act). I'm having problems even articulating how great I thought they were. I don't know if it was being so close...being able to see them all the time. Watching the tears fall silently down their cheeks as they still managed to sing.
Sunday is one of the shows that gets me choked up just listening to it, so seeing it was just incredible. There were a number of moments, but the one that got me was at the end of the second act, after the reappearance of the subjects of the painting. I don't want to spoil it, but it put me completely over the edge. I managed to hold myself together at "Sunday" in the first act, but couldn't get through its reprise.
Which is not to say that it was a perfect production. As I mentioned, Jenna Russell couldn't quite figure out where she should be from in the second act (England? American South?). I'm still not sure I feel about the use of projections during "Putting It Together," though overall, I enjoyed the projections. The girl playing Louise kept hitting notes oddly--which was actually fortunate, because it kept me from totally blubbering at the end of the show.
But seriously, even the make-up was impressive--that is, not noticable even from the front row.
Anyway. Then, after the show, they announce that there's going to be a Q&A with some of the cast. Crazy! Naturally, we stuck around. Sadly, neither of the two leads took part, which is understandable (though I found out they did the one two weeks earlier!). But it was like the day just got better and better. There weren't really any huge revelations. My favorite question was when one person started talking about the "paradox" of George relating to his art, but not to the people in his life, and what did the actors think about that?
I've obviously worked myself into a state of blathering inarticulateness about this. My apologies. (I do recommend checking out this piece on Good Morning America about it.) I'll just say that if you can, go see this. Totally worth it.
Stop worrying where you're going-
Move on
If you can know where you're going
You've gone
Just keep moving on
I chose, and my world was shaken-
So what?
The choice may have been mistaken,
The choosing was not
You have to move on
Look at what you want,
Not at where you are,
Not at what you'll be...
Thursday, March 13, 2008
The more you face reality, the more you scar
I saw Kiss of the Spider Woman at the Signature tonight. I've known the music for a long time; back in high school, a friend gave me a copy of the cast recording--the one with Vanessa Williams and Brian Stokes Mitchell. (Side note: It wasn't until much later that I realized it was Brian Stokes Mitchell in it, when I realized that I recognized the anguished cry. He does the same thing in Ragtime.) I've never seen the movie, and while I knew the story, I wasn't terribly familiar with the book.
The production was really good. I have yet to be disappointed by anything I've seen at the Signature, and this was no exception. Sometimes I wonder whether I can see a musical and not like it, as I'm easily distracted by music (and shiny things), but then I remember The Life, which was a musical and sucked. There have been others I've seen that I was hardly enamored of, so I'm going to trust my judgement.
Obviously I knew and liked the music, and the cast did a great job. I was initially worried about Hunter Foster playing Molina a bit too gay (at times it seemed like he was playing Nathan Lane playing Molina), but either he tuned it down or I quickly accepted it as the character. (Which, honestly, it is.) Seriously, both he and Will Chase as Valentin were phenomenal; the atmosphere was positively electric at the climactic moment between them. (Also, Will Chase has the dark hair-blue eyes thing going on, which I cannot resist. That's neither here nor there, though.) (And lots of shirtless men!) (*cough*) And Natascia Diaz as Aurora totally won me over in the Russian movie sequence. Until then, I wasn't sure about her (she wasn't bad, but I wasn't overly impressed, either), but that section was great.
I was a bit disappointed with one of the actors. The problem may have been exacerbated by him messing up one of the very first lines of the show, and later muffing at least one or two more. So maybe it was just an off night for him. However, I've seen him in other stuff and can actually remember not being particularly impressed, so maybe it is him.
But other than that one guy, I really enjoyed it. Liked the staging, liked the acting (for the most part), thought the lighting was awesome--if a tad borderline cheesy during the song "Kiss of the Spider Woman." There was one song I wasn't familiar with, which I always find interesting. It seemed to particularly help move the plot along, so I wonder how they handled it before adding that song.
And now I have to get my hands on a copy of the recording. I still have the tape, but other than the stereo in my kitchen, I have no way of listening to it.
The production was really good. I have yet to be disappointed by anything I've seen at the Signature, and this was no exception. Sometimes I wonder whether I can see a musical and not like it, as I'm easily distracted by music (and shiny things), but then I remember The Life, which was a musical and sucked. There have been others I've seen that I was hardly enamored of, so I'm going to trust my judgement.
Obviously I knew and liked the music, and the cast did a great job. I was initially worried about Hunter Foster playing Molina a bit too gay (at times it seemed like he was playing Nathan Lane playing Molina), but either he tuned it down or I quickly accepted it as the character. (Which, honestly, it is.) Seriously, both he and Will Chase as Valentin were phenomenal; the atmosphere was positively electric at the climactic moment between them. (Also, Will Chase has the dark hair-blue eyes thing going on, which I cannot resist. That's neither here nor there, though.) (And lots of shirtless men!) (*cough*) And Natascia Diaz as Aurora totally won me over in the Russian movie sequence. Until then, I wasn't sure about her (she wasn't bad, but I wasn't overly impressed, either), but that section was great.
I was a bit disappointed with one of the actors. The problem may have been exacerbated by him messing up one of the very first lines of the show, and later muffing at least one or two more. So maybe it was just an off night for him. However, I've seen him in other stuff and can actually remember not being particularly impressed, so maybe it is him.
But other than that one guy, I really enjoyed it. Liked the staging, liked the acting (for the most part), thought the lighting was awesome--if a tad borderline cheesy during the song "Kiss of the Spider Woman." There was one song I wasn't familiar with, which I always find interesting. It seemed to particularly help move the plot along, so I wonder how they handled it before adding that song.
And now I have to get my hands on a copy of the recording. I still have the tape, but other than the stereo in my kitchen, I have no way of listening to it.
Kiss me...
I'm not a huge fan of public displays of affection. Holding hands can be cute, and the occasional hug is OK. Kissing? Well, a peck every now and then is fine. Obviously there are cases when more is more than that is totally acceptable (weddings, picking someone up at the airport), but in general, I don't want to see other people making out.
Except on tv or the movies. Then I love it. The other night I was watching something when two characters kissed and I got giddy. I've watched--multiple times--a montage of Veronica and Logan making out. After the season two finale of The Office, I went back and watched the big Jim-Pam kiss countless times. Thinking about the clothes fluke makes me smile. Watching the end of Bridget Jones's Diary, I yell at Bridget for shying away as Mark Darcy nuzzles her neck.
So...why? Maybe it's because I'm involved in the fictional relationships at a deeper level. After all, as a viewer, I get to see the major points of these relationships--the big moments. I'm certainly more invested in them than I am with a random couple on the Metro. Or maybe it's just that usually by the time the kiss happens, I'm nursing a crush on the guy and that watching the girl kiss him is a way to live vicariously.
It's probably a combination of the two. Plus, the people on tv and in the movies are generally prettier than the people I encounter in everyday life. That definitely makes it easier to take.
Except on tv or the movies. Then I love it. The other night I was watching something when two characters kissed and I got giddy. I've watched--multiple times--a montage of Veronica and Logan making out. After the season two finale of The Office, I went back and watched the big Jim-Pam kiss countless times. Thinking about the clothes fluke makes me smile. Watching the end of Bridget Jones's Diary, I yell at Bridget for shying away as Mark Darcy nuzzles her neck.
So...why? Maybe it's because I'm involved in the fictional relationships at a deeper level. After all, as a viewer, I get to see the major points of these relationships--the big moments. I'm certainly more invested in them than I am with a random couple on the Metro. Or maybe it's just that usually by the time the kiss happens, I'm nursing a crush on the guy and that watching the girl kiss him is a way to live vicariously.
It's probably a combination of the two. Plus, the people on tv and in the movies are generally prettier than the people I encounter in everyday life. That definitely makes it easier to take.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Murderobilia
There was an interesting story in the Washington Post today about people who collect mementos from serial killers. The story fascinated me, partly because reading it, I was thinking about how I'd totally buy something John Wilkes Booth-related if I could find and afford it. That somehow seems different, but I can't quite pinpoint why. I'm not sure whether it's because Booth wasn't a serial killer, because the Lincoln assassination was so long ago, because Booth's not in jail and getting money from anything, or what. Maybe it's because I regard the Lincoln assassination as an important moment in history, whereas the acts of a serial killer, while horrifying, didn't change America in a major way.
On the other hand, I do find serial killers fascinating. I read true crime books, I watch tv programs on them, I thought Zodiac was a really good movie. But I can't imagine having a drawing done by John Wayne Gacy; that creeps me out. (Not as much as reading Helter Skelter did, though.)
So where is that line between murderabilia and an interest? Where does an interest become a desire to collect things done by someone who has murdered (and possibly done worse) to people? Does it make a difference if the victim is famous, or if there's only one victim (as opposed to many)?
And should the people who collect this sort of thing be shunned? How far should legislative bodies go to prevent it?
On the other hand, I do find serial killers fascinating. I read true crime books, I watch tv programs on them, I thought Zodiac was a really good movie. But I can't imagine having a drawing done by John Wayne Gacy; that creeps me out. (Not as much as reading Helter Skelter did, though.)
So where is that line between murderabilia and an interest? Where does an interest become a desire to collect things done by someone who has murdered (and possibly done worse) to people? Does it make a difference if the victim is famous, or if there's only one victim (as opposed to many)?
And should the people who collect this sort of thing be shunned? How far should legislative bodies go to prevent it?
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
I could always go back and search for the alpaca
I finished Veronica Mars on Monday night, though I kept it going through last night by watching all of the extras on the last disc. Now I'm trying to figure out what to do with my life. Good thing March is pretty full of travel and theater (and some work that I really should be doing, but keep putting off), and that baseball season is less than 3 weeks away.
Thoughts after completing it? Well, I'm very glad that I don't have to worry about stumbling across spoilers now. Obviously, I really enjoyed it. I loved the continuity, from little things like repeated callbacks to unicorns to much larger issues. It definitely gets props for not treating major events as if they happened in a vacuum; people have to deal with the consequences. I might not have always liked how they were handled (*cough*trial*cough*), but I appreciate that the show didn't just drop these threads. Of course, the continuation of these stories makes me want to go back and rewatch, just to see what I missed.
Ultimately, I don't necessarily find Veronica's journey, as a character, to be the most interesting--that would be Logan. Veronica isn't particularly likable a lot of the time (though she's certainly easier to relate to, perhaps, in the first couple of seasons). But man, she'd be cool to pal around with. Particularly since you know she won't burden you with her "feelings" and whatnot. (Downside: Close to Veronica = high chance of crappy stuff happening to you. Not quite as bad as your likelihood of being involved with a murder if you're friends with Jessica Fletcher, but still a definite possibility.)
I did watch the promo Rob Thomas and crew put together for the fourth season, with Veronica in the FBI. It just didn't work for me at all. Maybe it's because while I enjoy watching Veronica, I enjoy the other characters a lot, and the only familiar character was Veronica herself. I've heard that they talked about maybe bringing Logan in for a few episodes, but would Keith be in it? The Veronica-Keith relationship was the center of the show, really. I just don't know that it would be the same without him. Plus, it seems so abrupt to go from freshman year of college to being out of the Academy and already working for the FBI. If that's the way they would've gone, I'm almost glad it did last only three seasons.
Anyway, good times. With a very amusing fandom. I've laughed myself silly at this site about the Echolls' mystery alpaca. Now I just need to figure out what to do for the next few weeks. Maybe I'll rewatch Wonderfalls or Freaks and Geeks.
Thoughts after completing it? Well, I'm very glad that I don't have to worry about stumbling across spoilers now. Obviously, I really enjoyed it. I loved the continuity, from little things like repeated callbacks to unicorns to much larger issues. It definitely gets props for not treating major events as if they happened in a vacuum; people have to deal with the consequences. I might not have always liked how they were handled (*cough*trial*cough*), but I appreciate that the show didn't just drop these threads. Of course, the continuation of these stories makes me want to go back and rewatch, just to see what I missed.
Ultimately, I don't necessarily find Veronica's journey, as a character, to be the most interesting--that would be Logan. Veronica isn't particularly likable a lot of the time (though she's certainly easier to relate to, perhaps, in the first couple of seasons). But man, she'd be cool to pal around with. Particularly since you know she won't burden you with her "feelings" and whatnot. (Downside: Close to Veronica = high chance of crappy stuff happening to you. Not quite as bad as your likelihood of being involved with a murder if you're friends with Jessica Fletcher, but still a definite possibility.)
I did watch the promo Rob Thomas and crew put together for the fourth season, with Veronica in the FBI. It just didn't work for me at all. Maybe it's because while I enjoy watching Veronica, I enjoy the other characters a lot, and the only familiar character was Veronica herself. I've heard that they talked about maybe bringing Logan in for a few episodes, but would Keith be in it? The Veronica-Keith relationship was the center of the show, really. I just don't know that it would be the same without him. Plus, it seems so abrupt to go from freshman year of college to being out of the Academy and already working for the FBI. If that's the way they would've gone, I'm almost glad it did last only three seasons.
Anyway, good times. With a very amusing fandom. I've laughed myself silly at this site about the Echolls' mystery alpaca. Now I just need to figure out what to do for the next few weeks. Maybe I'll rewatch Wonderfalls or Freaks and Geeks.
Monday, March 3, 2008
And in the end...what then?
I was listening to Revolver in the car today and my mind drifted to a place it frequently does when I'm listening to the Beatles: their ages. At some point, I realized that the oldest Beatles (John, Ringo) were only 30 when the band broke up. Actually, younger, since the band was pretty much over by January of 1970 (despite the release of Let It Be later that year), and John and Ringo were both born in 1940. (Paul was born in 1942; George in 1943.)
It blows my mind how young they were. I realize that obviously there are currently young rock/pop stars (e.g., anyone from the Disney Channel) and that there certainly were in the 60s, but it still blows my mind. By the time they were my age, these four guys had been part of the greatest band ever...and it had broken up. Whereas I have done...um...
No, I've done things, too. Just, you know, pretty much anything compares to being in the Beatles. Which is the obvious downside. How do move on with your life when you've hit such heights in your 20s? And I guess that's the up-side to not having been part of the best band ever. While I had a lovely and fairly productive youth and adolescence and young adulthood, I can probably top it. (Maybe.)
Not that John, Paul, George, and Ringo haven't done awesome things since 1970. (Yes, I like Wings. What of it?) But I just can't imagine that life.
It blows my mind how young they were. I realize that obviously there are currently young rock/pop stars (e.g., anyone from the Disney Channel) and that there certainly were in the 60s, but it still blows my mind. By the time they were my age, these four guys had been part of the greatest band ever...and it had broken up. Whereas I have done...um...
No, I've done things, too. Just, you know, pretty much anything compares to being in the Beatles. Which is the obvious downside. How do move on with your life when you've hit such heights in your 20s? And I guess that's the up-side to not having been part of the best band ever. While I had a lovely and fairly productive youth and adolescence and young adulthood, I can probably top it. (Maybe.)
Not that John, Paul, George, and Ringo haven't done awesome things since 1970. (Yes, I like Wings. What of it?) But I just can't imagine that life.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Books + theater = good, right?
This afternoon I saw the final performance of the Book Club Play. I like books, and I like theater, I'm in a book club, and I'd heard it was humorous, so I was looking forward to it. And I wound up being pretty underwhelmed.
The play is framed as a documentary about book clubs, following a particular book club over the course of the year, and interspersed with vignettes (read: monologues) from people commenting on the book club phenomenon or how books in general affected their lives. All of these monologues were performed by one woman in various get-ups and accents, pretty much all of which were somewhat annoying stereotypes. Of the half dozen or so, I think I enjoyed one. The woman reminded me of Rachel Dratch, in a bad way.
The problem with the vignettes was the problem with the play, in general--it was heavy-handed. Very little of what happened was a surprise (let's just say that anyone familiar with The Age of Innocence easily predicted one of the Act Two revelations), and I didn't feel there was much depth in any of the characters. The plot of the book club itself revolves around tensions arising when a new member joins. And dude, if that's actually an issue with other book club, it makes me love mine more.
(Side note: I wonder if this would be more relatable if I were older and/or if my book club was comprised of people who started as friends who then formed a book club. My book club started from Fametracker; we were pretty much all strangers at the beginning.)
Anyway. Maybe the show would be benefit if the play dropped the documentary conceit and focused on fleshing the characters out a bit. I will say that the performances were pretty good--particularly the guy who played Rob, the slacker husband of the main character's queen be, and the woman who played Lilly, a recent addition to the club who had to deal with being the youngest and only black person in the group.
It wasn't bad, and had some funny moments, and the majority of the audience seemed to laugh a lot more than I did (for the record, I seemed to be probably a good 10-15 years younger than the average audience member). It wasn't a waste of money or time, but I don't think I'd enthusiastically recommend it. It was a world premiere, and I hope the playwright goes and tweaks it a bit.
Washington Post review
The play is framed as a documentary about book clubs, following a particular book club over the course of the year, and interspersed with vignettes (read: monologues) from people commenting on the book club phenomenon or how books in general affected their lives. All of these monologues were performed by one woman in various get-ups and accents, pretty much all of which were somewhat annoying stereotypes. Of the half dozen or so, I think I enjoyed one. The woman reminded me of Rachel Dratch, in a bad way.
The problem with the vignettes was the problem with the play, in general--it was heavy-handed. Very little of what happened was a surprise (let's just say that anyone familiar with The Age of Innocence easily predicted one of the Act Two revelations), and I didn't feel there was much depth in any of the characters. The plot of the book club itself revolves around tensions arising when a new member joins. And dude, if that's actually an issue with other book club, it makes me love mine more.
(Side note: I wonder if this would be more relatable if I were older and/or if my book club was comprised of people who started as friends who then formed a book club. My book club started from Fametracker; we were pretty much all strangers at the beginning.)
Anyway. Maybe the show would be benefit if the play dropped the documentary conceit and focused on fleshing the characters out a bit. I will say that the performances were pretty good--particularly the guy who played Rob, the slacker husband of the main character's queen be, and the woman who played Lilly, a recent addition to the club who had to deal with being the youngest and only black person in the group.
It wasn't bad, and had some funny moments, and the majority of the audience seemed to laugh a lot more than I did (for the record, I seemed to be probably a good 10-15 years younger than the average audience member). It wasn't a waste of money or time, but I don't think I'd enthusiastically recommend it. It was a world premiere, and I hope the playwright goes and tweaks it a bit.
Washington Post review
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Guiltiest pleasure
I admit it. I watch Big Brother. It's not something I'm particularly proud of, but I can't help myself. I started watching with Season 2, and honestly I should've stopped, because it's all been downhill since then. (Seriously, you cannot top Dr. Will that season.) For the past few seasons, I've started watching and then stopped partway through the season, unable to put up with the horribleness of the hamsters any longer. This frustration, to put it mildly, peaked last season with Dick, who more than lived up to his name. After reading of what he did on the live feeds and seeing what CBS showed--seeing the insanely favorable edit he got--I couldn't take it anymore.
And yet somehow I'm back. I'm keeping myself sane by not reading about the goings-on shown on the feeds (though, like everyone else, I couldn't help but hearing about the "orgy" the other night), and I don't know it's whether everyone pales in comparison to Dick or what, but I'm finding the current group nowhere near as bad as last year.
It may be other things, too. With everyone playing as teams, the game is going a lot faster. Plus, I get some odd pleasure at seeing it actually raining at the Big Brother house. It apparently rarely rains in LA during the summer, but that's not an issue during the winter. There's less of people wandering around solely in bathing suits (though some of that still happens), and I like watching the hammies shiver outside during competitions.
Yes, I realize it's wrong that the more the hamsters suffer, the more pleasure I get out of the show. But if you look at past America's Choices, I'm far from alone in that view.
And yet somehow I'm back. I'm keeping myself sane by not reading about the goings-on shown on the feeds (though, like everyone else, I couldn't help but hearing about the "orgy" the other night), and I don't know it's whether everyone pales in comparison to Dick or what, but I'm finding the current group nowhere near as bad as last year.
It may be other things, too. With everyone playing as teams, the game is going a lot faster. Plus, I get some odd pleasure at seeing it actually raining at the Big Brother house. It apparently rarely rains in LA during the summer, but that's not an issue during the winter. There's less of people wandering around solely in bathing suits (though some of that still happens), and I like watching the hammies shiver outside during competitions.
Yes, I realize it's wrong that the more the hamsters suffer, the more pleasure I get out of the show. But if you look at past America's Choices, I'm far from alone in that view.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
