Time for a jaunt into lost youth, entertainment, and the world of professional wrestling. Kidding? Nope, I'm serious. While yes, it's scripted, it's still brings countless hours of joy to young kids, and the inner child of adult men across the country. Like most men of my generation, I started watching pro wrestling back in the 80's. The days of NWA, WWF (now called WWE), neon, flash, over the top characters, and REALLY BAD HAIR.And while this form of sports entertainment changes with every generation, there's a question on the lips of every mark out there. Who's your favorite wrestler?
For me, I've always been a black sheep with a lot of things. This area is really no different. Over the years, the average fan will utter the names of Flair, Hogan, the Rock, and occasionally Bret Hart, or Sting. While those men have made their mark and earned their way, the names I always wanted to watch were different. Piper, DDP, and Austin. Ok, not that different, but lets take a look at them.
The 80's were great. I started watching, and cheering like other boys. For me though, I could have given a rats booty about Hulk Hogan. While everyone else was Hulking up, I was excited to see Rowdy Roddy Piper. The man was a maniac. Hardcore, before hardcore was a thing. While most people were saying holy cow, I was saying PIPER, PIPER, PIPER! The 90's came around, and it got better. Hogan was starting to show his age, fans were starting to see him for who he always has been. A weak wrestler that could cut a great promo. So when Piper crossed over into WCW and was working a feud with him, it was a weird good time. I went from cheering for the bad guy, to cheering for the good guy because both men switched places.
But the 90's were a turbulent time for wrestling. The pomp and circumstance was no longer the status quo, as balls and attitude were the new demand. And while Piper will always be my first favorite, I was still cheering for the dark side. Enter Diamond Dallas Page. A bad guy with style. And he was just getting better and better. The best part, his finisher the Diamond Cutter can and would come out of nowhere. But there was something interesting that really pulled me in. In a short span of a few years of actually wrestling, everyone was cheering for the bad guy instead of the good guy. It wasn't because he was being bad, instead, it was because he was standing his ground and telling the good guys, and the bad guys where to stick it. He did what he wanted on his terms. It wasn't over the top, it wasn't flashy, it seemed somewhat real and could be related to by anyone. He was essentially opening up to take on the entire roster. It was incredible.
But DDP wasn't alone in this. Stone Cold Steve Austin entered his own here too. He had been fun to watch in the past, but this character was him. He turned on his handler, he gave the finger to everyone, and essentially was doing the same thing as DDP but in a different way. While DDP was the self made man doing what was best for him, Austin was essentially saying, "You're not the boss of me!" It was something that everyone from the adolescent to the working man could find. So seeing what the two of these men would do next was almost always a gamble. Unlike what Piper was doing, and the rest of the previous generation of wrestlers, it was no longer the predictable good versus evil. It was now a game of who could hit harder.
These days wrestling can still be fun. But it's not the same. It's a different generation, relating to a different audience. Sadly, some wrestlers haven't realized that 30 plus years is too much and haven't retired from full time involvement, while others occasionally show up as a blast from the past. But it's not a weekly venture for me any more. It's an on/off relationship that I come back to every couple months. The torch has been passed. And with all the change, not everything is different. Much like real sports, it's something that old fans and new fans alike can sit down and talk about.
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Friday, August 30, 2013
Burn Notice and B Movie Actors
Just another quick jaunt through my mind. So I've finally gotten into the show Burn Notice. It's taken me time though. I couldn't quite put my finger on it until recently.
Typically, I love a good B movie. They're campy, cheep, fun. And ultimately you see hungry up-and-comers that are really putting themselves on the line to make it or break it. Which leads to what caught my initial interest in the show, Bruce Campbell. I've been a huge fan of his for years. The initial ads for the show didn't win me over. Instead I was looking at it as a cheap, American knock-off of Mission Impossible. But with Bruce being cast, I felt it would only be right to give it a shot.
So I tried, failed. Tried again, and failed again. I just couldn't figure out what was throwing it. The dialogue was good, the filming was good, effects great, there's some good acting here. And it hit me, it's the acting of the main character. He's good with voices and accents, but ultimately he's just walking in, chin high, and delivering lines. I don't feel him. Not only that, but watching his movement kills me. He doesn't seem like a spy, or that he's even trying to play one. The most honest acting he does is when he's putting on a "please don't hit me" act for the bad guys. He just strikes me as a straight up sissy.
Now, I've watched all the way up through the end of season 4. It's steadily gotten better. The other actors are great, and the story has stayed true. I'm not seeing Michael Weston as much of an act now because Jeffrey Donovan has finally gotten comfortable (though not entirely connected) with the character. But it's evolving quicker and quicker, and I have hope to actually be pulled in completely fairly soon. I'm really liking it now.
This is really why I don't care much for many well established actors. For instance Tom Cruise. Back in his early days he had emotion, and something tangible. Today, it doesn't matter if he's a spy, or Jerry Maguire, he plays it all the same. It makes him just another over paid actor, but once in a while, he breaks away from his norm and shows us he still has a little gas in the trunk. Such as when he portrayed Les Grossman.Then you have the likes of Nic Cage, who also has fallen in the rut of different characters generally being the same. What makes him different is when he tries to do something different, he comes across as freakin NUTS!
But when you get a B movie actor, you know it's truly for the love of film. That's probably why the Bruce Campbell's, Roddy Piper's, and Adrian Paul's keep their magic. They've seen glory, utter crap, risen again just to find they're standing knee deep in the sewer, and they keep coming back for more.
Hail to the B actor actor baby. And here's to Burn Notice getting better.
Typically, I love a good B movie. They're campy, cheep, fun. And ultimately you see hungry up-and-comers that are really putting themselves on the line to make it or break it. Which leads to what caught my initial interest in the show, Bruce Campbell. I've been a huge fan of his for years. The initial ads for the show didn't win me over. Instead I was looking at it as a cheap, American knock-off of Mission Impossible. But with Bruce being cast, I felt it would only be right to give it a shot.
So I tried, failed. Tried again, and failed again. I just couldn't figure out what was throwing it. The dialogue was good, the filming was good, effects great, there's some good acting here. And it hit me, it's the acting of the main character. He's good with voices and accents, but ultimately he's just walking in, chin high, and delivering lines. I don't feel him. Not only that, but watching his movement kills me. He doesn't seem like a spy, or that he's even trying to play one. The most honest acting he does is when he's putting on a "please don't hit me" act for the bad guys. He just strikes me as a straight up sissy.
Now, I've watched all the way up through the end of season 4. It's steadily gotten better. The other actors are great, and the story has stayed true. I'm not seeing Michael Weston as much of an act now because Jeffrey Donovan has finally gotten comfortable (though not entirely connected) with the character. But it's evolving quicker and quicker, and I have hope to actually be pulled in completely fairly soon. I'm really liking it now.
This is really why I don't care much for many well established actors. For instance Tom Cruise. Back in his early days he had emotion, and something tangible. Today, it doesn't matter if he's a spy, or Jerry Maguire, he plays it all the same. It makes him just another over paid actor, but once in a while, he breaks away from his norm and shows us he still has a little gas in the trunk. Such as when he portrayed Les Grossman.Then you have the likes of Nic Cage, who also has fallen in the rut of different characters generally being the same. What makes him different is when he tries to do something different, he comes across as freakin NUTS!
But when you get a B movie actor, you know it's truly for the love of film. That's probably why the Bruce Campbell's, Roddy Piper's, and Adrian Paul's keep their magic. They've seen glory, utter crap, risen again just to find they're standing knee deep in the sewer, and they keep coming back for more.
Hail to the B actor actor baby. And here's to Burn Notice getting better.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Death of a Bat
Rant time kids! Ben Affleck as the new Batman? Are you kidding me? This is one of the worst miscasts in Hollywood history. What are they thinking? Just seeing the title Bat-Flack made me want to puke!
They might as well put him in a blue and gray leotard! In talking to others I've said, and will say again, I'd take a claymation Batman over this bruised vagina! A good friend put it best and said they might as well have Tom Cruise pick up the role of Catwoman so he could reclaim his TomKat moniker.
Does Ben have some talent? Yes. But like many actors, he has a limited tool bag. And while I'm one of the few that actually thought Dare Devil was a decent movie, Affleck is no Batman, let alone a Bruce Wayne. I'm sure if Kevin Smith took a minute to think about it, he'd agree that his close friend is a horrible choice to dawn the cowl.
There are a number of others that would make for a better Bat. But that doesn't mean I'd want to see them do it. Samuel L Jackson, Pee Wee Herman, hell, even the kid with downs who played Corky on Life Goes On would make for a better Bat than this polished turd.
All I can say is that this had best be a one time thing. And that he only has a 5 second cameo. Think I'm going to go lose my dinner now.
Sunday, August 4, 2013
Family Time: 3 Generations and a Memory
Today was a good day. I wish my wife and older kids could have come along, but they were out of town. So it was still a good day for a few of us. Got to spend some quality time with my youngest boy, and my mom. And I created a memory. And a memory created out of quality time is always a good thing.
So what happened? I took them to see the original Ghostbusters movie. It was being shown at a local theater today. And there really is no substitute for seeing a great film like that on the big screen. Sure, you can rent it, or buy it, but you really do miss some things in translation to the home theater. Things such as the bag of Marshmallows on counter being Stay Puft, a prelude to things to come. Details of equipment, or even the characters. For instance, seeing Gozer on the big screen is much more intimidating. She doesn't just have red eyes. Her eyes are intense, and have a lot of things happening. Let alone the rest of her character. The various ghosts are amazing. Plus it's just plain fun.
Of course everyone in my family has seen the Ghostbusters. I'm not sure how many times I've replaced copies of both films. But even my kiddo was excited about it being on the big screen. Which is great in my opinion. Originally, I remember clearly my parents taking me to the drive-in theater to see it as a kid. I've loved it ever since. I remember there was a light rain, and the windows in the backseat fogged up a little bit. Then a couple years ago, my wife and I went to a late showing at the 2011 re-release and got to relive our childhood all over again. So today was my boys chance to experience it.
It's very reminiscent of my first time as well. As it was clouding up while we were at the show. And this evening, closer to the time I first saw it, it's raining lightly out. It's as if Dad is looking down and smiling. Aside from not being at a drive-in this time around, there is only one really big difference. This time I didn't eat 2 large tubs of popcorn, and throw up in the backseat on the way home. ;) Today was indeed, a good day.
So what happened? I took them to see the original Ghostbusters movie. It was being shown at a local theater today. And there really is no substitute for seeing a great film like that on the big screen. Sure, you can rent it, or buy it, but you really do miss some things in translation to the home theater. Things such as the bag of Marshmallows on counter being Stay Puft, a prelude to things to come. Details of equipment, or even the characters. For instance, seeing Gozer on the big screen is much more intimidating. She doesn't just have red eyes. Her eyes are intense, and have a lot of things happening. Let alone the rest of her character. The various ghosts are amazing. Plus it's just plain fun.
Of course everyone in my family has seen the Ghostbusters. I'm not sure how many times I've replaced copies of both films. But even my kiddo was excited about it being on the big screen. Which is great in my opinion. Originally, I remember clearly my parents taking me to the drive-in theater to see it as a kid. I've loved it ever since. I remember there was a light rain, and the windows in the backseat fogged up a little bit. Then a couple years ago, my wife and I went to a late showing at the 2011 re-release and got to relive our childhood all over again. So today was my boys chance to experience it.
It's very reminiscent of my first time as well. As it was clouding up while we were at the show. And this evening, closer to the time I first saw it, it's raining lightly out. It's as if Dad is looking down and smiling. Aside from not being at a drive-in this time around, there is only one really big difference. This time I didn't eat 2 large tubs of popcorn, and throw up in the backseat on the way home. ;) Today was indeed, a good day.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Undead Snorefest
So time for a little opinion kiddies. The zombie thing has been played out. Don't get me wrong, I love a good zombie. But it's gotten pretty ridiculous recently. Movies, TV, video games, books, comics, advertisements, radio, slippers, magnets, the list goes on. Much like an apocalyptic story, they're everywhere.
Growing up, my favorite monster quickly became the zombie. For the most part, if you wanted a zombie tale, you were looking for reading material. There were a few zombie movies out there, but not a lot. You had versions like the mummy. Cheesy and barely inspired stories. Then you had George Romero's original trilogy. Those were great movies that made you double check the doors at night. I would watch those with my dad on many occasion. Just about every Halloween, he'd paint his face up zombie style too. I even remember going with him to see Return of the Living Dead 2, while my mom and little brother were across the hall watching Throw Mama From the Train.
Zombies had that appeal because they weren't common. Vampires, werewolves, ghosts, and various others were a dime a dozen. They even had their own cereals, courtesy of General Mills. Now I know some of you are saying, "What about Frankenstein's monster?" He was just that, a monster that was pieced to together by several dead people, and therefor not a zombie. Even the Monster Squad stayed clear of zombies, with a loosely connected mummy that was essentially nothing more than a wad of toilet paper.
Fast forward a few years. New breeds of zombies were starting to come out, and the first Resident Evil games stepped forward. This combined with the monsters and demons from Doom coming to eat you, zombies had a new platform. Even a good remake of Night of the Living Dead found it's way into theaters. And for about a decade it was good. While there were some absolutely horrible movies made, there weren't a lot. The entertainment biz was taking care to make good zombies. Then came the early 2000's to present. Zombies crawling from the ground, zombies made by viruses, zombies that aren't really zombies, but are merely people infected by viruses, people turned into zombies because they're bit by a mosquito that had previously fed on a zombie. Zombies have joined their undead brethren in becoming a dime a dozen. There are few zombie movies that I enjoy anymore.
The biggest allure that zombies had was that you didn't know what you were going to get because there just were that many of them. Now, you know just about everything you need to just by seeing an ad for the new show. What's worse is when Hollywood takes a great book and then tries to convert it to the big screen. I weep for World War Z, as I do for the many other books that Hollywood has done completely wrong. While most of the world is excited to see what new zombie movie is on the horizon, I'm patiently waiting for Netflix. That way, when I fall asleep my snoring doesn't bother anyone. At least the Walking Dead, hasn't taken a huge fall on its face yet.
Growing up, my favorite monster quickly became the zombie. For the most part, if you wanted a zombie tale, you were looking for reading material. There were a few zombie movies out there, but not a lot. You had versions like the mummy. Cheesy and barely inspired stories. Then you had George Romero's original trilogy. Those were great movies that made you double check the doors at night. I would watch those with my dad on many occasion. Just about every Halloween, he'd paint his face up zombie style too. I even remember going with him to see Return of the Living Dead 2, while my mom and little brother were across the hall watching Throw Mama From the Train.
Zombies had that appeal because they weren't common. Vampires, werewolves, ghosts, and various others were a dime a dozen. They even had their own cereals, courtesy of General Mills. Now I know some of you are saying, "What about Frankenstein's monster?" He was just that, a monster that was pieced to together by several dead people, and therefor not a zombie. Even the Monster Squad stayed clear of zombies, with a loosely connected mummy that was essentially nothing more than a wad of toilet paper.
Fast forward a few years. New breeds of zombies were starting to come out, and the first Resident Evil games stepped forward. This combined with the monsters and demons from Doom coming to eat you, zombies had a new platform. Even a good remake of Night of the Living Dead found it's way into theaters. And for about a decade it was good. While there were some absolutely horrible movies made, there weren't a lot. The entertainment biz was taking care to make good zombies. Then came the early 2000's to present. Zombies crawling from the ground, zombies made by viruses, zombies that aren't really zombies, but are merely people infected by viruses, people turned into zombies because they're bit by a mosquito that had previously fed on a zombie. Zombies have joined their undead brethren in becoming a dime a dozen. There are few zombie movies that I enjoy anymore.
The biggest allure that zombies had was that you didn't know what you were going to get because there just were that many of them. Now, you know just about everything you need to just by seeing an ad for the new show. What's worse is when Hollywood takes a great book and then tries to convert it to the big screen. I weep for World War Z, as I do for the many other books that Hollywood has done completely wrong. While most of the world is excited to see what new zombie movie is on the horizon, I'm patiently waiting for Netflix. That way, when I fall asleep my snoring doesn't bother anyone. At least the Walking Dead, hasn't taken a huge fall on its face yet.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Orange is the New Black... or is it?
Time for a brief show review. So after seeing some light advertising on +Netflix and my wife coming home saying we needed to check it out, I gave Orange is the New Black a look. After seeing some great originals on +Netflix I was looking forward to seeing what they had in store for me this time.
Lights, camera, and what is this? It took me a couple attempts to get through the first episode. The first half of it is horrible. It's easily confused with skinamax. There's virtually no story, and lots of sex going on. We're not talking artistic in a Sparticus kind of way either. It's just a raw, in your face, amateur film. I got about 15 minutes in the first time before I had to turn it off. I was disappointed. But wait, I'm not done yet.
So the first part of episode one was garbage. The next day I was thinking to myself, maybe I didn't give it the chance it deserved. So I went back and turned it back on. After a second time, the first part of episode one is garbage. But once you get past that, it does start to get better. So after the first episode I'm thinking maybe. But I just don't know. So I watched the second episode. It continued the trend of slowly getting better. And it had that little something that started to draw you in. Not so much a connection with any character, but the story line itself.
Before I knew it, I had watched all of its episodes. As a whole, the show is just okay. But individually the episodes are good. Each episode focuses on specific people, in specific settings. So they take a life of their own. And while they're nothing spectacular, they have just enough to keep you coming back for more. The last few episodes, however, that's you're meat and potatoes of the show. A lot happens, and it's fast. Those few episodes are what the entire season should have been. While not as intense, or insane as OZ was a decade or so ago, it grabs you. And every so often you catch yourself going, "Holy cow!" There are a few easily predictable scenes. Fortunately these are little things that don't take away from the show.
The actors are good for the most part. They take characters that are just meh, and really make them into something you're interested about. While there are a couple that are pretty stale. For instance, Kate Mulgrew really lets you see her chops, in a persona (and accent) that's light years away from her Star Trek days. In contrast though, Laura Prepon just isn't impressive at all. Every time you start to think she might do something with her character, you're left with nothing. She may very well have left her best work on "That 70's Show," because you certainly don't see it here.
So in all, it's an alright show. If you're a fan of police, crime, and prison dramas, this is really nothing more that a season filler for another show, or an in betweener for those brief periods between season. It will pull you in for a few minutes. But after that, it leaves you with little. Personally, I'd recommend Lilyhammer, or House of Cards before this. Keep em coming +Netflix, I'll keep watching. But this is just my opinion.
Lights, camera, and what is this? It took me a couple attempts to get through the first episode. The first half of it is horrible. It's easily confused with skinamax. There's virtually no story, and lots of sex going on. We're not talking artistic in a Sparticus kind of way either. It's just a raw, in your face, amateur film. I got about 15 minutes in the first time before I had to turn it off. I was disappointed. But wait, I'm not done yet.
So the first part of episode one was garbage. The next day I was thinking to myself, maybe I didn't give it the chance it deserved. So I went back and turned it back on. After a second time, the first part of episode one is garbage. But once you get past that, it does start to get better. So after the first episode I'm thinking maybe. But I just don't know. So I watched the second episode. It continued the trend of slowly getting better. And it had that little something that started to draw you in. Not so much a connection with any character, but the story line itself.
Before I knew it, I had watched all of its episodes. As a whole, the show is just okay. But individually the episodes are good. Each episode focuses on specific people, in specific settings. So they take a life of their own. And while they're nothing spectacular, they have just enough to keep you coming back for more. The last few episodes, however, that's you're meat and potatoes of the show. A lot happens, and it's fast. Those few episodes are what the entire season should have been. While not as intense, or insane as OZ was a decade or so ago, it grabs you. And every so often you catch yourself going, "Holy cow!" There are a few easily predictable scenes. Fortunately these are little things that don't take away from the show.
The actors are good for the most part. They take characters that are just meh, and really make them into something you're interested about. While there are a couple that are pretty stale. For instance, Kate Mulgrew really lets you see her chops, in a persona (and accent) that's light years away from her Star Trek days. In contrast though, Laura Prepon just isn't impressive at all. Every time you start to think she might do something with her character, you're left with nothing. She may very well have left her best work on "That 70's Show," because you certainly don't see it here.
So in all, it's an alright show. If you're a fan of police, crime, and prison dramas, this is really nothing more that a season filler for another show, or an in betweener for those brief periods between season. It will pull you in for a few minutes. But after that, it leaves you with little. Personally, I'd recommend Lilyhammer, or House of Cards before this. Keep em coming +Netflix, I'll keep watching. But this is just my opinion.
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Best Sci-Fi franchise
In the geek world, and outside among the average Joe, there's a question that runs rampant. Star Wars or Star Trek? Some people say they don't care for either, but we all know it's just a facade. Probably because they don't want to choose wrong, or they don't want to get caught up in the argument over which is better. My answer? Well, you'll have to keep reading to find out.
Let's start with Star Wars. Here we have a military force, a guerrilla force on the run, and a few people that for lack of better terminology are using wizardry (ie the force). While there's somewhat of a rank structure, it's all shot down by "ambassadors" known as the jedi. Not only that, but these "ambassadors" command and lead military assaults, and essentially dictate politics under the guise of negotiation. While the Empire shows a little bit more consistency throughout the whole of the series, it's not until the new trilogy that we know for sure that there are non-officer ranks which of course go to the little guys we see killed by the handful, the storm troopers and imperial scouts. Now, I'll take a moment here to address the "princess" because some will take note of her military service here too. A princess by adoption, not blood. And not only that, it's not unheard of for royalty to actually serve in the military. I'll refer you to Prince Harry as one of many. It's got war, a love story, family quarrels (that the Hatfields and McCoys can relate too), teddy bears, and all an all powerful Toxic Avenger looking Oompa-Loompa (aka Yoda). Plus, a lot of inconsistency. The Jedi can levitate, mess with minds, reflect shots with their swords, but a couple of storm troopers can take them prisoner and lock them up with little trouble. But hey, it's a lot of fun to watch. The cartoons on the other hand.... well my kiddo likes them, that's good enough.
Now you have Star Trek. Here you have military forces in conflict, trying to act as good will ambassadors and negotiate politics. With exception of Miles O'Brian (who went back and forth in rank a lot in TNG) you never see the enlisted man. It's always the head officers of the ship taking care of business. That's probably my biggest peeve of the whole series. While there's occasionally a first officer or someone saying the Captain shouldn't go, it's still the Command Staff putting boots to butts. Even the dreaded red shirt was usually an Ensign, or Lieutenant of some sort, and that's if they even mentioned their rank. But Star Trek does try to stay a bit more grounded in science. While there is some mystical elements here and there, they don't normally go too far. And Trek tries to go more in depth with the human elements such as emotions, taboos, beliefs, stresses, etc. It's not so much a struggle of good and evil like Star Wars, but rather overcoming adversity and growing.
So which is better? I'll direct you towards the grossly over looked Babylon 5. Yes, I said it. B5. (Insert evil laugh, and music here) While I like both of the above mentioned, Babylon 5 is a superior product. You have enlisted ranks, and established command structure, common ailments and addictions, failed political moves, coupes, wars, multiple religions and belief structures, grounded roots in science with a little bit of mysticism to allow you to fully escape your current reality and move into it's reality. You never know what's going to happen, or if things will work out. Unlike Star Wars, and Star Trek, you don't always end up with an ultimately happy ending. You say goodbye to major characters, and hello to others. It's a roller coaster that has as many ups as it does downs. And command staff get punished from time to time. They don't always get to lead missions. The enlisted man is an essential element in many cases. They do the work, while the command staff is along for the ride, and making decisions to guide them from the ground just like they do in real life. Sure it never made it to the big screen, but it had 5 great years, a number of TV movies, and who knows what the future will bring. The same can be said for other greats such as the modern incarnation of Battlestar Galactica. The next big thing may just be waiting a few decades to come back, much like the original Star Trek.
Let's start with Star Wars. Here we have a military force, a guerrilla force on the run, and a few people that for lack of better terminology are using wizardry (ie the force). While there's somewhat of a rank structure, it's all shot down by "ambassadors" known as the jedi. Not only that, but these "ambassadors" command and lead military assaults, and essentially dictate politics under the guise of negotiation. While the Empire shows a little bit more consistency throughout the whole of the series, it's not until the new trilogy that we know for sure that there are non-officer ranks which of course go to the little guys we see killed by the handful, the storm troopers and imperial scouts. Now, I'll take a moment here to address the "princess" because some will take note of her military service here too. A princess by adoption, not blood. And not only that, it's not unheard of for royalty to actually serve in the military. I'll refer you to Prince Harry as one of many. It's got war, a love story, family quarrels (that the Hatfields and McCoys can relate too), teddy bears, and all an all powerful Toxic Avenger looking Oompa-Loompa (aka Yoda). Plus, a lot of inconsistency. The Jedi can levitate, mess with minds, reflect shots with their swords, but a couple of storm troopers can take them prisoner and lock them up with little trouble. But hey, it's a lot of fun to watch. The cartoons on the other hand.... well my kiddo likes them, that's good enough.
Now you have Star Trek. Here you have military forces in conflict, trying to act as good will ambassadors and negotiate politics. With exception of Miles O'Brian (who went back and forth in rank a lot in TNG) you never see the enlisted man. It's always the head officers of the ship taking care of business. That's probably my biggest peeve of the whole series. While there's occasionally a first officer or someone saying the Captain shouldn't go, it's still the Command Staff putting boots to butts. Even the dreaded red shirt was usually an Ensign, or Lieutenant of some sort, and that's if they even mentioned their rank. But Star Trek does try to stay a bit more grounded in science. While there is some mystical elements here and there, they don't normally go too far. And Trek tries to go more in depth with the human elements such as emotions, taboos, beliefs, stresses, etc. It's not so much a struggle of good and evil like Star Wars, but rather overcoming adversity and growing.
So which is better? I'll direct you towards the grossly over looked Babylon 5. Yes, I said it. B5. (Insert evil laugh, and music here) While I like both of the above mentioned, Babylon 5 is a superior product. You have enlisted ranks, and established command structure, common ailments and addictions, failed political moves, coupes, wars, multiple religions and belief structures, grounded roots in science with a little bit of mysticism to allow you to fully escape your current reality and move into it's reality. You never know what's going to happen, or if things will work out. Unlike Star Wars, and Star Trek, you don't always end up with an ultimately happy ending. You say goodbye to major characters, and hello to others. It's a roller coaster that has as many ups as it does downs. And command staff get punished from time to time. They don't always get to lead missions. The enlisted man is an essential element in many cases. They do the work, while the command staff is along for the ride, and making decisions to guide them from the ground just like they do in real life. Sure it never made it to the big screen, but it had 5 great years, a number of TV movies, and who knows what the future will bring. The same can be said for other greats such as the modern incarnation of Battlestar Galactica. The next big thing may just be waiting a few decades to come back, much like the original Star Trek.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Superhero Equals Super Dilemma
You have to love a good super hero. They can do the things that nobody else can, but wishes they could. They stand up for all that's right. They take the best shot adversity has to offer, smile, and say, "Is that all you got?" While this may be a bit late for some, others are probably waiting like me.
Over the years I have become a Batman fan like so many others. Sure there have been some other good heroes. The Phantom, Flash, the Punisher, Darkman, the Rocketeer, the Shadow, Hulk, Ironman, Spiderman, Xmen, I'll even let you have Hancock. However, I'd be lying if I said that the Bat was always my favorite. Sure, I watched old 1968 cartoons that Casey Kasem voiced. Enjoyed the Adam West shows. And loved when Michael Keaton donned the cowl. But my original favorite is and always will be Superman. While we all know how much I love TMNT, Superman has always been in a special place. When I was little I had Superman Pajamas. We're talking the blue, with red ankles, the red and yellow "S" across the chest, and a red cape that attached to the shoulders with velcro. Christopher Reeves would have covered the floor in puke by how much of a mark I was. I'd put on my pajama's, climb on the top of the couch, bed, counters, or whatever else was around and jump off doing my best Superman impression. Sometimes even mimicking the music from the movies to the best of my ability. To this day I still have a red cape that my grandma made me with a "B" on it. (For Burtman of course. Start my entrance music.) My youngest gets a kick out of it.
Over the years however, I've drifted away from the Man of Steel a bit. I contribute this to the lack of any real movies over the years. Sure, there have been some TV shows, but they've always lacked something. Dean Cain was just too sappy. And Tom Welling's portrayal was just a bit too young. Then after several years, Brandon Routh donned the cape, and other than a few hiccups, there was hope that Superman would fly again. But then hope fell flat on its face.
Now, in an age of reboots, Superman is back. I'm excited but have mixed feelings at the same time. Not because an Englishman is playing him this time. After all, we're not talking about Snake Plissken. Superman is an alien, not an American. That seems to be a fact lost on many these days. No, I have mixed feelings because it is a reboot. A reintroduction that's not really needed. A start that can go in any direction. And new twists that can go either way. In days past, this would have been the one movie I would have geeked out, and camped out at the theater for. But my distaste for Hollywood these days, has me on the back burner, and debating when I'll go. To make things worse I've seen rave reviews, and some that absolutely tear it to shreds. So I don't know if I want to pay the gazillion dollars to see it now, wait for the dollar theater, or wait even longer for DVD. Decisions, decisions. Perhaps I'll ask my 7 year old to make up my mind for me. ;-)
Over the years I have become a Batman fan like so many others. Sure there have been some other good heroes. The Phantom, Flash, the Punisher, Darkman, the Rocketeer, the Shadow, Hulk, Ironman, Spiderman, Xmen, I'll even let you have Hancock. However, I'd be lying if I said that the Bat was always my favorite. Sure, I watched old 1968 cartoons that Casey Kasem voiced. Enjoyed the Adam West shows. And loved when Michael Keaton donned the cowl. But my original favorite is and always will be Superman. While we all know how much I love TMNT, Superman has always been in a special place. When I was little I had Superman Pajamas. We're talking the blue, with red ankles, the red and yellow "S" across the chest, and a red cape that attached to the shoulders with velcro. Christopher Reeves would have covered the floor in puke by how much of a mark I was. I'd put on my pajama's, climb on the top of the couch, bed, counters, or whatever else was around and jump off doing my best Superman impression. Sometimes even mimicking the music from the movies to the best of my ability. To this day I still have a red cape that my grandma made me with a "B" on it. (For Burtman of course. Start my entrance music.) My youngest gets a kick out of it.
Over the years however, I've drifted away from the Man of Steel a bit. I contribute this to the lack of any real movies over the years. Sure, there have been some TV shows, but they've always lacked something. Dean Cain was just too sappy. And Tom Welling's portrayal was just a bit too young. Then after several years, Brandon Routh donned the cape, and other than a few hiccups, there was hope that Superman would fly again. But then hope fell flat on its face.
Now, in an age of reboots, Superman is back. I'm excited but have mixed feelings at the same time. Not because an Englishman is playing him this time. After all, we're not talking about Snake Plissken. Superman is an alien, not an American. That seems to be a fact lost on many these days. No, I have mixed feelings because it is a reboot. A reintroduction that's not really needed. A start that can go in any direction. And new twists that can go either way. In days past, this would have been the one movie I would have geeked out, and camped out at the theater for. But my distaste for Hollywood these days, has me on the back burner, and debating when I'll go. To make things worse I've seen rave reviews, and some that absolutely tear it to shreds. So I don't know if I want to pay the gazillion dollars to see it now, wait for the dollar theater, or wait even longer for DVD. Decisions, decisions. Perhaps I'll ask my 7 year old to make up my mind for me. ;-)
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
A Rant for the Future of TV
So a few years ago I cut the cord. No more cable/ satellite TV. No more letting the industry gouge me on what I want to watch. Will I still overpay some? Sure, anyone that watches anything outside of just having rabbit ears on their TV will always be overpaying at some point. For instance the cost of a DVD costs a fraction of what we usually end up paying, even when something is on sale. So I invested in a Roku. LOVE IT!
It sets me up with what I am willing to pay for, and I can stream it when I'm ready. Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, PBS & PBS Kids, etc. It's all there. But once again, the industry got those of us that have cut the cord in a position for it to laugh at us. Sure, it's not bad to have to wait a day or two for a new episode with some networks. But others (ala Turner Networks to name one) are jerks about it. Now I can understand still having us pay. For instance, I don't mind purchasing a full season here or there. SouthLAnd, SOA, and a few others, I'll happily shell out a few bucks for. But it's really poor decision making to force people into cable to watch something. Some networks say, "We have it online now!" And technically they do, so long as you're a paying cable subscriber. But that's garbage. Now, I'm not saying they have to go to a service like Netflix, Amazon, or Hulu. They could open a website for subscription on their own. Or even put their product up for purchase on Google Play, Xbox Video, iTunes, etc. If they run their own site, they don't even have to worry about a middle man.
 |
| My Roku (Angry Birds Edition) |
After all, why should someone have to pay for cable when they only watch a couple of actual cable channels? It would make more sense to go a la cart, or through a streaming service. In some respects I wonder if it's the individual companies unwillingness to move forward and take a chance with new technology such as smartphones, and multimedia devices like tablets, ipods, and Android mp3 players.
What's more is it punishes those who are trying to better live within their means, or just plain can't afford the luxury of cable. And make no mistake, it is a luxury. I hope the streaming companies such as previously mentioned, and others like Crackle keep putting out quality original programming in addition to the various other content. So to all who see this blog, I recommend cutting the cord and putting more pressure on the networks to move into the modern technical age by putting their products online for us. If YOU work for a cable provider, please put my suggestion in your local suggestion box.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)