I mailed off three query packages to publishers today. Getting them in the mail followed three days of trying to do so and having various things go wrong. At times like I've been having these past few days, all I can think of is "Got the Time" by Joe Jackson.
(No such thing as tomorrow, only one two three go!)
Now comes the waiting. The awful waiting. Wish the ladies luck. Or better me (I probably need it more than they do. They have someone looking out for them, after all).
If you see fit to pray, that would be very nice. Or, if you're not the kind to be offended by naked self-serving: I could always point you to my Amazon.com Wish List, where you could see if you want to send me something to listen to or read while I'm waiting.
Fortunately, I'm above that sort of thing.
(It's accessible if you look over to the right there and click the View my complete profile link.)
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Sense & sanity prevail
In their second-wisest project kill of the week, Fox has called a permanent halt to production on a remake of Revenge of the Nerds. Good thing, too. For the record, I think the original RotN is one of the two best teen sex comedies of the '80s-the other is Fast Times at Ridgemont High. They're two of the only ones you can watch for anything other than laughs and titty.
I know I'm not the first person to say this, and it's probably not even the first time I've said this. But I wish Hollywood would stop remaking films that don't need to be remade. Especially in the video era, when virtually every film possible is availible in a five-minute trip to the video shop.
My idea of a great remake? Ocean's 11. It took an original film that, even for Sinatra fans (which I am) isn't really that good and gave it a better director, better actors, and a better script. Hey presto!
On the other hand, I haven't heard anything for a while about that supposed remake of Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid with Matt Damon & Ben Affleck. For which I am truly thankful at this time of year.
I know I'm not the first person to say this, and it's probably not even the first time I've said this. But I wish Hollywood would stop remaking films that don't need to be remade. Especially in the video era, when virtually every film possible is availible in a five-minute trip to the video shop.
My idea of a great remake? Ocean's 11. It took an original film that, even for Sinatra fans (which I am) isn't really that good and gave it a better director, better actors, and a better script. Hey presto!
On the other hand, I haven't heard anything for a while about that supposed remake of Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid with Matt Damon & Ben Affleck. For which I am truly thankful at this time of year.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Okay, the Michael Richards thing
I think Waveflux has got it: The man's career is over. I don't think I'm breaking the pinata there.
For me personally, this is a time I'm fortunate that "Seinfeld" means nothing to me; I've always thought it was overrated. So I'm not disturbed, as Waveflux posits (I think correctly) many are, by the question of how could loveable old Cosmo Kramer say such things?
To me it's more interesting because we don't often see a celebrity so completely flame out so fast. There are some things there's no coming back from, and I think this is one of them.
Putting aside for a moment the question of whether Richards revealed himself as a racist. I don't know.
(I do recollect reading an essay by a Puerto Rican actor (I think it may have been John Leguizamo) who related being cast in an episode of "Seinfeld." He was then replaced because he would not play the part in what he considered to be a stereotypical manner, though he was urged to by others, including Richards.)
But I'm astonished by his abuse of the stage. I think there are no rules to stand-up comedy and one of them is this: There are certain words you can't use and keep an audience with you unless you're a master, I mean, an absolute master.
One of those words is "nigger," if you're white (another is "cunt"). They're comedy killers. As I say obviously there are exceptions, but in today's comedy landscape you can count those exceptions on the finger of one hand and his name is George Carlin.
If Richards thought he was up there with Carlin, Pryor and Bruce, and that's why he said what he said, he's fucked in the head. If he was reaching for the most loaded word possible in order to hurt some fellow human beings, his go-to word was nigger.
If that's why he said what he said...he's fucked in the head.
Either way, his career is over.
I'll only care the next time I come across a showing of "UHF" with Weird Al Yankovic.
For me personally, this is a time I'm fortunate that "Seinfeld" means nothing to me; I've always thought it was overrated. So I'm not disturbed, as Waveflux posits (I think correctly) many are, by the question of how could loveable old Cosmo Kramer say such things?
To me it's more interesting because we don't often see a celebrity so completely flame out so fast. There are some things there's no coming back from, and I think this is one of them.
Putting aside for a moment the question of whether Richards revealed himself as a racist. I don't know.
(I do recollect reading an essay by a Puerto Rican actor (I think it may have been John Leguizamo) who related being cast in an episode of "Seinfeld." He was then replaced because he would not play the part in what he considered to be a stereotypical manner, though he was urged to by others, including Richards.)
But I'm astonished by his abuse of the stage. I think there are no rules to stand-up comedy and one of them is this: There are certain words you can't use and keep an audience with you unless you're a master, I mean, an absolute master.
One of those words is "nigger," if you're white (another is "cunt"). They're comedy killers. As I say obviously there are exceptions, but in today's comedy landscape you can count those exceptions on the finger of one hand and his name is George Carlin.
If Richards thought he was up there with Carlin, Pryor and Bruce, and that's why he said what he said, he's fucked in the head. If he was reaching for the most loaded word possible in order to hurt some fellow human beings, his go-to word was nigger.
If that's why he said what he said...he's fucked in the head.
Either way, his career is over.
I'll only care the next time I come across a showing of "UHF" with Weird Al Yankovic.
Britney Spears-that bra must hurt
Photo via the TMZ gallery, which is actually a treasure trove for those who like reading things into photographs. See the photo that Britney will one day use to explain to her children where they came from, and posing with not-at-all phallic objects.
Beware the Jabberwock, my son (Robert Altman)
You hear good and bad things about Robert Altman, dead today at 81. On the one hand, his skill with an ensemble cast ("MASH" "The Player") was justly legendary. Actors loved him, relaxed around him, and sometimes gave performances better than they ever had or would before or again for him.
In "Dr T. & the Women," for example, which was not on the whole a creatively successful film, he got a touching and memorable performance out of Tara Reid, of all people.
He was a filmmaker who, for better or for worse, deserved to have his name attached to a style of filmmaking. It's quite possible that some years from now if you say a film is "Altmanesque," people will know what you're talking about-big ensemble, overlapping dialogue, improvised in feel if not in reality, etc.
He was also, just to lighten things up a moment, one of the few Great American Directors who could get great American actresses to buy this argument: Taking off your pants is integral to your character.
(The story goes that in the phone conversation where he convinced Julianne Moore to do her infamous scene in "Short Cuts", she told him, "Bob, you get a bonus. I am a real redhead.")
I'm also a fan of "Tanner 88" his political-satire collaboration with Garry Trudeau, and I'm pleased it's currently rated second only to "MASH" in his listing at the IMDB.
And I'm one of those who thinks "O.C. and Stiggs," which seems generally thought to have been misconceived, is at least somewhat underrated. If nothing else the soundtrack by King Sunny Ade is always worth listening to, and he gets some fun and sexy performances from his cast, including a young Cynthia Nixon.
But-
He was also enamored and enraptured by The Auteur Theory, to the point where he tended to diminish the contribution of screenwriters and claim that he and the actors improvised much of his films.
This started especially after the success of "MASH," his first hit. According to people who were there at the time, most of "MASH" was in the script by Ring Lardner, Jr. But the bigger a hit it became, the less you heard Altman mention that name.
He was also publicly very negative about the TV series version of "MASH." Although in (series developer) Larry Gelbart's memoir, he records a meeting with the director in which he professed jealousy as the primary motivating factor for those comments.
Altman made the mistake, I feel, that many actors with a gift for improvisation make as well: He relied on it, trusting it to pull rabbits out of his ass when he hadn't prepared sufficient material. I loved "Popeye" as a kid and it's still a guilty pleasure today, but there's no denying it's a film that has no ending. It has a stopping place, not an ending, and that's not the same thing. Even Jules Feffier, the guy who wrote it, will tell you that.
In a way, if you wanted to make a satire of Altman's weaknesses as a filmmaker, you couldn't do better than his own "Ready To Wear." This is an indulgent movie which, dramatically, has no ending and, as a film, ends with Nude Women On Parade.
As Alice said of the Jabberwocky, it seems very pretty, but it's awfully hard to understand.
For better and for worse, such might be Altman's epithet.
In "Dr T. & the Women," for example, which was not on the whole a creatively successful film, he got a touching and memorable performance out of Tara Reid, of all people.
He was a filmmaker who, for better or for worse, deserved to have his name attached to a style of filmmaking. It's quite possible that some years from now if you say a film is "Altmanesque," people will know what you're talking about-big ensemble, overlapping dialogue, improvised in feel if not in reality, etc.
He was also, just to lighten things up a moment, one of the few Great American Directors who could get great American actresses to buy this argument: Taking off your pants is integral to your character.
(The story goes that in the phone conversation where he convinced Julianne Moore to do her infamous scene in "Short Cuts", she told him, "Bob, you get a bonus. I am a real redhead.")
I'm also a fan of "Tanner 88" his political-satire collaboration with Garry Trudeau, and I'm pleased it's currently rated second only to "MASH" in his listing at the IMDB.
And I'm one of those who thinks "O.C. and Stiggs," which seems generally thought to have been misconceived, is at least somewhat underrated. If nothing else the soundtrack by King Sunny Ade is always worth listening to, and he gets some fun and sexy performances from his cast, including a young Cynthia Nixon.
But-
He was also enamored and enraptured by The Auteur Theory, to the point where he tended to diminish the contribution of screenwriters and claim that he and the actors improvised much of his films.
This started especially after the success of "MASH," his first hit. According to people who were there at the time, most of "MASH" was in the script by Ring Lardner, Jr. But the bigger a hit it became, the less you heard Altman mention that name.
He was also publicly very negative about the TV series version of "MASH." Although in (series developer) Larry Gelbart's memoir, he records a meeting with the director in which he professed jealousy as the primary motivating factor for those comments.
Altman made the mistake, I feel, that many actors with a gift for improvisation make as well: He relied on it, trusting it to pull rabbits out of his ass when he hadn't prepared sufficient material. I loved "Popeye" as a kid and it's still a guilty pleasure today, but there's no denying it's a film that has no ending. It has a stopping place, not an ending, and that's not the same thing. Even Jules Feffier, the guy who wrote it, will tell you that.
In a way, if you wanted to make a satire of Altman's weaknesses as a filmmaker, you couldn't do better than his own "Ready To Wear." This is an indulgent movie which, dramatically, has no ending and, as a film, ends with Nude Women On Parade.
As Alice said of the Jabberwocky, it seems very pretty, but it's awfully hard to understand.
For better and for worse, such might be Altman's epithet.
Monday, November 20, 2006
"Gee, Davey, do you think it was...God?"
One of my all-time favorite "host segments" on Mystery Science Theatre 3000 was one during that fine film, Eegah! Joel and the 'bots had a little discussion as to the exact nature of Hell. You can watch it in the last two quarters-or-so of this 10-minute clip from the episode, which is recommended.
But if you don't have the inclination or the time to watch a 10-minute clip, here is a transcript of the bit. Or if you're really feeling like a lazy bum, here's the last handful of lines:
On a completely unrelated matter, the OJ Simpson book and TV special If I Did It has been cancelled. Proving that the American public can still be sickened by the poison the fangs of Rupert Murdoch have been pumping into them for years. Well done, American public. You're having a nice few weeks.
Keep up the good work.
But if you don't have the inclination or the time to watch a 10-minute clip, here is a transcript of the bit. Or if you're really feeling like a lazy bum, here's the last handful of lines:
Tom: Joel, what chance do we have in a world that keeps presenting us with vivid images of Hell?
Joel: Well, there's personal liberty, strength of conviction, those have been known to work... Then there's the times the country rallies together to beat back Hell, like the time we as a nation said no to Yahoo Serious.
Crow: I remember that, all of us, together, drawn inexplicably to the slobbering mouth of Hell, and then suddenly, somehow, by some unknown force, rescued in the nick of time like Moses and the Israelites.
Tom: Now, who in creation is powerful enough to do that?
Crow (in a deep, Goliath voice): Gee, Davey, do you think it was...God?
On a completely unrelated matter, the OJ Simpson book and TV special If I Did It has been cancelled. Proving that the American public can still be sickened by the poison the fangs of Rupert Murdoch have been pumping into them for years. Well done, American public. You're having a nice few weeks.
Keep up the good work.
Oy.
Fox is considering airing "a 'Daily Show'-like program" for conservatives. Good luck to them. Conservative satire is, traditionally, much harder than it might at first appear. Mark Evanier compared it to
I'm also reminded of something in the interview Playboy did with the cast & crew of "West Wing" in October 2001 (See? I told you I buy it for the articles). To quote Bradley Whitford, the actor who played Josh, the closest thing that series had to a lead (and now of "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip"):
Besides, "a Daily Show for conservatives" suggests that the "Daily Show" itself is a lot more progressive and liberal than it really is. You know I think they hit the heights almost every night, but they don't do it by trying to move the US in one direction or another.
A study a couple of years ago found that (if memory serves), in the months leading up to the 2004 election, the "Daily Show's" shots were almost equally distributed between George Bush and John Kerry.
They do it by seeing what's funny about reality. But then of course, as Stephen Colbert famously pointed out, reality has a well-known liberal bias. Which may be more what the Fox guys want to counter.
BTW, the mooted show is reportedly to be executive produced by "24's" Joel Surnow and Manny Cota. Well, "24" is a great show, but I don't know if they'd be my go-to guys for comedy, even if Surnow can spit George Bush's dick out of his mouth.
writing a Marx Brothers movie and trying to make Margaret Dumont the funny one.Of course, guys like Rush Limbaugh and, back in the day, Andrew Dice Clay do just that, so it may be safe to assume, as American Street does, that this is the level of humor we can expect from this undertaking.
Comedy, after all, usually involves a knee-jerk attack on the Establishment. Even today [Mark was writing in 1996], you won't get a lot of laughs mocking the underprivileged and disadvantaged
I'm also reminded of something in the interview Playboy did with the cast & crew of "West Wing" in October 2001 (See? I told you I buy it for the articles). To quote Bradley Whitford, the actor who played Josh, the closest thing that series had to a lead (and now of "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip"):
"If we were a bunch of Republicans, the show would end with swelling music and we'd be jumping up and down and saying 'Hurrah! We have managed to unprotect the land!' 'The tax break came through for the dot-com guys!"
Besides, "a Daily Show for conservatives" suggests that the "Daily Show" itself is a lot more progressive and liberal than it really is. You know I think they hit the heights almost every night, but they don't do it by trying to move the US in one direction or another.
A study a couple of years ago found that (if memory serves), in the months leading up to the 2004 election, the "Daily Show's" shots were almost equally distributed between George Bush and John Kerry.
They do it by seeing what's funny about reality. But then of course, as Stephen Colbert famously pointed out, reality has a well-known liberal bias. Which may be more what the Fox guys want to counter.
BTW, the mooted show is reportedly to be executive produced by "24's" Joel Surnow and Manny Cota. Well, "24" is a great show, but I don't know if they'd be my go-to guys for comedy, even if Surnow can spit George Bush's dick out of his mouth.
You'd be drinking, too, if you'd had the couple of weeks he's had
Good article from the New Statesman in the UK about the recent US election. I think I agree with about 98% of it. Especially the bits about how yeah, the Democrats won, but considering what they had to work with it's amazing they didn't deliver more of an asskicking. The article suggests that indeed, the Democrats didn't win, rather, the Republicans lost.
In an aside, the writer refers to John Edwards as "right-wing," which I don't actually think he is except maybe compared to someone like Dennis Kucinich. But then, Edwards/Dean remains the ticket that, at this time, I'd most like to see in 2008. This will almost certainly change by the time that year rolls around.
Anyway, that's hardly the main thrust of the article, which seems to have been written before it had been confirmed that the Democrats had taken the house and senate. So a few paragraphs near the end become less relevant.
But the last couple of paragraphs are especially interesting. In them, the writer reports claims he sources as high-up that President Bush is drinking again. For the record, I believe it, and I've believed it for a long time.
I've said this before, but it always bears repeating. Do you really think Bush passed out...from eating a pretzel?
In an aside, the writer refers to John Edwards as "right-wing," which I don't actually think he is except maybe compared to someone like Dennis Kucinich. But then, Edwards/Dean remains the ticket that, at this time, I'd most like to see in 2008. This will almost certainly change by the time that year rolls around.
Anyway, that's hardly the main thrust of the article, which seems to have been written before it had been confirmed that the Democrats had taken the house and senate. So a few paragraphs near the end become less relevant.
But the last couple of paragraphs are especially interesting. In them, the writer reports claims he sources as high-up that President Bush is drinking again. For the record, I believe it, and I've believed it for a long time.
I've said this before, but it always bears repeating. Do you really think Bush passed out...from eating a pretzel?
Gosh, I love living in this city
There is nothing like being awakened before dawn's early light by the sound of some guy banging and kicking at your door repeatedly for minutes at a time. Whining "Come on...it's cold."
You can call me a coward, but...I don't even like opening the door to unexpected strangers in the middle of the day when I'm well-rested. There was no way I was going to do it to someone doing that, when it's still so dark I can't see through the peephole. Before five o'clock in the morning when as it happens I haven't even had four hours sleep yet.
I admit it, I waited what seemed like several long minutes hoping whoever it was would go away. When he didn't, I called through the door, "Who is it?"
He replied what sounded like "Six."
I said "Who?"
"Two."
"Tell me who you are."
"Who are you?"
"I don't think you have the right apartment."
Then he said something else I don't remember and I said "Go away."
He did...as far as I can tell...and I came in here and started writing this. Why? Well, I'm hoping/assuming that in a few hours time after a better night's sleep this will seem like paranoia.
Logic would seem to suggest it was some drunken or otherwise brain-clouded friend of one of my neighbors. This apartment building is actually, technically, two facing apartment buildings so that I periodically get people knocking (in the day!) who want my apartment # in the opposite building. But that may be applying too much logic to it.
It seemed like a good idea to get down a timeline and as-immidiate-as-possible account of the weird experience. "See" you, god willing, tomorrow...
You can call me a coward, but...I don't even like opening the door to unexpected strangers in the middle of the day when I'm well-rested. There was no way I was going to do it to someone doing that, when it's still so dark I can't see through the peephole. Before five o'clock in the morning when as it happens I haven't even had four hours sleep yet.
I admit it, I waited what seemed like several long minutes hoping whoever it was would go away. When he didn't, I called through the door, "Who is it?"
He replied what sounded like "Six."
I said "Who?"
"Two."
"Tell me who you are."
"Who are you?"
"I don't think you have the right apartment."
Then he said something else I don't remember and I said "Go away."
He did...as far as I can tell...and I came in here and started writing this. Why? Well, I'm hoping/assuming that in a few hours time after a better night's sleep this will seem like paranoia.
Logic would seem to suggest it was some drunken or otherwise brain-clouded friend of one of my neighbors. This apartment building is actually, technically, two facing apartment buildings so that I periodically get people knocking (in the day!) who want my apartment # in the opposite building. But that may be applying too much logic to it.
It seemed like a good idea to get down a timeline and as-immidiate-as-possible account of the weird experience. "See" you, god willing, tomorrow...
Sunday, November 19, 2006
A short rant.
You know what I don't like? Writing samples. Specifically, preparing writing samples of my work to send to potential publishers and, in the past, theater companies. I'm trying to prepare two or three packages to send out tomorrow and one of the publishers I intend to try accepts email queries or, by regular mail, 10-page writing samples.
The task of picking 10 pages out of my work that represents what it is and what I can do, is a daunting one. There are scenes and chapters that I like but to place them out of context anguishes me.
I think (fingers crossed) that a lot of whatever effect My Girlfriend's Boyfriend has depends on its build. Some strong scenes I'm afraid won't have nearly as much effect if you haven't just spent the last x number of pages getting to know the characters and situations.
So you might well ask, as I have myself, why don't I just forgo the writing sample and take the emailed query option? That way I give them the premise of what my story is about, and they-we live in hope-tell me if they think it sounds like something they'd like to read. If yes, I send them the entire manuscript.
Well, that's fine, except that I actually do think the characterizations and dialogue are the best things in it, and that is perhaps best represented by a writing sample. So you see the hell that I am in this afternoon.
Should I-
If so, then what-
Or what about-
Yeah, but then-
Argh!
In a perfect world, of course, all publishers would be able to read entire manuscripts at all times. I understand that there are practical reasons why that's not possible. Nevertheless...
Argh!
ETA: Never mind. I fixed it.
The task of picking 10 pages out of my work that represents what it is and what I can do, is a daunting one. There are scenes and chapters that I like but to place them out of context anguishes me.
I think (fingers crossed) that a lot of whatever effect My Girlfriend's Boyfriend has depends on its build. Some strong scenes I'm afraid won't have nearly as much effect if you haven't just spent the last x number of pages getting to know the characters and situations.
So you might well ask, as I have myself, why don't I just forgo the writing sample and take the emailed query option? That way I give them the premise of what my story is about, and they-we live in hope-tell me if they think it sounds like something they'd like to read. If yes, I send them the entire manuscript.
Well, that's fine, except that I actually do think the characterizations and dialogue are the best things in it, and that is perhaps best represented by a writing sample. So you see the hell that I am in this afternoon.
Should I-
If so, then what-
Or what about-
Yeah, but then-
Argh!
In a perfect world, of course, all publishers would be able to read entire manuscripts at all times. I understand that there are practical reasons why that's not possible. Nevertheless...
Argh!
ETA: Never mind. I fixed it.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Whoo!
Veronica Mars has gotten a "full" season order. The ironic quotation marks because the CW has for inexplicable reasons chosen to order seven more episodes rather than the traditional nine.
This means that added to the initial tentative 13-episode order this year, Veronica will have a short, 20 episode third season, unless the CW decides to pony up for the last two at a later date. Still, this is good news, and kvetching too much about it feels like looking a gift horse in the mouth.
Studio 60, Friday Night Lights, now Veronica Mars. It's a suspiciously good year for shows I like. Come on, ABC, make if a fab four with The Nine. The premiere of Daybreak, the second half of which was in its timeslot, was even more disappointing in the ratings than The Nine, admittedly, has been. And it didn't get The Nine's reviews.
Even weirder than shows I like getting full season orders, this year there's some kind of Lewis Carroll thing going on where the networks are showing more patience than the critics. I just did a little search of the TV weeklies and such online.
A couple of them are already giving up on new shows after only a few episodes because "they're not dotting the i's and crossing the t's." But then, the TV critics are required by their jobs to watch shows like Dancing with the flippin' Stars. To say nothing of the OJ Simpson Fox special that no one should watch on peril of their mortal soul.
I, having fewer hours of my TV-watching time spoken for, can afford to give shows time to grow. What's weird is that the networks seem to be doing that too.
This means that added to the initial tentative 13-episode order this year, Veronica will have a short, 20 episode third season, unless the CW decides to pony up for the last two at a later date. Still, this is good news, and kvetching too much about it feels like looking a gift horse in the mouth.
Studio 60, Friday Night Lights, now Veronica Mars. It's a suspiciously good year for shows I like. Come on, ABC, make if a fab four with The Nine. The premiere of Daybreak, the second half of which was in its timeslot, was even more disappointing in the ratings than The Nine, admittedly, has been. And it didn't get The Nine's reviews.
Even weirder than shows I like getting full season orders, this year there's some kind of Lewis Carroll thing going on where the networks are showing more patience than the critics. I just did a little search of the TV weeklies and such online.
A couple of them are already giving up on new shows after only a few episodes because "they're not dotting the i's and crossing the t's." But then, the TV critics are required by their jobs to watch shows like Dancing with the flippin' Stars. To say nothing of the OJ Simpson Fox special that no one should watch on peril of their mortal soul.
I, having fewer hours of my TV-watching time spoken for, can afford to give shows time to grow. What's weird is that the networks seem to be doing that too.
Friday, November 17, 2006
I''ll never, ever live this down as long as I live.
You scored as The Pretty-Boi Dyke. You can be a bit cocky at times and ever the heartbreaker, but no one knows that you're really just looking for true love.
What Type of Lesbian Are You? (Inspired by Curve Mag.) created with QuizFarm.com |
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Where the right went wrong
One man's opinion from The Seattle Times, but it's an opinion I share.
The turning point, I believe, was a more emotional issue, that of Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman who brought Bush and his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, to the barricades in 2005 to back legislation keeping her on life-support over the protests of her harassed husband. Autopsies showed the woman's brain was in a "vegetative state," and the cynical appeal to religious conservatives turned off huge numbers of voters. Polling at the time showed most Americans, of both parties, rejected the Bushes' campaign to "save" Schiavo, and were disgusted at the raw partisan appeal in a tragic case
Short TV ratings news
Via Marc Berman.
My luck.
Friday Night Lights, a show I liked at first but has been losing more and more of my attention each week, has been picked up for a full season.
Meanwhile, Veronica Mars, a show I was tentative about early this year due to having been disappointed in the second season, has been giving me one "wow" episode after another.
And, after gaining some ratings points while House was on hiatus, now that it's back Veronica has slipped back into the "losers" pile in the ratings.
Irony is, I believe Veronica and House shouldn't be in competition with one another. I believe most people who like one, like me, would like the other. In a perfect world I'd like to see Veronica at eight and House at nine, maybe even on the same network.
But as I'm reminded daily, it's not a perfect world.
PS: And just to add insult to injury, more people would still rather watch The Unremarkable Adventures of the Stupid Whore & Her Daughter (formerly Gilmore Girls) than Veronica.
Did Rob Thomas desecrate a shrine in his youth or something?
My luck.
Friday Night Lights, a show I liked at first but has been losing more and more of my attention each week, has been picked up for a full season.
Meanwhile, Veronica Mars, a show I was tentative about early this year due to having been disappointed in the second season, has been giving me one "wow" episode after another.
And, after gaining some ratings points while House was on hiatus, now that it's back Veronica has slipped back into the "losers" pile in the ratings.
Irony is, I believe Veronica and House shouldn't be in competition with one another. I believe most people who like one, like me, would like the other. In a perfect world I'd like to see Veronica at eight and House at nine, maybe even on the same network.
But as I'm reminded daily, it's not a perfect world.
PS: And just to add insult to injury, more people would still rather watch The Unremarkable Adventures of the Stupid Whore & Her Daughter (formerly Gilmore Girls) than Veronica.
Did Rob Thomas desecrate a shrine in his youth or something?
That's what I like about Fox Broadcasting (re-linked)
Sometimes they air great shows like House, Bones and 24. And then sometimes they air shows where you just know, with absolute moral certainty, that every single person involved is going to hell.
Everyone. Either behind or in front of the cameras; including anybody hateful enough to watch it .
Shows like Temptation Island.
Or this.
If you did it, turn yourself in, you evil, arrogant fuck.
And to you Studio 60 viewers out there: Is it just me, or is the idea of a network president with honor starting to seem like even more of a wish-fufilment dream than Martin Sheen's President Bartlet?
Everyone. Either behind or in front of the cameras; including anybody hateful enough to watch it .
Shows like Temptation Island.
Or this.
If you did it, turn yourself in, you evil, arrogant fuck.
And to you Studio 60 viewers out there: Is it just me, or is the idea of a network president with honor starting to seem like even more of a wish-fufilment dream than Martin Sheen's President Bartlet?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)