courtesy of my blog: http://cjferrara.blogspot.com/
People often group me in with Liberals, and honestly that makes sense. Admittedly, most of my political views do often fall on the side of the Democrats. My dislike for the Republican party is probably not a secret. However, I must correct those people and remind you that I choose not to affiliate with ANY party. I believe that politicians should do what is RIGHT, and not what is in line with their party's agenda. I applaud those in Washington and Albany who come out and say, "Who cares what my colleagues think, this is the right thing to do, and I support it."
Because I am free to see all points of view, I actually agree with only one point the opposition to Occupy Wall Street brings up. This protest doesn't seem to have a point. Yes, the richest 1% have all the money, and are not paying their fair share of taxes. Yes, the banks and Wall Street got bailouts while the poor and middle class got screwed. The world is F-ed up, and it IS a problem, especially in this economy.
But even if the point has been driven home, the wealthy idiots who are the targets of the protest just don't get it. What do you people want us to do about it? They see their wealth as the reward for their hard work and success. Do you want them to stop being so awesome at their business that they lose money? Do you want them to give away all they have to charity, thus sentencing THEIR family to a life of poverty? Shall I ruin my business, and subject MORE people to unemployment?
They don't get it. They don't understand what they can do to make the situation better. Plus, there's really no end in sight for the protest. What needs to happen to satisfy the protesters and bring everything back to normal.
Well, I have a list of demands that I would like to offer to those participating in OWS. If they adopt this, and send THIS message to Wall Street, it at least sets boundaries and a negotiation starting point.
1. Stop C-Blocking attempts to raise taxes on the wealthy. The best, fastest solution to our economic troubles is to begin generating revenue. That means taxes. Poor and Middle Class families benefit most from government programs, so they best understand the need for tax dollars, and would pay more if they could. You guys can afford it, so, suck it up, do your patriotic duty. Instead of paying millions in lobbyists and bribes to politicians to keep them voting against tax increases on the rich; let them happen and pay a few hundred thousand more a year in taxes.
2. Release politicians from their anti-tax pledge. Many Republicans signed a pledge during their campaign to never, ever, ever raise taxes ever. There is still the threat of the consequences of breaking this pledge hanging over their heads. What if you released them from this, and instead suggested that you will support, vote for, and deify politicians that actually do something about the economy! Not talk about how the wealthy will save us... um... actually save us!
3. "Job Creators," how about actually creating jobs? Contrary to current Republican rhetoric, I know of no company that actually says, "I'm saving money thanks to tax cuts, so let me spend this additional income on hiring more staff." More likely, a company hires more staff because they have more work than people to do it. Or perhaps the wish to expand their company. Not hiring more people is a business choice, not an unfortunate result of high taxes. So, since the richest 1% are the "Job Creators,"create some frigging jobs! As I understand the President's Job bill, it's supposed to reward companies that hire new staff with a tax credit. It's also supposed to offer small businesses contracts to do work for government projects. More work = more staff = jobs. So... Pass This Bill!!!!
and
4. Every Bank must Re-finance Outstanding Mortgages and Credit Debt into a loan that is affordable. I'm not saying forgive outstanding debt, I'm saying roll it over into a loan with a logical, affordable monthly payment. Make it a condition that it must be paid regularly and payments must start immediately. Most people facing the threat of Foreclosure aren't there because they REFUSE to pay, they are there because they CAN'T AFFORD to pay. Start this project: go through your records, re-write the terms of every loan, contact the customers and offer them this chance to make their outstanding debt right again.
A) This creates Jobs! You now need to hire people to sort through all the paperwork. You need to hire people to train those people how to underwrite. JOBS, and not low level constructions jobs, (not that there's anything wrong with that,) but high level temp jobs to help people get back on their feet, and develop usable business skills.
B) It allows people to get out of their situation, and afford to spend money again, stimulating the economy. It also helps avoid foreclosure, which keeps them in their house, thus stimulating the real estate market.
and most importantly,
C) It makes you look like generous patriots interested in using your success and wealth to help the country recover from this crisis; not selfish douchebag elitists who care only about their own security. It would change your image, and prove the protesters wrong. It would gain BACK the trust of the people. Then, maybe, being a member of the richest 1% would become something people would WANT to be, instead of something people mock and insult. And then the 99% wouldn't feel the need to remind you that we are here, and we are hurt, and we are angry.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Thirteen Observations made by Lemony Snicket while watching Occupy Wall Street from a Discreet Distance
courtesy of my blog: http://cjferrara.blogspot.com/ and http://occupywriters.com/
by Lemony Snicket
1. If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald.
2. “Fortune” is a word for having a lot of money and for having a lot of luck, but that does not mean the word has two definitions.
3. Money is like a child—rarely unaccompanied. When it disappears, look to those who were supposed to be keeping an eye on it while you were at the grocery store. You might also look for someone who has a lot of extra children sitting around, with long, suspicious explanations for how they got there.
4. People who say money doesn’t matter are like people who say cake doesn’t matter—it’s probably because they’ve already had a few slices.
5. There may not be a reason to share your cake. It is, after all, yours. You probably baked it yourself, in an oven of your own construction with ingredients you harvested yourself. It may be possible to keep your entire cake while explaining to any nearby hungry people just how reasonable you are.
6. Nobody wants to fall into a safety net, because it means the structure in which they’ve been living is in a state of collapse and they have no choice but to tumble downwards. However, it beats the alternative.
7. Someone feeling wronged is like someone feeling thirsty. Don’t tell them they aren’t. Sit with them and have a drink.
8. Don’t ask yourself if something is fair. Ask someone else—a stranger in the street, for example.
9. People gathering in the streets feeling wronged tend to be loud, as it is difficult to make oneself heard on the other side of an impressive edifice.
10. It is not always the job of people shouting outside impressive buildings to solve problems. It is often the job of the people inside, who have paper, pens, desks, and an impressive view.
11. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.
12. If you have a large crowd shouting outside your building, there might not be room for a safety net if you’re the one tumbling down when it collapses.
13. 99 percent is a very large percentage. For instance, easily 99 percent of people want a roof over their heads, food on their tables, and the occasional slice of cake for dessert. Surely an arrangement can be made with that niggling 1 percent who disagree.
by Lemony Snicket
1. If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald.
2. “Fortune” is a word for having a lot of money and for having a lot of luck, but that does not mean the word has two definitions.
3. Money is like a child—rarely unaccompanied. When it disappears, look to those who were supposed to be keeping an eye on it while you were at the grocery store. You might also look for someone who has a lot of extra children sitting around, with long, suspicious explanations for how they got there.
4. People who say money doesn’t matter are like people who say cake doesn’t matter—it’s probably because they’ve already had a few slices.
5. There may not be a reason to share your cake. It is, after all, yours. You probably baked it yourself, in an oven of your own construction with ingredients you harvested yourself. It may be possible to keep your entire cake while explaining to any nearby hungry people just how reasonable you are.
6. Nobody wants to fall into a safety net, because it means the structure in which they’ve been living is in a state of collapse and they have no choice but to tumble downwards. However, it beats the alternative.
7. Someone feeling wronged is like someone feeling thirsty. Don’t tell them they aren’t. Sit with them and have a drink.
8. Don’t ask yourself if something is fair. Ask someone else—a stranger in the street, for example.
9. People gathering in the streets feeling wronged tend to be loud, as it is difficult to make oneself heard on the other side of an impressive edifice.
10. It is not always the job of people shouting outside impressive buildings to solve problems. It is often the job of the people inside, who have paper, pens, desks, and an impressive view.
11. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.
12. If you have a large crowd shouting outside your building, there might not be room for a safety net if you’re the one tumbling down when it collapses.
13. 99 percent is a very large percentage. For instance, easily 99 percent of people want a roof over their heads, food on their tables, and the occasional slice of cake for dessert. Surely an arrangement can be made with that niggling 1 percent who disagree.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Comparisons to Hitler
courtesy of my blog: http://cjferrara.blogspot.com/
Hank Williams Jr. recently got "fired" from Monday Night Football because of an unfortunate comment he made on Fox News. What he said was that President Obama and Speaker Boehner playing golf together was like Hitler playing golf with Bibi Netanyahu. This was perceived by many as comparing Obama to Hitler. And it infuriated many.
This is not an isolated incident. The memory of Adolph Hitler is often dredged up by pundits and politicians trying to drive home their point in an extreme manner intended to shock and draw attention. Our two most recent presidents have both been often mentioned in the same sentence as the former Nazi leader. This often generates a very visceral response; as if this is radically inappropriate.
I think people need to understand why we feel the need to continue dredging up the memory of this mass murderer. Adolph Hitler has become the true embodiment of evil. What he did in Germany was about as despicable as the human race gets. Many comedians have pointed out that Adolph ruined the Hitler name for everyone else. (not to mention the name Adolph.) Even people who don't fully understand what he did, or the ramifications of the final solution, understand that his name means bad news. When we mean ultimate evil, we could use the name Satan, but the devil is abstract; we imagine what hell must be like, but we have no actual reports of any events involving the prince of darkness. Most of our other extreme images of evil are fictional, and therefore a very nice concept, but useless as a political image. No, Adolph Hitler is the one man in history whose evil actions are so well documented, studied, and had so much of an impact on the world. He's not the only person to commit genocide, but he's the only one to take it to that level. There are others who epitomize extreme prejudice, but they often look up to A.H. as their predecessor and mentor.
So, why make the comparison in the first place? Well, I have been known to evoke the name when talking about Rudolph Giuliani. I don't think that it's a secret that I do not like the man. It's mainly because of his feelings on the subject of censorship, (he favors it), and public education, (he opposes it). When people respond to this by saying, "Well, you gotta hand it to him, he cleaned up New York!" I respond by reminding them that Hitler brought Germany out of a post World War I depression. Am I comparing Giuliani to Hitler? No. I'm pointing out that doing one great thing doesn't make you a wonderful man; by pointing out that even Hitler, mankind's most evil person, did at least one good thing as a leader. My point is that, yes, Rudy cleaned up New York, but he also actively sabotaged the NYC public school system, and pushed for the de-funding of a museum because he was offended by one of the paintings. Never forget that on September 10, 2001, Rudy Giuliani was one of the most hated men in NY.
Hank Williams was not comparing President Obama to Hilter, he was using the image of Hitler playing golf with Benjamin Netanyahu as an illustration of the concept of enemies palling around and being sociable. In his mind, as with many idiot teabaggers, Democrats and Republicans are not colleagues on opposite ends of the political spactrum, but rather the archnemesis of the other; one good, one evil; one bent on world domination, and the other the only man who can stop him. This comparison proves that Hank Williams is a moron, but not that he's speaking inappropriately about the president.
There are two ways to counteract an argument, either you have the knowledge to prove it wrong, or you make people afraid of it. Thus, when people "got nothing" in a debate, they often turn to demonizing their opponent. Glenn Beck was fond of comparing Obama to Hitler. Obama, he claims, is a socialist. (He's not, by the way.) Hitler was a socialist. Ooooh I'm scared now. But he fails to mention that Adolph Hitler's socialist policies are NOT what made him evil. No one thinks, "Damn, that Adolph Hitler, and his universal healthcare. And his state funded educational system." It wasn't his socialism that made him evil, it was the totalitarianism, the fascism, and the mass extermination of an entire race that did that.
Compare that to when some compared George W. Bush to Hitler. THAT was because Bush implemented the Patriot act, that allowed the government to monitor citizen's actions and communications. He also ordered military takeovers of other countries. Hitler actually DID both of those things. Did it make him feel bad to be compared to Hitler? Probably. Did his opposition have a point? Well, they had more of a point than Obama's opposition do.
What I'm saying here, is that Adolph Hitler is the perfect symbol of all things evil. And if you're going to use that symbol to make a political point, just make sure your comparison makes sense. And hey, compared to Hitler, most of us are pretty OK people. So being compared to Hitler isn't so bad. Being LIKE Hitler is really awful.
Hank Williams Jr. recently got "fired" from Monday Night Football because of an unfortunate comment he made on Fox News. What he said was that President Obama and Speaker Boehner playing golf together was like Hitler playing golf with Bibi Netanyahu. This was perceived by many as comparing Obama to Hitler. And it infuriated many.
This is not an isolated incident. The memory of Adolph Hitler is often dredged up by pundits and politicians trying to drive home their point in an extreme manner intended to shock and draw attention. Our two most recent presidents have both been often mentioned in the same sentence as the former Nazi leader. This often generates a very visceral response; as if this is radically inappropriate.
I think people need to understand why we feel the need to continue dredging up the memory of this mass murderer. Adolph Hitler has become the true embodiment of evil. What he did in Germany was about as despicable as the human race gets. Many comedians have pointed out that Adolph ruined the Hitler name for everyone else. (not to mention the name Adolph.) Even people who don't fully understand what he did, or the ramifications of the final solution, understand that his name means bad news. When we mean ultimate evil, we could use the name Satan, but the devil is abstract; we imagine what hell must be like, but we have no actual reports of any events involving the prince of darkness. Most of our other extreme images of evil are fictional, and therefore a very nice concept, but useless as a political image. No, Adolph Hitler is the one man in history whose evil actions are so well documented, studied, and had so much of an impact on the world. He's not the only person to commit genocide, but he's the only one to take it to that level. There are others who epitomize extreme prejudice, but they often look up to A.H. as their predecessor and mentor.
So, why make the comparison in the first place? Well, I have been known to evoke the name when talking about Rudolph Giuliani. I don't think that it's a secret that I do not like the man. It's mainly because of his feelings on the subject of censorship, (he favors it), and public education, (he opposes it). When people respond to this by saying, "Well, you gotta hand it to him, he cleaned up New York!" I respond by reminding them that Hitler brought Germany out of a post World War I depression. Am I comparing Giuliani to Hitler? No. I'm pointing out that doing one great thing doesn't make you a wonderful man; by pointing out that even Hitler, mankind's most evil person, did at least one good thing as a leader. My point is that, yes, Rudy cleaned up New York, but he also actively sabotaged the NYC public school system, and pushed for the de-funding of a museum because he was offended by one of the paintings. Never forget that on September 10, 2001, Rudy Giuliani was one of the most hated men in NY.
Hank Williams was not comparing President Obama to Hilter, he was using the image of Hitler playing golf with Benjamin Netanyahu as an illustration of the concept of enemies palling around and being sociable. In his mind, as with many idiot teabaggers, Democrats and Republicans are not colleagues on opposite ends of the political spactrum, but rather the archnemesis of the other; one good, one evil; one bent on world domination, and the other the only man who can stop him. This comparison proves that Hank Williams is a moron, but not that he's speaking inappropriately about the president.
There are two ways to counteract an argument, either you have the knowledge to prove it wrong, or you make people afraid of it. Thus, when people "got nothing" in a debate, they often turn to demonizing their opponent. Glenn Beck was fond of comparing Obama to Hitler. Obama, he claims, is a socialist. (He's not, by the way.) Hitler was a socialist. Ooooh I'm scared now. But he fails to mention that Adolph Hitler's socialist policies are NOT what made him evil. No one thinks, "Damn, that Adolph Hitler, and his universal healthcare. And his state funded educational system." It wasn't his socialism that made him evil, it was the totalitarianism, the fascism, and the mass extermination of an entire race that did that.
Compare that to when some compared George W. Bush to Hitler. THAT was because Bush implemented the Patriot act, that allowed the government to monitor citizen's actions and communications. He also ordered military takeovers of other countries. Hitler actually DID both of those things. Did it make him feel bad to be compared to Hitler? Probably. Did his opposition have a point? Well, they had more of a point than Obama's opposition do.
What I'm saying here, is that Adolph Hitler is the perfect symbol of all things evil. And if you're going to use that symbol to make a political point, just make sure your comparison makes sense. And hey, compared to Hitler, most of us are pretty OK people. So being compared to Hitler isn't so bad. Being LIKE Hitler is really awful.
Monday, October 3, 2011
What I'm Watching on SUNDAY! (or not)
courtesy of my blog: http://cjferrara.blogspot.com
SUNDAY is the new Thursday! Thanks to HBO, the big night for programming is on Sunday. The networks are following suit.
On HBO at the moment, it's all about Boardwalk Empire. Building on the popularity of gangster shows like the Sopranos, but set during prohibition era Atlantic City. This show lunches you into a realistic depiction of the actual politics of that era, and how Prohibition actually cause crime to BOOM. Steve Buscemi is amazing as Nucky Thompson, who is based on real life figure Nucky Johnson. They changed the name to give the writers the freedom to deviate dramatically from actual history; but most of the events that happen in the show, actually happened.
Hung, I can do without. And How to make it In America, not so much.
Fox has a whole animation block on Sundays. And as I mentioned before, the only time FOX comedies really work is when they are animated. The only "appointment" programming they have in my opinion is Family Guy. It's not that the Simpsons isn't funny, or The Cleveland Show, or American Dad. It's really more that I had to choose one, and FG won.
NBC reserves Sunday for special events like mini-series and sporting events. Someday they'll have programming, but not right now.
CBS has the Amazing Race, which should be more exciting. I mean it's a race around the world. It's won Emmys. The problem with AR is that it falls into the trap all Reality shows fall into. It's more about the wacky people on the show than it is about the competition.
The good news is that The Good Wife has moved to Sundays. This show is amazing, if you haven't seen it, you're missing out. Alicia Florrick (Juliana Marguiles) is the wife of disgraced State's Attorney Peter Florrick, who cheated on her with a hooker. While he was in jail, she went back to work for a law firm, and turns out she's a pretty good lawyer. She becomes friends with the awesome private investigator that works for the firm, Kalinda. Turns out, though, Kalinda used to work for Alicia's husband and they slept together. This has finally broken up their marriage, and gave Alicia the courage to sleep with Will Gardner, one of the firm's partners. Now, she's SEXY Alicia, and Peter, who is now out of jail, and re-elected, is looking to mess with her firm. Any questions, just write to me.
I can't deal with ABC's lineup. Desperate Housewives is just terrible guilty pleasure stuff. Brothers and Sisters, same thing. Extreme Makeover: The only edition that made any sense is overplayed, and in the reality show rut.
What I AM getting into is Pan Am. It's not anything really amazing or thrilling, and the hype of the show eclipses the actual content. But it has a charming group of characters, the pilots and stewardesses of Pan Am Airlines in the 60s. It discusses the image of the job, against the thrill of traveling the world, against the realities of the position. Add to that the intrigue of one stewardess who has been recruited by the CIA, and the side trips of the airline to evacuate refugees during the Bay of Pigs, and it's just interesting enough to hold my interest for now. Plus I know one of the core extras, so we play a game of "Spot Ray Gobes" during every episode.
So, my DVR is set for the return of House, and all the aforementioned programs. My DVR will be full for a few months. All is right with my entertainment. Please... enjoy. And if you profoundly disagree with any of my opinions. Use the web wisely.... leave a comment.
SUNDAY is the new Thursday! Thanks to HBO, the big night for programming is on Sunday. The networks are following suit.
On HBO at the moment, it's all about Boardwalk Empire. Building on the popularity of gangster shows like the Sopranos, but set during prohibition era Atlantic City. This show lunches you into a realistic depiction of the actual politics of that era, and how Prohibition actually cause crime to BOOM. Steve Buscemi is amazing as Nucky Thompson, who is based on real life figure Nucky Johnson. They changed the name to give the writers the freedom to deviate dramatically from actual history; but most of the events that happen in the show, actually happened.
Hung, I can do without. And How to make it In America, not so much.
Fox has a whole animation block on Sundays. And as I mentioned before, the only time FOX comedies really work is when they are animated. The only "appointment" programming they have in my opinion is Family Guy. It's not that the Simpsons isn't funny, or The Cleveland Show, or American Dad. It's really more that I had to choose one, and FG won.
NBC reserves Sunday for special events like mini-series and sporting events. Someday they'll have programming, but not right now.
CBS has the Amazing Race, which should be more exciting. I mean it's a race around the world. It's won Emmys. The problem with AR is that it falls into the trap all Reality shows fall into. It's more about the wacky people on the show than it is about the competition.
The good news is that The Good Wife has moved to Sundays. This show is amazing, if you haven't seen it, you're missing out. Alicia Florrick (Juliana Marguiles) is the wife of disgraced State's Attorney Peter Florrick, who cheated on her with a hooker. While he was in jail, she went back to work for a law firm, and turns out she's a pretty good lawyer. She becomes friends with the awesome private investigator that works for the firm, Kalinda. Turns out, though, Kalinda used to work for Alicia's husband and they slept together. This has finally broken up their marriage, and gave Alicia the courage to sleep with Will Gardner, one of the firm's partners. Now, she's SEXY Alicia, and Peter, who is now out of jail, and re-elected, is looking to mess with her firm. Any questions, just write to me.
I can't deal with ABC's lineup. Desperate Housewives is just terrible guilty pleasure stuff. Brothers and Sisters, same thing. Extreme Makeover: The only edition that made any sense is overplayed, and in the reality show rut.
What I AM getting into is Pan Am. It's not anything really amazing or thrilling, and the hype of the show eclipses the actual content. But it has a charming group of characters, the pilots and stewardesses of Pan Am Airlines in the 60s. It discusses the image of the job, against the thrill of traveling the world, against the realities of the position. Add to that the intrigue of one stewardess who has been recruited by the CIA, and the side trips of the airline to evacuate refugees during the Bay of Pigs, and it's just interesting enough to hold my interest for now. Plus I know one of the core extras, so we play a game of "Spot Ray Gobes" during every episode.
So, my DVR is set for the return of House, and all the aforementioned programs. My DVR will be full for a few months. All is right with my entertainment. Please... enjoy. And if you profoundly disagree with any of my opinions. Use the web wisely.... leave a comment.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
What I'm watching (or Not) 2011 - Thursday
Courtesy of my blog: http://cjferrara.blogspot.com
Fridays and Saturdays are basically re-run days, so Thursdays are the final day of the TV week, that is... until Sunday! I remember when Thursdays were "Must See TV." You would not make plans for Thursdays, because you HAD to be home to watch TV, so that you could discuss the shows at work the next day. That's when it was all about NBC's Comedy line up. Those days are OVER!
The only current NBC Thursday night comedy I can stomach is Community. The producers hit gold with the perfect casting, tone, and writing to this show. They also play with genre and concept which brings them a lot of flexibility with their storylines. If you haven't seen it; the plot revolves around a study group of various ages, races, and personal situations at a second rate community college. The genius is setting it at a COMMUNITY college means that older actors and younger actors can all act like immature school kids.
I think, psychologically, my issue with Parks and Recreation and The Office is my desire for escapism. Both shows center around characters who are in charge, and yet are completely incompetent. I deal with that in real life, and simply don't find it funny. I also get very irritated with the whole "Mockumetary" style of storytelling.
I think, psychologically, my issue with Whitney, is... well.. it sucks. Whitney Cummings is simply not funny, and the writing is amateurishly horrible.
While we're on the subject of sitcoms, How To Be a Gentleman is ALSO not good. It's trying, but not hitting the marks.
I'm very offended by comedy based on mockery of so-called "Nerds." I did NOT like Napoleon Dynamite, and for the same reason, I don't like Big Bang Theory. People love it. I know. Jim Parsons plays an effeminate nerd quite realistically, and people enjoy laughing at the smart guy intentionally written to be unsympathetic so that we don't feel guilty for laughing at him. I, personally, don't find it funny, and will pass, thank you.
I never got into The Mentalist. See my commentary about Castle. I'm also not a fan of Prime Suspect but for different reasons. I REALLY don't like the tone of it. It was created by Peter Berg, and I am not a fan of his work.
Grey's Anatomy and Private Practice. No.
The New Charlie's Angels should be awesome, what with modern action techniques and all. The acting, however, is TERRIBLE. It's also a remake, and remakes hardly ever work. I think Battlestar Galactica is the only time.
Person of Interest on the other hand, is original, well acted, and superiorly written. And since J.J.Abrams has his hand in it, you can bet that there's more to the story than is on the surface. Jim Caviezel is amazing, and Michael Emerson is, well, Michael Emerson. (Which is to say Awesome!) The story involves a computer created after 9/11 intended to monitor all cellphone activity, and track patterns in order to hunt down terrorists. A side effect is that it also finds possible murders and other crimes, but considers them to be "Irrelevant." Emerson, the computer's programmer enlists ex-CIA hitman Caviezel to find the people on the "Irrelevant" list and help to stop the murders.
Next up... SUNDAY!
In the meantime... Check out my opinions about...
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Fridays and Saturdays are basically re-run days, so Thursdays are the final day of the TV week, that is... until Sunday! I remember when Thursdays were "Must See TV." You would not make plans for Thursdays, because you HAD to be home to watch TV, so that you could discuss the shows at work the next day. That's when it was all about NBC's Comedy line up. Those days are OVER!
The only current NBC Thursday night comedy I can stomach is Community. The producers hit gold with the perfect casting, tone, and writing to this show. They also play with genre and concept which brings them a lot of flexibility with their storylines. If you haven't seen it; the plot revolves around a study group of various ages, races, and personal situations at a second rate community college. The genius is setting it at a COMMUNITY college means that older actors and younger actors can all act like immature school kids.
I think, psychologically, my issue with Parks and Recreation and The Office is my desire for escapism. Both shows center around characters who are in charge, and yet are completely incompetent. I deal with that in real life, and simply don't find it funny. I also get very irritated with the whole "Mockumetary" style of storytelling.
I think, psychologically, my issue with Whitney, is... well.. it sucks. Whitney Cummings is simply not funny, and the writing is amateurishly horrible.
While we're on the subject of sitcoms, How To Be a Gentleman is ALSO not good. It's trying, but not hitting the marks.
I'm very offended by comedy based on mockery of so-called "Nerds." I did NOT like Napoleon Dynamite, and for the same reason, I don't like Big Bang Theory. People love it. I know. Jim Parsons plays an effeminate nerd quite realistically, and people enjoy laughing at the smart guy intentionally written to be unsympathetic so that we don't feel guilty for laughing at him. I, personally, don't find it funny, and will pass, thank you.
I never got into The Mentalist. See my commentary about Castle. I'm also not a fan of Prime Suspect but for different reasons. I REALLY don't like the tone of it. It was created by Peter Berg, and I am not a fan of his work.
Grey's Anatomy and Private Practice. No.
The New Charlie's Angels should be awesome, what with modern action techniques and all. The acting, however, is TERRIBLE. It's also a remake, and remakes hardly ever work. I think Battlestar Galactica is the only time.
Person of Interest on the other hand, is original, well acted, and superiorly written. And since J.J.Abrams has his hand in it, you can bet that there's more to the story than is on the surface. Jim Caviezel is amazing, and Michael Emerson is, well, Michael Emerson. (Which is to say Awesome!) The story involves a computer created after 9/11 intended to monitor all cellphone activity, and track patterns in order to hunt down terrorists. A side effect is that it also finds possible murders and other crimes, but considers them to be "Irrelevant." Emerson, the computer's programmer enlists ex-CIA hitman Caviezel to find the people on the "Irrelevant" list and help to stop the murders.
Next up... SUNDAY!
In the meantime... Check out my opinions about...
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)