So, it looks like it's finally going to happen. For the unaware, there has been talk for a long time that the defunct Fox series, Arrested Development, would be made into a feature film. Though since those rumors had been going around since it was clear that Fox planned to cancel the show, way back in 2006, it was hard to know how credible this all was. Then again, I suppose that's Fox's "thing"--canceling awesome shows before their time, only to see them turn into cult classics and movies later (see Serenity/Firefly and our Imaginary Interview with a Fox Executive).
Anyway, while every other major cast member has long been a part of the movie project, Michael Cera was holding out for some unknown reason. It's not like he was up for James Bond or anything. Does the guy ever play anything other than awkward, geeky teenage boys? So why not play an awkward geeky teenager with a better cast and a script that probably involves somewhat fewer semen jokes? Anyway, this week, it was reported that Cera is now on board, and Ron Howard confirmed that they were moving forward with the movie--essentially, they're not giving out details anymore, which (while frustrating) is a good sign.
I have an ongoing argument with Gator6C about where Arrested Development fits among the best TV shows of all time. He claims it's too new to judge yet, which is fair, but I maintain that if we're going purely by writing and acting quality (and not dragging in influence or popularity) that it's a definite top 10. (It's actually top 3 on my personal list, but that's beside the point.)
Anyway in celebration, I give you this cool video I found of a guy doing a tribute to Gob at the 2008 annual Australian Society of Magician's competition. (Apparently, he'd won the last 4 years running and was bored with success.)
Morning all. Today, in addition to the Daily Fluff, we have an update to our Issues with American Idol. (For last night's results show--and no, I wasn't happy with the results, especially that wretched emo kid who covered the Stones, but what else is new?)
If you're catching up on the week, then don't forget to read the latest Fluff Five, Our Issues with Heroes, Issues with Top Chef (and there are quite a few issues with that finale), Issues with American Idol, and our article on When Valentine's Day Goes Wrong. And don't forget about the Daily Fluff Archive.
As some of you know, I'm a bad Catholic--which means that I subscribe to Catholicism, but am terrible about keeping all of the observances. Which, come to think of it, may make me an average Catholic. Anyway, as I mentioned in the Daily Fluff, yesterday was the begining of Lent, the traditional time for giving up candy bars while hoping to lose a few pounds before spring.
And of course, there's the meat thing. If you're not Catholic and have always wondered about the glut of fried fish commercials during March, now you have the explanation. We Catholics are supposed to abstain from meat from Fridays during Lent. Unless we forget and get a burger or slice of pepperoni pizza for lunch. Then, we're supposed to stare guiltily at our meal for a minimum of 5 seconds and attempt to quickly come up with a justification for eating it anyway. Popular choices include, "Aw, hell. I already screwed up so I may as well finish," and, "I'll just make up for it tomorrow--oh wait, I have that barbecue. Ok, I'll make up for it on Monday."
The funny thing to me about the no-meat thing is that I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time. Only being able to eat fish or vegetarian food must have seemed like a hell of a sacrifice back before safe transport of seafood and culinary knowledge had advanced quite as widely. (Though there was an interesting effort among various monestaries, etc. to categorize some things--like rabbit--as "fish" for the purposes of Lent. Which is a much more creative response to the mistake guilt mentioned above. It's a shame that I don't have the religious authority to declare pepperoni to count as "fish." I also think that the whole fish-on-Fridays thing is to blame for those people who say that they're vegetarian, but eat seafood. Sorry, real vegetarians. I know those people are annyong. Our bad.)
Anyway, as I was saying, I think it's more or less getting over if you enjoy lobster or shrimp scampi or sushi, etc., etc. for your Friday Lenten meal. How is that supposed to be keeping to the spirit of deprivation? "Yeah, it's Lent, so I can't eat steak today. I know! I'll have the lobster." I think that the rules should be amended a bit so that you can eat meat, but you would have to eat a disappointing meal on Fridays during Lent. So, for example, good sushi would be a no-no, but you could eat Spaghettios instead. Or a hot pocket. Or just about anything at Olive Garden. You get the point.
Hello. Today, in addition to the Daily Fluff, we have an update to our Issues with American Idol (how could we not comment on the most annoying cover of "Satisfaction" ever performed by someone not using a hairbrush as a microphone). There's also an update to our Issues with Top Chef. (Last night was the season finale, which I would have a lot to say about here if I weren't afraid of spoiling the ending for anyone who wants to catch it in one of the 15 million re-runs that Bravo will air in the next few weeks.) Oh, and if you're catching up, don't forget about our article on When Valentine's Day Goes Wrong.
Hey there. Today, in addition to the Daily Fluff, we have an article about When Valentine's Day Goes Wrong--for those of you who are still experiencing the silent treatment a week later and wondering why. And if you're catching up, don't forget about the latest installment of our Issues with Heroes or the newest Fluff Five.
As you can see in the latest installment of our Issues with Heroes, I'm not quite ready to throw in the towel on Heroes yet. I have my reservations, but I can't say that we've reached the shark jump quite yet.
And actually, I begin to grow a bit weary of the whole "jump the shark" phenomenon. Sure, the concept is true. It's more or less inevitable that any TV series that goes on long enough is going to suffer some level of repetitiveness or arguable decline. However, the real question to ask is how often the "shark jump" on the part of a popular show is due to a decline in writing and plotting and how often it's just our weariness with overfamiliar characters or a sign that the concept behind the show has gone as far as it can.
Take The Simpsons. Please. (Har har.) For the longest time (and well before the change to a sponsored and completely unnavigable site), The Simpsons was listed on Jump the Shark website as a "never jumped." I can't pinpoint exactly when the show started to decline, but anyone who thinks that it's even a fraction of what it once was is in sad, sad denial. Part of the problem with the jumping metaphor is that it presupposes a single defining moment of realization as opposed to the long, dubious slide that The Simpsons experienced. But the problem with The Simpsons isn't purely overexposure--sure there was a time when we were royally sick of the Bartman shirts, but the show was still good for several seasons after that point. With The Simpsons, it's clear that the writing slowly deteriorated. It became lazy, and fake outrageous instead of witty and provocative. Contrast it with South Park, which also went through a period of overexposure, but (despite its inherent uneveness) is very much what it always was--people who liked it still like it, and people who hated it still hate it, and it continues on, just as outrageous as it has always been. It's probably no coincidence that the creators of South Park are still involved with its production, whereas Lord knows what generation of writers The Simpsons is currently in.
But if The Simpsons suffers from writing decline, then what about the story/character exhaustion? I'll admit that this is somewhat more rare, but you can see strains of it in any show that is dependent on a gimmick to drive the plot. Take Lost, for example. Unless they ended it after 3-4 seasons, it was always destined to jump the shark from sheer story and character exhaustion. Eventually, we were going to get tired of these people being stuck on this island--no matter how many flashbacks or new mysteries got thrown at us. (And sure enough, the additional bluffs and storylines only exacerbated the frustration.) It is just impossible to maintain these stories and characters indefinitely without creating shark-infested waters. That's why I admire David Chase (and Dave Chapelle too for that matter) for making the decision to stop his series before it stumbled into repetition or contrived situations. No one wants to see a great show end, but seeing it slowly fade into absurdity is just as bad.
Hello. This morning, in addition to the Daily Fluff, we have an update to our Issues with Heroes based on last night's episode. And if you're catching up, don't forget the latest Fluff Five about the most annoying features of the Oscars.
Credit for this actually goes to Snickers, who sent the link to the best poncho ad ever. Admit it, you're thinking about getting a poncho right now, aren't you?
|
RSS Feed
