LOST and gone forever

I know you're all probably sick of this, and considering I haven't blogged in almost two months, I guarantee an eye-roll or two will result from this post, but whatever. There's a reason it's my blog.

But, on the day of the final DVD release of LOST, both the sixth season set and the complete series set, I just want to say this, once and for all:

The way I see it, there are two ways you can look at LOST, now that it's all said and done:

1. There will never be another show like LOST, so cherish the experience, because you'll probably never see anything like it again.

OR

2. There will never be another show like LOST, so breathe easy, because you'll probably never see anything like it again.

Whichever camp you fall in, congratulations! You have an opinion!

So now please, PLEASE, stop constantly sharing it with the violent vigor of a suicide bomber. We. Get. It.

In conclusion, check out the DVDs. The Epilogue is worth the price alone, as it gives closure to quite a few mysteries, including one very big one. A definite must-watch for any and all fans (even those who "wasted six years of their lives").

Check it.

Gory Details

I finally saw The Monster Squad, a nice little gem from the 80s. I must say, considering it's 23 years old, it holds up quite nicely, thanks in part to some nice cinematography and some great make-up effects.

Also, I love a film that's not afraid to kill people to raise the stakes, especially a film that's geared towards 10 year old boys. What a rarity. Thank you for that, Shane Black.

My biggest gripe with the film had to be that I just couldn't get past the fact that Frankenstein (portrayed by theatre actor Tom Noonan) looks like the deformed twin brother of Michael Shannon.

I guess, in a sense, it helped me buy into Frankenstein's creepiness, since I find Michael Shannon to be quite unsettling to look at. Revolutionary Road, anyone? 

No? Didn't see it? Count your blessings, my friends. Why? Because it's long and tedious. And because no one should ever have to witness anyone self-abort their unborn child and then proceed to bleed to death. 

Oops. Spoiler alert. 

Ritalin

Charlie Bartlett (2007)...

It's as if the writer saw Rushmore and Harold & Maude back-to-back and thought:

"I'll just do that"

A thematic mess.

Do-over

The time has come for me to face the music, and live up to my promises. June, my previously stated goal month, just didn't work out. Too much happened.

So, July is my new June, the battleground for my fight against unfinished screenplays.

Wish me luck, if you want.

And for those playing at home, the subject of this month's Script Frenzy: Do-Over is: Science-fiction.

Gif'd

"Heeeeey..."

This is what I look like when you Skype me.

And I'm recreating that thing I do when I blink for a long period of time, in case you folks were a wonderin'.

N-joi.

Make Some F#*kin Pitches

No one reads this blog anymore.

So for those who do (and who can read lips)....

I Tumble For You

I got me a tumblr.

Wilder & Wilder

That'll be my short-form blog, with more random--and hopefully more frequent--posts.

struck sure quest eons

This little writing epiphany came to me not too long ago, and I thought it was cool enough to share. It deals with structure:

ACT I - You are unlearned and ignorant. In order to become a better being, you must become learned and wise.

ACT II - So, you go to school. At school, you learn many things. It is a new environment. You make new friends. The ignorance begins to fade. You are becoming learned. But, you're not quite there yet, for school is not a place of application. You must enter into...

ACT III - The Final Exam. Here you are tested to the max on EVERYTHING you learned at school. You must apply it, so that you can become not just learned, but wise, for wisdom stems from experience, not from books. 

The End.

Yeah, I know. I said I was a Four Act Man, and I still am. It's just easier to illustrate in three. 

I dunno. This may not be news to you, but I found it rather enlightening. To think of the third act as being an exam of sorts for all the things learned in the second act makes the second act's often ambiguous purpose all the more clear. We often say the second act is where we try the protagonist, and that's true, but I think most importantly, it's where he/she is taught. It's almost as if you can come up with three or four "questions" that need to be asked in Act III, and then come up with ways for them to all be taught, or addressed, in the second act. 

Okay, an example (From a real script I'm concocting):

Protagonist - A new mother, estranged from her husband, desperately seeking approval from an adopted mother she never got along with, as well as from her mysterious birth mother. She believes that in knowing who her real mother is, she'll be able to raise her children right. In the end (SPOILER ALERT, sorta), she learns the most important relationship to foster is the one she chose to be in, the one with her husband.

So, what could the questions be for her Act II?

1. What kind of man is her husband?

2. What kind of mother is her birth mother?

3. What kind of mother is her adopted mother?

4. What does it take to be a good mother?

etc. etc. 

All of these questions could be a sequence, a scene, a conversation or even just a moment. When you look at it that way, it practically writes itself, no? 

And the best part is, you can write as many questions as you want. I mean, don't get carried away or nothin', cause then it'll get long, and possibly not as interesting, but always be asking questions. And maybe you don't address them all in the script. Maybe all they do help you with better understanding the characters; doesn't that still make them valuable? What's important is to just know the questions that need to be asked, and then shuffle in the answers during your second act. Teach your protagonist well*. 

So, basically, what I'm saying is this: Be your protagonist's meanest high school English teacher. Teach 'em everything you think they need to know to do awesome in their final act. Don't surprise them with new questions about information they never learned (I'd say that's a bit "deus ex machina", which by the way is such a cool sounding phrase, that it's a bummer that it's practically a swear word in Screenwriting Land), because that's not fair. Give them just enough (or more than enough) to pass the test. 

And don't make it easy. While they may do wonders for your GPA, there's nothing entertaining about an easy A. 

So, what are y'all's thoughts? Expound! Contend! Detest! Whatever works. I wanna hear what you think...

*Their father's hell did slowly go by

I sent this message to a friend of mine on Facebook, and I put a lot of thought into it, so I'm sharing it here.  Why? I dunno. I figure it's good to express one's opinions on something so divisive, and since LOST is over forever, why not do one last hurrah.

And, please, in no way am I saying I "get it" better than you did, if you don't agree with my analysis. If anything, LOST is a personal experience, and while its fantastic to discuss in groups, the only thing that matters is how you feel.

Spoilers Ahead. Natch.

[My friend asked about the character's mortality]

Yes, they all died, but not necessarily within the timeframe of what we saw on the show. Ben and Hurley even had the exchange outside the church talking about their tenure as Island protectors, so they must have done more after Jack died. I think Kate, Sawyer, Richard, Miles, Lapidus, and maybe even Desmond all got home, safely, and lived out their lives, and then died.

The Sideways world was, as Christian said, a place where there was no "now", so its a place where time isn't an issue (think about the continuity of Sun getting shot, meeting up with car accident Locke. The timeline doesn't match. Sun was shot the day after the plane landed. Locke was hit a week after...). All of those folks died, but at different times. It's messy to think about, because our brains have a hard time processing the idea, but it makes sense, sorta.

All in all, I see the show as an allegory for life, and how life is simply a confusing, mysterious place that never quite makes a lot of sense. And then you die. And in death, a lot of things get unanswered, and there's a lot of unfinished business. So, in a sense, when the show died, so did the burning questions. Since this was Jack's story, as we learned, it was necessary to leave the show with the same understanding that Jack had when he died. He didn't know what he was saving, or why it was important, but he just knew he had to do it. And we as an audience need to accept that. (I'm still struggling with it, to be honest. I get it, but I still want more.)

Jacob brought them all to the Island to not only save it from the Man in Black, but to set in motion a world where they could find peace (the Sideways world). He knew, after centuries of discovery, that human beings can't let go. We cling to life desperately, so much so that we often bring about our own demise. Our selfish need to survive, so to speak. Why? Because we don't want to lose loved ones. We congregate in groups, forming civilizations, and for us, death means the end of that. So, he pushed the castaways to the moment in 1977, where they set off Jughead, to create that new ending. But, they had to all be there. Together. They had to do it together. Everything they ever did had to be together, or else they'd be lost. Think about Michael, chasing after Walt. He ran away from the group, and then became "lost". The Oceanic Six. They weren't living fulfilled lives, because they weren't together. They were still "lost." Going back to the Island meant being together again. It meant being found. I think that's what Jack was craving when he said they need to go back; not necessarily his "destiny," but more like the chance to be with these people that have meant so much to him. He's survived with them, and that's a special bond.

The best thing we can take away from our lives are the relationships we cultivate. The people we love. Even the enemies we fight against.

I think what's most fascinating about the show is that in the end, they made their own ending. The Sideways world was their creation, created from a single act of incredible faith and trust. As a group, as friends, they changed their destiny, and gave themselves a happily ever after. That wouldn't have been possible without the experiences they had, living together. The show, for me, was about working out one's salvation, and most importantly, not working it out alone. The castaways were alone, miserable, and destined for failure. The plane crash changed that, and gave them new hope, in the form of friends and lovers. From there, they fought to protect one another, to survive as a group, and yes, there were casualties, but it made them stronger. Each season, the castaways would split up, chaos would ensue, and by the end, they'd be back together. Jacob knew that they HAD to be together.

Live together, die alone, right?

There's my ramblings. I didn't sleep much last night, because I kept thinking about the show. Insane stuff. I think I get what they were saying. I think they could have been more careful about filling the show with too much mystery, but that could have been by design. They knew folks would hate it, because it doesn't at all answer much of anything. But again, I think that's the point. We as the audience experienced the passing of LOST, and with it, all of the answers it supposedly held. As Damon wrote on his Twitter "Remember. Let go. Move on." It's a bold creative statement to say, but I like that they went there. They knew it would get people mad, but isn't that what LOST has been doing for six seasons?

So in that respect, it was perfect. Absolutely perfect.

Nerd Boyfriend

I'm trying something different today. Why? For kicks. Also, cause I want an excuse to write something short, sweet, and concise daily without it pertaining to film or pop culture. So, website reviews. Specifically, websites I've never heard of or been to before.

Why website reviews? Cause I just decided it. Get used to it.  And with the plethora of random junk on the Internet, I figured why not highlight the stuff that's just kinda cool?

This won't be a regular thing. I'm not that invested in this idea.

Enjoi.

NERD BOYFRIEND

LINK ME:
www.nerdboyfriend.com

DESCRIBE ME:
I suppose the title of this site stems from the notion that when it comes to fashion, nerds tend to emulate rather than innovate. It's these same folk that get a kick out of dressing like E.T. era Spielberg



or Harold Ramis in Stripes.



Consider this blog/site the source for all of your nerd boyfriend’s requests to dress like famous “nerds”, while still maintaining some sense of fashion.
Here are some notable ones:

Rowan Atkinson
Akira Kurosawa
Señor Chang (NBC’s Community)

SUMMARIZE ME:
A fantastic resource. Each entry has a well-researched selection of look-alike pieces to help create the look. It’s like any issue of GQ, except the pictures reflect a more relaxed, everyday demeanor, as opposed to the posed, and almost TOO fashionable celebs featured therein.

swamp eagle

I'm pretty sure I could listen to this song for a frighteningly long period of time, and not get sick of it.

(song starts at about 1 minute in...)



This is from the DVD of the 2007 Broadway revival of Stephen Sondheim's Company, in case you're curious. The man singing is Raúl Esparza, who you may know from his small stint on Pushing Daisies. That voice... Man alive....

And yes, he is playing the piano. All the cast members also play an instrument in the orchestra. It's a bizarre choice, but pretty cool nonetheless...

send 'em on in...

For those of you wondering what show I was referring to when I said "spec episode," here's a HUGE hint:

scripty larue part too

These are some conclusions I've drawn since messing around with Script Frenzy...


Slow Moves, Ellie

A little bit at a time goes a long way to aid in my sanity. I used to be a marathon writer, going on and on for as long as I could; but what that led to was me getting burned out and/or complacent. I was either convinced I'd had enough, or that I'd done enough. Write everyday, but make sure to not write MORE than you need to. Does that make sense? Spread out the fun, day by day, hour by hour, or however else you manage your writing. It's like any good serialized TV show: while we crave answers to throbbing mysteries, we actually wouldn't tune in if you gave them away. Keep the script alive by purposefully leaving something cool to write till the next time you write. If you've done a good days work of writing, but you still want to pound out that action scene because it's just too much fun, hold off. Get pumped about it as you go about your day, and then come back to it tomorrow. You'll have a whole day in between writing sessions, which will no doubt inject your sequence with more ideas.

Four Act Man

I'm writing in Four Acts now. It's official. I've been a bit skeptical about the idea, because it seemed to go against so much of the current wisdom floating around the Film/TV bookshelf at Barnes & Noble, but it makes so much sense. The midpoint of a film is a crucial turning point. It's where the world begins to shift. It's the entrance of the point of no return for our characters. It's a SUPER important moment. So, why is it treated as simply a "step" in the middle of the second act? It's not a simple story beat: it's an Act Changer. I think when you make the last half of your second act into an act on its own, it adds more weight to it... You view it differently.

Why the switch? Because of this blog post at Rage Against The Page, and also because of this article, written by the creator of NBC's Community Dan Harmon, a man who has many times ruffled his fair share of feathers in the studio system (namely those of Jeffrey Katzenberg, and apparently Lord Spielberg himself), but always over how they approach story in their animated endeavors. His approach is simple, and absolutely amazing. Here's how he breaks down thousands of pages of Hero's Journey-esque screenwriting books. Eight elements. One word each...

YOU
NEED
GO
SEARCH
FIND
TAKE
RETURN
CHANGE

I'll let Dan himself explain each one (Note: The context of this quote stems from his site Channel 101's quest for new 5 minute pilots. So references to 37 seconds and other time frames should be generally ignored. Unless you're looking to write a five minute pilot):

As I've said, the easiest way to visualize these steps is by drawing a circle, dividing it into 4 equal pieces, and writing numbers around it clockwise, with (1) and (5) at the north and south "poles" of the circle, (3) and (7) at the east and west poles.

1) "You" - who are we? A squirrel? The sun? A red blood cell? America? By the end of the first 37 seconds, we'd really like to know.

2) "Need" - something is wrong, the world is out of balance. This is the reason why a story is going to take place. The "you" from (1) is an alcoholic. There's a dead body on the floor. A motorcycle gang rolls into town. Campbell phrases: Call to Adventure, Refusal of the Call, Supernatural Aid.

3) "Go" - For (1) and (2), the "you" was in a certain situation, and now that situation changes. A hiker heads into the woods. Pearl Harbor's been bombed. A mafia boss enters therapy. Campbell phrase: Crossing of the Threshold. Syd Field phrase: Plot Point 1.

4) "Search" - adapting, experimenting, getting shit together, being broken down. A detective questions suspects. A cowboy gathers his posse. A cheerleader takes a nerd shopping. Campbell phrases: Belly of the Whale, Road of Trials. Christopher Vogler phrase: Friends, Enemies and Allies.

5) "Find" - whether it was the direct, conscious goal or not, the "need" from (2) is fulfilled. We found the princess. The suspect gives the location of the meth lab. A nerd achieves popularity. Campbell phrase: Meeting with the Goddess. Syd Field phrase: mid-point. Vogler phrase: Approach to the Innermost Cave.

6) "Take" - The hardest part (both for the characters and for anyone trying to describe it). On one hand, the price of the journey. The shark eats the boat. Jesus is crucified. The nice old man has a stroke. On the other hand, a goal achieved that we never even knew we had. The shark now has an oxygen tank in his mouth. Jesus is dead- oh, I get it, flesh doesn't matter. The nice old man had a stroke, but before he died, he wanted you to take this belt buckle. Now go win that rodeo. Campbell phrases: Atonement with the Father, Death and Resurrection, Apotheosis. Syd Field phrase: plot point 2

7) "Return" - It's not a journey if you never come back. The car chase. The big rescue. Coming home to your girlfriend with a rose. Leaping off the roof as the skyscraper explodes. Campbell phrases: Magic Flight, Rescue from Without, Crossing of the Return Threshold.

8) "Change" - The "you" from (1) is in charge of their situation again, but has now become a situation-changer. Life will never be the same. The Death Star is blown up. The couple is in love. Dr. Bloom's Time Belt is completed. Lorraine Bracco heads into the jungle with Sean Connery to "find some of those ants." Campbell phrases: Master of Both Worlds, Freedom to Live.

I've taken this to heart, and applied it to everything I conceptualize, in order to see the story broken down into the most basic of parts. EVERY story follows this pattern, believe it or not, so it's an incredibly effective means to simplify a story.

AND, the best part is, it fits so nicely into the Four Act Structure:

(This one goes counter-clockwise, I know. The man who created it is Australian, so...)

It's just a better way to handle things, I think, when you're dealing with four equal parts. With three acts, the second act always seemed to daunting, plagued by sooooo many story beats, and so much change. Yet here, it's clear what needs to happen in each act, and how that leads to the mighty change of heart. It just makes sense to me, more than three acts ever did. And yet, I went YEARS sucking from the teet of the three-act gurus, believing Aristotle to be a dramatic genius*, tapping into the very fabric of story, and exposing its thread count. I knew some folks subscribed to the four-act way of life, but I just couldn't get into it. But, after struggling through countless second acts, I finally see just how beneficial it is to add a fourth act, and to cut that bloody Act Two into two separate and juicy pieces.

In conclusion, I'm as pleased as punch to have figured this one out for good. It's liberating. Read Rage Against The Page's article, and also Dan's article (links above). They may just change your [screenwriting] life.

*Dramatic effect, people. I hope that's clear. Aristotle WAS a genius. A mighty, mighty genius.

Scripty LaRue

Ah, Script Frenzy. My own personal Moriarity. Some day, I will defeat you. But not this day...

I've chosen not to talk about the unmitigated disaster that was this years Script Frenzy up till now, because it was indeed a disaster. My initial script failed to take off like I'd hoped, and the thought of finishing it to the end made me sick with boredom, so I pulled out an old idea, and got crackin'. I did well, and I was excited with the prospect, but then reality set in, and I realized I needed to be focusing my time on my spec episode. So, I wrote that instead, but even in the middle of that, nagging story issues and a premise that just wasn't holding water led me to the very exciting (but depressing at the time) conclusion that I needed to start anew. So I did, and right now, I'm on the path to full recovery. But, not before the end of April. Sad face indeed.

100 pages is a fantastic goal for one month, and very doable. I don't doubt that. I think I'll just have to dub June my own personal Script Frenzy, so that I can get something finished.

As for next year, I suspect I'll tackle it as such: preparation. Script Frenzy seems to put the emphasis on "just write something!", and while that's fun and all, it's not conducive to even first draft quality writing for me. I'm a perfectionist, even at the earliest stages, so if I'm forced to continue on with a terrible story, just for the sake of a fake writing contest, I'm going to go crazy, first draft or not. So, it has been decided by me, and myself, that come next year, I will prepare more earnestly beforehand to establish a feature-length idea that is not only interesting for 100 pages, but also fully-formed in my head, and more importantly, on paper.

Thus it has been decreed, and so shall it be.

i'm hooked on a theory

It's Tuesday, and in my world, very little occupies my thoughts except for that of LOST. Pathetic, sure, but since we're in the final stretch, I see no harm in appealing to my inner geek and enjoying these last moments.

Anyway, I wanted to just briefly give anyone who cares a piece of what I'm thinking about, in regards to the final season, but specifically to Jacob and his friend.

SPOILERS AHEAD, NATURALLY...

Good and Evil seems to be the buzz words when it comes to these two folks, but in last week's episode, we saw that both of these guys deemed the other one "Evil", or "The Devil." This struck me as fascinating, and definitively proved that this isn't about good and evil, in the absolute sense.

I'm reminded of the season 2 premiere title, "Man of Science, Man of Faith", an episode that highlighted the struggle Jack has with Locke's blind faith in his "destiny" and in the Island's powers. As we've seen, Jack has slowly become a man of faith, someone who just last season, took the biggest leap of all and tried to explode a hydrogen bomb, in order to reverse the past and make their lives better by never having their plane crash. Locke however, had his faith fail him countless times, ultimately leading to his death, and to him becoming the face of the Smoke Monster.

So, here's what I'm thinking: this conflict is key to the show. It has been since season one. So, instead of good vs. evil, I wager the show is presenting a much more interesting approach: Faith vs. Reason. Here's why:

Jacob - He's an enigma. He speaks only through Richard Alpert, who as we've learned, was also not privy to everything. He asks only that those who follow him learn for themselves what they must do. They know they are special, having been given a gift, but in the end, they have to figure it out on their own. He leaves things unanswered on purpose, so that people like Jack can learn on their own.

MIB - Smokey takes a different approach: he's forthright. He spells it out like it is, almost over-simplifying things. He promises results in exchange for discipleship, and his arguments are sound, and reasonable. He holds little back.

I think when Jacob was saying that The Island keeps "evil" from pervading the world, he wasn't talking about demons, or monsters, but rather an overflowing of Reason. Reason teaches us so many wonderful things, through science and philosophy, but what would happen if Reason was to pervade our world on a massive scale? What would happen if EVERYTHING was spelled out for us, and we knew all the answers? I think we'd all be asking ourselves "So, what now? What's left to believe in?"

I think belief and faith is something crucial to human existence, whether it's in God, or Buddah, or Allah or even whether it's faith in Science. Scientists have faith, believe it or not. It may be a more secular faith, but it's faith nonetheless. They believe that Science can prove all the mysteries of the world, even though they can't see it, they believe it. If Scientists had all the answers, what would be left? Our understanding would be complete, and Science would become fact and life would be, well, boring.

The Island governs that balance. It keeps Reason at bay, allowing men to discover for themselves how to be men, and how the world functions. It promotes the need for faith, for belief. But, as it is a balance, Reason still is allowed to exist, for it is as necessary as faith.

What's interesting to realize is that while Faith is the enemy of Reason (which is why MIB was so dead set on killing Jacob), Faith has no reason (ha!) to despise the idea of Reason, because without Reason, there can be no understanding, and isn't that what we are all seeking? Understanding? Jacob wants his followers to understand, but he doesn't want it all spelled out, because then what's left to learn? Jacob needs that balance, or else he's done for.

It's a balance. It's like the Cave of Names and the two rocks. One without the other is chaos, either a world of blind faith without reason, or reason without the ability to learn for one's self.

Also, look at it another way: Jacob believes men are good, and he's desperate to prove that to MIB, while MIB believes men are inherently evil, capable of terrible things even without negative influence. That seems to further emphasize the varying belief systems of these two individuals: If men are good, then they don't need all the answers to make a better world, but if they're evil, then you need to spell it out for them to help them make the best decisions.

So, essentially, the Island serves as the ultimate place of understanding. All the answers are there, everything we could ever want to know about The World. But, with Jacob as its ruler, those answers are kept hidden from the Island's inhabitants, allowing them to discover the answers for themselves. With Jacob gone, the world is in danger of losing faith, and becoming all knowing, if MIB were to leave. To the MIB, that's a wonderful thing, because there are no secrets, no blind following of mystical entities. In his mind, the world is better off understanding itself than constantly questioning itself.

Jacob brings people to the Island to keep trying to prove to the MIB that it's better for him to be imprisoned and locked away on the Island, but he's been failing. The men keep killing each other off, proving, in a sense that without the influence of Jacob, men will still be evil. Now, enter Richard Alpert, who introduces the notion that maybe Jacob's approach is flawed; if they don't know to follow Jacob, how can they not listen to Reason, the only other voice on the Island? So, Richard begins to gather castaways, with the help of Jacob, and we get The Others, the indigenous folk who help Jacob to guide his "candidates", fully aware that one day the MIB will kill him (for he knows all, right?).

Now, this only accounts for the Jacob/MIB thing, not the time travel, Jughead, Dharma Initiative, Flash Sideway stuff. That is all still a mystery to me, but I for one hope they connect to my theory.

So, there you go.

Probably a lot of hokum, I know. But, what else you gonna think about when you can't sleep? There's so much more to this story, that I'm half-convinced this is wrong, but I like to believe it anyway. It's what makes the show so much fun; it means so many different things to so many different people. And, I think it'll remain relatively ambiguous all the way to the end. We'll get our answers, sure, about the Island, and where exactly these two fellas came from, but apart from that, why would we want to know more?

jeux d'enfants

Today I made two very frustrating gaffs in my attempts to be a good sport in the Game of Social Networking. One involved me making a fool of myself. The other involved me making a fool of myself, and losing a friend in the process.

First booboo: I found out via various stalking methods (you know, the kind where you see someone you know in your friend's "Friends" section on Facebook, and so you click, and that clicking leads to more people you know, until eventually you're looking the blog of someone you know, but haven't had the gumption to add them as a friend. That kind) that someone I knew from high school was engaged to someone else I knew from high school. I wanted to congratulate her, because I just think its cool that her and him hooked up. I mean, in my mind it made sense. So I added her as a friend, and said something to the effect of, "I'm adding you as a friend because I want to congratulate you", as if that was the sole reason why I needed her friendship, so that I could show her how happy I am for her. Because that matters to her. I then went on to remark that the two of them "make sense," whatever that means. After I sent it, it took five minutes (read: far too long) before I realized what I said was COMPLETELY ridiculous. So, I waited. I waited for her to (hopefully) add me as a friend.

And she did. So, I tried to make amends. I apologized for sounding like an idiot, and all felt right. Until I posted it on her wall. And then read it back. Here's how it read in my head: "Dear Self: You have succeeded in twice making a fool of yourself with this person. Stop now, or risk her unfriending you." Red face. Foot in mouth. Stomach churning with anxiety.

Now, it must be noted that I don't have a "Friend Complex." (This is important for both this story, and the one to come.) I don't have any need to accumulate 5,000 friends (which is the max, I believe), or even 300 friends. I'm happily content with my 222 (previously 223 as of 8 pm) friends. I rarely befriend folks who I don't know. So there.

Okay, so on to the next:

I have a certain friend who I've known for years. We went to school together, church together, camped together, talked together, played too many video games together, and saw a lot of movies together. We were good friends. As we've grown older, we've grown apart, naturally, but we managed to keep in touch. He married a fine gal from Colorado, and then moved to Provo. He even starred in my first film project. Anyway, we had some good times.

So, today, he posts something on Facebook about how he's noticed that those he knows who complain about the film Twilight seem to be --and continue to remain-- single. Like any upstanding Twilight critic/single man, I took slight offense to this, because it seems to be insinuating that single people "just don't get it", and that somehow, being married gives you keen insight into the love-starved brilliant mind of Stephenie Meyer. (Side note: I get really fed up with folks who use their marital status as, well, a status symbol, positioning themselves above their single friends, as if to say "Well, what's wrong with you?". It gets old.)

Anyway, back to the status. So, I called him out on it. I mentioned that I've seen Twilight 3 times, and that it's just a terrible movie. I called his comment "douchy", because it kinda was. This kid is known for his sick sense of humor, but this rubbed me the wrong way. So I told him about it. I figured he could take it, considering he dishes it out himself quite frequently. I was at relative peace with this, until I got a notification that he had commented on my comment. I clicked it, and got a surprise: He was no longer my friend. I couldn't read his comment. He not only replied to what I said, but in his anger, he wasn't even going to let me read it!

I was livid. I didn't get it. I vented. I talked it out with someone over Google Chat. It felt good. During this chat, I was peeking around, wondering if his wife would soon follow suit, and cancel our digital friendship as well. It was then that I saw ANOTHER thing that took me aback: her relationship status no longer listed my friend. He was gone. I searched his name, and nothing came.

I asked my Google Chat friend to search his name, to see if he blocked me. Sure enough, he had. He had blocked me. My friend of over 10 years blocked me because I didn't like Twilight. Or, at least that's what I have to assume.

Looking back, I have to wonder if I'd somehow deserved this. Him and I did have our differences of opinion, and I was probably more vocal about it than anything. This could have led him to become increasingly annoyed with me, possibly hiding me from his feed, or whatever. Maybe I earned this final goodbye by continuing to annoy him.

Whatever it was, it still feels petty. It still feels like he's in the wrong. Who unfriends someone, and then blocks them forever? Who is that ridiculous? He is, I suppose.

I emailed him, asking what I did. I have to know. I have to understand how I offended him. It's bothering me. I can't stop thinking about it. I mean really! Who could not like me? (the answer is plenty of people, as I'm beginning to learn)

*Sigh*

Oh well, right? Two infractions of social networking etiquette. They're not uncommon. One hasn't resolved itself (she hasn't responded to my wall post), and the other still lingers, but I'm beginning smell the heavy scent the finality. I doubt he'll email me back. I don't think he cares to know me anymore if he's that serious about blocking me. Makes me sad.

So, in an effort to better myself, I have to look back and wonder: what can I learn from this? Well, for starters, I need to keep my trap shut. Sarcasm doesn't register in black and white. Also, just avoid being a dill-weed on the Internet. Don't hide behind miles of distance between you and your subject; imagine they're in the same room as you, and only say things you'd say to their face. I think that's a good rule of thumb, don't you?

Baby Fish Mouth: Revisited

In the ever burgeoning spirit of change that's been sweeping the nation, I decided to revisit my list from last year regarding the shows I watch, including a few new ones that have picked up steam and tickled my fancy...

NOTE: Last year is written in plain text.
Right now is written in bold.

NEW SHOWS:

Modern Family - This is one of only two new shows I look forward to. The pilot had me almost on the floor laughing, and each episode since has been just as hilarious. And it has heart, which is crucial to a good, solid comedy. NOW - Still the funniest show on TV. It makes 30 Rock look weak, and it has pushed that show down a few pegs on my must-see meter. It's a shame.

Community - It's got Joel McHale, and it's wonderfully absurd. It too has heart, but it's a tad bit more cynical in its delivery, but I laugh consistently. NOW - It's consistently funny, and I'm in love with the characters more and more each week. I fear for what season 2 will bring, simply because I can see the show either getting high on its own comedic success (following the inevitable Emmy nominations), or trying to raise the stakes and grab viewers (similar to how 30 Rock front-loaded its second season with too many guest stars). We'll see. For now, I love it. A very, very close second to Modern Family as the funniest show on TV.

Glee - The music is fab-u-lous. The other bits? Not so much. Still, it's appointment television (it's the other show I look forward to). I'm not a fan of the show's central conflicts, but it doesn't hurt the show too much. NOW - This show rocked its mid-season finale, wrapping up conflicts, and bringing on the musical mayhem. I hear great things about its upcoming back 9 (Idina Menzel, Neil Patrick Harris, a Madonna episode, Joss Whedon directing, the return of Kristen Chenoweth, more songs per episode... the list goes on), so here's to a bright future.

The Good Wife - This show makes me want to be a lawyer. Not only are the cases compelling, but the central idea (disgraced politician's wife restarts her life as a junior associate in a law firm after her husband is sent to jail) drives the show to new heights. A must see NOW - Still the best new drama, and also one of the best dramas on network TV. The writing has remained sharp throughout, twist after twist. I like what it is, and I hope it never changes.

FlashForward - I don't know about this one. I'm intrigued, for sure, but I don't ache for this show like I did for LOST in its first season. I think its still figuring itself out. My suggestion? Get David Goyer away from as many scripts as possible... And lets focus on less characters, please... NOW - Its back 9 started back up last week, and it was iffy at first, but it picked up in the premiere's second hour, focusing on the enigmatic Simon (Dominic Monaghan), and answering A LOT of lingering questions. Should be interesting to see where this goes.

Cougar Town - I've only seen the pilot, and frankly, I was super creeped out. It got a full season pick-up so it must be doing well. I'll check it out once the back nine kick in. Here's hoping they remedy the creepy.NOW - I have watched more of this show, and I like it. It's not a show I watch consistently, but it's a nice distraction when Modern Family is over.

Cleveland Show - HATED the pilot. Haven't seen it since. NOW - Still don't care. Blech.

Eastwick - Desperate Housewives with magic. But boring magic. The guy playing the devil is good, but the women are dry stereotypes. Nothing exciting NOW - Cancelled. Thankfully.

Justified - So good. The pilot was phenomenal: tense, well-acted, and loaded with the promise of good, juicy drama. Check it on, Tuesdays at 10 on FX.

Archer - I'm on the fence with this one. I saw an episode way back when, and it felt forced, and I felt lost. But, I went back and watched the premiere, and laughed quite a bit, so maybe I need to watch it from the beginning. We'll see.

Parenthood - A decent show. Not super high on my must see list, but nice nonetheless. Lauren Graham is a welcome face to see again on Tuesday nights, so there's that. Still, she's no Lorelai Gilmore, so... Just not the same...

V - It had a great, if too short, first half (if you can call four episodes half), so I look forward to what's to come. I hear it's good. I like that it has a fast pace, and that it's not looking to develop an expansive mythology. This is an action show, pure and simple. And, thankfully, it's actually fun to watch.

Caprica - I completely overlooked this (thanks to Jacob for reminding me). I'm really far behind on this show. I JUST saw episode five, which was by far the best (the V world stuff with Tamara Adama will hopefully continue to be awesome), so I'm excited to watch the rest. My TiVo has been fickle about recording, because of some technical glitches, so I've had to wait and whatever. It's annoying. I like the show. It's slow. It's not Battlestar in terms of intensity, but it's fun to see how that world came to be. It's provocative, and it's certainly having fun pushing a few current political issues, but I like it. I don't love it yet. But, if it continues to touch on the philosophical and spiritual, and emphasize just how this gets us to the Cylon War, I'm down to fall in love.

RETURNING SHOWS:

Dollhouse- I'm officially bored with this show. After the supposedly game-changing "Epitaph One" episode, I expected a resurgence of energy in this show, but I see none of that. All we've gotten so far is Echo getting married, and nursing a baby. Uncool, Whedon... Uncool. NOW - As we all know, Dollhouse died in January, but not before pulling out all the stops, delivering some of its best episodes. Fantastic stuff. A master class for bubble shows: this is the kind of closure every bubble show should shoot for in its final hours of unwatched prime-time glory.

Grey's Anatomy - After an awkward season last year (but a pretty phenomenal finale), this show feels like it did in its second season. I hope it continues. NOW - Yeah, they were good episodes, but the show is back to dullsville. I don't miss it when I don't watch it. Never a good sign.

House- I like this show. It makes for a nice Monday eve. NOW - Same ole, same ole. They did get rid of my favorite character, Cameron. Still not sure how I feel about it. BUT, they're bringing Cynthia Watros (LOST's Libby) into the mix for an arc. Should be fun.

Heroes - I broke up with this show after the abysmal season premiere. I did watch Bryan Fuller's recent (and well done) episode, so my interest is piqued as to where it's heading (quite the cliffhanger), but his departure still has me unsure. NOW - Dead to me. I stopped watching, and never looked back, despite the rallying cries of "But it got better!" Sorry. I just don't buy it. Or rather, even if it were true, I just don't care anymore to care. It's as simple as that

The Office - This show is uneven for me. Season 2 is still where this show peaked. The Jim and Pam wedding was wonderful. I still enjoy it. NOW - Good. Watchable. Not stellar, but good filler b/w the ever better Parks and Rec and 30 Rock. The Halpert Baby Birth episode was pretty funny, if not a bit too silly. I just have to accept that this is what the show is, and not expect Ricky Gervaisian levels of subtle awkward genius. *sigh

Parks and Recreation - I'm actually liking this more and more each week. I think they're hoping for a bit of The Office mixed with 30 Rock, as the show has become significantly more absurd. After the underwhelming first season, this is nice to see. NOW - Love it. It's better than The Office, for sure. I feel like they've found their groove. But, with the news that Paul Schneider is leaving the show, and that Rob Lowe is joining the cast, I'm a bit dubious. And to top it off, Amy Poehler's pregnancy is causing the show to rush into production on its third season. I just hope the writers and actors aren't too burned out from a stellar season, forcing them to fall down the joke spiral. I hope not.

Fringe - I love this show. The mythology is fun, and its delightfully macabre. Yeah, it's not brilliant television, but I'm entertained, and I'm rarely bored. NOW - The mid-season finale was PHENOMENAL, furthering the show's bizarre mythology, and making it more and more relevant to the character's lives. I'm hearing amazing things about the April 1st episode. Can't wait.

Big Bang/HIMYM - Still good. Big Bang seems to get funnier each week. NOW - HIMYM is treading water. It's getting a bit stale. Barney is the best part of that show, and even he is starting to feel overdone. This last episode was a good example of that: Barney was hilarious. The rest? Not so much. Painting Ted as a man slut? Huh? Stop changing history to serve your story! I no likey. Big Bang is still funny, but the Penny/Leonard relationship isn't working. That's not the what this show is about anymore, so they need to put the focus back on Penny and Sheldon, and the bizarre friendship that has emerged b/w them. Still, I laugh. So, there you go.

LOST - Come on. Do I need to comment? Okay, I will. It's been a slow start, admittedly. The Flash Sideways are cool, but there's a sense that they're bogging down the show's main thrust, and I can agree with that. I want to see them coming together. I need to see how they relate more. The Dr. Linus episode was fantastic in that regard. But, we have gotten some interesting bits of mythology answered, including the notorious numbers, so that's a big deal. I'm excited. I'm not bored. I can feel it leading somewhere. I don't know where, but its somewhere, and that's better than in the early days of Caged Sawyer and the Rabbit of Hydra Island, when things were slow, but they were also going nowhere.

Breaking Bad- We're only one episode in to the third season, and I'm already on the edge of my seat. A great follow-up to its shocking finale last season. Can't wait to see where it goes.

24 - Oh my boring. This season has put me to sleep several times over. The last two episodes (haven't seen Monday's) have been a nice change of pace, but it feels like too little, too late. Thankfully, I'm hearing this is its last season, which means Jack Bauer will be hitting the big screen. Where he belongs.

Chuck- Love this show. And you should too. It's witty, action packed, romantic and loads of fun. You don't even really need to watch it from the beginning. Here's a primer: Chuck is an accidental spy. He has a computer in his brain that helps him be a spy. He loves the blonde, and she loves him. Complications ensue. Hilarity follows. Just watch it. Mondays at 8. NBC.

Project Runway- My patience is running thin with this show. The judges seem to be off in crazytown, picking designs that just seem ridiculous to win, but also picking contestants who are just too boring for their own good. If it weren't for Southern firecracker, Anthony, this season would be a HUGE bore, much like last season was. Boo.

Damages - This show is back with a vengeance. Last season was sort of the show's Quantum of Solace, pausing far too often so that poor Ellen Parsons could seek revenge for her fiancé's murder and the attempt on her own life, as opposed to focusing on the main legal case and it's repercussions. This season however has not only taken its story straight from the headlines (tackling  a Bernie Madoff type and his family), but has kept the focus primarily on the case. And, don't even get me started on the doozy of a twist in its first episode back. Wow. Way to slingshot this season forward in one single moment. Bravo.

Gangway for Footcycle!

This is a great article that talks about a time when finding a rare film was something not unlike finding a treasure map to incomprehensible riches in your attic.

Read it here...

My reason for posting it is because it touched on something that I've been trying to deal with for so long: the idea that once a film exits the theatres, it ceases to be a big deal.

I've discussed this before, and it was a big reason why I stopped liking movies those many months ago. Today, almost every single film is at our fingertips, whether through Torrents, Netflix, Redbox, On Demand, or what have you. Sure, that freedom to watch something whenever we want allows us the privilege of leading half-way decent lives. It lets us schedule our viewings in our iPhones, because there's no need to interrupt our lives for a film.

But, looking back as a kid, going to a movie, or renting a movie was the highlight of my tiny existence. I would go out of my way to do my chores and be extra awesome to my parents so that they would oblige my wishes for a simple $3.50 ticket to see Hook, or to rent Suburban Commando (please, no jokes.) Sure, they saw right through my efforts, but that's not the point: I made a big deal out of it, and because of that movies became a big deal. It became something almost magical. In short, I was willing to do ANYTHING to go to the movies. Seriously. Anything.

But, then I became a teenager. My parents got lazier (or rather, we became more responsible), and they got more money, so going to the movies became a more frequent occurrence. We'd rent two movies or so a month (maybe four, if we had a coupon), and that was more than enough. I was satiated. I was complete. But I was also becoming complacent.

Now, after four years at university, films are never out of my reach. I have the means to rent one if I want. I can also buy one, go see one, or even download one, whenever I want. No chores to do. No big deal to make.

Last year when I had my epiphany about movies was the moment when I realized that a crucial part of my movie equation was missing: They weren't a big deal anymore. They weren't the highlight of my week. They weren't the one thing I looked forward to more than anything. What had happened was they had become my life.

And so I looked around. I saw that it wasn't just me who had lost out on the "big deal" portion of the equation. The advent of all things digital had also created a gap in the old-timey ways of viewing cinema. It was all too easy, and all too accessible. Before, we would have to stop everything to watch a film; now, we multi-task while watching films. We even have to show commercials about it at the theater to get folks to stop multi-tasking just watch the frakkin' film...

Ugh.

But seriously, what I wouldn't give for someone to take my movies away*, and hold them hostage. What I wouldn't give for someone to make movies a big deal again.

And with that, I offer some hope:

James Cameron did something close to miraculous (in this day and age) with Avatar. He made an event film. He made going to the movies a big deal. This wasn't a movie you could download, or rent or get on demand, because you'd be missing out on what makes the film unique. I'd always saw 3D as a viable means to get butts in the seats, but never did I expect it to become what it is becoming. It's making movies special again. Sure, it costs more, but when it's done right, 3D gives us something we can't (yet) get at home, or on our computer. And I'm all for it.

Now, a slightly different realm, but applicable nonetheless:

Some of you may know what The Room is. Most of you probably don't, nor should you. It's arguably the worst movie ever made, but that's not the point. This film, not unlike The Rocky Horror Picture Show, has created a cult following in New York and L.A., where midnight screenings of the film are a common occurrence. Apparently, they're amazing screenings. People yell things at the film, and they participate. In short, they make it a big deal. Now, contrast that with how I first saw the film: as an April Fool's Joke on Adult Swim. Alone. I later saw it on DVD with my brother, and that helped, but it didn't have the same chutzpah that a midnight screening with a crowd would have garnered. Part of me regrets seeing it this way. Part of me thinks it could have been a better experience (the movie is so horribly bad that it's hilarious. Like this. Or this. And especially this...) by seeing it with other people, in a theatre. Part of me wishes I had paid to see it, as opposed to simply chancing upon it one Sunday night. Can I be certain of this? No, obviously. But, what I can be certain of is that the actual act of taking time out of my life to attend something of this magnitude would instantly classify it as a bigger deal than simply picking it up at the Redbox after getting some milk. It's just a different beast.

And I'm almost 100% sure it's a better one as well.

So, a call to action: Let us all try and make movies special again. Let's make them something we are willing drop everything for, and take the time to savor. Let's make 'em a big deal. Again.

*I have actually had this happen. It lasted two years, and I really think it helped. 

I Just Want My Kids Back

This is for those who are curious about the film industry, in terms we can all understand...Money.

Thanks to Eric for posting this...


Via: Online MBA

Aha!

I don't know what's in the air lately, but for whatever reason I've found myself drawn to British television (and one film). It's probably because, along with being a serious Francophile, I'm a also an enduring Anglophile. I've loved all things British since before I could remember, and with the Olympics on, there hasn't been much good American television to watch (besides LOST). So, here's a rundown of the generally excellent British fair I've been enjoying these past few weeks:

Jekyll - This is a neat little miniseries from Coupling creator/writer (and future Doctor Who producer) Steven Moffat, that takes a modern and conspiracy-driven look at the Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde mythos. Loaded with mystery, it's a fun ride. The last episode has a neat little twist, and then a not so neat one, so you've been warned, but other than that, it's a stellar series. (Caution: it does contain some colorful language). Netflix Instant Watch

Emma - A new adaptation of Jane Austen's book, staring Romola Garai (Atonement) and Jonny Lee Miller. It's nice to finally see a lengthy adaptation of Austen's book (I've seen Clueless and Gwyneth Paltrow's Emma), because there are so many peripheral characters that get the short shaft in both of those films. This one makes for a great Sunday afternoon, clocking in at only four hours. Fantastically produced and superbly acted. Masterpiece Classic on PBS (it's on DVD now, too)

The IT Crowd - I don't know why it's taken me so long to jump on this show, but it has. I wasn't super impressed with the first two episodes, but all the ones that have proceeded it have been laugh-out-loud hysterical. Netflix Instant Watch

Knowing Me, Knowing You with Alan Partridge - Aha! It's a parody chat show, complete with the most imbecilic of presenters ever to grace the BBC. Steve Coogan is Alan Partridge, a character who most definitely inspired Ricky Gervais' equally as ridiculous David Brent. Brilliantly conceived and just down right funny. A worthwhile rent. Netflix (the mail version)

Knowing Me, Knowing Yule with Alan Partridge - This is the Christmas special for the previous series. Probably the best episode of the series, for sure. You can watch the whole thing here on Dailymotion, if it suits you. Just brilliant. And it serves as the segue into this...

Or watch it here:

Alan partridge knowing me knowing yule. Part 1
Uploaded by CentralSouth. - Full seasons and entire episodes online.

I'm Alan Partridge - Following the Christmas special, Alan finds himself relocated to a small hotel in his hometown of Norwich, relegated to doing an early, early morning DJ stint at the local radio station. This is a more traditional sitcom, but still brilliant and amazing, thanks in part to smart writing and Steve Coogan's peerless performance. Netflix (the mail version)


Here's a good clip.

In The Loop - This is probably one of the best political satires I've seen in years. The comedy is sharp and the one-liners are juicy. Definitely not one for the kiddies (the language is rough), but if you can handle the swearing, it's smart, sad, and wonderfully hilarious. Netflix (the mail version)

The Thick of It - This is the TV version of In The Loop, with the same actors playing different characters (save for Peter Capaldi's vicious Malcolm Tucker, who appears in both). Equally as funny, and just as smart (although, it does help to understand British politics a bit. I still get confused, but the gist is relatively universal, so it works). Nefarious means Totally legit means of acquisition...

(If you're keeping score, the last five shows have one thing in common: Armando Ianucci, who writes, produces, and sometimes directs all of them. He's up for an Oscar this year for his script for In The Loop. He won't win, but boy does he deserve to...)

Top Gear - I was VERY skeptical about this show, but with two solid recommendations from friends, I had to give it a shot. I found it incredibly entertaining, and not because I have a thing for cars. Cause I don't. I hate to drive, and so I just don't get all happy pants around motorized vehicles. But, despite all of that, the charm of this show is undeniable. Very fun. Netflix Instant Watch