Banking at your local branch

There's a commonly shared view amongst virtually every wrestling fan who has voiced their opinion on the Internet. Time and time again, I read the following statement: "I really hope that CM Punk doesn't waste the Money in the Bank contract on the ECW Championship."

I'm definitely in the minority here, but I couldn't disagree more....

I certainly won't deny that the ECW Championship has lost a significant amount of steam over the past year. During the first portion of CM Punk's reign things were going pretty steadily, but after a while a dangerous trend began when, at numerous Pay-Per-Views, the ECW Championship bout would kick off the show. While everybody recognized that this belt was a distant third out of the three World Championships, repeatedly jerking the curtain with this title really sent home the message that it's nothing more than a glorified Intercontinental Championship.

I suppose you can even trace it further back to when John Morrison won the title. While it seemed unlikely that they would put either of the two main straps on The Big Show or Bobby Lashley, it was still within the realm of possibility. Ditto for Benoit, who was slated to win the title before that whole double murder/suicide thing. But that definitely wasn't the case when Morrison won the title. And it only got worse when Chavo Guerrero took home the gold. While he was champion, the title wasn't even defended at the Royal Rumble (where, conceivably, the winner could challenge him for his title at WrestleMania). Hell, despite being a "World" champion, HE participated in the Rumble match! If that didn't send home the message that this wasn't a REAL World Championship and on the same level of its Raw and Smackdown counterparts, what else could?

So after that long winded rant, why on Earth would I WANT CM Punk to challenge for the ECW Championship? By proxy, wouldn't that diminish the prestige of the Money in the Bank stipulation? No, I don't think so.

I've often said that perception is reality when it comes to wrestling. The reason why Raw is so much more popular than Smackdown and ECW is not because it's any better, it's because WWE has created the perception/reality that anything that's worthwhile or special will occur on Raw. All of the major returns, debuts, and angles will happen on that show, so there's no reason to keep up with the other two.

With that in mind, if WWE creates the illusion that CM Punk fully believes that he CAN beat Triple H and Undertaker (or whoever are champions at that point) for their respective championships, but would prefer to challenge Kane, it tells fans that yes, the ECW Championship is a legitimate World title, and one that several wrestlers actually regard as the most prestigious.

In fact, much of me believes that they should have gone the RVD route, and had CM Punk challenge Kane in advance for a title match at One Night Stand, which is "supposed" to be an ECW-centric PPV.

It comes down to this: The WWE can either accept that the ECW Championship isn't viewed as a legitimate World Championship and leave it at that, or they can try to remedy the situation by giving it a "rub." Considering that it is the sole championship on ECW -- and as such should be the center of the show -- it would be foolish of them, from a business standpoint, to just accept this as a reality. Reminding the fans that certain Superstars are willing to sacrifice a special stipulation (like the Money in the Bank contract or the Royal Rumble title shot) on the ECW Championship can help redeem the championship.

Read more!

TVGuide.com interviews Harold Perrineau

TV Guide's website interviewed Harold Perrineau, who plays Michael on Lost, and I have a few things to say about his comments. Naturally, the interview gives away what happens in the finale, so only click below if you've already seen the episode.

TV Guide: Were you disappointed Michael and Walt didn't reconnect before your character died?
Perrineau: Listen, if I'm being really candid, there are all these questions about how they respond to black people on the show. Sayid gets to meet Nadia again, and Desmond and Penny hook up again, but a little black boy and his father hooking up, that wasn't interesting? Instead, Walt just winds up being another fatherless child. It plays into a really big, weird stereotype and, being a black person myself, that wasn't so interesting. [Responds Cuse: "We pride ourselves on having a very racially diverse cast. It's painful when any actor's storyline ends on the show. Harold is a fantastic actor whose presence added enormously to Lost."]

I enjoyed the interview -- although I disagreed with some notions -- but I cringed when I read this comment. I think it's a little unfair of Perrineau to refer to Walt as a "black fatherless child" considering that one of the show's central themes is fucked up fathers. Locke's father completely abandoned him, only to come back into his life to con him out of his kidney and push him out of a window. Jack's father is a verbally abusive alcoholic who, incidentally, abandoned Claire as well. Kate's father was so abusive that she had to murder him. Ben's father, much like Jack's, is a verbally abusive alcoholic as well. Sawyer's father murdered his mother before committing suicide. Sun's father is pretty much a Korean mobster. Hurley's father abandoned him only to come back into his life after he won the lottery. Truth be told, he is one of the only fathers on the show that seems to want to play an active role in his child's life. While I do agree that a reunion and reconciliation with Walt would have been nice (and definitely would have made his redemption even more powerful), I think it's inaccurate and unfair to turn this into a race thing.

I also disagree with Perrineau's opinion that Michael was brought back to pay for his past sins. On the contrary -- and I'll discuss this in my Lost finale column -- I thought that his return did a wonderful job of redeeming the character. Had Michael never returned (and it sounds like this is what Perrineau would have preferred), he undoubtedly would have been remembered as a murderous traitor. Now, I believe viewers can look back and recall that the character died sacrificing his life for the sake of others. He made peace with his best friend and played a crucial role in helping the survivors get back home.

I'm a bit surprised that the actor looks back at his return so unfavorably. Some people have argued that his character was brought back and barely used. I disagree. The truth is that there really wasn't much to be told. He was a man who was haunted by what he had done and wanted nothing more than to redeem himself. Actually, Michael's character is a HUGE reason why I felt like they needed to abandon the flashback formula. In a lot of ways, there isn't all that much to his character, and it seemed like all of his flashbacks were telling the same story (Walt was taken from him, he fought for him, he failed, and he eventually became distant and disconnected). Sure, there wasn't some touching Walt/Michael reunion, but the fact is, not every character is entitled to a happy ending.

Read more!

The season that was....

The season finale of Lost is on later tonight, and in preparation of the big event (and don't fool yourselves, it WILL be an event) I thought I'd share with you EW.com's list of the 15 Best Moments of Season 4. In my opinion, this has been the best season of Lost yet, so for me to say that I'm excited for the finale -- which, unfortunately, I won't be able to watch til about midnight or so -- would be a grave understatement.

Anyway, enjoy:

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20202804_13,00.html

Read more!

Here we go again....

A few months ago I defended Rachel Bilson (shocker) against her very vocal and mean spirited critics on IMDb.com. Well, I've recently discovered that the posters at Just Jared are just as needlessly malicious and seem to hold her in just as much contempt. Some of these people are outrageously cruel, constantly posting comments about how ugly she is, how short she is, how she's the worst individual ever, and so on and so forth. It's like these people have this deep seeded hatred for her, just for existing. It's nothing she's done or said, it's just that she's alive in their world. To comprehend the ridiculous scrutiny she's under, consider that there are people on Just Jared that imply that she couldn't POSSIBLY care about the upcoming Presidential election or the war in Iraq because she's out shopping. Yeah, that makes sense....

Honestly, this backlash truly baffles me. Everybody loved her when she was on The O.C., so what's changed since then? It's not as if her acting abilities (whatever you may think of them)took a nose dive, so I don't understand why she's considered such a terrible actress now, but was so enjoyable in her role then. Along with that, it's not like she's been stuffed down our throats. She's been in, what, two movies in the past five years, and done a two-episode stint on Chuck. This is hardly like Ben Affleck, who was doing a minimum of three or four movies a year (honestly, take a look at his IMDb page, it's ridiculous).

To tell you the truth, the ONLY thing I can see that's different is her boyfriend. Despite the fact that Adam Brody is leaps and bounds cooler than Hayden Christensen, the latter is some revered teeny bopper sex symbol. The only conclusion I can draw is this vocal contingent is a group of fan girls that absolutely, positively hate this girl simply because she's dating somebody that they think is cute. And quite honestly, that's pathetic.

And if that's not the reason, then what is? The only other thing I can think of is that some people hate her so much because she's more successful than them. Or maybe it drives some females crazy that they personally don't find her attractive, while many men go on about how hot she is. If that's the case, are these people just so incredibly jealous of her that they must tear her apart like this? Listen, I can totally respect not finding her attractive, or not appreciating her acting, but if you can't just leave it at that and go on with your day, then there's obviously something deeper (and probably a little sad) about the issue. Just a few blog entries ago I mentioned how I find Scarlett Johansson odd looking, but it would never, ever occur to me to go to her IMDb page to say so. Or to insult her any time she's shown on an entertainment site.

Some people might argue, "But Matt, you've devoted entire entries to ripping apart Kanye West and Spike Lee, so what makes you any better?" The big difference there is that I don't dislike either of those individuals because they exist or because of their success. I just have a disdain for them because of what they say and how they act. On top of that, I can certainly appreciate many of Kanye West's songs and Spike Lee's films. I also have absolutely no problem whatsoever with either of them being recognized for their achievements, whether it be via loads of money, awards, or both. Again, the only time these individuals -- or any celebrity, really -- gets on my nerves is when they say and do asinine things (which, in their cases, seems to be quite often).

I find it ironic how the Internet Wrestling Community (or IWC) has a reputation for being overly negative, when in actuality, the Internet just seems to attract people who like to be negative and bring other people down. I don't know if Rachel Bilson is getting roles due to her looks, or her acting abilities, or nepotism, or because people genuinely enjoy working with her (the creator of Chuck wrote a guest starring role specifically for Rachel to play), but I don't see any reason why she doesn't deserve success. As one poster noted, how often is it that an actress (or actor, for that matter) in her mid-20's isn't plagued with constant drug and alcohol issues? The fact that she's managed to avoid scandal and seems to have a normal, healthy relationship with her family has seemingly become a rarity within the entertainment industry. Honestly, it's tremendously sad if there are people in the world that are so bitter and insecure that her mere existence -- or the fact that she's successful -- brings them such misery. Enough is enough, give the girl a break already.

Read more!

Your Lost flashback....

With the Lost finale just days away -- and with some crazy things sure to happen -- I thought we'd take a look back at last year's big death scene (do not interpret this as an indication that a major character is dying this year, because I haven't a clue if that's the case, nor do I want to know if it is).

Anyway, I might go as far as to say that this was the greatest death scene ever written, directed, and performed in the history of television. I especially enjoyed the sign of the cross at the end. Enjoy:

Read more!

What I don't like about WWE.com

I've been meaning to discuss this since WWE.com's ever-so-slight redesign a few months ago, when some minor changes were made that I believe made general navigation extremely inconvenient and difficult. The biggest of these changes was the navigation bar on the left side of the screen. In the past, it was pretty simple, with a heading like "TV Shows" with Raw, Smackdown, ECW, and the latest PPV as subheadings, or "Superstars" as a heading, with Raw, Smackdown, ECW, Divas, and Hall of Fame as subheadings. Basically, it was very easy to find the page you were looking for.

Well, they redid the layout, and now the listing doesn't even make sense. Like, for example, "Appearances" and "Title History" appear under the "Superstars" heading, when they branch out from the "Schedules" and "Inside WWE" categories. What annoys me the most is that you can't even directly access any of the Superstar pages with one click. If I want to check out the Raw Superstar roster page, I have to either go to the Raw TV Show page, and then hit the "Superstars" link, or I need to go to the Superstars page, and then go to the Raw section from there. It doesn't sound like a big deal, but when you regularly check the Superstar pages, it's a real pain in the ass.

And I think the thing that annoys me most about the new navigation is that nothing is easier to find, and certain things (as I listed above) are now significantly more difficult to find.

Along with that, the maroon navigation bar at the top of the screen REALLY clashes with the blue background they've been rocking for the past few months. This is a nitpick, but it also drives me crazy that they are STILL using that lame "action shot" picture of Edge for the Smackdown Superstar roster page, instead of an actual promo shot. I mean, this guy has held the World Championship four times in, what, two years? I think you can make the time to update his graphic.

Finally, the whole Broadband video section had a lot of promise, but they seemingly gave up on it after a couple of months. I particularly liked the Lifestyles... episodes. Other features I've liked, such as Superstar Ink, List This!, and What If... are practically never updated.

Some things I do like, though: I think the flash slideshow they use for the main banner looks cool. I also think the tabs for Photos, Videos, WWE News, etc. is an organized, clutter-free way to post a lot of material. The Industry News section is pretty neat as well. And they do have some pretty cool special features, when they decide to update them.

Anyway, Joey Styles, it's YOUR job to address and fix these problems!

Read more!

A Case of the.... Lost - Episode 4-12

I hope everybody is having a nice Memorial Day weekend. We didn't have an episode of Lost this week, so here's my review of last week's episode to tide you over until the finale.

One of the comments I left from my March 24th, 2008 Lost episode review (Episode 4-8):

Call me stubborn, but until the series itself refers to him as one of the Oceanic Six — and by that I mean, within an episode, he is referred as such — I’m going to remain somewhat skeptical (based almost entirely on Jack’s testimony at Kate’s trial).

Well, consider this my official concession.

http://primetimepulse.insidepulse.com/2008/05/24/a-case-of-the-lost-episode-4-12/

Read more!

Looks like Maxim agrees with us!

A few weeks ago my blog readers voted Rachel Bilson hotter than Mila Kunis, 5 votes to 3. Looks like the 2008 Maxim Hot 100 agreed with us: While Mila Kunis came in at #81, Rachel Bilson ranked in at #28!

I will admit, though, that this list immediately loses a whole lotta credibility for excluding the immensely beautiful Kristin Kreuk. I mean, really, can you honestly tell me that, say, Emma Watson (#94) or Anna Paquin (#50) are hotter than the Smallville beauty?

Some other issues and notes of interest....

• Lacey Chabert & Jennifer Love Hewitt (#90 & #20, respectively): Personally, I've always been partial to Lacey Chabert. She's taller, has a better body, and can pull off both sexy and cute with ease. And hey, big ups to her for getting past those awkward pre-pubescent years!
• Evangeline Lilly & Emilie De Ravin (#88 & #68): Hey, I'm not denying that Claire is incredibly hot, but Kate will always, ALWAYS be the hottie of Lost. If not her, it's Sun. Or the late, great Shannon.
• Rachel Bilson & Mischa Barton (#28 & #22): Really? Did I miss the memo where cellulite suddenly became sexy?
• Avril Lavigne & Hilary Duff (#24 & #25): For the second year in a row, Avril Lavigne beats out Hilary Duff. Nicely done, Avril, nicely done.
• Britney Spears (#19): Hey, I'll be the first to admit that she looks better than she did a year or so ago, but please, this girl is still an absolute mess. I refuse to believe that the photo they used in this edition is from the past two years. This girl doesn't belong in the top 50, no less the top 20.
• Vanessa Hudgens & Ashley Tisdale (#12 & #10): Sure, it's not a big discrepancy, but like the Party of Five example above, I much prefer the co-star that was ranked lower (by that, I mean the higher number). In my opinion, Vanessa Hudgens is much hotter.
• Elisha Cuthbert (#6): I went through a HUGE Elisha Cuthbert phase a few years ago. While I've waned on her slightly, I think the fact that she continuously remains in the top 10 of these hot lists despite staying out of the public eye (relatively speaking) is a huge testament to her beauty.
• Scarlett Johansson (#2): I'm sure that LOADS of people will disagree with me on this, but Scarlett Johansson just doesn't do it for me. I find her odd looking.
• Marisa Miller (#1): I'll be honest, I'm not even sure who this is.

What did everybody else think of the list? Fair? Accurate?

Read more!

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 7-20

Yikes, I was starting to wonder when PrimeTimePulse would get around to posting this...

I’m disappointed to say that I was, well, a bit disappointed with the Smallville finale. And to tell you the truth, it didn’t really have anything to do with the content. Quite simply, the episode felt extremely rushed (especially the last ten minutes), and really would have benefited from being a special 90-minute finale. In fact, they could have very easily devoted 90 minutes to the Smallville finale, and then used the remaining half hour to promote The Dark Knight. They did something very similar a few years ago when Batman Begins came out.

http://primetimepulse.insidepulse.com/2008/05/23/a-case-of-the-smallville-episode-7-20/

Read more!

Tolerating today

It was quite the day for tolerance, wasn't it? First we had John McCain on Ellen discussing his disapproval of same sex marriages, and then we had Spike Lee insulting Clint Eastwood for not representing black soldiers in his two Iwo Jima films.

Right off the bat, I'll admit that I like John McCain. I'm extremely disenfranchised by the whole two party system that our government utilizes (as I often say, it works in theory, but not in practice), and McCain is one of the few politicians that seems to think for himself, and doesn't necessarily toe the party line. Yes, I know a lot of people will probably argue against this assessment due to the fact that he so often identifies himself as a "conservative Republican" on the campaign trail (when he's really not), but I honestly feel like if he is elected President, he'll do what he thinks is right and best, and not what the party dictates.

That being said, I thought McCain was exceptionally respectful during the light hearted debate. Granted, Ellen kept the tone un-confrontational -- which I thought was very professional of her -- but I thought McCain handled an extremely sensitive matter with a lot of class and dignity. To her credit, Ellen articulated her points very eloquently, just as McCain said she did.

Here's my view on the whole same-sex marriage thing. It baffles me how we can live in a society where "God" and "government" cannot go within 100 yards of each other, yet we give the government power over a religious ceremony. Along with that, this religious ceremony offers benefits recognized by the government. This doesn't seem to mesh.

So, basically, I think that marriage should be a purely religious ceremony, where the church (or temple or what have you) has the sole authority to dictate who can get married. However, this marriage would only be in the eyes of God -- it would not come with any benefits. In order to get those benefits, you will ALSO have to get a civil union. Many politicians -- even those who fervently fight against same-sex marriages -- don't have an issue with civil unions, they just believe that marriage should be shared between a man and a woman. To me, it's just really, really backwards that we can't say a prayer in school, but the government can decide who can and can't get married. Doesn't make sense to me. It also absolutely baffles me how we can openly admit how foolish we were to not treat blacks and women with complete equality, yet we continue to deprive homosexuals of certain rights because of their sexual orientation.

And then there's Spike Lee.

I don't like him. I haven't ever since his positively ridiculous lawsuit against Spike TV. Yes, this man is so deluded and egotistical that he believed that the network was attempting to capitalize on his celebrity by changing their name to "Spike." I also loathe the fact that he plays the race card ALL the time. Well, not all the time, only when it benefits his race.

At the Cannes film festival, he attacked Clint Eastwood because he, according to Lee, overlooked the role of black soldiers during World War II. I will openly admit that I have not seen Letters from Iwo Jima or Flags of Our Fathers -- and I firmly believe that anybody who risked or sacrificed their life by serving their country should be recognized -- but it is my understanding that during World War II, the units were segregated. That means that if these films focused on one particular unit and they happen to be white, there simply wouldn't be any black soldiers in it.

And nevermind the fact that the film included a Native American character and several Japanese soldiers. It's STILL racist, because there isn't a black soldier.

It also seems a bit odd that Spike Lee would be making these comments years after the films have been released. Well wouldn't you know? It just so happens that he's about to release his own World War II film, soley devoted to a black division.

So it's racist for Clint Eastwood to unintentionally exclude black soldiers, but it's artistic for Spike Lee to intentionally make a film excluding white soldiers? Double standards are great, aren't they?

Read more!

How's your sex going?

Some of you may have noticed the massive Mamajuana Extreme ad on the side of the site. Well, I've recently signed up for a partnership program, which basically means that if you buy something from their site, I get half of the money. So help a brother out!

Anyway, former WWE Champion JBL can shill this thing far better than I can, so here's what he had to say about it:

Mamajuana, the legendary Caribbean cocktail, has been around for centuries and used as a cure for almost everything, including the common cold. But most importantly, it is virility in a bottle.

When I, John Layfield, first discovered this legend, I knew I had to bring it to the world. I have worked with my partner, Baywood International (BAYW.OB), a leading nutraceutical company focused on all-natural, herbal supplements and remedies, for more than a year developing an all-new, all-natural, non-alcoholic formula that still has all the attributes of the legend that inspired it. This is simply virility/energy in a bottle.

The great thing about this is that it is all-natural, no prescription needed. No need to go to a doctor to get a prescription and then to a pharmacy to have it filled. You can buy this at www.mamajuanaenergy.com and soon at retailers nationwide. We are working on getting fulfillment so you can buy this globally soon over the Web and in retailers worldwide.

Anyway, if you have any desire whatsoever to check it out -- even if you're just curious if it works -- please consider doing so by clicking the ad on my site. For what it's worth, it's gotten so very positive reviews, from what I understand.

Read more!

Easy button my arse!

So late last week I made the devastating discovery that the LCD screen on my digital camera had cracked and leaked. The camera still worked fine using the viewfinder (old school baby!), but without the LCD screen, I was unable to see how much memory or battery I had left, and couldn't take advantage of some key features (like altering the exposure or converting to black & white or sepia tone).

I had initially planned on getting it repaired, however I quickly discovered that this is both costly and time consuming (one place told me it would take them a WEEK just to give me an estimate, and at least an additional week to actually do the repairs). Based on my research, between parts and labor, the repair would cost in the range of $100. I own a Canon PowerShot SD700. Upon browsing the Internet, I came to discover that the Canon PowerShot SD750 (a slightly better model) is being sold for $199. I also came to realize that I have a $20 Staples gift card. And I never shop at Staples. Thankfully, the camera was being sold at Staples, so with the gift card I could get it for $179.

Then i did a little thinking, and decided to check up on their price match guarantee. Indeed, they will match any competitor's price, as long as the item is available in the competitor's store (as in, they won't match website exclusive deals). I obsessively searched every retailer I could think of, and the lowest I could find was Wal-Mart, which was selling the camera for about $169. So with the $20 gift card, we're now down to $149. Then I get home, and what do I see on the kitchen counter? A $25 "Spend your Economic Stimulus Payment on us!" discount card for items over $100. Yes! We're now down to $124!

So, what's with my "easy button my arse" title? Well, according to the Staples website, the camera was available at my local store. Upon going there, I discover that no, indeed the item is NOT there. But, they assure me, the item is at one of the stores a couple towns down. That store is somewhat on my way to work, so while heading to work this morning, I decide to drop by there. Well, the fine people at that store (who actually were pretty helpful) take FOREVER to tell me that, no, indeed they do not have the camera at their store. I ask them if they would mind checking to see if it's in any of the other stores in the area. While checking, they tell me that the computer is indicating that they DO have the camera here. They check again, but to no avail. They then tell me that there are apparently four still available at a close by store, which is, thankfully, still on the way to work.

I go to THAT store, and thankfully they actually did have the item, and they did match the price without incident. I also decided to splurge and purchase a $10 protective case, to hopefully avoid the screen from ever being damaged again.

Nevertheless, their two main ad campaigns of "Yeah, we've got that" and "That was easy" both proved to be astronomically inaccurate.

As a side note, I find it funny that whenever I told somebody the LCD screen is broken, but that the camera still works fine using the viewfinder, people would act as if the camera is completely useless. In fact, when I used it this past weekend and people were forced to use the viewfinder instead of the screen, they were practically incompetent. Do people not realize that, what, five or so years ago, this is how you took pictures? It's as if somebody looking at a land line phone, picking it up, holding it up to their ear, and wondering how on Earth the item is used.

Read more!

My money, please

This one goes out to all of my U.S. readers and visitors. Many of you probably haven't received your Economic Stimulus Payment yet (I haven't), and in case you're wondering when you'll be getting it, here's a helpful little schedule provided by everybody's favorite internal revenue service (the numbers refer to the last two digits of your social security number):

• 00-09: May 16
• 10-18: May 23
• 19-25: May 30
• 26-38: June 6
• 39-51: June 13
• 52-63: June 20
• 64-75 (that's ME!): June 27
• 76-87: July 4
• 88-99: July 11

Please note that the above is for paper checks, and not direct deposits.

Happy spending, everybody!

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=180247,00.html

Read more!

A late House call

My PrimeTimePulse colleague Mistah Keith already discussed last week's tremendous episode of House, but I thought I'd provide my two-cents as well.

First off, you can tell right off the bat that the person who wrote this episode has never been to a strip club, because he/she's dreaming if they think that a stripper would:

(a) ever voluntarily offer the information that you have already paid for your lap dance, and

(b) ever admit that you haven't yet earned your money's worth.

I've basically only been to strip clubs for bachelor parties. My first time was at a Scores in New York City, for my brother-in-law's bachelor party. That night, I repeatedly refused a lap dance, until the stripper finally decided she's just going to give me one.....and then demanded that I pay her $20 (and trust me, you're not going to win that argument). Later on in the night, I had bought a lap dance for a friend who had spotted me money....and the stripper charged him for it as well.

Trust me, strippers are basically on par with pick pockets and street corner hustlers.

Wait, this was about House, right?

I thought the whole mystery aspect of the show was really cool, and very cleverly done. Upon finding out what had actually happened, it was also pretty neat seeing a softer, more caring side of House. I thought it was a powerful image having House reach out for Amber in the midst of the accident. The great imagery continued after the carnage had subsided, showing House crawling over to the fallen female with much more care and concern than we ever see from him.

The question remains: Was he so worried because he has feelings for Amber? Or is it something sweeter? Perhaps he's just so concerned because this is the woman that his best friend is in love with. Nevertheless, really cool episode, and I look forward to the finale.

Read more!

Why Michael is in the casket...

With the first part of the three episode Lost finale airing tonight, I thought I'd revisit one of the biggest questions since last year's finale: Who was in the casket that Jack visits in the future? Please remember that this commentary does NOT include spoilers -- this is 100% speculative. I look forward to reading some of your comments regarding this matter, but please DO NOT include any information from episodes that have not aired yet. In respect to those who don't watch the show "live" I also request that you give a one day buffer zone for anything we find out from tonight's episode. Thank you.

As I've noted in previous columns, I believe that the man inside the casket is Michael Dawson.

Based purely on that episode, lets take a look at the evidence that supports this theory:

- The article that Jack is reading states that the deceased is survived by one teenage son. Provided that the person is somebody from the flight -- a relatively safe assumption, given that it is of interest to both Jack and Kate -- that points strongly to Michael, as the timeline given would fall within Walt's teenage years. Along with that, the only other major characters with a child are Sawyer (who has a young daughter) and Claire (who is, as you may have noticed, a female).

- The article also indicates that the person committed suicide in New York City. As we all know, Michael resided in the Big Apple before all of the island shenanigans.

- And finally, the funeral took place in a predominantly black neighborhood. This would certainly be an odd occurrence if it was, say, Sayid that died.

We also learned a lot from "Meet Kevin Johnson" that not only support the points above, but also provide some new information.

- The means of death is particularly interesting here. The article notes that the deceased hanged himself in his New York City apartment. As we learned in his season four flashback episode, Michael was suicidal before returning to the island. While his actions on the freighter may, in a sense, redeem himself, it's not outside the realm of possibility that he still cannot forgive himself for what he had done, and, in turn, continue his quest to take his life.

- The fact that Michael was ABLE to commit suicide is equally significant. Recall that when Jack reads the article, he's driven to attempt to jump off a bridge. Considering that he refers to himself as neither a family member or a friend at the funeral, it's unlikely that this death touched his soul in a profoundly deep way. Perhaps instead, Jack was saying to himself "I guess suicide is now possible. Let me give it the old college try." Considering Jack's disheveled state, I don't think it's unlikely that he tried -- and failed -- to kill himself numerous times.

- Along with that, as we saw in "Meet Kevin Johnson," Walt and Michael are not on the best terms. It seemed strange that the obituary would mention a teenage son, but the funeral worker would remark that nobody had shown up. The fact that Walt no longer communicates with his father may answer that ponderable.

- Additionally, Michael's mother also mentions, in the passing, that Michael are Walt are living under aliases. If I remember correctly, she never actually states what that name is (if I'm not mistaken, "Kevin Johnson" was an entirely different alias provided by The Others). It almost felt like the scene went out of its way NOT to use his assumed name, as if they were holding off on that potentially big revelation.

- Jack also seems like the type of person, more than most people on the show, to have the ability to forgive Michael, in death, and recognize that he ultimately tried to help them. He's also the type to not fully forgive, hence his refusal to actually view the body or to refer to himself as a friend.

- At its core, Michael is also the character most likely to get off of the island (he's on the freighter, posing as a member of the crew) without being a member of the Oceanic Six.


So there you have it. What does everybody else think?

Read more!

And the winner is....

Indeed they do, Ms. Bilson, indeed they do.

I'll be honest, even though I'm ever so slightly partial to Rachel, I didn't think she'd win. Like I stated in the original post, Mila Kunis is the current flavor of the month. She looked positively stunning in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, which itself was absolutely hilarious.

In other words, Mila is a little more relevant at the moment, which works to her advantage. Nevertheless, Rachel Bilson persevered, winning by two votes (provided that nobody voted more than once).

Congratulations. However, based on the fact that nobody voted for the "neither" option, I think it's fair to say that both of these young ladies are undeniably hot.

Read more!

I guess this means Fox was John's soul mate?

http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Ausiello-Report/Ausiello-Scoop-Fox/800039290

According to TV Guide's website, Fox has officially canceled New Amsterdam. Regency -- the production company -- can continue to shoot new episodes and shop around for a new network, but that seems unlikely. This is really fortunate. Not only does this mean my friend is out of work, but I was really getting into the show as well.

I suppose if I had to ask the creator one question, it would naturally be "Who was John's soul mate?" Was it Sara? His partner? His boss? Somebody that we haven't even met yet?

If I was writing the show, I'd spend the second season having John convinced that Sara isn't "the one," and obsessing over finding out who else was in the subway that morning. Ultimately, I'd reveal the twist that Sara was the one all along, but in order for him to become mortal, she needs to not only believe his story, but also love him regardless.

Of course, I do realize that this story is flawed: After all, when John initially "died" Sara didn't even know him, and as such couldn't possibly love him unconditionally.

I'll tell ya' what, though. If I do have a chance to talk to Alexie, I'll find out what I can about whether the show is going to be picked up on another network, or what the plan would have been for a second season.

Read more!

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 7-19

To be honest, I was a little unimpressed with the latest installment of Smallville – the final episode before the finale of an otherwise phenomenal season. In the past, I’ve poke fun (in jest, of course) at how the whole Veritas story arc is eerily reminiscent of the Illuminati. That said, “Quest” seemed like it was lifted directly from Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code.”

http://primetimepulse.insidepulse.com/2008/05/12/a-case-of-the-smallville-episode-7-19/

While I may not have been overly enthusiastic about last week's episode, the season finale looks absolutely awesome! Check it out:



And be sure to cast your vote on who you think is hotter, Rachel Bilson or Mila Kunis, if you haven't already! Time is running out....

Read more!

The Saga Continues 14 Years Later

Just a quick note, but has anybody been keeping up with this whole O.J. Simpson/Mike Gilbert business? To sum up: Gilbert is Simpson's former business partner, and is alleging in his book How I Helped O.J. Get Away With Murder: The Shocking Inside Story of Violence, Loyalty, Regret and Remorse that one night Simpson smoked a little pot, popped a sleeping pill, and drank some beer. This tasty cocktail led Simpson to confess to the murders, claiming that he showed up at Nicole Brown's residence without a knife, but when she opened the front door, she had a knife in hand. According to Gilbert, Simpson stated "If she hadn't opened that door with a knife in her hand ... she'd still be alive."

What is Simpson's lawyer's response to these claims? "I've talked to O.J. about it. This stuff not only didn't occur but it's not factually supported by the evidence."

I'm sorry, but I just got such a kick out of that. So NOW we should be putting all this emphasis on factual evidence? Does that mean we can also look at the OVERWHELMING evidence indicating that your client did in fact commit those two brutal murders?

It's almost as if O.J.'s lawyer is saying: "That's absolutely ridiculous. Of course he brought the knife."

Read more!

Who Survived?

Don't wanna spoil the Survivor finale for anybody who didn't watch yet, so click the "Read More" link for my thoughts. For what it's worth, I was rooting for Amanda going into this episode.

One thing that irked me, though, was Cirie's rant. It just came across as very, well, ridiculous. It's absolutely idiotic how Cirie could go on and on about how nobody has ever said "I can't put Cirie's name down" well SHE HAS NEVER RECEIVED A SINGLE VOTE AGAINST HER! Along with that, she's talking about how she feels like she's at the bottom of her alliance, bringing up how Amanda had something going on with Ozzy while Parvati had something going on with James. Cirie, how on earth can you consider yourself BELOW Ozzy and James when OZZY AND JAMES HAVE BOTH BEEN VOTED OFF! And you're still here. Personally, I sided with Amanda on that argument.

Speaking of Amanda, when she whipped out the dough eyes -- the very look that single handedly lost her last season's competition -- when Natalie got voted off, I shook my head in disappointment. When she made the face AGAIN after she won the final immunity challenge, I wanted to throw something at the TV. "Woe is me" is NOT an endearing attitude when you're trying to win a million dollars.

While I haven't much liked Cirie this season, I think her one comment regarding the final two twist was very poignant. These women spent the entire competition blindsiding others, and now they're on the receiving end.

I don't mind the "honor your fallen brethren" routine that they do every year. Actually, I got a kick out of Parvati's "and you liiiiike him" line to Amanda, regarding Ozzy. Which was supplemented by the "I'll let you hold his torch" comment.

To me, Amanda is an amazingly complex player. She manages to play an absolutely phenomenal game up until the final couple tribal councils, when she just completely falls apart. I mean, the fact that she's made it to the finals two years in a row is pretty incredible when you think about. But like I said earlier, when people are trying to decide whether or not to give you ONE MILLION DOLLARS, they don't feel sorry for you. So don't put on a pouty face and act like you're in the worst position in the world. On top of that, considering how many people you've backstabbed this season, they absolutely don't want to hear how terribly you feel about voting somebody off and hurting their feelings. Just like last year, this was Amanda's game to lose. And just like last time, she did. And she really, really shouldn't have.

Regarding the final tribal council, what in the blue hell was the deal with Natalie's comments? Wow, strange. And how stupid and one sided was Cirie's question. I mean, she asked Amanda to tell her why Parvati deserved to be there more than herself. She then asked Parvati to explain why she (Cirie) deserves to be there more than her (Parvati).

Along those same lines, Ozzy's rant was complete bullcrap. Sorry Oz-man, but people compete in this game to win money, not to make friends. So for him to go off on Parvati for "putting a price on our friendship" is such a ridiculous, unfair load.

That said, how could your heart NOT melt when he professed his love for Amanda? I mean, hell, I still don't have my hetero card back from my 90210 entry, so I might as well admit that I totally loved that moment.

And as a final note, does anybody else miss those absolutely, ridiculously overly elaborate "Jeff arrives at the live taping" scenes?

Read more!

Canadian Pride

This goes into the category of little things that I appreciate, but I really liked how on this past week's episode of Smackdown -- which was filmed in Ontario -- native Canadian Superstar Edge was wearing a special Maple Leaf version of his latest t-shirt.

Nicely done, Edge-ster. And extra credit points for keeping the sunglasses on for nearly the entirety of the segment.

While on the subject of the blue show, I thought it was really stupid that they stripped Undertaker of the World Championship, especially since in all likelihood the title will end up around his waist again anyway. The whole "Championship Chase" idea was neat, but it just as easily could have been done to determine the new #1 Contender for the Undertaker's title. As many people have already noted, since the World Heavyweight Title was moved to Smackdown, it has already been vacated twice due to injury, which has arguably diminished its prestige. Why needlessly add another vacancy?

Read more!

Returning to the zip code

Have you picked sides in the Rachel Bilson vs. Mila Kunis super duper hotness competition yet? If not, be sure to vote!

So according to People Magazine, Jennie Garth has officially signed on for the 90210 spin off series that will debut on the CW Network (yay! They survived the strike!) Upon hearing this news, a few people I know have sighed and shook their heads, as if Jennie Garth was lowering herself to appear on the series. Lets be honest: Aside from Dancing with the Stars, what has Jennie Garth really done? And don't even bring up that Amanda Bynes series. I'd bet my bottom dollar that the vast majority of people couldn't even give the name of her character.

What I found most interesting about the article, actually, was the fact that Ian Ziering and Tori Spelling are actively trying to attach themselves to the show. Should their characters join the show, I'm interesting in seeing how they will be written, since their series spouses have, thus far, shown no interest in appearing on the spin off.

If I could briefly turn in my hetero-card, I'd like to actually rant about one qualm I have with the original 90210 series, and that's the constant cop outs they've utilized when it comes to a character having to choose between two love interests. This is most apparent with the two central love triangles, namely Dylan, Kelly, and Brenda, and Kelly, Brandon, and Dylan.

Yes, I do realize that at one point, Dylan DID pick Kelly over Brenda -- and I commend the writers for having the character solidly make a decision -- but for the remainder of the series, they really avoided having to make that decision. They were clearly leading towards a Dylan/Brenda reunion before Shannon Doherty left, and once Brenda was written off, suddenly Dylan was undyingly devoted to Kelly again. And then when the Dylan character subsequently left, he was back to his old ways, shacking up with Brenda off screen. Naturally, when he returned, he was back to loving Kelly with all his heart. The writers also established a "what was Dylan doing this whole time" time line, which completely contradicted previous indications that he was still living and involved with Brenda.

The Kelly, Brandon, and Dylan affair was even worse, highlighted by that ridiculous "I choose me" crap. Kelly and Brandon didn't even reunite until after Dylan left, and likewise Dylan and Kelly didn't get back together until after Brandon left.

For what it's worth, I always felt like Dylan and Brenda belonged together, while Kelly and Brandon should have ended up together. Yes, there was an attraction and even passion between Kelly and Dylan, but that relationship truly seemed to lack the deep connection that Dylan shared with Brenda, and that Kelly shared with Brandon. To me, the love between Dylan and Kelly seemed very superficial.

Can I have my hetero-card back now? No? What do you mean I'm on probation?

Read more!

A Case of the.... Lost - Episode 4-11

I would like to now officially recant the statement — in full — that I made a couple of months ago regarding my then-view that Frank wouldn’t go out of his way to help the survivors of Flight 815. If it wasn’t clear last week, it certainly is after this past week’s episode. Not only did he essentially rescue Michael, he also refused to return Keamy and his men to the island when it became clear that the mission was to kill everybody, and when that resistance ultimately failed, he presumably dropped a little care package for the survivors, again presumably for them to find the helicopter so that he can (again, presumably) get them off of the island before The Purge: Redux.

http://primetimepulse.insidepulse.com/2008/05/09/a-case-of-the-lost-episode-4-11/

Read more!

Survivor: Why last night's occurrences never should have happened...

Based on what happened last night, I'm not going to include anything but this preface in the main section. Instead, click on the "Read More" link below for my thoughts.

If we learned anything from last night's episode, it's that women are pure evil and men are friggin' morons.

The women have absolutely dominated this game (how that ended up happening, I am still not quite sure), which was incredibly evident following the votes of Ozzy and Jason in particular. The women completely manufactured both of those blindsides, making the person who would inevitably be voted out feel so safe that he wouldn't feel the need to play his hidden immunity idol. This was particularly impressive in Jason's case, as there was already a MASSIVE target on his back and he had just seen the exact same blindside occur at the previous tribal council.

Nevertheless, Erik had seemingly defied the odds by surviving through these women, and even miraculously won both the reward and immunity challenges. Erik now had the immunity necklace and would live to fight another day. Or so we thought.

Instead, the women completely manipulated Erik and convinced him to give up his immunity necklace (?!?!?!?!?!) for Natalie. How they convinced him that giving up his immunity necklace would result in one of the women getting voted off absolutely baffles me. I mean, they had somehow led him to believe that Natalie and Cirie would only vote with him if gave up the necklace, as if they had all these possible options. If Erik had kept the necklace, one of the girls were going home. Whether it's his top choice doesn't really matter in the long run, does it? The fact remains that one of his competitors will be voted off (and really, in order to avoid a tie, some of the girls would have HAD to vote with him, whether they liked it or not), and tension would develop between the women.

Arguably the most frustrating part of the entire episode was the fact that they convinced Erik that he had pissed off every single person on the jury. How exactly did he do that? Everybody on the jury recognizes that Erik didn't orchestrate any of their eliminations. On top of that, if memory serves, he was never even the swing vote! Additionally, at the very least Jason and Ozzy know that the women arranged for them to get voted off, so he would undoubtedly get both of their votes (especially when you consider that Erik is a male fan -- like Jason -- and that Ozzy sided with Erik over Ami). I believe that James would have voted for him too, considering his bitterness near the end towards the females. Eliza is a question mark, but I think she bears some ill will towards the women who didn't include her in their little club. And it's also entirely possible that the still competing women that inevitably get voted off may split their votes between whichever women remain (assuming there's a final three). If Erik wasn't an idiot for giving up the necklace, he was an absolute fool for not realizing that he easily had as many votes as the most popular girl still playing.

It also baffles me that he didn't consider the source. I mean, these girls are telling Erik that he upset EVERYBODY because of his double talk. The reason everybody else has been voted off already is because of the fact that they told people one thing and did another. He knows this. They know this. The jury knows this. How did he fall for this trap?

There's no question about it, this move WILL go down as the dumbest in Survivor....nay, television history! That being said, the actual voting portion of the tribal council was absolutely brilliant.

The biggest mystery this season, for me, is the fact that Cirie has had so much power. While the last few votes were seemingly due to Amanda and Parvati, Cirie maneuvered some of the earliest surprise eliminations. And she's continued to bestow her influence throughout the rest of the season. What has she contributed to this game? She hasn't won a single individual challenge, and she hasn't played a crucial role in any team challenge. She doesn't bring any special skills to the camp. Why does she have so much power?

At this point, I think I'd like to see Amanda win it all. Honestly, it was her game to lose last season. Hopefully she learned from her atrocious final tribal council performance.

Read more!

Friday Fun: The Awareness Test

The weekend is finally upon us (well, aside from the full day of work most of us still have ahead of us), so here's a fun little test for everybody to take. Comment on how you do!

Read more!

Connie and The Con

This past season I made it a point to watch the first few episodes of Law & Order. I was curious to see how the virtually all new cast would do, and Ed Green is one of my favorite characters in the L&O universe. Along with that, being a fan of Boston Legal, which focuses on the defense side of a trial, it's fun seeing things from the prosecution's standpoint. That being said, when Jesse L. Martin left the show, much of my desire to keep up to date with the series dissipated as well. Lets face the facts, if I'm ever Jonesing for an episode, one must only turn on the TV and surf a few channels in order to find one.

Nevertheless, due to a massive lack of programs to watch last night, I decided to give the show another shot....and I really, really enjoyed the episode. Despite the fact that I had previously noted that I like the show because you see things from the prosecutor's standpoint, I loved the fact that this episode gave us something different. Due to a public defender's strike, there was nobody to represent the defendant. As a result, Assistant District Attorney Connie Rubirosa was literally forced to defend the very man that she was charging for murder. And let me tell you, it was a really fun trip.

Through the police investigation and the first few minutes of the "order" portion, the viewer had already seen the prosecutor's side, so the episode was -- for the most part -- a fair and balanced look at a trial, with the latter part of the court scenes following Connie's attempt to represent her client. In a lot of ways, Connie really is an underutilized character, so it was nice seeing her take the forefront. It was also great seeing how much she has grown as a lawyer. She's incredibly smart, can think on her feet, and is deceptively aggressive. In many ways, she WAS wiping the floor with Cutter, her superior. Perhaps the highlight of the episode for me was how McCoy joyously looked over her performance with a real mentor-like interest. Despite the fact that she was the "opposition," he really revelled in her success.

It was also nice that, despite her unenviable position at the end, you really didn't feel like she jeopardized her ethics. I think the writers also made a great decision by not forcing hostility between Connie and Cutter. Throughout the entire trial, Cutter recognized that Connie was just doing her job, and that it wasn't anything personable. I do believe that a show like Boston Legal WOULD have taken the easy route, and had a conflict between the two opposing councils.

Anyway, that episode gets my thumbs up. Great performance by all involved.

Read more!

Battle of the Titans

A few days ago in my review for Forgetting Sarah Marshall, I noted how stunningly beautiful Mila Kunis has become, and it looks like I'm not alone. In fact, whenever the movie comes up, the FIRST thing everybody says (after noting how hilarious it was) is how incredibly hot Mila Kunis looked. I also mentioned that my beautiful and beloved Rachel Bilson may have a little competition for my heart. It's been a slow TV week, so for fun, lets see how these two beauties measure up (cuz Lord knows I'll have the opportunity to have to one day choose between them).

Overall looks and determining who is "hotter" are purely subjective, so I'm going to avoid judging that on such a large scale. However, I will admit that the more I see Rachel's floppy, banged hairdo, the less I like it.

First off, I've got to decide if I want an older woman or a younger woman. Incidentally, Rachel is exactly one month and three days older than I am (yum, an older woman...), while Mila is just short of two years younger (robbin' the cradle....) I'm 26, so nabbing a cougar is likely viewed as "cooler" and "more impressive." Not that I'd really know either way. Nevertheless, I'm going to side with Rachel on this one.

Who's got the better body? Well, both of them are skinny and petite, so it's tough to deprive either of them of the blue ribbon. However, Mila is a few inches taller -- and by proxy "leggier" -- so I guess I'll have to give this one to Mila. But even that's with reluctance -- I mean, Rachel's littleness is so adorable...

Personality? Of course I don't personally know either of them (damn), so this is based purely on what I've seen on screen and in interviews. They both seem down-to-earth and sweet. But c'mon, I'm a sucker for the Bil-ster. She just seems very personable and real in all of her interviews, and I like that she's able to poke fun at herself. Most importantly, she makes me laugh, and she was impressively able to match the underrated comedic chaps of Adam Brody in The O.C. While Mila's competition was of course a lot stiffer in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, she left the comedy to the pros (for the most part) and can probably be considered the movie's straight man, if there is one.

As far as past and current boyfriends. Well, Mila Kunis has been dating Macaulay Culkin forever, so right off the bat she loses. Then again, Rachel Bilson is seeing Hayden Christensen, who -- as I've noted before -- seemingly achieved the impossible by making DARTH F'N VADER a whiny bitch. I would call this a stale mate, but she also dated Adam Brody, and he's a cool guy. Heh, I just remembered that Adam Brody -- as Seth Cohen -- did several promos for the Star Wars prequels, starring Hayden Christensen. Awk-ward.... Anyway, going with Rachel -- by a hair.

I'm actually going to take a huge leap here and argue that Rachel Bilson is actually more famous as well. Considering that That 70's Show lasted 10 years -- dwarfing the 3 and a half years that The O.C. aired -- and the extreme popularity of Forgetting Sarah Marshall (not to mention that whole Family Guy thing), this may be an uphill battle. However, in her short career, Rachel has managed to star in two relatively well known movies, with another star-studded one on its way (New York, I Love You). She has also guest starred on popular network shows like That 70's Show (shown in the photo above), Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Chuck. I would also venture to say that Rachel's magazine cover credits far outnumber Mila's.

Perhaps most damning of all, if you type "Rachel Bilson" in any search engine (and you know I have), you'll see several pages worth of fan websites. If you do the same for Mila Kunis, a grand total of ONE fan site appears. I'm sure many people will argue this contention -- once again, likely because Mila is a little fresher in people's minds right now -- I'm still going to award this particular distinction to Rachel.

So, in conclusion, I wouldn't kick Mila Kunis out of bed, but Rachel Bilson still has my heart. I am interested in what you -- the readers -- think, though, so be sure to vote in the poll to the right.

Oh, and SEE FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL!!

Read more!

What a massive tool

http://news.aol.com/entertainment/music/music-news-story/ar/_a/kanye-rips-miserable-magazine-writer/20080503091909990001

So Kanye West is bitching and complaining -- again -- about his genius not being fully appreciated. You see, Entertainment Weekly gave Kanye's concert a dreadful B+, and now the artist has gone and uninvited the publication from the rest of his concerts.

This is the guy who stated that the VMA's would lose credibility if he doesn't win an award. And when he didn't win the award (for the second year in a row), he argued to anybody that would listen that it's because he's black! Totally disregarding that Beyonce, Rihanna (with Jay-Z), and Gnarls Barkley took home awards in 2007, and Missy Elliot, Beyonce, Gnarls Barkley, and Chamillionaire were winners in 2006.

One must not also forget his latest shenanigans at the Grammys, where he chastised the production crew for having the nerve to play the "wrap it up" music in the midst of his acceptance speech (how DARE they!) And then after talking about how great he is for a minute or so, he slips in a little tribute to his mother, and -- again -- ranted about how it was in poor taste for them to be playing the music.

I'll go out on a limb and say it: Kanye West is the biggest douche bag celebrity there is. And there are a lot of pricks out there.

Read more!

A Case of the.... Lost - Episode 4-10

Happy Cinco de Mayo, everybody!

A couple months ago I received an e-mail from one of my readers, Dan, arguing with my contention that Daniel is the “most good” out of all the freight rescuers. In Dan’s opinion, Frank was actually the most good, feeling that Dan manipulated the Desmond flashback to ensure that he had a constant.

I initially stuck to my guns, however following this past week’s episode, I want to amend my statement. While I don’t necessarily believe that Frank is “more good” than Daniel, I do believe he is just as good. More specifically, I think they’re a different kind of good.

http://primetimepulse.insidepulse.com/2008/05/04/a-case-of-the-lost-episode-4-10/

Read more!

Forgetting Sarah Marshall

So after extending far too much effort, I was FINALLY able to catch Forgetting Sarah Marshall last night. And let me say, it was absolutely phenomenal. It's very rare that I see a movie and say "I'm going to have to get this when it comes out on DVD" -- even when I enjoy it. But that was exactly what I was thinking following this film.

On top of that -- and this is a comment I'm sure some of you have come to expect from me -- but Mila Kunis was positively STUNNING. I've always found her hot, but in the time between this and the end of That 70's Show, she has grown into a rather gorgeous young lady. Little Miss Bilson may have a little competition.

I also loved Jason Segel's Dracula voice. Even if you haven't seen the film, I think you'd enjoy this YouTube video, of "Dracula's Lament" performed by Sesame Street's The Count:



Anyway, if you've seen the movie, click below for my spoilery thoughts. If you haven't, GO SEE IT NOW! Then read what I thought.

While my Cartoon Wars post may suggest that I can appreciate and enjoy a comedy even if it doesn't have much of a story, my standards are a little stricter when it comes to movies. After all, you're paying money to watch a movie. And unlike when you're watching a television program from the comfort of your home (where you can distract yourself with other tasks), when you're at the movies, the film really needs to keep you entertained.

And that's perhaps what I liked most about Sarah Marshall: In addition to being absolutely hilarious, it was also a really sweet story at its core. On top of that, the central characters felt real. Instead of making Sarah a one-dimensional cheating bitch, the viewer came to understand that while she truly did love Peter, his lack of ambition and direction made him an impossible person to be with. This didn't make her sympathetic, per se (nor was it supposed to), it just made her real.

Along with that, the whole relationship between Peter and Rachel (wow, what are the chances that Mila Kunis' character would be named "Rachel"?) wasn't completely out there. For example, while I found the relationship between Elisha Cuthbert (another immensely beautiful actress) and Emile Hirsch in The Girl Next Door cute, it just didn't ring as realistic to me. It's like, "Yeah, this incredibly hot PORN STAR just moved next door and conveniently and immediately falls in love with the dorky, good natured kid next door. That happens ALLLL the time!"

I didn't feel that way with Rachel and Peter. The one scene where the bartender says to Peter "You thought that was a date? She works in customer service" was pretty dead on. The fact is, she DOES work in customer service and she does get paid to be flirtatious and nice. I find it completely believable that at first, she was just being nice to Peter, but came to really enjoy his personality and company, developing their relationship into something deeper.

And while Aldous wasn't necessarily the most realistic person in the world, he was absolutely, positively hilarious. I LOVED the scene of him teaching the awkward married guy sex moves using the giant chess pieces. His facial expression when Sarah was having sex with him, just to try to make Peter jealous, was equally priceless.

I also really enjoyed the flashbacks, with Sarah slowly realizing that Peter really was a great guy, while Peter discovers that things weren't all that great with Sarah.

My favorite part of the movie was probably the dinner scene, just because it was so multi-layered. The meal began with Peter and Aldous hitting it off, mostly through their criticism of Sarah's last movie. Meanwhile, Sarah and Rachel are getting along, with Rachel defending the premise of the film. However, as Rachel and Peter get chummier, things between Sarah and Aldous get a bit more hostile (most notably with Aldous' poor treatment of his shirt). From there, Peter starts to sympathize with Sarah, who starts acting quite chilly towards Rachel, leading to some hostile jabs between the two ladies. By the end of the scene, we came to realize that Rachel is sweet, what's going on between her and Peter is genuine, and the relationship between Aldous and Sarah isn't.

Anybody who has seen this video can also find the great humor in not-Alec Baldwin's performance on Crime Scene.

Movie highly, highly recommended.

Oh, and this is also a must-see for anybody wondering what Jason Segel's penis looks like.

Read more!

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 7-18

While I really enjoyed last night’s episode of Smallville, it wasn’t without its quirks. As I’ve made it abundantly clear, I think this series has far outgrown the whole Clark/Lana thing, so I was really, really annoyed by the fact that he was willing to give up his EXISTENCE and, in turn, the well being of everybody he’s ever known, because of his super duper Lana love. I mean, c’mon, that was a little much. While it’s fair to say that in this particular instance Lana wouldn’t have been targeted, there were countless times throughout high school that she was at the receiving end of a meteor freak attack. And this episode wasn’t a clear cut “hey, imagine if Krypton — and in turn Clark — never existed.” It was a “imagine Krypton still blew up, but Clark wasn’t sent to his rescue” deal. That means all the meteor freaks and Brainiac still exist, Clark just isn’t there to save the day.

http://primetimepulse.insidepulse.com/2008/05/03/a-case-of-the-smallville-episode-7-17/

Read more!

Quick Survivor Note....

"I never lied once when I was here." - Alexis

Sweetheart, crossing your fingers when you're telling a lie does not nullify it. That is all.

Read more!