Saturday, October 31, 2009

Top Ten Cases: Greatest horror movie villains


I hope everybody is having a nice Halloween. You know, sometimes I'm not quite sure how large my audience actually is. But earlier today, I saw some kid in a Masked Emotions costume, and it really put the enormity of this blog into perspective. Anyway, as promised in my last video, here's the return of Top Ten Cases, ranking my ten favorite horror movie villains. For the most part, I've limited this to "slasher flicks," so you won't see memorable killers like Hannibal Lecter (despite being a marvelous character).

Oh, and this list in part out of my appreciation for those who have filled out my quick blog survey. If you haven't participated yet, please take a moment and answer a few questions. They've been very enlightening so far:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=Dn2gP3OIv0b6ObU_2bwb50Sg_3d_3d

Now, click the "Read More" link for the list!

10. Samara ("The Ring") - The thing I like about Samara (the creepy, watery TV killer from The Ring) is that she's painted in a sympathetic light -- yet she just continues to kill and kill. Near the end of the movie you're thinking, "Aw, poor thing." But then seconds later, she's killing the heroes' boyfriend and threatening her son. Part of me appreciates that sort of character complexity, in addition to the unwillingness to sacrifice the sense of danger for the sake of compassion. Plus, she was creepy as all hell in the psychiatric hospital scenes from the first movie.

9. "Mr. Ghost Face" ("Scream") - Sure, there's nothing supernatural about the killer in the Scream movies, but it was loads of fun trying to predict who was lurking behind that ghastly mask. The constant hints (bruises appearing on various characters' faces the night after an intense struggle) and teases ("That character is wearing the same shoes!") added a suspenseful level to the franchise. It wasn't simply a matter of who would survive. It was also a question of who was the killer. Along with that, the idea of a bunch of high school kids going out and buying some cheap costume (which actually existed years before the movie was released) and massacring people is pretty unsettling.

8. Leatherface ("The Texas Chainsaw Massacre") - As I noted in a previous edition of Top Ten Cases in which I ranked horror movies in general, the story of Leatherface and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is so powerful because you can genuinely feel the utter desperation expressed by the protagonist. No matter what they do, no matter who they turn to, it all brings them back to this grim fate. And wearing a mask made of human skin? It doesn't get much grizzlier than that.

7. Pennywise ("It") - Whether you call him "Pennywise" or simply "It," there's nothing creepier than a demonic, dancing clown with sharp fangs and long claws (and this is coming from somebody who doesn't suffer from coulrophobia). Sure, he was technically a shape-shifting entity, but if you ask anybody to describe the killer from Stephen King's "It," they're going to call him a clown. I suppose the greatest compliment I can pay this particular villain is that I barely remember the actual movie -- or even the premise -- but that clown is etched into my memory.

Besides, how awesome is Tim Curry?

6. Jack Torrance ("The Shining") - I have to admit that I don't recall actually ever seeing The Shining in its entirety, but even despite that I cannot deny the infamy of Jack Nicholson's psychotic character. Much like the other movies alluded to on this list, The Shining preys on the innate fear that your ordinary life can take an extraordinary turn, with disastrous results. Here you have a family that retreats to an isolated hotel, only for the father to go mad and attempt to kill his wife and kid. Incidentally, from what I understand, the novel in which the movie is based focuses far more on Jack's alcoholism, indicating that THAT might be the cause of his abusive behavior -- making his murderous descent even more disturbing.

And hey, Jack breaking a door down with an ax and peaking through while yelling, "Here's Johnny!" is one of the most famous scenes in cinema history.

5. Jason Voorhees ("Friday the 13th") - Fun Fact: I've camped at No-Be-Bo-Sco, the location used for Crystal Lake for a number of the Friday the 13th films. Anyway, I daresay that if you asked your average person to name three horror movie villains, Jason's making the list. And while his character steadily devolved to a one dimensional zombie, his original backstory is pretty interesting and overall sympathetic. Jason's a true icon in the horror movie franchise, but unfortunately, because of the deterioration of his character, I couldn't rank him much higher than this.

4. Michael Myers ("Halloween") - In a lot of ways, Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees are the same characters. Both are physically massive and inexplicably strong. Both have a penchant for wearing masks and coveralls. And both have severe issues with the females in their families. Oh, and neither of them talk or appear to enjoy moving at a speedy pace (until recently, anyway).

So why did I rank Mr. Myers higher? In a nutshell, the zombie aspect of his character is ever-so-slightly less explicit and offensive. Along with that, for the most part, the Halloween franchise has managed to stay pretty on target with the psychological aspect of the character. That is to say, Michael Myers' family issues were typically the driving force of the movie. As the Friday the 13th movies became more and more outlandish, the stories tended to drift away from Mrs. Voorhees impact on the Camp Crystal Lake killer.

But my main pet peeve with this character -- and the Halloween movies -- is that they attempt to portray him as a regular human being (just a very tall and strong one). Yet they still decide to kill him off in such a conclusive fashion, essentially destroying any sense of realism for the next installment (and they just KNOW it's coming).

3. Jigsaw ("Saw") - Something has to be said for a horror movie villain who never actually commits a murder (not directly, with his bare hands anyway). That being said, the "Jigsaw" I refer to here is John Kramer -- not any of his successors. Here you have a killer who preys on individuals who would hardly be considered "heroic." For my money, the original is still the best. There's just something claustrophobic and uncomfortable about having the lead characters stuck in a small room throughout the entire ordeal. That's far more unsettling -- even for the viewer -- than having a collection of people roaming through odd looking rooms. The first movie also captured the "what lengths would you go to survive?" mentality, as it focused on two characters, instead of one.

But anyway, I'm drifting a bit. Jigsaw himself is an interesting character. Unlike virtually everybody else on this list, who are driven by revenge or severe mental issues, Jigsaw's motives are surprisingly altruistic. He seemingly genuinely wants his victims to find a way to survive, with the hopes that they'd have a deeper appreciation for the life they had taken for granted. And if they do find a way to survive, he willingly lets them go. That's really unlike anybody else here. And hey, from a purely aesthetic view -- whether it's the dummy, the pig mask, or the black robe -- he's a creeper!

And while I commend the Saw series for killing off their villain and actually keeping him dead (at least I assume, I haven't seen the sixth installment) while continually coming up with clever ways to keep him in the franchise, it's been like four movies since he's been killed. Perhaps it's time to move on?

2. Norman Bates ("Psycho") - Perhaps it goes without saying, but I'm pretty much restricting this to the original Psycho, and not any of the sequels. And in its own right, the 1960 classic stands alone as the greatest moneymaking, by a large margin, of all of Hitchcock's films. I may sound like a broken record at this point, but once again, this is an example in which the audience's insecurities are taken advantage of. A seemingly nice man who appears to be helping some strange woman ends up being a psychotic killer. And it was doneso in such a disturbing manner that many claim they were afraid to take a shower afterwards (then again, it was the Sixties -- how often did people shower to begin with?) And it's also worth mentioning that this particular twist ended has transcended genres -- its constantly alluded to!

As a sidenote, part of what made Norman Bates so great was his diminutive stature, which really makes you realize how much Gus Van Sant dropped the ball by casting 6'5" Vince Vaughn in the direct shot-for-shot remake in 1998. I mean, c'mon, we're supposed to believe that this guy could disguise himself as his own feeble mother. You don't think people would turn heads if they saw a 6'5" elderly woman?

1. Freddy Krueger ("A Nightmare on Elm Street") - Sure, near the end Freddy got a little campy, but when he was first introduced (and I daresay, even in Freddy vs. Jason) he was one twisted dude. Here was a child killer who was essentially executed by a group of vigilant parents. Even without the supernatural stuff that made the character famous, that's some pretty disturbing stuff. But what sets Freddy apart? What makes him stand above the rest as #1? Quite simply, EVERYTHING about this character is so iconic and immediately recognizable. From the charred face to the fedora to the striped sweater to the clawed glove -- you see some article of the Freddy Krueger look and you IMMEDIATELY know who it represents. Like I said above, if you see an extra large, dirty coverall, you may have to think twice before deciding if it belongs to Jason or Michael Myers. You see a bloody knife, and there's a plethora of murderers that belongs to. Practically everything about Freddy is unique and sets him apart from everybody else. Even the way he kills people is out of the ordinary.

I'm excited that the character is making a return -- with its original dark outlook -- but it's a travesty it's being done without Robert Englund.



Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Monday, October 26, 2009

A Case of the.... Heroes - Episode 4-7

If there was ever a “filler” episode of Heroes, this was it. However, “filler” is decidedly different from “stalling,” so I’ll chalk this up as the lesser of two evils. Normally episodes such as these are a necessary evil when it comes to properly pacing the season, however with such a large cast with so many stories going on, it’s admittedly a bit tough to defend.

http://tv.insidepulse.com/2009/10/27/heroes-episode-4-7-review/



Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Sunday, October 25, 2009

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 9-5

While it’s no longer the hot topic sparking debate within my columns, I did want to briefly revisit the point I made a few weeks ago, about how I believe the natural conclusion to Chloe’s current story arc is for her to leave Smallville (the show and the town). Incidentally, my feelings on the matter have tweaked somewhat following this past episode, but an excellent comparison sprung to mind that I think may assist me in more eloquently making this point. Take Prison Break, for instance. C-Note’s character was written out of the series (essentially) relatively early on. His character received a pardon and he was able to live happily ever after with his wife and daughter, no longer forced to live a life on the run without his family. His character had pretty much reached a point where he either received that happy ending, or was needlessly forced to stay on the show because he was popular, even though it deprived the character of his happiness. On the other side of the coin, consider T-Bag. Here’s a guy who was kept on the series throughout its entire run, no matter how much it defied logic, and constantly avoided his comeuppance. His consistent presence – and the fact that he was continually forced to team with the protagonists – really made it difficult to root for our heroes at times. Sure, Lincoln was framed and Michael was merely trying to save his brother, but their antics resulted in a convicted killer and rapist attaining his freedom. And over the course of the series, their actions only ensured that T-Bag remain a free man. Sure, T-Bag was a fun character, but in my opinion the fact that he remained on the show for so long tarnished the intent of the central story.

Of course, this isn’t a perfect example. It’s just to show what can happen when you don’t take advantage of a natural exit because the character is still popular.


Bookmark and Share


Read more!

Nothing to Brag about?

So tonight is the next "theme" PPV presented by WWE, the aptly titled Bragging Rights, where the main event features seven Smackdown guys competing against seven Raw guys. Before anything else, I'm going to bring up the obvious point made by several others: Why do such a match just weeks before Survivor Series -- the originator of the specialty-match-centric Pay-Per-View? It'll only make me even more disappointed if the WWE, once again, abandons the elimination match formula for the traditional November event.

Anyway, this past Friday, practically the entire Smackdown team was overhauled. Normally I would criticize such a dramatic change happening two days before the big show, but in this case I think it was the right decision. My initial reaction to Team Smackdown was that I never really identified any of the Superstars as "Smackdown Superstars." Kane changes shows pretty much every year, so I don't really solidly classify him with any particular brand. Cryme Tyme has spent more time on Raw than they have Smackdown. Drew McIntyre and Eric Escobar have only competed in a handful of official matches, so they're far too fresh to represent the brand. And while Dolph Ziggler is getting the biggest push of his career on the blue show, since he was initially introduced to the company as a Raw guy, I think a lot of people still identify him with that program. And although Chris Jericho has been pro-Smackdown since being drafted, he still appears on Raw each and every week. In fact, out of the original 14 guys participating in the match, DX is really the only ones I solidly identify with their show. And Cody Rhodes too, I guess.

I was beginning to think WWE should have just gone all out with this match, and had guys like Cena on the Raw team and Superstars like Batista and Rey Mysterio on the Smackdown team. It would have at least given us a reprieve of the same title matches we've seen all year.

But anyway, I think this Smackdown team shift was a smart move. While guys like Matt Hardy and Finlay have switched shows a few times, I honestly do consider both "Smackdown" guys. And it's great to see the Hart Dynasty get some of the spotlight. I'm actually majorly intrigued with seeing them compete against DX.

In the end, though, I think the rumored original concept of the show was superior. A night full of triple threat matches (one guy/team from each brand), with the winners of each match competing in a brand supremacy multi-person tag match. Sure, it would get a little clunky with a big three way at the end, and the uneven roster sizes, but it at least would have guaranteed fresh matches, and some of the ECW guys that never see the light of PPV day could have gotten a nice payday opportunity. Plus Undertaker vs. Orton vs. Christian could have been a nice, fun change.

Anyway, ultimately, I see Raw winning because it seems like they're being pushed as the faces in this war. Then again, I think it could also be interesting seeing Big Show turn on his team to help Jericho and Smackdown win.

In related news, yesterday I picked up Smackdown vs. Raw 2010 for Wii, and I must say, I am majorly disappointed. A HUGE reason why I bought the game was because of the Superstar Threads feature, which allows you to alter the attire of the Superstars who appear in the game. This is one of my favorite aspects of the hugely popular No Mercy for N64. In fact, I still go back to that game and update certain appearances. As it turns out, that feature is only available for XBox and PS3. Yet WWE.com and WWE Magazine BOTH go on and on and on about this feature, never once mentioning the exclusivity of it (the game's official site makes one reference to it, from what I can tell).

Along with that, the appearance of some Superstars haven't even been updated since the last game. Shawn Michaels, for instance, is in that same pair of black and red pants that he's been seen in since WrestleMania 21. And he's minus the beard, which he's been sporting for two years now. And Finlay, who's typically in green tights and orange boots, is in his old black tights and white boots. And Edge is in a very early incarnation of his Rated R Superstar tights. Sure, certain guys who have gone through dramatic physical changes have been updated (like Matt and Jeff Hardy), but for the most part the character models shown on WWE.com are not what I've seen on my game.

The game play is fine and there are a lot of fun new features, but overall I feel a little misled, which has taken a lot of the fun out of it for me.



Bookmark and Share


A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Friday, October 23, 2009

Wait....really????

What in the blue hell? This actually exists?

http://www.peeandpoo.com/eng/flasheng.asp

What the heck is going on in Sweden?



Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Thursday, October 22, 2009

True Hero


With Heroes seemingly becoming my own personal Trending Topic this week, I thought this would be a good opportunity to discuss something I've felt since the end of this past summer: That the once acclaimed NBC series should take a page from the latest season of True Blood.

The critically praised second season of True Blood was unique in the sense that much of the cast was kept separated for virtually the entire season. Sookie and Bill were in Dallas, most of the time with Eric, dealing with bureaucratic vampire matters (yes, you read that right). Jason was with his church group (yes, you read that right too), Lafayette had a separate arc with Eric, and Sam, Tara, and Andy had generally unrelated story arcs revolving around Maryann. About three quarters of the way through the season, Jason was united with Bill and Sookie, and Sam and Andy's stories intertwined. The episodes leading to the finale were almost like a Seinfeld episode as all of the individual characters and their misadventures came together. Everybody was back in Bon Temps and attempting to control the chaos that had gradually erupted throughout the season.

And while the finale itself didn't quite feel like the climax I was expecting, the season as a whole was marvelous. It was actually very reminiscent of the first season of Heroes (the finest one of them all, according to most fans). The relatively large cast were mostly set apart into pairings (Claire and HRG, Nathan and Peter, Hiro and Ando, Niki and Micah, etc.), with these couples eventually merging with others to create smaller groups (Bennets and Petrellis, Nathan, Niki/Jessica, and Linderman, Hiro, Ando, and Isaac, etc.) And, much like the instance referenced above, by the end of the season the stories converged for a climatic battle.

This season of True Blood was 12 episodes. If Heroes continues the model they followed last year (with one season equaling two Volumes), then this is certainly a fair comparison, and not an apple and oranges situation.

Of course, I'm not one of the people who feel like Heroes needs to copy what they did when they were at their peak -- they just need to recapture that magic. Despite their faults, at the moment they seem to be doing a relatively good job at that (thus far, the central stories are more or less independent, but are beginning to intermingle).

And for what it's worth, I think season one was so successful because people genuinely cared about the characters. Much of that is lost, due in large part to the uneven writing and sometimes inconsistent character behavior. Yet this season of True Blood made me like virtually every character significantly more than I had before. Being separated from Sookie did wonders for Sam's character, in my opinion. Instead of being a lovesick puppy (pun intended), he was a supremely loyal, kind hearted and heroic man. Set apart from everybody else and forced to find himself, Jason grew astronomically from the intolerant sex fiend he was portrayed as during season one. And Eric -- who managed to pop up at least once in the stories of Sookie/Bill, Sam, Jason, AND Lafayette -- proved to be the real highlight of the season.

Is it too late for Heroes to rediscover that spark that made it so successful? I certainly hope not, but if they're open minded enough to realize they might need a little inspiration, might I suggest checking out HBO's On Demand station?



Read more!

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Message from an adoring fan....

The following comment was left under my Heroes review over at Inside Pulse by a reader named "CoolerThanYou" (which is actually rather convenient, because now I know where we each stand on the social ladder):

you are so stupid, your review sucks. heroes is going way down hill and you obviously haven't watched many episode of previous seasons because you aren't comparing it properly. previous seasons were much better and to spin the show in such an upright manner making it sound good still with lame story lines like saving hiro and will peter petrelli lose his healing power if he touches someone is just downright retarded. anyone who reads your review and takes your opinion with any credibility is a dumbass. and who the fuck is HRG? his name is Noah Bennet, get with it!

Geez, tell me how you really feel.

First and foremost, I write my reviews while sitting down, typically in a lounging position. So I'm not doing anything in an "upright manner." Got it?

Second, I have to wonder why somebody with such obvious disdain for the show not only bothers to spend an hour of his night watching the show, but then proceeds to go out of his way to read a review.

Those observations aside, I don't recall ever stating that Heroes hasn't gone downhill. Sure, I try to remain positive, but anybody who reads my reviews should recognize that I usually spend about half of them criticizing some aspect of the episode. I certainly don't give the show a free pass. Along with that, I figure that most people who read my column enjoy the show. If you're a fan of the show, why would you want to read a review that does nothing but rip it apart? So, basically, I'm writing for the people who actually enjoy the show -- not the obnoxious jerk who thinks the show is "retarded."

Also, while I've seen every single episode of Heroes, I'm not comparing this episode to past ones (for that matter, I didn't realize there was a proper way to make comparisons). I also believe that many people are remembering past seasons with rose-colored glasses. The writing was NEVER that great, even in the first season. Consider the fact that Mohinder traveled around the world on the whim that people might have abilities, and even tracked down people he believed possessed some powers. When he's confronted with his first sign of proof, suddenly he's super skeptical and inexplicably decides to return to India. And how about all the stalling with Hiro, where he lost his powers for no identifiable reason just so that the big climax wouldn't occur until the finale? Or the incredibly slow Niki/Jessica story arc? The first season was not without its flaws.

Actually, I'd probably say that season two was the worst season of them all, and that this current season is an improvement over that. But hey, you're free to have your own opinions.

Oh, and I'll call HRG whatever the hell I want. Live with it!


Bookmark and Share


A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Monday, October 19, 2009

A Case of the.... Heroes - Episode 4-6

Even though there’s a decidedly snide tone to my reviews – and I do criticize the show a fair amount – I truly do enjoy Heroes. It’s not a flawless show, and the flaws tend to really get under my skin (mostly because many of them could be fixed so easily), but at the end of the day there are several characters I really like, and it’s an hour that doesn’t drag. Admittedly, I don’t have that “I can’t wait until next Monday!” feeling, but I would be legitimately disappointed if this was one of the shows impacted by the Leno Effect.


I also felt that this was one of the stronger episodes of the season, mostly because it primarily featured three characters I have a soft spot for (HRG, Claire, and Peter) – who, incidentally, also bring out the best in each other, scene-wise – and while I tend to tire of the utterly redundant Sylar and Hiro, I felt they were, for the most part, harmless this episode.


Bookmark and Share


Read more!

Well that's an annoying headscratcher....

While I do strongly dislike Triple H, I'd like to think I'm level headed enough that I don't demonize him and blame him for every wrong decision. That being said, I really can't wrap my head around tonight's booking, where Triple H cleanly defeated John Cena, who's heading into Sunday's PPV match as the #1 Contender to the WWE Championship. One of two things happens: Either Cena loses Sunday, in which case he's leaving Raw, which means he lost his "last" match on that program. I know it's all fake, but Cena deserves better than that. He's carried the weight of the company on his shoulders for the past few years, and he's made astoundingly quick returns to rather severe injuries. If he's leaving the flagship show, I don't think it's unreasonable for him to go out beating one of the bigger stars (especially since he'd be jobbing at the PPV as well).

Or, he wins at Bragging Rights, and we're forced to sit through Triple H and John Cena again, and honestly, this circulation of John Cena, Randy Orton, and Triple H is pretty unbearable. And for that matter, if Cena's winning the title on Sunday, why have him lose it in the first place?

Anyway, check back this weekend for my Bragging Rights thoughts.



Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Sunday, October 18, 2009

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 9-4

So last week’s review of Smallville received quite a bit of feedback, which naturally thrills me. Most of the reader comments were in response to my thoughts on Chloe, and how I feel like the natural progression of her current story arc is to leave to find her own path. I feel like I should clarify those thoughts. It’s not that I want Chloe to leave. Anybody who has read my columns regularly should know that she’s one of my favorite characters on the show. I just feel like, based on what we’ve seen so far, this is where the story is going. Whether it’s been due to Clark’s silent treatment, or his budding relationship with Lois, or the resources Emil is now bringing to the table, there has been an obvious sense of “how important am I to the team?” emanating from Chloe. And directly or indirectly, I think this has also brought to the forefront all that Chloe has given up for Clark. She was once an aspiring journalist, whose dream was to write for the Daily Planet. She sacrificed that due to her loyalty to Clark. She sacrificed her marriage, and ultimately her husband was murdered, all because she felt that she had to babysit Davis, in large part because of the fact that he was a threat to Clark.

Oh, and didn’t she also kill somebody? I seem to remember her sneaking into somebody hospital room and pulling the plug.

It just seems like, to me, Chloe has sacrificed a whole lot, and it also occurred to me that we haven’t really seen her happy for any extended period of time in quite a while. As I noted in my comments last week, it’s a lot easier for us to watch Clark and Lois (and even Oliver) make these grand sacrifices because we know, ultimately, they end up happy. We know that Lois becomes an ace reporter for the Daily Planet and becomes the love of Superman/Clark Kent’s life. We know that Clark grows into the hero he aspires to be, with Lois hanging on his arm. Whether or not that happens in the show remains to be seen, but I don’t doubt that the series finale is upon us, it’ll end with the implication that everything we know from Superman is going to happen.

So, basically, we know that Clark and Lois have a happy ending. We don’t have that comfort with Chloe. As such, it’s a lot harder to watch her give up everything for Clark’s journey. Because, in the end, she’s not a part of it (based on what we know).

But, then again, this is all based on what we’re seeing so far. This story arc can quite as easily conclude with Clark realizing what a valuable friend and asset Chloe is, and having a renewed appreciation for what she has done for him. At which point, I may change my opinion and feel like she should stick around for a long time.

So there ya’ go. Hopefully that clears everything up. But, again, I really enjoyed all the reader feedback, so please don’t hesitate to leave a comment. And even more Smallville, Heroes, and TV content can be found on my blog, where I’m always seeking out some reader interaction. Be sure to visit!

Now, onto this week’s episode, which saw the return of Toyman and Jor-El.

http://tv.insidepulse.com/2009/10/18/smallville-episode-9-4-review/




Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Thursday, October 15, 2009

I can't believe I'm going to suggest this....


....but be sure to watch Grey's Anatomy and Private Practice tonight.

Why would I recommend watching these programs when I can't even watch one of their commercials without cringing? Well, my old family friend Alexie Gilmore (who you might remember from the short-lived, but mighty entertaining New Amsterdam) will be guest starring in this crossover event.

Suffer through the show, she'll be great.




Bookmark and Share


Read more!

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Looks like the Case Workers have some competition...

It has always been my hope that this blog would be more than me simply spewing out some thoughts, observations, and reviews. I've always wanted it to be a center for some debate and discussion. And while there has been a select few visitors who frequently comment -- for which I am extremely grateful -- I do feel like my hope hasn't quite been realized.

So it's somewhat ironic that this week, my Smallville column posted on the Inside Pulse website has received, like, a ton of feedback! It began with me and one reader exchanging a few comments, and before long, four more people jumped in. By the end of the discussion, there were 14 total comments. Check out the exchange:

http://tv.insidepulse.com/2009/10/12/smallville-episode-9-3-review/

I'll leave it to you guys to decide if you want to read it, but I will share one comment from "Aqgalaxy," who did not appreciate my argument that, at this point in time, I believe the natural progression of Chloe's story is for her to leave and find her own path. In fact, he doesn't like the notion that Clark ends up with Lois, and not Chloe. Here's an excerpt:

Sure you love Chloe so that’s why you don’t want her killed off, you rather her just leave like Lana.

Superman is supposed to be about Truth, Justice, and the American Way!

The Truth of the matter is, Chloe should be gutted from what made her the fan favorite and light-switched to a hallow shell of what she was because Lois and Clois couldn’t meet the standards she and Chlark set.

It’s an Injustice to the actress and her fans what these people are doing to Chloe.

And if this is the American way, where someone like Erica Durance’s Lois Lane, deserves the the most moral/powerful hero in DC Comics, then it’s no surprise why America is so hated around the world.



So in case any of you were confused, apparently the world hates America because Clark Kent doesn't fall in love with Chloe on Smallville...

For that matter -- and let me make this VERY clear -- I will never, ever compare my feelings for Chloe with my feelings for Lana. And my reason for thinking each should leave are at entirely different ends of the spectrum. To clarify, I just feel like the current story we're seeing, with Chloe finding herself less necessary in Clark's day-to-day missions and his overall journey, should conclude with her living her life for herself. She's given up a lot for Clark -- I daresay more than anybody on the series. She deserves some happiness.

And by the way, I also want my loyal readers to understand that I genuinely appreciate the support, even if that doesn't mean you're leaving comments. I just had a fantastic time interacting with my readers -- and having those readers interact with each other -- and I do wish that could happen on my personal blog, instead of a website I simply contribute to. So, give it a shot. Hopefully we'll get a nice discussion going on.

And if those that commented on the Inside Pulse article are reading this right now -- spread the love to [a case of the blog]!



Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Monday, October 12, 2009

A Case of the.... Heroes - Episode 4-5

You gotta admire Peter….using the vulnerability of some girl who is confused about what’s happening to her in order to get a date.

That being said, I do love that the scenario that I’ve been waiting for has finally happened: Peter has a kick ass power, and accidentally loses it in favor of a significantly less impressive power. “Yeah, I had super speed and was able to save a lot of lives. Now I, um….see wavy colors in response to sounds?” That’ll sure come in handy!

http://tv.insidepulse.com/2009/10/13/heroes-episode-4-5-review/



Bookmark and Share



A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Never Forget

This video was referred to me by Neal over at Oblivious to Melody. I woulda posted it anyway, but I gotta tell ya, this was pretty damn hilarious.



Although I must admit, I am a bit disappointed they went for the easy joke at the way end.


Bookmark and Share


A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 9-3

When I read the preview for this episode – that Zod turns people into Zombies – and realized it was airing in such close proximity to Halloween, I began having nightmares about Lana’s vampire experience, which is incidentally perhaps he only episode in the show’s history in which the writers even acknowledge is terrible. But I have to say, I thought this continued the season’s hot streak, and all of the aspects that I complimented last week were apparent in this episode as well.

http://tv.insidepulse.com/2009/10/12/smallville-episode-9-3-review/



Bookmark and Share


A CASE OF THE BLOG VISITORS: PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO FILL OUT THIS QUICK SURVEY!!

Read more!

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Blog Survey

Despite the fact that Thursday is my busiest TV night, I don't formally review any of those shows. So since blog activity is a little slow at this point of the week, I thought this would be a good time to ask everybody to take a quick blog survey. Please take a minute or two to fill out these questions, because not only will they help me gear the direction of the blog, it'll also give me an idea of how many people visit. So, again, please take a moment or two to take this survey. Thanks!

Click Here to take survey


Bookmark and Share

Read more!

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 9-2


So after nearly a week I was finally able to watch the last new episode of Smallville online at the CW website. And this exceptionally frustrating occurrence has made me take issue with the CW. I mean, unlike virtually every other network, which promptly (as in, the next day) offer full episodes on sites like Hulu and IMDb in addition to their own official network site, the CW waits about 5 days and (unless there are exceptions that I am unaware of) ONLY offers the episodes on CWTV.com. Meanwhile you’ve got somebody like me, who is attempting to watch the show honestly (as in, not downloading it or watching on YouTube), and this is what I get. And they wonder why their network is perennially struggling.

Honestly, I don’t know all too much about Metallo, so I don’t have a whole lot to say about the villain aspect of the night’s episode. Although I did love Lois’ “Terminator” shout out. Overall, the thing felt very Iron Man-esque to me. Not that that’s necessarily a criticism.

I must say, though, that I think Chloe was the real driving force and overall highlight of this episode. This is noteworthy because her character didn’t do anything particularly eventful, per se, she was just the perennial voice of reason for all of the major players. And quite honestly, the burgeoning romance between Lois and Clark has worked so magnificently the past two episodes – despite their not really sharing any scenes – because of Chloe acting as their conveyer.

Perhaps Chloe’s strongest performance came in her genuine realization that she’s being replaced by Lois, as it relates to Clark, in pretty much every conceivable way. Not only is she now the one he turns to when the superhero in him requires some sort of expert sidekick, but she’s also the compassionate ear he relies on when his human side needs companionship and understanding. I found her mostly understated reactions to be very real and touching. Considering all she’s gone through – and all she’s sacrificed and lost – it’s easy for her to ask herself, “What purpose do I serve now? Where do I belong?” It’s sad to say, but directly or indirectly, her relationship with Clark has resulted in her losing her husband, her journalistic aspirations, and many of her friends. I can easily imagine how painful and difficult it is for her to watch somebody else swoop in – without even trying, no less – and taking all that she lives for.

I do find it funny, though, that she has all of that high tech computer equipment so openly set up in her home. It’s like, doesn’t she ever get ANY visitors? Such as, I don’t know, her cousin???? Which leads me to the only real criticism that I have of this season so far: We really should have witnessed the powerful scene in which Chloe tells Lois that Jimmy was murdered. I really feel robbed of that moment.

Actually, her not-so-hidden computer fortress is a bit ironic, considering the fact that she (rightly) lashed out at Clark for carelessly roaming around his house in his Blur garb. Throughout the entire episode, it felt like she was bringing out those really great points that the audience is thinking: Why would he walk around the house in his costume without even checking if anybody else is in there? Why would he continue to feed the dog if he’s attempting to cut off all forms of human emotion? At first I wanted her to ask a VERY obvious question: Why on earth do you not wear a mask, when you fully intend on creating this character? But then I thought about it, and it makes sense. In Clark’s eyes, “Clark Kent” no longer exists. So hiding his face is a moot point.

But I think my favorite scene was the conclusion, when Clark finally decided to drop the dark routine and had an open, honest, and heartfelt discussion with Chloe. And while I’m a HUGE supporter of the Lois and Clark relationship, I do feel it was right that he had that talk with Chloe. The question is, will he now ditch the black wardrobe in favor of his classic (and future) red and blue?

That being said, I do love the fact that Lois was the reason Clark couldn’t completely cut off his humanity. While she was MIA, Clark did this pretty successfully (according to Chloe and others), yet once she returned, Clark started dropping in on their personal lives again. My favorite part? Sure, Clark can’t physically be near Lana (so stupid), but he is still allowed to love her. Yet his feelings for her didn’t come into play here. It’s his feelings for Lois that are coming into play here.

So far, I’m really pleased with how they’ve handled this relationship. And how cool was the visual of Clark and Lois’ nameplates sitting on their desks (both aiming at the camera) at the Daily Planet? This show has really come a long way, hasn’t it? Now Lord, PLEASE don’t take a giant step back again.




Bookmark and Share

Read more!

Monday, October 5, 2009

A Case of the.... Heroes - Episode 4-4

With this episode focusing mainly on the Hiro story arc, I can’t help but think about Charlie’s demise on Lost. More specifically, I’m wondering if Heroes will have the cajones to do what the ABC hit series did. For those of you unfamiliar with Lost, Charlie was a highly lovable, practically universally adored character who was killed off, arguably at the height of his popularity. However, unlike most of the major deaths on the show, this departure was foreshadowed (quite literally) for the entire season. Within the first few episodes of the season, Desmond told Charlie that he had visions of his death. And throughout the year, fans were continually wondering, “Would they actually write this guy off?” And they did, and I honestly believe that it will go down as one of the most beautifully written deaths in modern television history.


So I restate the question: With Hiro’s current story arc revolving around his impending death, will the writers have the guts to pull the trigger and actually kill him? Considering the last “major” character they’ve conclusively killed off is Isaac, near the end of season one, I’m not exactly optimistic.




Bookmark and Share

Read more!

Sunday, October 4, 2009

TV reviews

For those of you waiting for my next Smallville review, I apologize but there is going to be a slight delay. My CW affiliate decided to air the baseball game on Friday, so I wasn't able to watch or tape the show during its normal airing. And the CW is THE WORST about putting their episodes online -- and they're, like, the only network that doesn't also utilize Hulu and IMDb.com either. Tell me again why this network is constantly struggling? But anyway, I'll review it once it's posted online.

Speaking of CW, I was finally able to catch the past two episodes of The Vampire Diaries (for what it's worth, I eventually had to submit and turn to YouTube for the first episode I missed. The episode wasn't even posted before the next episode aired!) I'm really glad that they finally "dumbed it down" and outwardly explained why Damon and Stefan are able to walk around during daylight, it's their rings (as I suspected, I just didn't know Damon had one as well). I also got a real kick out of their shots at the Twilight series (the one vampire-centric production I have not gotten into). There's a lot I like about this series, particularly the subtle and sneaky ways that the vampires receive their invitation into households. I do have to wonder, though: Was the ball being held at the same home as the original one centuries ago? Because if so, Damon and Stefan wouldn't have needed an invite, since they were at the original. I also enjoy how openly Damon talks about being a vampire, but it's always to somebody in a trance, so it won't bite him in the ass. It reminds me of the short-lived New Amsterdam in that sense.

Oh, and I can't help but smirk each time the "you didn't tell me you had a brother" scene plays in the "Previously" clip. It's like, who randomly just tells a person they just met, "by the way, I have a brother." Without knowing anything of their history, it's not he was keeping some deep, dark secret.

I did finally catch the first two episodes of Flash Forward. The easy critique would be that it's a bit TOO much like Lost -- same network, similar premise, many of the same actors. That's an obvious observation, hell, the series even kicked off practically the same way. The lead character wakes up in the midst of chaos, and the audience is shown what happened before that moment throughout the rest of the episode.

But why criticize a series because it's just like another show you really like? That's part of the reason why I decided to give it a shot. And, much like Lost, I think this show "works" because you can relate to, or at least get attached to, the characters. It's also not afraid to dip into a bit of humor, like with one character spending his entire flash forward taking a dump.

I also enjoy the mix between self fulfilling prophecy and trying to avoid "fate." Case in point: The entire Mossaic investigation is an outward attempt to replicate the future. Yet certain actions like avoiding the man you're supposed to get involved with and burning the friendship bracelet your daughter gave to you are efforts to prevent what is "supposed to" happen.



Bookmark and Share

Read more!

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Why WWE just doesn't "Get It"

Last month, just before WWE's latest Pay-Per-View Breaking Point, I commended the company for attempting to lure viewers into ordering an otherwise throwaway event by trying to make it something unique and different, but felt that, in practice, they were going about it the wrong way.

Now, just one night before WWE's newest conceptual PPV, Hell in a Cell, I feel obliged to borrow one of the company's Attitude slogans by saying that they simply don't "Get it."

Once again, it's admirable that WWE has made efforts into providing their paying audience with something they won't see every month. But the problem lies in the fact that the audience IS seeing the same thing every month. In fact, the three "specialty matches" (as in, the three matches that will take place in the Hell in the Cell) for this upcoming pay-per-view are identical to the three submission matches they saw just the month before: DX vs. The Legacy, Cena vs. Orton for the WWE Championship, and CM Punk vs. Undertaker for the World Heavyweight Championship.

I can't help but think of that classic Simpsons episode when all those 8 year old girls were tricked into buying a new Malibu Stacy doll because it suddenly had a hat. In my opinion, the WWE audience (or, ugh, "Universe") is a little smarter than that. To me, changing the environment won't manipulate people into seeing the same match over and over again.

I'm also not entirely optimistic that fans will be compelled by the whole Hell in a Cell concept. Think of it this way: If there are three matches taking place in the structure, the "Holy Crap" moment surely won't happen in the first match, and likely not the second match either. Otherwise, they essentially screwed the pooch, and the proceeding matches will fall short. I don't think I'm the only person making this assumption. Therefore, I can easily see viewers disinterested in the first two cell matches -- which does nothing but damage the credibility of the stipulation.

At the very least, next month's Bragging Rights at least seems to offer something different (evidently Raw vs. Smackdown matches -- not sure where this leaves the red headed stepchild ECW, though). If that's the case, we may hopefully get a reprieve from these three matches.


Bookmark and Share

Read more!

Friday, October 2, 2009

Basically, my life is an episode of Seinfeld

It's hardly an original or unique observation, but I honestly believe my life is just one long episode of Seinfeld. The situations I get myself into -- many of which could easily be solved by merely speaking up and clarifying a situation -- often feel like they could happen to George Costanza or one of the other hapless characters.

Take this evening, for instance. By no means do I consider myself cheap. I'm careful with my finances, but I never hesitate to buy gifts for no reason for the people in my life. That being said, I find tipping to be the biggest scam going on, and it's happening right in front of our eyes. And it continues to happen because nobody in a position of influence has stood up and said, "how did we get convinced to do this?" Nonetheless, I still submit to the social norm and tip my 15-20%, depending on service and how often I frequent the establishment. And sometimes more or less, when extreme examples arise.

But I do draw the line with pick-up orders. If I make an order over the phone and go to pick it up, I don't tip. I don't care if I'm "supposed to," but in my eyes really no service was provided. Anyway, I made an order at Charlie Brown's, and went to go pick it up. It came out to $13.90. I put $14 on the bar, but the bartender was completely ignoring me. So I'm left in an uncomfortable position. Either I stand there and wait Lord knows how long for 10 cents (certainly not worth my time), or I just leave it, making it seem like I'm leaving a 10 cent tip. Ultimately I just did the latter. Not that they deserved a tip anyway -- I got home and they forgot to include my sour cream.



Bookmark and Share

Read more!