Sunday, August 31, 2014
Faking It!
So MTV has been getting pretty darn good at this TV thing lately, it seems. Not a huge surprise, while they did invent reality tv, which I've never been especially fond of, they also had some of the best shows of my youth like Daria and Aeon Flux (and Undressed -- at least when I was eleven years old!)
So they came out with this show called Faking It, which I found out about completely randomly on youtube. I was curious, but skeptical. Luckily it showed up for free on Amazon Prime so I gave it a shot.
First episode, I still had some trepidation. I was like... There has to be some catch, something more to this. I mean if this is really a show about two straight girls pretending to be gay... then this is not something I'm going to be watching.
But, of course, in the last second of the first episode you find out one of the fakers, weeelll, she might be having a pretty easy time faking it.
And it pretty much gets better each episode. It feels a little like MTV's other hit romance romp, Awkward. Faking It isn't as funny or clever as Awkward, but I'd have to say that the characters on Faking It are a lot more sympathetic. Jenna on Awkward is just a straight up bad-ass. Everyone around her is crazy as fuck and that gets her into 'awkward' situations, but she herself isn't awkward. She's smart and collected and basically ready to take on all comers. So I mean, I root for her but I don't exactly relate to her -- I'm nowhere near as cool as she is.
Faking It gives us characters that are a little more flawed and a little more down to Earth. I mean, I'm not as cool as Amy either. But she's more conflicted. And even the evil popular girl -- confounded by her inability to lord over the school because of the school's inverse social structure that puts outcasts on top and barbies at the bottom -- even she ends up being pretty sympathetic.
I thoroughly enjoyed Awkward's first two or three seasons but the premise has run thin for me with all the constant back and forth between Guy A, Guy B, or Guy C. Faking It hopefully has a better plan for us. But even if it only lasts 18 episodes, it'll be a whirlwind knockout of a show. I'm curious where they intend to go with this set-up and I'm hoping it turns out to be a classic best-friend romance, we haven't seen that in a long time. At least not on TV.
I'm up to episode 6 of a disturbingly short 8 episode season, and #6 was the best so far. I mean, in most cases the whole threesome concept is thrown into a TV show as a lowest common denominator appeal to male fantasy. But gosh, the version in Faking It was fiendishly nerve-wracking in such a unique way. Imagine you're pretending to be in a relationship with your best friend who you are secretly in love with, and you're tasked with, um... pretending to have sex with this friend but you really want to have sex with her so you have to... pretend to pretend to have sex with her? That's an Oscar-worthy performance if you can pull that one off!
So, way to go MTV. I'm looking forward to finishing this season and I can't wait for next season of Faking It. I also can't wait for Finding Carter's season to end so I can watch that. But I still can't get into Teen Wolf. It's like a not-as-good version of The Vampire Diaries which I already gave up on in the third season. But I'm sure there's something great about it which I'm just not seeing.
Sunday, July 13, 2014
New Series: Finding Carter
Escalation. We wear kevlar, they use armor-piercing rounds.
As you know if you read my blog, Switched at Birth roundly raised the bar on what kind of depth is required to compete in the world of good teen drama. The formerly ubiquitous 'rich teens behaving badly' motif has been replaced by sexy vampires and sexy werewolves. So to keep apt against such flashy aesthetics, grounded teen dramas had to fight back with the only recourse left to them: conceptual depth. Switched At Birth brought us all the dependable necessities of young love and parental showdowns, but with a complex family life and a unique cast of characters.
Earlier this week, MTV debuted a program which invites instant parallels to Switched at Birth. They both bring to life an extremely unique familial situation where a child is torn between more than one set of parents.
MTV's Finding Carter introduces us to a girl who was kidnapped as a young toddler, and then raised as her own by the kidnapper. At age 16, young Carter (real name: Linden) finds out everything she remembers about her entire life is a lie. In one fell swoop her entire world is taken from her, her "mother" is on the run from the law, and she's thrust against her will into a family of strangers. Now she struggles with her burgeoning feelings for her biological family, while refusing to let go of her love for the woman that raised her.
This is the kind of scenario that I, as a TV fan, dream of witnessing. A direct correlation where one great show inspires another. So far, Finding Carter seems to effortlessly walk that thin line where the influence is obvious, but the new material is genuine and legitimate without even the slightest hint of rehash.
Those first two episodes of Finding Carter were so fucking fantastic, almost 'next-level' shit. It fills my eternal soul with anguish that I can't watch the whole first season right now. This week to week thing, damn you terrestrial TV and your outdated, 1950s ways. Why couldn't this have been a Netflix series? If I want to watch this show properly, I'll have to wait until the season is done before I can watch the next episode!
While you can't possibly compare 2 great episodes to 40 great episodes fairly, I haven't rolled out the possibility that Finding Carter could be even better than Switched at Birth. And in any case, if this proliferation goes any further, we'll have undoubtedly entered the golden age of teen dramas. There have been so many amazing shows that have come before, but this new class of teen drama brings in a quantifiably more complex emotional dynamic that is highly difficult to usurp.
Labels:
Finding Carter,
MTV,
new shows,
Switched at Birth,
teen drama,
TV
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Editorial: The Myth of the Dying Album
Taylor Swift recently penned a fairly insightful article for the Wall Street Journal about the state of the music industry. In it she brushes on the oft-recited mantra that the era of the album format is over, and singles will become the primary purveyance of music like it was before the late-1960s.
Taylor didn't fall for the common deceit herself, but most people do. I was a kid when Napster exploded and ever since then every pundit, blogger, and professional music commentator has told you one thing with absolute certainty: the album format is on its way out. In fact they don't even limit it to a future event, commentators almost uniformly have the gall to declare that "many modern artists no longer release albums, and only release singles or EPs." This concept has become so ubiquitously spoken of that it's become an urban fact. Journalists who would otherwise be criticized for reporting blatant falsehoods can get away with erecting a tombstone for the album because everyone believes it's true. You don't have to take my word for it, I encourage you to google "death of album" or what you'd like and see for yourself. You don't have to look very far, you'll find the exact same sentiment everywhere.
Won't Get Fooled Again
Funny thing is, they've been saying that for 15 years and um... the album format is as imperishable as ever. Are CD sales down? Of course, digital is now the primary music medium. Are music sales down? Yes, they are. But is the album gone? Has the album format suffered any blow what-so-ever?
Good God, no. The album hasn't taken the slightest hit. Music may be raking in less dough but that's a separate issue -- has the album format been replaced by singles? Not at all, and it never will. Do people still release singles? Of course they do. Uh, they released singles in the 70s, 80s, and 90s as well. And just like in the early 90s, the **ONLY** artists who release singles instead of albums today are DJs and electronic dance artists.
Show me one single popular, legitimate modern pop, rock, or rap artist in the mainstream that releases singles and doesn't release albums, and I'll give you $100. You can't do it because it simply doesn't exist. No legitimate music act today would solely release singles without ever producing albums because it doesn't make financial sense. Pundits thought they were clever when they projected the death of the album format but they forgot to look at the logistics of it.
Business As Usual
Music is a business. And business is why none of us living today will ever see a world without the album. Releasing singles without albums makes less money than releasing albums does. Here are the five primary reasons why:
1) Revenue. Albums make more money than singles. A $15 album with a hit single makes a lot more money than a $2 hit single alone. Is the industry trying to make money? Then the album format stays.
2) Repertoire. When a fan buys an album, they are spending money on tertiary tracks (album "deep cuts") that the vast majority of fans wouldn't deem worthy of purchase in a singles-only market. So basically the album format allows the industry to make money off of otherwise unsellable material. Every fan has their favorite deep cuts but every fan also has their least favorite deep cuts, and few fans would be willing to pay $2 for the deep cuts they aren't fond of, in a singles-only climate. Albums will always be a lucrative investment for acts with large fanbases and so they will always be produced by any major-name act.
3) Advertising. Advertising is quintessential to the industry's strategy for selling artists. Producing one album every two years allows labels to meticulously devise a massive media blitz and pour the vast majority of their advertising budget into just one release. On the other hand, releasing nothing but singles requires the money to be spread out evenly among each individual single. That means labels would have to spend several times as much money, so each single can have the same push an album would have, or else the artist isn't going to stand a chance. And a reminder, singles make less money than albums do because they cost less (and albums themselves include singles). What's better business: spending less money on a bigger return, or spending more money on a smaller return? No savvy record label CEO will ever accept an album-less strategy.
4) Setlists. In the digital age, touring has become the primary source of income for many artists. The album format is crucial to the tour schedule. If an artist only releases singles, what goes on the setlist? A singles-only market means few to no deep cuts to flesh out a setlist. Older established artists might have enough material for a live show, but a new act needs to release albums in order to build a setlist. Even if you release a new song every single month, it'll take a year and a half to have even a rudimentary concert setlist. And then what are you going to do, have the same setlist every tour, except for a new single here or there? Albums are essential to produce a workable tour, and since touring has become the focus for most acts, albums will never cease to exist.
5) Unpredictability. Try as many have, from CEOs and pundits to scientists in labs, it's still impossible to predict what will become a hit, and what will flop. History is riddled with examples of filler tracks that almost didn't even make it onto the album -- Bon Jovi's Livin' on a Prayer, The Who's Pinball Wizard -- which end up becoming the band's all time biggest hit. And that trend continues to this day, often times tracks slated as singles are sidetracked for album cuts that ended up becoming unexpectedly popular -- like Kesha's C'mon from a couple years ago. This is doubly true for new and breaking artists, nobody expected Smells Like Teen Spirit to conquer America, and nobody thought Taylor Swift would break into the pop market with Love Story.
In fact, one advantage of the digital age is that big artists now have their entire albums chart on the singles chart. And that's why deep cuts need to be produced. You can write two dozen songs and you can guess which ones might be popular, but you can never be sure. That's why the album format is in fact essential to the existence of singles, the album format is what allows artists and producers to hedge their bets. A singles-only climate would be filled with far, far greater rates of failure -- and these would be enormous financial disasters because (as above) the singles-only market requires more money to be spent per single.
Fan Connection
So, as you clearly see, albums will continue to be produced by every major record label and every major recording act until the end of time, or until they can beam music directly into our brains with lasers. But, you might ask, what if fans simply stop buying albums? Won't the industry be forced to change?
Fans aren't going to stop buying albums because it's a better deal to buy 15 tracks for $10 than it is to buy 5 tracks for $2 each. The digital format empowers people who in the 90s might have had to buy 15 bad songs to get the 1 song they like, today they can just buy that one individual song. So the industry loses money in the short term, off of that particular demographic. Yet they're gaining money from the large group of people who would never have spent $15 for one good song, but will gladly spend $2 for that song. And the secret trick is, once you buy one song, that builds brand loyalty and you become much more likley to buy a second, and a third, and before you know it you're spending the $10 to get the 15 tracks, even though you only know for sure that you like 5 of the tracks.
Albums make the proliferation of material much more feasible for fans -- even if packaged together, an iTunes "album" of all hit singles would cost significantly more than a traditional album of 3 or 4 singles and a ten deep cuts. That proliferation of material is important to develop a personal bond with the fanbase. Fans feel like they "get to know" an artist by listening to both their singles and the myriad other tracks on a record. Singles alone present a much colder, less personal experience for the fan, and so fans will always continue to buy albums.
In short, don't let the apocalyptic pundits fool you. They're been wrong for fifteen fucking years and they still say the end is nigh. Not even the best cult-leaders get away with being wrong this many times with their doom & gloom prophecies. So rejoice, fellow lovers of the album, because the continued existence of the album is as assured as the greed of humanity itself. When a day comes when people no longer want to make as much money as possible, only then can the album format die out. Only then.
Sunday, June 22, 2014
Thirty Days of PRIDE
While pride is important every month, June is the month we single out for the biggest gay pride events to commemorate the world-changing Stonewall Riots on June 28th, 1969, which began the modern Gay Rights Movement as we know it. Similar to my 31 Days of Halloween, I wanted to put together some special TV programming for a great LGBT Pride Month.
Blue represents hour long dramas, green represents half-hour sitcoms and dramas, purple represents reality shows and red is used for special programming slots.
Weekday Lineup
---------------------
5am: Buffy the Vampire Slayer
6: Dawson's Creek
7: Dawson's Creek
8: Glee
9: Glee
10: Will & Grace
10.30: Ellen
11: Ellen
11.30: The Ellen Degeneres Show (talk show)
Noon: - Movie Slot C - "Related"
2pm: The L Word
3: The L Word
4: The L Word
5: Degrassi
5.30: Degrassi
6: - Documentary Slot -
8: - Movie Slot A - "Premium"
10: Queer As Folk (US)
11: Queer As Folk (US)
Midnight: Chozen
12.30am: Chozen
1: - Movie Slot B - "General"
3: - Music Slot -
Weekend Lineup
---------------------
2.30am: Exes & Ohs
3: Smash
4: Work Out in the Zone
5: Xena Warrior Princess
6: - Movie Slot B - "General"
8: - Documentary Slot -
10: Lip Service
11: In The Flesh
Noon: Coming Out Stories
12.30: Vicious
1pm: - Movie Slot B - "General"
3: South of Nowhere
3.30: South of Nowhere
4: Sugar Rush
4.30: Sugar Rush
5: - Movie Slot C - "Related"
7: - TV Slot - "Special Episodes"
8: Hit & Miss (Sat) / Orange is the New Black (Sun)
9: Pretty Little Liars (Sat) / Tipping the Velvet (Sun)
10: - Movie Slot A - "Premium"
Saturday Only:
Midnight: Hot Gay Comics
1am: DTLA
1.30: Rick and Steve
2: Big Gay Sketch Show
Sunday Only:
Midnight: - Musical Theater Slot - (2 & 1/2 hrs)
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Documentary Slot
----------------------
- 2 hour slot -
-30 entries necessary -
Short-lengthed programs have been paired to better fill the slot, signified with an /+/
--
I Am Divine
Let's Get Frank
Fish Out of Water
Outrage
Live Free or Die
Small Town Gay Bar
For The Bible Tells Me So
Out Late
Blood on the Flat Trac
Celluloid Closet
Fabulous: The Story of Queer Cinema
I Can't Marry You /+/ Edie & Thea: A Very Long Engagement
Jihad For Love
Lavender Limelight Lesbians in Film /+/ Sole Journey
The Mormon Proposition
Out in the Open
Stonewall Uprising
Training Rules + Fatherhood Dreams
Inspired: Voices Against Prop 8
(A) Sexual
Brother Outsider: Life of Bayard Rustin
Saint of 9/11
Before Stonewall
After Stonewall
Call Me Kuchu
Family Values: An American Tragedy /+/ Mr. Angel
Bridegroom + Dangerous Living
Off and Running
Making Grace
We Were Here
Music Slot
----------------------
- two hour slot -
- 21 entries necessary -
Entries accumulating less than 120 minutes are to be embellished with music videos from the wide world of LGBT performers.
Tegan & Sara: Get Along
Tegan & Sara: It's Not Fun, Don't Do It!
Wish Me Away: Chely Wright
Adam Lambert: Glam Nation Live
To Russia... With Elton
Elton John: Tantrums & Tiaras
K.D. Lang: Live in London with the BBC Orchestra
Queen Rock Montreal & Live Aid
Hungarian Rhapsody: Queen Live in Budapest
Queen: Live at Wembley Stadium
Backstreet Boys: Homecoming Live in Orlando
A Night Out with the Backstreet Boys
Hit So Hard
Rise Above: The Tribe 8 Documentary
Left Lane: On The Road with Folk Poet Alix Olson
Radical Harmonies
Glee: The Movie
Lady Gaga Presents The Monster Ball Tour at Madison Square Garden
Indigo Girls: Live at the Roxxy
Indigo Girls:: Live at te Fillmore
Indigo Girls: Live at the Uptown Lounge
Movie Slot A "Premium"
----------------------
- 2 hour slot -
-10 entries necessary -
These ten exemplary films are to be featured three times each of the course of the month, for this year.
Gods and Monsters
The Normal Heart
We Are The Best
Fucking Amal
Brokeback Mountain
Cloudburst
Hannah Free
Boys Don't Cry
If These Walls Could Talk 2
Whip It
Movie Slot B "General"
----------------------
- 2 hour slot -
-39 entries necessary -
Reaching For the Moon
A Marine Story
Circumstance
Personal Best
All Over Me
Geography Club
My Summer Of Love
The Truth About Jane
Kissing Jessica Stein
All Over Me
But I'm a Cheerleader
Ladies and Gentlemen: The Fabulous Stains
Weekend
Pariah
The Incredibly True Adventure of Two Girls in Love
A Perfect Family
Longhorns
North Sea Texas
Jack & Diane
Imagine Me & You
Blue is the Warmest Color
The Kids are Alright
Concussion
Keep The Lights On
Kiss Me
Mosquito y Mari
Water Lilies
Heavenly Creatures
Lost & Delirious
The Guest House
Bloomington
Cracks
The World Unseen
Molly's Girl
The Gymnast
She-Monkeys
Jamie and Jesse Are Not Together
Flowers for Bobby
Girls' View
Movie Slot C "Related"
----------------------
- 2 hour slot -
-30 entries necessary -
These films feature one or more of the following: gay directors, gay actors, gay supporting characters, or subtle LGBT themes.
American Beauty
The Night Listener
Pitch Perfect
The Runaways
Nell
The Accused
The Brave One
V for Vendetta
X-Men
X-Men
X2: X-Men United
X-Men: The Last Stand
X-Men: First Class
X-Men: Days of Future Past
Emile
Asylum
Neverwas
Apt Pupil
Juno
Mouth to Mouth
Hard Candy
An American Crime
Ghost Cat
Mean Girls
Ginger Snaps 2: Unleashed
Scream
Kinsey
Poison Ivy
Frozen
Divergent
ParaNorman
TV Slot "Special Episodes"
------------------------
- 1 hour slot -
- 9 entries necessary -
These are episodes of classic TV shows which feature LGBT characters or themes. Half-hour programs have been paired up to fill the slot.
- The Simpsons s8e15 "Homer's Phobia" /// All in the Family s1e5 "Judging Books by Covers"
- Married With Children s7e15 "Heels on Wheels" /// Two and a Half Men s11e1 "Nangnagnangnang"
- Roseanne s9e10 "Home is Where the Afghan Is" /// Roseanne s9e11 "Mothers and Other Strangers"
- Shake It Up s2e7 "Double Pegasus It Up" /// Good Luck Charlie s4e19 "Down a Tree"
- Fraiser s11e3 "The Doctor is Out" /// Frasier s2e3 "The Matchmaker"
- South Park s11e2 "Cartman Sucks" /// The Boondocks s2e13 "The Story of Gangstalicious Part 2"
- American Dad s3e4 "Lincoln Lover" /// American Dad s4e7 "Surro-Gate"
- House of Cards s1e8 "Chapter Eight"
- Seinfeld s4e17 "The Outing" /// Seinfeld s6e16 "The Beard"
Musical Theater Slot
----------------------
- 2 & 1/2 hour slot -
- 4 entries necessary -
Avenue Q
Les Miserables: The 25th Anniversary Concert
Rent: Live on Broadway
Hedwig and the Angry Inch
Monday, June 16, 2014
A Long-Belated Review: Sleeps With Angels
After a period of bizarre experiments in the 1980s, Neil Young had a veritable renaissance in the 1990s. He found himself on the very cutting edge of the grunge explosion, and became the honorary guru of the alternative rock era. He achieved this, largely, by getting back to his roots and courting the styles he had become famous for in the 70s: lucid hard rock albums like Ragged Glory (1990), and sentimental folk such as Harvest Moon (1992). For his next disc, Neil attempted to channel a different style: the grim mentality of his "ditch trilogy," which ruminated on the heroin overdose of original Crazy Horse guitarist Danny Whitten in 1970. With the untimely death of Kurt Cobain halfway through the creation of Sleeps With Angels, the project became imbued with unfortunate new resonance.
There has never been a more archetypal late-night record made, than Neil Young & Crazy Horse's 1994 album: the dark, ponderous Sleeps With Angels. It's the epitome of cool, the very essence of a midnight drive or a glass of wine on the porch at 4am. A full moon beach seance. A huddled mass of close friends waxing philosophic as dawn breaks. It's such a relentlessly shadowy album that it actually seems pretty ridiculous to listen to it during the day -- unless, of course, you're obsessively lost in yearning for those late nights long past.
The Crazy Horse format of rancorous guitars is subdued here into an almost neo-jazz sloppy precision. Vocals are given strictly in hushed tones and ominous background chants. The guitars become fuzz-ridden laments, as if slowly disseminating from a small amp in the far corner of an after-hours dive bar while the architect of said sound, a man in a trenchcoat and a top hot, is bent over his instrument with his face obscured, coming down off some long-stale high -- and he's the only person in the bar but you. It's an album seeping with shards of reality, but still firmly ensconced in the dewey gleam of preternatural warmth. Like an LSD hangover.
Like Neil's other 90s records, the lyrics present the worldview of a contented, happily wisened middle-aged man. But Sleeps With Angels is additionally haunted by the spectres of those who could not be saved. Neil's seen his share of destruction in his time, and on this record his ascension to maturity is made bittersweet by what could have been, had his fallen friends been able to achieve the same peace of mind.
It's not a wholly flawless record. There's some major filler. And a small studio performance called The Complex Sessions which Neil and the Horse did shortly after releasing the album, captures all the same hushed aesthetics while actually improving upon some of the initial arrangements.
But where it autonomously excels, is in sheer atmosphere. There's a lot of atmospheric music out there, and a lot of music that invokes the feeling of nighttime adventure. But there's no album that transports me so decisively into that world than Sleeps With Angels. It's a genuine marvel and, to me, an invaluable resource. It's one of Neil Young's greatest accomplishments, even if it's not one of his top 5 greatest records, when judged song for song.
Labels:
1994,
grunge,
guitar,
Neil Young,
Sleeps With Angels
Sunday, June 8, 2014
Switched at Birth
As a kid I enjoyed the golden age of The WB, with the incomparable Dawson's Creek, the eternally endearing Gilmore Girls, and occasionally, when it wasn't too imposing, a little 7th Heaven. You could call it 'family entertainment' but it was aimed primarily at moody teenagers, and to a pre-teen like me, it seemed astoundingly mature. The height of adulthood. I was enthralled.
Today, The WB is gone. Its formal successor is The CW, but the programming on that network errs almost exclusively towards the supernatural end of the WB/UPN spectrum. Shows such as The Vampire Diaries and The Originals are quite good, but you don't see the same down to Earth, daily life sensibilities that informed the WB's best work.
Another channel has stepped in to pick up where the WB left off, a channel that for years subsisted on syndicating programs including Dawson's Creek and Gilmore Girls. It's almost strange to imagine a TV network operating with such a clear logical, linear progression (since market turmoil tends to necessitate more haphazard evolutions), but all those years spent accentuating the WB's best must have given them a rather keen understanding of the classic WB mentality.
ABC Family has become the true, irrevocable heir to the WB aesthetic. They're hit and miss like every network is, but if you're looking for the quirky homeliness and the warm-hearted sentimentality of old WB, ABC Family is your destination. And so far their best show is Switched at Birth, the story of two girls and their two families, who didn't discover that a baby switch had occurred until 16 years after the fact. It is an astoundingly well done show, that never ceases to yield at a very high quality. It has to be the best family drama since Gilmore Girls.
Genuinely Unique
I'm about to go on a minor rant, but the best way to explain Switched at Birth's strengths is to contrast it with one of ABC Family's lesser shows. You have no idea how much I was looking forward to the debut of The Fosters. Adoption AND LGBT themes? These are specifically my two most sought-after story aspects for family dramas.
But the show didn't turn out so great. The Fosters tries *so damn hard* to be diverse and innovative. But unfortunately what you get with The Fosters is most of the same characters and plots you've already watched on other TV shows. Trust me, there's absolutely nothing I am more desperate for than a great LGBT show on ABC Family. But The Fosters panders more so than emotes, and the barriers it purports to break have largely been breached before. If it opens even one set of eyes to the validity of gay adoption then that's a service rendered to the whole human race. But is it a good, well-written drama show, on an entertainment level? No, it's merely decent.
Switched at Birth, on the other hand, makes being unique in a sea of TV copycats appear virtually effortless. Sure we've dealt with certain themes before, like class warfare and student protest. But we're treated to these themes in new ways thanks to this nuanced premise. The titular switched at birth angle gives us a far more innately introspective and intimately conflicted look at the discrepancy between social classes than similar family drama treatments.
Allow me to elaborate. Our two girls from opposite socioeconomic backgrounds struggle not just with their understanding of conflicting social ideologies and the revelation of class warfare, as many coming of age stories address; they also struggle with how these two opposed ideologies are simultaneously inherent to who they are, due to the girls' dual nature between their birth parents and the parents who raised them. This issue is usually dealt with as a simple arc, from ignorance to understanding. But for Switched at Birth, our protagonists are adamant about retaining both aspects of their self.
Furthermore, the recurring emphasis on deaf culture and deaf issues gives a voice to a group that has almost no representation in mainstream media. And the framing of the classic 'student sit-in' plotline through the lens of deaf students trying to save their one haven from the world of the hearing majority, allows the show to raise awareness about a defining moment in deaf history which most viewers are not going to be familiar with (the Deaf President Now protests at Gallaudet University), as well as bringing in a bit of new depth to the old formula.
Keeps Me Guessing
Yes, I'd certainly be lying if I said Switch at Birth doesn't tread on *any* ground we haven't seen plenty of times before. Like nearly all works in television and film, it rests on some old standards when need be. But the special thing about Switched at Birth is that even when they're redoing a classic standard, they still keep me on my toes.
For example in one storyline, one daughter befriends a political activist who is opposed to her father's work as a state Senator. And of course, she accidentally reveals sensitive information the senator hiding from the public. We know how this goes, right? The boyfriend is going to release the information, after a fight or a breakup, or because the political stakes are too high. But, no, Switched at Birth doesn't go that route. They actually don't make that into a plot thread at all, the Senator himself makes the information public later in that same episode, under no duress or conflict.
Not every trope is subverted here, but there are just enough subversions to make sure the audience can't confidently predict the plotlines, because you don't know when they're going to go the traditional route, and when they're not.
Switched at Birth has impressed me virtually with every new episode. I'd say it's definitively proven itself as the third best family-drama, behind Dawson's Creek and Gilmore Girls. But Switched at Birth isn't over yet, could it get even better? I wouldn't be surprised.
Best episode so far? The alternate reality episode where they had found out about the switch much sooner. Daphne the altruist became a spoiled socialite growing up rich instead of seeing poverty up close, while wild child Bay became a shy bookworm, internalizing her artistic side after having to live in Daphne's shadow. It was heartbreaking, it was illuminating, it was clever as hell and it was fucking awesome. What's next?
The Avengers and The Marvel Cinematic Universe
As a teen in the 00s, I thought I was growing up in the era of superhero films. But this trend has no apparent ceiling, and in 2014 we're still at the era's utter peak. It hasn't plateaued yet, it may even have a little higher to climb. Me, I'm perfectly thrilled about that; I like superhero films and I have no problem picking and choosing one or two out of the ten that come out each year now.
But to be honest, by the time the Marvel Cinematic Universe began in the summer of 2008, my eagerness to gobble up new superhero films had already begun to waver. They came too late to cause a stir. I enjoyed Iron Man well enough, but I had no interest in Thor or The Incredible Hulk. Not only was my interest in the trend waning, but The Avengers are a B-grade superhero outfit to me.
So I was highly skeptical of The Avengers film, even after hearing from pretty much everybody on Earth that it was amazing. In fact, the first time I tried to watch The Avengers, I turned it off after one scene. Could that first scene have been any more generic? Ooh there's this super-powerful object and a bunch of pseudo-science. Uh oh, the evil guy steals the super-powerful object. I was just like "Ugh, seen it before," and turned it off.
Avengers Reassemble
But people keep gushing about the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films. And after X-Men: Days of Future Past, I'm in the mood for some superheroes right about now. So I gave The Avengers another try.
And to my surprise, this movie actually fucking rocks. Despite frequent misgivings, it really won me over. The action was sick, the CGI looked good, it even had me genuinely invested in these characters. It pulled on my heartstrings a couple times. The story kept my interest and lacked any especially jarring foibles. They fit all these different characters into the film without ever feeling overburdened with content or leaving any characters noticeably underused. And most surprising of all, Loki waxes philosophic a couple times and it was actually pretty clever stuff. It didn't come off as cheesy.
Best of all was ScarJo. Black Widow, a SHIELD Agency assassin played by Scarlet Johansson, completely stole the film. In a movie featuring several of history's most beloved superheroes, Black Widow was more interesting than any of them. Here's a character with wit and strength, who doesn't have superpowers, and leaves me grappling for who she is, what her backstory is. Where's her stand alone movie? Now that's an MCU film that I'd actually go see. Maybe even in theaters.
So, I'm officially won over. The Avengers make a great ensemble and this film definitely ranks among the top 10 best superhero movies. But I can't say I'm completely sold on the MCU just yet. The MCU is much more of a comic-styled film series, with aliens and gratuitous action. I am and always will be more a disciple of the superhero approach that is grounded closer to reality (even if it's merely relative), with darker, more adult content, like what has been done with the Batman and X-Men films.
Marvel Takeover
A lot of people want Disney-Marvel to regain the rights to X-Men and The Fantastic Four, currently held by Fox. To that I say no no no no no no, no no no no no. We already have continuing franchises for Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and The Avengers, quite possibly The Hulk as well, plus new films for Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man, and any number of other additions. Do you really want to see X-Men and the Fantastic Four placed on the MCU assembly line as well? The MCU has roundly proven their style to be stagnant and consistent between all their products. All we would be getting from MCU-made X-Men and Fantastic Four movies is exactly what we've already gotten from the dozen other MCU movies. To people who have an insatiable appetite for the MCU, this would be a good thing. For those of us who want variety and nuance, this would be an unbearable Marvelopoly.
The problem with the MCU is that it's the assembly line of superhero movies, they keep coming out, but they're too similar to each other. It's a lighter, more kid-friendly approach to superhero films, exactly what you'd expect from Disney. And I frickin' love Disney, but there's no reason that all great comic characters should be bowdlerized to fit this mold. What we have now is pretty much perfect, Fox doing more serious movies with the best Marvel franchise, and Disney doing lighter, but still high quality, films with a lesser set of characters.
The biggest problem with The Avengers film is this: Too many one-liners. And don't get me wrong, this is Joss Whedon, a lot of these one-liners are really frickin' funny. But when you have enough one-liners to end every fucking scene, you have to really start to wonder whether this movie is action/adventure, or a comedy. This tactic seems designed primarily to diminish the tension as often as possible, and makes it patently impossible to deny that the Marvel Cinematic Universe takes itself less seriously than the X-Men, Batman, or even Spider-Man franchises.
What we really need isn't to Disney-ify all the great comic-film franchises. What we need is for studios to wake the fuck up to the money train and start cooperating on flicks that can include characters from more than one franchise. We don't need a Marvelopoly in order to see The Hulk, Spider-Man and Wolverine in the same film, all we need is for these studios to be a little less antisocial and a little more ambitious. As the superhero trend continues to soar uninhibited, these collaborations may inch closer to fruition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
















