MY REVIEW: MATCH GAME 2008 PILOT

    

The recent death of Bob Einstein  (a.k.a. Super Dave Osbourne) has brought forth some interesting and heretofore unknown facts about the comedy legend for the casual fan.  First, his brother is another comedy legend, Albert Brooks who changed his name for show business purposes as his real name, Albert Einstein, just might be a little confusing.  Their father, Harry Einstein, was a famous comedian during the golden age of radio.
     However, the most interesting artifact for me popped on YouTube a few days after Bob's death.  This would be most of the 2008 pilot for a proposed revival of  "Match Game" that was commissioned by TBS but never became a series on that or any other network, at least in this incarnation.
     The pilot was hosted by comic Andy Daly and featured celebrities such as Bob.....er, Super Dave, Sarah Silverman and Norm MacDonald among others.  The set was an exact replica of the 1973 revival that was the top rated game show for awhile in the 70s.  It even appears to have been shot in Studio 33 at CBS Television City where the famed 70s version was taped.
     The rules even seem similar to the 70s version right up to the bonus round.  This is where things are a little different.  Instead, of the audience match where the top three answers would decide how much money they would play for in the final head to head match with a celebrity of the contestants choosing,  there was five phrases that had the final word blanked out and the contestant, with some help from the celebrities, would have to guess the final word for each one for a chance to go on to the final head to head round.  I have intentionally left monetary values out of this review as I believe they are a bit irrelevant to what is basically a crapshoot of a Friday night party game at someone's key party (70's version only.)
     All in all, this was a very good revival effort (with Daly being a competent host) and the changes were minor and did not harm the freewheeling nature of the original 70s version.  For those not in the know, Gene Rayburn did a version of this show in the 1960s that was much different and lacking in the goofy humor the later updates of the show possessed.  I will say that the 1996 pilot for a proposed syndicated revival with Charlene Tilton (WTF?) was horrible and the 1998 one season syndicated effort with Michael Burger, who was also a competent host, was just too mean spirited.
     The only version of the franchise I haven't seen now is a much talked about and little seen 2004 pilot called "What The Blank" made for the Fox Network (with that title, who else could it be?) with Fred Willard hosting.  I would have went with the title of the German version of the show, "Schnick Shnack", but that's precisely why the networks will never hire me.  I'm just a lone wolf.  However, I will give the 2008 pilot a grade of B+ as it is more or less similar to the current Alec Baldwin version except that the contestants on the current version seem to be way too excited as if they were forced to enjoy some complimentary cocaine in the green room before entering the stage.  Tone it down, people.  Remember; hugs not drugs.

IN OUR POLARIZED CONSTITUENCY.....

    

In today's political and cultural climate there are two types of people:  the toilet trainers and the toilet trainees.  Without sounding too glib, I would like to wish all of you a mostly dry new year.

EVER FALLEN IN LOVE (WITH A BAND YOU SHOULDN'T'VE) ?

    

Pete Shelley died a few days ago of a heart attack.  From what I've seen and read Shelley was not into drugs or alcohol and so I doubt that had to do anything with his untimely demise at age 63.  Even though he wrote songs like "Totally From The Heart", I understand he had recently married and was very happy so dying of a broken heart would be a stretch although broken hearts of all kinds figured into most of his songs.
     I am a huge Buzzcocks fan.  They took the theme of the awkward part of love and romance and sex and turned it into an art form.  Nothing about young love was easy for Pete and he channeled it straight into his lyrics with songs like "What Do I Get", "I Don't Know What To Do With My Life" and of course their signature tune "Ever Fallen In Love?" The idea that the music was made for adolescents (you know; the youngsters) is to sell this music short.  These songs would make for a great midlife crisis mixtape stuck in a '89 Camaro.
     His solo work was much more complicated and sometimes not the most hummable music but, then again, that's why he made it by himself.  When bisexuality was not a subject for a pop song in 1981, he came out with "Homosapien" to break down that barrier.
     The Buzzcocks were a punk band in the way they operated as a band with a very strong DIY ethic.
Mohawks and safety pins were for other guys.  These fellas wore whatever they liked whenever they liked.  One of their last songs, "I Believe", is a manifesto that foreshadowed the original breakup of the band as well as Shelley declaring 'I believe in my Mum and my Dad' before repeatedly chanting 'There is no love in this world anymore!" before his voice breaks off into the void.  Was he serious?
Maybe.  Or just maybe 'this world' meant the Buzzcocks band was over and that he would soon go it alone.  He wouldn't have to jump into the real world alone. It just felt like it.  Pete was always telling you how he was feeling.  No abstract storytelling or metaphors here.  Just pure and simple words totally from his heart.















fgggSdg

MY TWO SHITS WORTH: EPISODE ELEVEN

RE: RHETORIC AS THE CAUSE OF DEATH

    

It's happening.  It's been happening forever but only when it hits home do we really care.  Self absorption takes its toll in bodybags.  We mourn and speak out for a time but then quickly turn back to our self induced distractions for comfort.  The human head feels much warmer in the sand, I guess.  Is the stock market up or down?  Should I buy or sell?  What celebrity hates another celebrity?  Will it go 'viral?  'Do we realize that going 'viral' shouldn't be something that we ought to be trying to achieve as it 'infects' our attention to what actually should be important to us all?
     As I've said, this fear of what we do not know or even try to understand has been occurring since the beginning of time.  Scapegoats for why we fail are very easy to find.  It's who and what we can comfortably live with that seems to be the most difficult thing to dissect.
     I don't talk to my neighbors.  Where I live, neighbors come and go every month.  No excuse.  I'm a somewhat shy person.  No excuse.  I don't have time to make conversation with a stranger.  No excuse. Maybe I don't want to find out how much different I am than they are and vice versa.  No excuse.   I suspect I'm not the only one with a kindness deficiency.  Deficiency is described as a lack or shortage of something.  It doesn't mean I have no kindness.  It means my kindness extends only to a certain point and then it ceases to exist.  An end to something always seems sad, doesn't it?  Can I turn that existential frown upside down?  Can I give an inch and not give a damn if someone else takes a mile?  Can I not only see and listen but attempt to really understand someone's opposing viewpoint without feeling it will forever damage my code of conduct?   Comfort zones are called as such for a reason, you know.  Fear of the unknown is just waiting for us right outside that space.
     Is that something we can live or die with?  I know for a fact that a bodybag with our name on it is waiting for all of us.  Maybe the real question is how fast are we eager to fill it?  Happy Halloween.

MY TWO SHITS WORTH: EPISODE TEN

 

  When is a 20th anniversary something not to celebrate?  Twenty years since I started freebasing?  Twenty years since my wife took her vow of celibacy?  Twenty years since that guy on the subway took a leak on me?
     Regular readers (all three of them) know how seriously I take music.  In the late 1980s both mainstream Rock and Country music were in a creative funk.   You know, the same thing over and over again.  If you were a record executive, the formulaic types of there genres were still selling but that's mainly because you forced us to repurchase our favorite music on a different format and then you made that format more expensive to own.  And you were laughing all the way to your cocaine dealer.  It's no surprise that long standing artists like The Moody Blues, The Rolling Stones, Waylon Jennings and Johnny Cash dropped off their respective Top 40 singles charts after 1990.
     In Country's case, Garth Brooks showed up around 1989 with his high octane arena-ready brand of music and pretty much destroyed any type of artist still using pedal steel guitar and singing tear-in-my-beer lyrics.  This genre of music hasn't changed much then mainly because Mr. Brooks' music was pretty darn profitable (over 100 million albums sold) even though industry insiders have been warning us of a traditional country comeback for over 20 years now.
    Rock music got a one-two punch in Nirvana and Pearl Jam in 1991; pushing alternative rock right into the mainstream.  However, with the exception of Pearl Jam, most of these modern rock stars either burned out or faded away by the end of the decade.  This meant change once again on Top 40 radio and pretty much anything but modern rock replaced it.
     One genre was teenybopper pop, a category thought driven into the ground in the 1970s by just about every Osmond who ever made a record. But much like the graveyard below the Freeling house in 'Poltergeist', it wasn't.  Boy bands like Backstreet Boys and N'Sync popped up, seemingly out of nowhere, and took radio by storm.  Where were the girls?  Yes, Christina Aguilera was there but the first to the charts was Britney Spears whose debut song "Baby One More Time" is celebrating its 20th anniversary this week with many music critics lauding this debut as the beginning of more mature sounding teen-pop.  Does anyone else see this as a contradiction in terms?  Certainly not the Spears family who rushed their oldest daughter into showbiz at an early age and obviously didn't see anything wrong with the title song's creepy video and lyrics sang by someone not even eighteen yet at the same time espousing her strong Christian beliefs.  I understand Christians are not all prudes but the song and the video were and still are borderline child porn.
     I'm willing to overlook the fact that the image and music were completely manufactured from the ground up.  Spears, Aguilera and Justin Timberlake were all being groomed for stardom as members of the late 80s version of the Mickey Mouse Club.  Ms. Spears sang the songs pretty much like anyone on karaoke night would as she did not write a single note or word of the song (or anything on the album which would appear in early 1999).  I'm willing to overlook the fact that her voice was nothing special compared to the vocal stylings of Whitney Houston or Mariah Carey.  But the way she 'delivered' the songs would have been more understandable coming from them than from someone who most likely had to be taught how to properly 'shake her groove thing.'  Just plain embarrassing.  I remember seeing pre-teens everywhere dressing up (or, more precisely, down) like her as these young girls were obviously voicing their support of female empowerment, not realizing their fearless leader was slowly headed for a self imposed mental breakdown.  I honestly don't remember Gloria Steinem doing this.  Of course, I don't remember Gloria's parents shoving her into showbiz as a toddler either.  As the late, great Tom Petty once said 'as we celebrate mediocrity all the boys upstairs want to see how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.'  'Nuff said.

ANOTHER BRIEF THOUGHT

   

  In my opinion, technology can be a fickle mistress.  It can improve some areas of our lives while simultaneously making other areas more difficult.
      I've noticed how retailers (you know, the brick and mortar variety) are offering special discounts to people who have smartphones.  I suppose it's just another ruse to collect your personal data but the these offers feel a bit cruel to me.  I know a majority of people have smartphones now (I don't) but it seems to me that the ones who do not have them are exactly the ones who could benefit from these type of deals that are being offered.
    Not so long ago, people were complaining about not being able to get special discounts on items at the local grocery store because they refused to give out their personal info in order to get a 'savings 'card.  Today, people are willing to do almost anything to get a discount, even if it means forking over their entire life history to some faceless machine.  Have we become so desensitized or manipulated that we are accepting things we used to deny because they come gift wrapped prettier now?  I still don't find pigs attractive; even with an extra coat of lipstick.