IS THERE A BETTER (OR BIGGER) PICTURE?

    

     The 2019 Oscars gave just about everyone something to celebrate as well as criticize.  What else is new?  Even with a more diverse slate of nominees and winners, many people felt the need to shit all over the Best Picture winner "Green Book."  I didn't think it was the best film of last year but I certainly didn't think it needed to be pummeled into the ground either.  Many viewers were upset at civil rights hero and Senator John Lewis for introducing a clip from this film.  Because he felt the film was important, many viewers and commentators rushed to the conclusion that poor old misguided Lewis didn't even see the movie.  How do you know this is true?  Is it possible that someone his age may still have a different world view of race relations than the younger filmmakers who supposedly are more enlightened and 'woke'?  It's certainly possible.  But does that make it right to condemn him for his views?  You certainly have that right but with all the things he has done to help improve race relations in this country, I don't think throwing him under the bus is necessarily the correct response but, then again, that is the exact drawback of social media:  People tweet their first emotional responses without thinking rationally first.  I know this because I see all of the deleted tweets and apologies that occur the next day.
     Spike Lee won his first competitive Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay but apparently turned his back and started walking out of the theater when "Green Book" was announced as Best Picture.  Is this really the message he wants to send to young people?  I honestly don't know.  Octavia Spencer is one of the producers of "Green Book."  Do you think she would have helped make this movie if she didn't really believe in it?  Again, I honestly don't know.
     Personally, I believe Robert Redford should have been nominated for his performance in the 70s throwback heist film "The Old Man And The Gun."  I think it was a very nuanced and gutsy performance.  However, I'm not going to bitch and moan about it.  And do you know why?
     Because I believe we currently have a government that is not working for the people and the decisions they are making are causing ripple effects across the entire world that we will not be able correct any time soon.  Once the proverbial horse is out of the barn, its very difficult to wrangle him back in again. To me, real life and death matters a bit more than winning or losing.  I'm sorry if I seem more concerned about the state of the world than who won what award but I guess I'm just funny that way.

NEVER ENDING MATH EQUATION

    

For those of you looking here to read some story on Modest Mouse (you may have to Google that reference), I'm sorry but it really has something to do with what I'll be talking about here.
     With the brutal attack of cable news pundits from all sides of an issue, you're head might spinning after hearing all the different ways a subject can be turned into an opinion or, in one man's case, actual talking points for the leader of the free world to memorize and regurgitate to the media the following day.
     This is where the political machine has got this method down to a science, even if some of them don't believe in actual proven scientific facts.  One of the most popular phrases in the mathematical or scientific community is to view the question, simplify the actual meaning or expression and then justify why that meaning (or theory) is the 'truth.'  They say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  I say the truth is in the emotions of the beholder as well.  Once we manipulate your emotions, we have you wrapped around our finger.  Once the supposed the truth is narrowed down to sound bytes, slogans and headlines; you can easily be persuaded.  This is especially true if you make no effort or have no desire to do your own research to verify what is trying to be proven.  And because people are so busy these days working more than one job, being enslaved to technology, social media and wanting to escape the horrors of the real world, we will be satisfied to just believe the most convincing answer and move on with our mundane lives.
     We want drive-thru answers to questions that require a full fine dining explanations.  Go ahead and order when you're ready.....if you dare.

MAIL FORWARDED TO A NEW ADDRESS IN SIBERIA

 

Everyone is flawed.  We know this but we repeatedly try to make sinners out of saints and vice versa.  There is a difference between getting arrested for shoplifting and being found guilty of spousal assault.  There is no such thing as the court of public opinion but we repeatedly use this nonsensical institution to make final judgments on people who get caught sinning.  We hold our public figures to a ridiculously high standard that they'll never be able to achieve.  We are looking for these people to be heroes when we should be casting our eyes and ears elsewhere.

     If a person is found guilty of something illegal such as having sex with a minor, serves his time, attends therapy, and then proceeds to save several people who were trapped in a burning building, how do we judge him?  Is there any change in perception of that person?

     If a person apologizes for appalling behavior on audio or video several decades ago, do we forgive them or do we severely punish them to make an example to the rest of the world that this type of behavior is never acceptable?  Do we still punish the person after a lifetime of public service and helping the same people who are punishing him?  Will we ever let this person back into public life or will we forever banish them to their own private Siberian-like hell?

     Every incident should be judged on case by case basis-not in the court of public opinion but in an actual courtroom.  To me, this is simple common sense that has been devoured and swallowed by the faceless mob courtesy of social media created for the sole purpose of provoking emotions and knee-jerk reactions rather than laying out all of the evidence in a rational matter and then making your best judgment to find one a upstanding person or not.  And what really qualifies one as upstanding?  Isn't that subjective as well?

     We celebrate national holidays for people we now know were far from perfect people but yet did everything they could to make life better for many of us.  How do we separate private life from public service?  Have we lost the ability to forgive but not forget?

      Going back to my first two scenarios, would you perception change if the person arresting for shoplifting was doing so because they were trying to feed their family after being let go from their job?  Would you perception change if the person found guilty of spousal assault wasn't correctly diagnosed with PTSD after serving in a overseas war causing them to lash out irrationally because of an illness that was overlooked? 

      We know the answers.  How willing are we to roll up our sleeves and face them?  I have a scary feeling that the easy way out doesn't have a return entrance.

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