I ALSO WONDER

     There is a strange phenomenon happening in the world of movies these days.....and, no, it has nothing to do with the controversy with Martin Scorcese's Netflix film "The Irishman" being funded by the streaming service, playing for a very limited time in theaters and the going back to Netflix for maximum streaming consumption (they hope, as the budget for the epic Mob drams is around $150 million and there isn't a DC or Marvel character in sight).

     I'm instead referring to several episodes of a 20 plus year old sitcom that will be playing in select theatres over the Thanksgiving holiday.  Yes, "Friends" will be clogging up some screens at your megaplex (I'm betting on theater 26 myself) very soon.  They're all Thanksgiving themed episodes so that's something, I guess.  No new content.  No restorations.  Nothing different that what you're streaming or shows up on your dusty DVD box sets.  I'm not much of a fan of the show but if my local theater was showing 6 episodes of one my favorite series (i.e. "Seinfeld") I wouldn't go out of my way to rush down to catch them at the cinema.  Why?  Because it's everywhere else....at little to no charge.  And, besides, Kramer looks spooky enough on my 42 inch TV.  I think I would have one of those Mary Hart induced seizures if he was as large as Godzilla trampling through Tokyo.

     I could blame this on millennials who supposedly breathed new life into this show and "The Office" but I think these shows are comfort food for people who think life is getting a little too dark these days.  Understood.  And  I will watching the box office totals for this Fathom Events stunt to see if this actually starts a new trend.  But I will not be watching a decades old sitcom on the big screen no matter how hilarious it is to hear Matt LeBlanc uttering the phrase 'How you doin.' 

I WONDER

"Immediately remove and wash clothes or linens that may be contaminated with vomit or poop."

This sentence comes from a government website.  They are using what is basically a slang term for feces or excrement.  What's next?  The Department of Housing and Urban Development telling us how to best inspect the 'crib' that our family deems acceptable?

MY REVIEW: PRESS YOUR LUCK (2019)

    

I must admit, I was a BIG fan of the original 1980's version of "Press Your Luck" and its host Peter Tomarken.  It was literally all bells, whistles and whammies all of the time.....and a few trivia questions thrown in to satisfy someone's need to justify watching such a razor-thin premise of a game show.  And for all of us who thought it was a giant hit show, it didn't fade away but rather burned out in a rather dull fashion after only three seasons on CBS daytime.
     Is all of this nostalgia enough to bring such a trifle of a show back?  Hell, yeah it is!  And of course now that it is a prime time beast, we have to super-size it; making the highs higher and the lows so much more sad and tear-jerking.  However, those nasty whammies just don't seem as nasty as they did when I was thirteen years old.  I guess real life will do that to you.  And the trivia questions seem even more dumbed down than before.
     And then there's the new host.  There are probably thousands of people more qualified to host this show ( both men AND women) but I suppose few women who look like they just walked off of a fashion shoot like Elizabeth Banks.  But I'm afraid her hosting skills leave a lot to be desired.  Her 'banter' sounds either rehearsed or wooden or both.  It's refreshing to see a non-comedian get the job but she acts like she studied at the Drew Carey school of game show hosting.
     Oh, and the contestants.  They seem to have been hooked up to a Red Bull I.V. before taking the stage.  No one can be that excited.  I know you're enthusiastic but take it down a notch or two, ok?
     The game board is what I really want to see but after a few episodes, I simply became bored.  All the bells, whistles and whammies just aren't that dazzling anymore.  This is an okay time waster but as a great game show it's only a mediocre one at best.
      My grade: C-

THE TIMES SURE-HAVE-A-CHANGED

    

Woodstock 50 is dead.  At least, in its dreamed-up-by-Michael Lang edition.  Why?  Because the rules have changed.
     The original 1969 was hatched on a handshake deal by Lang and a few others who wanted to hold a music and arts festival.  The place, bands, and size of the grounds constantly morphed during the seven months between conception and execution.  This type of 'ever changing scenario' would not be allowed in today's world.  Neither would a 'handshake' deal.  Hell, even Lang knew this at the start of his 50th anniversary idea because it was mostly and heavily backed by a Japanese financial conglomerate.  What kind of contracts and confidentiality agreements would poor old Max Yasgur have to sign if he were still alive today?
     Everything is a business now.  Air. Water.  Literally everything.  And how about these 'radius clauses'  (MEANING: a tour promoter stipulates that a performer, for a certain length of time prior to or following an appearance at a concert or festival, must not hold concerts at other locations within a certain radius of the city where they are to perform. In essence, it gives the promoter a form of territorial exclusivity, ensuring that the performer does not book concerts with competing promoters and venues in nearby areas, which can undermine ticket sales for their main event.)  This kind of thing forced several bands to drop out because of ties to companies like Live Nation who love this type of practice.
  Would legendary rock concert promoter Bill Graham have done that type of thing?  Hell no, man.  Live and let live, right?  When the original Woodstock ran out of tickets to sell, the promoters started to just let people in for free because they felt that if these people who came from everywhere, they shouldn't be denied entry because of their poor job at ticket selling.  Like, pretty heavy, huh?
     What would have happened if at the end of Jimi Hendrix's appearance at the 1969 event, he suddenly grabbed the mic and said 'I'm gonna be auctioning off this guitar I was playing right after the show and whoever gives me the most money or five football fields full of hash can have it?"  I believe the hippie dream would have gone up its own ass right then and there.
     Not everything needs a sequel.  Woodstock is just one of those things.  I'm sure Mr. Lang had good intentions (he was trying to raise money to promote voter participation) but these intentions are just going to have to stand on their own two feet as a separate entity.  Bummer.

MR. STEWART GOES TO WASHINGTON

    

This article probably should have been titled "Why I Miss Jon Stewart As Host Of The Daily Show"  but I thought twice about that, especially since the show has become an almost an entirely different entity under its current host Trevor Noah; much like the way the show transformed when Stewart took over for Craig Kilborn.  Everyone is bringing something different to the table.
     In Jon's case it was his critical and watchful lens on the television media and its tendency to wander off from its supposed journalistic integrity in its naked and shameful pursuit of giant ratings.  John Oliver has a little fun poking the eye of the local CBS affiliate in New York City (WCBS) from time to time but for Stewart it was a never ending battle.  The broadcast networks and later the cable news outlets have become neutered by their sponsors and shareholders in what stories they can and cannot tell and in some cases how they tell them.  To him, MSNBC was just as guilty as Fox News in how unashamedly crass they where in how they 'dumbed down' the events of the day, even though it was clear he leaned more than a little to the left.
     Recently, Stewart has been back on TV but not in his previously satirical pose.  He has been working with surviving first responders of the Twin Towers attacks in hopes getting the 9/11 Victims Bill extended so that it never runs out of money.  He is speaking for many of those who literally can't.
This is not a 'bit' or a 'gag.'  I happen to agree with his point of view on this subject and most who don't are currently holed up in Washington D.C. taking their orders from a man who probably never even volunteered a decent line of Peruvian marching powder up to a fellow partier at Studio 54 back in its heyday.  And one of the Congressmen he called out personally fired back by saying that he didn't think Stewart was 'funny anymore' and called him a member of the 'left-wing mob.'  First, the left wing is too unorganized and diverse to be even considered a 'mob' and, more importantly, sir, he wasn't trying to be humorous; especially after one of the survivors who testified in front of a governmental committee a little over six weeks ago is now dead and buried.
     Now let's try to get our facts down before we start vomiting up falsehoods, shall we?


UPDATE:  Can you guess how the vote went by this picture?

A MOST UNINSPIRATIONAL BUT HILARIOUS QUOTE

"The three purposes of the University?--To provide sex for the students, sports for the alumni, and parking for the faculty."

^{-Clark Kerr}
Former President of the University of California

MY REVIEW: 'LIVE BEFORE A STUDIO AUDIENCE'

    

It's no secret that Norman Lear is one of the true pioneers of television.  After years writing for other people's programs, he decided to branch out on his own.  He started directing a few motion pictures and then had a idea while watching a British sitcom called "Till Death Us Do Part" while on business in England.  He decided to buy the U.S. rights, Americanize it by very loosely basing the characters on people he knew and changing the title.  However, this was no overnight success.  After 2 failed pilots, a third titled "All In The Family" debuted in early 1971....to low ratings.  However, summer reruns caught viewers eyes and it eventually became the #1 show for several seasons.

     Lear quickly started to break minor characters off into to 'spinoff' shows.  Edith Bunker's cousin Maude got her own show.  Maude's housekeeper Florida Evans got her own show.  The Bunker's neighbor's the Jeffersons got their own show.  Suddenly Lear was a rich and successful mini mogul in his own right, cranking hit after hit of topical and often controversial in-your-face comedy based mainly on characters that were sometimes bigoted, sometimes ignorant, sometimes arrogant but deep where supposedly well meaning.  The language subject on these shows were raw and uncensored and many local affiliates refused to broadcast certain episodes, but a hit is a hit in showbiz so these refusals never lasted too long.  Most importantly the scripts were meticulously plotted by some of the best comedy writers and were almost always flat out hilarious.

     After ruling the 1970's Lear's interests lead him elsewhere but at the age of 94 he had an unexpected comeback with an all Latinx version of "One Day At A Time."  Suddenly Lear was hot again.  Jimmy Kimmel took note of this and wanted to team up with Lear and had a novel suggestion: "Why not take one classic episode each of 'All In The Family' and 'The Jeffersons' and use the exact same scripts but with new actors taking on the iconic roles?"  Lear was game and even threw in another twist:  Do them live just like many early television sitcoms were done.

     And so this happened a few weeks ago and, like many diehard fans of these classic shows, tuned in to see how these classic but somewhat topically dated scripts would fare in today's world.  Oh, and they got TV best sitcom director ever James Burrows to helm these episodes.

     How did it go?  First, the actors updating the iconic roles and their versions of the characters seemed a bit irrelevant to me as long as they didn't do anything too distracting like getting Christopher Walken to play Archie Bunker.  And because it was live there where a few mistakes here and there but to me that was part of the fun; to see if the actor could 'get back on the horse and keep riding' which thankfully never failed to happen.

     Of course, it was heaven to see the surprise casting of Marla Gibbs stepping back into the her role as the Jeffersons' maid Florence Johnston and she knocked it clean out of the park. I almost cried.

     But, of course, the main question was: would the original scripts which were not changed one word (causing one contentious word to be bleeped) be as funny as they were over 40 years ago.   Yes and yes to both episodes because they were impeccably structured originally and only a fool would try to change these Emmy Award winning writers words.  And some parts of these scripts are unfortunately just as relevant as ever.  People who say Lear was trying to change the world with these shows are missing the point.  Getting people with differences to have a meaningful dialogue is what was and still is desired.

     And, of course, it was refreshing to see characters having differences and then having them try to work them out with the people they disagreed with standing just a few feet away without any 'firewalls' between them.

     If Lear and company can find a way to this again with more daring episodes like 'Maude's Pregnancy' or  the "Good Times" classic 'Black Jesus' episode with as much care, I say 'bring it on!'