Who’s That Guy?
My rants tend to take a nostalgic bent, but I find I try to stay away from the true "retro blogging" front. I rarely venture earlier than '93, and there are so many bloggers that already have a handle on the '80s stuff. That said, the folks over at UnderScoopFIRE! and ColdSlither Podcast have really kind of stoked the fires for my nostalgia. Having followed them on Twitter, and listened to their podcasts, I realize that they're my kind of people. Every day, I can count on a great debate like "Stone Cold OR The Rock?" or "Ma'am and George Papadapolis OR "Philip and Maggie Drummond?" These aren't the debates you get from CNN, but these questions must be asked! So, the wheels have been turning, and I've started thinking about 80s pop culture, and some of the quirk inherent to that era. One such phenomenon I'd like to refer to as "Who's That Guy?"
Sitcoms have really evolved over the past 50 or so years. Before we settled on the whole single camera, no laugh track model (The Office), we had the multicamera, studio audience model (Three's Company). In the beginning, these shows usually starred some comedian or variety act, maybe a husband and wife team. Then, we got to the 70s where things were a bit more politically charged, and sitcoms began to explore the workplace (Mary Tyler Moore). In the '80s, however, shit got weird.
In the 80s, shows centered on a family model, and tended to have male family friend who Just Might Be Gay. Who's that guy? Why is he here? What's his motivation? He wasn't just a wacky neighbor, as those had been around for years. No, this was something different. Of course, he couldn't actually be gay, as Three's Company showed us that you could only be gay if you weren't (Ha! He's only pretending). No, these characters seemed like they were testing the waters of America's acceptance of the potential of a gay sitcom character. The role disappeared in the 90s when shows gravitated towards the Living Single model - centered around a group of friends who are primarily not immediate family; I'd say Friends model, but any black person under the age of 50 will tell you that Living Single did it first (Honestly, I think TGIF's Going Places might have actually pioneered the whole thing, but I digress). It's said that the funniest jokes have some truth to them, so it stands to reason that these roles were possibly meant to ease America into the idea of homosexuality, without fully understanding how best to accomplish that. After all, this was new territory for the era, so there wasn't really a road map as to how to successfully pull this off. These characters were always played as "bachelors", but little "bacheloring" was done on their part. It's kinda like your middle-aged uncle who lives with his "friend", Kevin. At most, they were played for comic relief. Still, their addition always seemed a bit off, as if mandated by the network. I want to take a closer look at some of these characters.
In the sitcom Webster, real-life couple Alex Karras and Susan Clark take in little Emmanuel Lewis, and hilarity ensues! Not really. Anyone with eyes knew that this was just a Chinese knockoff of Diff'rent Strokes. I wonder if white folks were as crazy about adopting black kids as TV led me to believe. Seriously, TV made it seem like a typical yuppie weekend agenda was:
_Play tennis at the club
_Brunch
_Detail the BMW
_Go down to the orphanage and look at the black kids
The saddest thing about Webster was that he wasn't even a part of the original premise. It was just meant to be a show about the couple, but everyone was apparently riding the wave of black adoptions (gotta catch 'em all!), so Webster was pigeonholed into the show. And then he took over. And the real life couple wasn't pleased.
Anyway, despite all the behind the scenes drama, something interesting was happening onscreen. You see, the show introduced Jerry (played by Henry Polic II - how do you even become a "II"? Don't you have to be a JUNIOR? Anyway...), who was the male secretary to Katherine Papadapolis. Hold up, MALE SECRETARY?!! But that's a WOMAN's job, like housekeeping (little did we know the 80s would also turn that occupation on its head, too). Anyway, I've watched a LOT of TV. We're talking a LOT. That said, I can't remember an important episode featuring Jerry. I do remember him dressed up as Dracula once. Otherwise, I just remember him as looking like he could be Cousin Larry Appleton's stand-in. As a child, though, all I could think was "Why is he here? They already want me to believe these rich white folks want Webster, and now I've gotta make sense of him, too?!" I don't know if there were any episodes about Jerry going on dates with women way out of his league, or a rushed marriage storyline or anything. In hindsight, part of what taints my memory of him is the Britcom, Take A Letter, Mr Jones. In that show, John Inman (of Are You Being Served? fame) plays a male secretary, and I don't think John Inman EVER played a straight character, so I guess I'm applying that bias to Jerry on Webster. Was Webster sending a message through established gender roles or was it trying to change established gender roles? Let's move on to another example, shall we?
Another quirky 80s sitcom was Too Close For Comfort, starring Mary Tyler Moore/Caddyshack alum, Ted Knight. This show was all over the place, partly because it went from network to first-run syndication - changing plot points as it went along. Mainly, Knight played Henry Rush, a cartoonist whose most popular strip was Cosmic Cow. He lived in San Francisco with his wife and hot daughters. Oh, and Monroe Ficus.
Played by Jim J. Bullock, Monroe started out as a friend of Henry's daughters. While he's a klutz and always tends to gum up the works, his heart is usually in the right place. Over time, Henry becomes a bit of a father figure to him - especially once the daughters are written out of the show. The problem with Monroe, though, is that he's a character that just doesn't exist in that time period. I mean, in today's vernacular, you would classify him as a manchild, but not in the Judd Apatow sense of the word. Those characters just don't want to embrace responsibility, while Monroe just had a Peter Pan naivete about him. He never dated any of Rush's daughters, nor did he even try. I've been watching the show a lot lately on Antenna TV, and he doesn't seem to ever really have girlfriends. Then, there's the "very special episode" where he's raped during his shift as a mall guard. It's played for comedic effect, even though there's a buried message about how men can be raped, too. He's embarrassed to go to the police, but Henry convinces him that he should. The whole message isn't conveyed very well, and you find out he was raped by a burly senior citizen, so it's still "Haha, poor Monroe!"
As a character, Monroe was a sweet kid, but what was his true purpose? Sure, he served as a foil for Henry (much like the Urkel and Carl relationship from Family Matters), there are still a lot of questions that need to be answered about the character's motivations. Early on, we learn that his own parents don't really even care about him, from dissuading him from visiting, to not even calling on his birthday. This is part of why Henry decides to make time for him, but why did the Ficus clan disavow him?
Then, there's the fact that the character was played by Jim J. Bullock. A longtime HIV survivor, Bullock has never been shy about his sexuality, and he actually learned he had the virus during the final season of Too Close For Comfort. I often wonder if Monroe never chased women because they felt the audience wouldn't believe it OR if Monroe was actually as gay a character as network TV was willing to allow at the time.
Here's where I wanted to talk about Joey Gladstone from Full House. I've always had a problem with Full House because I don't know why Danny Tanner puts up with all those freeloaders. Seriously, Joey wasn't a blood relative, and it seemed like they were helping him more than he was helping them. Also, when you get married, it's time to move out. When you have a baby, it's time to move out. When you become a DJ, it's time to move out. You do NOT move into the attic, expand said attic, or install a studio in the basement. As you see, though, most of my problems were actually with Jesse - Joey was just along for the ride. Plus, any theories about Joey were dispelled by Wolfgnards's excellent takedown of what was really going on in the Tanner household.
So, we've gone over just a few examples here. There are others who fit the mold (Dexter on Silver Spoons, Ralph Simpson on Gimme A Break!, etc), while others don't (Charley Dietz on Empty Nest). In fact, speaking of Charley, he's indicative of what happened later on in the decade. Played by "Joe Isuzu" actor David Leisure, Charlie was an oversexed douchebag, much like a real-life version of Family Guy's Quagmire. In the latter half of the decade, most of the "Who's That Guy?" characters would follow this path, as womanizing cads with little moral character. If psychology tells you anything, these guys are actually more likely to have issues dealing with their sexuality than the characters like Jerry and Monroe. But this has already gotten too cerebral, and I'll be damned if I'm gonna actually use my degree for a blog post! Can you think of any other characters who fit the mold? Am I way off base here? Do you just want me to hurry up and talk about comics and toys again? Stay tuned!
The Gang Goes Seinfeld All Over Their Asses
Unless you're new here, you know that I know next to nothing about sports. As a result, I tend to relate even less to sports fans. And don't get me started on fantasy teams! Nope, not a sports guy. What I do know, however, is TV. Sometimes, when I really get into a show, I start thinking about how things could've gone differently. This morning, I had quite the revelation about the darling of Must See TV, Seinfeld.
Unless you've been living under a rock, you've surely caught an episode of Seinfeld in syndication. You've probably seen all the watercooler episodes, like Soup Nazi, Man Hands, and Mulva. If you're like me, you've seen them all. As it was marketed, Seinfeld was a "show about nothing". Or so they claimed. You see, in the finale, they decide to pull the finale macguffin that "everything wasn't as it seemed." Sure, it wasn't anything as daring as the Roseanne finale, but the thesis was that the Seinfeld crew were, and always had been, assholes. To sum it up, the gang are on the way to LA, but the plane has to make an emergency landing in a small town. While there, they notice a fat guy being mugged, but instead of helping him, they just kinda laugh. Since this was a violation of a newly-instated "bystander law", which required citizens to intervene in such cases, the four are arrested. At this point, several guest stars from the past are paraded into the courtroom to support the idea that, yes, the four are horrible, horrible assholes. Episode ends with them being sentenced for a year, and our last image is of them on their cell.
I HATED that finale. It served to give the show a retroactive thesis that didn't exist. Sure, they were all selfish characters, but they never did anything malicious. Their biggest crime was probably that they were always looking out for themselves, which, at times, *may* have been at the expense of others. The parade of cameos was almost necessary to build this case against them, but it really came off as "Larry David doesn't know how to end this show."
That finale bothered me so much that I couldn't watch syndicated episodes for over a DECADE. Seriously, the show ended in 98, and I just started watching again last year. What brought me back? I got into syndicated eps of Curb Your Enthusiasm, and one season's plot concerned a "Seinfeld Reunion". From a TV fan perspective, it's so unique to a see reunion take place within the story of another show. The only other example that comes to mind is the Night Court reunion on 30 Rock. I also enjoyed the idea because the ideas being thrown around actually sounded like Seinfeld ideas, and not something from left field like that finale.
So, how'd we get here? Well, this morning, it dawned on me that the Seinfeld finale was PERFECT...for another series. That show: It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia. I've often felt it to be the show that "out-Seinfelded" Seinfeld. Sure, they own a bar, but that's just a setting. At the end of the day, it's another show about nothing. That said, the characters will go to malicious lengths to get what they want. They been addicted to crack, conned a priest into becoming a crackwhore, opened the bar to minors, tricked pro-lifers into unprotected sex, bought a boat to seduce women on international waters, etc. And that's just the first few seasons. There's no other way for the show to end BUT for them to all be in a jail cell. So, the Sunny gang has Larry David to thank, as he's already done the heavy lifting on what will be the beat sendoff for their show. As the show is currently in its 7th season, they reportedly have 2 more to go. Charlie Day's been popping up in real movies, while Rob McElhenney's starting up 2 new shows. So, it's only a matter of time before they have to pull that trigger. Seeing as how they've done amazing parodies of Million Dollar Baby and Catfish, I'd love to see them go out with a parody of the Seinfeld finale. It would finally put that story to good use.
Book Report – Toyland: The High-Stakes Game of the Toy Industry
This will come as a surprise to no one, but I used to want to work in the toy industry. Yeah, I did the whole 10 years at Toy "R" Us, but I also chose my college major in the hopes of landing a position at Kenner (hey, it was still around then!) or Mattel. My major was early childhood development, with a focus on play and interaction. Since there was no real "toy curriculum", I figured knowledge of how children go about playing would point me in the right direction. I couldn't have been more wrong. It turns out that toy companies want *designers*. Instead of trying to make educational toys that look pretty, toy companies attempt to make pretty toys that seem educational. Like with dating and job interviews, looks come first. I did, however, manage to snag an internship at a small specialty toy company in Chicago, called Manhattan Toy. Now, during my time at TRU, I'd learned that I didn't really care about ALL toys - I just loved aisles 6D and 7D. So, when this small stuffed animal company came along, brash 19-year old me blew it off and jetted of to London. By the time I graduated, I started to realize my dream may not come true. Then came Diamond.
Many people may not realize this, but Diamond has a toy team. Sure, most of the focus is on comics, but they're also the ones responsible for getting those overpriced toys and busts to your local comic shop. Sadly, the extent of Diamond's toy decisions are usually something like "How can we get Kotabukiya to give us a great price on these Slutty Sakura statues?" By this point, I was already pretty much over the idea of working in the toy industry. I'd already been a brand manager, albeit in the comic world, and I was really just tired of the sense of entitlement. I didn't wanna shift over to DST, 'cause a lot of those guys were asshats. Don't get me wrong - like anything, there were some cool folks, but there were also quite a few douchebags. So, there ended my toy dream. Or so I thought. The moment I cracked open Toyland: The High-Stakes Game of the Toy Industry, it all came rushing back to me. This might sound like hyperbole, but I feel this book should be required reading for anyone with an interest in the business side of toys. If you ever want to bitch about Mattel's distribution, or wondered why NECA picked up a particular license, or needed to know how toy marketing and development actually work, you MUST READ THIS BOOK.
Toyland, by Sydney Ladensohn Stern and Ted Schoenhaus, primarily follows the creation, development, and release of Tyco's Dino-Riders toyline. Along the way, however, they provide a great history of the industry - citing major players, as well as the stories behind all of the major toy companies. Published in 1991, many of the companies have since merged or folded, but that doesn't change any of the history. I got the book about 8 years ago at a used book store, but never really got into it as I didn't have a lot of attachment to the Dino-Riders line. To be honest, I didn't even remember it being successful. Now, I clearly see that I was wrong.
I don't want to give away all of the good parts, so I'll just give you a sample of what's inside:
-Sure, you knew about Toy Fair, but did you know about "pre-Toy Fair"?
-Toy companies, while always looking for the next hit, do better with "staples". In fact, a success could actually be detrimental, as they may be unable to keep up with demand - which is what drove Worlds of Wonder out of business following supply problems with Teddy Ruxpin and Lazer Tag. Hasbro's acquisition of Milton Bradley helped them stay afloat in lean years, as board games are staples.
-Mattel was considered the "University of Toyland", as many of its alums have gone on to lead other companies in the industry, bringing Mattel's systems, terminology, and practices along with them. Most other toy companies ran like family businesses, but Ruth and Elliot Handler built Mattel into the first professional toy operation. Then, they were ousted for fraudulent stock claims, and Mattel eventually became the model of how NOT to run a toy company. Still, it's nice to read about what it was like before it sucked.Due to its position in the industry at the time the book was written, much of the book serves as an "official history of Mattel".
-It's believed that Jem dolls ultimately failed because she was created in a different scale than Barbie. Had they been the same size, they could've shared clothes and accessories, despite coming from different companies.
-It's somewhat amazing to read about the conception of Dino-Riders, and then follow along as it evolves into a completely differrent animal. By no means was the end result what the creators had envisioned, but it was close enough that they could still be proud that their idea ended in a finished product - something few can say.
- Of course a big chunk of the book is about how toy companies felt sidelined when home computing and video game systems came on the scene in the early 80s.
-While the Teddy Bear was originally seen as a fad named for Theodore Roosevelt, it was expected to be replaced by Billy Possum, named for William Taft. Apparently, Taft had eaten roast possum on a trip to Atlanta, but there was no demand for the product.
-When Stanley Weston invented G.I.Joe for Hasbro, the normal inventor's fee was 5% of net wholesale revenue. Hasbro, however, cited high development costs and only offered Weston 0.5% . Weston countered with 3%, and Hasbro offered him 1% - prompting Weston to sue. In a private meeting before the 1964 Toy Fair, Hasbro asked Weston if they could just buy the concept from him outright, as they felt they were taking a gamble. Eventually, Weston agreed to sell for $100,000. Had he kept the original deal, he would've made $150,000 on the first year alone. Weston, however, wasn't too upset, and had this to say: "I've been married and divorced twice. If I'd had all that money I probably would've been divorced four times instead of two."
-Hasbro's problems surrounding Flubber deserve an entire book of their own. Long story short, a massive Flubber recall resulted in the supply being buried under Hasbro's parking lot, which has pushed the property about 2 inches higher than the rest of the site.
-My Little Pony was the result of market research where Hasbro asked little girls "What do you see when you go to bed and close your eyes?"
-In the great GoBots vs Transformers debate, Tonka's development team felt they were doing kids a favor by simplifying the transformations, while later research indicated that kids enjoyed the more complex transformations of the Transformers line.
-Toy companies seem to have more moles than a season of 24, which results in specs and samples being leaked to bootleggers and the competition. Most companies, however, take it as proof than they're onto something big if other are that interested in stealing the idea.
-Xavier Roberts, creator of the Cabbage Patch Kids, is an eccentric genius. He was an artist first and foremost, making him a terrible businessman.
-There's a goof chunk about the deregulation of the 80s, leading to the Program Length Commercial. It also into the deals that were cut between television stations and syndicators. For example, Lorimar syndicated Thundercats. If a station agreed to air the cartoon, they would get a percentage of LJN's Thundercats toy sales.
-There's a great comparison between the business practices of Toys "R" Us, Kay-Bee, and FAO Schwartz. Two of these companies don't exist any longer, and the remaining one doesn't look like it did then. Still, it's an interesting snapshot in time.
Anyway, I've teased enough. If you're interested in the business of the toy industry, I highly recommend Toyland: The High-Stakes Game of the Toy Industry. How do you get it? I dunno. Do I look like Barnes OR Noble? Maybe it's on bit torrent or Amazon or something. Geez, I can't do everything for you!
So, That Was The Wonder Woman Pilot…
All of the "real" sites used their connections to see the rejected Wonder Woman pilot right after the network upfronts in May, but I don't have that kind of Rolodex (does anyone use an actual Rolodex anymore?). Anyway, thanks to a pal on Twitter, I was finally able to see what all the fuss was about. Let me just get my snobbery out of the way: as a student of comics and television, it's glaringly obvious as to why NBC passed on this show. Even in its position at the bottom of the ratings, Wonder Woman was NOT going to be NBC's salvation. If The Cape didn't save them, this sure wasn't going to do it, either. Honestly, Wonder Woman is more on the level of the short-lived Birds of Prey series.
Few people remember it, as Smallville went on to last ten seasons compared to BoP's one, but I maintain that Birds of Prey and Smallville were of the same level of quality. The only difference was that Superman was a more recognizable character than Commissioner Gordon's crippled daughter/niece and Batman's daughter (?!). Both shows were on The WB, where it didn't matter what the shows were about, as long as the people were pretty. With Adrianne Palicki and Elizabeth Hurley, Wonder Woman's got that in spades. Also, Birds of Prey struggled with the fact that it was trying to tell a story without being allowed a full understanding of the characters. As BoP was laid out, Barbara Gordon was the former Batgirl who, after being crippled by The Joker, now operates as infojock Oracle. If you've read the comics, that's familiar enough. Next, you've got Helena Wayne, who in this situation, is actually the adult daughter of Batman and Catwoman. Oh, and she's also a mutant. She's got heightened senses and jumps high and shit, which enables her to patrol the streets as Huntress. Now, here's the kicker: since Warner Bros wanted to focus on revamping the Batman movie franchise (this was pre- Batman Begins), they didn't allow Batman in the show (except for a brief sequence in the pilot). So, you've got your core cast, whose origins revolve around a concept that can only be danced around. And to explain it in the show, apparently The Joker killed Catwoman. TV Batman was such a punk bitch that he became distraught, and left Gotham City forever. So, what followed were 13 episodes of Barbara and Helena, both inspired by He Who Shall Not Be Named, defending Gotham City in the hopes that He Who Shall Not Be Named decides to stop being a bitch and comes home. Sadly, the show didn't last that long, but the finale did involve a cool fight scene set to the t.A.T.u. classic "All The Things She Said".
How does this all relate to Wonder Woman? Well, just like BoP, it doesn't seem like David E. Kelley was allowed full access to the character. Sure, it's a Wonder Woman costume, and DC was behind the project, but it lacks an understanding of Wonder Woman. This has been one of the biggest problems for Wonder Woman, as the comics lost sight of what makes her tick quite some time ago. The Greg Rucka era was the last time that anyone proudly read the WW comic series, and even "female character wunderkind" Gail Simone couldn't get a grasp on the character. I ranted about this at length on twitter, but I felt like they should've focused figuring out the answer to "Who Is Wonder Woman?" before committing her to other media, like a weekly TV series. If they had called this show "Donna Troy", it would've worked better. She wears a similar costume, looks the same, and nobody knows what the Hell her deal is. That's her gimmick! Over the past 30 years, her mere existence is perpetuated on the fact that she's just a walking identity crisis. Wonder Woman, however, should have a defined mission statement, which is neither present in the recent comics nor this pilot. There's nothing to "wonder" about the woman in this pilot unless you're wondering how she got cast. Anyway, here are the thoughts that occurred to me as I watched the show:
-There's a LOT of exposition, but you're really only informed of Wonder Woman's backstory through newscasts and political pundits. I liked the pundit sequence. Not sure if they actually got Dershowitz, Dr. Phil, and Nancy Grace on board, or if it was just clever editing, but this is what would happen if superheroes existed in the "real world". If that's what they're going for, however, this could be a problem down the line.
-OK, here's where things get more confusing than they need to be. In the show, Wonder Woman has THREE identities! She's Wonder Woman, she's international businesswoman Diana Themyscira (who's also publicly known to be Wonder Woman), but she's ALSO Diana Prince, which is the mousy-'cause-she-wear-glasses-and-a-ponytail-even-though-you-know-she's-really-hot-like-in-She's All That identity. By day, she's one of the first two, but by night, she goes home to be Diana Prince, where she watches The Notebook with her cat. Yes, that happens. Since she's not a lawyer, nor is she in Boston, I'm left to believe that this is the "David E. Kelley Touch" on this project. First off, I don't think Wonder Woman would watch The Notebook, nor would she ask her cat if she should set up a facebook profile. This is all part of the "Well, she is a single woman, so she's got needs and is probably lonely." Family Guy conveyed that best here:
I get it. Set up a love story to grab some female viewers, but all that's missing is the pint of Ben & Jerry's. Also, I don't see why she needs a 3rd identity in order to be lonely and "normal". So, she puts on glasses and hides in her modest apartment so she can pretend she's making decent lonely single lady money, when she knows that she's actually a multimillionaire with a penthouse and a multinational corporation? I can understand having a weekend getaway, but this is a bit much.
-I'm the one guy who's never watched Friday Night Lights, so I have no previous experience with Adrianne Palicki, but I don't feel this was good casting. She never conveys the strength of Diana. Instead, she's soft, and comes across as Kelly Kapowski in a Halloween costume. Her acting is also phoned in. Surrounding Palicki, everyone else feels like they're over acting. Everyone has a sense of urgency, while she just seems...bored. In my mind, Lake Bell or Missy Peregrym would've been stronger, better choices, as they have the look, and they're still somewhat "unknown talents", since nobody watched Surface or Stick It.
-I liked the color/weight blind casting on Etta Candy, but I know the fanboys would've loathed that! They hate Wonder Woman, but still would've jumped on that. Plus, I some fangirls would be upset that Etta Candy wasn't "properly" portrayed as a larger gal...
-This is always going to be a problem when you make an adaptation of a comic character, but the suit doesn't translate to reality. Batman works 'cause he hides in shadows. Superman works in a way. Wonder Woman just looks like she's on her way to her shift at The Crazy Russian. Call me sexist, but the suit doesn't work. You don't know if she's gonna arrest you or try to take you to the champagne room.
-I hate Diana's male assistant, Henry. Had the show been picked up, I feel like he exists solely to be the person close to Diana who gets killed by some villain trying to make a point.
-They say "prick", "balls", and "tits" as an attempt to be edgy.
-Can we talk about the political/legal ramifications of the structure of this show? Everyone knows that businesswoman Diana Themyscira is Wonder Woman, yet no one goes after her company in a lawsuit? They kinda address it, when a senator threatens to sic the Justice Department on her. Diana answers that threat by saying that the country's in two wars, so it doesn't have time to investigate her. Not only is that lazy storytelling, but it's another problem with combining real world aspects with comic aspects.
-She fucking kills a guy! I mean, she throws a pipe through his fucking throat! A security guard who's just following orders! Not a Star Wars guy, but it's really the whole "independent contractors on the Death Star" debate all over again.
-The villain, Veronica Cale, was experimenting on folks from a slavery ring, yet they were all white males. Not who you usually think of being involved in slavery, even the white kind. So, I guess this is when the show decided to stop trying to ape the real world, huh?
So, in the end, it's not a horrible show, but it's certainly not great. Based on production value, this show would've lasted 6 seasons in weekend syndication back in the 90s, but sadly that market is dead. It could've been in a block with Mutant X, Night Man, and Viper. It might even work as a cable show, but it certainly wasn't a good fit for NBC. At the end of the day, it's a serviceable action hour of television, but it's not Wonder Woman. They tried a different take on the character that just didn't work. The funny thing is that there's source material for what they were trying to do: it's called Ultra. As the first big comic project from The Luna Brothers, Ultra was a miniseries from Image Comics which was basically "Sex and the City with Powers". Sure, it had dating drama and whatnot, but there was also a lot of action. Based on what I've seen here, David E. Kelley would be the PERFECT guy to adapt that series. Wonder Woman, however, just wasn't the project for him.
Glee: The Music Presents The Warblers
I haven't really discussed Glee much on this site. I actually wrote a pretty scathing review of the "sneak preview" that Fox aired back in '09, but it's still sitting in draft form. Basically, I didn't think the show would last, but I wanted to give it a chance to prove itself. After a bit, I became happy with myself for not publishing that post, as I fell in love with the show.
Season 1 of Glee was this musical quirk fest that shouldn't exist, yet somehow became popular - kinda like Lady Gaga. You'd ask anyone why they liked it, and you'd get the Apple Jacks response: "I dunno. I just do." Glee launched a bit slowly, but then exploded after winter hiatus during its first season. Of course, the candle that burns brightest burns fastest. Season 2 started off contrived, and just continued to go downhill. In conversations I've had with folks, I've pointed out that I was driven away by how preachy the character of Kurt had become. If you want to know more about that viewpoint, we can handle that in another post. Mainly, I felt that few of the characters were likable, and it was no longer worth tuning in just to hear the gold that comes from Brittany and Santana's mouths - especially when those lines will just end up on twitter.
My biggest problem with the second season, however, is the role that the music now fulfills: in the first season, the plot dictated the song choices, but now it's the other way around, as the song choices have begun to dictate the plot. It was already illogical that these kids would break out in song this much, but now it's harder to believe that they all suffered Britney Spears-centric hallucinations from a visit to the dentist. These are Sitcom Season 6 plotlines, when the cast is just trying to burn off some stories to add to the syndication count. Glee now feels like an odd combination of lazy/forced, as you can tell that a lot of work went into the musical aspect, but they're just so lazy in setting up a *reason* for said music. So, I gave up on the show about 6 episodes into the season. However, one good thing did come from this season: The Warblers.
I dropped out of Glee just as The Warblers were introduced, so I don't know the full story there (nor do I care enough to wiki it). I know Kurt was thinking of transferring to Dalton Academy, and his new school would feature this A-MAH-zing all-male group called The Warblers. While New Directions music contained instrumentation, The Warblers were full-on a cappella, bringing a new sound to the show while also showing people that not all show choirs are a cappella (and vice versa).
Once I gave up the show, I continued downloading the songs, as I still liked the music - especially the songs that clearly had unique arrangements and weren't just karaoke versions of Top 40 hits. The tracks that never failed to impress me all came from The Warblers. Not only do they tackle some pretty intricate arrangements, but they also have a sound remiscent of late 90s collegiate a cappella, which was a time before technology came to dominate those recordings. Currently, as technology has become cheaper, a cappella recordings have started abusing autotune as much as Top 40 radio.
The main force behind The Warblers' sound would be the Tufts Beelzebubs, an all-male collegiate a cappella group from Tufts University. The Bubs dominated a cappella during the late 90s/early '00s with a clean blend that was achieved through talent and effective mixing, but didn't overuse unnecessary effects. The current Bubs actually contribute the vocals for The Warblers, and it's nice to hear that the group is still amazing at what they do. When you meet someone on the street and tell them you sang a cappella, they always ask "Oh, like Rockapella?". Yeah, sure, but what we really wanted to be were The Bubs, The Derbies, The Crosbies or The Dukesmen. So, you could say I'm a fan.
I finally got around to listening to Glee: The Music Presents The Warblers, which collects the Warbler songs that have been featured on the show. I had heard tracks here and there, but after listening to them altogether, I feel that this is once of the best a cappella albums I've heard in QUITE some time. From start to finish, from song selection to blend, this is a nearly flawless collection. Plus, it's nice that Chris Colfer has a platform where his voice can finally shine. He has that distinctive voice where, in an a choral setting, it would be a bitch to get him to blend, but the trade-off would be that he's a dynamic soloist.
There are some real standout tracks on this collection. A cappella groups have done a good job reinterpreting Train songs, and that's true here as they guys turn in a great arrangement of "Hey, Soul Sister."You can also hear the fun in their voices in their cover of "Animal" by Neon Trees. Out of nowhere, they blow the doors off "When I Get You Alone", originally performed by a "Robin-less" Thicke. Finally, I found myself really enjoying a simple, yet still moving, rendition of Keane's "Somewhere Only We Know". If there's one track that might go into the "miss" category, I'd have to say it's their version of "Blackbird". It's not bad, per se, but it lacked the dynamics of the other arrangements. Other than that, it's a solid collection.
If you went to a school that didn't dabble in a cappella, or if you just want to hear what some consider to be the gold standard of collegiate a cappella, you can't go wrong with Glee: The Music Presents The Warblers. I consider this a nice little "Bon Voyage To Glee" present for me. I came for the Lea Michele, but I left with the Darren Criss. Y'all let me know if they ever make a Warblers spinoff show.
So, Which TV Network Are You?
I'm not sure if this is obvious to some, but the "television experience" has changed a LOT in just a few short years. Once upon a time, people were concerned about airdates and antenna positioning, however, the prevalence of DVR and cable have pretty much done away with all of that. The aspect which has experienced the greatest change, however, is that of network branding. Currently, networks no longer really have a specific identity, instead choosing to let their shows speak for themselves. This can be confusing, though, as what does it say about a network when its most successful shows involve crime scene semen or anti-social nerd caricatures? This wasn't always the case. There was a time, not that long ago, when networks not only promoted their programming, but also their identities. This was true from the biggest network affiliate to the smallest local syndicated outlet. For example, Channel 5 used to show the same reruns of Mr. Belvedere, Three's Company, and Who's The Boss?, but for the summer of '92, they expected you to refer to it all as "Camp Teeheehaha". Sure, you'd seen the shows before, but they were taking advantage of the American experience of going off to summer camp in an attempt to rebrand the shows. That's some Don Draper shizz right there! Networks did little things like this to show that they supported their series; after all, they'd already paid for the syndication rights, so they might as well get their money's worth. Nowadays, all we have are court shows. If you miss one, another will be on right after it. There's no real need to promote, as there's no real difference: sassy black woman judge, sassy white woman judge, sassy might-be-Latina judge, etc. The shows have changed, but so has the promotion of said shows. So, where am I going with this? Well, growing up, I used to think about which network I'd want to be on were I to have my own series. As I grew from boy to man, in what was (to me) a golden age of television, I noticed certain things about each network that made me want to park myself on their prime-time lineup. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
ABC
This one is pretty much a no-brainer, as anyone who grew up in the 80s and 90s knows where I'm going with this. ABC had a bunch of shows which made them seem like The Touchy-Feely Network, whether it was the family drama of Life Goes On, or the generational experiences of Thirtysomething. Judith Light starred in the riveting TV movie of The Ryan White Story, and families loved gathering around to watch dads across America get hit in the crotch on America's Funniest Home Videos. All of those shows, however, had NOTHING on the powerhouse known as TGIF.
I'm not going to go into the history and lineup of the TGIF block, 'cause most of y'all were there. Maybe it's the comic fanboy in me, but what I loved most about TGIF was the shared universe. I guess I'm always looking for a sense of community, and I loved how the early series tended to be related to each other in some way: Mark Cooper (Hangin' With Mr. Cooper) subbed for Michelle Tanner's (Full House) class, while Harriet Winslow (Family Matters) was the elevator operator at Larry & Balki's job (Perfect Strangers). Steve Urkel (Family Matters) did a science project with Mark Foster (Step By Step), while Dana Foster (Step By Step) gave love advice to Cory Matthews (Boy Meets World) at Sea World. With all of this crossover action, it was kinda fun trying to imagine where I might fit in. Maybe I'd be friends with Eddie Winslow, like Weasel and Waldo Geraldo Faldo. Or maybe Karen Foster would reject me before her character oddly disappeared to pursue a country music career. Or maybe I'd be the black friend that Cory and Shawn used to have when Minkus was still around. The possibilities were endless!
One of this biggest perks of a perch on the TGIF lineup was that you also got to host the Saturday Morning Preview special. These are relics of days gone by, but back when networks still had Saturday morning cartoons, they always kicked off the season with the Saturday Morning Preview one Friday night in September (Sure, NBC had one, too, but those were usually hosted by Cosby kids or those awkward kids from ALF or The Torkelsons). The TGIF ones were great, as everyone was (usually) still in character and they genuinely seemed excited about dreck like Hammerman and Little Rosie. Everything was awesome in TGIF Land! As an added bonus, once Disney bought ABC, every show was pretty much required to do a stint at Disney World, so free vacation!
CBS
Growing up, I can't ever remember wanting to be on CBS. That's not to say that I didn't watch CBS shows. In fact, it was quite the opposite. Up until the dawn of the CSI Era, CBS got a bad rap as The Old Folks' Network. Yes, they had programming like Murder, She Wrote and 60 Minutes, but I never saw it like that. If anything, I always felt that CBS shows had a sense of maturity that couldn't be found on other networks. I grew up watching Murphy Brown and Designing Women - both shows that spoke more to my experience of being raised by strong, single women from the South. So, I never wanted to be on CBS, as I felt I was already there. Next!
NBC
While ABC was courting me with TGIF, NBC had another acronym waiting in the wings for my affection: TNBC. By far, the most successful NBC branding of that era was "Must-See TV", but I couldn't really relate to that. I enjoyed the shows, but they all took place in Manhattan, as the protagonists seemed to have these fantasy jobs that paid for their massive apartments. As much as I love New York, I wasn't gonna be on "Must-See Thursday" unless I sold a joint to Theo Huxtable or got transferred to Hillman College. Then, along came TNBC as a world of possibility for young black guys. Sure, Lisa Turtle didn't do much for The Cause, but California Dreams came along and showed me that I could be a drummer. And there was that black dude on The Guys Next Door - sure, no one remembers that show, but I remember he was there. Then, we got Saved By The Bell: The New Class, which always seemed to have a slot for a hip, dancing black guy that needed to be filled. And Hang Time - a show about basketball! C'mon! As a teenager growing up in the late 90s, nowhere felt like "home" as much as TNBC. Yes, I realize that those shows were basically created for girls, but I still kinda felt like those characters were my people.
The BIGGEST perk of being on NBC, however, is one of these:
I don't know if it's contractual or what, but if you're on an NBC show, you are pretty much guaranteed to film one of these public service announcements. A lot of PSAs just come off kinda clunky, but The More You Know has gained a special place in the annals of pop culture. Most PSAs are lame, but I always saw these as some kind of badge of honor. I'll take one of these over those Truth.com kids ANY day!
Fox
Oh, Fox! It's amazing how an entertainment network can be so edgy, while its news wing is so conservative. Fox was founded on Married...with Children, so that has colored its identity. While ABC was the Touchy-Feely Network, Fox was on the complete other end of that spectrum. Besides the early reality fare like World's Greatest Police Chases, there was a "Fox Show" model: the aforementioned Married..., Top of the Heap, even Herman's Head. Generally, if you wanted to make middle America uncomfortable for about 6 episodes, and your show wouldn't work anywhere else, then Fox was the place to be. Even to this day, I'm surprised by how much Fox Standards & Practices allows on the air - the entire Seth MacFarlane franchise is a good example of this.
I've admired Fox because they are willing to take chances. They still carry shows that you just wouldn't see anywhere else, and they miss more than they hit. The beauty of the network, however, is that it lives by American Idol alone. The show airs 5 months of the year, but the ratings are high enough to make Fox the #1 Network for the entire season. Growing up, all they had was The Simpsons, but the attitude seemed to be the same as it is now. Sure, reality programming has evolved, and Fox has taken advantage of that, but it's still the same old Fox. I'd want to be on Fox 'cause they'll promote the Hell out of your show during NFL and MLB games, but you're still gonna get cancelled after they move your show to Sundays at 7:00 PM.
UPN
Has there ever been a network with more of an identity crisis than UPN? It's remembered as The Black Network, but that's not entirely accurate. Sure, the network had a lot of horrible black shows, like Homeboys in Outer Space and The Secret Diary of Desmond Pfeiffer, but there was so much more to it than that. The oddest part of UPN was the it's prelaunch reputation didn't match what ended up on the screen. Here's the pre-launch promo for the network:
As you see, it's relying on the reputation of the shows that had been developed by Paramount in the past, yet doesn't really go into detail as to what we should expect from the network. Were they just going to rerun all those shows they just mentioned? Should we be expecting new stuff? Classical music! Rock music! Then, the network launched, and we were introduced to DiResta, Marker and Platypus Man. When your network is bolstered by shows starring a Mad About You costar and Richard Greico, you're in trouble. Yeah, there was Star Trek: Voyager, but it could also be said that UPN was the nail in the Trek coffin, as both of its offerings were reviled by fans. Early UPN was the television equivalent of the Dot Com Boom, as they really just threw around a lot of ideas to see if they'd stick. Richard Dean Anderson as a cowboy. A Love Boat reboot. A bunch of shows NBC had knocked off their schedule because they apparently weren't "New York" enough. Through all of this, there was one spot where I could see myself.
Around the time the NBC's TNBC block was at its peak, UPN started toying around with a similar concept for weekday afternoons. Comprised of reruns of Sweet Valley High and a new teen show called Breaker High, the network adopted the slogan "UPN is U'pn", which was pronounced "oo-pin". Sure, it made no sense, and to say it aloud sounds like something you'd hear in a commercial for Dunkaroos. Maybe they were implying that UPN was moving up? Maybe UPN was jumping? I don't know, but where there are teen shows, I'll be there. Anyway, Breaker High was about a bunch of kids who were in a semester-at-sea program. It had everything you'd come to expect from teen shows, but starred a charismatic Ryan Gosling and Tyler Labine. I loved the Hell out of that show, even though it didn't even last an entire season. The U'pn block ran for about 3 months on a daily schedule until it just disappeared one day in November, as the timeslot was given back to the stations. Breaker High finished up its run on Sunday mornings, but the only time I ever saw anything worthwhile in that network was the 3-month U'pn Era.
The WB
OK, I already covered the fact that I'm drawn to things that give off a sense of community, and no network exemplified that as much as The WB. When it first launched, the network's promos revolved around the image that all of the stars hung out on the Warner Bros backlot. Going to work seemed like it would be a ton of fun, as you'd see Nikki Cox on the elevator, and run into Tia and Tamara Mowry on the way to the set.
Plus, I was entering a point in my life where I really kinda wanted to be in a boyband. While girls my age were pining for heartthrobs, I wanted to be one, and nobody developed teen stars quite like The WB. The stars of those shows kept the teen magazine industry in business for the better part of a decade. If you were under the age of 20, and wanted to make it big, you either needed to fly to Orlando and audition for Lou Pearlman, or you needed to get yourself on a WB show.
Even though it's a bit of a joke in some circles, The WB did more for pop culture over a decade than people realize. I explored this once before, and my feelings haven't changed. For that reason, The WB is where I'd want my show to air. You can thank them for Buffy, even if you blame them for Katherine Heigl. To top things off, I think they had a really classy send-off video. A network hadn't folded since the DuMont Network, so I had no frame of reference for these things. However, if you've got to go out, this is the way to do it:
Why Starfleet?
Yes, this began as a late night Twitter rant last week, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized a full blog post would give me a reason to play with MS Paint.
As some of you may know, I've been a Star Trek fan for most of my life. Back in middle school, my friends and I had the Star Trek Encyclopedia, as well as any tech guide or manual that Simon & Shuster decided to put out. We were the ones watching all those Star Trek: The Next Generation reruns that used to clog up Channel 20's schedule. As I got older, however, my pallet began to prefer more mature tastes, such as Power Rangers and Aqua Teen Hunger Force. I gave up the ghost during Voyager, and I've only seen a handful of Enterprise. That said, you can take the boy out of Trek, but you can't take the Trek out of the boy. My brain's still full of a lot of useless 24th century knowledge, and every now and then I find myself trying to make sense of it. During an usual bit of insomnia last week, I found myself wondering why, exactly, a human would even want to join Starfleet.
For those not in the know, in the Star Trek Universe, Starfleet is the "Space NATO" to the United Federation of Planets' "Space UN". Its members are predominantly human, and it is headquartered in Fort Baker, California. While Starfleet's primary mission is to explore and seek out new life, things can get pretty tense out in space. Between wars with Cardassians, or lethal electrical feedback, there's no shortage of danger for a Starfleet officer. Based on current economics and world affairs, I find myself wondering what would inspire a human to join an outfit like Starfleet, as the risks seem to outweigh the rewards. Let's take a closer look at a few things.
Money: In today's society, a big reason that people enlist in the Armed Forces is money. Whether they want to provide for their families with their signing bonus, or get in on some of that G.I. Bill money, the financial benefits entice many into joining the service. This, however, isn't true for the Starfleet cadet. You see, the 24th century is based on what has been called "The New World Economy". For all practical purposes, Earth has done away with poverty and hunger, but it has also done away with currency. As a sidebar, I don't really know what I want to do with my life. Whenever I'm looking for work, people always ask me "Well, what would you want to do if money weren't an issue?" I HATE this question because money is ALWAYS an issue. I just can't wrap my head around that not being the case. I know that there are people who can, and God bless 'em, but that's just not me. So, that's why I have a hard time understanding why you'd want to go out in space, and risk getting tubes shoved in your ass and ear holes by a bunch of space zombies if there's no financial gain. That's too much danger to just write off as "the cost of exploration"!
Sex: Could the lure of Space Pussy be enough to get you to join up? But could you imagine the STDs out there? Or will a hypospray just clear that right up? Also, note that I said Space Pussy and not Space Dick, because the future doesn't seem too bright for women - utopia be damned. If you're a young, single woman in Starfleet, you'll end up phasing through the floor or being killed by a large sentient oil spill. And don't even try to be a gay male! Over the 40 year franchise, we've seen men in miniskirts (the "skant") & go-go boots, but we were still led to believe that they liked the minge. Have they ever shown a homosexual on Star Trek? The closest they got was that androgynous race, and Riker still couldn't help himself from giving one of them a bunch of confusing urges. Otherwise, the only gay icons of the 24th century were Major Kira, Tasha Yar, and Harry Kim. No, they never confirmed this, but c'mon...
Technology: If you're a tech geek, then Starfleet is probably a dream come true. You could join Starfleet Engineering and test out all of the gadgets that you used to read about on your PADD before mandatory lights-out at the mining colony where you grew up. There's a lot of leeway for experimentation, and there's no battle for patents and ownership 'cause there's no money to be had. The worst part, however, is when that technology backfires on you. I'm going to go with the simplest case here. You see, during space battles, the ships are protected by shields. When those shields are struck, it results in electromagnetic feedback that sometimes shoots out of the ships consoles and control panels. Many a Starfleet officer has been killed while simply sitting at his station during the wrong battle. When you graduate from the Academy, they might tell you to watch out for The Borg, but you'll find that you risk your life just by simply walking down the hall. Observe (the fun starts at 01:18):
Meeting New Races: It might sound exciting to meet a new race of beings, but some of them have some crazy beliefs that you have to put up with. Sure, we've got the Scientologists and the vegans, there's one 24th Century-era race that will KILL YOU IF YOU STEP ON THE FLOWERS! Did I also mention that they worship a giant space chandelier? Aside from little quirky things like that, sometimes you just deal with some straight up, fucked up shit:
Supporting Your Government: OK, I get it. There's no money to be had, you're not that into green chicks, and you don't really mind phasering giant space slugs. Then, what is your incentive? Oh, maybe you're just really patriotic. After all, your government (which now commands a network of planets rather than just Earth) has created a society in which you are taken care of, and given a chance to be a tool of discovery. Why wouldn't you want to support a governing body like that? Well, maybe it's because the United Federation of Planets is just as shady as today's governmental bodies.
First off, there's Section 31, which is The Federation's version of the CIA. Nobody talks much about them, as very few people know that they exist. Not only do they exist, but they've had their hands in everything from the Temporal Cold War to the outlawed genetic enhancements that were performed on humans, like Dr Bashir. You may think everything's well and good, but your government still doesn't trust you, even in the 24th century. Also, their tactics are questionable, as they engage in full-scale, Jack Bauer level torture. They ended a war by eradicating an entire race. For Section 31, no one is off limits, so they might come for you one day.
On top of that, there's all the shady stuff that the Federation does to coerce non-member planets into joining. The sheer existence of a bunch of space hippies like the Maquis proves that not everything that the Federation does is liked by all. Sure, you can't please everyone all of the time, but the Star Trek Universe is based on the assumption that you not only can, but you have. So, why are The Maquis so mad?
So, I know it's science fiction, and I really shouldn't overthink it, but I'm just starting to think that the Star Trek Universe posed more questions than it answered. When I was 5, I used to weep at the fact that I'd never live to see the creation of Starfleet. I mean, even if I did, it would've been the crappy, Kirk-era Starfleet, and I don't get down with The Original Series. After some careful thought, however, I'll take capitalism, with its non-exploding walls and curable-by-penicillin-STDs, any day! The future's just not for me, but I hope my great, great, great grandson, Hyperflex Westion IV, is a better man than I am, and will find a reason to beam up.
The Digital Revolution Is Being Televised
I like to think of myself as an informed person. By no means am I a genius, but I like to think of myself as "Jeopardy Smart" - I know a little about a lot. There's one thing, however, that I know a LOT about, and that's television. I'm not just talking about shows and actors, but the behind-the-scenes aspect of television. I've studied the biography of Brandon Tartikoff, I've read everything I could about the Late Night Wars, and I recognize there's more genius to Peter Engel than we give him credit for. So, with all this focus on TV, I'm always taken aback when something fails to make any real sense. One such occasion was the broadcast switchover from analog to digital. While we were given plenty of warning (and even an extension), it was never fully explained as to why the switch was taking place. For non TV folks, I'm referring to the fact that you can no longer watch TV with a simple antenna, but are now required to have a digital box in order to catch an over-the-air TV signal. Some explanations suggested that it would free up the analog airwaves to be used for emergency purposes. According to some accounts, the government plans to auction off the vacated analog spectrum. For whatever the reason, it was never clear, and it was a huge headache for the elderly population. Most of the folks reading this have cable, so y'all never noticed any real change. I, however, grew up without cable and I was raised by the Black Golden Girls. Preparing them for the switchover was akin to prepping them for potential missile attacks from the "reds". What truly came as a surprise, however, was that the switchover would open a door to the past that I never dreamed possible.
It was like this, but picture them black
Here's a little full disclosure for you: I've never had cable. My mom finally caved and got it once I moved out, but I have never lived in a place that had cable. To make matters worse, I have a basement studio apartment, so getting any kind of over-the-air signal was a bit of a challenge before the switchover. I've never minded a little static, though, as I grew up watching Baltimore TV through the static because their Channel 54 had better shows than our Channel 20 (syndicated Punky Brewster, son!). Nobody told me, however, that digital airwaves would do away with that ability! Now, if you don't get a signal, the screen just goes blue or you get a "No Signal" message. Another part of my childhood gone. That damn digital box ruined my life, as it pretty much eliminated the ability to watch any local station. What it did provide, however, was a link to the past. You see, I now only really get 3 channels, but those 3 channels have turned out to be more awesome than I could have imagined. I tend to suffer from a pretty bad case of seasonal affect disorder where pretty much any condition makes me depressed. Yeah, I should probably see a professional about that, but my home remedy is regression. That was a big deal back in college: "Hey, it's Finals Week, so come to RPU and join us for comfort food and your favorite cartoons!" It's a remedy I still employ to this day, and it works. Apparently, "everything old is new again", and the 3 digital channels that I manage to get actually do a pretty good job recreating my childhood. Let's take a closer look at what we have here, shall we?
As I said, none of my local network channels seem to work any longer, but most of those channels have additional digital channels that the stations seem desperate to fill with programming. For instance, our local NBC station has a digital channel (4-2) that played nothing but old beach volleyball matches. Our local ABC affiliate, however, has something I actually enjoy. You see, they carry the Retro Television Network (Channel 7-2). In what could be considered a "Poor Man's TV Land", RTV focuses on showing hour-long dramas from the past. Stumble across the channel, and you'll find yourself watching I, Spy or Magnum, P.I. The true beauty of the station, however, is that it shows Knight Rider and The A-Team every glorious night. It's like I'm 3 years old again, and I ain't complaining! Sure, those shows haven't aged all that well, but I simply don't care. Forget How I Met Your Mother 5 times a week - I've got the DVDs; when I'm rushing home in the evening, it's to travel back to a time when bullets didn't kill and a talking car was a rarity.
I first discovered RTV last winter when I was unemployed, and I pretty much thought that was as good as the retro television scene was going to get. Then, everything changed on January 1, 2011, when the local CW affiliate started carrying Antenna TV on one of their digital channels (Channel 50-2). While RTV is more of a TV Land clone, Antenna TV is more of a Nick at Nite clone. It hearkens back to the days when Nick at Nite used to play actual classics, and not The George Lopez Show and Roseanne. We've had a ton of snow days recently, and during that time I've seen shows that I haven't seen in years - things like Too Close for Comfort, The Monkees, and Gidget. What really put a smile on my face was when I read that Antenna TV would also be adding Three's A Crowd to their schedule. I know it's a terrible, formulaic show, but I'm a Three's Company fanatic. It has always bothered me that spin-offs Three's A Crowd and The Ropers aren't a part of the syndication package. Antenna TV will be showing the entire franchise. I don't care if it's 4 in the morning, I'll be watching.
I've been familiar with qubo for some time, mainly due to the fact that the qubo programming block took over the NBC Saturday morning timeslots formerly occupied by TNBC and Discovery Kids. My biggest gripe with qubo was that they focused on thinly-veiled Christian CGI cartoons, like Veggie Tales and 3-2-1 Penguins. I actually enjoyed Penguins, but I felt they were hitting kids over the head with the Morals of the Week. So, when I realized that there was a qubo digital channel (66-2), I wasn't exactly rushing home to watch it. Sadly, I get the strongest signal from that channel, so I find myself watching it more than I would like. Well, imagine my surprise a few months back when I caught something called qubo Night Owl. Apparently, qubo acquired the rights to the Filmation cartoon library, so starting around 1 AM, they show He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, She-Ra: Princess of Power, Bravestarr, and (the "unreal") Ghostbusters, with the gorilla. It's not award-winning television, but it's pretty cool to watch if you're drunk and/or can't sleep. You might, however, find yourself wondering if She-Ra's skirt was always that short...
So, while I still can't explain the reasoning behind the digital switchover, I found a way to turn a negative into a positive. I kinda proud of myself, as I tend to like to just complain about stuff. In any case, I'm just like you. I can drive a car and hold a job. I just can't watch television shows when they air. Oh well, thanks to the internet, I can just watch them the day after. While you're consumed with your DVR and your On-Demand, I'm taking a trip back to a better time. Everything old is new again, and I've got a front row seat. Don't you wish you could be me? Ok, you can stop laughing now. Come on, that's not cool. Stop laughing!
*channel numbers based on Washington, DC viewing market. Check your local listings for your own damn digital channels
- RT @MeisterShake: Seriously folks, WHY THE FUCK would I care about YOUR horoscope? Stop tweeting it.
- A midget!!! #SNL
- I love how that Bon Iver photo was like Find The Black Guy. Oh, there he is! Between Chad and Tyler!
- If y'all wanna make fun of Lana Del Ray, you can make fun of this dude's Eunuch Wails.
- This dude is just making noises - like the kind you make when you catch your balls in the zipper. I hope the internet takes notice!
- This Bon Iver song sounds like Johnny Hates Jazz. Not complaining. I just need bigger shoulder pads.
- That's why Harlem Nights is such a good movie - it passes the torch, but you'll never get that much black talent in the same movie again.
- When is Tyler Perry gonna get cracking on the black version of The Expendables?
- If I investigated rape cases, like on SVU, my first question to the vic (that's Cop Talk) would be "Did he look like Guy Fieri?"
- Ten seconds, gun to your head - who won The Voice last season?
From The Vault
- Top 40 Letter From Pop Camp
- Relaunch?
- Boston & The West-1
- Huh?
- The One Where I Just Miss WizardWorld Chicago
Recent Comments
- Will on The Gang Goes Seinfeld All Over Their Asses
- Ponderiss on Who’s That Guy?
- Mary on Who’s That Guy?
- Howie on Who’s That Guy?
- Classick Material on Who’s That Guy?
- Dex on Who’s That Guy?
- Vincent on The Gang Goes Seinfeld All Over Their Asses
- Kelli on The Gang Goes Seinfeld All Over Their Asses
- Josh on Adventures West Coast #3: Scarface: Devil In Disguise
- Van on Thrift Justice – What You Leave Behind
- Classick Material on The Gang Goes Seinfeld All Over Their Asses
- arjit on My Life with the Power Rangers – Reader Response
- arjit on My Life with the Power Rangers – Reader Response
- Michael Johnson on 2011 In Review: #New52 Pick-Up
- PopCultureCube on Thrift Justice – What You Leave Behind