Among my all-time favorite TV producers are Ed Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz. Their Bedford Falls company has generated a number of series whose characters have lived on for me long past their initial runs. There is probably no series on TV I have re-watched more than My So-Called Life, but their other prime time dramas are also faves: thirtysomething's '80s angst, Once & Again's it's-all-just-so-hard multi-generation tales, even the somewhat lackluster Relativity. We've even named our kid Leo in part through the inspiration of the Leos that have populated the Bedford Falls-averse (Michael and Hope's infant son, Relativity's leading man, the hunky younger-man doctor Karen Sammler dates).
Because of my love for all things Zwick/Herskovitzy I was so, so excited when the duo's new series, quarterlife, began its life as an internet-only series. Since then, NBC has picked up the already-produced episodes for broadcast, and I look forward to seeing them on air this February. But we've been keeping up with the online episodes, nonetheless, and I am happy to say that they've finally gotten really good, finally are beginning to live up to their producers' impressive cred.
The online eps of quarterlife range from about 7 to 14 minutes each, but these segments are clearly that--segments of hour-long TV episodes chopped up for twice-weekly internet streaming. It's a clever idea and all--finding a way to distribute a series when the nets decided not to pick it up--but it seems a bit disingenuous to call 44 minute broadcast TV episodes chopped into bits an internet series.
Just aired are the segments that make up what would be the 4th broadcast episode. Written by Devon Gummersall, also the actor who played MSCL's unrequited lover/uber-geek Brian Krakow, "Goodbyes" has all the markings of great prime time drama, and of Bedford Falls drama in particular--parallel plotlines that enrich each other in the similarities and differences of the characters' experiences, subtle dialogue that exposes character, sweet humor laced with awkwardness, Snuffy's music--just lovely and perfect.
Most perfect, however, was the story told in this episode about the growing romance between Dylan and Eric. I've liked both of these characters all along, but "Goodbyes" moved them up a notch for me into the pantheon of great Ed and Marshall couples or, better still, Ed and Marshall maybe-couples and sort-of-couples, for romance in the Bedford Falls-averse is always fraught and painful. In particular, the story of Dylan and Eric in this episode fulfills my fantasy of seeing what would happen if MSCL's Angela and Brian were to finally, actually, and really get together, a possibility only briefly hinted at in the final moments of that series. Dylan has always been an Angela-esque character and, in "Goodbyes" Eric proves himself to be the sensitive, if slightly bumbling, man that Brian always seemed he could become. Their scenes in bed make this particularly clear, but I also see it in some brief moments of this "episode":
Dylan and Eric coming inside with their bikes is sweetly reminiscent of Angela and Brian's bike straddled talks. And the moment when Dylan walks upstairs evokes for me the shot of Angela walking upstairs in the MSCL credit sequence (and taken from the pilot episode):
Too much of the early quarterlife episodes dealt with Jed and Danny's frustrated efforts to become filmmakers-- a plot way reminiscent of Michael and Elliott's story on thirtysomething, an arc I love in that show but that reads as old and boring when it features Jed and Danny. Now, however, thanks perhaps to the intervention of Brian Krakow himself, quarterlife may be becoming more My So-Called Life than thirtysomething. I always knew that Angela and Brian were destined for each other--or at least for a really awkward attempt at destiny.
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Giving blogging a whirl
So I've decided to give blogging a try. Not sure exactly why, as I've been resistant to its time-suck capacity for a long time. I think I may be a wee bit frustrated by the media scholar blogosphere, at least that of it that I have discovered. It's pretty boy-centric, and really, really serious. I spend plenty of my time doing scholarly writing. If I'm going to blog I'd like to have a little more fun with it. I'm also perpetually frustrated by more popular writing about media, especially TV, so I hope that my scholars' perspective will offer something different. That said, I'm hoping that this blog will combine some of my favorite elements of other blogs I enjoy. I'm quite the lurky fan of Dr. Crazy's Reassigned Time and hope to achieve her blend of the personal, the political, and the professional. I admire lots of the academic feminist blogosphere, and am happy to track the few feminist media scholars' blogs written by women (if there are more of you out there, please let me know!). I do love lots of non-academic but still sharply critical media writing to be found online, especially sharp soap opera criticism, which is abundant these days in the increasingly disappointing world of US daytime soaps (this is way pre-writers' strike, so don't blame the scabs). I guess we'll see where this blog takes me. I hope to keep posts kinda brief and to write about things I am reading and watching and thinking about. This may at times deal with ideas I'm struggling with in my teaching or my research, but it may also deal with the hairstyles of the General Hospital actresses. Take these for example (screen caps from the great Serial Drama):
The blondification of these gorgeous brunettes is a crime. Stop the highlighting!
Also on the soap front is this exciting new promo for Guiding Light's new shooting style (also to be used on P&G's other soap As the World Turns):
This cheaper production mode is looking mighty good here. In a time of great threat to the soaps' survival (not just the writers' strike but declining ratings all around), there are some fascinating instances of creativity and innovation at work. I don't think that the soaps are bound for extinction, as some have predicted, but change is definitely afoot. With so much of it for worse, I'm hoping that P&G's experiment in borrowing reality TV-style shooting is as promising as it appears here.
The blondification of these gorgeous brunettes is a crime. Stop the highlighting!
Also on the soap front is this exciting new promo for Guiding Light's new shooting style (also to be used on P&G's other soap As the World Turns):
This cheaper production mode is looking mighty good here. In a time of great threat to the soaps' survival (not just the writers' strike but declining ratings all around), there are some fascinating instances of creativity and innovation at work. I don't think that the soaps are bound for extinction, as some have predicted, but change is definitely afoot. With so much of it for worse, I'm hoping that P&G's experiment in borrowing reality TV-style shooting is as promising as it appears here.
Monday, August 26, 2013
Trials of ebay
Over the weekend I stayed up way past my bedtime to bid during the final minutes of several ebay auctions. What was I bidding on? Full year runs of Soap Opera Digest magazine from the late 1970s. Did I win these auctions? Hell, no, as they quickly became too rich for my blood--the last going for $102.
A single seller is offering up her lifelong collection of SODs, year by year, as she prepares to move. You may think this sort of thing would sell for a few bucks, but their rarity makes them quite valuable to those in the know. The winners of my failed auctions seem to run TV collectible businesses and so surely know the market for such things. Most old soap mags sell on ebay in single issues, and most are from the 1990s on. I'm sure these folks will be able to sell off the collection they are acquiring, probably issue by issue, making back their money and then some.
But my desire for these yellowing stacks of industry propaganda comes from a different place. Lots of TV ephemera is hard to come by, but little of it is as difficult to track down as the soap press. Very few libraries retain their holdings beyond a couple of years, and some libraries (ahem, Milwaukee Public Library System) don't have any soap publications, past or present. As a graduate student, I was blessed by the South Central Wisconsin Public Library system's collection of SODs from the '70s on (when the mag began), all handily stored in Madison's Central Public Library. I spent many delighted hours there devouring these magazines, which offered me story details, the occasional feature story of interest, and lots of letters to the editor full of great audience info. Made my dissertation, and the subsequent book, much better.
Now, as I begin to work on another book project exclusively focused on soap history, I very much want access to those old SODs again. One problem: the Madison Public Library THREW THEM OUT. I found out about this last year and so my indignation has (barely) abated, but I can easily get worked up about it again. Please note: this is one of a HANDFUL of libraries in the country that have any run of SODs beyond the past few years. According to Worldcat, only the Popular Culture collection at Bowling Green has a full run (not even the Library of Congress keeps them, though they do have Daytime TV, a now-defunct pub of the same genre that was also quite helpful to me in past research).
When I saw that this ebay user was selling off a nearly complete collection of SODs I had fantasies of owning the whole lot, of turning myself into the archive no one else cares to maintain. Alas, the financial investment seems too great and so I will likely trek to Bowling Green for a few fleeting days with these texts.
I do admit that the huge challenge of doing this sort of work is pretty appealing to me--brings out my youthful ambition to be a private detective, a la children's lit heroine Trixie Belden (Nancy Drew was too wimpy for my tastes), or an intrepid spy, a la Harriet the Spy, also a favorite read of my past. While I do believe strongly that our libraries do a disservice when they neglect to archive popular publications or, for chrissakes, THROW THEM OUT, the persistence required to actually track these things down is part of the fun of researching denigrated cultural products like soaps.
A single seller is offering up her lifelong collection of SODs, year by year, as she prepares to move. You may think this sort of thing would sell for a few bucks, but their rarity makes them quite valuable to those in the know. The winners of my failed auctions seem to run TV collectible businesses and so surely know the market for such things. Most old soap mags sell on ebay in single issues, and most are from the 1990s on. I'm sure these folks will be able to sell off the collection they are acquiring, probably issue by issue, making back their money and then some.
But my desire for these yellowing stacks of industry propaganda comes from a different place. Lots of TV ephemera is hard to come by, but little of it is as difficult to track down as the soap press. Very few libraries retain their holdings beyond a couple of years, and some libraries (ahem, Milwaukee Public Library System) don't have any soap publications, past or present. As a graduate student, I was blessed by the South Central Wisconsin Public Library system's collection of SODs from the '70s on (when the mag began), all handily stored in Madison's Central Public Library. I spent many delighted hours there devouring these magazines, which offered me story details, the occasional feature story of interest, and lots of letters to the editor full of great audience info. Made my dissertation, and the subsequent book, much better.
Now, as I begin to work on another book project exclusively focused on soap history, I very much want access to those old SODs again. One problem: the Madison Public Library THREW THEM OUT. I found out about this last year and so my indignation has (barely) abated, but I can easily get worked up about it again. Please note: this is one of a HANDFUL of libraries in the country that have any run of SODs beyond the past few years. According to Worldcat, only the Popular Culture collection at Bowling Green has a full run (not even the Library of Congress keeps them, though they do have Daytime TV, a now-defunct pub of the same genre that was also quite helpful to me in past research).
When I saw that this ebay user was selling off a nearly complete collection of SODs I had fantasies of owning the whole lot, of turning myself into the archive no one else cares to maintain. Alas, the financial investment seems too great and so I will likely trek to Bowling Green for a few fleeting days with these texts.
I do admit that the huge challenge of doing this sort of work is pretty appealing to me--brings out my youthful ambition to be a private detective, a la children's lit heroine Trixie Belden (Nancy Drew was too wimpy for my tastes), or an intrepid spy, a la Harriet the Spy, also a favorite read of my past. While I do believe strongly that our libraries do a disservice when they neglect to archive popular publications or, for chrissakes, THROW THEM OUT, the persistence required to actually track these things down is part of the fun of researching denigrated cultural products like soaps.
Sunday, August 25, 2013
A few more thoughts . . .
A friend told me he heard a rumor that I was "boycotting" the Flow conference, a rumor surely inspired by my last post. I told him that I wouldn't call it a boycott, rather that I thought it impossible for me to attend a conference held on Yom Kippur, given my personal situation.
I don't know who labeled my situation a boycott, but it seems to me representative of a certain view of the work and life of academics, or at least of the academia I know, in that it assumes that I must have made a choice against the conference rather than having to grapple with a tension between my identity as a media scholar and my other, more personal, roles. Rather than a choice against the conference this was a situation shaped by choices I have made in my personal life that are not readily accommodated within academia. These choices are not about religion, but rather about sustaining certain kinds of personal relationships (in this particular case, to my immediate and extended family) for which there is no clear place in academia. These relationships include those with my partner (in that it would be inequitable for only one of us to attend a conference in which we are both interested), with my child (for whose care I am responsible), and with my extended family (whose babysitting generosity and religious observance I respect). Perhaps I should include my relationship to the Jewish community here, but my particular dilemma in this case was more about the Jews in my family than a community at large.
These thoughts are really not specific to the Flow conference, rather they are about the academic culture in which I take part. The academic culture in which I have been socialized (primarily through graduate school and the world of my "field," with which I engage most regularly through conferences) is one that seems to assume a 24/7 living and breathing of the work. In part, this may be because we study media, and thus cannot escape our object of study even when in our "down time." I imagine this may be different for the chemist or perhaps even the literature scholar, though other fields surely feel the same 24/7 work mentality in their own respects, as well as some shared ones.
Now, please understand that I love this aspect of being a media scholar--that the work, the ideas, suffuse all of my life, not just some segmented "work time." I would love to be able to live in a world in which I am always surrounded by others as interested in and passionate about media, especially TV, as I am, and who want to talk about it in the ways I do. This is in large part what I loved about graduate school, that immersion in a world of people and ideas focused on similar interests and passions. When I came to graduate school, I couldn't believe my good fortune in finding such a community of like-minded people. And in many ways, I still reap the benefits of that, as I live with a like-minded media scholar and so get to experience that 24/7 world moreso than might someone who is single or partnered with a non-academic or even an academic in another field.
And yet. The real world is not graduate school. And the harsh truth that I think many of us must encounter when we move into jobs (hopefully) and other responsibilities is that a 24/7 life of the mind, of scholarly passion and commitment, is kind of impossible. Even if one chooses to keep one's personal ties limited and to focus on the work as a result, it can be difficult in the world post-grad school to find the like-minded souls you once knew. Many of us work in places where we are not surrounded by people engaged in the same ideas and interests as we are and thus we make other kinds of friends. So my real life, day to day friends are not necessarily fellow media scholars, but psychologists, and doctors, and stay at home parents, people with whom I've found other ways of connecting than our intellectual passions. And I have family members, both older and younger than me, who need my attention and time, or to whom I owe certain considerations (as in the case of not being able to ask anyone to babysit over Yom Kippur).
My point is that the ideal of 24/7 intellectual immersion that academia demands/promises/threatens is not a practical one for most of us. It is a patriarchal ideal, as well, in that it assumes an academic who can be readily freed from real world obligations and commitments in pursuit of the scholarship. This person has of course traditionally been male. Male academics have always had connections and obligations outside of their work (to partners, children, etc.) but have also lived in a culture in which it is assumed that their work can and must supersede those private links and that someone else (typically a wife) will be there to take care of them. The picture of an academic, male or female, who cannot or will not subsume those links fits less well into an academic culture that sees all else as secondary to the intellectual (and social) pursuits of the professorial life.
Dr. Crazy wrote about similar issues a while back, talking about the ways that academia is inhospitable to a personal life and I really liked what she said but couldn't figure out how to articulate my take at the time. So this is my awkward attempt to do so, not to complain about any one problematic policy in academia, but instead to reflect on what I see as the patriarchal roots of academic culture, roots that assume an ease of separation between academic life and personal life that is not always possible, and that has consequences that we are not all willing to accept.
UPDATE: Just saw this column at the Chronicle of Higher Ed that reports on the impact of such matters for women in the sciences.
I don't know who labeled my situation a boycott, but it seems to me representative of a certain view of the work and life of academics, or at least of the academia I know, in that it assumes that I must have made a choice against the conference rather than having to grapple with a tension between my identity as a media scholar and my other, more personal, roles. Rather than a choice against the conference this was a situation shaped by choices I have made in my personal life that are not readily accommodated within academia. These choices are not about religion, but rather about sustaining certain kinds of personal relationships (in this particular case, to my immediate and extended family) for which there is no clear place in academia. These relationships include those with my partner (in that it would be inequitable for only one of us to attend a conference in which we are both interested), with my child (for whose care I am responsible), and with my extended family (whose babysitting generosity and religious observance I respect). Perhaps I should include my relationship to the Jewish community here, but my particular dilemma in this case was more about the Jews in my family than a community at large.
These thoughts are really not specific to the Flow conference, rather they are about the academic culture in which I take part. The academic culture in which I have been socialized (primarily through graduate school and the world of my "field," with which I engage most regularly through conferences) is one that seems to assume a 24/7 living and breathing of the work. In part, this may be because we study media, and thus cannot escape our object of study even when in our "down time." I imagine this may be different for the chemist or perhaps even the literature scholar, though other fields surely feel the same 24/7 work mentality in their own respects, as well as some shared ones.
Now, please understand that I love this aspect of being a media scholar--that the work, the ideas, suffuse all of my life, not just some segmented "work time." I would love to be able to live in a world in which I am always surrounded by others as interested in and passionate about media, especially TV, as I am, and who want to talk about it in the ways I do. This is in large part what I loved about graduate school, that immersion in a world of people and ideas focused on similar interests and passions. When I came to graduate school, I couldn't believe my good fortune in finding such a community of like-minded people. And in many ways, I still reap the benefits of that, as I live with a like-minded media scholar and so get to experience that 24/7 world moreso than might someone who is single or partnered with a non-academic or even an academic in another field.
And yet. The real world is not graduate school. And the harsh truth that I think many of us must encounter when we move into jobs (hopefully) and other responsibilities is that a 24/7 life of the mind, of scholarly passion and commitment, is kind of impossible. Even if one chooses to keep one's personal ties limited and to focus on the work as a result, it can be difficult in the world post-grad school to find the like-minded souls you once knew. Many of us work in places where we are not surrounded by people engaged in the same ideas and interests as we are and thus we make other kinds of friends. So my real life, day to day friends are not necessarily fellow media scholars, but psychologists, and doctors, and stay at home parents, people with whom I've found other ways of connecting than our intellectual passions. And I have family members, both older and younger than me, who need my attention and time, or to whom I owe certain considerations (as in the case of not being able to ask anyone to babysit over Yom Kippur).
My point is that the ideal of 24/7 intellectual immersion that academia demands/promises/threatens is not a practical one for most of us. It is a patriarchal ideal, as well, in that it assumes an academic who can be readily freed from real world obligations and commitments in pursuit of the scholarship. This person has of course traditionally been male. Male academics have always had connections and obligations outside of their work (to partners, children, etc.) but have also lived in a culture in which it is assumed that their work can and must supersede those private links and that someone else (typically a wife) will be there to take care of them. The picture of an academic, male or female, who cannot or will not subsume those links fits less well into an academic culture that sees all else as secondary to the intellectual (and social) pursuits of the professorial life.
Dr. Crazy wrote about similar issues a while back, talking about the ways that academia is inhospitable to a personal life and I really liked what she said but couldn't figure out how to articulate my take at the time. So this is my awkward attempt to do so, not to complain about any one problematic policy in academia, but instead to reflect on what I see as the patriarchal roots of academic culture, roots that assume an ease of separation between academic life and personal life that is not always possible, and that has consequences that we are not all willing to accept.
UPDATE: Just saw this column at the Chronicle of Higher Ed that reports on the impact of such matters for women in the sciences.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Who to praise? Who to blame? Daytime soaps and the mystery of the head writer
My perusal of soap discourse online these days tells me that soap viewers spend a lot of time discussing the shows' head writers. When shows go bad, the head writer is to blame. When they're good, the head writer is praised. Hence the consistent Guza-bashing, Higley-mocking, and Carlivati-worshiping that fills the soapy internets of late. My sense is that head writers have not always been attributed with this degree of power. The best example of this I can think of is the Gloria Monty tenure at GH. A number of different writers served under Monty's command, but everyone always attributed the show's ups and downs to Monty. Today, we seem to hear much less about EPs in daytime than we do HWs.
Soaps are of course quite different from prime time TV in that, in prime time, the primary creative force behind most shows is a hybrid writer-producer--a Joss Whedon, a Shonda Rhimes, an Alan Ball. Creators are executive producers are head writers in prime time. In daytime these are two distinct roles, at least they are most of the time. The primary exceptions I can think of are the Bell shows, where Bill Bell was HW and EP for Y&R and Bradley Bell still fills both roles for B&B. If I am remembering correctly, this was the formula tried for Lynn Marie Latham at Y&R, as well, and, while I don't watch the show, many seem to think Latham's tenure there was a disaster. Since so few soaps follow this model, I've got to think that the intense production models these programs follow necessitates this sort of split in duties.
I've always had a kernel of skepticism for fans' effusiveness of praise and/or vitriol for the head writers of soaps. I can't help but think that the forces shaping the creation of these shows are too complex for their success or failure to be attributed to a sole cog in the machine. But I think I may be starting to believe that the HWs really are the source of all good and all evil in soapland. The significance of the role has become especially clear to me with the new season of GH: Night Shift, which is being written (and produced) by non-GH folks (in contrast to season 1 of the show, which was helmed by GH HW Bob Guza and EP Jill Farren Phelps). I've already made clear my despair at season 1 and my hopefulness about season 2. That hopefulness continues to gather steam three episodes in.
GH: NS is being written by a newcomer to soaps, Sri Rao. Rao is a difficult figure to suss out. The guy doesn't even have a Wikipedia page! But his production company has a way-cool website that presents Rao and the company as "indie" creators of TV. My preliminary digging tells me that Rao positions himself as a writer-director-EP, that he has written a play, made an indie film, and created teen series for The N (as far as I can tell, this series has never aired). He's also a self-proclaimed GH fan (since age 8, he declares--and given his early 30s-seeming age I think this dates the beginnings of his GH viewing to the same period as mine). He's also a Wharton School of Business grad. (I dated one of those once upon a time and, trust me, not what you'd expect of a soap writer.) In all, he seems like a young, cool, smart guy who, unexpectedly, also knows about and loves soaps, GH especially.
While NS is not perfect (I'm with most other critiques I've read on the "no, just wrong"-ness of the new Leo Julian and his pairing with the lovely Saira Batra), I'm enjoying it immensely more than I do GH these days. Robert Scorpio's return and brain-tumor induced confusion that made him run around acting as if it were the 1980s were about as perfect as I'd want them to be. (My favorite was the tossed-off crack to Jagger: "Where'd you get your training? DVX?") And I was all choked up at Robin's reactions to everything. Funny, touching, nods to GH history all over the place--what a soap-wonderful treat. This show is so vastly different from the Guza-written daytime GH that it seems to me to be the alternate life the show might have had, had it veered differently in, oh, the late '90s or early 2000s or so, when I think so much started to go south.
In any case, I'm encouraged that the ABC Disney/Soapnet brass had the good sense to hire Rao and I will continue to harbor my secret fantasies of him taking over GH proper. That said, no doubt head writing a 5 day a week daytime show is way different than a 13-week season of of a p-t spin-off. But perhaps someone like Rao is the fresh perspective daytime--and GH in particular--so desperately needs.
Soaps are of course quite different from prime time TV in that, in prime time, the primary creative force behind most shows is a hybrid writer-producer--a Joss Whedon, a Shonda Rhimes, an Alan Ball. Creators are executive producers are head writers in prime time. In daytime these are two distinct roles, at least they are most of the time. The primary exceptions I can think of are the Bell shows, where Bill Bell was HW and EP for Y&R and Bradley Bell still fills both roles for B&B. If I am remembering correctly, this was the formula tried for Lynn Marie Latham at Y&R, as well, and, while I don't watch the show, many seem to think Latham's tenure there was a disaster. Since so few soaps follow this model, I've got to think that the intense production models these programs follow necessitates this sort of split in duties.
I've always had a kernel of skepticism for fans' effusiveness of praise and/or vitriol for the head writers of soaps. I can't help but think that the forces shaping the creation of these shows are too complex for their success or failure to be attributed to a sole cog in the machine. But I think I may be starting to believe that the HWs really are the source of all good and all evil in soapland. The significance of the role has become especially clear to me with the new season of GH: Night Shift, which is being written (and produced) by non-GH folks (in contrast to season 1 of the show, which was helmed by GH HW Bob Guza and EP Jill Farren Phelps). I've already made clear my despair at season 1 and my hopefulness about season 2. That hopefulness continues to gather steam three episodes in.
GH: NS is being written by a newcomer to soaps, Sri Rao. Rao is a difficult figure to suss out. The guy doesn't even have a Wikipedia page! But his production company has a way-cool website that presents Rao and the company as "indie" creators of TV. My preliminary digging tells me that Rao positions himself as a writer-director-EP, that he has written a play, made an indie film, and created teen series for The N (as far as I can tell, this series has never aired). He's also a self-proclaimed GH fan (since age 8, he declares--and given his early 30s-seeming age I think this dates the beginnings of his GH viewing to the same period as mine). He's also a Wharton School of Business grad. (I dated one of those once upon a time and, trust me, not what you'd expect of a soap writer.) In all, he seems like a young, cool, smart guy who, unexpectedly, also knows about and loves soaps, GH especially.
While NS is not perfect (I'm with most other critiques I've read on the "no, just wrong"-ness of the new Leo Julian and his pairing with the lovely Saira Batra), I'm enjoying it immensely more than I do GH these days. Robert Scorpio's return and brain-tumor induced confusion that made him run around acting as if it were the 1980s were about as perfect as I'd want them to be. (My favorite was the tossed-off crack to Jagger: "Where'd you get your training? DVX?") And I was all choked up at Robin's reactions to everything. Funny, touching, nods to GH history all over the place--what a soap-wonderful treat. This show is so vastly different from the Guza-written daytime GH that it seems to me to be the alternate life the show might have had, had it veered differently in, oh, the late '90s or early 2000s or so, when I think so much started to go south.
In any case, I'm encouraged that the ABC Disney/Soapnet brass had the good sense to hire Rao and I will continue to harbor my secret fantasies of him taking over GH proper. That said, no doubt head writing a 5 day a week daytime show is way different than a 13-week season of of a p-t spin-off. But perhaps someone like Rao is the fresh perspective daytime--and GH in particular--so desperately needs.
Saturday, August 17, 2013
Girl TV Update
Some new shows, some old shows, here's what's up with my TV watching for and about the ladies:
-- Because of my last, glowing post about quarterlife, I want to make clear that, while the episode I praised, "Goodbyes," was super-fantastic, the rest--not so much. To be honest, we have yet to watch the final 3 or 4 segments of episode 6 (the final ep). We'll do so, but the show just did not live up to the best of the Zwick-Herskovitz-averse. Except for "Goodbyes"--a must-see for all MSCL fans.
- Two new woman-centric sitcoms on my viewing schedule these days: The Return of Jezebel James, created by Gilmore Girls' Amy Sherman-Palladino, and Miss Guided, the ABC show featuring the wonderful Judy Greer. Fox is clearly trying to burn off the Jezebel James eps, airing them on Fridays with little fanfare. From the first two eps, I can say it is definitely not great, but it has some winning elements, including some trademark ASP laughs and a great mom character played by Dianne Wiest. But Parker Posey, usually a great presence, is just . . . odd here. MZN and I keep thinking of all the great comic TV actresses who would work better in the part, taking on Sarah's annoying quirks while still making her sympathetic. Lauren Graham, of course, but also a Jennifer Aniston, a Courtney Cox, a Judy Greer!
Which brings me to Miss Guided, which had me laughing hard enough to pause the DVR. Here's one of the promos. The brief shot of her crying, in the green Homecoming dress, was what got me (it's a longer bit in the actual episode):
Maybe I'm a sucker for anything that lovingly mocks '80s high school geekdom, but I'm thinking that Greer's Becky Freeley may be up there with Tina Fey's Liz Lemon for me as a welcome kind of relatable sitcom heroine missing from TV for too long.
- Another update on a previously mentioned show. I somewhat sheepishly admit to having continued to watch Lipstick Jungle. It's not what I'd call good, but the fact that I watch i
t before the other series with episodes stacked a mile high on the DVR (Grey's Anatomy, I'm lookin' at you) says something about the pleasure it must be giving me. In part, I'm pretty sure this is because of the clothes, which are FABULOUS. Here's one image of the ladies in their fabulous coats:
But I've just spent way too much time searching for pictures online. NBC's "Shopisodes" will be happy to show you more. I think I just fell deep into a target marketed hole.
But in addition to the clothes, I like the fact that these beautiful women have relatively realistic bodies and faces for their age--well, except for Lindsey Price, and I think Kim Raver looks like this because she's pregnant, but still.
- I could say more about General Hospital, especially my growing discomfort with Sarah Brown's cartoonish proportions, as well as my appreciation of her compelling acting, but some Idol results await.
-- Because of my last, glowing post about quarterlife, I want to make clear that, while the episode I praised, "Goodbyes," was super-fantastic, the rest--not so much. To be honest, we have yet to watch the final 3 or 4 segments of episode 6 (the final ep). We'll do so, but the show just did not live up to the best of the Zwick-Herskovitz-averse. Except for "Goodbyes"--a must-see for all MSCL fans.
- Two new woman-centric sitcoms on my viewing schedule these days: The Return of Jezebel James, created by Gilmore Girls' Amy Sherman-Palladino, and Miss Guided, the ABC show featuring the wonderful Judy Greer. Fox is clearly trying to burn off the Jezebel James eps, airing them on Fridays with little fanfare. From the first two eps, I can say it is definitely not great, but it has some winning elements, including some trademark ASP laughs and a great mom character played by Dianne Wiest. But Parker Posey, usually a great presence, is just . . . odd here. MZN and I keep thinking of all the great comic TV actresses who would work better in the part, taking on Sarah's annoying quirks while still making her sympathetic. Lauren Graham, of course, but also a Jennifer Aniston, a Courtney Cox, a Judy Greer!
Which brings me to Miss Guided, which had me laughing hard enough to pause the DVR. Here's one of the promos. The brief shot of her crying, in the green Homecoming dress, was what got me (it's a longer bit in the actual episode):
Maybe I'm a sucker for anything that lovingly mocks '80s high school geekdom, but I'm thinking that Greer's Becky Freeley may be up there with Tina Fey's Liz Lemon for me as a welcome kind of relatable sitcom heroine missing from TV for too long.
- Another update on a previously mentioned show. I somewhat sheepishly admit to having continued to watch Lipstick Jungle. It's not what I'd call good, but the fact that I watch i
t before the other series with episodes stacked a mile high on the DVR (Grey's Anatomy, I'm lookin' at you) says something about the pleasure it must be giving me. In part, I'm pretty sure this is because of the clothes, which are FABULOUS. Here's one image of the ladies in their fabulous coats:But I've just spent way too much time searching for pictures online. NBC's "Shopisodes" will be happy to show you more. I think I just fell deep into a target marketed hole.
But in addition to the clothes, I like the fact that these beautiful women have relatively realistic bodies and faces for their age--well, except for Lindsey Price, and I think Kim Raver looks like this because she's pregnant, but still.
- I could say more about General Hospital, especially my growing discomfort with Sarah Brown's cartoonish proportions, as well as my appreciation of her compelling acting, but some Idol results await.
Friday, August 16, 2013
Religion, culture and the politics of academia, or why I'm not going to Flow
Sorry to break my blogging silence with the screed I'm about to write, but something is bugging me and I want to have my say.
An exciting development in the world of TV and media scholarship in recent years has been the advent of Flow, an online forum for somewhat informal, timely writing by media scholars. Published by graduate students at the University of Texas at Austin, the journal also spawned a conference two years ago, which I attended and enjoyed. The second Flow conference is being held this week in Austin, and I'm not going. Why? Because the first day of the conference overlaps with the Jewish high holiday, Yom Kippur, often regarded as the holiest of holidays in the Jewish religion.
I'm Jewish, but am not religious. For my immediate family, Jewish holidays are occasions for family togetherness, but not especially for religious observance. I don't go to synagogue services or participate in other religious rituals. In this respect, I might have attended Flow without it impeding on any particular religious conviction. But attending the conference would most definitely have been problematic for my cultural identity--and for the practical realities of my life as a Jewish parent, daughter, and daughter-in-law.
As a Jew, even a non-religious one, I find offensive a culture that takes Jewish observance for granted and sees it as insignificant. The Flow organizers have been apologetic about the conference scheduling but I still find the choice to schedule it on this day to be insensitive and culturally myopic. I do not believe that an academic conference would be scheduled over Christmas or Easter, even if many of the academics in the field had little or no religious investment in the holiday. And the organizers' offer to schedule Jewish participants' panels on days other than the holiday and to direct those interested to the campus Hillel services fundamentally misunderstands the community- and family-based nature of Jewish culture.
While I chose not to attend in part in protest of this kind of cultural prejudice, I also felt that my participation was impossible for practical reasons, even though those reasons are also culturally contingent. I am married to another Jewish media scholar, and so any time we both want to attend a conference we must make arrangements for the care of our 4 year old son. We typically manage this about once a school year with the generous assistance of our extended families, who travel to our home or take our son into theirs when we both attend the same conference. (Sure, we could bring him with us, but his presence requires that one of us NOT be involved in the conference at any given time--not a very acceptable situation to either of us.) Each of our extended families are more religiously observant than are we, so it would be impossible for us to ask them to care for our son on this holiday. And I, for one, would be ashamed to ask, knowing full well the significance of this particular holiday and the general disregard for Jewish culture in American society more generally. Asking my family to babysit on this day would reproduce the insensitivity that the Flow organizers have perpetuated, albeit unintentionally.
That's why I'm not going to Flow.
An exciting development in the world of TV and media scholarship in recent years has been the advent of Flow, an online forum for somewhat informal, timely writing by media scholars. Published by graduate students at the University of Texas at Austin, the journal also spawned a conference two years ago, which I attended and enjoyed. The second Flow conference is being held this week in Austin, and I'm not going. Why? Because the first day of the conference overlaps with the Jewish high holiday, Yom Kippur, often regarded as the holiest of holidays in the Jewish religion.
I'm Jewish, but am not religious. For my immediate family, Jewish holidays are occasions for family togetherness, but not especially for religious observance. I don't go to synagogue services or participate in other religious rituals. In this respect, I might have attended Flow without it impeding on any particular religious conviction. But attending the conference would most definitely have been problematic for my cultural identity--and for the practical realities of my life as a Jewish parent, daughter, and daughter-in-law.
As a Jew, even a non-religious one, I find offensive a culture that takes Jewish observance for granted and sees it as insignificant. The Flow organizers have been apologetic about the conference scheduling but I still find the choice to schedule it on this day to be insensitive and culturally myopic. I do not believe that an academic conference would be scheduled over Christmas or Easter, even if many of the academics in the field had little or no religious investment in the holiday. And the organizers' offer to schedule Jewish participants' panels on days other than the holiday and to direct those interested to the campus Hillel services fundamentally misunderstands the community- and family-based nature of Jewish culture.
While I chose not to attend in part in protest of this kind of cultural prejudice, I also felt that my participation was impossible for practical reasons, even though those reasons are also culturally contingent. I am married to another Jewish media scholar, and so any time we both want to attend a conference we must make arrangements for the care of our 4 year old son. We typically manage this about once a school year with the generous assistance of our extended families, who travel to our home or take our son into theirs when we both attend the same conference. (Sure, we could bring him with us, but his presence requires that one of us NOT be involved in the conference at any given time--not a very acceptable situation to either of us.) Each of our extended families are more religiously observant than are we, so it would be impossible for us to ask them to care for our son on this holiday. And I, for one, would be ashamed to ask, knowing full well the significance of this particular holiday and the general disregard for Jewish culture in American society more generally. Asking my family to babysit on this day would reproduce the insensitivity that the Flow organizers have perpetuated, albeit unintentionally.
That's why I'm not going to Flow.
Thursday, August 15, 2013
I'm sad about my networks
My 4 year old son had a phase in which he would say, at times, "I'm sad about my friends." After some probing, we figured out what he meant by this. He meant that he missed his friends, that he was sad not to be with them, that he hoped to see them again soon.
That's how I'm feeling these days about TV -- I'm sad about my networks.
It's now reached that point in the fall TV season (and, trust me, there is still a fall TV season, despite industry claims to its elimination) when I've sampled pretty much everything and have whittled down my options, settling into something of a regular line-up of shows to continue watching. It's not lookin' good. At this point, I can only think of two new shows that have achieved "season pass" status (in TiVo parlance, even though my main DVR is--sniff--no longer a TiVo). And neither of these shows is a favorite, by any means. In case you wonder, they are Privileged, on the CW, which I like for its smart, plucky protagonist, but which isn't so great on the whole, and Raising the Bar on TNT, Steven Bochco's new lawyer show, which I think I like mostly for the retro feel of it (the man DOES know how to write a lawyer show, after all), even if I find the sexual and gender politics rather retro, too. Since I'm a few episodes behind, I'll reserve further comment on that, but I do have some thoughts I'd like to share eventually.
There is certainly other competent fare on the nets these days. I thought The Mentalist and Eleventh Hour both work as procedurals with slight continuing character arcs and the charms of Simon Baker ALMOST convinced me to keep watching the former, but no. I thought Worst Week was sort of funny, and the same for Kath & Kim, which I know is heresy given the massive pan it received. But, again, no real desire to watch more of either.
I do still plan to watch at least one more episode of Easy Money, which has a somewhat new premise in its check-cashing place setting, and I think Valentine, also on the CW, is worth watching here and there for its hyper-corny Love Boat appeal. But, on the whole, I'm really sad about my networks. Other than fun reality competish shows like The Amazing Race, Dancing with the Stars and--looming in the new year--Idol, the broadcast nets just aren't bringing it.
And don't get me started on what makes me sad about the daytime soaps.
My favorite shows of late have all been on cable, and have all recently concluded or are finishing up their seasons--Project Runway, GH: Night Shift, and Mad Men. (Oops. There's also Friday Night Lights, another fave, being brought to me by Directv in advance of its NBC run next year. This show is fabulously back to season 1 greatness. But again, it wouldn't have been if just on NBC.) I don't want to be one of those high falutin' types who turns my nose up at the broadcast networks. (OK, probably not much danger of that as I continue to watch Dancing and Idol.) But I really think they ain't what they used to be, those networks. Maybe I have changed as much as have they, but I am fond of much TV and just can't get excited about any of those nets' new shows. This comes on top of last year's strike-shortened season, in which I ended up taking on very few new series, as well. Even those series that have survived since then only achieve half-hearted liking from me. If it weren't for the amazing wardrobes, jewelry, and those Chuck and Blair moments I don 't think Gossip Girl or Lipstick Jungle would be showing up on my Now Playing list at all.
As I continue my ongoing project of dubbing my VHS collection to DVD, I can see that the network TV of yesteryear had so much more appeal. Today I dubbed a favorite episode of the short-lived Herskovitz/Zwick Relativity and recently I've been transferring some mid-'90s GH (Claire Labine years, for those in the know). Shows like those could really make a person love TV.
Now I'm really sad about my networks.
That's how I'm feeling these days about TV -- I'm sad about my networks.
It's now reached that point in the fall TV season (and, trust me, there is still a fall TV season, despite industry claims to its elimination) when I've sampled pretty much everything and have whittled down my options, settling into something of a regular line-up of shows to continue watching. It's not lookin' good. At this point, I can only think of two new shows that have achieved "season pass" status (in TiVo parlance, even though my main DVR is--sniff--no longer a TiVo). And neither of these shows is a favorite, by any means. In case you wonder, they are Privileged, on the CW, which I like for its smart, plucky protagonist, but which isn't so great on the whole, and Raising the Bar on TNT, Steven Bochco's new lawyer show, which I think I like mostly for the retro feel of it (the man DOES know how to write a lawyer show, after all), even if I find the sexual and gender politics rather retro, too. Since I'm a few episodes behind, I'll reserve further comment on that, but I do have some thoughts I'd like to share eventually.
There is certainly other competent fare on the nets these days. I thought The Mentalist and Eleventh Hour both work as procedurals with slight continuing character arcs and the charms of Simon Baker ALMOST convinced me to keep watching the former, but no. I thought Worst Week was sort of funny, and the same for Kath & Kim, which I know is heresy given the massive pan it received. But, again, no real desire to watch more of either.
I do still plan to watch at least one more episode of Easy Money, which has a somewhat new premise in its check-cashing place setting, and I think Valentine, also on the CW, is worth watching here and there for its hyper-corny Love Boat appeal. But, on the whole, I'm really sad about my networks. Other than fun reality competish shows like The Amazing Race, Dancing with the Stars and--looming in the new year--Idol, the broadcast nets just aren't bringing it.
And don't get me started on what makes me sad about the daytime soaps.
My favorite shows of late have all been on cable, and have all recently concluded or are finishing up their seasons--Project Runway, GH: Night Shift, and Mad Men. (Oops. There's also Friday Night Lights, another fave, being brought to me by Directv in advance of its NBC run next year. This show is fabulously back to season 1 greatness. But again, it wouldn't have been if just on NBC.) I don't want to be one of those high falutin' types who turns my nose up at the broadcast networks. (OK, probably not much danger of that as I continue to watch Dancing and Idol.) But I really think they ain't what they used to be, those networks. Maybe I have changed as much as have they, but I am fond of much TV and just can't get excited about any of those nets' new shows. This comes on top of last year's strike-shortened season, in which I ended up taking on very few new series, as well. Even those series that have survived since then only achieve half-hearted liking from me. If it weren't for the amazing wardrobes, jewelry, and those Chuck and Blair moments I don 't think Gossip Girl or Lipstick Jungle would be showing up on my Now Playing list at all.
As I continue my ongoing project of dubbing my VHS collection to DVD, I can see that the network TV of yesteryear had so much more appeal. Today I dubbed a favorite episode of the short-lived Herskovitz/Zwick Relativity and recently I've been transferring some mid-'90s GH (Claire Labine years, for those in the know). Shows like those could really make a person love TV.
Now I'm really sad about my networks.
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Infrared Receiver Extender Cable for HD DVR STB's *See Product Description for Compatibility*
Features
- 9 ft lead. 3.5mm gold plated stereo plug. Tip VCC 5V Center 'Data' sleeve 'ground'
- Dark color lens makes this unit plasma proof and enhances product performance.
- 35-40ft range from remote control to Ir receiver.
- 3.3~5v 38kHz operating range. Compatible box list in product description.
- Extend 25ft more with our 25ft. Ir Receiver Extension Cable
List Price: $24.99
Special Offer: check this out!
Related Products
- 25ft Ir Receiver 3.5mm stereo plug to 3.5mm stereo jack Extension Cable by Infrared Resources
- 12ft Ir Receiver 3.5mm stereo plug to 3.5mm stereo jack Extension Cable by Infrared Resources
- Channel Vision IR-3001 Single IR Emitter with Confirmation LED
- 9-inch 3.5mm stereo Plug to Dual 3.5mm stereo Jack Splitter by Infrared Resources
- 25ft IR Repeater/Receiver Extension cable for IR Connecting blocks
Product Description
This Ir Receiver is made and sold Exclusively by Infrared ResourcesWORKS WITH VERIZION HD DVR QIP 7216 1,7232-P2,7100Cisco CHS435+HDC ,CH335+HDC HD DVR, Direct TV Model # H25-500LG LST-4600A HD converter boxMASSCOOL HS-MA105DC550D HDMI Switcher,Peerless HDS100 and IoGear Wireless Multimedia Kits,Thomson DCI1011com,PACE DC551P, PACE/Cisco,Pace DC700X Apache.RNG110,PACE/CiscoRNG150,RNG100,,RNG200N ( NOTE:RNG units need to be completely enclosed as the front ir sensor does not disable when ours is plugged in like other boxes do. The box will not operate properly unless the IR signal is received from only our receiver cable)PACE TDC787X HD,PACE TDC 575D DVR, DC50X,DCH100,DCX3300,DCX3400-M,DCX3416,DCX3425,DCX3432,DCX3501,MVIX 760 HD Media Player.DTA50WILL NOT WORK WITH LISTED BELOWWILL NOT WORK with any Samsung, Motorola DCT or DCH, Series,QIP2500, ,SA Explorer 4280 HDC, 8300HD,Cisco1642HDC,8742,Cisco 4742HDC Verizon Motorola QIP 6416-2 ,6000 series,Moto DCX3200-M,DCX3400,RNG200. DISH,Direct TV unless it is the H25-500 box DO NOT PURCHASE FOR any SCIENTIFIC ATLANTA boxes unless it is listed in the WORKS WITH above ( 1st Section).DO NOT PURCHASE FOR STEREO RECEIVERS(Harman-Kardon etc) or Ir Repeater systems such as Logitech etc.WILL NOT WORK WITH AV RECEIVERS(Panasonic, Harmon Kardon etc)!!!!! OR IR REPEATER SYSTEMS,or directly plugged into TV's (they require 12v receiver ours is 5V)Contact us if you do not see your make and model. Now you can place your Set Top box behind cabinet doors or other locations up to 9ft away by plugging the 3.5mm plug into the Ir port on the back of the box. We also have 25ft Stereo extension cable for our ir receiver.When the unit is plugged into the Ir port the Ir signal over rides to only the receiver eye. (except RNG boxes. They must be enclosed or black tape over the front IR sensor). Remote control must be pointed toward the round ir receiver. It will perform all functions of the remote control. plasma proof!
AEI Digisender Gold X4 additional Receiver: Amazon.co.uk: TV Extend your DigiSender Gold/X4 system to include additional televisions in your home. Add as many additional receivers as you require for extra televisions located ... Wireless Audio Video Transmitter Kit Dual A V Inputs with IR ... Wireless Audio/Video Transmitter Kit - Dual A/V Inputs With IR Remote Extender in Consumer Electronics, TV, Video & Home Audio, TV, Video & Audio Accessories eBay Infrared Receiver Extender Cable for HD DVR STB's *See Product ... This Ir Receiver is made and sold Exclusively by Infrared Resources WORKS WITH VERIZION HD DVR QIP 7216 1,7232-P2,7100 Cisco CHS435+HDC ,CH335+HDC HD DVR, Direct TV ... www.phigemparts.com System Name: Part Number: Description: Quantity: SIEMENS POLYDOROS 100: ZWS 35 SL: RESISTOR (SIEMENS) 0: SIEMENS POLYDOROS 100: ZWS 100 E SS: RESISTOR: 0: HITACHI ... Marmitek IR Eye universal IR extender cable: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics The IR Eye can; in combination with an infra-red extender; extend the IR signal of your remote control. With an infra-red extender; you can control your A/V equipment ... Paul DeMara's Home Page www.pdemara.com www.pauldemara.com www.hipcomputing.com www.itsallaboutthesound.com its all about the sound. 24.207.14.64. CDE1A003-6A8B-2A479ED3-AFCB-3CC54880 Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Infrared Receiver Extender Cable for ... 5 stars. "Verizon FIOS & the right cable box" My FIOS HD (non-DVR) box series QIP6200 had a port labeled "IR". With some internet investigation and an impressivly ... 9ft. Infrared CFL,pcm,emi,ambient light proof Receiver Extender ... 9ft. Infrared CFL,pcm,emi,ambient light proof Receiver Extender Cable for HD Set Top Boxes *listed in Product Description Section*: This Ir Receiver is made and sold ...
DVR drama
Here's a problem for you: one nearly-full DVR leased from a certain satellite company, with an on-the-blink remote reception thingy. A DVR with only like 6% available space that cannot be operated with a remote control. Which means no fast-forwarding. Of commercials. No searching for titles to record. Playback is OK, operable from the receiver itself, but no pausing while playing, and NO FAST-FORWARDING OF COMMERCIALS.
Not a big problem for the boy's shows, as they are commercial-free anyway. Bigger problem for mine. I've started recording everything on the other DVR in the house, so I'm covered there. But said satellite company, finally recognizing that the problem is not with the remote but rather with the receiver/DVR is sending a new one. Current one--remember 94% full hard drive--needs to be returned to company upon receipt of new one. So what to do?
I have a LOT of hours of TV to watch and no ability to fast-forward while watching. Do I go on a watching binge, filling up commercial time with bits of work, reading, house cleaning? Or do I let go some of the backlog of shows? As a TV completist, it kills me not to see all of something that I decide to watch. I admit it will be some relief to start fresh with an empty DVR, but the mountain of shows before me (WITH commercials) makes the new DVR seem as much of a burden as an opportunity.
This is one of those moments when real life and research life oddly coincide. Early this week I spent time researching the history of Nielsen's measurement of time-shifting--the problematic inclusion of VCR recording, but not playback, in the live program ratings as well as the current C3 compromise of average commercial minute ratings based on live viewing plus 3 days' DVR playback. Because I was researching this in the context of the recent history of the soaps, I had to think about the ways in which time-shifting figures into soap viewing and also about the ways that keeping these shows viable is so dependent upon those time-shifters playing rather than fast-forwarding commercials (so that the viewing counts in the C3 ratings system--all of this only being relevant for Nielsen households, of course). Now, if I had the good fortune to be a Nielsen household (a lifelong dream, I typically tell my students) I would play, play, play those commercials on all of my shows. But, alas, Nielsen has not come knocking and thus I can imagine little more painful than sitting through the many commercial minutes of a daytime soap. I know that many viewers do, but I just don't get that. My time-shifting habits are too deeply engrained.
Damn it, I've been watching the first episode of Soapnet's Canadian import, the hockey soap MVP, as I write this (during commercials) and I like it. Means I have 3 more backlogged eps to catch up on, with commercials, before the DVR switch. Such is the burden of television.
Not a big problem for the boy's shows, as they are commercial-free anyway. Bigger problem for mine. I've started recording everything on the other DVR in the house, so I'm covered there. But said satellite company, finally recognizing that the problem is not with the remote but rather with the receiver/DVR is sending a new one. Current one--remember 94% full hard drive--needs to be returned to company upon receipt of new one. So what to do?
I have a LOT of hours of TV to watch and no ability to fast-forward while watching. Do I go on a watching binge, filling up commercial time with bits of work, reading, house cleaning? Or do I let go some of the backlog of shows? As a TV completist, it kills me not to see all of something that I decide to watch. I admit it will be some relief to start fresh with an empty DVR, but the mountain of shows before me (WITH commercials) makes the new DVR seem as much of a burden as an opportunity.
This is one of those moments when real life and research life oddly coincide. Early this week I spent time researching the history of Nielsen's measurement of time-shifting--the problematic inclusion of VCR recording, but not playback, in the live program ratings as well as the current C3 compromise of average commercial minute ratings based on live viewing plus 3 days' DVR playback. Because I was researching this in the context of the recent history of the soaps, I had to think about the ways in which time-shifting figures into soap viewing and also about the ways that keeping these shows viable is so dependent upon those time-shifters playing rather than fast-forwarding commercials (so that the viewing counts in the C3 ratings system--all of this only being relevant for Nielsen households, of course). Now, if I had the good fortune to be a Nielsen household (a lifelong dream, I typically tell my students) I would play, play, play those commercials on all of my shows. But, alas, Nielsen has not come knocking and thus I can imagine little more painful than sitting through the many commercial minutes of a daytime soap. I know that many viewers do, but I just don't get that. My time-shifting habits are too deeply engrained.
Damn it, I've been watching the first episode of Soapnet's Canadian import, the hockey soap MVP, as I write this (during commercials) and I like it. Means I have 3 more backlogged eps to catch up on, with commercials, before the DVR switch. Such is the burden of television.
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Available at Target, Walgreens, and CVS
Leo is quickly approaching his 5th birthday and his grasp of the world around him continues to expand. Latest on his horizon is the world of TV commercials. The kid has been a TV fan for much of his life, reared primarily on Noggin, the Nickelodeon networks' commercial-free pre-school channel. In the last year or so he has picked up some Disney Channel shows, but those, too, run in largely commercial-free blocks. I'm not kidding myself that any of this is non-commercial, despite the absence of conventional commercial spots appearing throughout the shows. This programming has well prepared him to participate in American consumer culture, chock full as it is of Dora games and Mickey Mouse nightlights and Backyardigans CDs. But until very recently the boy had seen very, very few commercial spots. Not only were his shows commercial-free they were also watched via DVR and so could be fast-forwarded, stopped, etc. at parental will.
But now he has discovered commercials. AND HE LOVES THEM.
He's been encountering conventional commercial messages in several ways: during the football games he has taken to watching with his dad, during shows in the Qubo block of programming that runs on Sunday mornings on NBC, even during some of his long-time faves I recorded to DVD off of Nickelodeon (rather than Noggin) in order to bring them along while traveling. The first signs of his fascination with actual commercials--those 20 or 30 second spots I spend much of my life fast-forwarding in my own TV vieiwng--was his use of the phrase "for real." As in, "I really like these chicken nuggets. For real." So cute, I thought, then I began to hear the phrase repeated ad nasuem on the Chucky Cheese sponsorship message running before many Disney Channel shows.
Increasingly, he has asked us to leave the commercials playing rather than fast-forwarding them (as on the home-burned DVDs I mentioned) and often seems more intrigued by the commercials than the football during his sports-bonding time with dad. But I really knew how very enamored he was of commercials when, a couple of days ago, he announced, apropos of nothing, "Available at Target, Walgreens, and CVS."
What did you say?
Available at Target, Walgreens, and CVS.
To M: Did you hear what he said?
Leo: Available at Target Walgreens,and CVS.
Yes, this delightful turn of phrase comes straight from the Chia commercial (as in Chia pets) running during Turbo Dogs, his fave of the NBC-run Qubo block, and a show during which he now expressly forbids fast-forwarding of ads.
The next day we got another of these, this time, "Canada and Puerto Rico!" As in, available for shipping to the US, Canada, and Puerto Rico.
There is only so long one can shield one's children from the horrors of the world.
But now he has discovered commercials. AND HE LOVES THEM.
He's been encountering conventional commercial messages in several ways: during the football games he has taken to watching with his dad, during shows in the Qubo block of programming that runs on Sunday mornings on NBC, even during some of his long-time faves I recorded to DVD off of Nickelodeon (rather than Noggin) in order to bring them along while traveling. The first signs of his fascination with actual commercials--those 20 or 30 second spots I spend much of my life fast-forwarding in my own TV vieiwng--was his use of the phrase "for real." As in, "I really like these chicken nuggets. For real." So cute, I thought, then I began to hear the phrase repeated ad nasuem on the Chucky Cheese sponsorship message running before many Disney Channel shows.
Increasingly, he has asked us to leave the commercials playing rather than fast-forwarding them (as on the home-burned DVDs I mentioned) and often seems more intrigued by the commercials than the football during his sports-bonding time with dad. But I really knew how very enamored he was of commercials when, a couple of days ago, he announced, apropos of nothing, "Available at Target, Walgreens, and CVS."
What did you say?
Available at Target, Walgreens, and CVS.
To M: Did you hear what he said?
Leo: Available at Target Walgreens,and CVS.
Yes, this delightful turn of phrase comes straight from the Chia commercial (as in Chia pets) running during Turbo Dogs, his fave of the NBC-run Qubo block, and a show during which he now expressly forbids fast-forwarding of ads.
The next day we got another of these, this time, "Canada and Puerto Rico!" As in, available for shipping to the US, Canada, and Puerto Rico.
There is only so long one can shield one's children from the horrors of the world.
Friday, July 26, 2013
The greatness of the group
I'm definitely enjoying the return of American Idol to my TV watching these days. As deadly boring as some of the episodes can be (I couldn't watch without benefit of a DVR), as irritating as the judges' banter can be, as ear-splitting as some of the singing can be, a new season of Idol, especially once the competition is on, is pure pleasure. Which of theses kids will become my faves? What kinds of theme weeks will we be subjected to next? How will the "packages" that feed us tantalizing bits about the contestants turn them into characters we know and love--or hate?
After making it to the 5th (yes, 5th!) hour of Idol this week, I was rewarded with one of my favorite kinds of Idol moments--the group number. The series typically delivers group numbers on results show nights, though not on every such episode. With this week's '60s theme and full roster of 24 contestants, we were primed for a group number and, boy, did we get one, complete with '60s get-ups right down to the girls' hair and makeup, which were adorable.
Group numbers like this embody Idol's cheese factor in all its glory. Which is not to say that I enjoy them in a so-good-it's-bad kind of way. I love them instead for their honest-to-goodness wholesomeness. It really matters to these kids' futures that they perform well, that they make us like them, and that earnestness makes such Idol moments sincere. In fact, they remind me most of those icons of wholesome sincerity, the Brady kids, and of those awesome Brady moments when the kids became a singing group and not just a bunch of step-brothers and sisters:
I was way disappointed when the second Idol concert I attended, for season 5, the year of my beloved Elliott Yamin, had many fewer group numbers than the first show I'd seen, the Clay, Reuben, and K.Lo. year, which was pure joy in its plethora of group acts. The reduction in these numbers over the years of the concert seemed to me a sign of the tour becoming more and more of a money-making machine, one that saw no need to invest in the production of new numbers when the fans would still pay money for the tickets and the Idols could just recycle songs they'd sung on the show. I'd still go to another concert, if I were to have the same attachment to the finalists as I did the two years I've attended in the past, but for now I'm holding onto the group numbers I'm getting on screen. Let's hope the bloated results show has the decency to include another next week.
After making it to the 5th (yes, 5th!) hour of Idol this week, I was rewarded with one of my favorite kinds of Idol moments--the group number. The series typically delivers group numbers on results show nights, though not on every such episode. With this week's '60s theme and full roster of 24 contestants, we were primed for a group number and, boy, did we get one, complete with '60s get-ups right down to the girls' hair and makeup, which were adorable.
Group numbers like this embody Idol's cheese factor in all its glory. Which is not to say that I enjoy them in a so-good-it's-bad kind of way. I love them instead for their honest-to-goodness wholesomeness. It really matters to these kids' futures that they perform well, that they make us like them, and that earnestness makes such Idol moments sincere. In fact, they remind me most of those icons of wholesome sincerity, the Brady kids, and of those awesome Brady moments when the kids became a singing group and not just a bunch of step-brothers and sisters:
I was way disappointed when the second Idol concert I attended, for season 5, the year of my beloved Elliott Yamin, had many fewer group numbers than the first show I'd seen, the Clay, Reuben, and K.Lo. year, which was pure joy in its plethora of group acts. The reduction in these numbers over the years of the concert seemed to me a sign of the tour becoming more and more of a money-making machine, one that saw no need to invest in the production of new numbers when the fans would still pay money for the tickets and the Idols could just recycle songs they'd sung on the show. I'd still go to another concert, if I were to have the same attachment to the finalists as I did the two years I've attended in the past, but for now I'm holding onto the group numbers I'm getting on screen. Let's hope the bloated results show has the decency to include another next week.
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Swingtown
Several requests later, I am finally blogging about Swingtown, CBS's summer drama about sex and the '70s. As I've written a book on American television and sex in the '70s, some friends seem to think I must have lots to say about the show. I kind of don't, but I do like the show and so thought I'd say a bit about it here.
I'm a sucker for all things '70s, so I'm surely an easy target, but I've enjoyed the show from the get-go. The pilot laid on the cutesy nostalgia a bit thick--pilots, bah!--but since the series has been a bit more subtle in its efforts to evoke a different time and the possibilities it contained. The show is a bit too much in love with what it sees as the sexual freedom and openness of the '70s. My own sense is that this spirit of liberation was certainly there, but not nearly as widespread as the series makes it out to be, nor as good for men and women alike as it makes it out to be.
That said, the last episode aired, "Go Your Own Way," began to nuance the show's portrait of the times in ways I found interesting. Helen Reddy's "I Am Woman," playing over the final moments was NOT one such nuance. No, it pretty much smacked you over the head with its announcement of Susan's growing awareness of herself as an autonomous being. But who doesn't like that song? So even though it was way unsubtle as the closure to the episode, I enjoyed it anyway (kind of my story about the series as a whole--not all that impressive, but I enjoy it anyway).
My favorite part about this episode was that Trina and Sylvia were throwing a benefit party for Harry Reems, the Deep Throat actor that was threatened with legal reprisals for his participation in the film. Harry was portrayed as a nice guy, a bit geeky even (or maybe that's just my 2008 interpretation of the mustache), who found himself in a circumstance much bigger than he had ever imagined. While I somehow doubt that Reems was as innocent a figure as he seemed here, I loved that the porn actor seemed one of the least sexually threatening men on screen.
The episode was most centered on Molly Parker's Susan. (upper left corner; I love Parker and am eager to see her other work. She's an amazingly likable actor.) She defies her husband, Bruce, in attending the Reems benefit, and is thrilled not so much by the porny titillation but by her newfound sense of social justice in participating in this anti-censorship action, as well as by her circulation in the public sphere without a man at her side. Susan's teenage daughter, Laurie (bottom row, center; with period-perfect Laurie Partridge hair) is an extremely self-possessed young woman, and she cheers on her mother's efforts at independence. I'm totally rooting for those two.
I think I liked this episode most of all so far for several reasons: 1) it showed some glimmers of awareness of women's liberation alongside the gender-neutral sexual liberation that most other episodes have considered. I'm hoping this means this will be a continuing arc. 2) It referenced the media world of the '70s--porn film, not the PG-rated "porn" of TV--but '70s media nonetheless. And 3) it really began to pay off my viewing investment. This deserves a bit more explication, so here goes.
One of the things I love about series television is the way it can pay off your viewing investment. You give it enough time, enough attention, you open yourself to it, and you can get big rewards. What are these rewards? Seeing characters you've come to "know" act in expected--and unexpected--ways. Having knowledge you've acquired about characters inform something those characters do, and thus allowing you to see multiple levels of meaning in their actions or words. And the way that, when done well, you don't really have to work all that hard for those meanings, those levels, they are laid out for you in aesthetically pleasing but relatively straightforward ways. Anyone can "get" it, anyone, that is, who has put in the time and the attention, something not everyone is willing to do for their TV. That TV rewards time and attention, commitment and patience, is one of the things I love about it. And it's a reward I felt I got in Swingtown's "Go Your Own Way."
I'm a sucker for all things '70s, so I'm surely an easy target, but I've enjoyed the show from the get-go. The pilot laid on the cutesy nostalgia a bit thick--pilots, bah!--but since the series has been a bit more subtle in its efforts to evoke a different time and the possibilities it contained. The show is a bit too much in love with what it sees as the sexual freedom and openness of the '70s. My own sense is that this spirit of liberation was certainly there, but not nearly as widespread as the series makes it out to be, nor as good for men and women alike as it makes it out to be.
That said, the last episode aired, "Go Your Own Way," began to nuance the show's portrait of the times in ways I found interesting. Helen Reddy's "I Am Woman," playing over the final moments was NOT one such nuance. No, it pretty much smacked you over the head with its announcement of Susan's growing awareness of herself as an autonomous being. But who doesn't like that song? So even though it was way unsubtle as the closure to the episode, I enjoyed it anyway (kind of my story about the series as a whole--not all that impressive, but I enjoy it anyway).
My favorite part about this episode was that Trina and Sylvia were throwing a benefit party for Harry Reems, the Deep Throat actor that was threatened with legal reprisals for his participation in the film. Harry was portrayed as a nice guy, a bit geeky even (or maybe that's just my 2008 interpretation of the mustache), who found himself in a circumstance much bigger than he had ever imagined. While I somehow doubt that Reems was as innocent a figure as he seemed here, I loved that the porn actor seemed one of the least sexually threatening men on screen.
The episode was most centered on Molly Parker's Susan. (upper left corner; I love Parker and am eager to see her other work. She's an amazingly likable actor.) She defies her husband, Bruce, in attending the Reems benefit, and is thrilled not so much by the porny titillation but by her newfound sense of social justice in participating in this anti-censorship action, as well as by her circulation in the public sphere without a man at her side. Susan's teenage daughter, Laurie (bottom row, center; with period-perfect Laurie Partridge hair) is an extremely self-possessed young woman, and she cheers on her mother's efforts at independence. I'm totally rooting for those two.
I think I liked this episode most of all so far for several reasons: 1) it showed some glimmers of awareness of women's liberation alongside the gender-neutral sexual liberation that most other episodes have considered. I'm hoping this means this will be a continuing arc. 2) It referenced the media world of the '70s--porn film, not the PG-rated "porn" of TV--but '70s media nonetheless. And 3) it really began to pay off my viewing investment. This deserves a bit more explication, so here goes.
One of the things I love about series television is the way it can pay off your viewing investment. You give it enough time, enough attention, you open yourself to it, and you can get big rewards. What are these rewards? Seeing characters you've come to "know" act in expected--and unexpected--ways. Having knowledge you've acquired about characters inform something those characters do, and thus allowing you to see multiple levels of meaning in their actions or words. And the way that, when done well, you don't really have to work all that hard for those meanings, those levels, they are laid out for you in aesthetically pleasing but relatively straightforward ways. Anyone can "get" it, anyone, that is, who has put in the time and the attention, something not everyone is willing to do for their TV. That TV rewards time and attention, commitment and patience, is one of the things I love about it. And it's a reward I felt I got in Swingtown's "Go Your Own Way."
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Cheetah Mounts APTMM2B Flush Tilt Dual Hook (1.3" from wall) Flat Screen TV Wall Mount Bracket for 32-65 inch Plasma, LED, and LCD TVs Up To VESA 700x400 and 165lbs, Including 10' Braided High Speed with Ethernet HDMI Cable and 3-Axis Magnetic Bubble Level
Features
- Top Selling Mount at Amazon for Two Years (100% Lifetime Guaranty) Stronger (Dual Hook) with Less Metal GREEN Design
- Flush-Tilt design is only 1.3" from wall while still providing 15 degrees tilt
- Supports up to VESA 700x400 (including 65" Panasonics) and up to 165LBS
- Fits Up To 24" Studs With An Additional 3" of Side-to-Side Adjustment (11" of adjustment on 16" Studs)
- Included 10' Braided Cable Supports 1080P, 3D, Ethernet, and Audio Return conforming to Lastest HDMI 1.4 Standard
List Price: $40.99
Special Offer: check this out!
Related Products
- CH Hanson 03040 Magnetic Stud Finder
- DataComm 45-0001-WH 1-Gang Recessed Low Voltage Cable Plate (White)
- Datacomm 50-3323-WH-KIT Flat Panel TV Cable Organizer Kit with Power Solution - White
- Arlington LVCE1-2 Low Voltage Mounting Bracket with Cable Wall Plate, 1-Gang, 2-Pack
- VIZIO E601i-A3 60-inch 1080p 120Hz Razor LED Smart HDTV
Product Description
This mount fits essentially all 32-65" TVs sold today including any TV with a hole pattern from 100x100 to 700x400mm. From the initial APTMM2B design in 1999 until today, this mount has seen continuous improvement to keep pace with the state-of-the-art 1080P 3D TVs available today. The initial design which extended 3.5" from the wall has been reduced to 1.3" while still achieving 15 degrees of tilt to improve your viewing angle and reduce glare. To help our environment, our latest design achieves the same 165lbs of holding capacity with less than 6lbs of steel, which we refer to as the Stronger (Dual Hook) with Less Metal GREEN Design. US homes typically have either 16" or 24" studs. The APTMM2B is 27" wide allowing for up to 3" of side-to side adjustment even on 24" studs. Because of this, you may be able to see the APTMM2B mount behind smaller TVs and you may instead want to consider the Cheetah APTMSB for smaller TVs. When wall mounting a TV, often the 6' cables that come with many component devices such as DVD players, will not quite reach. So we include a full 10' HDMI cable adhering to the latest 1.4 HDMI standard and capable of carrying a 1080P 3D signal including Ethernet and Audio Return. This mount also ships with a full set of hardware to both mount your TV to the wall (either wood stud or cement) and to your TV (including 4, 5, 6 and 8mm screw sets). Lastly, your mount ships with a bubble level on the mount and a separate 6" 3-axis magnetic bubble level and approximately 3mm of rotation adjustment on the studs screw slots to help ensure that you achieve a level and enjoyable display. We have done our best to ensure that you will enjoy your mount, but should you be dissatisfied with ANYTHING in your mount purchase, we welcome your feedback and the opportunity to assist you. Please never hesitate to contact us and let us show you what we mean by a true lifetime 100% guarantee.
App and Apk ANDROID DEVELOPMENT Cheetah Mounts APTMM2B Flush Tilt Dual Hook (1.3 from wall) Flat Screen TV Wall Mount Bracket for 32-65 inch Plasma, LED, and LCD TVs Up To VESA 700400 and ... Jumbo TV Depot Cheetah Mounts APTMM2B Flush Tilt Dual Hook (1.3" from wall) Flat Screen TV Wall Mount Bracket for 32-65 inch Plasma, LED, and LCD TVs Up To VESA 700x400 and 165lbs ... Amazon.com : Cheetah Mounts APTMM2B Flush Tilt Dual Hook (1.3 ... This mount fits essentially all 32-65" TVs sold today including any TV with a hole pattern from 100x100 to 700x400mm. From the initial APTMM2B design in 1999 until ... Cheetah Flat Screen TV Wall Mount And Bracket Review Well, you've got your new LED or Plasma flat screen TV. Now what do you do with it? That's where a Cheetah TV wall mount or bracket comes into play. Amazon.com : Cheetah Mounts 32"-55" Articulating LCD TV Wall Mount ... Cheetah Mounts APTMM2B Flush Tilt Dual Hook (1.3" from wall) Flat Screen TV
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Busy, busy
Much to do of late, as I am teaching two new courses this semester. One, a large introductory lecture, the other a graduate seminar. Both are going well but extremely time-consuming. Plus lots of TV to manage--always a challenge in Idol season. Those of you in the teaching/learning biz might be interested in the website for my lecture course, Television and Radio in American Society, and the class blog for my seminar in Gender and Popular Culture. The latter is great thanks to my super duper students. Too tired after a rousing seminar today to say much of note, but here's a few recent, random-ish thoughts on TV and other media consumed:
-- The sexism and homophobia of Idol is really bugging me this season. The excessive discussion of the female contestants' attractiveness when their singing stinks? Ryan and Simon's homophobic taunts? Yuck.
-- But I join the bandwagon of excitement around hometown boy Danny Gokey. I just want him to make it to the top 3 so I can go to his home visit festivities! Though I am convinced I know that Adam Lambert from somewhere. Anyone know if he was a student at UW-Madison or Milwaukee at some point?
-- Mamma Mia is quite absurd, isn't it? But I was amazed to see a Hollywood product so baldly designed for the pleasure of middle-aged women.
-- I liked the Hugh Jackman-hosted Oscars. The individual tributes for the acting awards were nice, but I found those for the actresses way more moving and genuine than those for the men. Better acting or just greater comfort with the emotional display?
-- Fascinated with the new Disney XD channel for boys and its flagship series Aaron Stone. I may a have a paper in me on this one.
-- Finally finished watching last season's episodes of Lipstick Jungle. Gotta say, I really like that show. I think it's a case of a show one may watch but is not supposed to discuss.
-- I was so saddened by the "special" GH reflecting on what would have happened if Maxie had died and B.J. had lived woe those many years ago when the show was THE AWESOME. Kirsten Storms gave it her all with her sassy commentary but too much of it just made no sense for those with any awareness of the show's history. Carly got involved with Tony only AFTER BJ had died. Bobbie and Tony were as solid as soap couples come before losing their child. Makes no sense that Carly would have been married to Tony in the scenario they offered. And why no recognition that Lulu and BJ were cousins? And why did Maxie's absence have anything to do with Johnny becoming a jr. Sonny? So lame. The show just makes me sad, sad, sad.
-- To end more hopefully, do you know how many free magazines one can acquire by agreeing to free trial issues with no-obligation cancellations? And once you're in the system, they just keep offering you more free issues every time you cancel.
-- The sexism and homophobia of Idol is really bugging me this season. The excessive discussion of the female contestants' attractiveness when their singing stinks? Ryan and Simon's homophobic taunts? Yuck.
-- But I join the bandwagon of excitement around hometown boy Danny Gokey. I just want him to make it to the top 3 so I can go to his home visit festivities! Though I am convinced I know that Adam Lambert from somewhere. Anyone know if he was a student at UW-Madison or Milwaukee at some point?
-- Mamma Mia is quite absurd, isn't it? But I was amazed to see a Hollywood product so baldly designed for the pleasure of middle-aged women.
-- I liked the Hugh Jackman-hosted Oscars. The individual tributes for the acting awards were nice, but I found those for the actresses way more moving and genuine than those for the men. Better acting or just greater comfort with the emotional display?
-- Fascinated with the new Disney XD channel for boys and its flagship series Aaron Stone. I may a have a paper in me on this one.
-- Finally finished watching last season's episodes of Lipstick Jungle. Gotta say, I really like that show. I think it's a case of a show one may watch but is not supposed to discuss.
-- I was so saddened by the "special" GH reflecting on what would have happened if Maxie had died and B.J. had lived woe those many years ago when the show was THE AWESOME. Kirsten Storms gave it her all with her sassy commentary but too much of it just made no sense for those with any awareness of the show's history. Carly got involved with Tony only AFTER BJ had died. Bobbie and Tony were as solid as soap couples come before losing their child. Makes no sense that Carly would have been married to Tony in the scenario they offered. And why no recognition that Lulu and BJ were cousins? And why did Maxie's absence have anything to do with Johnny becoming a jr. Sonny? So lame. The show just makes me sad, sad, sad.
-- To end more hopefully, do you know how many free magazines one can acquire by agreeing to free trial issues with no-obligation cancellations? And once you're in the system, they just keep offering you more free issues every time you cancel.
Monday, July 1, 2013
Soaps and the writers' strike
As the WGA strike wears on, I have moments of panic about what it all means for the future of TV. I'm still full up on shows to watch, from those stockpiled on the DVR, the few still trickling across the pipeline, and DVDs too numerous to list. I'm also still getting my daily soap dose. General Hospital, my soap of choice for, well, ever has finally run out of episodes written by the show's regular writing team and is now airing episodes credited to just one writer. This writer is a regular staff member who has presumably gone "fi-core," which I understand to mean officially giving up his WGA membership but still paying guild dues and receiving guild benefits. The LA Times and NY Times have both covered the matter of late, mentioning that some soap writers have taken on this status, including the head writers for ABC's All My Children. Presumably neither the AMC headwriting team (of 2) or the GH writer who has been credited on the episodes I have seen thus far (I'm perpetually a few days behind in my viewing) could write five one hour scripts per week, so I assume other, uncredited writers, a.k.a. scabs, are pitching in.
From a storytelling standpoint, the GH situation is especially fascinating. Audiences have been EXTREMELY disgruntled with the show lately, as these criticisms of the regular head writer show. Now, the internet has made the grumbling of soap fans especially amplified, but the level of vitriol on the part of fans seems stronger than ever to me these days. I myself am religiously devoted to the show--I've probably missed only a handful of episodes over 26 years--and have been so, so unhappy with it lately. The detailed reasons why are too involved to explain in full here, but some of these include storytelling that moves very quickly and without much narrative logic, little to no time on character development, such that it is difficult to understand the characters' motivations for anything they do, and a disturbing amount of misogyny.
That is, until the fi-core writing began. Granted, I've only seen a few days of this so far but . . . I kinda like it. I need to watch more before I figure out exactly why--and see if this impression holds--but the show has incorporated humor again, something sorely lacking of late; it has humanized characters (I'm thinking here primarily of Ric Lansing, for those familiar with the show) whose traits had previously seemed entirely plot-dictated (bad guy one day, without a clear motivation, good guy the next); and, most importantly, I think it has been taking the time to give us scenes about little more than characters interacting, or thinking about one another, or having experiences that are revealing of them as characters but not especially focused on plot development. If indeed this is the case--and I do need more time to be sure--I'm certain it is a deliberate strategy to stretch things out, to fritter away some time until the "real" writing resumes. But it has taken me back to some of the things I've always liked best about soaps, and about my soap and its characters in particular. I like just wandering around their world, knowing it intimately.
I've always said that my favorite days on GH are holidays because on those days nothing really happens. Lots of characters are on and they hang out and celebrate Christmas or Thanksgiving or the 4th of July. Sure, they talk about things related to the current stories, but these days are typically just about spending time with my TV friends. I'm starting to think it might be Christmas every day on GH for a awhile.
From a storytelling standpoint, the GH situation is especially fascinating. Audiences have been EXTREMELY disgruntled with the show lately, as these criticisms of the regular head writer show. Now, the internet has made the grumbling of soap fans especially amplified, but the level of vitriol on the part of fans seems stronger than ever to me these days. I myself am religiously devoted to the show--I've probably missed only a handful of episodes over 26 years--and have been so, so unhappy with it lately. The detailed reasons why are too involved to explain in full here, but some of these include storytelling that moves very quickly and without much narrative logic, little to no time on character development, such that it is difficult to understand the characters' motivations for anything they do, and a disturbing amount of misogyny.
That is, until the fi-core writing began. Granted, I've only seen a few days of this so far but . . . I kinda like it. I need to watch more before I figure out exactly why--and see if this impression holds--but the show has incorporated humor again, something sorely lacking of late; it has humanized characters (I'm thinking here primarily of Ric Lansing, for those familiar with the show) whose traits had previously seemed entirely plot-dictated (bad guy one day, without a clear motivation, good guy the next); and, most importantly, I think it has been taking the time to give us scenes about little more than characters interacting, or thinking about one another, or having experiences that are revealing of them as characters but not especially focused on plot development. If indeed this is the case--and I do need more time to be sure--I'm certain it is a deliberate strategy to stretch things out, to fritter away some time until the "real" writing resumes. But it has taken me back to some of the things I've always liked best about soaps, and about my soap and its characters in particular. I like just wandering around their world, knowing it intimately.
I've always said that my favorite days on GH are holidays because on those days nothing really happens. Lots of characters are on and they hang out and celebrate Christmas or Thanksgiving or the 4th of July. Sure, they talk about things related to the current stories, but these days are typically just about spending time with my TV friends. I'm starting to think it might be Christmas every day on GH for a awhile.
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Video catalog
I've been a TV time-shifter since the early 1980s, when my family purchased our first VCR. My early-adopter dad got a top-loading VCR in 1981, right around the same time my mom and I were hearing so much talk about this Luke and Laura and this General Hospital. We decided to check it out, as we could videotape the show during the day and watch it after school/in the evening. The rest of that tale is a history for another time. But I soon began to videotape and time-shift my viewing of most everything I watched, a practice that became a full-fledged part of my life when I went off to college later in the '80s. I wasn't particularly concerned with archiving most of what I taped; I time-shifted then (as now) for convenience and efficiency of viewing, and to avoid commercials (no, I am not one of those DVR users who still watches the ads). But I did begin to save tapes of some of my favorite episodes. As I began to study television more formally in college, some of this taping-and-saving was for particular uses--a paper I was writing, etc. But most of my archival practices were still fan-motivated. I kept this up during my few years between college and grad school. By this point, however, I was pretty clearly a media-scholar-to-be and so I began to get more serious abut what I saved. With graduate school, I continued to tape and save, though still selectively. Unlike at least one of my graduate school colleagues, I did not save everything I recorded. Still, over the years I built up a nice library of tapes, including some off-the-air recordings from the '80s and early '90s.
Over the last few years, I've been working on transferring all of these tapes to DVD. It is still, of course, an imperfect archival medium, but schlepping boxes and boxes of tapes from move to move was seeming more and more ridiculous with the streamlined world of DVD there for the taking. I have reluctantly disposed of the VHS tapes as I've gone along, but it is always a bit painful to let them go. The dubbing project is going somewhat slowly, in large part because I'm always doing some sort of over-the-air archiving at the same time. My biggest ongoing over-the-air effort is saving all of the Ryan's Hope episodes airing on Soapnet (the channel runs the soap's episodes from its debut in 1975 to the end of 1981. Though RH aired until 1989, I have been told that music rights issues keep Soapnet from airing the post-'81 eps). But I've been archiving lots of other soap material, as well, and have saved full or nearly full runs of various prime-time series, too.
All of this may seem somewhat futile and old-fashioned in an age of YouTube and TV-on-DVD, but so much material remains unavailable in these formats, so much of it still seems fleeting (on YouTube today, gone tomorrow), and so much of it is partial (either clips of episodes or less than full runs of series) that I remain a tenacious archivist. I seem to get more and more serious about this as I get older. Perhaps it is nostalgia for the past; perhaps it is an inherent suspicion of new technologies; perhaps it is just experience that has taught me how devalued most TV still is.
The best part of these efforts has been my simultaneous creation of a video catalog that allows me to find whatever I need quickly and easily, and that gives me a collectors' geeky pride whenever I look at it. I'm getting close to having a thousand disks (most of which have from 2 to 13 TV episodes on them) and this darn catalog is as much a point of pride for me as is my book, or my child (OK, OK, I'm pretty much kidding there, but I do love my Excel spreadsheet beyond reason). To love a thing like television is to be protective of it--little boxes on a spreadsheet and a line-up of disc carrying cases is one of the best ways I know to preserve a piece of my own connection to the tube.
Over the last few years, I've been working on transferring all of these tapes to DVD. It is still, of course, an imperfect archival medium, but schlepping boxes and boxes of tapes from move to move was seeming more and more ridiculous with the streamlined world of DVD there for the taking. I have reluctantly disposed of the VHS tapes as I've gone along, but it is always a bit painful to let them go. The dubbing project is going somewhat slowly, in large part because I'm always doing some sort of over-the-air archiving at the same time. My biggest ongoing over-the-air effort is saving all of the Ryan's Hope episodes airing on Soapnet (the channel runs the soap's episodes from its debut in 1975 to the end of 1981. Though RH aired until 1989, I have been told that music rights issues keep Soapnet from airing the post-'81 eps). But I've been archiving lots of other soap material, as well, and have saved full or nearly full runs of various prime-time series, too.
All of this may seem somewhat futile and old-fashioned in an age of YouTube and TV-on-DVD, but so much material remains unavailable in these formats, so much of it still seems fleeting (on YouTube today, gone tomorrow), and so much of it is partial (either clips of episodes or less than full runs of series) that I remain a tenacious archivist. I seem to get more and more serious about this as I get older. Perhaps it is nostalgia for the past; perhaps it is an inherent suspicion of new technologies; perhaps it is just experience that has taught me how devalued most TV still is.
The best part of these efforts has been my simultaneous creation of a video catalog that allows me to find whatever I need quickly and easily, and that gives me a collectors' geeky pride whenever I look at it. I'm getting close to having a thousand disks (most of which have from 2 to 13 TV episodes on them) and this darn catalog is as much a point of pride for me as is my book, or my child (OK, OK, I'm pretty much kidding there, but I do love my Excel spreadsheet beyond reason). To love a thing like television is to be protective of it--little boxes on a spreadsheet and a line-up of disc carrying cases is one of the best ways I know to preserve a piece of my own connection to the tube.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
G-Box Midnight MX2 Android 4.2 Jelly Bean Dual Core XBMC Streaming Mini HTPC TV Box Player
Features
- True 1080p Dual Core XBMC HD Decoding*! High performance Dual Core A9 CPU paired with the powerful Mali400 Dual Core 3D GPU Graphics Processor = Insane Android Performance. The MX2 has twice as much power as the original Midnight which provides the best Android experience available from any other competing product. Watch your favorite movies and live streams with vivid and smooth playback. Hook up a USB mouse (not included) and play your favorite Android games on the big screen!
- Over-The-Air updating means you never have to worry about complicated and cumbersome firmware installations. We'll be adding new features over time so that you can love your MX2 even more. Software updates will be sent to you automatically and you can install them at your convenience, easily.
- So many options! Unlike Roku and Apple TV, the MX2 is free of any restrictions and never needs to be jail-broken. So go ahead, install your favorite apps and customize away! With the MX2 you're not limited so you can personalize the experience the way that you like. The 8GB internal storage gives you space and freedom to install apps without having to always worry about running out of space.
- Includes the Special Edition XBMC designed by elite developers specializing in XBMC specifically for the Midnight MX2 provides the best experience with Android 4.2.x which is available on authentic G-Box products! Tons of free streaming add-ons available for XBMC so quit paying for cable.
- The best warranty in the WORLD. Your box is already covered no matter what happens to it. So go ahead and hack away and live worry-free because your device is covered unconditionally for 1yr from purchase direct from Matricom. The MX2 has been updated to Android 4.2.2 giving you the latest Android experience and will automatically update to later versions of Android and apps seamlessly from the internet! *1080p decoded videos are scaled to 720p in XBMC.
List Price: $119.00
Special Offer: check this out!
Related Products
- iPazzPort 2.4GHz Mini Wireless Fly Air Mouse Keyboard with IR Remote
- Hausbell (TM) Mini H7 2.4GHz Wireless Entertainment Keyboard with Touchpad for PC, Pad, Andriod TV Box, Google TV Box, Xbox360, PS3 & HTPC/IPTV
- Logitech Wireless Touch Keyboard K400 with Built-In Multi-Touch Touchpad (920-003070)
- Hausbell (TM) Mini H7 2.4GHz Wireless Entertainment Keyboard with Touchpad for PC, Pad, Andriod TV Box, Google TV Box, Xbox360, PS3 & HTPC/IPTV
- FAVI Entertainment SmartStick Wireless Keyboard with Touchpad Mouse, FE02RF-BL (Black)
Product Description
About G-Box Midnight MX2:
The G-Box Midnight MX2 by Matricom brings high performance HD streaming from the internet and local media to your TV. The powerful dual core MX processor with the Mali-400 3D graphics engine provides stellar performance for high definition video playback. XBMC runs smoothly with 1080p hardware decoding from local media and your favorite XBMC streaming add-ons.
More Features than Roku and Apple TV CombinedLooking for more than just a simple streaming box? The MX2 does it all. Running the full Android 4.2.2 OS gives you the ability to run virtually any Android app on your TV. Streaming just happens to be only one of the many things that the MX2 is really great at.
Automatic Online Updating:With over-the-air updating, the MX2 will ensure that it's software is up-to-date and brings the newest updates and bug fixes for Android and XBMC to your device seamlessly.
G-Box Midnight MX2 Specifications:* Amlogic A9 Dual Core Neon HD CPU
* Mali400 Dual Core High Performance 3D GPU
* 1GB RAM (DDR3)
* 8GB Total Internal Storage
* USB Storage Extendable (Flash Drives/HDD)
* SD Storage Extendable (Up to 32GB!)
* 802.11b/g/n internal Wifi
* HDMI v1.4 video output
* 10/100 Ethernet Port
* Coaxial SPDIF Digital Audio Output (Surround Sound)
* Composite Audio/Video Out
* 4x USB 2.0 Ports
* Android 4.2.x Jelly Bean installed
* Supports Wireless USB Keyboard/Mouse
* Google Play Store installed
This device is manufacturerd by Matricom and features a 1yr extensive device warranty. Support is available online by Matricom and through the G-Box community.
Dual Core 1.6Ghz Android 4.0 Mini PC - Android 4.0 Mini PC ... Android HDMI SmartTV Mini PC - http://www.chinavasion.com/di20-HomeA... - Android 4.0, Dual Core 1.6Ghz CPU, WiFi N, HD 1080P Android TV 4.0 HDMI Mini PC ... android tv eBay - Electronics, Cars, Fashion, Collectables ... newly listed android mx2 xbmc best version you will find media tv player jailbroken jailbreak G-Box Midnight MX2 Android MiniPCs and TVBoxes Update 5/29/2013: Brad Linder (@bradlinder) described XBMC running in Linux on a TV box with an Amlogic AM8726-MX chip (video) in a 5/29/2013 post to his Liliputing blog: G-Box Midnight MX2 Android 4.2 Jelly Bean Dual Core XBMC Streaming ... About G-Box Midnight MX2: The G-Box Midnight MX2 by Matricom brings high performance HD streaming from the internet and local media to your TV. The powerful dual core ... YouTube http://tinyurl.com/chkt3lp G Box Midnight MX2 Android 4 2 More Customer Reviews android xbmc eBay - Electronics, Cars, Fashion, Collectibles ... Newly listed Android Mini PC MK808 Dual Core HD Media Player XBMC Wifi 2.4Ghz Wireless Mouse Matricom G-Box MX2 Roku Killer? New Matricom G-Box MX2 - Kick Ass Streamer Does Roku need to worry about the MX2? Matricom's newest streamer the Android and XBMC based G-Box MX2, is going full ... Android TV Box maakt van je TV een Entertainment systeem Films, Games Android TV Box ook wel bekend als Google TV is een krachtige mini computer op Android. HDMI 3d HD film kijken op 1080P, Internet, games, facebook, youtube Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: G-Box Midnight MX2 Android 4.2 Jelly ... 2.0 out of 5 stars BEWARE: does not output 1080p video The player only outputs 720p video, not 1080p. I purchased for 1080p viewing. The description is misleading ... G-Box Midnight Android 4 TV Box With Genuine Hologram: Amazon.co ... Firstly, I also have an Apple TV2 with XBMC on board. Have been happy with how that functions - using add-ons and also streaming my own content stored locally on a NAS.
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Mele A1000 1080p Android 4.0 Internet Tv Set Top Box w/ Wifi / Optical / 3 X USB / Hdmi / LAN / Sd
Features
- Mele A1000 1080P Android 4.0 Internet TV Set Top Box w/ WiFi / OPTICAL / 3 x USB / HDMI / LAN / SD
- Dimensions: 6.89 in x 4.33 in x 1.85 in (17.5 cm x 11.0 cm x 4.7 cm)
- Weight: 14.32 oz (406 g)
List Price:
Special Offer: check this out!
Product Description
Description:
Model:Mele-A1000
Casing:Plastic
Color:Black
CPU:ARM CortexA8 1GHz
Memory:DDR3 512MB RAM / 4GB Nand Flash
OS System:Android 4.0
External Storage:Supports SD card up to 32GB, supports 2.5" SATA HDD up to 1TB, Supports max 16GB USB flash disk
Video coding:HD MPEG1 / 2 / 4.H.264.HD AVC / VC-1,RM/RMVB, Xvid/ DviX4 / 5 / 6, RealVideo8 / 9/10, VP6
Video Format:ts / m2ts / tp / trp / mkv / mp4 / mov /avi /rm / rmvb / wmv / vob / asf / flv / da / mpf / mpeg
Audio Format:MP3/WMA/WMV/OGG/FLAC /MKV
Subtitle Format:SRT/SMI/SSA/ASS
Network interface:RJ45(10/100Mbps)
WiFi:802.11b/g/n
Interfaces:SD/SDHC + 3 x USB HOST + OPTICAL +LAN + HDMI + VIDEO + L + R + VGA
Features:HDMI 1.4 and support for 3D playback. Internet TV box, Software application supported, 1080P media player, QQ/MSN/Skype etc.
Language:Simplified Chinese/Traditional Chinese/English
Accessories:
1 x 2.5 HDD cover
1 x AV cable (130cm)
1 x AC 100~240V power adapter (2-flat-pin plug / 110cm cable)
1 x Remote controller (2 x AAA batteries not included)
1 x Chinese & English manual
Amazon.com: Mele A2000 TV Box Full HD Internet Media Player ... Turn your TV into a mini computer smart TV (through Android 4.0) Android 4.0 - Play Game, Skype, watch video and etc on your TV; Support 2.5" SATA HDD up to 1TB ... 2012 New Hot sale Mele A2000 TV Box Android 4.0 hd media player ... 2012 New Hot sale Mele A2000 TV Box Android 4.0 hd media player 1080p allwinner a10 CPU +free HDMI cable +3 years warranty! .org - ... Medal of Honor Tier 1 Operator ... Android Tv Box Quad Core-Buy Cheap Android Tv Box Quad Core lots ... Buy Android Tv Box Quad Core from Reliable China Android Tv Box Quad Core suppliers.Find Quality Android Tv Box Quad Core at Consumer Electronics,Set-top Boxes, and ... Ubuntu 10.04 Running on Mele A1000 1080P Internet TV Set Top Box ... SPEC: WiFi 3USB HDMI LAN SD Buy Here: http://www.airaccent.com/mele-a1000-1080p-android-23-internet-tv-set-top-box-w-wifi-optical-3-x-usb-hdmi-lan-sd-p ... Mini PC barato, comprar Google Android TV / WIFI Jugadores Media ... 1080P HD Media Player Android 2.2 w / HDMI / USB / YPbPr / COAXIAL / OPTICAL / LAN / SD - Modelo: M6 - Material de la carcasa de plstico - Full HD 1080p de salida ... What is the A10? Specs, Devices and Resources - Linux Device Hacking Thanks!! Here is a very good one for the Mele: http://lundman.net/wiki/index.php/MeLe_A2000 Lundman also has a lot of good files on his FTP site. 7dayshop Android 4.2 Dual Core Wireless Internet TV: Amazon.co.uk ... 7dayshop Android 4.2 (Jellybean) Dual Core Wireless Internet TV Box Media Centre Full HD HDMI 1080p & XBMC Support by 7dayshop Cheap Mini PC, Buy Google Android TV/ WIFI Network Media Players - DX 1080P HD Android 2.2 Media Player w/ HDMI / USB / YPbPr / COAXIAL / OPTICAL / LAN / SD - Model: M6 - Plastic housing material - Full HD 1080P video output - Supports ... Amazon.com : Mele A1000 1080p Android 4.0 Internet Tv Set Top Box ... Description: Model:Mele-A1000 Casing:Plastic Color:Black CPU:ARM CortexA8 1GHz Memory:DDR3 512MB RAM / 4GB Nand Flash OS System:Android 4.0 External Storage:Supports ...
iPod TV
I've mentioned previously watching video on my iPod while working out, so I thought I'd post a bit more about this. I've always thought that I would be much more motivated to exercise if I could watch TV while doing it. As I've never really had the space or desire to fill my home with serious exercise equipment, this means that my workouts typically take place elsewhere (e.g., my neighborhood gym, which is actually a community fitness center). The standard TVs that appear in most gyms do no good for my TV-watching-while-exercising desires. I don't want to watch just any TV, I want to watch things I want to watch. I do love TV, but I never said I wasn't choosy about the TV I love to watch. So the introduction of a video iPod into my household within the last year has been a great addition.
This past fall, the networks' new practice of offering the pilots for many new series for free on iTunes greatly assisted my old practice of watching all network (and most cable) scripted series at least once. I'm still a free iTunes junkie and will watch a wider range of shows there than I might otherwise choose to record and watch. So I recently got to check in with Kyle XY again (still don't think I'm missing anything there) and got to watch the first episode of the endearing Scott Baio is 46 . . . and pregnant. As a childhood Happy Days devotee and a generally proud product of the '70s, Scott Baio is of course very close to my heart. I got a real kick out of Scott Baio is 45 and single last summer, and so was happy to get to see the next phase in Scott reality TV drama. This series is shot in the Laguna Beach/Hills model--no "confessionals," no talking head interviews--just you-are-there footage of Scott and his buds bumbling through middle age. An added bonus is that one of those buds is Jason Hervey, the actor who played Wayne Arnold, Kevin Arnold's obnoxious big brother in one of my '80s TV faves, The Wonder Years. (Hmm . . . I'm sensing something about my past preferences for nostalgia TV . . . ) So I get Chachi and Wayne--what more could a girl want? [Sometime I'll have to write about my fondness for the animated kids' show, Oswald, a fondness primarily rooted in my adoration of Fred Savage, who voices octopus Oswald and was, of course, the Wonder Years' darling protagonist.]
But I really, really digress from the iPod at the gym thing. Today I began to watch the pilot of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles while at the gym. Now, I'm not done with it yet but I like it so far--strong women characters, lots of action. There is no way the money that was put into this pilot will appear in the later episodes and I can see how the on-the-run formula might get old. But here's my secret: I like pretty much anything I watch on the iPod at the gym. I think the fact that I am watching TV that I want to watch at the same time that I am working out is just too perfect a confluence of efficiency, productivity, and pleasure to make me anything but gleeful. (Maybe this explains my pleasure in the Lost recap, too.)
That said, I do find that I especially enjoy sitcoms and other half-hour programming viewed this way. Perhaps if I had a fancy new iPod Touch or some other device with a bigger screen and a better quality image, I'd enjoy dramas more. But the bright lighting, clear sound, and easy-to-follow plots of half-hour comedies fit that little screen and my sweating self just beautifully.
This past fall, the networks' new practice of offering the pilots for many new series for free on iTunes greatly assisted my old practice of watching all network (and most cable) scripted series at least once. I'm still a free iTunes junkie and will watch a wider range of shows there than I might otherwise choose to record and watch. So I recently got to check in with Kyle XY again (still don't think I'm missing anything there) and got to watch the first episode of the endearing Scott Baio is 46 . . . and pregnant. As a childhood Happy Days devotee and a generally proud product of the '70s, Scott Baio is of course very close to my heart. I got a real kick out of Scott Baio is 45 and single last summer, and so was happy to get to see the next phase in Scott reality TV drama. This series is shot in the Laguna Beach/Hills model--no "confessionals," no talking head interviews--just you-are-there footage of Scott and his buds bumbling through middle age. An added bonus is that one of those buds is Jason Hervey, the actor who played Wayne Arnold, Kevin Arnold's obnoxious big brother in one of my '80s TV faves, The Wonder Years. (Hmm . . . I'm sensing something about my past preferences for nostalgia TV . . . ) So I get Chachi and Wayne--what more could a girl want? [Sometime I'll have to write about my fondness for the animated kids' show, Oswald, a fondness primarily rooted in my adoration of Fred Savage, who voices octopus Oswald and was, of course, the Wonder Years' darling protagonist.]
But I really, really digress from the iPod at the gym thing. Today I began to watch the pilot of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles while at the gym. Now, I'm not done with it yet but I like it so far--strong women characters, lots of action. There is no way the money that was put into this pilot will appear in the later episodes and I can see how the on-the-run formula might get old. But here's my secret: I like pretty much anything I watch on the iPod at the gym. I think the fact that I am watching TV that I want to watch at the same time that I am working out is just too perfect a confluence of efficiency, productivity, and pleasure to make me anything but gleeful. (Maybe this explains my pleasure in the Lost recap, too.)
That said, I do find that I especially enjoy sitcoms and other half-hour programming viewed this way. Perhaps if I had a fancy new iPod Touch or some other device with a bigger screen and a better quality image, I'd enjoy dramas more. But the bright lighting, clear sound, and easy-to-follow plots of half-hour comedies fit that little screen and my sweating self just beautifully.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)