Plank to the Face

Is Avatar all that?

2010-02-13T15:31:00.004-06:00

As I post this, I've only seen 5 of the 10 films nominated, and my favorite film of the year got snubbed. (Sorry, but I loved "The Hangover". Actors always say comedy is the most difficult yet it always gets ignored come award time.) Meanwhile, "Avatar" had a successful run through the award season, leaving its sight on an Academy Award for Best Picture. And while the number of nominations has been expanded to ten this year, will that really stand in its way? "Avatar" seems to be the favorite for this year, but is it really the best picture of the year?
I guess the honor of "Best Picture" is a relatively subjective idea. Over the years, it's been amazing the number of films that didn't win the big award, yet became part of our cultural landscape. "Raging Bull", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Fatal Attraction", "Field of Dreams" and "Pulp Fiction" are some of the movies in the last thirty years nominated for the top prize, yet somehow falling short, in some cases to films that are no longer really remembered or required repeat viewing. That will not be the case for "Avatar", but for me, the film comes down to the visual than the actual story.
What James Cameron did with "Avatar" in terms of technology is amazing. While I didn't have the opportunity to see it at an IMAX theater, watching it on the large screen, Cameron transported me to a never before seen world that was beautiful and complex. The visuals popped, and not in the traditional way we're used to seeing 3-D with imagines occasionally jumping out at the viewer. This was a 3-D that was layered, where you felt at any moment, one could reach out and pull something, anything, from Pandora. And for that accomplishment, Cameron deserves another Best Director award.
But my big problem with the movie was the overall story. Once you push aside the special effects, you have a simple love story with patches of clumsy dialogue that also gets a little preachy about the environment and military (although many other groups want to add their own take on what's being advocated). And at a few points during the film, I found myself looking at my watch simply because some of the scenes didn't really advance the story. I don't blame Cameron for showing off, but he should have left me wanting more.
So the final question is; Once this movie is released on DVD, how will play on your television at home? Sure, 3-D television is on the way, but will the quality equal what you witnessed in the theaters? If this movie is robbed even slightly of the eye candy effects, is the story enough to make it this year's Best Picture? I'm guessing technology gets a huge win on Oscar night.

Five Things I'm Digging Right Now:

1) "Shatner's Raw Nerve"- I don't know exactly what it is about Shatner's interviewing technique that has me riveted, but I'm watching and liking.

2) "Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis"- You'll find it on the Funny or Die website, in which Zach does a talk show parody. Intensely funny.

3) "Better Off Ted"- Under-appreciated comedy on ABC about the corporate world.

4) "Zombieland"- I missed it in the theater, but enjoyed it immensely at home with its sharp wit and Bill Murray cameo.

5) "Love Is The Law" by the Suburbs- A lost '80s album that is out-of-print on CD by a band that deserved more love.

New Stuff on Plank to the Face Radio

2010-02-07T07:00:00.000-06:00

Okay, I try to add a bunch of new tunes to Plank to the Face Radio in an attempt to keep it fresh. Sometimes I'm successful and other times... not so much. However, plenty of stuff added in the last week or so. Look for some great '80s stuff from Big Country, Bananarama, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Lone Justice. Also new stuff from Spoon, Freedy Johnston and the Heavy. And look for classics from Bill Withers, Neil "freakin'" Diamond and The Cars plus Cat Power, the Pretenders, Slint, Doves, Firewater and the Jesus Lizard.

Palin and Simon and Jay oh my! Part 2

2010-01-21T16:08:00.004-06:00

So it's finally done... $45 million for Conan. I guess if NBC talks about a round of layoffs, those in fear of losing their jobs should storm the castle. But it done offer proof that television executives aren't very high on the evolutionary chart.
I know that the Conan fan sights are painting Jay as the bad guy. I think instead of wearing black, he might settle more into a shade of gray. It was NBC that five years ago didn't think that "The Tonight Show" would still be number one with Jay at the helm. They didn't want to lose rising star Conan, so they made a deal that would keep both. Fast forward five years, Jay doesn't want to leave and NBC again wants to retain both. Jay could have been the gentleman and stepped aside, but chose not to. So now NBC eats over $45 million (one should probably include the money spent on bringing Conan to the West Coast and the amount of publicity involved).
Unfortunately, the real loser who seems to get lost in the shuffle is Andy Richter. That guy can't seem to catch a break as he's already had three television series canceled. He seems more cursed than the cast of "Seinfeld."
Well, at least it's over, although late night television has just become less funny.

Maybe the NBC executive should have taken a cue from Fox News, who recently hired Sarah Palin. A very shrewd move by both parties included. Fox knows there demographics and with Palin hot off a book tour, and can only help. Meanwhile, Palin keeps in the public eye, giving herself a chance to weigh future options. Talk show? Presidential run? Thelma and Louise-type spree? Who knows? And while I don't agree with the politics, I understand the move.

And Simon leaving "American Idol"? I never really watched the show except for the occasional train wreck the first couple weeks. Of course, with those quickly appearing on-line ("Pants on the Ground" guy), there really is no reason to watch. Simon seemed to be the brutally honest one of the group, and quite frankly, some people need to told they can't sing. Sorry, your parents and friends aren't always the best judge of talent.

Five Things I'm Digging Right Now:

1) "Archer"- Currently on FX, it's a really funny spoof of the secret agent genre. Produced by the guys from "Sealab 2021", another show I loved.

2) The Rolling Stones- I was never a fan in high school, as I was more into the Beatles and the Who. I've been listening to a lot of their pre-1973 stuff lately.

3) "The Daily Show"/"The Colbert Report" - I got behind over the holidays, so I've been watching a lot of episodes. Favorite late night combo (thank you DVR).

4) Pylon- "Gyrate"- Most people aren't familiar with Pylon, which is a shame. Angular, cutting guitars with a danceable beat. They only put out three albums and this would be my second choice.

5) "Avatar"- Sort of. The 3-D and special effects just blew me away. The story... not so much. A couple times Cameron was just showing off without really advancing the story. But I guess if you have cool technology, why not?

Palin and Simon and Jay oh my! Part 1

2010-01-12T16:20:00.005-06:00

The last couple days have provided a literal feast for the television news world. After having only a few stories to beat into submission recently, the media were handed a golden platter. Which story would get the most attention? Would it be Mark McGwire's admission that he used steroids or the late night problems at NBC (which I find funny how much publicity NBC is getting on the other networks)? But don't forget about Simon leaving the biggest show currently on the planet and Sarah Palin joining Fox News. Even Barbara Walters tried to drum up some attention, only to be pushed aside for those who weren't fans of "The View". Her story just wasn't big enough in the feeding frenzy.
The Leno/O'Brien situation has created quite a mess for NBC, one that will likely cost them millions of dollars, paid to a person sitting on the bench or even on another network. However, as television continues to become more competitive to get eyeballs, networks are quick to pull the trigger if they feel a show isn't attracting a desired audience at a quick enough pace.
Critics wasted no time in condemning NBC for moving Leno to the 10:00 p.m. slot. With Conan on at 11:30 p.m., followed by Jimmy Fallon, the network would be developing a quagmire of talk shows. The affiliates feared this would weaken their lead-in numbers for local news, causing a decline in their ratings. But NBC, in an effort to keep Leno and O'Brien on board, went ahead with the plan. Jay and Conan had successful first weeks, then the numbers went south.
From what I've read, the expectations for Leno weren't too high, and he was able to deliver on the numbers the network projected. It was still cheaper than slotting in a high priced drama. Conan, on the other hand, wasn't as lucky. "The Tonight Show" numbers slipped behind Letterman, something that hadn't happened in years. So NBC, with only one ratings period in the rear view mirror, pulled the plug on their grand experiment. And one has to wonder if the sale to Comcast had a hand in the situation.
I've never understood the appeal of Leno, as to me, he is to comedy as vanilla is to flavors. Where Johnny Carson seemed engaged in his guests, Leno often comes off as uncomfortable. Maybe it's because I grew up with and appreciated Letterman when he did "Late Night", and enjoy a quirky, off-beat sense of humor, like Conan exhibits. However, it doesn't seem fair to either talent as NBC backed themselves into a corner in order to appease both comedians, hoping that by throwing enough money around, the problem would work itself out.
I guess we'll keep a watch on how this situation changes and unfolds. Conan said he won't move, the affiliates won't be able to blame Leno and the network has some programming holes to fill. So, if you have any show ideas, now might be the time to forward them to NBC.

Five Things I'm Digging Right Now:

1) Bob Dylan- "Highway 61 Revisited". Sometimes you just have to go back to the classics.

2) "Steven Seagal: Lawman". I just started watching this series and it wouldn't be so funny, but Steven is so serious. It's also a great drinking game. Drink when he mentions "martial arts" or uses the word "zen".

3) "Modern Family". One of the few sitcoms on television that I watch. It has an edge, but doesn't totally rely on snark.

4) The Beatles Remasters- I've been slowly buying these when they came out and they are great to listen to with headphones. The only disappointment; no bonus tracks.

5) "The Hurt Locker"- Since this didn't play at my local theater, I had to wait for DVD. A well done movie about a bomb squad in the Iraq War. It avoids the politics to feature plenty of tense moments.

Welcome to my resolution

2010-01-05T15:27:00.003-06:00

We received about three inches of snow over the weekend, which for my area, is a big deal. The winter weather created light traffic and an easy to navigate shopping experience. And yet, as I arrived at the gym, the cardio room was packed with people, eager to maintain their freshly made resolutions. Ah, the start of a new year.
I personally have never been much of a resolution person. I've tried in the past, only to find myself adjusting the resolution in mid-January, then again at the end of the month only to abandon it by the start of February. The resolutions were generic in nature, usually involving health or money, with no real stated goal. You know how they go; I want to be in better shape, save more money, blah, blah, blah. Like I said, no real goal.
But over the last couple of years, I really lost interest in those hollow promises. If I really wanted to be a better person, why wait until the start of the year? If you really want change, why not right now? I started a workout program during May while getting a better grip on my finances in September. And when I start to slack, I get back on track the first given opportunity.
However, this year I thought I would try again, making the resolutions simple; where I'm not trying to change my entire being, but rather small pieces. And a return to writing this blog is one of the pieces.
Again, I'm hoping to cover a wide range of topics, and hopefully I can make this stick. Now off to play some Guitar Hero... resolution #7.

Five Things I'm digging right now:

1) My new iPod: I had a mp3 player that worked, but I wanted one with the ability to hold more stuff. Thousands of songs without hearing the same one twice.

2) Daniel Johnston: While I haven't watched the documentary about him, I have found myself gravitating toward his music. Some might think childish, but really listen to it.

3) "The Hangover": Sure, it make a lot of money at the box office, but it was the funniest movie of the year. The DVD extra with Ken Jeong is hilarious.

4) "30 Rock": Of the Thursday night show on NBC, this one has turned into the most consistently funny. "The Office" still has it's moments, but "30 Rock" shines.

5) "Modern Family": For those who thought the family sitcom was dead.

Good Bye John Hughes

2009-08-07T13:03:00.003-05:00

The death of John Hughes is a disappointing event on a couple different levels. When I woke up early this morning, it didn't appear on the front of my Yahoo page. In fact, I was greeted with another Michael Jackson related story. Instead, I discovered his death via Facebook. Several friends had placed quotes from his various movies in their status line, and after a little scrolling, I learned about his passing.
After a summer of Jackson stories, the death of Hughes seems to be just a blip on the radar of life, but yet his influence was huge to any suburban teenager growing up in the 80s. It would difficult to find a writer/director that had a track record better than Hughes for that decade. When channel surfing, I still find myself stopping if a Hughes movie of that period is playing. He did write some hits in the 90s, but the impact of his films just wasn't the same.
Teens flocked to his movies because they felt the films spoke to them, presenting a realistic portrayal of their lives. But Hughes brought that style of reality to a lot of his films from that decade. Whether he directed and/or wrote the screenplay, you were drawn into his movies because they were generally situations you could relate. Sometime he would cross the line into an absurd reality to racket up the comedy, but you could still feel for the characters.
Teens saw themselves in the characters of "The Breakfast Club", whether it be an individual character or a combination (half the fun was figuring out which one). "Sixteen Candles" featured the awkwardness of puberty along with the embarrassment that family could provide. "Ferris Bueller" (my personal favorite) was the kid everyone wanted to be in high school while "Pretty in Pink" showed the difficulties of peer pressure.
You can even move beyond the teen films for those everyday life situations. Who hasn't been on a hellish family vacation like "National Lampoon's Vacation" or had some bad travel experience similar to the many depicted in "Planes, Trains and Automobiles"? I've never had much luck with train travel.
It's also hard to talk about Hughes films without the mention of music. After screening one of his films, I remember heading to the record store to find some of the music. Psychedelic Furs, New Order, Love and Rockets and Simple Minds were just some of the bands that populated his soundtracks, opening a new avenue of music for many kids. Not all the tracks were winners, but hey, who else would put music by Yello, the Beatles and Wayne Newton in the same movie?
So thanks John for making the 80s enjoyable and bringing us stories we often felt were ripped straight out of lives. It's tempting to fire up the VCR to watch "Ferris Bueller", but I'll probably stick with my DVD copy.

Five thing I'm digging right now:

1) "Michael and Michael Have Issues"; Comedy Central keeps tossing out new shows and this one is a winner.
2) "Funny People"; not the comedy you'd expect from Apatow. Still plenty of dick jokes, but with a more serious side.
3) "Top Chef Masters"; I don't care for the host or the panel of judges, but it's fun to watch the chefs create these fabulous meals.
4) Talking Heads Dual Disc releases; the entire Heads collection remastered with bonus tracks and video.
5) Pandora; even though I broadcast on Live 365, it's always interesting to see what Pandora has in store for me.

Plank is Back... and so is Conan

2009-06-03T14:48:00.001-05:00

I haven't posted anything new in the last two years, and a big part of it is simple... I'm lazy. Blogging seems to be a fun thing to do, but I was turning it into too much of a project. The entries were turning into lengthy essays, with research and re-writes. I'd sometimes spend a couple hours carefully crafting a single entry, trying to ensure that everything was worded perfectly. But recently, I started reading other blogs and came to the realization that it's really not that hard. Write what you know and let the words spill out. So Plank is back... until I get lazy again.

Given my work schedule, I don't get to watch a lot of late night television. I'll record "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" and catch up with them on the weekend. And when the opportunity would present itself, I'd stay up on watch Conan. With so much hype on his ascending to "The Tonight Show", I thought I would take a peek. His final "Late Night" was funny and bittersweet, and hopes were high with the new gig.

I finally got to watch it Tuesday afternoon, and I have to admit I was a little disappointed. I know that the reviews have been mixed, so this is just another to add to the pile. First, I'm very happy to see Andy Richter back on the show, although it seems to be in a limited role. He now stands at a podium and I'm not sure whether he's announcing the show or seating a table of four. Hopefully that's one aspect that gets ironed out.

The criticism against those that knocked the show was that the reviewer just didn't get Conan's edgy humor. Unfortunately I would have to disagree with that statement because it seemed the writers played it safe. The filmed pieces were hit-or-miss. The opening piece wasn't laugh-out-loud funny, but I enjoyed it. The tram piece seemed to miss some promising opportunities, while the bit about the Tauras was just lame. And given the amount of preparation time, I guess I expected more. However, Conan seemed a little nervous during the opening, which would seem natural given what's riding on the show. On the plus side, Will Ferrel, as usual, brought the funny, although it took a lengthy time to bring him out. Pearl Jam also rocked the house even though I'll never understand what Eddie Vedder is singing.

I think it's a promising start to what I hope will be a long run for Conan. I'm sure he's going to ease into the time slot, with the edge coming back to the forefront. I hope that the big name bands isn't the norm as I enjoyed many of the lesser known bands often featured. So best to you Conan, and thanks for finally knocking Jay out of that time slot.

Five things I digging right now:

1) Breaking Bad. The season just ended and it was a wild ride.
2) Spoon "Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga". Listening to it as I write.
3) The local Humane Society. If you're adopting a pet, go there first.
4) Point Beer. A friend brought me a six and it was delicious.
5) Guitar Hero. I'm not very good, but I could spend hours playing.

Thoughts on Imus

2007-04-14T18:18:00.000-05:00

Okay, so I wrote most of this over the weekend, and it took me a while to go back and finish. But finally, the Don Imus controversy has died down. Unfortunately, it took a tragedy to make it disappear.
Even though Imus apologized more than once, CBS received enough pressure from advertisers to fire him. And after spending several years as a broadcaster, I, just like every other broadcaster in America, have a few thoughts on the situation.
Naturally you have to feel sorry for the Rutger's players. They had a successful season, finishing second, and yet they're receiving more publicity for this incident then they've probably received the entire season. The media is whipping themselves into a frenzy (as is always the case) to get these girls on the air, but where was the media when the actual season was in progress?
However, you also have to have some pity for the team from Tennessee. I realize the remarks weren't made toward them, but this controversy will over-shadow the accomplishment of their season. Tennessee played a tough game against Rutger's to win the national championship and yet the season is ruined by the remarks of a cranky, old radio personality. In most instances, ask people who Rutger's played in the game, and they probably couldn't tell you. And to be honest, I was one of them. In fact, until this scandal broke, I couldn't have even named the two teams that made the final game.
Another of the big concerns is whether Imus is a racist or not. I've never listened to Imus before and can't make that call. Has he been known to make comments similar to this... I don't know. One stupid comment doesn't make you a racist. If there's a visible pattern of his behavior, then I would lean in that direction. The truer statement might be that he's an insensitive idiot. He was trying to be outrageous (like Michael Richards) and said something in poor taste. Unfortunately in our society, shock value sells and the stakes keep getting higher. However, the statements can also be construed as sexist, which doesn't seem to be getting an equal amount of play.
Of course, many people began turning to the rap industry for their portrayal of women in their lyrics and claim a double standard. Maybe, but rap lyrics generally shy away from naming particular women as ho's. Imus referred to a group of women that could be identified and got busted. That doesn't make rap lyrics better, but it's harder to demand an apology. I'm willing to bet if someone used a similar phrase to describe someone like Beyonce, then you'd see an uproar.
Freedom of speech has also been mentioned in some arguments and that Imus has the right to make that statement. However, the fact is that the government can't limit free speech and this was a case where commerce dictated the situation. Sure, the government does control the airwaves, but CBS made the call. Listeners threatened the livelihood of CBS, the advertisers responded and CBS took the obvious fiscal path. And freedom of speech is a double-edged sword; it includes speech you don't want to hear and yet you'll also be held accountable for your statements.
But now the controversy has taken a backseat and hopefully we will soon return to the important things in life, like the father of Anna Nicole's baby.

When punk and Kelly Clarkson collide...

2007-02-11T17:11:00.000-06:00

A couple weeks ago, I happened to catch a blurb on the CNN ticker about Mike Watt playing on the next Kelly Clarkson album. Ask most people about Clarkson, and I'm sure they'll mention "American Idol." Ask them about Mike Watt, and they'll probably say "who?" I give Clarkson's producer some credit for going outside the mainstream to find musicians, and given that Clarkson has received some praise from such musicians as Dave Grohl, this adds some street cred to the album. Which brings me back to the question, who is Mike Watt?
Mike is currently working with Iggy Pop and the Stooges on their new album. But more importantly, Watt was the bass player for one of the best American punk bands of the 80s, the Minutemen. The Minutemen consisted of three guys from San Pedro (Watt, D. Boon, George Hurley) who played hardcore with touches of folk and jazz. Politics were often the theme as the songs generally clocked in under two minutes. However, the band holds a place in my heart because it was the first punk show I ever attended. I was a junior at EIU and was just starting to get into the world of punk. I was familiar with the Sex Pistols, Dead Kennedys and Ramones, but was now discovering such bands as Black Flag, Husker Du and the Minutemen. Several of my friends were into politics and naturally, they gravitated toward this form of musical expression.
Since I was the only one with a car, I got to drive the 45 miles to Champaign for the show. Now I had been to many concerts in the past, but they were held in stadiums and amphitheaters, where the band was seemingly miles away. But this show was different. The stage was inches away, bodies were slamming to the beat and there was an air of choas. And while the music provided a rush of adrenaline, my personal highlight was meeting the band after the show. Again, it was different from the stadium experience when the band disappears behind the stage. When the Minutemen set came to an end, the band hopped off stage and milled with the crowd. My friends and I stopped D. Boon for a few moments to chat politics and the situation in Nicaragua. It was brief, but cool experience.
Unfortunately, the Minutemen saga came to a tragic end. The band seemed to be on the brink of greener pastures. But a few weeks after the release of "3-Way Tie for Last" later that year (1985), D. Boon was thrown from a van in a traffic accident and died. Watt and Hurley retired the Minutemen name, got a new guitarist (Ed Crawford) and continued under the name Firehose (not the lame 90s band, Firehouse). Firehose shared some of the musical qualities of the Minutemen, but seemed to lack some of the edge. Oddly enough, I got to interview Crawford a few years later while I was attending school at SIU.
If you're truly interested in the Minutemen, I recommend starting with "Double Nickels on the Dime". After listening to that, you'll understand my amazement of Watt working with Clarkson. But even old punks need a paycheck and it's better than hearing "This Ain't No Picnic" in a car ad.

Live from New York...

2006-11-26T12:00:00.000-06:00

Ask anyone when they think Saturday Night Live "jumped the shark" and I'm sure you'll get a variety of answers. Generally, the answer will depend on which cast the person grew up watching. And for a show that's been on television since 1975, that's a lot of ground to cover and a lot of cast members to consider. In fact, I think that SNL has jumped the shark so many times, the shark doesn't even show up anymore.
The reason I'm writing about the show is because the first season is set to come out on DVD in December; unedited, complete with musical guests. It's been years since I've seen an entire show from that era and it will be interesting to see how the episodes have stood the test of time.
The basic format of the show hasn't changed much over the years. The show opens with a sketch, usually something topical, followed by a monologue by the host, then maybe a commercial parody and a few more sketches. A musical performance is usually after about 4 or 5 sketches, followed by Weekend Update. After that point, the laughs drop off considerably, although some characters have grown from those late program sketches. And while the format stays the same, it's the eclectic aspect of the program that's changed, not necessarily for the better.
Argue all you want about which cast is the best, but I prefer the early years and not just for the cast. Back in the late 70's, there was nothing like this on television. Variety shows were basically safe and family-friendly, from Carol Burnett to Donny & Marie. SNL offered the only real alternative, a slap-to-the-face of network programming. It was also event television, something people talked about Monday morning. Occasionally SNL will inspire that kind of conservation now, but not like the early days. And the eclectic choice of hosts and music provided a spark. Unlike today, when the host is someone usually plugging a movie, television program or record, the hosts in the early days seemed to people the cast wanted the opportunity to work with. Such comedians as George Carlin, Richard Pryor, Lily Tomlin and Robert Klein wound up as hosts in the first season, while Steve Martin would host the show five times in season two and three. In fact, the first show, which was hosted by Carlin, contains a lot of his stand-up as well as an odd performance by Andy Kaufman.
The musical guests in the early years were generally an odd mix, consisting of folk/singer-songwriter types, with appearances by Paul Simon, Gordon Lightfoot and Leon Redbone, but also unlikely groups like ABBA and the Preservation Hall Jazz Band. SNL, though did tap into the new-wave music trend in seasons three and four, boasting appearances by Elvis Costello, Talking Heads, DEVO and Kate Bush. Occasionally SNL will still book a group considered "cutting edge", but they generally venture into the commercially-safe territory.
I know I'm looking forward to this boxed-set. Not just as a reminder of this television institution got started, but also as a way to remember my youth. When staying up late was cool and you couldn't wait until Monday to recite the sketches to your classmates. Also, the only shark the show had to worry about was a landshark.

Is it November 8 yet?

2006-11-05T08:10:00.000-06:00

I've just wanted to hide under the covers until this current political season is over. While I enjoy the freedom we have to exercise the democratic process, this year has been overkill as the two parties fight for control. And it seems that no matter where you turn, you're getting bombarded with political adds. Television has been a non-stop parade of ads, although it's mostly been about three things: Claire McCaskill vs. Jim Talent, Admendment 2 and Admendment 3 (for those outside Missouri, McCaskill/Talent is a Senate race, Admendment 2 is stem cell research and Admendment 3 is a cigarette tax). The McCaskill/Talent race has gotten ugly at times (who am I kidding, most of the time) as they spend their ad space telling us what the other candidate isn't doing in their current position instead of telling us what they're actually going to do if elected.
Of course, the adds don't stop there. On Saturday, we received four(!) political mailings, although it was really two sets of the same mailings. And the barrage has also occurred on the phone as I now live in fear of phone calls. Thank goodness I don't listen to the radio, because I'm sure it's there as well.
But the big question is, do these ads really help? I can't see a Republican voting for a Democrat, or vice versa, simply based on these ads. And while they may be targeting the undecided, how many people really are undecided? I've had a clear picture of who I'm going to vote for some time ago and these ads aren't going to sway me. Do people say they're undecided as a way to taunt the pollsters? Is an attack ad that is void of facts really going to change your mind?
What we really need are ads for the lesser known races, like some of the propositions or judges. These are races/decisions that are important to a community but get lost in the shuffle of the bigger races. Or better yet, how about taking that money from political advertising and use it to help people. I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to compile a list of charitable organizations, government programs, etc. that could use the money. And even though I work in an industry that relies on political ads, what's wrong with politicians actually giving back to the community.
So until November 7, I'll turn off my television, won't answer the phone and stay away from the mailbox. And as far as the McCaskill/Talent race is concerned, I'm just going to vote "No."

Goodbye Cardinals... uh, I mean Yankees...

2006-10-09T16:19:00.000-05:00

The way the St. Louis Cardinals finished the 2006, I didn't figure they would last the first round of the playoffs. After almost losing a comfortable lead the last two weeks of the season, I figured the Padres would finish them in four. So when the Cardinals took the first two games of the series, I knew my prediction was wrong. Meanwhile, in the opposite league, I felt that no one would stop the Yankees bats. Even when the Tigers were up 2-1, I still thought the Yankees would come back to win the final two. But good pitching prevailed, and the Yankees can get some rest. George Steinbrenner will spend the off-season pouting, then spending tons of money for another team that lacks chemistry. Now, which direction do the playoffs go?
Since I know more about the National League, I'll start there. While the Cardinals have mediocre pitching, the Mets seem to be hurting in that category at the moment. Manager Willie Randolph expects to tap into the bullpen a lot, so you'll probably see several four and five inning starts. So the Cardinals have the advantage there. However, I think the Mets line-up is a little more balanced. Pujols is a huge threat, but they'll need a couple other guys to step up. If it's a short series, I'd go with the Mets... long series, Cardinals. I say Mets in five.
In the American League, Detroit doesn't have quite the pop that Oakland has in their line-up. However, they've got some major adrenaline flowing after the Yankee series and those young arms will come through. A tough series, but I go Detroit in six.
Those are my predictions for this round of playoffs. But then again, I could be wrong.

Check Your Local Listings

2006-10-01T07:05:00.000-05:00

The new network television season started a few weeks ago with plenty of shows vying for your attention. But the trouble with choosing which new program to watch goes beyond just the quality of the show. One also has to wonder; how quickly could this get cancelled?
Back before the onslaught of cable channels, television shows generally got half a season to prove themselves. That would usually mean around 13 episodes, less if the show was a summer/mid-season replacement series. If a network was floundering in third place, a show would sometimes be given more time, mostly due to a lack of a better option. Of course, if the show was a disaster and had no audience, the axe would naturally drop sooner. The quick axe would happen a couple times a season.
But now with so many choices competing for your eyeballs, the shelf life of a new show seems much shorter. Shows now get cancelled (or put on hiatus) after two, maybe three airings. A television program now has to get out of the gate quickly, or it's put down. And with the current trend of shows with continuing plotlines, it's hard to know what show to invest time in. Fans of "Reunion" discovered that last season. I don't know much about the show expect that it was to follow a group of classmates over I believe a 20 year span and a murder was involved. The show got cancelled and the murderer never revealed. And while the show didn't have a big audience, there were a few million people left with a big question mark.
Of course, big ratings early don't guarantee anything either. Remember "Commander in Chief"? One of the best rated new dramas to start the season, but cancelled by the end of the season. But there, you're dealing with a lot of internal problems that lead to the decline in viewership.
FOX seems to be the most inconsistant with the handling of shows, as they'll nurture some and quickly cancel others. "House" didn't start strong, but when paired with "American Idol", it found an audience, and now does quite well. Meanwhile, "Arrested Development" received strong critical support, but never found an audience. Many fans were upset when it wasn't brought back this year, but I'm more amazed that FOX stuck with it for three seasons. However, FOX is also the quickest in pulling the trigger. When "Family Guy" returned to the air, one segment had Peter naming the shows that had been cancelled on FOX during the time "Family Guy" was off the air. It's quite a list.
I don't know how these frequent schedule changes effect viewers. After all, I've found a couple new shows that have piqued my interest, but with some trepidation. I guess before I sit down, I'll need to check my local listings.

Comedy is more than subjective

2006-09-24T10:38:00.000-05:00

Humor is one of the toughest things to gauge because you never know what will make someone laugh. Shots to the groin for some reason, always seem to work on most people, while comedy like "South Park" appeals to a select audience. But not only is comedy subjective, it also is generational. Just like music, the "old folks" don't understand what the kids find funny. Two reasons why I mention this: a recent on-line discussion on Dane Cook as the best stand-up comedian ever and my recent purchase of Steve Martin's album (yes, on vinyl) "Comedy Is Not Pretty."
I own a copy of Cook's "Retaliation" and watched his brief series on HBO. And while he seems to be a funny guy, he doesn't have the history to claim "Funniest Stand-Up... Ever." Most of the participants making that statement seemed younger in age, more plugged into what's happening at the moment. Naturally, the older people invoked names like Carlin, Pryor and Seinfeld. And while I don't know if I'd make a comparison between Cook and those icons, there are some similarities between him and Steve Martin.
Unfortunately, this current generation is mostly familiar with Martin as the father figure in lame family comedies. But at one time, like Cook, he was a rock star among stand-up comedians. His first two albums charted in the Top Ten of the Billboard charts, he toured amphitheaters, and make the crossover into television then movies.
When I was a teenager, I thought Steve Martin was the "funniest comedian... ever." I devoured "Let's Get Small" and "A Wild and Crazy Guy", memorizing the bits and performing them later for friends. I eagerly looked forward to his appearances on SNL, as well as his television specials and movie, "The Jerk." However, I also remember sitting in the family room, listening to "Let's Get Small" with my father. He was curious as to why I found this man, performing in a white suit, wearing an arrow through his head while playing banjo, so funny. And while we listened, all of the laughter came from my side of the room. I don't remember much being said afterwards, but I'm sure he didn't understand his son's sense of humor.
My recent listen to "Comedy Is Not Pretty" wound up being a bittersweet nostalgic turn. I still knew a good chunk of the bits, but they didn't hold the same comedic impact. However, I still enjoy the humor in "Let's Get Small" and "A Wild and Crazy Guy". While I would put Martin on a list of Best Stand-Up Comedians, I doubt I would place him at #1.
As I've gotten older, I've listened more to guys like Carlin and Pryor, taking in more of the history of stand-up comedy. I still enjoy cutting edge material, but I've also learned to appreciate guys like Seinfeld and Newhart, who may not considered edgy, but who perform funny, well-written bits. So I guess the question that should be posed of Cook fans ten or fifteen years from now is, still funniest... ever?

Colbert Vs. Stewart

2006-09-05T15:12:00.000-05:00

The recent Emmy Awards pitted Stephen Colbert against Jon Stewart, with "The Daily Show" walking away with the victory. Then, moments later, Colbert lost to Barry Manilow. While I won't analyze that battle, I'm more interested comparing "The Daily Show" with "The Colbert Report." The reason is because I'm beginning to believe that Colbert has surpassed Stewart in the laughs department.
This isn't to take away anything away from Stewart as "TDS" is still funny. The opening block of the show still contains plenty of pointed barbs aimed at current issues and I always look forward to "Back in Black." But unfortunately, they're pre-recorded pieces have lost their punch and their correspondent positions have turned into a revolving door. I'm sure the shows notoriety has caused the former while Steve Carell's success may have had a hand in the latter. It should be interesting to see who's left for the mid-term elections.
Meanwhile, Colbert has slipped effortlessly into his right-wing pundit character. Segments like "The Word," "Stephen's Sound Advice" and "Threatdown" generally hit the mark. His "Better Know A District" has provided several laughs, especially the Robert Wexler interview. And because of Colbert, I no longer trust bears.
The interview segments aren't the strong part of either show. Sometimes Stewart seems a little too excited with certain guests (mostly entertainment related guests) and occasionally Colbert seems too caught up in the questions on his index cards. However, Colbert's best interview moments happen when the guest appears to be in on the joke, yet lose their cool anyway after Stephen provokes them. As for Stewart, his better interviews are generally people in the literary or political community.
Comparing the two shows is a difficult thing to do since they still stand as two of the best shows currently on television. I just believe Colbert may be inching ahead of Stewart. And now for your moment of Zen...

Snakes on a Motherf#*@ing Plane II

2006-08-18T17:22:00.000-05:00

This week's "Entertainment Weekly" just came out with a blurb explaining that the magazine would not include a review of SoaP. The magazine makes it sound that New Line didn't want a review to appear as though New Line were withholding secret documents that would blow the lid off an investigation that could topple a world leader. And while "EW" has been part of the hype-machine, it wasn't a surprise that they would be denied an advance screening of the movie. You could sense early in the ad campaign that critics were not going to get a chance to see this movie before the paying masses. New Line knew it had to take to advantage of the hype and hope for a big opening weekend and word-of-mouth.
My wife and I went to a Thursday night screening with a fairly small audience. While I wore my SoaP T-shirt, a group of kids brought rubber snakes into the theater. They were ready to rock.
As to the actual movie itself... well, I can say that I had a very good time. It's not a complex plot and the plane passengers are the typical line-up of disaster movie cliches. And it took too long for Samuel L. to utter his catch phrase about the MF snakes. However, you're not going to a movie like this to think. You want to see people attacked by snakes. And you get plenty of opportunities as snakes, real and CGI, roam freely around the plane. You have to also give the producers credit for an original twist on a standard Hollywood idea, something you don't see often.
I've read several of the reviews on Yahoo! (from users, not critics)and they have swung mostly from one extreme to the other. People seemed to love this film (some calling it "great", which is overdoing it) while a minority really hated it. Those people, the haters, seemed to miss the camp value. For me, I thought it was a fun thrill ride where you could just turn your brain off for a couple hours and simply enjoy yourself. Absolutely nothing wrong with mindless entertainment. A good crowd and maybe a few adult beverages wouldn't hurt. Of course, you know it will only be a matter of time before SoaP turns into a drinking game. Coming to a college near you.

Snakes On A Mother*&#@ing Plane

2006-08-16T19:26:00.000-05:00

"Snakes on a Plane" has been one of the most hyped films of the year, regardless of whether it's any good. When I first heard about this movie, I honestly thought it was a joke. Samuel L. Jackson fighting snakes... on a plane. But I admit, I've gotten caught up in the hype, which has been brilliant. Websites are devoted to this movie, short films are popping up and T-Shirts are all over the place (yes, I own one). The title says it all. And yet, I haven't heard anything about the actual film itself. I've seen the trailer several times, and I doubt that it will be screened for critics, who would probably look down on it anyway. But even without any commentary about SoaP, I am full of anticipation. Besides, this isn't a film for critics. It's "Snakes on a Plane". And while I can be critical of films, there's a certain kitsch level that is exciting. The movie opens here Thursday night. My wife and I will be in line, expecting two hours of mindless entertainment. Now I wonder where they'll put the snakes for the sequel...

Goodbye Greg Maddux. Could you please take Dusty Baker with you?

2006-08-05T11:13:00.000-05:00

Saturday, July 29, Greg Maddux pitched his last game as a Chicago Cub. And it was almost vintage Maddux as he painted the corners, worked quickly and kept his pitch count low. The Cubs would beat the Cardinals that day, on the way to sweeping the Cards in four games and providing one of the few highlights of a dismal season. Two days later, Maddux became a Dodger in exchange for a light-hitting, middle infielder because, apparently, the Cubs needed another one. Maddux would make his Dodger debut by pitching six, no-hit innings.
I've always been a fan of Greg Maddux, even after the Cubs let him getaway the first time. Maddux was a student of the game. He didn't have a fastball that would overpower a hitter, but he understood the art of pitching. Using the corners, working effectively and letting the hitter basically get himself out. And his stretch from 1992 to 1998 (mostly for the Braves) in one of the best in recent memory.
As a Cub fan, I only got to see Maddux pitch once, oddly enough against the Dodgers. It was back in 1990 and wasn't one of his better games as I believe he lost 8-0. The Cub highlight was the return of Mitch Williams as he made his first appearance after returning from the disabled list. However, Maddux was one of the few pitchers that seemed to handle Wrigley Field and it was a disappointment when he signed with Atlanta.
Unfortunately, the second time around wouldn't be as sweet. Occasionally we'd see flashes of vintage Maddux, but he didn't dominate as he once did. The strikeout totals were decreasing while the ERA was increasing. And the pitchers he was to tutor spent more time on the DL in the last 2 1/2 years than Maddux did in his career.
So the best of luck to Greg Maddux as a Dodger and future Hall-of-Famer. You always seemed to be a class act. A student turned teacher of the game. And as to the Dusty Baker comment, that's another post for another time.

Happy Birthday MTV: Sorry I didn't get you a gift

2006-07-30T12:05:00.000-05:00

VH1 Classic has been hyping the 25th anniversary of MTV as well as promoting the fact that they'll run MTV's first day. In watching the videos this new station ran in its first hour, it's fun to see how videos have changed over the last 25 years. These early clips were mostly shot on video, with the band members awkwardly dancing while lip-synching their songs. Occasionally the videos would get ambitious by adding special effects or even a storyline. And with a short supply of promotional videos, there were a few bands I vaguely remember (okay, I didn't even recall a band named PhD).
There's no doubt about it, MTV changed music. Of course, if you don't believe me, the promos will emphasize that fact. But this anniversary makes me feel old since I work with a bunch of people who don't know life before MTV. Or even life before MTV became a haven of teen-based reality shows.
I remember the early days of MTV. No, I wasn't watching the first few hours or days because we didn't have cable television. In those days, cable television was a luxury many people didn't have and my father couldn't fathom paying for television. In fact, my mother still doesn't have cable. Usually we'd have to gather in a friend's basement to watch this revolutionary channel and on occasion, we'd head to the local arcade for our blast of video music. But we would watch for hours at a time. It didn't seem to matter if we liked the bands or not, we would watch in hopes of catching one of our favorite videos.
Of course, my MTV viewing declined during college. MTV tried to reach out by adding "120 Minutes" and the goofy game show "Remote Control" to accommodate my changing tastes. But sooner or later, you're no longer in the MTV demographic, and you drift away. Occasionally I'll tune in, but I find myself gravitating more toward VH1 Classic to re-live the early years.
But like all things, MTV has changed over the years. I've made fun of MTV for not taking the "M" part of the name seriously anymore. But with the advent of home computers and DVD players, watching music video isn't the same either. You want to watch your favorite video, you can download it or buy them on DVD. I can watch "Whip It" or "Rio" whenever I want (that reference doesn't give away my age, does it?). Now MTV attracts the kids with a sea of dating shows and programs featuring rich kids acting snotty. Then again, MTV isn't reaching out to a post 40-year old male. And if I want to learn about new music, I do it the old-fashioned way... I read about it.
So happy 25th birthday MTV. It won't be long before you're too old to be considered part of your desired demographic. I can't wait for the mid-life crisis.

M. "Shama-Lama-Ding-Dong" Night

2006-07-30T11:30:00.000-05:00

"Lady in the Water" opened last weekend and I have a fair amount of indifference. Judging by the box office, I wasn't the only one. My wife made an attempt to get me interested in the movie, but I have too many doubts. And several of the reviews appear to confirm these doubts.
Night makes good looking films and knows how to set the mood. But his stories seem too hit-or-miss. "The Sixth Sense" was a fabulous movie with the twist that you didn't see coming. "Signs" was solid, although unspectacular with a weak ending. With "The Village", once you figured out the twist, it was tough to sit through. And "Unbreakable"... well, I thought it was two hours in which nothing happened (comic books fans, I discovered, disagree strongly). And judging by the trailers of his latest, it's atmosphere over plot. However, there are some pluses. Night has stated there is no twist with "Lady in the Water" and it does star Paul "why hasn't he been nominated more than once" Giamatti. But a recent article in Entertainment Weekly painted Night as a control freak with an inability to listen to outside ideas. That's a blessing and a curse. It's good to see Night stand his ground as Hollywood has a tendency to water down an idea. But if the idea doesn't work... Hey, I'm a control freak as well, but I also realize the need to listen to constructive criticism (the downside is that it has to come from someone I respect).
Maybe the recent disappointing box office will make Night rethink his strategy. He's definitely a director with a unique prospective and the ability to make quality movies. Hopefully Night won't let ego trump creative vision.

Reunited, and it feels so good...

2006-07-23T17:46:00.000-05:00

Reunions are something that have been part of the entertainment industry for as long as I can remember. Musical acts hit the road again and in some cases, write new material. Television characters from popular shows converge for a special, usually during a sweeps period. And let's face it, isn't a sequel some form of a reunion? Unfortunately, I think the word reunion gets thrown around too easily in an effect to generate interest. Because what really constitutes a reunion?
Two recent reunions got me thinking about it: The New York Dolls and The Cars. The New York Dolls latest release hits stores on July 25 while the "New" Cars is already available. And both bands have only two original members as part of the gathering. Granted, for the Dolls, David Johansen and Sylvain Sylvain are the only surviving members. So, a full-fledged reunion is out of the question. The death toll is not as great for the Cars, with Benjamin Orr as the only casualty. But is 40% of a band enough to be considered a reunion?
I've heard music from both, and the answer seems to depend on which band you examine. Johansen was the main songwriter for the Dolls and he still has plenty of power and swagger. Johnny Thunders' guitar is a missing element, but the spirit of the band still seems to exist. In a recent interview with "Blender" magazine, Johansen expressed the importance of having a brand. The name recognition is an important factor even if it isn't really the full New York Dolls.
On the other hand, the New Cars just doesn't seem right. Ric Ocasek was the chief songwriter and architect of the band's sound. In his place; Todd Rundgren, who happens to be an accomplished songwriter but with a different style. They've also produced new material although what I heard was merely adequate. The rest of the material was classic Cars songs, which had an odd sound with another voice. I don't want to take away anything from what Greg Hawkes and Elliot Easton contributed to the band's sound, but it's missing a lot without Ocasek.
But frankly, is this really any different than a band that continues to use the same name even if it only has one or two constant members? The Pretenders have used the same moniker for years even though it's basically Chrissie Hynde. So I guess approach each reunion with some caution and be glad that the Dolls didn't go the Cars path by slapping the word "New" into their name.

Clerks II: Just thoughts, no review

2006-07-21T19:40:00.000-05:00

I will probably see "Clerks II" although I have some hesitation. I've generally enjoyed the work of Kevin Smith, and will go to support him as a film maker. I won't be there opening weekend because I'm not a big fan of crowded theaters. Plus, the wife wants to see it and we have to coordinate our movie schedules, which is no easy task. But regardless of the reviews, I'll still have ticket in hand.
I remember when "Clerks" came out and the waves it created in the film business. I worked in a video store at the time, where I think most of the employees aspired to be Randal. In reality, they were more like Dante. However, I do have to credit them with turning me onto the film, and I've seen most of his work since (missed "Jersey Girl"). "Chasing Amy" ranks as my favorite while "Mallrats" appeals to me the least. I know of at least one person who rated it as his favorite, but there was too much slapstick for me.
A couple years ago, I had the opportunity to attend a lecture by Kevin. He answered several questions throughout the evening, mostly on topics you would expect from fans. He's a really funny, personable guy and a good storyteller. What amazed me was the fact that he spoke for four hours! He could have easily continued, and may have at a local diner (the college cut him off at midnight). Of course this is where my older self battled with my younger self. Older self kept reminding younger self that I had to work in the morning. Younger self won, and I stuck with the whole lecture. Older self wasn't happy with the hour of sleep I got before work. Anyway, there's a DVD available called "An Evening With Kevin Smith" that features his speaking engagements.
So best of luck to Kevin at the box office this weekend. I'll be with you for "Clerks II"... just don't push your luck with "Clerks III."

TV Shows on DVD: Marketing Genius

2006-07-15T12:31:00.000-05:00

While I love my DVR, I think another trend I like is the influx of television shows available on DVD. Before the "DVD Revolution", television shows weren't too common on VHS. You'd get the British cult classics (Monty Python, the Avengers) and various episodes of an American series, but generally not an entire season or series. But now, every week, a new (or old) series is popping up on DVD. I figure there are three reasons why I like the trend. First, it's a chance to relive your favorite shows without having to dig through television schedules wondering if there's even a channel carrying your show. I recently purchased the fourth season of "News Radio", and have been enjoying the brilliance of the show. Granted, season three is my personal favorite, but you get the point. Comfort in knowing that I can watch my favorite show without commercials and if I'm lucky, with cast commentary or bonus extras. Second, it's a chance to catch a show you may have missed the first time. "Freaks & Geeks" and "Family Guy" are two examples in my collection. "Freaks & Geeks" was a show that I had heard of, but never got around to watching it's one season on the air. A joy to watch because it's a time frame I can relate to and yet I wish I could say I had supported it when it was on television. With "Family Guy", I didn't start to watch the program until after its cancellation and release on DVD. And, as it turns out, I wasn't the only one, as the DVDs sold like wildfire, bringing the show back. Finally, and this is the marketing genius, is that if you miss a season of a current program, you can catch up and hop aboard for the current season. I think HBO really took advantage of the situation and the networks are using the strategy. Simply release a season on DVD just before the next season begins. Particularly effective if the show has a continuing plot line. My wife and I are currently hooked on "Deadwood," although we just started season two. But that's where the DVR is handy, as it's recording season three. However, not all my favorites have made it to the DVD format yet. "WKRP in Cincinnati" may never make it because of music rights. But "Freaks & Geeks" cleared that hurdle, so there's hope. After all, if Screetch is available for home viewing, then shouldn't Les Nessman. And if you'd like more information on what's coming out on DVD, check out the site TV Shows on DVD. The link is on the right.

Plank to the Face Radio... Huh?

2006-07-13T16:51:00.000-05:00

In my 20 plus years of broadcasting, I've spent a majority of it working in radio. And while I overall enjoyed the experience, I never really liked the way the music was programmed. Granted, that's another subject for another time, but in looking back, I think there were four situations I didn't feel that way. Two involved college stations. The stations were student run and more importantly, student programmed. The DJs controlled the music for the most part. The format was generally alternative, but other styles crept into the mix, like blues, reggae, jazz and even country. So while we played artist like Midnight Oil, the Cure, the Smiths (hey, it was the 80s), you might also hear Miles Davis, Albert Collins, Burning Spear or even Johnny Cash, before he was cool again. The third was a syndicated radio show I produced that featured new, independent artists. The final situation was a couple years ago when a local station let me do an 80s show on Saturday afternoon. The audience response was good, I got to play music I liked, and even had my friends co-host the show. And that brings us to the present. I guess in an attempt to recreate my college radio experience, I put together the playlists for Plank to the Face. It's a variety of music, from the 50s to the present with an emphasis on the 80s. Most of it would fall into the alternative category, but there's plenty of mainstream music I also enjoy (ABBA is a guilty pleasure). Do I make any apologies for my choices? No, because music means different things to different people. My wife loves Josh Groban, but thankfully our tastes meet at They Might Be Giants. I just enjoy having an avenue to share my musical taste and maybe turn people onto a band or song they might not be familiar with. New tunes are added weekdays with a larger playlist on the weekend. So hit the link and enjoy. And I promise, no idle DJ patter...

Bad Movies

2006-07-08T13:13:00.000-05:00

While in the office the other day, the discussion turned to your favorite movies. Naturally, when this discussion begins, sooner or later, someone will mention a movie you totally hate. One thing will lead to another, and the topic turns to bad movies. And that subject got me thinking: What actually defines a bad movie? It is a film that's bad technically or a film that you hate so much, you'd rather gouge your eyes out than watch it again. There are several bad movies that exist that I enjoy because of the good-bad movie factor. The works of Ed Wood are a perfect example. Poorly written, acted and directed, but yet they have a certain charm to them. If anything, he had enthusiasm, which is so missing in a lot of film making these days. "Showgirls" is another example. A bigger budget film that was poorly written and acted. Elizabeth Berkley only showed two emotions; angry and naked. The attempt at erotic soap opera turned more into unintentional comedy. To me, it's one very funny movie and has become a camp classic. On the flip side, I recently saw "The Family Stone," a movie I absolutely hated. It wasn't bad in a technical sense, but I disliked every character and the oh-so-predictable ending. And yet, other people enjoyed it. Bad movies are always a matter of opinion and the cause of a good argument. Now maybe if they had made "The Family Stone vs. Alien"...

Welcome to Plank to the Face

2006-07-01T14:50:00.000-05:00

Okay, welecome to Plank to the Face: The Blog. This is a site that deals with pop culture, mostly movies, television and music. Sports will be also covered and whatever else is on my mind. This also ties into Plank to the Face: The Internet Broadcast.