The Lost Sucks countdown continues!

Latest to jump onboard: Newsweek (ala MSNBC) and The New York Times. Sure, both of them wrap the countdown in warm and fuzzy observations about how the writers and producers need to walk that fine line between answering questions and feeding the mystery, but they’re also ignoring the crucial point that Lost does something different–it keeps changing the backstory. It’s so annoying–instead of giving you the story from start to end, it’s increasing tension by telling it to you in reverse. Which means that we, the supposedly omniscient observer who can travel in time to find out what happened in people’s lives, are being lied to. Either we can see the past–meaning we should see ALL the past and not just this little snippet this week–or we can’t and it should be revealed another way.

Instead, Lost is manipulative in a cheap and ineffective way. It’s completely fake, and as the flashbacks eventually run out of consistent stories to tell, they’ll start changing things. They’ll insert things to increase tension, but don’t line up with facts we learned earlier. So what will they do? They’ll make us question whether they were ever facts to begin with. Which are all cheap techniques for people who don’t have a story to tell and want to just keep you in front of the TV every week. It’s exactly what TV is supposed to do, which is why this kind of mystery, especially told in this fashion, is appealing at first but must ultimately crash to a mysterious island in the middle of the ocean.

To put it simply: Lost sucks.

Out of Practice

Grade: B

A sitcom with potential.

So I freely admit it–this show was TiVoed by Mrs Hose, not me. I hadn’t even
heard of it, seen a commercial, anything. She recorded the show because Stockard
Channing is in it, which makes me think she isn’t in West Wing anymore. But
that’s okay, because that show ended when Sorkin left–I tried watching it
afterwards but it was awful.

This one, though, has potential. In the same twisted, sickening way any runt
of a sitcom has the potential of becoming a huge hit in today’s reality
TV-infested world. Some good characters with surprisingly good performances by
veterans Channing and Winkler. The weakest spot, not surprisingly, is the main
character. But he’s the straight man (not in a sexual way), so that’s expected.
Several good moments by the brother and sister, so we’ll give it another shot.

How I Met Your Mother

Grade: B-

Dead on arrival.

First off, can Neil Patrick Harris please get a decent show? He’s the only
funny part of this one, and he and Tony Shalhoub made a great pair on Stark
Raving Mad (also not given enough time to develop). This show only gets a decent
grade because of Harris–the rest of the cast misses every mark possible. The
quirky friends try to play sweet, the oddball random characters aren’t odd at
all, and even the central premise doesn’t hold up since we’re told from the
first episode that this is about the main character meeting his wife, but the
main love interest isn’t the main character’s future wife.

Um, so why are we watching? Oh yeah, because Doogie’s in it.

Doogie rocks. Bring back Doogie! Put him on ER or Gray’s Anatomy or give him
a new series. Vinnie Delpino must be in some crazy jam by now that Doogie needs
to fix. And I’m betting Doogie’s diary is up to a whopping 5 pages by now.

Breaking Bonaduce

Grade: A+

Get a pillow for your jaw.

This show is so disgustingly good, it’s disturbing. Or maybe it’s so
disgustingly disturbing, it’s good. Whichever it is–watch it. It’s brutal,
frank, and gets right to the point. Danny Bonaduce is an addict and this is the
best look at addictive personalities since that very special episode of
Blossom.

Sure, parts are fake–like the fact that the therapist’s office is actually a
sound stage. But the advice is real, and whenever you hear the therapist speak
you can’t help but feel like he’s being authentic. Not like that hack of a shrink on Blow Out,
this one is giving real, genuine advice. Not that Danny listens to it.

But at least Danny is honest–he opens the show by saying his life is a car
wreck and it’s okay to slow down and take a look. Which is exactly the point of
every episode–we get to see horrible decisions in the making and (possibly)
their impact. I’m assuming the impact comes later, because so far the decisions
have been bad but the repercussions haven’t kicked in yet. Episode 1–he admits
to affair, but wife doesn’t leave. Episode 2–he admits to using steroids (well,
more like injects them on camera) but nothing too bad happens; then he lies to
his wife, again no consequences (yet). But you feel like this is all building
up. Like any second now the Behind The Music voiceover is going to come on with
the “But then, things started to go downhill…” Before we know it, Danny will end
up in the hospital or at a Krispy Kreme with Carny Wilson.

This show is shocking, honest, and finally puts some real back into reality
TV. You may not like Danny (that’s the point), but it’s a fascinating look at a
really sad guy.

Lost sucks, but the Emmys suck more

The Emmys suck. It’s official. They’ve always had sucky moments, but this year they took suckage to a whole different level of suckitude. That British guy who invented the bagless vacuum cleaner better keep an eye over his shoulder, because the Emmys could suck scum off a carpet from ten miles away.

Three huge disappointments last night. First, Zach Braff not winning for Best Actor in a Comedy. Instead they gave it to James Spader–a guy who shows time and time again that he isn’t playing odd and quirky, he IS odd and quirky. He’s not acting people, he’s just weird. That’s why he only did soft-core porn and movies with Rob Lowe (sometimes both at the same time) before getting cast in the David E. Kelley legal drama of the week. He sucks, Zach Braff doesn’t. Stupid Emmy voters.

Second disappointment, Hugh Laurie getting passed over for the best acting job on TV as House. The second season started off with a bang, and watching old first season episodes again just shows how amazing Hugh is at portraying this guy. Not to mention the accent (which had a funny moment when Zach and Hugh presented an award together). Idiot Emmy voters.

For the third disappointment I’m tempted to blame the audience, but given the Emmys were counting the votes, they probably screwed that up too. The Emmy Idol idea was mixed at best, but the best performance was not the stupid Green Acres theme. William Shatner and that opera lady were hilarious–whoever thought of having someone sing the Star Trek theme was a friggin’ genius. It should have won, everyone knew it–that’s why when they announced the “winners” there was a reaction shot of Shatner (who, incidentally, looked confused the entire night–but next to Macy Gray he looked like a Nobel laureate). Everyone knew Star Trek should have won, so either the older CBS crowd voted in the oldest theme song presented, or the Emmys suck. Oh yeah, I know–the Emmys suck.

I’m not even going to discuss the Best Drama Series award. The Emmys will learn in just a few weeks how they’ve been duped.

I think when they go down the hatch they’ll find JJ Abrams in a compromising position with the entire group of Emmy voters. The suckage circle will be complete.

Missing Post

Sadly, post 117 was lost in the server crash.

House is in da house!

Finally.

Tonight is the season premiere of House. If you haven’t watched it, tune in. It’s possibly the best drama on TV right now, and gives us hope that there’s life beyond reality TV. When I first reviewed the show, I liked it from the start, but it just kept getting better and better. And that was even watching most of the episodes out of order over the summer. Now we’ll get the full season glory of House’s biting comments and incredibly rare disease diagnoses.

Smallpox, here we come!

iPod Nano: Let the drooling commence!

After a lot of speculation about the iPod mini moving to flash-based memory over those micro-hard drives, turns out the mini is dead, long live the iPod nano! Smaller, thinner, lighter, less colorful in terms of plastic but more colorful in terms of screen.
Not as good a deal as regular iPods in terms of dollars for gig of storage, but they’re pretty slick looking. Expect rip-offs from other companies within the month.

Does anybody else think that, design-wise (not functionality-wise, I hope!),
we’re moving closer and closer to an iPod Suppository?

Coach Carter

Grade: C

It shoots for the student athlete message and puts up a brick.

Coach Carter is based on a true story that’s better than the movie. In real life, a basketball coach lifted an urban high school basketball program to become undefeated, then locked them out when their grades weren’t high enough. The real Coach Carter became a media hero, and he’s a truly admirable man.

But this movie misses the point. It focuses so much on the basketball that the academic element is completely swamped. It becomes the obstacle the boys must overcome, but it feels tired and cliched instead of central to the storyline. This is not Stand And Deliver, an utterly superb movie about an inspiring teacher in an urban high school–this is MTV Films trying to make a movie about academics appeal to a younger crowd. Their method of doing that–make the basketball really, really cool looking. Swamp the soundtrack with the latest hip hop tracks, and drop in a B-list singer on the cast.

MTV Films, lest we forget, is the same group that brought us The Perfect Score last year, a movie about teenagers stealing the answer key to the SAT. They also brought us the worst movie of 2004, Napolean Dynamite. MTV Films doesn’t care about academics, they care about entertainment.

As movies about inspiring teachers/coaches go, better movies include Stand And Deliver or Remember The Titans. As movies about creating an amazing basketball team go, Hoosiers has this one beat hands down. And if you’re looking for inspiring sports figures dealing with real life issues, go watch The Rookie again.

But if you’re looking for watered down hip-hop entertainment filled with overly dramatic basketball masked in a feel-good “stay in school” message that completely misses the point, this is the flick for you.

Artemis Fowl: The Opal Deception

Grade: B-

I know Harry Potter. Harry Potter was a friend of mine. You, sir, are no Harry Potter.

I first read the Artemis Fowl series when the third book came out, hearing some buzz about the books and that it might be the next Harry Potter. Of course, a lot of children’s books were trying hard to be the next Harry Potter, and the only one that really succeeded was…well, the next Harry Potter book. I found the first two books to be somewhat enjoyable, but I thought the series started to come into its own with the third book. Like the Potter stories, the third book really showed a sea-change for the series. So when the fourth finally came out amidst little fanfare coupled with the release of the penultimate Potter, I was eager to find some time to finally see where Fowl was heading.

Ultimately, the book did present some changes to the series, but not a lot. Certainly nothing as profound as Potter did in books 3 and 4. Yes, there’s death and major characters change, but its all presented in a much simpler way to a much younger audience. While Potter’s audience is expected to grow and mature, the Fowl readers are stuck at 10 or 11. This limits the change that can happen, and makes the book feel superficial when there’s much more promise.

I think the foundation is still there, and maybe the author has deliberately chosen to keep his audience young and unexposed to more serious matters. But this is the post-Potter world of children’s literature, and it’s silly to think your readers won’t have already devoured every Potter book before turning to Artemis Fowl. Hopefully Colfer will learn this and grow his audience a bit by the next book.