St. Louis is currently being swallowed by a cloud of humidity that reduces us all to sweaty messes within fifteen minutes. That must mean it's time to start sifting through the combatants in the annual Song of the Summer contest! To be clear, although this type of contest is all over the media landscape, this particular contest is taking place entirely within my heart. What the public at large thinks won't win the day here. So thankfully, it doesn't matter if "She Looks So Perfect" gets the most radio play; since I think it's an idiotic track that comes off as a slightly-douchier One Direction song, it won't be in the running.
What will be in the running? Well, let's start with "Waves", by Sleeper Agent. Since I don't listen to a lot of radio, I should attribute the source where I first found out about these songs, and in the case of "Waves", it's my friend Robin, whom I traveled to Hawaii with. Some of the reasoning behind this choice should be pretty damn obvious. It's high-tempo. It mentions California and the ocean, and... OK, fine. The lyrics aren't the cheeriest thing in the world, but listen to how peppy it is!
Now imagine listening to that song while you're cruising down a Maui highway with the windows open and the sea air wafting in. How can you resist? While it's a strong contender, it can be be a bit melodically repetitive - this singer doesn't have much of a range on this one. Still, I really enjoy it, and there's no denying that it captures the mood of a Song of the Summer perfectly. Even if the highway I'm cruising down now is in the flatlands of Missouri and it's way too sweltering out to open the windows, this is still a song I'll be listening to all season.
Song of the Summer Odds: 3:2
The Path of Minor Planets
See what I did there? With the title? Oh, forget it.
For me, a lot of television shows are about pure entertainment. I'll occasionally watch news, politics, or some other sort of show with educational content, but I leave most of that to the realms of documentary films and non-fiction books. It was a different story when I was a kid; I was all about educational shows. Sesame Street was the gold standard, of course, but as a child in the '80s through high school in the '90s, there was no dearth of incredible shows to immerse myself in. Mr. Wizard's World, 3-2-1 Contact, Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?, Square One TV, Beakman's World, Bill Nye, the Science Guy, Reading Rainbow... These shows were not only grand fun, but were built on a solid foundation of helping their young viewers soak up the basics of math, geography, science, and literature.
That type of show is mostly extinct now, and the world is a worse place for it. We've entered a long stretch of years of anti-intellectualism (not coincidentally kicked off when our country was being helmed by George W. Bush), and not just in the arena of shows for children. News shows yielded to shouty pundit shows. Bravo stopped showcasing opera and started showing vapid, fighting housewives. Here Comes Honey Boo Boo airs on a network once known as The Learning Channel. The History Channel produces Ancient Aliens. So while we're in a Golden Age of scripted television, when it comes to factual content, the world has never been darker.
Until now! I was a little too young to take in Carl Sagan's original 1980 Cosmos: A Personal Voyage miniseries, but there is little doubt that the updated version, the 2014 miniseries Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey will appear on my top five shows of the year. It would be almost impossible to describe how fine a line this show had to walk. In more enlightened times, a scientist could go on TV, present a consensus agreed upon by 99.9% of the scientific community, and leave it at that. Now, of course, one must actually debate the merits of creationism or the lack of climate change or other such bullshit. Somehow, host Neil deGrasse Tyson managed to calmly, politely, yet assertively present the facts and hypotheses of our universe's scientific past, present, and future without ever getting polemic about it.
But even leaving the unfortunate politicization of science aside, Cosmos was just a ripping good show. It described the inner working of the universe, from the most distant stars to the tiny cells within our bodies. Its production value was breathtakingly gorgeous. It went out of its way to highlight the forgotten geniuses of our past (many of them women), who were responsible for some of the most important scientific achievements to date, but whose names never filtered into the popular consciousness.
In fact, the only bad thing about this show is that since Seth MacFarlane produced it, I am now forced to take back 75% of all the mean things I've ever said about him and his work. Excellent work, sir. Cosmos was not only an entertaining show, but a wholly necessary one. As far as I know, there are no plans for a second season, but if the healthy ratings for this all-too-brief miniseries signifies a return of the days when audiences embraced shows with actual educational content, the stars will certainly be shining a little brighter for me.
Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey: A+
For me, a lot of television shows are about pure entertainment. I'll occasionally watch news, politics, or some other sort of show with educational content, but I leave most of that to the realms of documentary films and non-fiction books. It was a different story when I was a kid; I was all about educational shows. Sesame Street was the gold standard, of course, but as a child in the '80s through high school in the '90s, there was no dearth of incredible shows to immerse myself in. Mr. Wizard's World, 3-2-1 Contact, Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?, Square One TV, Beakman's World, Bill Nye, the Science Guy, Reading Rainbow... These shows were not only grand fun, but were built on a solid foundation of helping their young viewers soak up the basics of math, geography, science, and literature.
That type of show is mostly extinct now, and the world is a worse place for it. We've entered a long stretch of years of anti-intellectualism (not coincidentally kicked off when our country was being helmed by George W. Bush), and not just in the arena of shows for children. News shows yielded to shouty pundit shows. Bravo stopped showcasing opera and started showing vapid, fighting housewives. Here Comes Honey Boo Boo airs on a network once known as The Learning Channel. The History Channel produces Ancient Aliens. So while we're in a Golden Age of scripted television, when it comes to factual content, the world has never been darker.
Until now! I was a little too young to take in Carl Sagan's original 1980 Cosmos: A Personal Voyage miniseries, but there is little doubt that the updated version, the 2014 miniseries Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey will appear on my top five shows of the year. It would be almost impossible to describe how fine a line this show had to walk. In more enlightened times, a scientist could go on TV, present a consensus agreed upon by 99.9% of the scientific community, and leave it at that. Now, of course, one must actually debate the merits of creationism or the lack of climate change or other such bullshit. Somehow, host Neil deGrasse Tyson managed to calmly, politely, yet assertively present the facts and hypotheses of our universe's scientific past, present, and future without ever getting polemic about it.
But even leaving the unfortunate politicization of science aside, Cosmos was just a ripping good show. It described the inner working of the universe, from the most distant stars to the tiny cells within our bodies. Its production value was breathtakingly gorgeous. It went out of its way to highlight the forgotten geniuses of our past (many of them women), who were responsible for some of the most important scientific achievements to date, but whose names never filtered into the popular consciousness.
In fact, the only bad thing about this show is that since Seth MacFarlane produced it, I am now forced to take back 75% of all the mean things I've ever said about him and his work. Excellent work, sir. Cosmos was not only an entertaining show, but a wholly necessary one. As far as I know, there are no plans for a second season, but if the healthy ratings for this all-too-brief miniseries signifies a return of the days when audiences embraced shows with actual educational content, the stars will certainly be shining a little brighter for me.
Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey: A+
Shorties #13
It's time for an all-movie Shorties! Once in a while, I'll find myself with a couple of spare hours and knock something out of the Netflix queue, or I'll follow up on a recommendation, or I'll be hanging out with someone who's watching a movie, and I'm taken along on the ride. These little bits of cinematic detritus get collected as the side dishes of the entertainment world, but that's not to say they're unimportant. Several Shorties wind up being more enjoyable than the tentpole movies that get far more attention. Let's hit it!
#1: Penelope: This 2006 Christina Ricci film is the epitome of a Laundry Movie. It's a fairly generic morality tale about loving-the-person-within, in which the title character is cursed with a pig nose until she finds true love. Ricci and James McAvoy are a pleasant calm eye in the middle of an overacting storm. Everyone else, from Penelope's parents to the shallow suitors who don't fit the bill, are far too hammy. It was a perfectly fine way to spend a couple of hours, but certainly not something that I'd ever hasten to recommend to others (Grade: B-)
#2: The Last of Sheila: Some movies are entertaining because they're good, but some movies are entertaining because they're interesting. 1973's The Last of Sheila was talked up on a movie website I regularly read, and I thought to myself "Eh, what the hell? I like mysteries and puzzles." While it didn't sweep me up in cinematic grandeur, there's no denying that this was a pretty weird and wonderful experience. All of the characters have secrets simmering under the surface, and when an eccentric game-master brings them all to the surface, the game turns to murder. This taking place in the '70s means that the shameful secrets are treated with an oddly high or low level of reaction, but overall, it was really fun, and unlike other murder mystery movies, this one actually drops clues that observant viewers can pick up on. (Grade: B+)
#3: It's a Disaster: I have to dance around a fine line with disaster/apocalypse movies. I generally love their premises, but they can be too gory or too silly or too lots-of-things. A lot of self-winking end-of-the-world flicks came out a couple of years ago: I mostly enjoyed This is the End, ignored Rapture-Palooza, and have been trying to decide if I want to tackle Seeking a Friend for the End of the World or not. One of the ones that slipped through the cracks was the 2012 movie It's a Disaster - an omission I corrected one weekend I was studiously avoiding cleaning the apartment. Four couples meet for one of their usual Sunday brunches. One of the couples is brand new, and the woman (Julia Stiles) is introducing her new boyfriend (David Cross) to her friend group. It's a tense gathering of people who mostly don't like each other, and the situation is not improved when news that the city has been attacked with a biological weapon reaches them. Sealed into the house, their interpersonal problems intensify. I liked that the entire movie takes place within the confines of the house, and we never see what's actually going on out there. Being trapped with no real way of acquiring news would be one of the scariest parts of such a societal breakdown, and those fears definitely afflict the characters. But, woof, what a set of characters. There isn't really a single one to root for; it's an assemblage of unpleasant people who shouldn't be friends, and you kind of wish they'd shut up and just die already. This is one of those movies that has a terrific concept, but fell apart in the execution. (Grade: C)
#4: Urbanized: I get geeky about the weirdest topics, and one of them is an interest in urban design. What makes a city succeed or fail its citizens? How does something as simple as a bike path or a series of light bulbs enhance the lives of a city's denizens? How do you balance the endless and constantly shifting needs of a populace? The 2011 documentary Urbanized does an admirable job of exploring a lot of these questions. I've mentioned before that I really liked director Gary Hustwit's previous documentary, Helvetica. The follow-up, Objectified was also informative, if not as entertaining, but this third one easily springs back from that limitation. Interviews with architects, designers, politicians, and others provide multiple perspectives about the challenges of designing city services and attractions, from parks to public transportation to roadways. The movie doesn't pull punches when it comes to cities that do things wrong, either. The film goes along at kind of a slow pace, but the fascinating subject matter more than makes up for it. (Grade: B)
#5: The Big Wedding: This 2013 movie is not one I would have picked for myself, but was willing to give it a whirl when I was staying with some friends who wanted to watch it. Oof. This is one of those farce comedies, in which Robert De Niro and ex-wife Diane Keaton must pretend to still be married, in order to...impress their adopted son's biological mother at said son's wedding. This is obviously not happy news for De Niro's longtime girlfriend Susan Sarandon. Topher Grace and Katherine Heigl round out the cast as De Niro and Keaton's insufferable children. I'm using actor names instead of character names, because the characters are so two-dimensional as to be almost non-existent. No cliche is too hoary for this movie, from the sexy foreigner who exists only to titillate the virginal son to the whooooooooa-we're-falling-in-water bit of comedy that stopped being cute in 1982. I haven't even gotten to the part where Robin Williams is allowed to let loose with spastic insults as the wedding's priest. In case I haven't made it clear yet: I wasn't a fan of this one. (Grade: C-)
#1: Penelope: This 2006 Christina Ricci film is the epitome of a Laundry Movie. It's a fairly generic morality tale about loving-the-person-within, in which the title character is cursed with a pig nose until she finds true love. Ricci and James McAvoy are a pleasant calm eye in the middle of an overacting storm. Everyone else, from Penelope's parents to the shallow suitors who don't fit the bill, are far too hammy. It was a perfectly fine way to spend a couple of hours, but certainly not something that I'd ever hasten to recommend to others (Grade: B-)
#2: The Last of Sheila: Some movies are entertaining because they're good, but some movies are entertaining because they're interesting. 1973's The Last of Sheila was talked up on a movie website I regularly read, and I thought to myself "Eh, what the hell? I like mysteries and puzzles." While it didn't sweep me up in cinematic grandeur, there's no denying that this was a pretty weird and wonderful experience. All of the characters have secrets simmering under the surface, and when an eccentric game-master brings them all to the surface, the game turns to murder. This taking place in the '70s means that the shameful secrets are treated with an oddly high or low level of reaction, but overall, it was really fun, and unlike other murder mystery movies, this one actually drops clues that observant viewers can pick up on. (Grade: B+)
#3: It's a Disaster: I have to dance around a fine line with disaster/apocalypse movies. I generally love their premises, but they can be too gory or too silly or too lots-of-things. A lot of self-winking end-of-the-world flicks came out a couple of years ago: I mostly enjoyed This is the End, ignored Rapture-Palooza, and have been trying to decide if I want to tackle Seeking a Friend for the End of the World or not. One of the ones that slipped through the cracks was the 2012 movie It's a Disaster - an omission I corrected one weekend I was studiously avoiding cleaning the apartment. Four couples meet for one of their usual Sunday brunches. One of the couples is brand new, and the woman (Julia Stiles) is introducing her new boyfriend (David Cross) to her friend group. It's a tense gathering of people who mostly don't like each other, and the situation is not improved when news that the city has been attacked with a biological weapon reaches them. Sealed into the house, their interpersonal problems intensify. I liked that the entire movie takes place within the confines of the house, and we never see what's actually going on out there. Being trapped with no real way of acquiring news would be one of the scariest parts of such a societal breakdown, and those fears definitely afflict the characters. But, woof, what a set of characters. There isn't really a single one to root for; it's an assemblage of unpleasant people who shouldn't be friends, and you kind of wish they'd shut up and just die already. This is one of those movies that has a terrific concept, but fell apart in the execution. (Grade: C)
#4: Urbanized: I get geeky about the weirdest topics, and one of them is an interest in urban design. What makes a city succeed or fail its citizens? How does something as simple as a bike path or a series of light bulbs enhance the lives of a city's denizens? How do you balance the endless and constantly shifting needs of a populace? The 2011 documentary Urbanized does an admirable job of exploring a lot of these questions. I've mentioned before that I really liked director Gary Hustwit's previous documentary, Helvetica. The follow-up, Objectified was also informative, if not as entertaining, but this third one easily springs back from that limitation. Interviews with architects, designers, politicians, and others provide multiple perspectives about the challenges of designing city services and attractions, from parks to public transportation to roadways. The movie doesn't pull punches when it comes to cities that do things wrong, either. The film goes along at kind of a slow pace, but the fascinating subject matter more than makes up for it. (Grade: B)
#5: The Big Wedding: This 2013 movie is not one I would have picked for myself, but was willing to give it a whirl when I was staying with some friends who wanted to watch it. Oof. This is one of those farce comedies, in which Robert De Niro and ex-wife Diane Keaton must pretend to still be married, in order to...impress their adopted son's biological mother at said son's wedding. This is obviously not happy news for De Niro's longtime girlfriend Susan Sarandon. Topher Grace and Katherine Heigl round out the cast as De Niro and Keaton's insufferable children. I'm using actor names instead of character names, because the characters are so two-dimensional as to be almost non-existent. No cliche is too hoary for this movie, from the sexy foreigner who exists only to titillate the virginal son to the whooooooooa-we're-falling-in-water bit of comedy that stopped being cute in 1982. I haven't even gotten to the part where Robin Williams is allowed to let loose with spastic insults as the wedding's priest. In case I haven't made it clear yet: I wasn't a fan of this one. (Grade: C-)
The Calm Before the Storm
I've been racking up some summer blockbusters recently, and one of my longstanding hypotheses is getting truckloads of supporting evidence by the day: When it comes to action movies, the biggest determinant of whether or not it's worth seeing is everything but the action. Anyone can throw some money into CGI monsters or massive explosions. Americans (me included) seem to be reaching a point of Spectacle Fatigue, in which no amount of impressive visual effects is enough to carry the movie on its own. As leveling cities and killer lizards become more and more humdrum, filmmakers might soon realize that it's becoming increasingly important to - gulp! - actually write a decent story.
Want to see this rule in action (so to speak)? Go see Godzilla and X-Men: Days of Future Past in rapid succession, like I did. Both are mega-budget extravaganzas. Both rely heavily on special effects. Both take existing properties and attempt to spin a new story off of them. But only one of them really succeeds, because it takes the time to actually care about what's taking place on screen when giant robots/monsters aren't attacking. I saw Godzilla first. I guess Two Other Monsters But Then Godzilla Drops By For A Few Minutes didn't fit on the posters. This movie gets a few things very right. It can be difficult to represent the scope and scale of just how insignificant puny humans are when gargantuan monsters are roaming through the streets, and Godzilla pulled it off better than any other movie I can think of. You truly get the sense of being no more than an ant when compared to the beast causing casual devastation across the globe. So, big points for that. Bryan Cranston is typically great in everything he appears in, and Godzilla is no exception. His increasing hysteria and frustration in trying to warn people of impending disaster, only to be turned away, is wholly believable. And, since this is a monster movie, I should mention that the monster fights are pretty cool. So it's got that going for it.
What's wrong with Gozilla? Everything else. All of the humans are two-dimensional nothings, and the movie shows zero interest in having their reasoning or reactions approach reality. The main character (the trailers would have you believe that Bryan Cranston is the main character -- he is not) is seemingly the unluckiest man in the world, consistently showing up in the one location that killer monsters are converging upon, and he shows absolutely no interest in that point. He purportedly wants to protect his (boring) wife and (more boring) child, yet casually tells them to hang out in a disaster area and that he'll come fix things, because...reasons. He shows no emotion upon being the sole survivor (and let's face it, the cause of) his compatriots' deaths. Fuck, even Blast Hardcheese at least had actual motivations. Nobody acts like an actual person, and nobody is worth rooting for. And if you think that character is being sacrificed in service of plot... Nope. Plot holes abound. In one scene, we cut away from our "hero" in mortal peril on a demolished airport tram. When we rejoin him, he's fine-and-dandy, and off to another adventure. What happened in between? Good question! Godzilla has had a rough go of it lately, and while this movie wasn't terrible (and I'd watch it a hundred times before I'd revisit a single frame of the 1998 crapfest), it was a decided disappointment.
But then, I went to see X-Men: Days of Future Past, which totally rejuvenated me. This movie had a lot working against it. It involves time travel, and in doing so, must weave together the storylines of the original X-Men trilogy and X-Men: First Class, plus tell a new story of its own. Which it then proceeds to do, almost flawlessly. In the future, mutant-hunting robots known as Sentinels have all but wiped out not only mutants, but humans who have DNA that would prospectively produce mutants. The world has fallen into chaos, and in desperation, a small band of survivors goes for a Hail Mary - they will send Wolverine's consciousness back to the '70s in order to unite Charles Xavier and Magneto (who are enemies as of the end of First Class) so they can stop Mystique from assassinating the head of the Sentinel program. That assassination is what secured the Sentinel funding, so by preventing it, they hope they can alter the timeline.
Note that I haven't mentioned anything about mutant powers, and it's not because they're not on full display. It's because this movie put effort into crafting an actual story with stakes and shifting relationships. It's not just an excuse to watch Wolverine slash at stuff and Magneto levitate some bullets. As a result, it's a fantastic flick, where the verbal fights are as compelling as the super-powered ones. The cast certainly helps. The elder versions of Xavier and Magneto (Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen) are well-matched by their younger selves (James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender). Jennifer Lawrence is an emotionally powerful Mystique. Peter Dinklage is a superb antagonist. Each of the secondary characters gets a chance to show off as well, and actually use their powers in concert with each other, demonstrating cooperation that not enough team movies display. And if you're just looking for pure fun, the Quicksilver setpiece in the middle of the movie is one of the most amazing scenes I've seen in a long time.
That's not to say the movie doesn't have a few problems. There are some third-act issues that don't make much sense, but never to the point that they derail the movie. Magneto's motivations (and even the scope of his powers) sometimes shift too suddenly. And this one isn't even a complaint with the movie itself: I've had it with post-credit stingers. Mark it, this was my breaking point. No longer will I sit through fifteen minutes of a hundred visual effects artists, craft services, weapons wranglers, and set painters so that I may be treated to a ten-second scene that doesn't make any sense. We're done. I'm sure the internet will inform me of any cool ones I should look up later. In general, though, Days of Future Past is just about everything I could hope for in a summer action movie, and why? Story. Imagine that.
Godzilla: C+
X-Men: Days of Future Past: A-
Want to see this rule in action (so to speak)? Go see Godzilla and X-Men: Days of Future Past in rapid succession, like I did. Both are mega-budget extravaganzas. Both rely heavily on special effects. Both take existing properties and attempt to spin a new story off of them. But only one of them really succeeds, because it takes the time to actually care about what's taking place on screen when giant robots/monsters aren't attacking. I saw Godzilla first. I guess Two Other Monsters But Then Godzilla Drops By For A Few Minutes didn't fit on the posters. This movie gets a few things very right. It can be difficult to represent the scope and scale of just how insignificant puny humans are when gargantuan monsters are roaming through the streets, and Godzilla pulled it off better than any other movie I can think of. You truly get the sense of being no more than an ant when compared to the beast causing casual devastation across the globe. So, big points for that. Bryan Cranston is typically great in everything he appears in, and Godzilla is no exception. His increasing hysteria and frustration in trying to warn people of impending disaster, only to be turned away, is wholly believable. And, since this is a monster movie, I should mention that the monster fights are pretty cool. So it's got that going for it.
What's wrong with Gozilla? Everything else. All of the humans are two-dimensional nothings, and the movie shows zero interest in having their reasoning or reactions approach reality. The main character (the trailers would have you believe that Bryan Cranston is the main character -- he is not) is seemingly the unluckiest man in the world, consistently showing up in the one location that killer monsters are converging upon, and he shows absolutely no interest in that point. He purportedly wants to protect his (boring) wife and (more boring) child, yet casually tells them to hang out in a disaster area and that he'll come fix things, because...reasons. He shows no emotion upon being the sole survivor (and let's face it, the cause of) his compatriots' deaths. Fuck, even Blast Hardcheese at least had actual motivations. Nobody acts like an actual person, and nobody is worth rooting for. And if you think that character is being sacrificed in service of plot... Nope. Plot holes abound. In one scene, we cut away from our "hero" in mortal peril on a demolished airport tram. When we rejoin him, he's fine-and-dandy, and off to another adventure. What happened in between? Good question! Godzilla has had a rough go of it lately, and while this movie wasn't terrible (and I'd watch it a hundred times before I'd revisit a single frame of the 1998 crapfest), it was a decided disappointment.
But then, I went to see X-Men: Days of Future Past, which totally rejuvenated me. This movie had a lot working against it. It involves time travel, and in doing so, must weave together the storylines of the original X-Men trilogy and X-Men: First Class, plus tell a new story of its own. Which it then proceeds to do, almost flawlessly. In the future, mutant-hunting robots known as Sentinels have all but wiped out not only mutants, but humans who have DNA that would prospectively produce mutants. The world has fallen into chaos, and in desperation, a small band of survivors goes for a Hail Mary - they will send Wolverine's consciousness back to the '70s in order to unite Charles Xavier and Magneto (who are enemies as of the end of First Class) so they can stop Mystique from assassinating the head of the Sentinel program. That assassination is what secured the Sentinel funding, so by preventing it, they hope they can alter the timeline.
Note that I haven't mentioned anything about mutant powers, and it's not because they're not on full display. It's because this movie put effort into crafting an actual story with stakes and shifting relationships. It's not just an excuse to watch Wolverine slash at stuff and Magneto levitate some bullets. As a result, it's a fantastic flick, where the verbal fights are as compelling as the super-powered ones. The cast certainly helps. The elder versions of Xavier and Magneto (Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen) are well-matched by their younger selves (James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender). Jennifer Lawrence is an emotionally powerful Mystique. Peter Dinklage is a superb antagonist. Each of the secondary characters gets a chance to show off as well, and actually use their powers in concert with each other, demonstrating cooperation that not enough team movies display. And if you're just looking for pure fun, the Quicksilver setpiece in the middle of the movie is one of the most amazing scenes I've seen in a long time.
That's not to say the movie doesn't have a few problems. There are some third-act issues that don't make much sense, but never to the point that they derail the movie. Magneto's motivations (and even the scope of his powers) sometimes shift too suddenly. And this one isn't even a complaint with the movie itself: I've had it with post-credit stingers. Mark it, this was my breaking point. No longer will I sit through fifteen minutes of a hundred visual effects artists, craft services, weapons wranglers, and set painters so that I may be treated to a ten-second scene that doesn't make any sense. We're done. I'm sure the internet will inform me of any cool ones I should look up later. In general, though, Days of Future Past is just about everything I could hope for in a summer action movie, and why? Story. Imagine that.
Godzilla: C+
X-Men: Days of Future Past: A-
Señor Skrillex and the Citrus Dichotomy
Four Courses Podcast - Episode 5
¡Hola! Up for some Mexican food? Sure you are! Well, you're in luck. In honor of Cinco de Mayo, the May episode of Four Courses is almost entirely Mexican-themed. Why not mix up a margarita, kick back, and go give Episode 5 a listen? It's live at fourcoursespodcast.com, and is also available for subscription on iTunes and Stitcher.
Topics include Tower Taco, the origins and variations of margaritas, the St. Louis festival for Cinco de Mayo down on Cherokee Street, the relatively recent trend of upscale Mexican food, and finally, a short discussion of the edibles we've got planted in our spring gardens.
Please enjoy, and mail fourcoursespodcast@gmail.com with any questions, comments, feedback, or suggestions!
¡Hola! Up for some Mexican food? Sure you are! Well, you're in luck. In honor of Cinco de Mayo, the May episode of Four Courses is almost entirely Mexican-themed. Why not mix up a margarita, kick back, and go give Episode 5 a listen? It's live at fourcoursespodcast.com, and is also available for subscription on iTunes and Stitcher.
Topics include Tower Taco, the origins and variations of margaritas, the St. Louis festival for Cinco de Mayo down on Cherokee Street, the relatively recent trend of upscale Mexican food, and finally, a short discussion of the edibles we've got planted in our spring gardens.
Please enjoy, and mail fourcoursespodcast@gmail.com with any questions, comments, feedback, or suggestions!
Summer Movie Preview: June 2014
Vacation time is over, and I'll be sticking to home for a while. And speaking of sticking, it looks like it's going to be the usual sweltering, humid summer, so I'll be seeking out air-conditioned locales, many of which will contain technology capable of screening movies. Hey, what a great opportunity to see what cinematic treasures June has to offer! As always, let's sift them neatly into one of four handy categories: Must-See, Rental, TBD, or Pass.
June 1
X-Men: Days of Future Past: First, a correction. Obviously, this movie has already come out, and isn't weirdly being released on a Sunday. I just accidentally left it off of the May movie preview post, and will be doing penance not only by mentioning it now, but by going to see it on June 1. I don't even need the glowing reviews this film has already been getting; I was already excited to see it. The X-Men have always held the most allure for me in the superhero genre (and not just in in movies - I watched the show and played the video games religiously, too), so I'm giddy about this. (Must-See)
June 6
Obvious Child: A comedian goes through a breakup, loses her job, and gets pregnant from a one-night-stand, all in one day. It sounds like it has the potential to be incredibly annoying, but Jenny Slate, you guys. I love Jenny Slate. She's been killing it on shows like Parks & Rec and Bob's Burgers lately. And if I need any additional backup, the crowds at Sundance loved it. This one is definitely staying on my radar. (Rental)
Edge of Tomorrow: This is the most confusing of the movies being released this summer. I don't mean the plot is confusing; it's actually a pretty clever idea, in which Tom Cruise reawakens when he dies, and thus learns more each time about how to defeat an invading alien army. Emily Blunt takes on her first big action role as his...trainer? Co-death-walker? Long lost sister? Who knows? What's confusing is that the trailers walk such a tight line between looking fascinating and goofy. I feel like this movie is either going to be completely amazing or a total disaster, but I can't predict which. (TBD)
Trust Me: Movie previews is one of the reasons I keep up my subscription to Entertainment Weekly, despite its continual slide into becoming the next love child of Tiger Beat and US Weekly. This movie, directed by and starring Clark Gregg, would have slipped right by me if I didn't comb through the movie calendars they publish. And look how interesting it seems! Gregg plays a former child star who now struggles to hold onto clients as an agent for child actors. The movie costars Felicity Huffman and Allison Janney, and basically looks like it was tailor-made to my tastes. I'm really looking forward to seeing how it's received, and if it can live up to my expectations. (Rental)
June 13
How to Train Your Dragon 2: The trailers for the first one made it look like a pretty generic kids' movie, so I didn't realize how great it was until months later. So now I'm in a pickle. The trailers for this one make it look like a pretty generic kids' movie sequel. Am I being misled again? Or is this exactly what it appears to be: a straining attempt to recapture the magic of the original? I'll let some first-wave viewers let me know before I make any decisions. (TBD)
22 Jump Street: I am apparently the only person on Earth who didn't think that 21 Jump Street was a rollicking good time. So I think I'll leave the rest of you to enjoy this series, and I'll go start another Sims family or something. (Pass)
June 27
Transformers: Age of Extinction: I'm intensely curious who the audience for this series is now. It's not like the plot or even the special effects were ever that great, and with Megan Fox no longer around to bounce up and down in slow motion... Who are these Michael Bay enthusiasts lining up for tickets? (Pass)
They Came Together: I like David Wain, but he's not infallible. I was distinctly meh about Wanderlust, so no matter how much I love a cast, they can't always elevate weak material. That said, They Came Together promises to do for romantic comedies what Wet Hot American Summer did for summer camp movies, and if it can follow through on that promise, it'll be my favorite movie ever. With stars like Paul Rudd, Amy Poehler, Cobie Smulders, and Christopher Meloni, it seems like all signs point to awesome. I'm cautiously optimistic that this will lean more towards Role Models than A.C.O.D. (Rental)
Snowpiercer: Mentions of this South Korean movie have already been popping up a lot on the film podcasts I listen to. It's gotten awards and nominations at various festivals. But until I looked it up to write this entry, I had no idea what Snowpiercer was about. Now I'm intrigued. It stars Chris Evans, Jamie Bell, and Tilda Swinton, among others. The plot revolves around the passengers on a train that circles the globe. A catastrophe has wiped out most of humanity, and a new society begins to form on board the train, with all the problems and complications that entails. I'm not sure I'll rush out to the theaters to see it, but assuming it's not too gory, this seems like a good Netflix movie. (Rental)
June 1
X-Men: Days of Future Past: First, a correction. Obviously, this movie has already come out, and isn't weirdly being released on a Sunday. I just accidentally left it off of the May movie preview post, and will be doing penance not only by mentioning it now, but by going to see it on June 1. I don't even need the glowing reviews this film has already been getting; I was already excited to see it. The X-Men have always held the most allure for me in the superhero genre (and not just in in movies - I watched the show and played the video games religiously, too), so I'm giddy about this. (Must-See)
June 6
Obvious Child: A comedian goes through a breakup, loses her job, and gets pregnant from a one-night-stand, all in one day. It sounds like it has the potential to be incredibly annoying, but Jenny Slate, you guys. I love Jenny Slate. She's been killing it on shows like Parks & Rec and Bob's Burgers lately. And if I need any additional backup, the crowds at Sundance loved it. This one is definitely staying on my radar. (Rental)
Edge of Tomorrow: This is the most confusing of the movies being released this summer. I don't mean the plot is confusing; it's actually a pretty clever idea, in which Tom Cruise reawakens when he dies, and thus learns more each time about how to defeat an invading alien army. Emily Blunt takes on her first big action role as his...trainer? Co-death-walker? Long lost sister? Who knows? What's confusing is that the trailers walk such a tight line between looking fascinating and goofy. I feel like this movie is either going to be completely amazing or a total disaster, but I can't predict which. (TBD)
Trust Me: Movie previews is one of the reasons I keep up my subscription to Entertainment Weekly, despite its continual slide into becoming the next love child of Tiger Beat and US Weekly. This movie, directed by and starring Clark Gregg, would have slipped right by me if I didn't comb through the movie calendars they publish. And look how interesting it seems! Gregg plays a former child star who now struggles to hold onto clients as an agent for child actors. The movie costars Felicity Huffman and Allison Janney, and basically looks like it was tailor-made to my tastes. I'm really looking forward to seeing how it's received, and if it can live up to my expectations. (Rental)
June 13
How to Train Your Dragon 2: The trailers for the first one made it look like a pretty generic kids' movie, so I didn't realize how great it was until months later. So now I'm in a pickle. The trailers for this one make it look like a pretty generic kids' movie sequel. Am I being misled again? Or is this exactly what it appears to be: a straining attempt to recapture the magic of the original? I'll let some first-wave viewers let me know before I make any decisions. (TBD)
22 Jump Street: I am apparently the only person on Earth who didn't think that 21 Jump Street was a rollicking good time. So I think I'll leave the rest of you to enjoy this series, and I'll go start another Sims family or something. (Pass)
June 27
Transformers: Age of Extinction: I'm intensely curious who the audience for this series is now. It's not like the plot or even the special effects were ever that great, and with Megan Fox no longer around to bounce up and down in slow motion... Who are these Michael Bay enthusiasts lining up for tickets? (Pass)
They Came Together: I like David Wain, but he's not infallible. I was distinctly meh about Wanderlust, so no matter how much I love a cast, they can't always elevate weak material. That said, They Came Together promises to do for romantic comedies what Wet Hot American Summer did for summer camp movies, and if it can follow through on that promise, it'll be my favorite movie ever. With stars like Paul Rudd, Amy Poehler, Cobie Smulders, and Christopher Meloni, it seems like all signs point to awesome. I'm cautiously optimistic that this will lean more towards Role Models than A.C.O.D. (Rental)
Snowpiercer: Mentions of this South Korean movie have already been popping up a lot on the film podcasts I listen to. It's gotten awards and nominations at various festivals. But until I looked it up to write this entry, I had no idea what Snowpiercer was about. Now I'm intrigued. It stars Chris Evans, Jamie Bell, and Tilda Swinton, among others. The plot revolves around the passengers on a train that circles the globe. A catastrophe has wiped out most of humanity, and a new society begins to form on board the train, with all the problems and complications that entails. I'm not sure I'll rush out to the theaters to see it, but assuming it's not too gory, this seems like a good Netflix movie. (Rental)
Fuck, Marry, Kill
No, you haven't stumbled onto that game where you decide which celebrities you can't stand and which ones you'd like to bone! This time, Fuck/Marry/Kill is the status of four television shows that recently wrapped up their seasons (and in one case, their series). We'll soon be entering the Summer TV Dead Zone (also known as let's-catch-up-with-things-on-Netflix), but before we move on, let's spare a word for the recently-departed:
Fuck
"Fuck" can mean a lot of things. In the case of this latest season of RuPaul's Drag Race it stands for "Fuck, yeah!" The best reality show on television continued its streak with a pretty compelling season, capped off with a much-deserved win. (Spoilers ahead!) Too often, the prize goes to a fishy queen who looks pretty but lacks much of a personality (that would be Tyra Sanchez' ears ringing right about now). So while I was sad that BenDelaCreme couldn't go further in the competition, I was overjoyed to watch Bianca Del Rio, a whip-smart, experienced queen snag the title. Condragulations, girl. And condragulations to RuPaul, whose show is clearly in the midst of a Golden Age.
"Fuck" can also mean "Fuck off," which is unfortunately the point I'm at with Once Upon a Time. I was never under any illusion that it was a terrific show. Even when I started getting sucked in, I could tell it was a Guilty Pleasure. Though the effects were often laughable, and the acting hammier than a pork festival, there was genuine pleasure to be found in the melodrama of the fairy tale twists they kept throwing at the audience. Then came Season 3, which was so...goddamn...boring. All of the problems I willingly overlooked when the show was entertaining got amplified a thousand times when there was nothing else the show could offer. The show is now teasing that Elsa from Frozen will be appearing next season, but it's too late. As far as I go, it's time for this story to say "The End".
Marry
As I mentioned in my Best of 2013 post, there was no way I was going to stop loving Season 4 of Bob's Burgers, and I was right. It started out on a weak episode, but quickly righted itself to easily become the best show of the season. The characterizations are note-perfect, the side characters are amazing, the plots are zany, but grounded, and the jokes are hilarious. News that they'll be releasing an album of the incredible music this show puts out week after week was simply the icing on what has become the tastiest cake I've had in a long time.
Kill
I hate you all. I'm sorry, that was rash. I just mean I'm bummed that more people didn't watch Trophy Wife, which was a marvelous little show. That means its inaugural season is also its last. I'll grant you that it has an awful title, and the marketing material didn't explain the premise well (young woman marries older man and deals with his two ex-wives and three kids and it's waaaaaaaacky!!!!!), but once I sat down to give it chance, I started to realize that it was actually kind of genius.
The balance of quirk on this show was perfect. As the titular (hee) wife, Malin Akerman was perfectly good, but it was the other women who really shined. Marcia Gay Harden nailed her role as an icy perfectionist, while Michaela Watkins' lazy earth-mother was responsible for most of the belly laughs I found bursting out of me every week. Even the kids, usually the weakest part of any sitcom for me, stepped up to the plate. If you have Hulu Plus, I'd encourage you to go watch the season. If only to join me in drowning our sorrows over the fact that such a funny, warm show got axed.
RuPaul's Drag Race - Season 6: A-
Once Upon a Time - Season 1: B
Once Upon a Time - Season 2: B-
Once Upon a Time - Season 3: C-
Bob's Burgers - Season 4: A+
Trophy Wife - Season 1: A-
Fuck
"Fuck" can mean a lot of things. In the case of this latest season of RuPaul's Drag Race it stands for "Fuck, yeah!" The best reality show on television continued its streak with a pretty compelling season, capped off with a much-deserved win. (Spoilers ahead!) Too often, the prize goes to a fishy queen who looks pretty but lacks much of a personality (that would be Tyra Sanchez' ears ringing right about now). So while I was sad that BenDelaCreme couldn't go further in the competition, I was overjoyed to watch Bianca Del Rio, a whip-smart, experienced queen snag the title. Condragulations, girl. And condragulations to RuPaul, whose show is clearly in the midst of a Golden Age.
"Fuck" can also mean "Fuck off," which is unfortunately the point I'm at with Once Upon a Time. I was never under any illusion that it was a terrific show. Even when I started getting sucked in, I could tell it was a Guilty Pleasure. Though the effects were often laughable, and the acting hammier than a pork festival, there was genuine pleasure to be found in the melodrama of the fairy tale twists they kept throwing at the audience. Then came Season 3, which was so...goddamn...boring. All of the problems I willingly overlooked when the show was entertaining got amplified a thousand times when there was nothing else the show could offer. The show is now teasing that Elsa from Frozen will be appearing next season, but it's too late. As far as I go, it's time for this story to say "The End".
Marry
As I mentioned in my Best of 2013 post, there was no way I was going to stop loving Season 4 of Bob's Burgers, and I was right. It started out on a weak episode, but quickly righted itself to easily become the best show of the season. The characterizations are note-perfect, the side characters are amazing, the plots are zany, but grounded, and the jokes are hilarious. News that they'll be releasing an album of the incredible music this show puts out week after week was simply the icing on what has become the tastiest cake I've had in a long time.
Kill
I hate you all. I'm sorry, that was rash. I just mean I'm bummed that more people didn't watch Trophy Wife, which was a marvelous little show. That means its inaugural season is also its last. I'll grant you that it has an awful title, and the marketing material didn't explain the premise well (young woman marries older man and deals with his two ex-wives and three kids and it's waaaaaaaacky!!!!!), but once I sat down to give it chance, I started to realize that it was actually kind of genius.
The balance of quirk on this show was perfect. As the titular (hee) wife, Malin Akerman was perfectly good, but it was the other women who really shined. Marcia Gay Harden nailed her role as an icy perfectionist, while Michaela Watkins' lazy earth-mother was responsible for most of the belly laughs I found bursting out of me every week. Even the kids, usually the weakest part of any sitcom for me, stepped up to the plate. If you have Hulu Plus, I'd encourage you to go watch the season. If only to join me in drowning our sorrows over the fact that such a funny, warm show got axed.
RuPaul's Drag Race - Season 6: A-
Once Upon a Time - Season 1: B
Once Upon a Time - Season 2: B-
Once Upon a Time - Season 3: C-
Bob's Burgers - Season 4: A+
Trophy Wife - Season 1: A-
Blockheads
It didn't surprise me that The Lego Movie was entertaining. That company's track record has been nothing short of stellar lately. What is surprising is how many rights Lego has access to. Shockingly little internet ink has been spilled over the fact that a single toy company has permission to put out products that involve, among other names: Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and the entire Marvel universe. That's not even a cash cow - it's a cash minotaur.
I had watched a friend play one of the many Lego-themed video games, and while I thought it looked pretty fun, it also seemed a little outside my realm, age-wise. Yes, yes. I know playing Cake Mania all the time isn't the height of mature gaming. But still, the Lego games struck me as only appealing to kids. When a sale on Steam dropped the price to five bucks, though, I knew this was the perfect opportunity to give one of these games a whirl. I think all of these games have identical gameplay, so it just came down to a matter of which characters I wanted to play around with. I selected LEGO Marvel Super Heroes from the list, and dove in.
From a story standpoint, it's a really well-written game, despite its simplicity. The bad guys have stolen "cosmic bricks" in order to build a super-weapon. There's also the small matter of Galactus coming to swallow the world. Little in-jokes pop up frequently, both in dialogue and in animation. The whole thing is breezy and clever. As to the gameplay, on each level, you control a few Marvel characters and work your way to a boss fight by taking out minions and solving little puzzles that only certain superpowers can resolve. Need to get past a camera? Use Black Widow to slip by unnoticed. A switch you need to activate is hiding behind a fire? Have Iceman put it out. Once you've completed a level on the Story Mode, you can come back in Free Play with different characters in order to complete side-missions. Stan Lee is trapped in some form of disaster on each level, and figuring out which character to bring to save him is lots of fun.
There is a problem with this game, though, and it's a big one. The controls are not intuitive, and they're not explained well. Why is easier for me to execute complicated spins, deflections, and acrobatics in Assassin's Creed than to get a blocky version of Mister Fantastic to jump across a gap? How do I access side characters necessary to completing side missions, and why does it require a Google search to figure out the answer to that question? I'm told that playing the game by hooking up a console controller to the PC makes gameplay a lot more fluid, and while that's nice to know, it shouldn't be necessary.
Overall, though, I'd give this game a nice, square thumbs up. It's definitely a great game for kids, and a pleasant way to spend a lazy afternoon for us adults as well. Later this year, I hope to be immersed in games that explore our rights to privacy, games in which I'll execute corrupt government officials, and games that hand over the reigns to entire civilizations. For now, though, it's nice to just watch a cubical Spider-Man quip his way through the Oscorp building.
LEGO Marvel Super Heroes: B
I had watched a friend play one of the many Lego-themed video games, and while I thought it looked pretty fun, it also seemed a little outside my realm, age-wise. Yes, yes. I know playing Cake Mania all the time isn't the height of mature gaming. But still, the Lego games struck me as only appealing to kids. When a sale on Steam dropped the price to five bucks, though, I knew this was the perfect opportunity to give one of these games a whirl. I think all of these games have identical gameplay, so it just came down to a matter of which characters I wanted to play around with. I selected LEGO Marvel Super Heroes from the list, and dove in.
From a story standpoint, it's a really well-written game, despite its simplicity. The bad guys have stolen "cosmic bricks" in order to build a super-weapon. There's also the small matter of Galactus coming to swallow the world. Little in-jokes pop up frequently, both in dialogue and in animation. The whole thing is breezy and clever. As to the gameplay, on each level, you control a few Marvel characters and work your way to a boss fight by taking out minions and solving little puzzles that only certain superpowers can resolve. Need to get past a camera? Use Black Widow to slip by unnoticed. A switch you need to activate is hiding behind a fire? Have Iceman put it out. Once you've completed a level on the Story Mode, you can come back in Free Play with different characters in order to complete side-missions. Stan Lee is trapped in some form of disaster on each level, and figuring out which character to bring to save him is lots of fun.
There is a problem with this game, though, and it's a big one. The controls are not intuitive, and they're not explained well. Why is easier for me to execute complicated spins, deflections, and acrobatics in Assassin's Creed than to get a blocky version of Mister Fantastic to jump across a gap? How do I access side characters necessary to completing side missions, and why does it require a Google search to figure out the answer to that question? I'm told that playing the game by hooking up a console controller to the PC makes gameplay a lot more fluid, and while that's nice to know, it shouldn't be necessary.
Overall, though, I'd give this game a nice, square thumbs up. It's definitely a great game for kids, and a pleasant way to spend a lazy afternoon for us adults as well. Later this year, I hope to be immersed in games that explore our rights to privacy, games in which I'll execute corrupt government officials, and games that hand over the reigns to entire civilizations. For now, though, it's nice to just watch a cubical Spider-Man quip his way through the Oscorp building.
LEGO Marvel Super Heroes: B
Cosmos
I haven't had much patience with depressive culture lately. It's my failing, but I have to be in the mood to enjoy downers, and I simply haven't been in that mood for a while. So it says a lot that I responded to Andrew Sean Greer's 2001 novel The Path of Minor Planets the way I did. This is emphatically not a cheerful book. On the surface, it concerns a group of astronomers who gather on an exotic isle to witness the comet that one of them has discovered. A tragic accident in which a local boy falls to his death spins the narrative off into the characters' inner lives, and how they relate to one another. We check in with them at regular intervals, seeing how they've changed in the time since the comet last entered their lives.
Legends say that comets are harbingers of bad news and disaster, but all of the tragedies that befall the people in this book are decidedly man-made. Greer's writing is fluid and beautiful; the inner turmoil that the characters experience is aptly described, and their inability to connect on the levels they wish they could is often heartbreaking.
This book strikes me as having a very old-fashioned tone, which I don't necessarily intend as a compliment or as a criticism. I just mean that everything, from the cover design to the language to all the plot points (except one), reads like a book published in the '50s or '60s. It didn't capture the contemporary tone in the way a book like The Interestings did, but in a way, that's to the book's credit. It gave me a surreal feeling, perfect for a novel that wants the reader to loosen our ties to everyday concerns and regard the big picture.
From the comet's point of view, all of our problems are trivialities. But to our limited minds, we're always striving for a happy ending. Perhaps those happy endings are in short supply for this set of characters, but it's a bit freeing to realize that even if things don't work out for now, everything will work out in the end. We're all part of the intricate web of humanity, and if we never get the love we want, the career we've worked so hard for, or even a life beyond a childhood game of catch on a starry night, we're all part of the grand story. That very participation is something to cherish, and even if the novel doesn't put you in the thoughtful, pensive mood that it did for me, if nothing else, the next time you walk outside on a clear night, you'll feel compelled to look up and consider everything that's out there, watching.
The Path of Minor Planets: B
Legends say that comets are harbingers of bad news and disaster, but all of the tragedies that befall the people in this book are decidedly man-made. Greer's writing is fluid and beautiful; the inner turmoil that the characters experience is aptly described, and their inability to connect on the levels they wish they could is often heartbreaking.
This book strikes me as having a very old-fashioned tone, which I don't necessarily intend as a compliment or as a criticism. I just mean that everything, from the cover design to the language to all the plot points (except one), reads like a book published in the '50s or '60s. It didn't capture the contemporary tone in the way a book like The Interestings did, but in a way, that's to the book's credit. It gave me a surreal feeling, perfect for a novel that wants the reader to loosen our ties to everyday concerns and regard the big picture.
From the comet's point of view, all of our problems are trivialities. But to our limited minds, we're always striving for a happy ending. Perhaps those happy endings are in short supply for this set of characters, but it's a bit freeing to realize that even if things don't work out for now, everything will work out in the end. We're all part of the intricate web of humanity, and if we never get the love we want, the career we've worked so hard for, or even a life beyond a childhood game of catch on a starry night, we're all part of the grand story. That very participation is something to cherish, and even if the novel doesn't put you in the thoughtful, pensive mood that it did for me, if nothing else, the next time you walk outside on a clear night, you'll feel compelled to look up and consider everything that's out there, watching.
The Path of Minor Planets: B
Rec Center
Towards the end of last year, I declared that Season 6 of Parks and Recreation was and would continue to be on my top 5 list of the best TV I'm currently watching. At the same time, I admitted that this is a show on a clear downslide. Its beginning drew a lot of apt comparisons to The Office, so let's make one more: Parks & Rec is still a good show, but it's time to wrap it up gracefully before it overstays its welcome and becomes insufferable like its big brother. I'm pretty sure the producers know this, and it's likely that next season will be the last. I don't want to give the impression that I dislike the show now, or even find it disappointing; like I said, it's still good, and I still enjoy watching it. It's just that it doesn't seem to have much more to say about any of these characters.
To that end, a lot of Season 6 is about big changes. Leslie's recall vote is only a drop in the bucket. A lot more focus is directed towards the merger of Pawnee and their snobby Eagleton neighbors. Ann and Chris decide to leave Pawnee. Tom starts a restaurant. And...stop reading now if you don't want to be spoiled...Leslie becomes pregnant with triplets as she considers taking a job with the federal parks department, which would mean leaving the town she's spent guiding for so long. All of these storylines are handled well, though I defy you to name an example of a TV show that got better with the addition of babies.
This show has mined a lot of humor in skewering American politics, and though there's still a fair amount of that, Season 6 is much more about interpersonal relationships than workplace situations. Never before would they have devoted so much time to what Leslie thinks of Donna's tweeting practices, or whether April thinks Tom has what it takes to run a successful business. Strong writing saves it from being too twee, but there's no question that it's a different show than the one that I initially fell in love with in Season 2. This season was also big on secondary and tertiary characters. In some cases, it was done masterfully (any scene with Jean-Ralphio and/or Mona Lisa Saperstein was gold), and in some, they went to the well way too often (Billy Eichner's Craig is something of a one-note character, and they struck it over and over and over and over and over and over).
That said, there were some stellar episodes: "Doppelgängers", "The Cones of Dunshire", and "Anniversaries" all showed Parks & Rec firing on all cylinders. The show took its biggest turn in the season finale, "Moving Up". (Seriously, stop reading if you don't want to be spoiled.) All of those big changes I mention above are nothing in comparison to the final scene, in which time jumps ahead three years. Leslie has taken the position with the federal government, though she and Ben have convinced them to relocate the office to Pawnee. Her triplets skipped infancy entirely, and are now toddlers. Michael Schur has stated that next season will pick up right where we left off, so good-bye, 2014! It's officially the future. That opens up all sorts of fun possibilities, and I'm looking forward to seeing where they take it.
Parks and Recreation - Season 6: B
To that end, a lot of Season 6 is about big changes. Leslie's recall vote is only a drop in the bucket. A lot more focus is directed towards the merger of Pawnee and their snobby Eagleton neighbors. Ann and Chris decide to leave Pawnee. Tom starts a restaurant. And...stop reading now if you don't want to be spoiled...Leslie becomes pregnant with triplets as she considers taking a job with the federal parks department, which would mean leaving the town she's spent guiding for so long. All of these storylines are handled well, though I defy you to name an example of a TV show that got better with the addition of babies.
This show has mined a lot of humor in skewering American politics, and though there's still a fair amount of that, Season 6 is much more about interpersonal relationships than workplace situations. Never before would they have devoted so much time to what Leslie thinks of Donna's tweeting practices, or whether April thinks Tom has what it takes to run a successful business. Strong writing saves it from being too twee, but there's no question that it's a different show than the one that I initially fell in love with in Season 2. This season was also big on secondary and tertiary characters. In some cases, it was done masterfully (any scene with Jean-Ralphio and/or Mona Lisa Saperstein was gold), and in some, they went to the well way too often (Billy Eichner's Craig is something of a one-note character, and they struck it over and over and over and over and over and over).
That said, there were some stellar episodes: "Doppelgängers", "The Cones of Dunshire", and "Anniversaries" all showed Parks & Rec firing on all cylinders. The show took its biggest turn in the season finale, "Moving Up". (Seriously, stop reading if you don't want to be spoiled.) All of those big changes I mention above are nothing in comparison to the final scene, in which time jumps ahead three years. Leslie has taken the position with the federal government, though she and Ben have convinced them to relocate the office to Pawnee. Her triplets skipped infancy entirely, and are now toddlers. Michael Schur has stated that next season will pick up right where we left off, so good-bye, 2014! It's officially the future. That opens up all sorts of fun possibilities, and I'm looking forward to seeing where they take it.
Parks and Recreation - Season 6: B
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
