pin down a reason for so many failed comedies, he said, it would probably be that writers keep looking to get the next laugh instead of trying to “tell a great story.”"“Contrary to popular opinion, order does not stifle creativity, but promotes it. It d
oes not restrict freedom, but enhances it for the greatest number. Disorder is a kind of tyranny in which good things seldom happen. When disorder reigns, people suffer in many ways.
“There is a vast difference between order and regimentation. Jesus didn’t tell the five thousand to sit down in groups, organized alphabetically by last name, to count off, and remain silent until addressed. Instead, he created order that was not ominous and restrictive, but pleasant and liberating.
“Regimentation stifles creativity, and restricts freedom, but order creates an environment where freedom and creativity flourish.”
Order but not regimentation. A fine balance – yet having worked recently as an artist for hire in both disorder and regimentation, I have to say that Bob and Ray are on to something.
Just my thoughts,
Sean
Like today, when the female beggar -- uh, I mean fund raiser-- suggested a donation level of $15 a month, and her chipper male partner pointed out that the amount worked out to "about fifteen cents a day!"
With the voices of math teachers Tolomay and O'Leary screaming in my head, I changed channels to a less literate but hopefully more numerically sound station.
So that’s how I ended up on the talc music channel. (Think about it, wait, wait – there it is. What, you expected a better pun from me?)
I was not assailed with politician math there, but their sense of history baffled me.
The announcers were giving clues about a musician, offering the listener a chance to guess the artist. Since one of the clues was an event that helped create “one of the greatest musical careers of the century,” I was thinking in terms of Bono, or Sting, or some other contemporary one word moniker.
It was somebody I never heard of, which didn’t surprise me as much as learning that the performer’s first song aired in 2002.
If my math is less fuzzy than the fun-drivers, that makes his “greatest career of the century” only four years long.
Which I suppose qualifies on a technicality with a century only six years in existence. But still, it feels like politician math to me.
Just my thoughts,
Sean
th ruminating on. Maybe you will ruminate some as well.
Apropos to my entry into the world of sit-coms, Dalton Ross says this in a review of The Addams Family television series:
“It doesn’t sound like a big thing, but therein lay the key to the 1960’s sitcom: Sure, it was irreverent and off-the-wall, but unlike pretty much all the comedies on the air today, these characters genuinely loved and cared for one another.”
From a guy wh
o has run for office, I found this tidbit from Clint Eastwood on the current political climate interesting:
“We’re living in a kindergarten. It should be on issues, and that’s the thing that makes you sick about the political scheme of things right now, regardless of which side.”
And another actor who is clearly a smart cookie, Masi Oka says this about his character in Heroes, Hiro:
“I play him like a big kid, inspired by Tom Hanks in Big.”
Just triggering my thoughts,
Sean
At this point in the essay, Kurt is talking about the complaint he often hears about the superhero genre, that the characters are too simplistic and that they are nothing more than symbols. He then lists several of the figurative views of heroes – Superman as the weak child wishing for strength; Captain 
Then he says this:
“However – and you knew there was going to be a however, right? – what charms me about that objection to the superhero is the way it points out, in the guise of criticism, what to me is the greatest strength of the superhero genre – the ease with which superheroes can be used as metaphor, as symbol, whether for the psychological transformation of adolescence, the self-image of a nation, or something else. A genre that can do something like that – is that really a limitation?”
For a compelling introduction to Busiek’s work, check out Marvels, or my favorite graphic novel of recent times, Superman: Secret Identities – Busiek’s own take on the Heroes question “What would happen if someone discovered super powers in a non-superpower world?”
Just my thoughts,
Sean
SPOILERS contained within.
When Jennifer Schuchmann and I first embarked on collaborating on a musical for
But not just about supe
rheroes; they wanted a show that was about what makes a hero. The kids knew that super powers do not a hero make.
Heroes on NBC also know that super powers do not a hero make, and they too are interested in what it is that makes a hero.
In a world without folks in tights running around representing for truth, justice and the American way, some people are starting to realize they have unusual powers.
A cop hears people’s thoughts.
An artist draws the future.
A nurse thinks he can fly.
But does this make them heroes? Certainly not for the guy who uses his powers to become a serial murderer.
The single mom whose alter ego kills with remarkable ease and glee might not be on the side of the angels.
Or how about the indestructible cheerleader that takes the rapist for a ride into a brick wall at 90 miles an hour? Is that heroic? Or is that just vengeance?
I don’t know; but I do know that Heroes is a marvelous, compelling and entertaining way to explore such questions.
And that it makes this comic book geek giggle with joy.
Just my thoughts,
Sean
PS Save the cheerleader. Save the world.
The Bad: Don’t expect a lot of coherence. Several scenes seem randomly placed, and you will only hurt your head trying to figure out what they are doing there. (What’s the deal with the opera scene, and Jack Nicholson tossing cocaine around? Is it because every movie about the Italian mob requires an opera scene, and Marty didn’t want the Irish to feel le
ft out?)
There are many set ups with no payoffs (as you watch, do not become invested in the envelope that DiCaprio leaves with the psychologist, telling her to open it if something happens to him and that it is very, very important. It isn’t, and the envelope is never mentioned again.)
This is a movie that needs no deus ex machina, yet somehow manages to squeeze several in during the last fifteen minutes. Taped conversations never hinted at before, a lawyer that missed mention, an act of trust that makes no sense, a cop choosing to make an arrest in the stupidest way imaginable… Again, don’t think about it – it will only make things worse.
Jack Nicholson’s performance is too far over the top. And we are talking about a movie where everything is intentionally over the top; you have to go a long way over before it becomes annoying. Yet Jack reaches that height.
The Good: I’d hate to be the guy trying to decide which actor should be up for the Oscar. Mark Wahlberg,
Martin Sheen, and Alec Baldwin each deserve a statuette. Leonardo DiCaprio is a revelation in this movie; and Matt Damon maintains his status as one of my favorite smart action stars. And all five work off of each other -- each making the other guy look good (which is another reason that Jack’s performance was so disappointing.)
There are scenes that are explosively compelling; as well as scenes that are quietly beautiful. Martin Sheen inviting DiCaprio to sit and eat, “We’ll talk in the kitchen.” Beautiful.
The Ugly: So, there’s some good stuff, and some not good stuff. What’s the tipping point for me?
Ultimately, this is a movie that doesn’t matter. It has been compared to Shakespeare – mostly because a lot of people die in the end. But in Shakespeare, the lives of those killed mattered.
Shakespeare's characters left a mark. Their existence mattered.
Yet The Departed doesn’t matter – the characters do not leave a mark. It is reminiscent of Shakespeare more in embodying the line: “Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Martin Scorsese has been accused of having too much Good Friday in his films, and not enough Easter.
Maybe that’s it.
Just my thoughts,
Sean
Rob, I will whole-heartedly support your stance that this is a serious matter, and that is why I will continue to use humor in confronting it.
While I will grant that there is a form of humor that “makes light” of its topics, I find that wit is actually the strongest form of defense (and offense!) in exploring serious matters. Social criticism is a pill better swallowed, and often more effective, when presented in the form of comedy.
You will find that folks like, say, the Nazis (since you brought them up) tolerated no lampooning of their ideas – not because they thought them too serious of a subject matter, but because they knew that their propaganda could not stand up to the scrutiny of the comedian.
It requires someone with the ability to laugh to point out that the emperor has no clothes; and we have too many emperors running around this world. We require more laughing and pointing.
As Heywood Broun pointed out, “Humor is the grit in the evolutionary process. ‘Does it matter?’ is the underlying mood in almost every expression of humor. And of course it does matter.”
Just my thoughts,
Sean
Happy birthday
My children's book, Larryboy and the Sinister Snow Day had another printing -- now up to 31,000 copies in print.
duced by Buzz McLaughlin. The film is deeply moving, a collage of seemingly disparate yet connected stories of those trying to make sense out of life’s seeming senselessness.
elieves he is a messiah.
Okay - I'm not the story expert in the family - but I do watch TV and am interested in what works and what doesn't and why.
So...these aren't the final authoritative statements about these shows - but they are early opinions.
UGLY
BETTY - I was excited about this show. But found myself disappointed. Why? Well, while I really enjoyed America Ferrera's character, and appreciated that the writers didn't fall into the trap of the "ugly duckling" stereotype, I felt that everyone else in the show was a total caricature. When the show is about seeing worth in things that we are unfairly labeling (the "don't judge a book by its cover" idea) - why on earth would you make the other characters so obvious and unreal? Makes no sense to me. A shame.
BROTHERS A
ND SISTERS - I knew nothing about this show before watching. I watched it right after "Ugly Betty" (Oh, the joys of TiVo.). While some characters could be stereotyped (Calista Flockhart's character is a conservative radio host) - it was more about subtle layers - about being real, despite what people think is going on. And I was actually blown away by the acting in a scene with Sally Field and Calista. Wow!
Feel free to share your thoughts if you've seen the shows. (I'm not interested in arguing any points - but an open electronic discussion could be fun.)
Just Cath's thoughts...
