Jake Cleland

Tuesday August 17, 2010 at 19:49

Tuesday August 17, 2010 at 17:02

True Blood.

Okay, so, True Blood. What is this I don’t even. I tried watching the episode with a blank slate, for Jillian, but it wasn’t easy. I skipped most of the Sookie & Bill scenes, because they’re such dialtones (it’s all “Sookehhhh” and “Gee willikers, I sure am clueless about everything! Zippity dee!”) and I have no interest in their relationship. Eric & Pam more than made up for it, though. God I love Eric. We can all agree he’s the best one on the show, yeah? Though Russell is making a convincing argument.

And what’s up with Franklin? At first I was like “Oh, this is a metaphor for Tara overcoming her guilt and shame” but then he was actually, physically there… only to be blown apart a minute later.

The show is walking a fine line between showing the human drama and the supernatural drama, but with the ramping up of the vampire crazy lately, the situations with Sam & Tommy, Arlene & Terry and Jason & Crystal Meth have become so mundane. I especially hate Jason & Crystal, because I realise Jason is dumb as fuck, but surely even he can recognise that this girl is playing him. Season One Jason would’ve walked away from that.

As for Hoyt & Jessica/Muppet, I don’t even know. Jessica’s a babe, though, so I guess I don’t mind that much.

The main issue I have with the show in its present form is how splintered it’s become, so much so that maybe the writers are overextending themselves and should pull back a bit. Just get rid of all the human characters. I did some reading about where this is all heading on Wikipedia, and it gets even more bizarre, but nothing ever happens with the humans. And please, whatever you do, writers, don’t kill off Eric Northman.

Tuesday August 17, 2010 at 14:52

Know what would’ve made Scott Pilgrim a thousand times better? If Edgar Wright stuck with his team.

Scott Pilgrim portrayed by Simon Pegg
Knives portrayed by Jessica Stevenson
Evil Exes portrayed by Bill Nighy
Ramona Flowers portrayed by Nick Frost

Let’s fast-track this.

Tuesday August 17, 2010 at 14:00

28 Drinks Later, starring Nick Swardson, Katrina Bowden, Chris Pine, a bunch of other That Guys.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 23:30

juniorgazette replied to your quote: I think your expectations for the program are a…

It’s not a show that I’ll go out of my way to watch, but if I’m downstairs/near a television at the right time, I will tune in. Maybe it isn’t hard-hitting journalism, or witty political satire, but it’s both informative and a little fun. I like it.

I guess it’s a matter of taste, but while The 7pm Project is on, so is The Daily Show, with Jon Stewart doing the same thing with greater wit and much more sense. Once you get past his goofy face (and his beard, does he still have the beard) it is streets ahead of Pickering et al.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 23:27

Hello, Junior Gazette!: jakec: ... ... Normally I’d agree, but I actually think it’s everyone...

jakec:

“I think your expectations for the program are a little high. As news-based entertainment for a generation who’d prefer to be watching The Simpsons, I think they do an alright job. And Charlie Pickering is awesome - I’ve been a fan of his for years.”

—

Britt.

Normally I’d agree, but I actually think it’s everyone else’s expectations (or at least standards) that are a little low. It’s been over half a decade since The Panel and yet we have nothing in a similar vein that surpasses it. You’re right that our generation gets the panel show it deserves, but I really don’t think that should be an excuse for poor quality programming. Maybe it would benefit from a longer timeslot, but the fast-paced glossing over of each night’s topics (which could be a product of our culture, I’ll admit) makes it hard to see the point in having the six o’clock news, and then The 7pm Project.

I don’t think that 7pm is as “low quality” as you suggest. It was never intended to be a replacement for The Panel - it’s targeted towards a completely different demographic, evidenced by the presenters/timeslot. The fast-paced format is there to capture the short attention span of their viewers - who generally are people who wouldn’t even consider watching the actual news. Something as glossy and light as 7pm is appealing in that it entertains while providing a glimpse into relevant news and current affairs.

So can we at least agree, then, that it’s “successful” but not “good”?

This post was reblogged from Hello, Junior Gazette!.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 23:23

tiimkennedy asked: iyho, what's the best tv network in the country? (and how/why?)

Channel 31!

No, while I admire the ethos of C31 and its dedication to varied programming, the inconsistency is a little frustrating. Like Ellie said to me the other day, you need to know when to watch. And when to watch is 5pm weekdays, especially on Thursday (and Tuesdays, but that’s not as necessary).

Using words like “best” makes it so much harder to answer because of how vague it is, so I’ll try to cover as many of the definitions as possible.

ABC is my favourite network. ABC24 is obviously a huge step in the right direction for news in the country, and ABC has always had the best news coverage, so a 24 hour free-to-air channel was a pretty smart move on their behalf. ABC also have my favourite night-time line-up. Just looking at tonight’s, there’s The Colbert Report, The Daily Show, Summer Heights High, Q&A, Torchwood, and Radio 1’s Big Weekend. Another thing I really love is something they have in common with SBS, which is showing the best British comedies.

Seven, Nine and Ten typically show NBC-style programs, low-brow (not synonymous with “shit”) comedies and the like. Ten also has an abundance of the worst reality programming, from Big Brother to Biggest Loser. Though as far as I can tell it’s a worldwide epidemic, the replacement of quality scripted shows with reality programming because of the economic factor.

Of the commercial networks, though, I think the best is Nine. I’ve been a huge fan of GO! since it launched last year because it brought so many of the shows I loved from overseas to free-to-air, like The Hills and Community. But to its discredit, tonight it’s playing Meet The Spartans.

Just soo I don’t seem to naive, I realise they are commercial networks, and thus are in the pursuit of profit. They have to appeal to as many people as possible, which means showing programmes with as wide a consumer appeal as possible, and given the relative stupidity of the average Australian, sadly that results in simple programming. So I understand, but I still don’t like it.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 23:08

“ten don’t have the six o’clock news. they have the simpsons. 7pm has a specific demographic that they’re pitching to well (as evidenced by the show’s continued existence). that doesn’t make it any ‘good’ but it’s doing its job for the network.”

— Tim. That’s a fair counterpoint, but (and this is not Tim’s fault) it’s also an inevitable one. I hate feeling like I can’t critique things when the debate is always reduced to art vs economics. Personal gripe. So then, I suppose my issue really is with the demographic for being enablers.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 22:56

“I think your expectations for the program are a little high. As news-based entertainment for a generation who’d prefer to be watching The Simpsons, I think they do an alright job. And Charlie Pickering is awesome - I’ve been a fan of his for years.”

—

Britt.

Normally I’d agree, but I actually think it’s everyone else’s expectations (or at least standards) that are a little low. It’s been over half a decade since The Panel and yet we have nothing in a similar vein that surpasses it. You’re right that our generation gets the panel show it deserves, but I really don’t think that should be an excuse for poor quality programming. Maybe it would benefit from a longer timeslot, but the fast-paced glossing over of each night’s topics (which could be a product of our culture, I’ll admit) makes it hard to see the point in having the six o’clock news, and then The 7pm Project.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 22:40

The 7pm Project

At the live taping of The 7pm Project tonight, Tim asked me why I was there, because I was being such a little bitch/smart ass. Fair question with a simple answer: I love TV and live tapings are always fun, so I couldn’t pass it up. The fact that it was at Channel 10, the worst station in the country, and it was a taping of The 7pm Project, the worst newstainment program in the world, were minute details. I was just there to enjoy the experience.

However, as I do go on about how much I loathe the show, I’m going to articulate exactly why. Just to clarify.

Some of the quips are painfully obnoxious.
They don’t treat their guests respectfully. Often they get really intelligent people on, and reduce their presence by riffing on everything they say.
They dedicate very little time to serious world issues, often giving only a cursory impression of the points without making any real commentary.
George Negus is just a crotchety counter-point. I think he’s quite clever, but sometimes I feel like the hosts patronise him. Not always without reason, some of the statements he makes on the show are poorly thought-out for how definitively he says them, but if he’s just there to lend some authority, don’t just smile and humour him.

It was a good experience, though. It certainly helped humanise Charlie Pickering for me, so I’ve softened on him a bit, though he does seem to take himself quite seriously. There was also this moment when they were filming a promo, and Carrie Bickmore said “Now we need something funny” and they crash-zoomed on Dave Hughes, which was pretty amusing, and a defining statement about his role on the show. He contributes the jokes, and in fact it’s a little bit sad, I think, that his role’s been reduced to setting up a joke and using a soundbite as the punch line. I miss Glass House. Everything old is better.

Lastly, I have to apologise to KB, the warm-up comedian. It’s a tough job being a comedian at all, let alone one who has to warm up a crowd for an extremely popular television show. When I asked him “What’re your career aspirations?” I didn’t mean to come off as snarky. Plenty of warm-up comedians go on to do their own brilliant creations, so I was just curious as to what else he was up to, but I realise assuming his goal in life wasn’t to be a warm-up comedian was demeaning, and I genuinely feel terrible about it. He seemed like a nice guy! Sorry, KB. <3

Monday August 16, 2010 at 21:49

Australian Crawl - Beautiful People

Sometimes, the reality of things, the immovable logic of a situation, is immensely frustrating. Not all the time. Often when something’s not going my way I’ll just change it so it is. Obviously, though, some things are just out of my control.

On the train back from Toorak tonight, I met a beautiful girl. She was interesting and well-adjusted (which surprised me) and liked cool things. I looked like shit so I felt like shit. That’s the part I could’ve changed. The part I couldn’t involves her getting an awesome new job and leaving at the end of the week such that I’ll probably never see her again. I’m hardly in love with her, but it is a shame I won’t get to know her better. It’s a shame we won’t bump into each other at random, and have inside jokes, and text each other weird shit we find in thrift stores, and commiserate over how guilty we feel for eating McDonalds at four in the morning but actually genuinely enjoy it. I always feel bad for missing an opportunity to make interesting friends.

Monday August 16, 2010 at 1:38

fuckyeahellie:

Uh oh.

This post was reblogged from keep calm and ellie on..

Monday August 16, 2010 at 1:37

Men about town.

Sunday August 15, 2010 at 11:44

fucknicethings:

iwearjesuspants:seijin-son-of-eve:-sisteroficarus:iamthejavafox:pisantlr:antisocialanarchist:failship:(via tommyrancour)

Alright, you smug bastards, off the top of my head:

a) Sexual submission is something a lot of people engage in willingly, not because they’re being disrespected. Men and women.
b) She’s got a whip in her hand, so while she’s in chains, she’s also in the position to give as good as she’s getting.

I’m sure there are an abundance of naive puritans ready to object to the presence of chains around a woman, but the stigmatization of fetishes (as long as they’re played out with consent) is far more oppressive and disrespectful than engaging in light bondage.

This post was reblogged from IT MAY BE STUPID, BUT IT'S ALSO DUMB.

Sunday August 15, 2010 at 6:01

Jersey Shore.

This week’s Jersey Shore was my favourite episode of the series yet. There was minimal drama, everyone stopped hating Angelina, and Snooki was on fire. I think this might be contrary to the aims of the producers, but the only time I really love this show is when everybody’s getting along. I don’t like the bitterness! This is not a show I watch to hate people (come on, that’s what Glee is for), and I don’t want to find reasons to stop liking the Shore cast. I was saying this to my girl J.Crow the other day, I think the reason I like the show so much is because I know people who’re terrifyingly similar to the people on the show. And they all went to private schools.

If I had to pick a favourite, it’d probably be Vinny. He’s sensitive, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen him whinge, and he has a good moral center. He reminds me of the friends I’ve had that I always wished I was strong enough to be, the ones who’d really look out for and take care of people (me) at parties. My least favourite is JWoww, because she’s too aggressive and reminds me of this girl I once hooked up with. At this point we’ve seen every part of her, except for her heart. Ronnie and Sammi are tied for second least-likeable. Their plot is so isolated from the rest of the show it feels almost like a spin-off. But not a good spin-off, like Frasier or Boston Legal (pre-fifth season). More like Joey. Ronnie and Sammi are the Joey of Jersey Shore. Imagine the show without them there anymore. Nothing would change. I’m so certain of this I’m almost tempted to edit their scenes out of the latest episode, but I’m not quite bored enough yet.

The only thing that harms my enjoyment are the contrivances, like the Shirt Before The Shirt scene from last week. It felt exactly like what it was: exposition. Is there any doubt he was saying that to anyone but the audience? The only other people in the room were the co-creators of this phenomenon, they don’t need it explained! While I love hearing The Situation and his cadre espousing their philosophies (“The Guido is the modern day Dandy”, discuss) but the delivery felt so fake. It’s like WWE when you were still young enough to enjoy it but just starting to realise it was fake. You tried to walk that precarious line between immersing yourself in the experience, but also looking out for the tricks. This is exactly what ruined magic.

jake cleland