Within this experiment of writing daily, this will be my 100th blog entry!
To mark the occasion, like a good girl, I've redecorated and I'm modifying one day's theme. For Tuesdays, I think I'm getting hung up on the word "hobby" when trying to find a topic. Unless someone has a suggestion for me, I'm going to simply refer to Tuesdays as Favorites. I'll discuss any of my best liked topics (people in history, music, events, books, etc.) I might seek out new titles for some of the other days as well, so, this week will be an experiment of its own!
Thanks to all who read this collection... it keeps me accountable and focused. I appreciate you.
So, onto my thoughts on entertainment... namely, what we watch on TV.
This topic occurred to me because we were watching An American in Paris starring the irreplaceable Gene Kelly this evening. Last week, it was Swing Time starring Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire. It also dawned on me that my most typical "winding down" activity is to put The Dean Martin Show on.
Now, you might be thinking I need to get a life... I'm still living in the 40s through the 60s. But I like it there, because of the actual talent that stars used to exhibit to be on screen. Gene Kelly looks like he's exerting no effort whatever as he gracefully taps at a dizzying pace. Dean Martin invites a number of excellent singers, dancers, and comedians to dazzle you on his show. I've decided that Ginger Rogers is one of the scariest women who ever lived... because she looks like she's floating, like those toes aren't even touching the floor, when she dances.
Today... well? I don't even know what's on TV because I was so unimpressed with what was available that I decided to cancel our cable altogether. The only shows that are still on regularly that I would want to see are the occasional Discovery Channel documentaries or History Channel specials... maybe some Food Network shows. These are all programs I can find either online or through Netflix.
I hear people talking about reality TV more than anything else. I have a big issue with this whole concept, because once you put a camera in the room, it's no longer reality. I don't care who you are, most of us will alter our behavior if we know we're being recorded. The last accurate reality show that I can think of is Candid Camera. Yes, these people were set up. Someone is in the know. But, you're probably witnessing the closest example to a genuine reaction in the unsuspecting victim possible.
What I dislike most is what passes off for humor now. There's a show I think was called Street Smarts where they picked three random people off the street, ask them simple questions, and video tape the decline of the general American I.Q. I also watched one episode of Top Chef since a relative strongly recommended it. While I do enjoy the idea of cooking competition (I'm actually a huge fan of Iron Chef... Tristan and I used to watch the Japanese version on Food Network over the phone in high school), I'm pretty unimpressed with the general package. People are so rude, unnecessarily cruel when cutting cooks from teams, etc. I hear people giggling at the tears, insults, and failures.
Now, I realize we're hardwired to laugh at pain... and to a point, I'm okay with that. I see it as a way to help subdue physical discomfort. For instance, in Richmond, when I fell down a flight of steep wooden stairs landing flat on my behind at the bottom, I howled with laughter as I crawled under the downstairs door and into the kitchen. It's not that funny, but it helps with the embarrassment (four people in the house came running towards me) and even relieves the sting. So, obviously, Larry, Curly, and Moe delighted us on a natural, sympathetic, human level. But I don't find emotional anguish terribly amusing. You could... if you enjoy the view from your high horse and all... but your mother would ask you as a child, and I ask you now, how it would make you feel if someone laughed at your humiliation and best effort? While I can see that some idiots and their overreactions can be funny, should they be?
Once, scripts had to be clever. Situations had to be ironic. People had to just be authentic. I always enjoyed Bill Cosby's stand-up because he gets it: The truth is funny. He would take all the petty annoyances of life (parenting, the dentist, childhood bullies, etc) and just remind you of what you must have been thinking in various, common situations. Oscar Wilde was all the rage because he gave the audience most of the details and we watched the unwitting characters stumble through misconceptions and poor assumptions. Frasier is one of my favorite shows because it's just so well written... it's just clever.
I know we shouldn't always have to think to have a good laugh... but do we lose all compassion for humanity for a cheap chuckle? I just think it's disappointing and shallow.
I'm also convinced that most of our entertainers today are hired because they're trainable and look good on camera. I realize that the 40s-60s are not innocent on this point. I love Marilyn Monroe, but the poor woman was strenuously trained... she didn't have any genuine talent in single cell in her body. She's just devastatingly beautiful and a quick, determined study. Still, while being good looking helps your case (Gene Kelly is awfully handsome), so many screen stars used to have to have something behind their pretty faces (Can any of our popular movie stars dance like Gene Kelly?).
There are certainly still some talented actors currently taking up space on the big screen. I'm a fan of Adrian Brody (despite his arrogance), Gary Oldman (because he's amazingly versatile), Christian Bale (C'mon... Laurie's come a pretty far distance), Kate Winslet (she's done a wide range of good work), Jodie Foster (I think she's a genius), and Annabella Sciorra (She's just so real). Whatever your tastes, these people aren't exactly ugly. But could you put all of them in a variety show?
What happened to the variety show anyway? Performers that had more than one trick in the hat? Dean was a great singer, but he could also move, and he could wing it in a comedy sketch better than anyone. Nicole Kidman has taken a less-than-inspiring stab at musicals alongside Ewan McGregor (You know, now that I think about it, I think I'd definitely give McGregor a variety show of his own). So, even if there are a few multi-talented people left, what is the country actually paying to watch? Impressive performances or un-engaging, badly written drivel in which people are embarrassed or injured?
I guess my opinion on current entertainment seems pretty negative... but, even as I write this, I'm playing Mythbusters in the background. There are a few cheap laughs, and I won't lie... I definitely laugh along with them. But, what am I actually watching here? A group of people working as a team to ask questions and find some scientific proof in their answers. Has anyone ever tried to tell you, if you were the sort to wince as a dog licked your hand, that a canine's mouth is cleaner than you own? Mythbusters test topics like that (okay, okay... and the kind of myths that end in a big boom... which is also pretty entertaining. At least when things go wrong, this team laughs together and tries again.
That's enough out of me. Sports and news aside, what do you think about today's TV programming?
No comments:
Post a Comment