Britt's On

A few weeks ago I PVR'd Cameron Crowe's classic 90s film Jerry Maguire off of my godsend free movie channel, Encore Avenue HD. And you know what, despite its lengthiness, I enjoyed every second of it. After a quick mental analysis of the Cameron Crowe movies I'm familiar with, I decided Jerry Maguire was possibly his best film ever. Then I decided to document it, here.

Crowe's major career started with directing and writing the beloved 'Say Anything' starring a doe-eyed John Cusack in his prime. However anyone that has seen or talked about that movie knows it makes little sense and is ultimately a sad story. An 80s teen classic to be sure, but aside from the infamous boom box scene, not exactly the stuff iconic films are made of.

After that in the early 90s he moved onto 'Singles', a forgettable (as in, I haven't seen it) rehashing of St. Elmo's Fire with twenty-somethings searching for love in tres hip Seattle. The fact I haven't even heard of this movie probably speaks volumes. So I'll leave it at that.

Following 1996's Jerry Maguire, Crowe stepped up to write, produce, and direct his possibly most beloved film, 'Almost Famous'. Don't get me wrong, this is a great movie with a great cast. It showcases Kate Hudson's best (and unfortunately, one of her earliest) performance to date and features a wonderful ensemble cast from Jason Lee's snotty rocker to Zooey Deschanel's charming big sister take to the always on Frances McDormand in her taut mother role. The main problem I have with this movie is the fact it never really settles on a protagonist. Although you see this world through the lens of inexperienced youth William Miller, you rarely feel attached to him. The main emotional scenes of the movie surround Hudson's Penny Lane and the overall dynamics of Stillwater. It's hard to fall in love with a protagonist that consistently exposes his naivete, making the viewer feel superior over and over again. Plus I feel like the boxes were drawn a bit too finely around each character. Still, a fantastic movie in my collection.

After Jerry and Famous, Cameron Crowe had elevated himself to new heights - his films managed to be commercially successful, viable for awards, and ultimately endearing, nostalgic, almost timeless works of cinematic art.

However his next two films after that - despite being highly touted and buzzed about in advance - failed to grab viewers or awards, tarnishing Crowe's reputation. I actually like both of them but...I can see why you wouldn't.

Vanilla Sky reunited Crowe with Tom Cruise, aka Jerry Maguire, as well as sparked the Cruz/Cruise relationship, and perhaps revealed Cameron Diaz's true possessive nature (that drove Justin away?) in one of *her* best performances to date. I liked this movie for its realism mixed with fantasy - specifically in the 'realistic' parts of the film. The Cruz/Cruise connection was amazingly captured on film, I found Penelope absolutely adorable in this movie despite not being a massive fan of hers, and I believed the romance scenes between them. Again, Diaz's insanity was brilliantly played here. However, the whole film loses its lustre with its ending, which I won't ruin for you - it plays on science fiction a fair bit which is such a juxtaposition with the rest of the slightly eccentric and mysterious yet charming and passionate tone of the rest of the film.

Following that we have Elizabethtown, better known as an excellent showcase for the amazing soundtracks Crowe put together, but an underwhelming love story between two twenty-somethings getting in touch with their adult sides. Orlando Bloom jumped on this project to shift his reputation as a 'serious' actor, but he never quite fits the role of the lauded shoe designing wunderkid with his tail between his legs as he returns home for his father's funeral. Kirsten Dunst suits the role of the perky (almost annoyingly so) stewardess much better than her male counterpart, but unlike Crowe's earlier films, he fails to really build out the supporting cast, choosing instead to focus on Bloom who as mentioned, doesn't really fit. Dunst's character of Claire and Bloom's entire extended family are underused or packaged into extremely tight packages. I also recall reading a scathing review that picked up on the fact Susan Sarandon (as Bloom's mom) goes through a ridiculous number of mid-life crises' in the film's short time period.

Since then, all has remained on the Cameron Crowe front - Elizabethtown was released in 2005 (and yes, I have it on DVD and both soundtracks...I could watch the film to see the soundtrack play out alone) and it appears Crowe is in pre-production for a new film with Reese Witherspoon and Ben Stiller for release in 2010.

Now...here are my 7 reasons why Jerry Maguire is the best Crowe film of all time (and likely will be) in no particular order.

#1) Iconography - I watched 'The Godfather' for the first time the other day, and I was amazed at just how many famous phrases come from that film. The same is very true of Jerry Maguire. From 'show me the moneyyy' to 'you complete me' to 'you had me at hello' to 'help me, help you' the film offers no end of now cliched expressions that are completely embedded in our language. It takes a very well-written and received film to reach the level of integration JM has.

#2) Renee Zwelleger - this movie launched her career, without a doubt. Mostly because she is adorable, does a perfect job of playing the wide-eyed, naive single mom still hoping for something more, and she just *looks* better. Her eyes aren't as squinty, her voice isn't as gravelly, her body isn't deathly thin - she just looks lovely, in a way that also screams normalcy next to Kelly Preston's primped and glossy character.

#3) Ensemble Cast Development - every character, and I mean EVERY character in this movie is so amazingly well-rounded. In many ways, this book works like a novel in its characterization - the little details in the set design to their appearance to the lines they say, they all speak volumes about every character. Just looking at one or two examples - Bonnie Hunt's big sister character, Laurel, runs a divorcee club, is blunt with both Jerry and Dorothy about their relationship, has a protective mother bear streak for Dorothy and her son yet no children of her own, and believes in being conservative. Regina King's wife demonstrates loyalty, passion, strength, and tenacity in virtually every scene she's in. Even the most minor of characters - Dorothy's male nanny, Rod's slacker brother, Cush's weak-boned father - are detailed and jump off the screen and stick in your mind long afterwards.

#4) Complications - sure the movie ends on a high note, but the fact is, virtually nothing in this movie comes easily. The big breaks in Jerry's otherwise haphazard life - landing Cush, landing Rod, and marrying Dorothy - all head south at one point or another, and cost Jerry more than a piece of his sanity and soul. Even though the movie implies things are looking up for Jerry, it never actually takes the Hollywood ending route of the 'and suddenly, Jerry got millions of phone calls with new clients to take on'. The movie manages to both condemn and laud many of the themes and characters - including Jerry's flash of inspiration, Dorothy's search for a happily ever after, and Rod's mixture of heart and headiness when it comes to playing sports.

#5) Jerry Maguire - the character of Jerry is one of Tom Cruise's finest acting performances, mostly because he stops being Tom Cruise for five seconds and lets himself be both humiliated and shameless. He is endearing, especially in his realization that the self he's been for so many years maybe isn't so great - highlighted in his engagement party video. He doesn't want to be another sports agent guy, but he also recognizes it's the only way to do business. He is ungrateful, but not stupid enough to realize when he's got something good (or when something is worth letting go, like his fiancee). Like the entire film, Jerry Maguire is a complicated character, one that is easily relatable as we see his flaws in ourselves.

#6) Johnathan Lipnicki - Seriously this kid is freaking adorable in this movie. I don't care if he grew up to be an ugly irrelevant bugger, in the film, he steals every scene he's in. His scenes, although adorable, aren't just played for laughs. They're critical to cementing the tricky situation of shoplifting the pooty that Rod harasses Jerry about. This isn't just playtime with your sister's nephew, it's a child who is simply looking for someone to latch onto that they can rely on.

#7) It Takes Times - Unlike many movies today, this story does not happen overnight. Although the timeline is shady - particularly in terms of the Dorothy / Jerry love story - you get to experience the passage of time in a difficult time in every character's life, particularly via the football season. When things do seem to move rapidly, such as Dorothy's marriage to Jerry, the movie makes a point of showing the failures in this. The ending also acknowledges that it will take time for Jerry to really be successful at his 'new way' of managing sports stars.

There you have it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I still love this movie. Yes it's long. Yes it's a little emotional. And yes you're more than likely tired of the famous lines being quoted in excess during the 90s. But it's great, and an example of what amazing filmmaking can be.

- Britt's On

My friend Dana and I lend one another TV on DVD series. So far, she's lent me Lost (I devoured the first four seasons literally just in time for the 5th season premiere) and the first 3 seasons of Alias. I lent her Buffy and Gilmore Girls - both of which she's loved.

I was a bit resistant towards Alias and wasn't clamouring quite as badly between episodes to watch it as I was with Lost, but overall I'll admit, I enjoy the show. JJ Abrams seems to have been a fan of Buffy and all the girl power / kick butt messaging it stood for - he even borrowed several of the minor characters to play small roles on Alias.

But overall, I have to concede that Buffy dominates Alias. I think it all comes down to the reality of the two series. In Buffyverse...everything is rooted in the paranormal. The relationships throughout Buffy - which are a big feature on both shows - are firmly related to fantasy...vampires, witches, demons, monsters, soldier slayers, sons of slayers...these are the people Buffy and her cohorts get involved with, and everything in their world - except perhaps, why people choose to live in Sunnydale - can be explained or connected to magic and the hellmouth.

The same is not true with Alias. Aside from a penchant for wiping the slate clean / being free of consequences, JJ Abrams has a problem with motivations. The character motivations are generally pretty clear in terms of how they react to things, but the crux of the show surrounds various characters' involvement with terrorist organizations. Perhaps I'm ignorant as to why you'd ever want to be a part of a terrorist organization, but JJ gives no inclination as to why his characters are involved at all. Thus, the show is asking you to believe in reality and is rooted in reality...yet every organization - evil & good - is interested in this mythology related to a 14th century prophet / inventor named Milo Rambaldi. Not only do we have a lack of motivation for why, we have a lack of explanation of how Milo Rambaldi exists and why at this specific moment in time his works are coming to light (presumably Rambaldi predicted it and we're just tuning in at the right time) conveniently involving Sydney and her family.

While on Buffy you can believe various characters' involvement - from the Mayor to the school principal to various mythological groups - because of their nature of being involved in this whole other fantasy world, on Alias, the fantasy world seems quite far-fetched in a world of somewhat fantastical CIA spy work.

I suppose my other problem would be character history. Buffy is probably best loved for its insane amount of character development and connections. Many shows shy away from referencing moments in their earlier seasons, but Buffy, despite having a blah first season, makes frequent references - in conversation, plot, and character - to defining and not-so-defining moments for every character, big and small. While some of these are ongoing puns - Xander the demon magnet as a good example - other huge character moments feel so realistic and well-developed because of the history infused into each character. See: every storyline and character development related to Buffy, particularly leading up to and after the Season 5 finale.

Alias on the flipside, is like one big continuous loop that quickly forgives and forgets its past action. Aside from a few references to early Rambaldi discoveries (namely the early prophecy related to Sydney) there is almost no back story from the first season that plays a part in the daily actions of the characters - largely because JJ is uninterested in providing you with how the actions of the first few seasons play into the behaviours, motivations, and emotions of the characters as the show progresses. Perhaps that is its greatest downfall, although not to fear as many shows suffer from it. And JJ did make a solid effort - when he was still at the helm anyway - to eradicate this glaring error in Lost by making the show equally about characters (and their back stories) and plot.

That being said, I'm curious enough to finish out Alias. Dana doesn't have seasons 4 & 5 so I'll have to track them down one way or another...I've heard they're not the greatest, and for my complaints during Seasons 1-3, I don't expect things to improve in the character roots front at all.

Ah well!

- Britt's On

Trying to pick my favourite episodes of Sex and the City is similar to trying to pick my favourite seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Each show has great 'standalone' episodes (and on Buffy, some episodes are characterized by such eps, while others are more about the season-long arc) that are more memorable, yet the episode-spanning story arcs like Carrie's affair with Big or Charlotte's marital troubles with Trey are the heart of the show, and what really captured your attention over the endless parade of bachelors the girls worked their way through. If you haven't watched the show or movie and don't care to be spoiled, don't read on.

I have no reason to write this entry, other than I was just thinking of the hot and humid weather, which segued into 'Hot Child & The City' (a fave SATC ep...not sure if it ranks top 10...read on to find out), which made me think about the movie coming out next summer.

To be totally honest, I'm not sure how I feel about the movie. I loved getting back into the show with some new content, and I loved analyzing the endless parade of fashions...but it really just made me miss the show and all its brilliance. They coulda, shoulda, woulda (?) continued it on methinks. The movie was missing a lot of things the show did - the humour was more slapstick than sassy (think: Charlotte's poo-kipsie incident), the so-called happy ending was hard to cheer for after the shocking level of depression shown by Carrie, and overall the film suffered by its length. While you never wanted a SATC episode to end (ah how I love the bite-size episodes), they were all very tightly wound in terms of themes (at times, laughably so). The movie felt like endless sketches and lacked that cohesiveness.

Still, I will be there opening day.

Back to my entry. I'm doing this off the cuff. I've spent zero hours thinking about this really, so I'm not going to actually rank these episodes from fave to least fave - they'll be ranked by season of appearance. And without further ado...my top 10 episodes of a little show that introduced us to Big and Carrie (blah). Oh and for the record...I tend to like the episodes of momentous occasion. You'll see what I mean.

S2 - Series Episode #29 - Twenty-Something Girls vs. Thirty-Something Women: This is one of the eps that sees the women outside of NYC for a rollicking good time. Charlotte's entire faux-twentyhood is awesome and hilarious. This was one of the episodes that really put the whole setting of the show in perspective (as someone who first saw the show as a teen) and clearly demonstrated what stage of life these women were in. As much as I felt like I could relate to them (and still do), seeing twenty-somethings through their eyes was hilarious in this instance (and not quite as malicious / pie-in-the-face as 'Attack of the 5'10 Woman' in S3).

S3 - Series Episode #41 - Running With Scissors
As one of many loyal Aidan devotees, it was hard but amazing to watch Carrie engage in her affair with Big. As if he didn't jerk her around enough in the first two seasons (and again, why it hard to support the ending of the series / film)...anyway! This is the best of the entire affair storyline, although I enjoyed the previous ep or two ago where Big and Aidan actually meet at the furniture show. The show isn't afraid to not only dig into "Why would you ever have an affair?", but also to highlight that things are degenerating between Big and Carrie as shown in the opening montage from swanky 5-star to seedy motel. Plus the confrontation at the end with Natasha and Carrie, and Big at the hospital? Handled so shockingly / grippingly! Who doesn't love the little details like Natasha slamming the cab door shut when Carrie attempts to accompany her to the hospital?

S3 - Series Episode #45 - Hot Child In The City
Apparently I love me some pot-smoking Carrie, despite being anti-drugs. I couldn't *not* include this episode as it's literally the first one I ever saw, and to this day makes me giggle. All four storylines are hilarious / awesome / insightful; Carrie's fried chicken afternoons with Wade? Charlotte's 'Rebecca' and Trey's 'Schooner'? Miranda's gawk-ward braces? Samantha's showdown with a tween a-lister (future emo teen star Kat Dennings of Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist)? I love an episode that manages to be hilarious, self-deprecating, and insightful at the same time, all wrapped up in tightly-linked storylines.

S4 - Series Episode #50 - The Real Me
This is a perfect example of Sex and the City catering to its fans; giving you a does of celebrity stardom and showcasing one of the show's stars: fashion. Not only that, but one of the funniest scenes of the entire series - fashion roadkill! - takes place. The rest of the episode is pretty whatever and doesn't impact much future happenings, but Carrie's fashion storyline more than makes up for it.

S4 - Series Episode #63 - Change of a Dress
Possibly my favourite episode of the entire series...for the Aidan and Carrie storyline. They have a much more interesting, deep, defined, and prototypically flawed relationship this season, and everything that happens in this episode has been simmering for the first 2/3rds of Season 4. The horrible wedding dress scene, and the truly beautiful break-up scene outside the fountains...it's painful. The other girls really aren't important in this episode, but the Carrie/Aidan drama (and actually the next episode, which follows it up SO well) is worth it.

S4 - Series Episode #66 - I Heart NY
This is a prime example of a very 'big moment' (not Big moment...) the show purposefully orchestrated. This is my friend Robyn's fave episode, and for good reason. I actually love the final four episodes of S4 with almost equal ardor - Carrie's post-breakup lament here is probably her most genuine (save for the movie), the stint at Vogue is a nice fashion-y diversion, and this episode is just pure magic. It's interesting they launched us towards Big again so soon, but they were smart to do so - giving Carrie a kind of bittersweet clean slate, and finally showing some grown-up romance and interaction between these two. Did I mention I love Moon River? There are just so many great scenes here...and clothes for that matter, I want almost everything Carrie wears this episode. Miranda's season-long arc also comes to a fitting end, and Charlotte has her last interaction with Trey (he did film a guest appearance in the s5 finale, but they cut it out to preserve love for Harry). Not only is the message of this episode sweet and memorable...we finally have a change of season!

S5 - Series Episode #72 - Critical Condition
I quite like the episodes where the characters kind of dwell on past break-ups. It makes for more cohesiveness when they're all going through a sort of single gal phase. This particular episode does things in a humorous but harsh way when Carrie gets "the face" from the next chick to date Aidan after her, which altogether makes for a funny takeaway. Who hasn't talked about this episode and made 'the face' with their friends? On top of that, we have the *awesome* Samantha / vibrator storyline, and the introduction of Harry. Joy!

S5 - Series Episode #74 - I Love A Charade
There are definitely elements of this episode that harken back to the S4 finale...but I somehow find this one more genuinely sentimental, romantic, and most importantly realistic. While S4 was all about wrapping things up with a pretty bow, this episode was really about transitioning these women into the final wrap-up of the show. Carrie is finally open to new possibilities (and believing in love again after the sham-marriage she's invited to). Miranda realizes it's not as easy as she thought to live happily ever after. Samantha finally moves past Richard. And Charlotte finally (albeit a tad reluctantly) accepts Harry as a full-fledged part of her life. I have a strange affinity for this episode, despite not liking S5 as a whole.

S6 - Series Episode #81- The Post-It Always Sticks Twice
Words cannot describe my love for (parts of) this episode. I actually wrote a paper on the Carrie-blows-up-in-Bed scene on communication theories. This is one of the funniest / best break-up stories the show puts out there, and possibly my fave comedic episode of the series. Aside from that, I like that Miranda finally gets a non-frumpy moment with her 'skinny jeans', and copious amounts of sexy Smith and happy Charlotte are always nice as well.

S6 - Series Episode #86 - One
This episode mostly ranks high because of the Steve & Miranda resolution. Don't get me wrong, I loved Dr. Robert Leeds, but these two are truly meant to be (at least in TV fantasy world). I know most people hated the Russian, but I liked this quirky introduction to his character that really set the stage for their relationship (him running the show and over-the-top bizarre romance) - plus Carrie's dress on their date was amazing. I also like Charlotte's story here, a nice return to form from an intermittently pandering character during the latter half of the show.

Honorable Mentions:
- S1: Secret Sex
- S2: The Chicken Dance, Evolution, La Douleur Exquise!, Games People Play, The Fuck Buddy
- S3: Politically Erect, Boy, Girl, Boy, Girl..., Easy Come Easy Go, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Escape From New York / Sex & Another City, What Goes Around Comes Around
- S4: Baby Talk Is Cheap (hot Aidan), My Motherboard My Self, Sex & The Country, Belles of the Balls, Just Say Yes, Ring A Ding Ding, A Vogue Idea
- S5: Luck Be An Old Lady, Plus One Is The Loneliest Number (Grey's Papaya!), The Big Journey
- S6: Pick-A-Little Talk-A-Little, Hop Skip & A Week, The Domino Effect, The Ick Factor, Splat, American Girl In Paris Parts Une & Deux

Fave Season: Four! Each of the ladies had an interesting - and at times, heart-wrenching - relationship this season, and 3 of the guys had a real good chance of developing their characters and stories this season (before being chucked anyway).

What are your top 10? Choose carefully. Looking at my list again, I would probably scrap my S2 choice and subsitute it for something like the S3 LA episodes, Ring A Ding Ding or a Vogue Idea, or the series finales...I just can't pick one I like the best out of those, so it stays.

But yeah, that's my top 10! Now all I want to do is rewatch the series for the millionth time. Love.

- Britt's On

Okay I've been an absentee poster, and with all the wonderful things happening in the entertainment world as things wrap up! I'm sure I'll try to find time to post on them...like wtf to the One Tree Hill finale?

Regardless, it's time I move away from TV a bit for prime movie season - that's right, it's summer!

I was browsing trivia on IMDB.com like I do after most movies when I came across this article written by a fellow blogspotter. In it, he lists his favourite Pixar films - since we've rounded out a full ten now - in order from 'worst' to best.

Truthfully this is super hard for me to do - I have emotional attachments to certain aspects and parts of all Pixar movies, and unlike most people, I don't despise Cars (although admittedly, it would rank lower in my ratings). I asked my boyfriend what he'd pick - and as an avid Cars fan (and 5 year old at heart) even he was torn. Still, I'm going to do my best to try and rank my top 10 for you now.

10. A Bug's Life - This is by default, since I haven't seen it, but there's probably a reason for that. For some reason, this movie seems to get lost in the Pixar filmography, which I can only assume is because it's just not that awesome. I mean...we still have Toy Story merchandise filling up the shelves at your local Disney store, but when's the last time you saw a Bug's Life toy?

9. Up - I didn't *not* like this movie and I feel bad for throwing it in the last spot...but to me, this movie is inextricably tied to its 3D animation. Had this film been released a couple of years ago, I don't think its story would have held the test of time quite as much as some of the other Pixar films. The characters weren't quite as dynamic, the story was a bit too bizarre, and I felt like the hallmarks of an absolutely amazing Pixar film gave way a bit to the extra effort put into making it 3D. That being said, I still found this movie to be quite heartfelt and quite funny at some points - and Pixar at 90% is still better than most animation studios out there.

8. Cars - Okay, my attachment to this film is mostly emotional. I too am weirded out by the Cars upon Cars upon Cars world this movie is set in. But my boyfriend adores it, and that makes me enjoy watching it - just to see him happy and think back to a really nice date night we had seeing this. Plus, the scene with the neon lights? Beautiful and heartwarming. That being said, Cars generally isn't my...subject...of choice, and I'm a bit ticked with Pixar for making a Cars 2 if only for the marketability of the whole thing (speaking as someone with a house full of Cars merch). I did love the little pit stop vehicle, and Jordan's love for Mater is sweet.

7. The Incredibles - I'm not sure why I'm not a bigger fan of this one. I think I prefer animated films not about people, even ones as incredible as the Parr family. Overall I didn't really relate to / like the Craig T. Nelson dad character, and the whole thing just felt very long and drawn out and frustrating at some points. I also felt like there was a lack of diversity in the usually colourful cast of characters Pixar creates in their films (see Finding Nemo, Toy Story, Cars). It was the family and the villains basically, plus Samuel L. Jackson's underused character. There were some cool elements and really nice animation though, and I'm glad people featured in at least Pixar film so I wouldn't be sitting her bitching about the lack of Pixar films about people, but overall I've just never LOVED this one.

6. Toy Story 2 - I actually really really liked both Toy Story 1 and 2. In some ways they are interchangeable on this list, despite having another movie between them. Toy Story 2 upped the animation quality, introduced a bounty of hella annoying new characters (I'm SO not a fan of Jessie, sorry), and featured all of our favourites for another round of relatively plausible / hilarious toy fun. It also took on an element of realism with the theme of abandoned toys that I quite appreciated...Sarah McLachlan's song? Beauty! The airport chase sequence? An awesome precursor to the door sequence in Monsters Inc. But yeah, I hated Stinky Pete and Jessie, so by default this movie ends up here.

5. Wall-e - Again, I feel weird putting some of these movies in the mid-range when I truly loved every single one of them. For me, Wall-e is possibly Pixar's most interesting technical achievement in their bleak portrayal of Earth. It's sort of their auteur stab at animation - breaking all of the rules for a children's film by incorporating vintage musical numbers, a desolate unfamiliar environment, removing most dialogue, and making the everyday person a villain. Well, that and technology - the very same technology we're actually supposed to love in Wall-e and Eve. I think Wall-e succeeds at all of these things, although much like Ratatouille, perhaps doesn't succeed so much at being a memorable, dynamic, marketable (ahem) children's film. Oh plus I absolutely LOVE the sequence of Wall-e traveling through space. As an astronomy nerd, I greatly appreciated Pixar's venture into our galaxy.

4. Toy Story - I think the Toy Story films probably have the best characters overall, hence the long-term marketability of the franchise. Buzz and Woody are two sides of the same coin for loveableness, and aside from that, the entire cast is interesting - both archetypal and hilariously layered at the same time. The first Toy Story film wins for an amazing story and introduction to what animated film can do - if not for the dazzling animation its current day peers have (although remember how amazing it seemed back then)? Am I a bit worn out with the story? Sure, but I still enjoy watching it time & again, and I still remember seeing this movie with my family and being blown away. A Pixar classic that stands the test of time.

3. Ratatouille - Despite the ick factor here, and the lack of distinguishable characters (I still refer to most of them with vague names like 'the chick chef' or the 'fat brother rat', or mix up the actual character names), I feel like this movie wins mega points - perhaps over any other Pixar film - for its ending. The Ego voiceover sequence seriously tugs every one of my heart strings every time I listen to it and generally just makes me feel great about life. It's definitely a daring movie, and definitely not a children's animated classic per se, but the visual richness, ability to make the implausible lovable, and the charming francais unity of the whole thing gives it bonus marks in my book.

2. Monsters Inc. - I think this is the first time Pixar really stretched it legs to show the world what it could do. Before that they were known for two successes - the Toy Story's - and kind of overshadowed with Antz in regards to A Bug's Life, meaning their name had yet to be set in glittering gold. To me, the animation, story, and widespread popularity of MI sealed the deal for them to be the darlings of animated Hollywood. As a result, I have a soft spot in my heart for this movie as being the first Pixar film that really screamed the Pixar that we know and love today - breaking major ground in animation and story development in the animated category. I'm still baffled as to why this didn't win the Oscar.

1. Finding Nemo - A safe bet, to be sure, but this is genuinely one of my fave Pixar films, and there's a good reason why it's so damn popular. For one, it's one of Pixar's most cohesively stunning movies - from the subject matter to the amazing Thomas Newman score (particularly in the belly of the whale) to the hugely diverse but memorable cast. I've actually wasted many hours of my time watching all of the Finding Nemo special features because I was so taken with this film. One thing I didn't appreciate until I did that was the interpretation of marine life through so many different settings - they didn't just settle in one coral reef and call it a day, you saw everything from the deepest bowels of the ocean to human-polluted shorelines to a freakishly sterilized tank. Aside from everything else, you've got to appreciate this was the most far-flung of Pixar films, refusing to settle with just being 'under the sea', you got to see everything there is with ocean / marine life. Awesome.

I'd tell you my fave Pixar shorts but I honestly don't remember them all. I know my faves include One Man Band, Presto, and Partly Cloudy - all more recent, I know, but I also love Knick Knack - and that I didn't love Lifted and Boundin'. For the Birds is good, but I don't get the extreme love for it. What can I say about my other choices, I'm a sucker for cuteness.

Till later,

Britt's On

I realized that I've only posted about television, which isn't the case of what this blog may be at all. I actually listen to a lot of music, read a lot of silly celebrity gossip, watch a lot of movies, and read a ton (a sick amount really) of books. So I'm going to make more of an effort to actually talk about such things, including music.

Yesterday for whatever reason, I started thinking about 90s boy and girl bands, including (oddly) S Club 7, and how people have continually bitched about 'manufactured music'. And then it kind of hit me / made sense. It's sort of impossible...somewhat anyway...for a band that doesn't play instruments to come together naturally.

Think about this realistically: you're a group of singers (perhaps lyricists or songwriters if you're lucky) but not one of you has more than a smattering of musical talent beyond that. You don't have the fundage to hire a backing band (and you won't until you have a legit record contract) - so you either have to shell out big bucks for cheesy backing tracks by someone that doesn't get your vision, or you risk being relegated to the doo-wop barbershop faction.

Thus, the music industry steps in and offers a ripe, juicy recording contract to any individuals - or small connected groups (Brian and Kevin from BSB, Nick and Drew from 98 Degrees - I'm looking at you) - interested in their shot at the big time.

There isn't much difference between putting together a group of 3-5 of these guys or gals, and those same people seeking out solo careers. Well actually, there may be one difference, in that a fair number of future banders have probably spent some time trying to make it on their own - and after the short stint of success their bands have, try to do so afterwards. Manufactured singing groups are very much a situation where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. The charisma of four or five can balance things out so that the more lacklustre members still get some lovin' (Howie from BSB, Chris from *NSYNC, Mel C from the Spice Girls...you know what I'm talking about).

Thus, I am in support of the manufactured bands of yesteryear. They never asked to be taken 'seriously', as when is the last time you heard of a singing-only 'rock group'? They were just out there producing feel-good pop for the masses that still holds up for sentimentality and "I'm so lame, but it's okay, you are too" conversations.

I recently realized I know pretty much every verse, chorus, hook, and vocal gymnastic warble on the first two Spice Girls albums, despite not listening to them for half a decade. And you know what? Those girls had a reunion tour for a reason - because on their own, they just aren't as dynamic.

The same can be said about most 'respected' bands out there today - with a few notable exceptions (Pete from Fall Out Boy, Flea from Red Hot Chili Peppers, or Richie Sambora from Bon Jovi for example) how often do you know ANY member of a band other than the lead singer? My aunt regularly hangs out with Coldplay - sans Chris Martin. Slightly less exciting, no?

And thus was the realized power of the all-singing, marginally musical pop group of the 90s: there was something for everyone! Multiple voices! Slightly different archetypal styles and personalities! Signature moves!

Am I saying it's time to go back to this? No, but I am saying that the music industry was onto something, and I'm not ashamed to say it wasn't so bad after all.

- Britt's On

So this season of SNL has been okay. And that's saying something, for a show that's been cited as dead in the water for the last few years. Of course, the first half of the year was super super strong in the political department but weak in the actual fun sketch department, while the second half has faltered a bit with the total elimination of good, recognizable female leads (other than Kristen!) and so-so hosts.

A big problem on the show has been its strong reliance on the females who have really carried the show over the last few years - Tina, Mya, Amy, Kristen, I'm looking at you. With Kristen as the last woman standing (and possibly one of the best, she's got a ton of recurring characters they are continually mining) the show is kind of at a standstill as they overexpose Kristen and try to deal with the other girls they've recently added. But is it fair to rely on the ladies, especially on a show that has primarily turned out mega-male stars? Definitely not. But I feel the time has come to do an analysis of each current cast member to see their value to the show, and prospects outside of it:

Fred Armisen
Value To The Show: He's excellent at Obama, and the fact Obama has such a huge pop culture role will keep him around. Especially since no one else can actually play Obama at this time. He's also pretty good at playing roles where facial and vocal expressions are important (as per this weekend's "I AM YOUR MOTHER" skit and the previous weekend's Grease "I got chills..." presentation folder skit). And he's got a unique look that is very translatable to different ethnicities and ages.
Success Rate Outside The Show: Very limited so far. He hasn't had any notable guest spots in the bit roles he's done. I'd say he needs several more years on SNL to have any shot out there.
Show Trademarks: Aside from Obama, there's the generally funny Nicholas Fehn from Weekend Update (although it's outdone by Kristen Wiig's travel advice chick), and bit roles - like playing menopausal what's her name in The View, and Liberachi in the Vincent Price sketches, and one half of the gay couple from New Jersey.
Bottom Line: I feel like Fred is underrated on the show, but he needs to bring more to get any sort of career off SNL. May end up as another Darrell Hammond type, although he doesn't share DH's passion for politico skewering.

Will Forte
Value To The Show: A big problem with SNL at the moment is the guys are all very interchangeable / forgettable - particularly with Will, Jason, and Bill. Will of course has the wildly popular McGruber saga that has only gotten better / more innane with time, and he's the token guy to play creepy / nerdy pedophilic types, but not much else. McGruber is a big departure from the usual role he plays actually.
Success Rate: He's done almost nothing outside of SNL, which probably doesn't bode well for him. That being said, McGruber has a pretty big following or Pepsi wouldn't have optioned it for their latest campaign. But McGruber the movie? No way, the hilarity comes from the stupidly short spots in tight confined 'control room' spaces.
Trademarks: McGruber of course, and the slightly aggravating Tim Calhoun on Weekend Update.
Bottom Line: Too forgettable to branch out or make a strong impact on the show.

Bill Hader
Value To The Show: Similarly to Will, Bill is pretty interchangeable - to the point where I often get those two and Jason mixed up when thinking back to past sketches. His trademark skit - the Vinny Venedici show - is my least favourite, I almost always fast forward over it. That being said, I somewhat enjoy the Vincent Price sketches.
Success Rate: While he may not be a shining star on SNL, Bill has done an excellent job of establishing himself in bit roles outside the show: namely Superbad, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and Adventureland to name a few. I'm hoping he recognizes that's what he does best - playing the sundance kid to someone's butch cassidy central plotline - because he's great in these scene-stealing roles.
Trademarks: Mostly Vinny Venedici and Vincent Price, plus the other half of the gay couple from New Jersey. Also, Bill, Will, and Jason have their "song memories" sketches but they aren't specific characters in those.
Bottom Line: Lacks the star power to really make a name for himself, but definitely has the charisma and intelligence to pick smart, snappy supporting roles in movies. Don't become a Rainn Wilson and try to be a leading role, it won't work Bill!

Darrell Hammond
Value To The Show: Can morph into almost any political or news pundit, also does a solid job of playing the older, grumpy characters. Plus, he's just a classic part of the show and a remnant of the 90s golden era. That being said, he's drastically underused now that politics season is over, which may lead some to think he's out of touch with the pop culture core of the show.
Success Rate: Darrell has always seemed content to let the show carry his career along - he's never been one to jump into the real acting world, at least not in any notable way. Once he leaves SNL, I think he recognizes he may fade into obscurity.
Trademarks: Donald Trump, John McCain, Bill Clinton, Sean Connery, Chris Matthews - Hammond is the master of impersonating, but doesn't bring his own recurring characters to the show.
The Bottom Line: Underused...but maybe for a reason. Definitely the best impersonater they have on staff, it's almost freakish.

Seth Meyers
Value To The Show: I have a major crush on Seth Meyers - and I feel like he always joined SNL with the goal of being part of Weekend Update / possibly part of the core writing staff. He's great on WU, although maybe not as charismatic as past solo hosts of the segment - he generally works better / well when interacting with a guest or a co-host. That being said, I always look forward to WU now that he's hosting it! I do wish he'd make a few more dips into the regular sketches - his take on David Beckham was priceless a few years ago!
Success Rate: Unlike some of his co-hosts / successors on WU (Tina, Amy), Seth never really established himself on the show. As a result, it may be harder for him to bring a unique brand of comedy to the movie / tv world beyond his wisecracking wit on WU. He's had the odd amusing guest appearance which are moreso of note becuase you'll find yourself going "Is that Seth Meyers?" rather than dwelling on his comedic prowess a la Bill Hader.
Trademark: Being the host of Weekend Update, and not much else.
The Bottom Line: The Weekend Update crown will be Seth's as long as he wants it, but beyond that? Not sure.

Andy Samberg
Value To The Show: Lorne Michaels sagely recognizes that Andy's viral popularity - i.e. Digital Shorts - are a huge boost for the show, thus, he lets Andy focus on those. Other than that, Andy mostly just plays the occasional teen/kid role, although his recent portrayal of Rohm what's-his-name has been good.
Success Rate: I feel like Andy's rise has been a bit too meteoric for his own good - he really only contributes digital shorts to the show, and otherwise plays filler characters, particularly in episodes with young hosts. Hot Rod & Space Chimps were both weak efforts. That being said, his return to Lonely Island / viral video success has been welcome / on point with his career path to this point.
Trademarks: Digital shorts, and within those, Laser Cats.
The Bottom Line: Although lauded as quite popular, I'm not sure Andy's career will hold up 90-minute feature roles. He's more of a 4-minute youtube video kind of guy.

Jason Sudeikis
Value To The Show: Oh Jason. He's probably my least fave character on the show as his "I talk loud", frat boy kind of pigheaded nonchalance isn't funny for very long. Neither is his shit-eating grin. BUT I do acknowledge he fills a void the rest of the more mild-mannered cast members probably couldn't fill. In fact, Jason is nearly always the role of the "director" in commercials, music videos, whatever. He has no recurring characters other than the painfully irritating Joe Biden that seems more of a caricature of Jason's own personality. Sigh.
Success Rate: I can see Jason having a Bill Hader type career in bit parts, but Bill is just a lot more likeable than Jason...
Trademarks: Loud, annoying jock types or Joe Biden (um, same difference)
Bottom Line: A forgettable part of the cast, moreso than his interchangeble counterparts (Bill and Will)

Kenan Thompson
Value To The Show: Token black guy (which is weird - where's the diversity?!?!), although his body type makes it harm for him to be as fluid in impersonations as his successors. Very campy OTT type of humour that can either be super funny, or super...unrealistic, and thus jarring. The more subtle actors often outshine him. He does have a few funny recurring roles though - including his bit part in Kristen Wiig's "Gilly" sketches.
Success Rate: Kenan's got a background in TV already, so he does do a fair bit of guesting, but nothing of note, and no bit parts in movies that are notable enough to mention.
Trademarks: Talking loud, saying WHAT? as loudly as possible, and at times, using some amusing intonations to rock some ebonics up in herr. Also he has a few fun recurring characters, although not as frequently touched upon as others, including his Deep House Dish starring role, Virginica (where is she???), and Jean K. Jean - the always amusing Def Jam french comedian that appears on WU.
The Bottom Line: His OTT comedy is a bit out of sync with his counterparts, and may account for why he's somewhat underused on the show / hasn't really established himself despite being around for awhile. Also, lots of fans of the show don't like him.

Kristen Wiig
Value To The Show: Undoubted star of the show. My boyfriend and I used to play a game with Amy Poehler to see how many times they used her per episode (almost every sketch). Kristen now takes that honour (and it's still almost every sketch). Very versatile, although best known for playing socially awkward women with great facial, body, and vocal expression.
Success Rate: Much like Bill Hader, Kristen has had some GREAT scene-stealing roles outside of SNL, including Knocked Up and Adventureland. Although she can be construed as a bit one note (always socially awkward) her ability to translate that character into everything from a shrewed television exec (Knocked Up) to a homely Target employee to a boastful one-upping diva (Penelope!), Wiig always delivers.
Trademarks: Agh so many! Judy or whatever her name the travel 'expert' on WU, also Amy's aunt the movie reviewer (may be in dead in the water now). One-upping Penelope. Target lady. The chick that LOVES surprises. Jamie Lee Curtis doing Activia commercials. Kathie Lee Gifford. Elizabeth on the View. Gilly, the troublemaking awkward child. There are many others I'm sure...
The Bottom Line: I'm unsure as to Wiig's long-term future. She's done some great supporting roles and cameos outside of the show, and she's clearly one of the current stars, but I feel like she'd do better in an ensemble situation (like Tina or Amy) rather than try to branch out on her own like say, Molly Shannon.

Abby Elliot
Value To The Show: Er...she's insanely young. I just looked it up, she's younger than me - she's only 21. Seriously? I mean I guess it gives her the potential for longevity. Plus she's prettier than most of the girls they've had on the show, which should make her a good candidate for celebrity impersonations. So far she's been mostly filler though, other than (excessively) portraying Angelina Jolie on WU.
Success Rate: Indeterminable at this point, but of the 3 newbie girls, she's the most likable I think.
Trademarks: Baby-obsessed Angelina Jolie has made at least 3 or 4 appearances since Abby started in November.
Bottom Line: Even for a featured performer, she's quite underused. I'm not sure she is really able to giv'r like Amy and Kristen have over the last few years, she seems more content to play cutesy roles for now. Can they please get her to impersonate Britney Spears? She looks freakishly like her at times.

Bobby Moynihan
Value To The Show: Captures the young, chubby, awkward character half-decently, and stands out from the general look / usability of the other actors current employed. Can be a bit annoying / much at times though, and occasionally treads on Will Forte's nerd corner a bit too closely.
Success Rate: I don't see him being versatile / likable enough to really do much beyond the show. There's something very juvenile / cutesy about his roles so far that has kind of been done (better) with Adam Sandler (a la Billy Madison).
Trademarks: Playing bratty, whiny children, Mark Payne - the wiggah bartender, and er, that's about it.
Bottom Line: Kind of a white Kenan actually.

Michaela Watkins
Value To The Show: So far she's poised to be the next Mya Rudolph (they play the same Muppet), but she lacks Mya's ability to play things totally straight and deadpan. She can be a bit on the hammy side and hasn't shown much prowess for timing yet, but I'll give her time. Angie Tempura, her celeb blogger person on WU, is half-decent and a departure from everything else she's been given so far, but nothing special.
Success Rate: She's probably been given the least opportunity so far to really shine, plus she's already a bit on the old side (37) to really establish a name for herself. I feel she's filler - on the show and beyond.
Trademarks: Hoda Kotb has made 3 appearances already with Kristen Wiig (as Kathie Lee) on The Today show. Plus Angie Tempura. The former is not really funny, the latter I have mixed feelings about.
The Bottom Line: All filler, not so killer.

Casey Wilson
Value To The Show: I feel like Casey had more potential when she was the only featured female on the show a season or two ago - she was used more frequently and was making progress in establishing herself. Now that Abby and Michaela have shown up, I feel they're being shoved down our throats a bit and Casey has been left to the wayside. She's okay at playing kind of hammy, dramatic, drag-queen types but her impersonations are pretty blase.
Success Rate: She's been smart in getting some production credits to her name (unfortunately with 'Bride Wars' rather than a successful vehicle like "Mean Girls") but given the recent downplay of her existence on SNL I'm not confident Casey will go anywhere with her face / fronting. She has potential to play the quirky best friend type in chick flicks.
Trademarks: Er, her operatic vocal trills would be the best I can think of.
Bottom Line: Forgotten and forgettable as of late.

So there you have it. SNL needs to sort out their females so Kristen isn't carrying the show, find a few more ethnically (or age, or body type, or looks) diverse cast members to add to the mix, and focus on developing some more recurring characters for some of the more veteran cast members that are still floundering.

Till later,

Britt's On

So two of the shows I regularly watch - One Tree Hill, and Friday Night Lights, are in seemingly paradoxical states.

Okay, different, but somehow similar. One Tree Hill, currently in its sixth season, is facing the imminent departure of the shows two stars - Hilarie Burton (Peyton) and Chad Michael Murry (Lucas, er, kind of THE star of the show). Worst of all, it looks like they'll pull a cheesy wedding day death based on a totally random, spontaneous incident where Peyton having a baby is vaguely fatal. While Lucas and Peyton have never ever ever been my fave characters, their story is kind of the heart of the show - much like Karen and Keith's was a few seasons ago (again not my faves). Without them, I'm not sure where they're planning to take the series...but we'll get back to that.

On the flipside, Friday Night Lights (FNL) has gone through 3 seasons - the latter two of which they've stretched the age of some of the main characters - Tyra, Lyla, and Tim in particular all seemed to be seniors or at least juniors in Season 1, yet are just graduating now with established sophomores come seniors Landry and Matt. The funny thing is, FNL was taped about a year ago, aired on Direct TV about eight months ago, and got renewed for two more seasons two weeks ago. So you do the math - it's been a few very swan song, poignant episodes packed with tears and drama and heart. Now the big question on all the fans lips is where do we go from here? I stated my theory already, Coach T is going to get fired and head for team underdog at East Dillon High - which gives them more flexibility if they stayed at their current school with a new cast. My friend Sarah thinks they might move to San Antonio to keep dreamtastic Timmy Riggins on the show. We'll see...

So here is the paradox. Both shows are losing some of their core cast members. What now?

One Tree Hill has suffered a bit last season, but moreso this one, because the show lacks the momentum of the four high school years (in fairness! they stretched each year - 11 and 12 - over two seasons and acknowledged it). Back then, it was about the State Championship and getting out of high school alive. The producers made a relatively wise choice of fast forwarding past college - more tideous basketball and watching them grow apart - and brought things together in a emotionally fraught and interesting season last year.

This year however, there's been zero momentum. The interesting career positions each character was in at the beginning of S5 have all been erased - Lucas' career options recently abruptly shutdown, Peyton is semi-managing a record label under a mega label, Brooke is doing nothing but working in an empty storefront and designing endless wedding dresses, Hayley has quit her teaching job but also isn't interested in singing again, and Nathan is in a minor league for basketball but with little to show for it on the home or work front. Where are we going? Where's the ambition? I want things to *finally* happen for Brooke, and I want the writers to decide whether they want to give Hayley or Nathan a fairy tale career ending as they snatched them away over the last two years. S6 did start off with a bang (literally) but it's quickly degressed from there without a final build-up.

My question with OTH in relation to FNL is would OTH have benefitted from college years? I'm not sure. I think the lateral drift of the characters would have been depressing, as it is on most shows that go to college, but at the same time the forced closeness (and desire to stay in Tree Hill) today is equally irritating. So is the prospect of killing off a major character for contractual / dramatic reasons. Just have her leave people. Have you learned nothing from S3 of The OC?

FNL...I'm guessing the grads will not be seen in college. The writers have two choices as I've mentioned - to send them off gracefully with a story arc like Smash & Street, or to feature them as minor recurring characters in their other lives. Another theory my friend Sarah had was Coach Taylor might end up at San Antonio state, thus giving him a chance to at least continue coaching Riggins, but we'll see.

Before I depart, let's rank the success of college seasons on other shows I've watched:

Dawson's Creek - 3.5/5: The show actually did a decent job of portraying college in its 90s pretentious way, Joey got better hair, and they finally did away with Dawson by making him exist in a world separate from the rest of the Creekers.
Pros: Less Dawson, continued enjoyable drama, the awesome episode with Joey and Pacey in the K-Mart.
Cons: Noticeable (although acknowledged) drift of the characters, Extreme emo Dawson and the death of his father, Busy Phillips as Audrey = worst cast addition ever.

Gilmore Girls - 4/5: A friend of mine is watching GG for the first time on DVD right now (thanks to moi) and it's making me reflect that the high school years really were fun - with the wider cast of characters from Rory's school definitely outweighing her college castmates. That being said, the show was about Rory's academics / future more than her friends, and ultimately, about family ties which the show never lost - other than that patch at the beginning of S6.
Pros: Smart move on the writers to make Rory choose Yale - it invoked serious family drama, but ultimately kept the family bonds in tact with Rory/Lorilei, Also Logan was a welcome change of pace from Dean, and seeing Rory evolve into someone more confident was nice. Plus Paris (realistically) stuck around. Also the show just let Rory grow more because it wasn't just about "getting into college" it was about boyfriends and futures and careers.
Cons: Some people complain Rory became too stylized in college which I somewhat agree with. Also, the loss of Madeline, Louise, the Puffs, and the various other high school castmates was sad, but realistic.

Buffy - 4.5/5: Let me clarify. Buffy herself went to college for approximately 1.5 seasons - but really, Season 4 of the show was "the college year" that made lots of puns and metaphors, and also heartbreaking drama, of typical college experiences (one night stands, missing home, and getting stupidly hammered to name a few). By the middle of season 5 we had nary a class scene with Buffy, who dropped out as explanation, and returned for one ill-fated class at the beginning of S6. That being said - I give Buffy a 4.5/5 for the college years because to me, Seasons 4-7 are the best of the series (4-6 really), and Willow was attending college for most of them. Season 4 was a transition / turning point, and thus, I gave it a solid mark.
Pros: The show always used typical high school drama as metaphors for the monsters it created (ex: Angel in S2). In college (s4), it did the same thing, but with a few seasons of doing this under their belt, it was much better executed (imo), and generally the funniest season of the show. S5-S7 were just way better in overriding story arcs than the earlier seasons. The fact Buffy never seemed to be in class (nor did Willow or Xander) was finally more logical, and honestly, freeing. Also, glad they acknowledged that Xander was the Pacey of the bunch - not in school, and struggling a bit, but ultimately both work it out.
Cons: S4 in particular had a relatively weak story arc, and mostly rested on its funny / smart college metaphors. Also, Buffy & friends never complete schooling which somewhat makes this a moot show.

The OC - 1/5: Marissa (Mischa Barton) died at the end of Season 3. It was stupid. The one thing I was looking forward to was seeing Ryan go to college, move on, and possibly add a new interesting female to the cast (and playing a guessing game as to who it would be?!?!). Well. The writers decided to predictably - for casting reasons, not for actual story / character relevance - pair him up with goody two shoes/show ruiner Taylor (Autumn Reeser), which, if you watch the beginning of S3 again, is ludicrous. Aside from that, Seth - the token brainiac - wasted away his unwanted gap year and decided to randomly become a movie critic by season's end, and Summer's experience at Brown was laughably bad - thus she dropped out early.
Pros: None. I hated all the characters added / focused on at this point (especially Taylor, Katelin, and Summer's stupid hippie friend) and the 3 main young leads felt disconnected without bonding together to save the day for Marissa.
Cons: Everything. See above.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head...till next time.

Britt's On

One of my fave games is to try and guess the outcome of a show. Friday Night Lights is actually pretty unpredictable because it rarely sticks to the conventions of dramatic television, but this last episode - where it was announced a second high school would open in Dillon, Texas, thus dividing up the football 'talent' by district lines - gave me one to ponder at least for what may happen in S4.

If you haven't followed the show, we've been with the general same pack of kids since S1, despite some very sketchy time placement of some of the main characters (Tim, Tyra, Lyla should all have graduated one or two years ago now) - this year it's inevitable that everyone, with the exception of Julie and newcomer JD, will be graduating. Which begs the question...where do we go from here? The two previous graduated characters were given four-episode story arcs each at the beginning of this season and have made peace with Panther football once and for all - but you can't do that with every character on the show and expect it to feel the same.

At this point the writers have a few options (assuming the show *please please please* continues on):

#1) Give each of the graduating characters a sweet farewell storyline much like Jason and Smash got at the beginning of this season. Start with a fresh cast of characters other than Julie and JD.

#2) Start with a fresh cast, but keep the other characters on as recurring characters for a transition (or possibly final) season - see, the first season or two after the original core cast of Degrassi kids graduated from 'The Next Generation'. You still had storylines with Ellie and Paige at college, but it didn't feel *too* weird, and show still largely focused on Degrassi.

#3) Follow the kids at college with equal weight to what's happening back in Dillon.

#4) Coach Taylor loses the State Championship and gets fired - only to get hired at the new rival high school in town and therefore a fresh new cast isn't so weird after all. Dramatic tension!

#4 was my theory as of this last episode, but I really don't know where things'll go. The writers have kept some of these twenty-somethings in high school for long enough, but it'll be sad to see them go. This is why high school shows are tragic my friends. Like...what will happen with Gossip Girl? That may be a bit easier as the show has never been rooted much in the realities of high school - but it has always focused on the main cast being in the sort of same circles at the same time at the same events and in the same places. GG is a whole nother kettle of fish which deserves a seperate blog post though.

In the meantime, if you haven't already picked it up watching FNL, do it. This is easily one of the best shows on television, and aside from a bit of screwy character editing and the odd blank slate scenario, I have zero complaints about it. And this is coming from a girl who was super against watching the show in the first place - but loved it from the first episode.

Did I mention the hotness & awesomeness that is Tim Riggins (Canadian Taylor Kitsch)?




Love!

Britt's On

Not every show a major name in the TV biz creates is gold. In fact, most TV production stars get their name from their first hit show, and carry it through several less awesome shows, until they are (hopefully) redeemed with an awesome show again.

Consider - Josh Schwartz rocked the world with the OC, which ended on a sour note, and landed a plum job at the helm of the TV adaptation of Gossip Girl, which truly pales in comparison to dear ol' Orange County.

JJ Abrams has built up a following over the years - first through Felicity, then through Alias, and finally through Lost - but he's also built up resentment by abandoning his projects towards the end and letting them suffer (as Lost currently is, and Alias did for S4 & S5). Don't forget, he's also had a couple of failed projects - What About Brian & Six Degrees, and Fringe isn't exactly storming the nation.

Then of course, we have Joss Whedon, best known for one of the best shows of all time - Buffy The Vampire Slayer. I'm not afraid to say I'm a fan of this show, I've watched the entire series several times over and love every second of it. As most fans will tell you, the show was an amazing mix of humour, introspectiveness, psychology, character development, passion, action, spookiness, and reality.

Things have not entirely fared well for Joss beyond Buffy (and its spin-off, Angel). His pet project Firefly (and movie Serenity) died out after one season - although I've heard it was a *great* season, and one I must watch. He's also laid pretty low on the radar since Buffy ended in 2003, and Angel in 2004, with his first major television project being launched this year on Fox - Dollhouse.

I decided to give Dollhouse a shot, mostly because my friend was rewatching Buffy at the time promotions started coming up, and I was craving a return to Buffyverse without actually rewatching the series. Well Dollhouse ain't no Buffy. If you don't know the show, essentially it's about a secret organization that signs people on for five years to have their minds reprogrammed to be whatever their multi-million dollar clients want them to. Although a fair number of the engagements are of the romantic (yuck) nature, they're also called upon for high-end thriller missions - from acting as security to helping to rob a secret vault to taking down a cult. When the 'dolls' aren't programmed, they are in a childlike state and simply exist in a very peaceful, zenlike, spa retreat.

Let me count the ways the show lacks in Buffy quality:
- There is no protagonist. In theory it would be Eliza Dushku's character, but Eliza doesn't have the acting chops, nor the character development required to make this work. She's either forced into some hokey role (with horrible costumes) each week, or she's a vacant doll, hanging around the compound. The alternative would be Paul Ballard, but the actor is wooden and the character can be downright annoying.

- The secondary characters fit neatly into Buffy-created roles, but they pale in comparison. Topher is a diet Xander (god, even their names are both short for another name), Sierra is a bizarre choice for proxy Willow (and equally as boring as Echo), Boyd is a boring version of Giles, and the other characters are wholly one-dimensional.

- There doesn't appear to be a solid direction for the show. While the same could be said of lots of shows, I've always at least felt like there was a purpose. I suppose on Dollhouse it would be for the dolls to realize what's happening to them and vive la revolution! but if that's the solution, the show would no longer exist - unless the dolls chose to continue on by choice, and be themselves instead of doll-like when not on engagements (unlikely).

- The show is rooted in science, rather than fantasy as Buffy/Angel were, which doesn't give it as much legs. Everything continues to be brought down to earth - but it's hard to envision anything on the show actually being plausible.

- It's just not as funny. The last episode this week did a decent job of being amusing, and Topher usually gets the show's rare funny parts, but as a 'forget who you are' episode, I could name 3 episodes off the top of my head on Buffy that did a much better job of being amusing in this same scenario (Halloween, Something Blue, Tabula Rasa).

That being said, I - like most other Whedon fans out there - am still holding out the show will manage to capture me once and for all.

I still feel like the characters are being underused, perhaps with too wide of a cast and not one unified location for them all to be in (like Lost), Whedon is struggling to make the time balance work. I also feel like Eliza Dushku was the wrong choice for this role - she's relatively one note, and having been in a previous Whedon vehicle in that very note, it's hard to seperate her into the myriad of roles she's asked to play each week. Finally, the blatant sexuality of the show is a put-off. The sexual aspect of the Dollhouse is creepy and hard to look past, and Eliza Dushku's wardrobe in general is horrible. This is definitely not appealing to all ages as Buffy once was.

Regardless, like I said, I am hoping for the show to go somewhere good and take me with it.

Till then,

Britt's On

I remember back in my college days, a group of my new classmates and I bonded over a mutual love of TLC's What Not To Wear. We all shyly admitted there were Friday evenings where we'd almost rather stay in and catch up with Stacey and Clinton (does anyone remember that weird Wayne dude that predated Clinton? Talk about an Upgrade!).

Since then, I kind of wavered - I got tired of incessantly following the show, especially when TLC decided to kick their episode numbers into high gear. My sister however, upon returning from living in Europe for a year, had never really gotten hooked on the show - until she returned. After a sister/sister bonding evening, I began my new love affair with WNTW, yet again, PVRing more episodes than is healthy. The crazy part is, I actually crave watching it. In a world where my once favourite shows continue to let me down, having a show that is consistent (albeit a tad repetitive) in its quality and fun makes me happy somehow.

I think part of it is that I am a bit of a shopaholic. Nothing makes me happier than new clothing - yet oddly, all of my newfound loves eventually find the reject pile of my wardrobe. I dream about shopping - and damn, I'm a good designer in my dreams.

Another part is that the change really is consistently revolutionary. These women are just better versions of their former selves - and Stacey and Clinton are awesome at promoting a healthier self-image, regardless of your body type. While they encourage healthiness, they're also champions of dressing for the body you have today - a lesson I think every woman could benefit from. The show is part inspirational (even if just to run out and get your hair did) and part educational - and surprisingly unsuperficial if you actually believe in the power of first impressions and personal style.

I would pretty much do anything to go shopping with S&C - ANYTHING - especially if we hit up a few of my fave stores (an ode to H&M could be written at this point) and a few stores I've always been curious to shop in, but never quite gutsy enough. Or wealthy :)

I don't think my personal style is particularly horrible - I definitely own a lot of er, cool clothing that generates a fair bit of (positive) attention & compliments. But, as I grow older, I think it'd be sweet to have a proper work wardrobe that suits the creative industry I'm in - i.e. not too fussy - and as much as I love shopping, I feel like some expert opinions would be awesome.

With that, I wanted to give a salute to Stacey & Clinton. Although I might never get to shop with them in person, I hope to enjoy shopping alongside them at a moderate pace for the forseeable future.

- Britt's On