what to watch
Apr. 26th, 2003 10:49 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lauralhHmmm, an all-male production of Taming of the Shrew sounds kind of interesting. Unfortunately going to see plays is really expensive.
For all but eighteen of you: I just wrote a rant about bad movies and bad TV, except just the ones I've seen. I still hate most reality TV, so I'm rather out of touch with America. I guess I shouldn't mock it all too much, because you probably have to watch that stuff from the start to actually care, and Buffy is the same way, but well, scripted television beats reality television, man.![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
candid liked the idea of reality shows as psychology experiments that would never get funding b/c of being unethical or something like that, but I just can't bear to watch them. I think it's mainly the same reason I have mixed feelings about online journals. Unless you know the people involved - or the stuff is really over-the-top - normal people are really boring. The benefit of journalling over these shows is that some people can write really well, or at least well enough to compensate. The general rule is, if you can write well enough, you can have a boring life, and vice versa. Reality shows never get dramatic enough, unless, that is, they're about celebrities, who just have the drama turned up "to eleven" automatically. I think that's why I watched the Michael Jackson special last month, and why I can watch The Osbournes or that Anna Nicole show.
Of course the rules all go out the window for scripted stuff. Six Feet Under, for example, is basically a soap opera (I'm basing this on season one, which is all that I've seen). But it's a really really well-written and acted soap opera. The very existence of soap operas shows that outrageous stuff that isn't true needs to be well-done to be - well, entertaining is the wrong word, evidently, but I'll use it anyway, because I'm just talking about me, not your average schmuck here. My whole rant is based on the fact that I have standards for television and movies, however misguided and warped they are. I try to hit a baseline with most of my viewing habits. Or at least I try to be ironic about the bad stuff I watch. I just can't do it all the time.
And on that note, I just edited my Profile a bit.
For all but eighteen of you: I just wrote a rant about bad movies and bad TV, except just the ones I've seen. I still hate most reality TV, so I'm rather out of touch with America. I guess I shouldn't mock it all too much, because you probably have to watch that stuff from the start to actually care, and Buffy is the same way, but well, scripted television beats reality television, man.
candid liked the idea of reality shows as psychology experiments that would never get funding b/c of being unethical or something like that, but I just can't bear to watch them. I think it's mainly the same reason I have mixed feelings about online journals. Unless you know the people involved - or the stuff is really over-the-top - normal people are really boring. The benefit of journalling over these shows is that some people can write really well, or at least well enough to compensate. The general rule is, if you can write well enough, you can have a boring life, and vice versa. Reality shows never get dramatic enough, unless, that is, they're about celebrities, who just have the drama turned up "to eleven" automatically. I think that's why I watched the Michael Jackson special last month, and why I can watch The Osbournes or that Anna Nicole show.Of course the rules all go out the window for scripted stuff. Six Feet Under, for example, is basically a soap opera (I'm basing this on season one, which is all that I've seen). But it's a really really well-written and acted soap opera. The very existence of soap operas shows that outrageous stuff that isn't true needs to be well-done to be - well, entertaining is the wrong word, evidently, but I'll use it anyway, because I'm just talking about me, not your average schmuck here. My whole rant is based on the fact that I have standards for television and movies, however misguided and warped they are. I try to hit a baseline with most of my viewing habits. Or at least I try to be ironic about the bad stuff I watch. I just can't do it all the time.
And on that note, I just edited my Profile a bit.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-04-26 12:31 pm (UTC)*blink*
now. what they're meaning to DO with us remains to be seen ;) maybe we'll be shuttled off to our own private island and placed before many a camera for the next reality tv show "nonbelievers survivors" or something like that?!? when they run out of other fodder?!
based upon what they're coming out with lately, i think it will be soon. so HIDE. *darts away*
no subject
Date: 2003-04-26 12:44 pm (UTC)*blushing*
But I've never watched "Survivor" or "Married By America" or that one where the girls all thought the guy was rich but he turned out not to be. They've just never looked that interesting to me. Maybe I'm not enough of a real person voyeur. ???
xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo
no subject
Date: 2003-04-26 01:10 pm (UTC)That's like saying a feeble old man with a walker beats a feeble old bedridden man. Neither one is a strong contender.
no subject
Date: 2003-04-26 01:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-04-26 05:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-04-26 05:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-04-27 05:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-04-27 11:22 am (UTC)I actually barely remember seeing Alan Sokal, I mean, he made fun of a lot of French philosophers, and the black plastic glasses and turtleneck wearers in the crowd were fuming, but that's about all I remember.