Buffy Anne Summers, aka

Posts Tagged ‘television’

Okay, I know lots of folks are looking forward to the premier of the 2nd season of Dollhouse, and I am too, but I just wanted to take a second to add my voice to another premier I believe is, in some sense, more important. I want to encourage everyone to make an effort to watch The National Parks: America’s Best Idea. It is a six-episode series directed by Academy Award winning documentary filmmaker Ken Burns and written and co-produced by Dayton Duncan. Filmed over several years at some of the United States’ most beautiful and awe-inspiring locales, e.g., Acadia, Yosemite, Yellowstone. the Grand Canyon, the Everglades, the Gates of the Arctic in Alaska , this is about our country, about our people, about the rich and the poor, the celebrities and the unknown, about dreamers and about the wise leadership of our past; and while you’re watching it, if the contrast of that wisdom of yesteryear with some of the foolishness that has been in power lately doesn’t jolt you a bit, then you are truly one of the zombies in this country who may never awake or ever be alive again.

I encourage you to find your nearest right-winger and somehow find a way to make them watch it, because this is all about having the kind of vision necessary so that the people don’t perish, and it is all about our common heritage and about the commonwealth, which many Republicans in recent years have failed to even acknowledge exists. It’s a reminder that we are capable of being one nation and one people with common and benevolent purpose… when we choose to be. 

Premiers Sunday, 8PM ET/PT.

Technorati Tags: documentary, Ken Burns, National Parks, PBS, television, TV

On this, the anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001, I thought it might be worthwhile to again assess the real damage done. Yes, there was the tragic loss of life on that day that now almost seems to have occurred somewhere else, in some other country, and I certainly do not mean to lesson the gravity of that loss, but I’m intent here on talking about some of the other damage that was done — the damage we’ve done to ourselves.

Although, prior to the attacks I would never have thought I would ever say such a thing, it was in some respects, a far more innocent time. In those more halcyon days, most of us I suspect thought that an American — with only the rarest exception — was simply an American, a US citizen simply a citizen, some of course better, far more responsible citizens than others, some to the political left and some to the political right, but nevertheless, a more or less given that, left or right, we were held together in as many ways as not by a common thread of understanding.

It is the sort of denial that seems almost a requirement to live in this post-post-postmodern age (or whatever), and it was naive, and perhaps in some ways it really was innocent, yet most of us I suspect know and have nearly always known that the edges of our society have always been raw with the rampant and the rabid, but that understanding nevertheless did not require very many of us to acknowledge the extent to which the half-cocked and half-crazed were waiting for their opportunity to pounce.

And suddenly, with the attacks, came that opportunity at last.

Suddenly, a man who was inarguably one of the most deeply flawed and unqualified to ever inhabit the house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, toward whom most Americans, judging by the polls, had already lost much of their initial good will and faith, became, overnight — primarily it seems because he could use a bullhorn and make a few terse comments — our Great Leader.

So we were told.

For many months — and to a slightly lesser extent, even years — after, to offer criticism of that particular president became tantamount to being unpatriotic, of offering solace to the enemy, of being un-American, of being treasonous.

So we were told.

As nasty as American politics had been in recent decades, it had rarely seen this sort of opportunism, this sort of vitriol, obsession, or sheer, mindless indecency. Suddenly, anyone who did not agree with the deeply flawed policies of our deeply flawed president had the choice of being silent or of being attacked by a propaganda machine with the sole intent of threatening, bullying, silencing, and blacklisting all comers.

Fortunately, enough fought back, and passions gradually cooled enough, so that that machine did not achieve the total political and media dominance to which its operators aspired. (At least some of us think it was fortunate.)

And yet.

Here we are today, still caught in the aftermath of a political tsunami in which it has become acceptable, even heroic to many, for an elected leader in our Congress to heckle the president of the United States in the middle of his speech, in which it has become acceptable, even heroic to many, to openly carry and display firearms into venues in which the president is scheduled to speak, in which it has become acceptable, even patriotic to many, to simply make up your own "facts" on any subject whatsoever, to attribute a statement to your opponent that is exactly the opposite of what your opponent actually said, to lie about everything, to give one’s loyalty only to one’s political party, or team, to concern yourself with winning only, and for your side only, and to treat any concerns about the actual future of this society as inconsiderable and beneath contempt.

It has been said, by many on the right, and on many occasions — in utter denial of all the damage that has been done — that we should all just shut up and be appreciative that the Bush administration protected us from further terrorist attacks. And I am willing to admit, despite mounting evidence to the contrary, it may well be that Bush, Cheney, et al, did protect us, that some of their policies were far more effective than we know, or are, apparently, allowed to know.

But even if all of that is true, if we should ever be attacked similarly again (or worse) there is still one question that has to nag incessantly at anyone in this country who still has a mind, who can still think a semi-coherent thought, who still cares: who or what will protect us from the fully-cocked and the fully-crazed, the rampant and the rabid, who are now orgasmically frothing at the lips at the thought of when their opportunity may come?

In short, who will protect us from ourselves?

Technorati Tags: 911, 911 anniversary, 911 attack, 911 attacks, future, media, national security, politics, television

I am frequently appalled by what manages to become a movie. After having given it the occasional thought, I’ve begun to conclude that it is at least partly due to the fact that too many in the business of making movies have never studied how the best stories usually work.

Now that the studio system is as dead as the ancient pharaohs and most actors are captains of their own careers, I suspect there really ought to be more emphasis on teaching actors more about the art of storytelling. If Marsters had a better sense of that, he likely would have never agreed to this script. Either that, or whatever he originally found compelling about the script never made it into the actual movie, and contractual obligations, or some sense of loyalty, compelled him to speak no evil of it despite.

High Plains Invaders had no significant character arcs, no moral dilemmas, no self-revelations, no inspired dialog, and was composed entirely of nearly dispassionate and seemingly burned-out characters, most of whom had very little (except for the most obvious) at stake.

If, as he said in the video clip posted elsewhere on the site, Marsters really believed this movie was better than even the worst of Buffy, he has an utter lack of appreciation for what Joss Whedon and his crew actually accomplished on Buffy, and he is in serious need of having his head examined.

(But since I wasted two hours of my time watching it — even if one of my motivations for enduring it was to be able to comment on it for this blog — I probably need my head examined as well.)

No, it wasn’t any worse than a lot of other made-for-SyFy-channel movies, but it wasn’t any better either — and given James Marsters’ acting ability and his impeccable sense of delivery, High Plains Invaders was a monumental waste.

If you missed it, count yourself fortunate. If it is rebroadcast and you somehow manage to miss it a second time, count yourself among the truly blessed.

Technorati Tags: film, flick, invaders, James, Marsters, movie, pop-culture, scifi, SyFy, television, western

I guess everyone’s heard by now that James Marsters is heading to Caprica (the Battlestar Galactica prequel) for a multiple-episodes story arc. James is cast to play a terrorist leader named Barnabus Greeley who is driven by carnal desires as well as moralistic. Anybody get the feeling James is well on his way to being typecast?

Ah well. My only concern is that, with all these actors doing this and that, how am I going to peel myself away from the TV (or ‘telly’) long enough to keep posting on this blog?

Premieres next year on January 22, 2010 on Syfy.

Technorati Tags: Battlestar Galactica, James, Marsters, scifi, series, SyFy, television

I don’t know what this says about me, but I enjoyed the music, I enjoyed the imagery, I just enjoyed it! But it’s kinda hot, so be sure to keep your toddlers away from this, as well as your monks, your priests, your puritans, your uptight relatives, your sexually repressed neighbors… well, you get the pic.

Technorati Tags: buffy, Gellar, James, Love, Marsters, media, Michelle, music, passion, Sarah, series, sex, slayer, television, vampire