Hooray for the Hype: Perks of Being A Wallflower

Hoodwinked or Hooray
Perks of Being a Wallflower

Dear Friend,
I am going to disclaim this by saying I have learned to never believe the hype. 70% of the time when a movie or album is ultra hyped, it turns out to be crap.  Whenever the words “stunning” “heartfelt” or “groundbreaking” are in a review, it sets off the hype-meter in my head. And not in a good way.

And when it comes to books, I have been hoodwinked by the hype one too many times. I’m talking to you, girlie with that reptile tattoo.  

Thus, when the hype started around the MovieBook “Perks of Being a Wallflower,” I was skeptical.
 
1. It was hyped.

2. It was written by a man and men cannot write relationships. (take that "Women aren't funny" spouters!)

I will concede that men can write complex introspective thought pieces that center on one character; they can write adventures, mysteries, horrors and nice autobiographies. But men are shit at writing about relationships, family and, in general, the things that make the world go round. All things I LIKE to read about.

(but I digress)

3. It was a book written by a man about teens and for teens.  
I have to be honest; most of the time adults just don’t get it...
 
Thus, it was with a healthy dose of skepticism that I picked up this slim novel at Target. Yes, Target! Thank you, America, for not reading thus causing all of my local bookstores to go belly up. 

After the first sentence I was hooked. 

That first sentence (heck the whole book) captures the feeling of adolescence perfectly.   It sums up what every teen is looking for in a friend:  someone who will listen and understand and has some integrity.

Chbosky continues to write the entire novel with that sense of honesty, naivete and openness that is adolescence at its best. As I was reading, I was taken back to my high school years. I remember all of the emotions Charlie was feeling.  

Chbosky describes and captures perfectly those little momentous moments. How the things that are most memorable are not the “rager house” parties, but the talking all night about NOTHING at Bob's Big Boy (or for us, Denny’s).  Or going  out with someone just because  they asked and it was polite but not because you liked them. There is a genuine confusion to Charlie's questions that I truly remember experiencing. There are things that happen as teen that you don’t understand and have questions about but there is no one to give you answers. You find out that eventually life gives you the answers.


I would recommend this book for every teen to read. I know, based on some of the hype, that there was controversy about this book and it was banned from some schools because they felt the material was too adult for kids. But the thing is, this is what kids are dealing with today (and everyday). I know when I was in high school, there were drugs, alcohol, pregnancy and suicide and I challenge you find anyone from ANY generation that did not deal with the same things in high school.
Let these kids read this book and know they are not alone in these issues.

What is great is that Charlie is NOT a cool kid, but he is himself, or the version of himself that he is becoming but he still not quite sure of. That is the whole paradox of adolescence: you are constantly becoming yourself in an attempt to be yourself when you have no idea who you are.

Love Always,
Squirt

P.S. Hooray for the Hype: for bringing this gem to my attention.

The Multiple Ways that Yvonne Strahovski Owned "Do the Wrong Thing"

Let's just get some basics out of the way:

1. Yvonne Strahovski is an actress.  A damn good one.
2. Dexter is show on premium cable.  Premium cable.  You were warned.

Yvonne Strahovski owned this episode.

From start to finish, this was her time to shine; to show multiple aspects of Hannah McKay; to show the world that she was not a one-note actress.  And boy, did she ever!

Do you even remember any of the other plot lines?

No, you don't.  Don't even pretend that you do.

So the Hannah & Dexter scenes/moments that I thought were awesome:

1. The delicate dance between Hannah and Dexter is simply mesmerizing.  It's easy to understand why Dexter is obsessed with Hannah.  We're obsessed with her, too!  We want to know more about her almost as much as Dexter!  (Personally, I don't think that she is guilty of any of the things that Dexter does, but I am willing to let it play out however the writers see fit.)
2. The stubborn strength that Hannah shows in keeping it all together.  She knows her weaknesses, but she is not a victim.  She's not an aggressor either.  She's something else all together.  And Yvonne is playing that balance with a grace and poise that looks simple, but is really rather difficult.
3. The "a plant" line.  Nailed it.  Pure comedy.  (Didn't expect anything less, but still.  Two words, so much subtext.)
4. The look on Hannah's face as they drove up to Santa's Holiday Adventure amusement park.  She looked like a kid at Christmas (no pun intended).  I actually was happy for her; that she finally got to see the snow, check something off of her list of desires.
5. The hand-holding as they were walking through the amusement park.   I actually giggled a bit.  It was just so sweet, so cute. 
6. The defiance in "Do what you gotta do."  Ugh!  Just so.....!

For those of you who are still upset about THAT scene, I just have one last thing to say:

- Sis

Bring. It. On!

I grew up on musicals.  Some of my earliest memories are of watching tapes of Annie, Brigadoon, Mary Poppins, Sound of Music and Pirates of Penzance.  Over and over and over again. 

I blew out my father's speakers on his new stereo by playing Christine's aria from Phantom of the Opera.  And then the speakers on my own boombox met the same fate due to unending repeat plays of the soundtrack from Newsies.  I wore out my first recording of RENT (a 2 tape set).  The Tonys are a National Holiday in my house and I record the Thanksgiving Day parade every year so that I can watch the musical numbers again.

Don't judge:  you have your entertainment; I have mine.

But even with my credentials, I had never seen a show on THE ACTUAL Broadway.  (Yes, the caps are necessary.) But when the opportunity presented itself for me to be in New York with enough time to see a show, I grabbed at it and held on with both hands.

First, I had to pick a show. 

Because I'm such a Broadway/musical theatre geek, I am a terrible audience member.  (The first step to dealing with a problem is admitting that you have a problem, right?)  I literally cannot stop myself from singing along if I know the music.  So that removed Wicked, Phantom of the Opera, Annie, Chicago, Jersey Boys, Mamma Mia and Avenue Q from being my first shows on Broadway.  Just for the record, if they were showing, RENT, You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown, Cats, Hairspray, Into the Woods, Les Miz, Putting It Together and Urinetown would have been out as well.  But I digress.

Ultimately, I picked a show that I had never seen and didn't know much about.  I went up to New York and was on of the hundred people who got off of the train (Company).  And in my hot little hands were tickets to the 2 pm show of "Bring It On: The Musical".

The remainder of this post is a gushing love fest about the show.  You have been warned.

WORTH IT! 

Everything that anyone is saying about the show is all true.  It is the same lightning in the bottle that was caught by High School Musical, Pitch Perfect, RENT, Save The Last Dance and the first Bring It On movie.  Just so very good!

For those of you who need more than my from-the-rooftops praise, here's what the show is:  Imagine if you took the first 3 Bring It On movies (I've seen all 5, thank you very much), added some Save The Last Dance and a splash of Pitch Perfect; that would give you a low-rent approximation of the show.  For those who have seen any of those movies, you will recognize some of the themes in the show, but, much like all great art, it is so much more than the sum of its parts. 

Yes, it is still about cheerleaders.  Yes, it is still about going outside of your comfort zone, being true to yourself and making mature decisions at an immature age.  But I will caution  those who think they know this show:  you haven't seen this story told yet.

And the cast album.  Don't even get me started on the cast album.  All I can say is that it is a good thing that we were dealing with Sandy and power concerns or else I would have already worn out the CD.  As it is, I have already listened to it, from start to finish, at least 20 times; twice this morning.  (I've only had the thing for about a week; just to put it in perspective.)


Here is the cast album recording one of songs that has been playing on repeat on my iPod for the past week.

And, as the sprinkles atop the awesome cupcake of "Bring It On: The Musical", most of the cast and creative team is on Twitter!  You can follow all of them (and you should because they are awesome) from the show's Twitter account:  @BringItOn.  This is the new crop of Broadway stars.  I am expecting great things from this group and I know that I'm not going to be disappointed.

-Sis

Downton Abbey, You've Changed

Downton Abbey has not "lost its way", "gone off the rails" or "jumped the shark".  It has, however, changed.

And I don't think that is a good thing.

When Downton Abbey first premiered in 2010 (or 2011, for those who waited to watch it on PBS in the United States), one of the main draws was the simmering romance between Mary and Matthew and the "will they ever get to be together" romance between Mr. Bates and Anna.  The creative folk behind the show did a great job of keeping those love lights quietly, but brightly, burning.

This was, of course, on top of an amazingly acted, gloriously shot period piece.

Even in the second season (the season wherein some do claim that the show lost its way), I held firm, convinced that there were still enough hints at possibly a "happily ever after" ending for our star-crossed pairs to keep me watching.  Even the treacle sweet romances between Daisy and William and Lady Sybil and Branson were bearable, as long as I could hold out hope that Matthew and Mary would finally get together.   

But, by sewing up all of those pairings by the end of Season 2, I feel like the writers have nowhere else to go.  At least with regards to love stories.

And that makes Downton Abbey a very different show from where it started.

In Season 3, if you are not awed by the splendor of the house, amused by the strictures of British society or in love with history, you are not going to love this show.  There is nothing for those who love romance to love; at least not right now.  Which is a shame.

A good love story can make any show easily accessible and can bring back viewers who have given up.  Even if you had never watched Downton before this season, if there was a good romance brewing, you could jump in, watch for the love story and figure out the back story along the way.

Lady Mary and Lady Sybil are happily, if boringly, married.  There is such little fire or passion in those pairings that even I, shipper of Matthew and Mary, find myself terribly bored by their couple scenes.  Anna and Mr. Bates are coupled together but torn apart by circumstances that the writers don't seem in any hurry to resolve.  As such, we wait.

But while we wait, there is really very little else to distract us.  In Downton Abbey time, the war is over, but we see very little change in the household or village.  The house itself, THE Downton Abbey, is in peril, this time from financial constraints.  And Lady Edith, poor Edith, has been given the misery role to play for yet another season.  But none of these are really enough to keep a viewer watching.

What are we expected to be waiting for?  What are we expected to be hoping for?  I don't care if the family keeps the house or loses the house.  I don't care if Thomas gets his come-uppance or not.  I don't even care if Mr. Bates never gets out of prison.  And I love Mr. Bates!  (But really, who doesn't?)

That's how much I've lost interest in this show!

Last season, it seemed like the writers were struggling there as well, but they managed to pull together intrigue towards the end of the season to keep me watching all the way through and happy at the end of the Christmas episode.

While I wait for the next episode I find myself wondering:  Will it be ever thus?  Will we Downton Abbey fans have to, every year, sit through boring starts of seasons before we get to the good stuff?

And will I still care?

- Sis

Out of Context: S.F.W.

I never watched SFW when it came out in 1994.  I also never watched it on DVD.

So it was clearly out of context when I watched it last weekend.

SFW asks the dual question: 

1.  What happens when you become a celebrity but you are still you?
AND
2.  What if you had no control over how you became a celebrity?

Even to a staunch avoider of reality-TV such as myself, watching this movie in 2012 was not a novel experience.  Having been a part of the generation in which 'The Real World' started the whole 'reality' trainwreck, watching a person become a celebrity due to nothing but circumstance and then watching those struggles and pitfalls was not new.

But in 1994, it was.  This movie relies heavily on context, or at least the environment where reality TV or being famous for just being famous is not the norm.

"Unintentional" celebrity is de riguer for roughly one-quarter of the 'known' names nowadays.  Even those who seek viral celebrity status often find that celebrity is not quite the shiny gold ring that it often appears to be.

But what if you couldn't even control how you 'became known'?  That question still rings profound.

Spab, our unlikely hero, (who's name I didn't believe was his full name until I saw it in the end credits) did not set out to become famous and definitely not in the manner in which he became.  What is fun about Spab is that he never seemed to try to rise above/beyond himself; to become the "thing" that everyone wanted him to be.  And I say "thing" because Spab, upon becoming a celebrity, lost his humanity.  He became a mantra, a slogan, an idea; the quintessential 'voice of a generation'.  But not a person, not a human with flaws and vices and needs.

I kept expecting the movie to go in the direction of either 'guru with feet of clay' or self-destruction.  But the movie doesn't go in either direction, choosing the at-the-time-not-yet-overdone 'slice of life', a raw, convoluted, sometimes boring and slow, but true lens.

-Sis

My New Best Friend: "Friends with Kids"

It has to be a very special movie to be started (and watched about halfway through) on a long plane flight, immediately rented on Netflix upon arriving home (so that the rest of the movie can be watched) and then placed into the Amazon shopping cart immediately once the movie is over.  

“Friends with Kids” is that kind of very special movie.  

On a superficial level, “Friends with Kids” follows the lives of 6 friends (2 couples and 2 singletons) as they maneuver the fraught-filled waters of early 30s coupledom.  The cast is so full of quality that you would be hard-pressed to find a bad performance in the entire movie.  

First off, let’s get the easy praise out of the way:  “Friends with Kids” is beautifully written, directed and produced by the incomparable Jennifer Westfeldt.  I had not previously experienced the package that is Jennifer Westfeldt (although “Ira and Abby” is now in my Netflix queue) but I knew early on into “Friends with Kids” that there was a woman at the helm of this movie.  The situations, dialogues and characters resonated too deeply with me for it to be otherwise.

What I loved most about the movie was how real it felt to me.  As a member of Generation X (or Y, they’re never really quite sure), I recognize the partnering-up, pairing-up and parenting-up frenzy that many of my friends are going through; as well as the anxieties of those who are “left behind”.   But this movie doesn’t let any green grass sit unexamined.  If you didn’t already know: marriage is messy, dating is messy, relationships are messy, children are messy, sex is messy, love is messy and life is messy.

Both situations, either being partnered or single, have benefits and drawbacks and this movie seamlessly (but lovingly) shines a soft light on all of it.  What this means as a viewer is that you interact with all of the characters using the full range of emotions (joy, embarrassment, sadness, anger, amusement, humor, frustration, love) and consequently are very, very sad to see them leave when the movie is over.  

Ultimately, it is a story about love for people who grew up on love stories, but are also grown-ups.

- Sis

Neilson's Needless Numbers

Just because I don’t watch in REAL time doesn’t mean I don’t REALLY watch.
 
(Disclaimer: I am crap with numbers.)

In 1930, 50 years ago, when Arthur Nielsen started his television ratings system, there were 5 networks and 3 channels that aired about 6 hours of content a day.  It was very easy to get a sense of what the public liked.  You were either watching television or you weren’t.  

Even in the olden days of VCRs and 25 basic cable channels (read: the 80’s), my dual antenna VCR and 8 hour EP recording tapes could ensure that I never missed a show.  Fast forward to now.  There are over 500 channels that I NEED to watch.  And suddenly I cannot not keep up.

So I upgraded to Tivo.  Oh bless you, Tivo!

This little box could not only record 2 shows at a time, but it could also find shows I had accidentally missed on ANY of my now 150 basic cable channels.  However, this amount of TV watching would not suffice for the The TV gods.  

I have to to admit the television Pantheon did help me out some:  expanding prime time programing to 11pm on weeknights.  Still no matter how hard I tried, anything starting at 10 pm had to be recorded to be viewed the next day. I just could not stay awake.  

Also, with the completely dreadful reality TV line up, I had full-on HOURs of time that I would not watch any programming at all on any network.  

And THEN CAME HULU!  And On Demand.  And life was sweet again.

(Cue the swelling orchestra and large dance number.)

But my happiness was short lived.  Because of Nielsen.  (Cue the booing.)

Because I couldn’t watch my shows in real time, Nielsen did not count my viewings towards the show’s ratings.  Suddenly, my 20 hours per week of television-watching did not count.  How crap is that!  

I am a FAN (a hardcore, loyal one at that).  I LOVE my TV and my television shows.  
Just because I do not watch them in “real-time” does not mean that I don’t REALLY WATCH them.

Nielsen’s needless numbers have been the death of some of my favorite shows and I feel partly responsible, because I (and others) watch them online.  

We are watching, just not on TV.

Here are some numbers for you.  In case you’re curious.
 
I am one person.  
12 is the number of hours of programming that I record on my DVR a night.*
4 is the the number of hours of programming I watch online every week.
5 is the number of hours of programming I watch On Demand every week.


This adds up. We need to be counted.  

Neilson needs new numbers.

*(see disclaimer above)


- Squirt