Tuesday, April 27, 2010

People Who Are Awesome: Chris Colfer

I'm not gonna lie, I could easily give the title of "People Who Are Awesome" to any member of the "Glee" kids (and who knows? I still may; adorable cast is adorable). But I decided that the first to follow behind Kristen Bell in the Awesome Line is the charming and talented Chris Colfer.

Let's break down The Awesome:

1. Chris is not quite 20 and his first job is on a hit television show. Point, Chris.

2. Chris was treated terribly in high school (citing friendship with the lunch ladies! Awww) and now has the last laugh. Yes, underdogs are Awesome.

3. He uses his Twitter account for hilarious good. Some examples:

Yesterday I was in a van with Olivia Newton-John, Josh Groban, Idina Menzel, and Jane Lynch. I think I had a dream just like that once.

I really want to get a dog to obnoxiously take everywhere I go. I'm thinking a Great Dane named Hans Christian Anderson.

I just said "excuse me" to a pigeon on a sidewalk...

4. He knows how to use sai swords. (0:35)

5. He is the funniest in the cast. (Seriously, it's a fact. They all decided.) (3:01)

And finally, reasons #6-8...

6. Kurt Single Ladies

7. Kurt 4 mins

8. Kurt Rose's Turn

And there you have, 8 Objective and Undeniable Reasons That Cannot Be Argued to support the fact that Chris Colfer is Awesome. Expect another Glee-related People Who Are Awesome very soon. Any guesses?

Credit for the gifs goes to killerspork33 and fight_the_sky. Many thanks for your part of the Awesome!

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Tyra Banks' Inflating Narcissism

You don't have to watch America's Next Top Model to know that the one thing Tyra Banks loves more than anything else in the world is... Tyra Banks. And perhaps barbecue. But that's another blog post.

Tyra's slippery descent into complete and utter self-absorption has played out entirely on television, and nowhere is it more apparent than the opening credits for her first TV baby, America's Next Top Model.

Take a look at Cycle 1:

Gasp! There's hardly any Tyra!

It continued in a similar fashion for five more cycles, and not only did she refrain from plastering her face all over the credits, she actually used footage of previous winners in a celebration of their victories. Aw, good for you, Tyra!

Cycle 6... look at all the former winners!

We started hitting a rough patch around Cycle 7.

Uh-oh. Notice all the shots of Tyra at the beginning? But I guess it's okay, they're just photos from her portfolio. Plus, she still included all the previous winners in the montage and that's really nice of her. She has a right to be in her own opening credits, after all!

But then Cycle 10 happened, and Tyra took her first sip of the intoxicating elixir of self-absorption.

No former winners! And a special segment devoted only to Tyra... as a fierce ringmaster? Whyyyy, Tyra? Why do you foresake the integrity of your show?

But it only got progressively more absurd. Here's Cycle 11:

Instead of just inserting her own photos into the opening credits, Tyra decided to do a whole shoot of just herself, acting out her duties as producer and showrunner - but in a model kind of way. I know that when I'm in the editing room with a colleague, I like to wear my headset and clap my hands in front of his face to get his attention! And who doesn't love to wag their "OH NO YOU DIDN'T" finger while in hair and makeup? Not me, that's who.

But the nail in Tyra's mirror-lined coffin is the most recent cycle of opening credits, Cycle 14. Take a look:

Oh. Holy. Jesus. Not only did Tyra include herself in the intro, SHE PUT HERSELF IN A ROOM OF MIRRORS. SHE MULTIPLIED. One Tyra at a time was not enough. We clearly needed more. And what's with the spandex-workout-wear styling, huh, Ty-Ty? This makes no sense to my brain, and certainly not to my eyes.

The ultimate Tyra count for the whole opening, including all reflections and repeated images: 92. NINETY-TWO TYRAS.

And that's how she likes it. Because if you question her motives, she will zap you with smiling laser eyes, dunk you in barbecue sauce and fiercely grill you on her George Foreman.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

SNL in the 00s: A Cultural Examination

Every few months or so, somebody somewhere writes up an article about how SNL isn't funny anymore and titles it "Saturday Night Dead." It gets old pretty quickly, and frankly, it's usually untrue.

I am unconvinced that the show premiered with amazingness in 1975 and has slowly deteriorated into toilet paper material. In truth, it's had its high points and low points and it will continue to as long as it's on the air.

The inherent problem with the show is that a viewer will only ever think that SNL was funniest during their teenage years, whether they be the Days of Akroyd, Murphy, Farley, or Sandler. I know that I am no different. The 00s coincide pretty evenly with my teenage years, and because of that, the sketches produced in that decade will always make me a touch over-sentimental.

But I am not here to discuss exactly how funny or unfunny the show was during this particular decade. Or ever. Rather, I think it's important, and fascinating, to examine the show as a cultural institution. Comedy is inherent in our culture, and having a live televised comedy show twenty-two times a year is an excellent barometer for the zeitgeist.
What's unique about the 2000s in terms of SNL is that the show underwent several changes early in the decade that truly set the tone for the whole ten years. Most of the changes derive from one key event: the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. The premiere of SNL's 27th season was set to occur 18 days after the tragedy, and could not be postponed. The cast was forced to find ways to be funny within such a stark national mood, and like many New Yorkers, forged a unity amongst themselves in the face of grim events. Not three weeks later, Anthrax was found in 30 Rockefeller Plaza, and yet again the cast was confronted with a faceless enemy in a place where the norm was fart jokes and fat suits.

The sobering events of 2001 solidified the 00s as a time where the ensemble would rule. It wasn't going to just be Will Ferrell doing a headlining character amongst bit players. The cast had to come together not only to make the comedy work, but also to cope with despair.

Furthering the 00s' presence of ensemble was the reign of Tina Fey as head writer. Tina took the position in 2000 exactly, and in doing so, added two sensibilities to the show: that of a writer, and that of a lady. The 00s were a good time for the women of SNL, and they best exercised their power in female ensemble pieces. Remember "Kotex Classic" and "Mom Jeans"? Lady-powered ensemble sketches, both penned by Tina Fey. Alongside Amy Poehler, Rachel Dratch, Maya Rudolph, and Kristen Wiig, Tina Fey put forth a strong female presence on the show that ultimately created an "era" in SNL history. It doesn't hurt that the women in the news that decade were particularly fascinating, from Lindsay Lohan to Ann Coulter, and Tina Fey & Co. wasted no time in using their public presence as commentary on the State of Ladydom in America as a whole.

Which leads me to Tina Fey's other sensibility that enveloped the 00s: that of The Writer. Sketches in the 2000s were allowed to be more thoughtful because of the emphasis given to the writers - gone were the days of Mary Katherine Gallagher heaving herself onto breakaway furniture, and ushered in her stead were spoofs of "Hardball," impressions of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, and naughty word play involving a man named "Colonel Angus." Inherently, a writer-driven show gave way to a point of view, and while SNL was criticized for political and social leanings, it got people talking and kept things interesting.
It doesn't hurt that the decade saw two explosive elections, in 2000 and 2008, and in reflecting on them, SNL called a lot of political figures out on their bullshit.

Of course, not all of the 2000s are characterized by these traits. In 2006, Tina Fey left the show, taking her directives to 30 Rock, and the fallout from Sept. 11 and the Iraq War was dwindling. Dratch, Rudolph, and Poehler all vacated by 2009, and the female presence on the show now is much diminished. By 2007, Seth Meyers was head writer, and the Digital Short was king. Both figureheads still stand today.

That's not to say that the current cast isn't funny. But is the show producing quality work that's relevant to the times? Well, sometimes. It's SNL; it has its bad days and its good days, and it's much easier to look at "funny or unfunny?" in the present than it is to say, "How is this reflecting on today's current society?" Only time will tell, and in another ten years, we'll get a special about the '10s, and we'll all regale about how much we miss seeing Andy Samberg and Abby Elliott on the show and how hilarious they were.

Until then, we can look back at the 2000s and acknowledge them outside the realm of comedy alone. The show became a whole new animal in the 00s. Perhaps that decade, more than any other, saw the cast as regular people going through the same day-to-day crises as we were. They weren't comedy gods like Chris Farley or John Belushi. They were like us: working people, searching for humor in the darkest of days. Questioning our country's leadership when the state of the nation was at its most dire. Coming together as a family to cope with loss and unanswerable questions. It is this notion that truly reveals just how much SNL is embedded in the zeitgeist. And because of that, SNL is never dead.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

10 Things: Favorite Glee Songs


And in honor of that joyous occasion (even though I will be watching it later, since I owe my devotion to Lost in its final season... sigh), I bring you the first installment of "10 Things" with "10 Favorite Glee Songs."

Now, "10 Things" is subjective, unless otherwise noted. Nobody's favorites are the same, and it's hard to objectively decree something as "the best!" without being shaded by personal preferences, etc. But here's my stab at my 10 Favorite Glee songs from the first 13 episodes...


Already I'm kicking it off with an unorthodox favorite. But here's the thing: Amber Riley is a fantastic singer, and she's largely (and rightfully) used on the show as a powerhouse voice of belt-tacular proportions. But "Don't Make Me Over" highlights a lovely restraint in her voice, and it's just as mesmerizing as hearing her hit the crazy high notes. Sadly, only an instrumental version of this song was used in an episode. But it's on Vol. 2 of the soundtrack!

NUMBER 9. MAYBE THIS TIME, Kristin Chenoweth and Lea Michele.

I fail to see how I need to explain a duet between Kristin Chenoweth and Lea Michele. But I'll try. Um, it's amazing. Does that work for you?

NUMBER 8. HATE ON ME, Amber Riley.

This song is excellent. So many of the Glee songs have a theme of self-empowerment and this one is one of the most direct: Hate on me hater! Combine that with the fact that it's being performed by all the minorities in the club and you've got an excellent song full of sass and mojo. Also: werrrrk, Amber Riley!

ENDLESS LOVE, Matt Morrison and Lea Michele.

I'm one of those people who loves this song in a completely un-ironic kind of way. So it's shmaltzy! So it's kind of a joke that this is a duet between teacher and lovestruck student! I DON'T CARE. It's beautiful, largely because it's the two big Broadway voices of the cast together. I love Cory Monteith to pieces, but it's nice to see Lea Michele have a duet with a male voice that's just as strong as hers.

I love this song, full-stop. So I was a bit nervous that the Glee cover would not be able to stand up to Barbra Streisand's original. Goodness, was I wrong. Lea Michele is pretty much pitch-perfect in this cover, and it's hard not to get goosebumps listening to her blast this to the rafters.

NUMBER 5. JUMP, the Glee Cast.

True, the merits of this song might be due in part to the joyous mattress-jumping dance sequence, but I defy anyone to not get a big stupid grin on their face by the time Cory Monteith does his rebel yell. You'll want to jump around on mattresses too.


For me, it was little contest who won the Girls vs. Boys showdown in "Vitamin D." These two songs blend together surprisingly well both musically and thematically, and the boys KILLED this performance. It's electrifying to listen to. Bonus points for Kevin McHale sounding sexy and for invoking the visual of Cory Monteith dancing ridiculously.


One of the more notable moments of Glee's first thirteen episodes was the Glee club's support of Quinn and her pregnancy. I was pleasantly surprised to see a group of people be so forgiving towards someone who was awful to them. "Keep Holding On" is the embodiment of that emotion, and combined with the cast's vocals and the song's message, it's a rather touching rendition. It's a good example of a Glee cover that's better than the original song. (Sorry, Avril.)


It's the song that started it all. It was the perfect song to kick off the Glee kids' run, and because of that it's always a goosebump-inducer for me. The only reason this is #2 and not #1 is because it only involves the original six Glee kids, with only two lead vocals, and while I love them, I'd much rather hear the full twelve.


This is probably no surprise to anyone who's watched the show. Several of the castmembers even cite "Somebody to Love" as their favorite performance because it was the first time the twelve main Glee kids came together. From Cory Monteith's first high note to Amber Riley killing her section at the end, this song is perfection. Lea Michele is predictably amazing, and in the full version of the song, Kevin McHale has an excellent solo. This is theatrics at its best, especially with the chanting of "Find... me... somebody to love" leading up to the song exploding with Amber Riley's divine high notes. Epic song is epic. Watch the live performance on Oprah (sans Kevin's solo, boo) for full effect:

There you have it. 10 Favorite Glee songs. What'd I leave off that should be on there? I'll tell you, if I could expand it to 11, I would have included "Sweet Caroline." I'm fairly confident that as the show marches through more and more episodes, this list will be harder and harder to make. But that's not the worst thing.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Tina Fey's Return to SNL

It's true that whichever cast of SNL was on during your teenage years is bound to be your favorite, no matter how much you try to like other eras. My teenage years fell exactly in line with Tina Fey's tenure as headwriter from 2000 to her departure from the show in 2006.

So you can imagine my excitement about her return to host the show for the second time. It'll be grand, I thought! Lady power back at SNL! Last year's Sarah Palin sketches were such a hit, I figured that having Tina Fey back on the show would be like a breath of fresh air, a reminder of all those good times we had.

And, in part, it was. With her patented blend of snark and intelligent self-deprecation at the wheel, we got a solid evening of entertainment out of it. But mostly, watching Tina interact with a cast that has evolved greatly under a new regime was a sad reminder that sometimes, you can't go home.

Sketches I did like: a commercial for "Brownie Husband," in which Tina went all the way with a life-size, humanoid, caramel-filled brownie and thereby cemented her status as the poster child for Slightly Pathetic Yet Endearing Single Woman. I also enjoyed her monologue, a spoken word ode to the supporting roles in her life, set to "I'm Every Woman" and complete with an appearance by Steve Martin as her tax lawyer and Kenan Thompson in (obligatory?) drag as Chaka Khan. Her take on a Random Loud Woman Who Slept With Tiger Woods, Sarah Palin, and Dina Lohan were all satisfactory, and her portrayal of a 9-inch-tall hooker with a heart of gold was oddly amusing.

The shining moment in the entire episode was Tina's latest installment of "Women's News" in a return to the Update Desk, in which she exercised her greatest strength: the sharp-tongued rant. She's never better than as a monologist, whether improvised or otherwise, and I cheered for (and chuckled through) her tirade against the "whores of the world" like Bombshell McGee.

The common theme in Tina's participation, bad or good, is the presence of women's interests. Inherently, Tina Fey is relatable as a woman in a man's world, and her time as head writer on SNL marked a very "pro-lady" time in the show's history. Between Amy Poehler, Maya Rudolph, Rachel Dratch, and Tina herself, the men were (arguably) overshadowed by the female talent. Yet at the same time, the word "bitch" was used in the show more frequently during Tina Fey's regime than any other time in SNL history. We saw an embodiment of this dichotomy in last night's episode - Tina played either a buttoned-up female role model type - a physics teacher, a homely mother - or a trashy woman with arguable morals - Dina Lohan, a Tiger Woods' conquest, and a hooker. (I'm going to leave Sarah Palin out of this one - you can decide which category you'd like to put her in. In truth, she doesn't fit the mold because she's a Tina character derived only from physical similarities.)

In short, Tina's comedy presence on SNL provides a commentary on the modern woman in all her forms, and often satirizes the ones giving the rest of us ladies a bad name. However, I am reluctant to say that last night felt like an SNL of yore and yesteryear. Even though Tina's sensibilities haven't changed, the climate in the cast has. There is only one female repertory player, Kristen Wiig, and her comedy is a much more gender-neutral kind of zany. The three female featured players haven't really put together an identity for themselves on the show, and a man, Seth Meyers, is head writer, and the only seat on the Update Desk. Watching Tina Fey sit amongst this cast just made me miss Poehler, Rudolph, and Dratch, and the opportunity to have a female-driven sketch with more than one female in it.

But, I have the Mother's Day Special to look forward to for that, with a reunion of those four ladies as well as Molly Shannon and Ana Gasteyer and, of course, the indomitable and hilarious Betty White. The men may as well not show up.

Friday, April 9, 2010

"Will They or Won't They?": Addressing Bones' 100th Episode

Warning: this is long. I tried to be brief, but what's the fun in that?
Perhaps no television convention is more universally recognized than the "will they or won't they" couple. However, this convention is at the same time one of the most problematic and troubling to play out and resolve. 

The problem with the WTOWT couple lies in progressing the individual characters as well as their relationship without ruining the dynamic or alienating the viewer. You're likely to see the WTOWT duo set up in the first season - often the first episode, even - and then subsequently kept apart as long as possible so as not to dissolve the tension or unrequited love. In the meantime, the situation is mined for miscommunication, longing, bad timing, and near misses that are usually quite effective both dramatically and comedically. It's agonizing and thrilling at the same time, and therefore keeps the viewer invested.

But what happens after several seasons of this, or worse, when it's resolved? Either the couple gets together or doesn't, and there are a slew of negative consequences of both. Many shows "jump the shark" when their WTOWT couples take the plunge (see: "Frasier," "Moonlighting," and to subject to debate, "Friends" and "The Office" [US version]), but if you just endlessly string them along in singledom, you run the risk of losing fans.

One of the main WTOWT couples on television right now consists of FBI Agent Seely Booth (David Boreanaz) and forensic anthropologist Dr. Temperence Brennan (Emily Deschanel) on Fox's "Bones." Their relationship began five seasons ago, mostly in the form of bickering that stemmed from a fundamental difference in beliefs (the whole head vs. heart, reason vs. intuition debate - she, being the scientist, scoffed at his faith in "gut instincts"). Since then, they have both relented a bit to each other's way of thinking and found a mutual respect, and even playful chemistry towards one another in their professional relationship.

Last night's episode of "Bones" was its 100th, and it was a big one. Basically, it was a flashback episode, a whirlwind tour of all the incarnations of Booth and Brennan's relationship through the years. In present day, the duo revealed to their occupational psyciatrist (Dr. Sweets) that a case study he had conducted on them was misguided - their first case together, upon which he based his whole study, was actually not their first case. Instead, we were shown Booth and Brennan's true beginnings, pre-show. And in fact, they were not mired in a stubborn clashing of personalities, but rather they exuded a spark of flirtation that even led to a drunken kiss. Plans for sleeping together were thwarted only by Brennan, who cited her reason simply as tequila. 

This was news to all of us, Dr. Sweets and audience alike. I'm fairly certain all "Bones" fans were scraping the floor with their jaws watching their WTOWT couple kissing one year before the show had technically started. How did they get so cranky at each other by the pilot? According to Dr. Sweets, they had missed their window of opportunity, and combined with some other unfortunate mishaps and offenses, they were essentially punishing each other.
This bit of information is how "Bones" has taken the WTOWT couple and turned it on its ear. Essentially, Booth and Brennan played out their "Will they or won't they?" scenario before we had ever met them. They had chemistry, they kissed, they continued their working relationship, and discovered differences between them that they at first couldn't negotiate. Once they had, it was too late to get back to their roots - they had too much at stake in them being friends and partners. In a roundabout way, "Bones" has set itself up for success: you can't spoil the sexual tension if they get together, because technically, it was already spoiled once, and guess what? It resurfaced again. 

So, Dr. Sweets urged Booth and Brennan to break their standoff and take a chance. And then came The Scene: Booth went for it. With this, we witnessed the second point of deviation from traditional WTOWT couples. One of the characters didn't have "the epiphany" and finally see what was in front of them all along. No supporting character accidentally let slip the secret of one's undying love for the other. It didn't happen when one of them was about to be married to someone else. It wasn't a drunken encounter to be dealt with later.
Instead, it was the two characters acknowledging what they've known (and what we, as an audience, DEFINITELY knew) all along: there's something there. Booth confessed he knew it since the moment he saw Brennan, and he wanted to give it a shot. But she said no. And even though it was painful to see them both with tears in their eyes trying to deal with this reality, it makes sense. It's in keeping with Brennan's character to say no. She's not one to take a chance. She is a foster-child-turned-scientist (bear with me) whose issues with abandonment and whose need for empiricism trump all else. She has no logical way of knowing whether or not she should be in a relationship with Booth, and without that reasoning, their current relationship is therefore too valuable to jeopardize. So she said no.
Of course, as a viewer, I'm fairly positive this isn't the end of that road for this WTOWT couple. The episode ended with Booth and Brennan resolving to stay professional partners, and walking off with her head on his shoulder. 

It was a bittersweet moment, and perhaps one that could have divided fans. But I for one appreciate the episode for advancing the WTOWT relationship in a realistic and impactful way without demeaning the characters or couple, or compromising the integrity of the show. You could argue that going back in time and tweaking the couple's origin is cheating a little bit, but in the long run, I think it's necessary. If (when?) the WTOWT couple gets together, this episode is the one that their future success, and the future success of the show, is hinged upon. Because of this episode, the chances of the show falling apart upon resolving the WTOWT couple are fewer. And ultimately, keeping the show intact is the goal.

Believe it or not, this was not the season finale. We still have a few more episodes, and supposedly, another gamechanger at the end of the season. We'll see how it inevitably affects Booth and Brennan, and their WTOWT status. In the meantime, we'll keep watching for the good chemistry and character development both independent of and instrumental to their relationship. Because even though every show loves a good "will they or won't they?" couple, it's probably best if you have something else that can headline. Just in case.

Your Daily Dose of Awesome

Alright, today's a big posting day. Not only was Jimmy Fallon's second installment of "6-bee" last night, but he had Tina Fey on as a guest, and together they went head-to-head in a game of charades against Seth Meyers and Amy Poehler.
And then my brain exploded.
It was Update Team vs. Update Team, and the ensuing game further illustrated that Amy Poehler is Kick-Ass Master of Charades (she's played on Late Night before) and that a Charade Night with these four would basically be my heaven. Actually, heaven would be if I replaced Seth Meyers in the game. (Sorry, Seth.)
NBC.com is currently being cranky and won't let me embed the video, but I linked them below:
Part One
Part Two

Today's Dose of Goofy Grinning

Sometimes I forget that I love Jimmy Fallon, especially since I don't watch a lot of late night television. But his latest installment of "6-bee" (his Glee spoof) is too wonderful to pass up.
Basically, Jimmy's group of misfit glee kids is hit with the news that the cast of "Parks and Recreation" has stolen Jimmy's house band, the Roots, and is planning on opening up a can of whoop-ass at Sectionals.
It does not get better than Jimmy Fallon, Amy Poehler and the P&R cast, and the Roots singing and dancing. Literally does not. Also, I have a hard time not rooting for the Roots/Parks cast ensemble... they're completely adorable in their bullying ways. So much for the underdog, Jimmy.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Haiku Wednesday!

It's a Wednesday! That makes me want to haiku! Today's haiku is in honor of television's current trainwreck, the unsinkable Kate Gosselin on Dancing with the Stars.

Dancing Kate Gosselin
Half-heartedly gallumphing
A sore sight for eyes.

It's unfortunate how painful it is to watch her dance on that show. But she dances with an all-consuming sense of terror in her eyes and hesitance in every step. I wish she'd either have a breakthrough or just leave, so I won't feel guilty for being appalled every week.

If you'd like to see an accurate representation of her most recent dance, done to Gaga's "Paparazzi" (yes, you read right), check out Jimmy Fallon below. His impersonation is spot-on, minus the feeble attempt at The Worm and the goo-goo eyes he makes at the camera. Kate has yet to show us she's capable of such finesse and emotional resonance on the hardwood. I'm holding out, though.

Monday, April 5, 2010

"Date Night," The Action Movie?

This Friday, the Tina Fey-Steve Carrell-helmed movie Date Night finally hits theaters. (Or theatres, if you're classy and/or English.)

Now, as I'm sure you know, I'm a huge Tina Fey fan. So it's not really a matter of whether or not I will see this movie. It's more a matter of whether or not I will enjoy it.

Ages ago, the only details we had about the film were the two leads and the premise: a man and woman's date night goes awry. Everyone, including me, immediately thought: Michael Scott and Liz Lemon on a date! It'll be awkward! There will be pratfalls and miscommunications! They'll be goofy and relatable!

Then the trailer was released, and we were all proved wrong. Or at least, misguided. This is... an action movie? Complete with a car chase, mobsters, gunfire, and black ops security?

It turns out the date night goes awry when Phil and Claire Foster pretend to be "the Triplehorns" at a fancy restaurant to get their reservation... but little do they know some mob boss wants the Triplehorns dead. Cue hijinx!

Now that I'm over my bewilderment, I'm going to say it: I'm optimistic about this "action movie" premise. Because there's your comedy right there. It's Tina Fey and Steve Carell. In an action movie. They're unconventional leads even for a rom-com, so why not be self-aware and turn it on its ear? What's even better is the people you'd most likely see in an action movie (a shirtless Mark Wahlberg, a strung-out-looking Mila Kunis, and a scruffy James Franco) are the supporting cast, making the two leads look even more out of place.

Hopefully, this won't be the only thing the movie has going for it. Nobody likes a one-trick pony, even if it's got Tina Fey and Steve Carell in the saddle. But I think it will be entertaining, if not a revelatory film that's going to make the Oscar rounds. Tina Fey's funny, Steve Carell's funny, and watching them try and blunder their way through all of the high-stakes conventions of an action movie is bound to be good fun. Who's with me?

Sunday, April 4, 2010

Apologies, dear Reader(s)

So, I took an unanticipated sabbatical from The Blog, largely because I was indulging in laziness and it felt too good to do anything otherwise. But, I will be back tomorrow with a new post, and we'll hopefully be back to regularly scheduled programming! Outstanding.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...