Tag Archives: TV

Spooked by MI-5

Posted on by
2

So, there was this British spy TV series, called Spooks, when it was broadcast in the UK, or MI-5 here in the U.S., and I’ve been hooked on it via Netflix for weeks, squeezing episodes into scattered hour-long gaps in my ridiculously busy days.

The show follows fictional exploits of the British intelligence agency MI-5, and I’m hooked, like I say, despite its significant flaws (to name a few):

  • the occasional glaring implausibility of plot
  • ineffective spy gimmicks used repeatedly and followed by disbelief that they fail
  • the unstated dismissal, after several seasons, of the idea that MI-5 is supposed to be a purely domestic agency, like the FBI
  • characters you like who leave MI-5 or get killed, accompanied by a frighteningly short-lived acknowledgment of their absence by their colleagues

And yet, one has to admit that a show is doing something right when it keeps you coming back, episode after episode, season after season, and that something right is rooted in the genre. Not every episode is successful, but as a series it is a pretty darned brilliant example of the spy suspense thriller — slickly shot and written, with all the spy gadget eye candy one could ask for, the occasional “where the hell did that come from” plot twist, etc.

The fact that it’s an excuse to listen to the ever-charming British accent for hours on end is just icing on the cake.

What’s more troubling, on the other hand, is that, as I go about my day-to-day lately, I’ve been thinking more and more like a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Walking around, I wonder if there are spies hiding everywhere, if there are cameras watching my every move, if my cell phone conversations are being listened to, whether that package someone is carrying is filled with secret documents or, worse, a bomb.

I could do without the latter. Really, I could. I don’t like being spooked by Spooks.

Unfortunately, I’m only a little more than halfway through, and like I said, I’m hooked.

Wish me luck.

R.I.P. Davy Jones

Posted on by
2

Very sad news today, that Davy Jones, formerly of The Monkees, has died at the age of 66.

It’s beyond my comprehension that anyone growing up when I did, in the late 60s and 70s, could NOT know who Davy Jones was, or at least who The Monkees were. Their music and their TV show were ubiquitous, both during the original run of the series and then in reruns. And, even if you didn’t like their music or the show, they were an indisputable cultural phenomenon and remain a relic of the commercialized version of the counterculture of the period.

And Davy, well, hailing from Manchester, England, he gave The Monkees their British Invasion street cred.

Now, I could be cynical and focus on that last point, I could go on and on about how the creators of The Monkees were blatantly ripping off The Beatles, and I would be right on the whole.

And yet, in truth, those are 20/20 hindsight observations, and I LOVED the TV show and the music for years before I figured all that out.

While I was too young to remember the original airing of the series, from 1966 to 1968, the reruns were still one of the most original shows on TV. The only thing that I recall that came close was Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In and possibly The Brady Bunch, in terms of how it captured contemporary culture, especially youth culture.

But mostly, The Monkees were masters of silliness, kids LOVE silliness above nearly everything else, I was no exception, and this silliness was a perfect, badly-needed antidote for all the ugliness of Vietnam War, the Nixon years, the dramatic street protests, and the riots.

And so, without further ado, here’s a taste, a portion of an episode, containing the classic theme song, as well as some of the zany humor they were known for. (Full disclosure: The video, posted by a YouTuber, could very well be pulled anytime for copyright reasons, so my apologies if it doesn’t play. In all likelihood, you should be able to go to YouTube and find some Monkees clip or another.)

Eyecatchers: Claire Brewster’s Birds

Posted on by
5

Back in March 2011, I blogged about the stop-motion animation work of Anderson M Studio, having been blown away by the painstaking paper art involved, and today I discovered some more beautiful paper art, this time from British artist Claire Brewster.

Brewster’s work, cut out of old maps, is a wonderful salute to the bird’s ability to fly freely above the topography that we ground-bound creatures must work so hard to navigate. The maps themselves add color, texture, and a 3-D quality to the birds that I find very appealing.

Via Colossal, here’s a sampling, though I highly recommending checking out Claire’s blog to see more of her work:

Oh, and I must say, I couldn’t help it, but Claire Brewster’s work made me think of this:

Portlandia Redux

Posted on by
3

Just about a year ago, I wrote about my mixed reactions to the then-new IFC comedy series Portlandia, written by and starring Fred Armisen and Carrie Brownstein.

Well, thanks to Netflix, I’ve since watched all six episodes from the first season, I’ve overcome my initial knee-jerk defensiveness, and I can’t wait to see season two.

Just yesterday, I read a great interview with Armisen and Brownstein in Salon, as well as a long feature article on Brownstein in the current New Yorker, and I’m incredibly impressed by how smart and talented they are.

As I wrote last year, the defensiveness I felt initially was rooted in my feelings that many if not most of the progressive causes and lifestyle choices being lampooned in Portlandia are actually critically important movements for the long-term survival of human beings. I’d already lived through the tragic death of the counterculture of the late 1960s, and I felt really uncomfortable with the stereotyping and making fun of progressive people, which could serve to marginalize them, creating a real barrier to the growth of important movements like organic farming, local living economies, alternative transportation, sustainability, etc.

But watching past the first episode, it became clear to me that there is a gentleness to the fun being poked at alternative culture in Portlandia, rather than some vicious attack, and there’s a key part of the Salon interview that speaks to this:

There’s this gentle mocking of these groups, but we all consider ourselves part of them at the same time. Do you ever feel pushback? The well-meaning and the earnest are used to being applauded; they’re not necessarily used to being made fun of by their heroes from indie-rock and comedy…

CB: Right. You know, I think it is hard, because I think there’s an inherent sensitivity that I know that I possess, and I think Portland and cities and communities of its ilk also possess this kind of hyper-sensitivity. I think that’s part of what makes us tick — this constant self-reflectiveness, and self-awareness. And so yeah, to have it come back at you on television, I think might be weird. But I also think that I am so much from this world, and I think it seems more like part of a conversation. We’re not talking at people; I feel like we’re sort of engaged in this conversation that people are having anyway. So I haven’t felt a lot of backlash, even though I’m sure there’s….

A Tumblr blog about how “Portlandia” is hurting the world…

CB: I’m sure it exists. And if I want to cry for the next hour, I can probably go online and find some anonymous commenter somewhere and make myself feel really shitty. But yeah, I think for the most part, the show is earnest — or, I should say, it’s not cynical — which I think helps people relate to it. It’s not a cynical show. We’re trying to be specific; we’re not trying to be realistic. I think there’s a difference. And I think you just can’t worry about insulting people with what you create. If you start at a place where you’re considering your audience’s feelings, you’re already stuck. You’ve already lost. So I think the idea is just to put something out there that hopefully people can relate to, and not worry about whether they’re going to be angry, or not get it. And hopefully, not everyone will get it. I’ve never liked things that are benign — or banal. So, I’m OK with it. Haters, hate on.

FA: I get confused, too. You know, we shot this one thing, in season one, where I was in this “technology loop,” where I had my iPad and everything else out. We wrote it as this sketch, but I straight-up do that all the time. I’ll sit on my couch, and I have every device out, and it’ll make perfect sense to me. That’s where it gets blurry, because it’s like, are we making fun of anything? Or are we just — it’s just ourselves, really.

It’s kind of refreshing when you think about it. Two big stars who see the humor in their own idiosyncrasies and the culture they call home, a kind of defense against hubris, really.

Count me in as a fan!

Reckless Rogue Sperm Donor or Altruist?

Posted on by
Reply

Just when I thought I’d heard and seen it all…

A man from the San Francisco Bay area has fathered 14 children in the last five years through free sperm donations to women he meets through his website — and is now in trouble with the federal government.

The case of Trent Arsenault of Fremont has drawn attention to the practice of informal sperm donation, which physicians and bioethicists call unsafe but some people say is a civil liberties issue…

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration sent Arsenault a cease-and-desist letter late last year telling him he must stop because he does not follow the agency’s requirements for getting tested for sexually transmitted diseases within seven days before giving sperm. The FDA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Violators of FDA regulations on human cells and tissues face up to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine, according to guidelines published on the agency’s website.

Now, Arsenault states that he does get tested regularly, but even more compelling…

Arsenault says he donates sperm out of a sense of service to help people who want to have children but can’t afford conventional sperm banks. The 36-year-old minister’s son has four more children on the way.

“I always had known through people praying at church that there’s fertility issues,” Arsenault told The Associated Press on Monday. “I thought it would just be a neat way of service to help the community.”

Sounds incredibly reasonable, doesn’t it?

I mean, how many Don Juan types are out there right now, impregnating women left and right the old-fashioned way, and here’s a guy who simply wants to help people, and he’s facing a year in prison and a hefty fine?

His website is loaded with information about himself — his medical records, his lifestyle and diet, even a criminal background check — so it’s hard to argue that he’s being reckless. What emerges is a picture of a pretty extraordinary guy. He’s the son of a pastor and states he’s a churchgoer himself, and yet…

He says he believes his case comes down to constitutional issues of a right to privacy and reproductive choice.

On his website, he includes this quote from the Guttmacher Institute, and he emphatically added the underlining:

…women, in consultation with their physician, have a constitutionally protected right to have an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy—that is, before viability—free from government interference.

Now, it’s entirely possible that Trent will sell out and end up with his own reality TV show, but for now I’m inclined to admire him for his desire to do good.