Cuff the Clark and ... George Michael

I was apparently totally screwing around at the beginning of this television season. I'll blame this miss-portunity to Clark and Michael not actually being on TV. The show is hosted online by CBS and stars Michael Cera (Arrested Development, Superbad) and Clark Duke (friend of Cera). Defining the show is a little tricky as it seems to be a documentary crew (hired by Cera and Duke) following the two as they make and attempt to sell the show they are currently filming. Obviously a mocumentary though still a snake eating its own tail. There are ten approx. ten minute episodes that comprise the entire season.

The show centers around Cera and Duke, so their interaction is critical to the success of the show. Both play oddball characters that react unpredictably and without any ounce of social awareness. There is plenty of the awkward humour Cera is so adept at playing (honestly I think he plays awkward better than any actor I've ever seen) and a copious amount of funny guest stars like David Cross, Tony Hale, and Andy Richtor. Also it's cool to see Sam Weir has grown up into quite the young man. Finally it has the best title sequence of any show I've ever seen.

The show isn't the bees-knees of comedy though, it falters more often than it succeeds in the beginning, but as the show progresses it certainly becomes quite enjoyable. My favourite is the penultimate episode and it's certainly worth a gander if you don't feel like watching the show from the start. Check it out.

Thursday Bonus Content (TBC): I had an argument with my cousin regarding Superbad a while ago. My cousin thinks Jonah Hill is going to be the next big comedy star and I unfortunately agree. Hill is capable of funny but so often resorts to bombastic cursing for his laughs, which will likely serve him quite well in his future. However, in that movie and all his other roles, Cera is able to act with such subtlety that his comedy comes not just from his lines but from his idiosyncratic mannerism. This makes his acting and comedy quite engaging for me, unlike the humorous yet relatively unchallenging fuck-yeller Hill who will no doubt be appearing in theatres near you soon enough. That being said, Juno comes out this December if I'm not mistaken.

The Bible is Full of some Badass Mofos

I was trying not to just post links to things that are funny but, hey, the semester is almost over, this is funny, and I've got other things to do than blog at length about the Top 9 Badass Bible Versus. But a quick sample regarding Moses' Egyptian incident in Exodus 2:

"Moses, seen here, is about to murder the hell out of an unsuspecting Egyptian."

"Moses later defeated the Egyptian Pharaoh, who, if we remember correctly, had been using Hebrew slaves to construct a 40-foot-high armored battle suit capable of launching nuclear missiles to anywhere in the world."

Found via Boing Boing. And obvious thanks to *sigh* Cracked.com.

Amiss to Push some Daisies

As I approached my 10am class this morning cancelled notices coalesced in my sleep-blurred vision. My body hit the wall in a last ditch effort to keep from collapsing. I used my head to force myself off the cold brick wall and roll back to a stand. A classmate swore and asked if anyone wanted to go for a beer. Alas society's laws against such a thing.

So I find myself in the student centre, listening to Dub Side of the Moon, and without the book I so crucially need to be reading at the moment. Might as well get off another entry though, the only other thing I could do is school work.

When I was home last so long ago (sorry mom) my mother showed me a television show called Pushing Daisies. I wasn't a big fan, perhaps because my mother was so adamant that I would love it (sorry mom). Even so, the quirkiness lingered in my subconscious. I'm not too sure what triggered the renewed interest but it may have had something to do with having nothing else to watch due to this damned writers strike. I ended up downloading the entire season thus far. My mother turned out to be on to something after all, though I still hate every brand of CSI under The Who (again, sorry).

These are the facts: Ned (the pie maker) has the unique ability to bring dead people back to life. However if he touches them again they re-die, and more severe, if he doesn't re-die them in a minute someone else will die to take their dead-place. Logically he ends up partnering with a PI and waking up murder victims to find out who killed them to collect rewards. When he finds his childhood crush (Chuck) dead and brings her back to life to ask after her murderer, he can't bring himself to kiss and thus kill her. It's very romantic, except they can't ever touch or cause Chuck to let loose her mortal coil, again. Elaborate at first, yes, but essentially it feels like a cross between Desperate Housewives and Dead like Me.

As you can guess the show is pretty damn quirky. It exists in a world not real, but perhaps a world so influenced by mystery novels and unapologeticly sappy romances that things like love at first glance and murder by scratch-n-sniff are perfectly common place. I say this but the wonderful thing about Pushing Daisies is it's ability to acknowledge itself. The PI, Emmerson, is usually there to make a sarcastic comment about how odd the murder is, or how lame Ned and Chuck's conversation is (indeed hanging the lantern I'll admit). Besides the quirky world, the dialogue is some of the most clever on TV. I wouldn't toss this around lightly, and later I'll put my comments in perspective, but the stuff they say on this show is often so clever I get mad that the Office is what it is currently.

In the end I'm surprised. There were all these comedies I was looking forward to this season and have been relatively disappointed by all of them (fyi BNL now provides the theme for the lame duck Big Bang!) and along comes this show I paid no heed to at first and yet proves to be the best new comedy of the season, perhaps even the best show on TV period. Chuck is mediocre, Office faltering, and SVU, well, child abuse and rape can only be funny for so long.

So if you haven't already, watch some Pushing Daisies. It'll make you believe in love again, or at least necrophilia.

Bored Girls and Comedy (Hott!)

Thought I should put up a link to this. I'll keep my opinions on Dane Cook to myself but definitely encourage anyone to check out their local stand-up scene.

Bender Bending Rodríguez's Back, Baby

Shut up friends!, I was cruising around IGN's TV reviews a few days ago. Boy, do they have my ass kicked in review quantity. Though seeing the giant scores they're giving some pretty mediocre Office episodes, I feel somewhat appeased that I'm a fair bit more elitist. *notch*

Anyways I stumbled upon a review of the new Futurama movie, Bender's Big Move. "Shit, they were making those weren't they!" I'd forgotten but started my download almost immediately.

I was hesitant. I loved and do still love Futurama, but that ex-girlfriend who was torn away by moronic TV execs is never the same when she walks back into your life. I mean the beret was cool in high school but when you're pushing 22 it looks a little silly. Also, Family Guy sure has sucked since it came back on the air. Each episode is like a bunch of chimps trying to approximate what Family Guy used to be. Maybe orangutans.

So I watched it. And it was sorta disappointing. I mean it wasn't terrible but it wasn't awesome either. Bender was the source of most of the laughs, which is abnormal as I tend to like the Professor, Zap, or Zoidberg more. Zap was pretty funny but was on screen for about 3 minutes. Some of the oddity has been lost which was always my (everyone's) favourite.

I was also worried that the "movie" would play like four episodes of Futurama pasted together. *cough cough Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story cough.* And surprisingly the plot held up pretty well. I don't want to give too much away but there's time travel. I love multi-layered time travel narratives, especially ones involving time-cops. The story was actually engaging and even had some moderate surprises. I've read some complaints about the Leela-Fry dynamic as tired but frankly has there ever been a television show without the will-they-or-won't-they get-together couple? And if that's been the driving force of the show why wouldn't it be the driving force of the movie? Yes, it's in there and it's sorta lame, but this means to me that the next three Futurama movies will likely be light on the issue. Get it over with first I guess? Whatever. I'm pumped Futurama's back.

In brief: if you like Futurama you were going to watch this anyways, if you don't, then this wont change your (obviously malfunctioning) mind.

But let's face it, comedy's a dead artform. Now tragedy, that's funny!

Comedy for People into Sonic Youth

I found this article via Stereogum. If you like David Cross, Demetri Martin, and indie rock then you'll probably love this article.

That may be untrue. I love those three things and was totally underwhelmed funny wise. I was tickled but I didn't laugh. I was more surprised to find out Keanu Reeves was in a band. I remember hearing about that but the deliciousness must have alluded me at the time because I forgot. I think I need to download a few albums, Willie Shatner is getting a little dusty. (I lie. I still love that WOW pimpin' fool.)

The prospect of getting these two comedians together to listen to music, then provide this sparse two page "interview" certainly seems like a missed opportunity to me. Why not ask Cross why he still thinks The Strokes are cool or Martin about when his new Grapes album is being released? Or at least get them to star in like a Grizzly Bear video? They're the critical darlings of the moment aren't they?

Whatever. Thought you might be interested.

John Hodgman on Boing Boing TV

Honestly what are the odds you read my blog and not Boing Boing? I however am not going to miss an opportunity to pimp John Hodgman.

From the moment I saw Hodgman (or Hodgie as I like to embroider onto pillowcases) in his first Daily Show interview, I've been enamoured. I was pumped to see him even get a much deserved re-occurring role as a their resident expert (here doing a bang-up job explaining net neutrality). Joy springs eternal when his beautiful punim appears on my TV screen. Blah blah blah mac commercials.

The original appearance was actually to promote his book The Area's of my Expertise. It's one of my favourite books, and one of the very few I find LOL-funny. This almanac of complete knowledge is essentially one giant fabrication. Off-hand my favourite parts may be the lobsters (not to be confused with "lobsters") section, the hobo signs section, and typical cyborg mischief. Read this book if you haven't. It's out in paperback now with an expansion of the original 700 hobo-names (which if you want you can listen to Hodgie reciting them all).

Anyways, Boing Boing TV has posted a pseudo-interview with Hodgman in his hotel room. He talks about his new book. Enjoy.



"It did not lead people to worry that I was insane."

He's on strike right now. Bollucks.

Writer's Strike and my Lack of Solidarity

I've been forced to keep writing despite the WGA strike because a) I'm Canadian, b) I'm not a member of the WGA, and c) I don't expect any of my professors to take "I'm on strike" to be a valid reason for an essay not being handed in on time.

Anyways here's a relatively unfunny video from a Daily Show writer about the strike if you haven't seen it yet. (I'm so late to join the party because the internet and I are seeing other people at the moment.) Thus far I'm on the side of the writers. More reading may change my mind but currently it seems like giant corporations could survive reimbursing their writers for what goes online.



They make a good point. However, I find it odd that a lot of the writers are still blogging, especially since the hooplah (how do I know how to spell that?) is actually about online content. I guess they're only striking against writing that makes other people money.

Goodnight, and good luck.

The Darjeeling Limited: If I mispronounce it once more I may be racist

When did Phil Collins become cool? Sorry, lingering confusion.

So this Tuesday I went to see The Darjeeling Limited, because I'm a big fan of Wes Anderson, but not a big enough fan to spend more than $4.25 on a theatre ticket. What do you want?

Anyways, I thought I was going to be pretty disappointed with this movie. My initial reaction to Life Aquatic was disappointment despite my now current and overwhelming tendency to gush about it. Then there was also the relatively mediocre reviews. Critics are pompous and I thought they'd be right behind this film, if they weren't it might actually blow. Apparently I got critics confused with hippsters. Bill Murray isn't really in this one either. I like Bill Murray. Finally, it just seemed like time for him to release a stinker.

But yeah, it was pretty enjoyable. I could chalk it up to low expectations but why ruin a good thing? This makes my heart... feel?

The stand-out feature of all Anderson flicks is that odd aesthetic of his. His movies seem to exist in parallel universes, not like cowboy universes, but universes with strange dialogue and odd ways of speaking. If you've seen one of his movies you'll know what I'm talking about. And that aesthetic is certainly present in this film.

Most of the actors do an admirable job in the film. Owen Wilson is always great in his Anderson roles and he's great in this one too. He's unpredictable and hilarious. Jason Schwartzman's dry acting is normally perfect for Anderson's film, and in Darjeeling he often seems at home, but sometimes he sticks out a little. However, I often need to see an Anderson film a few times to really get into it and so I imagine my complaints with Schwartzman might fade away in after another viewing. Anjelica Huston's performance, however, left a lot to be desired. Her role is pretty important (I won't spoil it) and her rather bland performance hurts the emotional climax of the film. Adrian Brody, though, that dude really surprised me. I've never really cared much for him, as I shy away from big budget academy award seeking movies about Nazis but Brody was absolutely fantastic in this film. He was by far my favourite character and doesn't seem out of place among the Anderson veterans. I hope to see him in further projects.

Ultimately I guess I should discuss whether this film is actually funny or not. It is. Often I was the only person in the theatre laughing (or at least my roommate and I) and so perhaps my sense of humour is part derangement but like all of his films (again) there is some awesome dialogue. I love the way people speak in Anderson films: blunt, concise, and drier than a Zellers clubhouse sandwich. Darjeeling is no different. And humour is used nicely as a contrast to the more somber nature of the character's problems. You feel worse for them because you just laughed at them.

I think the obvious conclusion for this review is that if you like Anderson films then you'll probably like this movie. There isn't anything strikingly new here but I'm not sure if that was what I wanted. Maybe some people are finding his aesthetic tired, but I think this is an issue of how overt it is and thus such an easy criticism. Is evolution about changing your style or is it in improving it? I'm happy with the current state. Ask me in another six films.

P.S. They play the short film made as a pre-cursor to Darjeeling Limited before the movie. This little film includes a very racy seen with one Natalie Portman. So if that's your thing, it's a giant screen man.

I'm not concerned about the monkey, it's the Phil Collins.

So I went to see Wes Anderson's new flick, The Darjeeling Limited. Never mind about that though, I'll blog about it in a few days. First, here's a preliminary:

We were a little late, my roommate and I. As we approached the door we heard Phil Collins' "In the Air Tonight" and on the screen I may have seen a gorilla. My roommate made a grunt of hesitation; so, as we walked into the theatre I commented, "The gorilla is a little much."
"It's not the gorilla but the Phil Collins."
"That's what was off putting for me at first too, but then I saw the man in the gorilla suit."
"To each his own."

Well, we picked a seat and watched the rest of the ad.



Apparently this came out in August, so apologies if this is old news for you. I just saw this tonight and it's seriously "the crazy." That said, it may be one of my favourite commercials of-all-time despite the fact it advertises not for drums, Phil Collins, or rhythmically inclined grey back gorillas, but chocolate bars?

Beckett would have been confused.

For those who wanted to own this as I did, I've got a high quality download right here. Enjoy.

The Bloggies

Blog + Dundies (The Office S02E01)

I figured everyone was wondering which blog I was voting for in the funniest blog category for the 2007 weblog awards. Don't worry, daddy's here.

I'm voting for The Sneeze. Check out his post on Dominoes Pizza. Quite amusing.

For best comic strip I actually voted for Penny Arcade. An obvious choice, I know, but they are continually funny in both post and comic. Currently the leader is xkcd, which is I used to really dig but hasn't made me really laugh in a while. So I voted with consistency.

Do your cyber-civic duty and go vote. Or don't.

Crisis of Faith (that sounds so emo)

So I had a conversation with a gentleman on Friday in which my authority as a comedy critic was contested. The argument boiled down to whether I, as someone who has not watched Cheers or The Honeymooners extensively, had the right to be a critic regarding sitcoms. Obviously I argued that I did, but I may have also lost the argument.

My friend, who I'll call Tim, argued that since I was not well versed in the history of the sitcom, or at least the successes and thus formative influences, I would not be fully aware of what new sitcoms were doing inside the sitcom genre. This was likened to literature. Could a writer respectively analyse a work of literature without studying the works which were of direct influence, or even further could a writer respectively analyse a work without reading the major works in literature? Those studying literature are specifically taught surveys of canon so that they can (at least to some degree) better analyse/understand/contextualize any piece of literature. Tim did not deny me the right to have and support an opinion, but merely that I do not necessarily have the authority to offer an educated critique of sitcoms. This is a very strong point.

I, however, would still like to argue my case. This is of course unfair to Tim as he will not be able to offer a response or even clarify my potentially unintentional strawman-ed rendition of his argument. But I will anyways.

The problem with his argument to me is the requirement of a historical background of a genre to evaluate new instances of it. I don't disagree that a knowledge of the past can greatly help your analytical abilities, but I don't think this is absolutely imperative. I think you can construct an analyses divorced of a great deal of context (of course not all context, as would humour even work in a vacuum?). That said, Tim is very right in the quality variances in evaluations with and without context. In academic articles it is very important to discuss the context of one's arguments (why they're such a chore to read). The context provides authority. The author has read and engaged the historical and critical backing of the issue s/he is now writing about, thus his/her argument is proven to be (hopefully) well informed. There is no reason this concept shouldn't be applied to comedy.

But the issue comes down to this for me. I don't find Cheers all that funny. Neither do I find The Honeymooners too enjoyable. And I've seen enough episodes to make these judgement calls. More so, I am not writing my critiques in vacuums. I haven't ignored these foundational shows. And the pluralization is the key. This isn't a few writings, movies, or albums, this is multiple seasons of a television show. Cheers had almost 250 episodes. That's a lot of hours to spend watching a show I don't like so I can know a little more about the sitcom genre. And here's the thing--I don't think it'd matter. I've watched many other sitcoms, ones that weren't on when I was 7, that were heavily influenced by Cheers. And that goes even more so for The Honeymooners. Yes, Seinfeld is greatly influenced by The Honeymooners, but what aspect of the show have I not picked up on from other shows (in content and form) and from watching the freakin Flintstones?

Ultimately though, I think we need to consider critiques and analyses in terms of a conversation. When I engage a sitcom, a comedian, or a movie I offer my analysis, which is by no means definitive. And I would not expect any worthwhile critic to say otherwise. When we write about any topic we are engaging in a conversation (one that perhaps takes place over some length of time). When someone writes a book on Milton, s/he engages in a conversation about Milton. Other writers will then engage those ideas. This may not happen as much in comedy analysis, merely because there is yet to be vast academic work in the area, but this does not mean that the project is not the same. So Tim with his greater knowledge of Cheers could offer an argument about The Big Bang, and reveal elements of the show I, with my "ignorance" of Cheers, would miss. This would not at all be unlike the conversation that occurs about Milton. (Okay it's way different, but not in terms of project.) Anyone can be a critic here, it's merely how good of a critic. Tim might be a better critic about comedy, but he doesn't maintain a blog on the topic. I wish he would, then we could blargue until our fingers were raw. And the comedy community would be the better for it. If even slightly.

I don't intend this post to be about me winning an argument, it is supposed to be about me trying to figure out how I (or anyone) can discuss comedy on a critical level. Do the same issues of literature or music apply to comedy? This is a difficult question, even more so with this broad definition of comedy. Perhaps you can construct necessary canon pieces with comedy films, but in television, with shows involving more than an hour total watch-time, can you still construct that same idea about canon? And then certainly with the cultural pervasiveness of some of the television comedies you have to consider how viewers acquire a comedy education. Everyone, whether a comedy scholar or not, gets a great deal of I Love Lucy references. Further, so much of how sitcoms are made is built upon previous success--so by watching Home Improvement, I've watched Family Ties. And all this hasn't even begun to address how these issues relate to stand-up.

I don't necessarily have any concrete answers to the issues I've raised despite the lengths I've gone to above. Unfortunately these issues seem to be argued about at 1am in apartment buildings rather than in any written text, denying me that conversation I believe leads to better answers than the above. Bummer.

Here's a link to something actually funny.

Spinal Tap meets Gen Y

Or is it Z at this point? My youth pastor was unclear.

Now I've never been a big fan of musical comedy. I mean Barenaked Ladies were cool for a bit (yes they were!) because their humour was silly and their music folky, but now they're some rock-pop band that sing about absurd chimpanzees. And then song parodies. Ugh. Worse is a comedian with a guitar and comedy songs! When I see a comedian grab a guitar I immediately have my finger over whatever button will silence his/her tired bit. There are of course exceptions to every rule. Demetri Martin uses a guitar in his act and is consistently hilarious, but he's really punctuating jokes with the guitar rather than composing funny songs.

But My Chemical Romance, they shatter all my preconceptions.

MCR (yes I'm hip) is musical comedy at its best. Instead of trying to make jokes in song, their entire body of work and personas are the joke. Irony is the strangest thing, you can take garbage and bring it up to a level of appreciable quality by simply placing your tongue firmly in cheek. MCR does this to a tee.

I was confused at first with MCR. I'll embarrassingly admit I didn't get it. I just thought they were lousy. But when their sophomore album, The Black Parade, came out I finally "got it." Their video for the title track is what swung me. Watch it not as a pretentious emo video but as a group of self-aware guys making a pretentious emo video. Then you have a comedy masterpiece. The song brilliantly starts off with soft/sad piano music, then after the mention of a "marching band" a snare march beat is added. This all occurs underneath Gerard Way singing about pseudo-christ imagery. Then there's an obvious Queen-stealing ramp-up with Way singing his heart out and finally, at like a minute and a half, we get the fast emo-punk business. And that's just the song. The video has black and white cinematogrophy, circle wipes, futuristic macabre imagery, dramatic slow-motion band performance, and my favourite--hand reaches to the sky.

Of course for this sort of thing to work the acting has to be impeccable. And it is. Not once do I see the ounce of self-awareness that would ruin the entire joke--the only thing you see in Way's eyes are a dude desperately trying to project overwrought emotion. Check out the video for Famous Last Words. This video really features Way's ability. He spends the entire video an inch away from the screen screaming his heart out ("I am not afraid to keep on living / I am not afraid to walk this world alone"), tearing at his face, and smashing his mic stand to the sand. The rest of the band does a great job too, being way too into the music, swinging their guitars around or flipping their hair dramatically as they hit the crash. Also!, there is fire everywhere. It's a metaphor for the fire raging inside their heart sleeves.

Despite what the critics said, MCR really evolved on their second album. They grabbed a hold of their silliness and took it to a new level of pretencion--the concept album. You can't get more pretentious than concept albums. (Okay you can, if you're already a prog-metal band. I'm looking at you Dream Theatre!) And further, it's a concept album about death. You might judge them for being obvious with their choices. Yes it's easy to do a sophomore concept album about death as a ironic emo band, but since when would an emo band not be obvious? These guys have to keep up with actual emo bands, like The Used, that are taking this shit to unprecedented levels of pretentiousness.

Pick up/download their albums and hit up all their videos on youtube. They're full of laughs by some of the smartest comedy musicians of our generation. I'm interested to see where these guys go when this whole emo fad sputters out. I'm hoping for overproduced mega-indie-bands. These guys need to be taken down a few notches.