It's that time of the year again. Everyone is in for Halloween and the trick or treating. As always networks and studios are looking towards movies for success and airtime. Same with television as shows try at least one episode around the time of the month if they aren't doing it every year.
Unfortunately, I'm not entertained by horror. The idea of being scared leaves me a bit uneasy. It's not the case with every horror movie, but I don't make an incentive to watch all these films that air. I do like stuff like Jaws, although that's more suspenseful than trying to scare people in my opinion. Zombie stuff doesn't bother me too much. It depends on the level of horror and blood and gore. I can tolerate some blood, but other times, it makes me a bit queasy. Something like Friday the 13th or Elm Street would more than likely want me changing the channel.
I'm more comfortable with video games. Resident Evil, Dino Crisis, Doom. Tons of games that have horror elements. Maybe because they know not to go overboard most of the time. Television wise, it depends. Light hearted comedies, I can laugh a lot. Drama, it depends, but I wouldn't be against it fully. I wouldn't mind reading some books. I do have some like The Shining for example.
Take it or leave it, horror isn't something I'm entertained about. Oh well. But I'm not against watching some stuff that airs in October.
Showing posts with label television. Show all posts
Showing posts with label television. Show all posts
Thursday, October 3, 2019
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Your Ideal Break Show
I work. My parents work. We all have breaks. And in our break rooms, we have TV sets. On my night shifts, they typically have it on Friends, which is not a bad show, but damn, it's very overrated and it's the same episodes over and over. My parents break includes The Price is Right, which is one of the few game shows I like. I would rather have it on something like Price is Right. What would be your ideal break show?
If A&E wasn't obsessed with The First 48 (which is good, but hear me out) and Storage Wars I would love to see reruns of some of their older shows. Stuff like Dog The Bounty Hunter and Parking Wars. Parking Wars is funny for the reactions from the people who just got ticketed for a parking violation. Add in a little Live PD and that would make my day. TruTV is something I would put on for a lot of their shows. Carbanaro Effect, Impractical Jokers, Hack My Life, and a few others are something that I would put on because of what they are capable of doing. I wouldn't want it on World's Dumbest (washed up people and B-writers suck at commentary and humor) and Adam Ruins Everything (douchebag Collegehumor gimmick should stay on YouTube)
As far as scripted stuff, there's a few that would make my ideal break. I honestly wish Seinfeld had a little more airing time or at least a different time on cable, because it's a much superior show than Friends. I'm a 90s kid, but some shows from the 70s would be delightful in my eyes. Shows like Sanford and Son and M*A*S*H are great. My preference on scripted material is comedies, so very rarely will I talk dramas as something I would want on my break.
What kind of shows would you want on your break? Let me know, because there is a vast world of great shows that someone would enjoy for 30 minutes before getting back to work.
If A&E wasn't obsessed with The First 48 (which is good, but hear me out) and Storage Wars I would love to see reruns of some of their older shows. Stuff like Dog The Bounty Hunter and Parking Wars. Parking Wars is funny for the reactions from the people who just got ticketed for a parking violation. Add in a little Live PD and that would make my day. TruTV is something I would put on for a lot of their shows. Carbanaro Effect, Impractical Jokers, Hack My Life, and a few others are something that I would put on because of what they are capable of doing. I wouldn't want it on World's Dumbest (washed up people and B-writers suck at commentary and humor) and Adam Ruins Everything (douchebag Collegehumor gimmick should stay on YouTube)
As far as scripted stuff, there's a few that would make my ideal break. I honestly wish Seinfeld had a little more airing time or at least a different time on cable, because it's a much superior show than Friends. I'm a 90s kid, but some shows from the 70s would be delightful in my eyes. Shows like Sanford and Son and M*A*S*H are great. My preference on scripted material is comedies, so very rarely will I talk dramas as something I would want on my break.
What kind of shows would you want on your break? Let me know, because there is a vast world of great shows that someone would enjoy for 30 minutes before getting back to work.
Tuesday, May 1, 2018
When Is Something Mediocre?
Everyone wants something to be at the minimum, enjoyable. At the maximum, good or great. It's all subjective because there are those that enjoy the bad stuff. However, there are the few things that even if one were to enjoy something bad, even they would admit it's not that great. When does the mediocrity occur?
One of these examples is a game that I am going through right now with Knack. It was out the same day the PlayStation 4 launched in 2013. Probably not halfway through and I noticed how mundane and monotonous it was a few chapters in. It's a by the numbers platformer. Nothing stands out other than the main character. Level designs are very linear. The difficulty is not even a good challenge. You take too much damage from enemies and it's very easy to die, leading to very cheap moments and poor checkpoint locations. It's a tech demo for the system. Maybe a rental, but not a game I would fully recommend.
When a television show is good, it can string some great episodes in a row and be given some slack for a few that are not above the standard it delivered. It's hard to judge one's inaugural debut because you don't know what to expect. If I were to judge, I would give the first two to four episodes a chance before either giving up or continuing to watch. If it's that bad of a pilot, maybe one more episode if you can stomach it. Otherwise, give up on it. It's mostly subjective since even shows considered great have its critics. Some louder for some shows than others.
Those two examples can happen at any time with a franchise or something that has been around for a very long time. Say a show has ran for eight years and that the first six were very good and the last two you found to be average or mediocre. It's a crapshoot when it boils down to movies and music. The former can easily be found on cable most of the time and the latter has so much material, you can wade through all the garbage to find what you want online. What about if you were to go to a theater or get a CD or vinyl? That's up to you. You are putting up the risk to see or listen to something you hope is at worst decent. How much you can stomach before you leave the theater is on you. Same with the music and the tracks they offer.
I enjoy my share of good and bad things, but when it's mediocre, it's fairly forgettable. Happy hunting in the search for what you consider good. There is plenty of stuff to find.
One of these examples is a game that I am going through right now with Knack. It was out the same day the PlayStation 4 launched in 2013. Probably not halfway through and I noticed how mundane and monotonous it was a few chapters in. It's a by the numbers platformer. Nothing stands out other than the main character. Level designs are very linear. The difficulty is not even a good challenge. You take too much damage from enemies and it's very easy to die, leading to very cheap moments and poor checkpoint locations. It's a tech demo for the system. Maybe a rental, but not a game I would fully recommend.
When a television show is good, it can string some great episodes in a row and be given some slack for a few that are not above the standard it delivered. It's hard to judge one's inaugural debut because you don't know what to expect. If I were to judge, I would give the first two to four episodes a chance before either giving up or continuing to watch. If it's that bad of a pilot, maybe one more episode if you can stomach it. Otherwise, give up on it. It's mostly subjective since even shows considered great have its critics. Some louder for some shows than others.
Those two examples can happen at any time with a franchise or something that has been around for a very long time. Say a show has ran for eight years and that the first six were very good and the last two you found to be average or mediocre. It's a crapshoot when it boils down to movies and music. The former can easily be found on cable most of the time and the latter has so much material, you can wade through all the garbage to find what you want online. What about if you were to go to a theater or get a CD or vinyl? That's up to you. You are putting up the risk to see or listen to something you hope is at worst decent. How much you can stomach before you leave the theater is on you. Same with the music and the tracks they offer.
I enjoy my share of good and bad things, but when it's mediocre, it's fairly forgettable. Happy hunting in the search for what you consider good. There is plenty of stuff to find.
Sunday, March 25, 2018
The TV Revival: Why the Push?
Over the last few years, there has been this push to bring back beloved shows and set them in a current era. Some, like Twin Peaks, are held in high regard and fans will cherish that for a very long time. Then there's shows like Will & Grace, where they are a complete bomb and are berated for not being what they used to be. So why are networks wanting to bring back some of these older shows?
There's not really an answer that directly is the reason for a revival. I'll go with Nickelodeon for an example. They know they got older fans. Hence why they are making movies based on some of their 90s shows. With Hey Arnold, Rocko's Modern Life, and even Invader Zim getting their own films for television, they somewhat understand their origins of why they were loved 20, 25 years ago. While they may still go after the younger generation, there is still a soft spot for the older generation of 90s kids. There are ideas for what could be revived, so there's chances of not ruling out other shows like Rugrats and whatever live action stuff was on the channel.
Maybe a reason is to see how a certain set of characters are for a new era. One of the curious things is one of the newest revivals, Roseanne. When it first aired in 1988, it was a blue collar and stayed down to earth compared to The Cosby Show and Married... With Children. It was part of that era that pushed for a more realistic look at family, making certain sitcoms feel very fresh and unique. This one is an odd choice to revive, but who knows how people will react. It has the same cast and probably will tackle some issues and deliver on laughs. Some websites have praised that it stays true to what made it great 30 years ago. It's just a matter of how viewers will feel about it when it airs.
The same can be said for something like The X Files. It was one of Fox's biggest shows of the 90s, and has held onto a decent run of new episodes the last couple of years. I'd say part of it is fans wanting more. With all this conspiracy stuff and internet website theories, it's lightning in a bottle for anyone craving for more adventures of Mulder and Scully solving cases, whether or not the truth is out there. There will always be shows, short lived or long running, that will always have fans wanting new episodes.
Another possibility is people thinking something from back then worked, and trying something different with it for a new era. What I mean is a new set of characters and/or new ideas in a setting that was used years ago. It also applies to movies as well. Unfortunately, there's nothing that is coming to my mind.
I see this fad going on for another few years and then dwindling down. That doesn't mean revivals are going to stop completely. However, new content will always keep interest for a longer set of years if loved by both critics and fans.
There's not really an answer that directly is the reason for a revival. I'll go with Nickelodeon for an example. They know they got older fans. Hence why they are making movies based on some of their 90s shows. With Hey Arnold, Rocko's Modern Life, and even Invader Zim getting their own films for television, they somewhat understand their origins of why they were loved 20, 25 years ago. While they may still go after the younger generation, there is still a soft spot for the older generation of 90s kids. There are ideas for what could be revived, so there's chances of not ruling out other shows like Rugrats and whatever live action stuff was on the channel.
Maybe a reason is to see how a certain set of characters are for a new era. One of the curious things is one of the newest revivals, Roseanne. When it first aired in 1988, it was a blue collar and stayed down to earth compared to The Cosby Show and Married... With Children. It was part of that era that pushed for a more realistic look at family, making certain sitcoms feel very fresh and unique. This one is an odd choice to revive, but who knows how people will react. It has the same cast and probably will tackle some issues and deliver on laughs. Some websites have praised that it stays true to what made it great 30 years ago. It's just a matter of how viewers will feel about it when it airs.
The same can be said for something like The X Files. It was one of Fox's biggest shows of the 90s, and has held onto a decent run of new episodes the last couple of years. I'd say part of it is fans wanting more. With all this conspiracy stuff and internet website theories, it's lightning in a bottle for anyone craving for more adventures of Mulder and Scully solving cases, whether or not the truth is out there. There will always be shows, short lived or long running, that will always have fans wanting new episodes.
Another possibility is people thinking something from back then worked, and trying something different with it for a new era. What I mean is a new set of characters and/or new ideas in a setting that was used years ago. It also applies to movies as well. Unfortunately, there's nothing that is coming to my mind.
I see this fad going on for another few years and then dwindling down. That doesn't mean revivals are going to stop completely. However, new content will always keep interest for a longer set of years if loved by both critics and fans.
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Too Many Commercials
As television has grown to where there are lots of cable networks competing, there is always a constant. That is the constant feed of commercials. In a time of watching stuff on AMC and Spike, you will always find five minutes of commercials before going back to the show or film before getting another five minutes. With that in mind, here is one that will creep up and anger people more. It is seven minutes of commercials per break.
Last year, I watched a few movies on cable. Early in the year, I watched an airing of Jackass: The Movie on MTV. It's not lengthy, but there was a point in the middle of the film where it was bombarded with two straight breaks of seven to eight minutes. A few months later, I watched the 60s version of The Jungle Book on Freeform. That film was not lengthy, either, but it was reaching points where it had some of the commercial lengths as Jackass did and had a two hour fifteen minute air time on the channel. As I look at some of these channels, it's been very evident for years that they are desperate for money and a few extra commercials is their way of getting more revenue in a time where people are going to Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, and other sites to get their TV or movie fix. The thought of every channel going seven minutes is a scary one.
As of now, the biggest offender is Viacom. Most of their channels employ tactics to get extra commercials. The air times on stuff like Comedy Central, MTV, and BET is beyond absurd and stupid. Looking at what is on for films for the rest of the week, two films had three and a half hour air times. These weren't dramas or even mob films. They were comedies that aren't that long. One clocked at below an hour fifty and the other was a few minutes past two hours. The tactic might work for Viacom in the short term, but long term is going to be a rough road if it backfires.
Syndication cuts are pretty obvious when it boils down to TV shows, but that's for another topic if it gets made. The tactic is time compression, which is speeding up shows to fit in the half hour time span of the syndicated version of the show to get more commercial time. Some movies do that, but they go more for cutting stuff for both time and content. This was a big deal a few years ago when sites and a few entertainment shows talked about a video one did on YouTube in 2013 on Seinfeld reruns ten years earlier at the time. He did a test in 2015 to see how much of a difference it was and it was sped up a little more.
It's not just TBS. It's pretty much the case with any network that has shows up until the 90s to early 2000s. Even some of the early SpongeBob SquarePants episodes suffer because of the era it was in. Yeah, original content like The Walking Dead may get millions of viewers, but for anyone wanting reruns of shows, the choice is obvious now these days. Networks are still going to wonder why they keep losing viewership. Netflix, Hulu, and other sites have access to all episodes of a show and barring certain things like Saturday Night Live and South Park, should be uncut and unaltered. You can watch as many times as you want before deals expire on shows.
Movies, on the other hand, is tougher. It's hard to know when a deal can be made on some films, popular or unpopular. Networks envy the most recent ones and try to get them on HBO or Showtime before going to a cable network like FX or AMC. Companies are making deals to stream exclusively on one platform, though, making them adjust pretty well to the modern era of watching things. Unfortunately, not every film will make it to an online site and unless you're not able to find on DVD or Blu-ray, you might be stuck with the cable version.
Could we see a time where there is ten minutes of commercials in one break? I hope not. With losing viewership from a number of networks (some of which cannot be blamed on commercials) and rising costs per household, it could be a reality that will be dreaded, even if you are dedicated to something like a 15-hour South Park marathon. Only time will tell, and it may look no good.
Last year, I watched a few movies on cable. Early in the year, I watched an airing of Jackass: The Movie on MTV. It's not lengthy, but there was a point in the middle of the film where it was bombarded with two straight breaks of seven to eight minutes. A few months later, I watched the 60s version of The Jungle Book on Freeform. That film was not lengthy, either, but it was reaching points where it had some of the commercial lengths as Jackass did and had a two hour fifteen minute air time on the channel. As I look at some of these channels, it's been very evident for years that they are desperate for money and a few extra commercials is their way of getting more revenue in a time where people are going to Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, and other sites to get their TV or movie fix. The thought of every channel going seven minutes is a scary one.
As of now, the biggest offender is Viacom. Most of their channels employ tactics to get extra commercials. The air times on stuff like Comedy Central, MTV, and BET is beyond absurd and stupid. Looking at what is on for films for the rest of the week, two films had three and a half hour air times. These weren't dramas or even mob films. They were comedies that aren't that long. One clocked at below an hour fifty and the other was a few minutes past two hours. The tactic might work for Viacom in the short term, but long term is going to be a rough road if it backfires.
Syndication cuts are pretty obvious when it boils down to TV shows, but that's for another topic if it gets made. The tactic is time compression, which is speeding up shows to fit in the half hour time span of the syndicated version of the show to get more commercial time. Some movies do that, but they go more for cutting stuff for both time and content. This was a big deal a few years ago when sites and a few entertainment shows talked about a video one did on YouTube in 2013 on Seinfeld reruns ten years earlier at the time. He did a test in 2015 to see how much of a difference it was and it was sped up a little more.
It's not just TBS. It's pretty much the case with any network that has shows up until the 90s to early 2000s. Even some of the early SpongeBob SquarePants episodes suffer because of the era it was in. Yeah, original content like The Walking Dead may get millions of viewers, but for anyone wanting reruns of shows, the choice is obvious now these days. Networks are still going to wonder why they keep losing viewership. Netflix, Hulu, and other sites have access to all episodes of a show and barring certain things like Saturday Night Live and South Park, should be uncut and unaltered. You can watch as many times as you want before deals expire on shows.
Movies, on the other hand, is tougher. It's hard to know when a deal can be made on some films, popular or unpopular. Networks envy the most recent ones and try to get them on HBO or Showtime before going to a cable network like FX or AMC. Companies are making deals to stream exclusively on one platform, though, making them adjust pretty well to the modern era of watching things. Unfortunately, not every film will make it to an online site and unless you're not able to find on DVD or Blu-ray, you might be stuck with the cable version.
Could we see a time where there is ten minutes of commercials in one break? I hope not. With losing viewership from a number of networks (some of which cannot be blamed on commercials) and rising costs per household, it could be a reality that will be dreaded, even if you are dedicated to something like a 15-hour South Park marathon. Only time will tell, and it may look no good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)