National Novel Writing Month: What Have I Gotten Myself Into?

Today is Halloween which means tomorrow is November 1st and marks the beginning of National Novel Writing Month. NaNoWriMo is an annual event that brings people across the globe together in pursuit of one goal: write a 50,0000 word novel in 30 days. Simple as that.

My friend in New Mexico has completed several NaNoWriMo's in the past and this year she has persuaded me and a few other friends to give it a whirl. Writing an entire novel in one month is a ridiculous proposition so the more people you know who are indulging in this insanity with you, the better off you will be. I dearly hope I can keep up with the ladies in our cross-country writing group, even if my novel does devolve into a fantastical imagining of people turning into parrots and chasing unicorns (a plot my friend is strongly urging me to pursue, despite my protests). NaNoWriMo seems incredibly stressful, but it is ultimately just a fun and challenging pursuit and hopefully you can revel in completing it at the end of the month.

Throughout the month, the wonderful people responsible for this crazed idea will send out encouraging e-mails, remind you to back up your novel, and give you lots of tips and pointers if you're in the midst of agonizing writer's block. If you're lucky enough to live somewhere with a regional NaNoWriMo group, you can look forward to parties at the beginning, middle, and end of the month. So if nothing else you will discover a bunch of writers you can either celebrate or commiserate with depending on how your month goes.

Aside from discussing NaNoWriMo, the reason for this post is to inform you, dear readers, that I will likely be in absentia for much of this month. As I will be furiously scrabbling to meet my daily word counts and hit that elusive goal of 50,000, I won't have much time for blogging. Of course, if the novel starts giving me a headache or tangles me up in various plot points, I'll pop back on the blog to write a procrastinatory note about something or the other. If you want to check on how I'm doing, you can search for me on the website (my username is shlokes) and see if I've made any headway.

Head on over to nanowrimo.org and consider if you want to give it a try. Yes, if you decide to do it you will have to get started tomorrow, presumably without a plot or any idea in place. But if you're stuck, just start writing about parrots and unicorns and maybe one day you'll be heading on stage to claim your Hugo award.

Whedon & Shakespeare: A Match Made in Writer Heaven

Last Sunday, actor Nathan Fillion tweeted out a simple message: muchadothemovie.com. Clicking on the link led his followers to a website with evidence that Joss Whedon had managed to pull off a wondrous feat: a film adaptation of Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing.

For a while the Twitterverse and Whedon fans were all abuzz. After all, Whedon had just finished production on the Avengers movie and was supposed to be on vacation. And the website revealed a huge cast list, with perennial Whedon favorites like Fillion, Sean Maher, Amy Acker and Alexis Denisof.. None of these people had let on that they were making a movie, all the more surprising given their constant Twitter presence. However, the details soon emerged through an Entertainment Weekly exclusive. Turns out that Whedon (with encouragement from his lovely wife) cancelled his vacation to make a Shakespeare adaptation, something he has been wanting to do for years. While most of us know Whedon as the sci-fi genius responsible for Firefly, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Dollhouse, and Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog, he also has a great love for Shakespeare and has hosted readings in his house with various actor buddies. After the big-budget shenanigans of The Avengers, it makes sense that Whedon would immediately go on to a low-budget Shakespeare adaption that he personally bankrolled and shot in his own home. Principal filming took place over just 12 days and everyone involved was sworn to secrecy until the website finally went live.

This is wildly premature, but I am already hugely excited for this film. Modern adaptations of Shakespeare are tricky, as evidenced by the BBC series ShakespeaRe-Told that adapted four plays that ranged from utterly fantastic to rather lackluster. However, Whedon is a writer par excellence who is capable of startling ingenuity. He might not be writing the dialogue (the film uses the original Shakespearean language) but he can be trusted to place his characters in memorable settings and add clever modern twists that will bring the play to the 21st century. He will be helped by the fact that Much Ado About Nothing is timeless - the story is perfectly suited to a contemporary setting, and the bickering Benedick and Beatrice are a far more sizzling couple than we get in most modern rom-coms. The cast is also extremely promising. Composed mostly of seasoned Whedonverse alums, these people do some of their best work under Whedon's direction and are guaranteed to bring an unprecedented level of wit and humor to this already marvelous play.

In this age of hype and publicity, it is a miracle that Whedon, the cast, and the crew were able to maintain such absolute secrecy all throughout filming. The shock of the announcement has naturally generated more hype than any big studio ad campaign could have managed and is rather characteristic of Joss Whedon's ability to let the work speak for itself. People who have never seen Whedon's other work (either because they've never heard of him or because they disdain sci-fi, fantasy, and superheroes), are in for a pleasant surprise when this movie releases next year. My greatest hope is that the film successfully showcases the multifaceted talents of the cast and their director and encourages more people to explore the Whedonverse. If so, they will discover some truly inspired TV writing that transcends the boundaries of all genres.

Tucker & Dale vs Evil: Horror Is Hysterical Again

Tucker & Dale vs. Evil is a Canadian movie from 2010 that made the festival circuit and garnered plenty of critical praise. It came out for a very limited release in the US last month (I don't think it's playing in theaters anymore, at least not in Manhattan), but the DVD is set to drop later in November, and you can rent it on Amazon Instant Video right now if you can't wait that long. Which you can't, because I can't think of a better movie to watch this Halloween.

The idea of comedy horror has been around for a while. The genre was most prominent with the Scary Movie franchise (I liked the first one but the sequels were horrific and not in a good way), and then got a much-needed reboot with the classic Shaun of the Dead. However, recent horror films have focused more on inducing plain terror and being as gory as possible. There's nothing wrong with straight-up horror films, but I had to object once we started getting into the insanely perverse realm of Human Centipede (how could anyone even ALLOW that movie to be made, and how could it be enough of a success to warrant a sequel?). Horror seemed like it was taking itself too seriously again, but then along came two unassuming hillbillies named Tucker and Dale.

The premise of this movie is absurdly delightful. Tucker (Alan Tudyk from Firefly, yay!) and Dale (Tyler Labine, the lovable guy from Reaper) are two hillbillies who are looking forward to spending some time in the woods to renovate Tucker's newly-purchased vacation home. On the way there they run into a group of college kids who are also headed to the woods for a drunken camping expedition. The college kids are instantly freaked out by Tucker and Dale, judging the duo based on their rather slovenly appearance and lack of social graces. As horror films have trained us to believe, hillbillies are leering and creepy, so the college kids immediately cast Tucker and Dale as the villains of the piece.

Later that night, the kids are skinny-dipping in the lake at the same time that Tucker and Dale are engaging in a spot of night fishing. One of the girls, Allison (Katrina Bowden from 30 Rock), strays away from the group and decides to jump into the lake from a height. Unfortunately, she is surprised when she sees the hillbillies in the distance, slips on the rocks, and crashes into the water. Tucker and Dale quickly row over and rescue her. As the college kids fearfully look on, Tucker yells out "We've got your friend!" Instead of realizing this is merely a statement of fact and they should go over and retrieve their concussed colleague, the kids (who didn't see Allison slip and fall) are convinced that the hillbillies have knocked her out and are kidnapping her for nefarious reasons. They run away screaming, while the bemused hillbillies look on and decide that maybe the college kids will just come to the cabin in the morning to pick up their friend.

In the morning, Allison wakes up, is initially scared out of her wits when Dale comes into her room with a plate of pancakes, but quickly discovers that he is harmless and that she was wrong to judge him so quickly. Unfortunately, the college kids do not know this. Certain that their friend has been kidnapped, they decide to attack the cabin and rescue Allison from the evil hillbillies. And thus begins the most hysterical hour of gory mayhem that you could possibly imagine. While Tucker and Dale remain unscathed, the kids keep accidentally killing themselves during their rescue efforts. It sounds ridiculous (because it is) but it's also devilishly clever and the method of each killing gets progressively more gory, more gruesome, and more hilarious. Of course the surviving kids think that their friends are being murdered by the hillbillies, but Tucker and Dale are just perplexed and terrified as the bodies keep mounting on their property. Each side is completely unaware of what the other side thinks of them and never before has a simple misunderstanding resulted in such a rapid body count.

The manner of these accidental killings is the best part of the movie so I won't detail any of them here. This is also why you really shouldn't watch the theatrical trailer for the movie, because it gives away the funniest bits of the film and will spoil almost the entire story for you. Just trust me, this is a fantastic premise, with a complete role reversal of the traditional concepts of horror villains and victims (after all, since when are the scared college kids the ones in a murderous rage while the hillbillies are perfectly docile?), enough gore to satisfy your horror cravings, enough humor and frantic one-liners to satisfy your comedy needs, and enough heart to make you root for Tucker and Dale as they fight Evil. My only problem with the movie is that it is entirely too short, but that is probably its greatest strength. This is mostly a one-joke premise, but the film mines that one joke for all the comedy gold it can muster, and wraps everything up neatly before it stops being funny.

Halloween is a day for both spooky horror and fun-filled celebration. There is no more perfect way to celebrate this Monday than spending 89 minutes with Tucker & Dale and reveling in the return of comedy horror. 

What's Your Number? See How Many Cliches You Can Spot

The romantic comedy is a much lamented form of cinema these days. Cliched, trite, and hopelessly predictable, Hollywood's recent efforts have involved simply upping the raunch factor while keeping the essential formula the same. Which brings us to the Anna Faris comedy What's Your Number?

The plot follows in the great tradition of being utterly cringeworthy and infuriatingly backward. Ally Darling (Faris) has broken up with her umpteenth boyfriend, lost her job, and reads a magazine article that declares that women who have slept with 20 or more men have a significantly reduced chance of ever getting married and settling down in life. Once Ally writes down the names of all the men she has slept with, she discovers that her number is 19. She is further horrified to discover that among her girlfriends, the highest number is 13, which incites a great deal of shock and the ever-so supportive "oh you whore/slut" remarks. Ally resolves that she will not sleep with another man until she knows for certain that he is "the one." Of course, she makes this declaration in a bar, where she proceeds to get drunk and lands in bed with her ex-boss who she loathes. Now her number is 20 and she can go no higher. So she decides her only remaining option is to track down her ex boyfriends and see if any of them has changed enough to become "the one."

How many cliches is that already? Lady with a life in turmoil, multiple commitment-phobic boyfriends, completely unsupportive girlfriends, a quest for "the one," and naturally, the all-important urge to drink oneself senseless and end up in bed with a hated man. Let's not forget also that she has an older sister whose life is all sorted out and is about to be married, and a mother who fusses over her hair and cannot give her a single word of encouragement about her life. 

Enter Colin, the handsome neighbor who will initially repel Ally, but will then be drawn to her as the proverbial moth to a flame. He lives across the hall from her, sleeps with a different woman every night (with no hand-wringing about his "number," because after all, shame about one's sexual proclivities is a purely feminine domain), and then hides out in Ally's apartment in the morning until the women leave. At first Ally is incensed, declaring that he can't treat women like that because she sees them all as "her sisters." But once she decides to find her old boyfriends she strikes up a deal with Colin - help her find her exes, and she will help him avoid his one-night stands in the morning. So much for the sisterhood. 

I am one hour into the film (yes, it is annoying me so much that I have decided to blog about it before even finishing it) and we have gone through a whole slew of ex-boyfriends ranging from the previously morbidly obese to the now gay. After Ally returns from another disheartening encounter, she and Colin end up playing a game of strip basketball, skinny-dipping in Boston Harbor (as you do), and naturally recognizing their mutual affinity for one another. That's as far as I've gotten.

And now we get to the point of this post: I think I can predict with 99% certainty what will ensue in the next 45 minutes. There will be a brief honeymoon phase when everything's hunky-dory and the new couple will take it slow and be romantic. Then the one ex that Ally hasn't met yet who seems to be perfect (he's rich and currently in Africa setting up a charity - why does Hollywood's idea of a "good guy" always tend to such extremes?) will return, Ally will be impressed, Colin will get jealous, grievous misunderstandings will ensue. The once-happy couple will split, everyone will be miserable. Then finally, Colin will realize he was a fool. Since Ally's sister is getting married, the wedding seems the most probable location for the ultimate reconciliation and his declaration that Ally is the only girl he has ever loved. By the way, Colin is a musician, so I wouldn't put it past him to show up at the wedding with his band and serenade Ally just to make sure that the film has hit every cliche in the book. Also, despite working in marketing, Ally's hobby is to make weird sculptures. Colin has been praising these sculptures for a while now, so I'm certain he will urge her to pursue her art and she will likely end the film as someone who makes a living from her craft while convincing her boyfriend to play music and live out his dreams too. And the final line will probably involve something about her "number" and how stupid it is to believe what you read in magazines, because look at her, this is guy #21, and everything turned out just fine!

I am going to watch the rest of the movie now (look at what lengths I go to in the name of pop culture research!) and will post an update as to whether I was right about any of my predicted plot points. Maybe the movie will come up with some brand spanking new revelation that will alter the rom-com landscape forever. But if prior movies are any indication, I can predict with 100% certainty that it will not.

Update: Ugh. Turns out my predictions may have been more romantic than expected, which I didn't think was possible. The essentials are the same, I just mixed up who would need to apologize at the end. The rich ex did return, Ally did go off with him, she realized her mistake at her sister's wedding (when the rich guy was horrified by her number and also dismissed the silliness of her sculpting), and then chased down Colin who was playing with his band at another wedding. So he didn't serenade her, but he was singing when she showed up. They both apologized for ruining a good thing and then she declared, "I think I love you, 21." So yay, she has come to accept that she likes who she is and she wants to be with the guy who loves her for who she is. What an unusual moral.

Of course, there's still the last scene. Ally and Colin are in bed when the phone rings and we hear a guy (the unmistakable voice of Aziz Ansari) leaving a message. Turns out Ally had called him to say she was getting in touch with everyone she slept with, and he was calling back to let her know that they never actually slept together (poor girl must have been drunk and forgetful again). So the final scene is Ally jumping up and down on the bed, yelling "Yay, you're only #20, I've only slept with 20 guys!" As Natasha Bedingfield (big surprise) started crooning over the end credits, I stared at the screen aghast. Not only did the film pay homage to every corny rom-com staple and tie things up with a happy, boring bow, but the last scene also managed to undermine even the small moral victory the heroine had made when accepting that numbers were stupid and all that mattered was that she be with someone who makes her happy. If 0 is the number of times you have watched What's Your Number? consider yourself fortunate. The number of times I've seen it is now 1 and I feel violated.

Remember Me? Chick Lit At Its Finest

When I first encountered a stack of Shopaholic novels in a friend's cluttered room, I scoffed. How could anyone stand to read such silly books about a woman who just spends all her time shopping? My friend protested that the books were actually a lot of fun and insisted that I would enjoy them, but I stubbornly refused. Then for some mysterious reason a few years later, I decided to give the series a try. And ever since then, Sophie Kinsella has won a place in the list of authors I adore.

While most famous for her Shopaholic series, Kinsella has also written several stand-alone novels. The ones she writes under her real name of Madeleine Wickham are witty and complex, but tend to be slightly more serious, with long-lasting consequences and mistakes that will not be tidily resolved by the end of the novel. But the ones written under her nom-de-plume of Sophie Kinsella star heroines who are as surprising, warm, exasperating, and wonderful as the Shopaholic Becky Bloomwood. And the heroine that captured my attention this week is Lexi Smart, the heroine of Kinsella's 2008 novel, Remember Me?

The set-up of this novel is predictably zany. One minute it is 2004 and Lexi is a 25-year old stuck in a dull job at Deller Carpets, drowning her sorrows with her friends in a club after her boyfriend Loser Dave stands her up, faced with the prospect of attending her father's funeral the next day, then desperately trying to flag down a taxi in the pouring rain. The next minute she wakes up in the hospital and discovers that it is 2007, she is 28 (so old!), a director serving on the board at Deller Carpets, hated by her old friends, and married to a gorgeous multimillionaire. She was in a car accident a few days ago in her Mercedes convertible (she couldn't even drive in 2004) and can no longer remember anything that happened between that horrible night in 2004 and her current state in 2007.

The novel progresses with shocking revelations, strangers who claim to be friends, various crises, and of course, hilarious interludes in trademark Kinsella fashion (wait till you find out what a Mont Blanc is). Initially convinced that her life has become perfect and she has everything she always dreamed of, Lexi quickly discovers that dark things are lurking under the shiny surface of her new surroundings. Everything that was important to her in 2004 seems to have disappeared in 2007 and she can't even console herself with a piece of toast at breakfast since her husband is obsessed with their low-carb diet. Not only have her best friends deserted her, but Brad and Jennifer have split up, and Lexi's world is totally upside-down. Throw in a sarcastic attractive architect who has some appalling information about the past three years and you have the recipe for a novel that you simply cannot bear to put down.

Kinsella knows how to write a ripping story that mines ordinary life for extraordinary circumstances. Remember Me? is a comic mystery masterpiece and as you slowly piece together the events that have changed Lexi over the past three years, you keep furtively checking how many pages are left because you don't want the story to end too soon. This is a smart and funny novel that effortlessly weaves between the ridiculous and sublime and delivers an ending that will bring a smile to your face. There is one moment with a garden of sunflowers that is gasp-inducingly romantic and leaves me in no doubt that Kinsella is in a league of her own when it comes to creating memorable characters that tug at your heartstrings. If you've ever scornfully dismissed the chick lit genre, try to keep your ego in check for a few hours and pick up a book by Sophie Kinsella. You might be surprised when it's a few days later and you're raiding the bookstore for more of her novels.

Once Upon A Time: If You Thought You Knew Your Fairy Tales, Think Again

Once Upon a Time premiered on ABC on Sunday night. I saw many trailers for the show leading up to Sunday night as well as a behind the scenes look during previews in the movie theatre. All of these glimpses didn't impress me, but I wanted to give it a fair try. Which is why I recorded the show and finally watched it this morning.

The show's premise is nice and fantastical. Snow White and Prince Charming are getting married when the Evil Queen shows up and declares that an awful curse is going to befall them and all the fairy tale characters of the Kingdom. No one wants to believe her, but fast forward to a few months later and Snow White is still pondering the Evil Queen's threat. She's now pregnant, which naturally makes her anxious for the fate of her child, so she and Prince Charming head down to the dungeons to question the only man who can see the future - Rumpelstiltskin. Played with manic glee by Robert Carlyle, Rumpelstiltskin warns the couple that the curse is indeed on its way, but they have once chance at salvation - Snow White's as yet unborn daughter, Emma. If she is protected, she will return in 28 years and commence the final battle against the Evil Queen to finally free everyone.

The story gets more intricate, but here are the bare essentials: Snow White gives birth to Emma on the day that the curse arrives. Prince Charming manages to fight his way through the Evil Queen's soldiers, and although he is mortally wounded, he manages to place Emma in a wardrobe made from an enchanted tree which spirits her away from the Kingdom and helps her escape the curse. And what is the curse? All the fairy tale characters are transported to the modern world, ensconced in the aptly-named town of Storybrooke in Maine, where they no longer remember who they are and where time stands still so that they never age and will never find their happy endings. Snow White is now Mary Margaret Blanchard, a sweet, bluebird-loving elementary school teacher, who no longer remembers her eternal love for Prince Charming. One of her students is a precocious ten-year old, Henry Mills, who reads the book of fairy tales that Blanchard gives him and realizes that all of the townspeople are actually characters from these stories. His mother turns out to be the Evil Queen (now known as the town's mayor, Regina Mills), but she adopted him so Henry heads off to Boston to find Emma Swan, his birth mother. Of course, this is the same Emma who was born to Snow White and Prince Charming. With a great deal of persuasive wheeling and dealing Henry brings Emma back to Storybrooke and presumably sets into motion the "final battle" as prophesied by Rumpelstiltskin.

This is an elaborate story, and I haven't even covered every nuance of the one-hour pilot. While the idea of fairy tales in modern settings is not new (and done to perfection in the 2007 movie Enchanted), the execution of Once Upon A Time is quite imaginative and enjoyable. The plot is well-constructed and multi-faceted, and at the end of the first episode I was convinced that I wanted to see more. The acting is solid and I have already started developing attachments to some characters. And the locations, set design, and costumes are spot-on, giving the fairy tale Kingdom a lush realism and lending an air of mystery and magic to the modern world of Storybrooke. The special effects occasionally do leave something to be desired and the Blue Fairy was woefully laughable. Subsequent episodes will alternate between the Kingdom and Storybrooke, advancing the plot while giving us flashbacks to help us discover the characters' backstories. For the show to succeed in making the Kingdom more believable, they will hopefully rely more on constructed sets or actual locations, instead of cheap-looking CGI effects. Unfortunately, this is often the problem with shows on network TV. When you have to produce about 20 episodes a year, the budget is stretched out and special effects don't get the attention they deserve. You definitely get the impression that if this show was on cable, it would have a better aesthetic and benefit from shorter seasons. And therein lie my reservations about Once Upon A Time. This is a story that seems more suited to be one season long, because we all know what the ending has to be. The Evil Queen will be overthrown, characters will remember who they are, and the final screen will say "and they all lived happily ever after." The problem is how we are going to get to that ending.

This problem is the same that plagued Lost. Once Upon A Time was developed by two Lost writers, who have received input from Damon Lindelof (Lost's co-creator). If anyone knows how to construct a vast story arc complete with flashbacks, character development, and mysteries all heading for an ultimate endgame, it's these guys. The pilot has some deliberate allusions to Lost as well, which is like a fun Easter Egg hunt for any Lost fans who are still mourning the end of that show. Lost was a TV masterpiece, but middle seasons did drag a bit when it became clear that the show was being hampered by the need to endlessly create filler for each season so that the network could reap the benefits. However, once the writers had a a definitive ending in sight, the series kicked into high gear and every episode from the final two seasons was a surprise and delight.

I can only hope that the writers of Once Upon a Time have taken that Lost experience to heart and have a well-established plan in mind for the direction this series is going to take. It debuted as the #1 drama and is critically favored, so it's not going away anytime soon. Now it remains to be seen whether upcoming episodes can deliver on the hype and give these characters enough depth and story to keep the momentum going. Ultimately when I see the words "and they lived happily ever after," I want to think that the end came too soon, instead of wishing it had come a few seasons earlier. 

Conan: Mercurial But Lovable

The kerfuffle with the Tonight Show, Jay Leno, and NBC was a long time ago, and everyone seems to have moved on. I still have the last episode of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien saved on my DVR - I love watching the montage of all the hilarious stunts and bits they managed to pull off during the show's short run, and Conan's heartfelt farewell message always makes me happy and sad at the same time. Fortunately, he wasn't off our TV screens for too long and the first episode of Conan was a joyful triumph. Like everyone else, I was only too happy to welcome Conan O'Brien back to my TV screen, and he is the sole reason why I now know where the TBS channel is on my cable line-up.

However, the drama that captivated the late-night audience and inspired wisecracking monologues from every host night after night has left an indelible impression on Conan. The most obvious manifestation of course, was that beard. After years of being clean-shaven and joking about how he could never grow any facial hair, the man returned with a luxurious beard that inspired much comment on Twitter before he even started the show. Will Ferrell eventually showed up one night to shave it off, and it was a hint that maybe Conan would now go back to his usual self. 

That hasn't lasted. The beard's back and that old Conan joy is still somewhat missing. I have yet to watch the documentary Conan Can't Stop, a look at the period after he was fired, did a comedy tour, and was trying to figure out where to go from there, but I suspect it will be a good insight into how the melee surrounding the Tonight Show turned him into the man he is now. The new show is still funny, especially when he goes off to do absurd segments like create a ridiculous cartoon character known as the Flaming C (who even had a fan following at Comic Con this year) or investigate the corrupt workings of the Foodies list among his office staffers. But when he gets to the guest interviews, the show can start to feel a little joyless, like a rote performance that is standing in the way of Conan's ability to just mess around and play with his brand of humor. Oftentimes he seems eager to read off his cards and cover all the interview items on his list so that he can just plug what the guest is selling and move on. Unlike Craig Ferguson who famously doesn't do pre-interviews and likes to have long rambling chats with his guests where they rarely even mention the thing they're trying to promote, Conan is very much sticking to the traditional late-night formula when talking to his guests. This isn't necessarily a problem - after all, aside from Ferguson, everyone else relies on those pre-interview topics of conversation - but it is an issue when the host fully makes it look like the chore that it is. 

That is why I was heartened to watch last night's episode of Conan. His first guest was Chris Colfer from Glee, and the interview was fine. But his second guest was comedienne and now actress on House, Charlyne Yi. Yi has been on the show before, and has established herself as a rather awkward, nervous woman. However, Conan has a soft spot for her and always puts her at ease. Their previous interviews have discussed how she doesn't consider herself an actress, so Conan's first question to her was about landing the gig on House and how she was coping with the demands of dramatic acting. What ensued was a lot of self-deprecation bordering on misery, and Yi's description of table reads in which she got frustrated because she's "sad about failing in reading and life." Conan laughed but was also genuinely sympathetic, re-iterating how she was surely doing a great job and insisting that she be happy. While in typical Conan fashion he was quick to say that he himself could never be happy, with Andy Richter chiming in, "There aren't enough meds in the world!", Conan couldn't bear to see Yi huddled on his couch lamenting her acting abilities and just gave her a huge hug. 

Conan is an unpredictable host and it is clear that he is very different today from the goofy NBC oddball who appeared not to have a care in the world. However, moments like last night serve as a reminder that he is very much a nice man who, when he wants, can be warm, funny, and generous. This is the man who famously declared, "Nobody in life gets exactly what they thought they were going to get. But if you work really hard and you're kind, amazing things will happen." As much as he can sometimes seem aloof and uninterested, he is still that man who believes in kindness and hard work. As long as I get to see that man from time to time, I will never stop tuning in.

His Dark Materials: A Trilogy That Demands Your Attention

When I first read Phillip Pullman's, His Dark Materials trilogy, I was either 14 or 15. I thought the first two books were fantastic, but the third book was almost nonsensical. This is a view that other people shared with me as well. However, upon discussing the trilogy with others over the years, especially once I was in college, everyone kept talking about how much it discussed religion and was a treatise on Christianity. I felt increasingly foolish because I had never realized this. Sure there was a Church that was in charge of everything, and in the later books there were warring angels and killer priests, but I just figured these were characters in a fantasy story and had no bearing on reality. Such touching naivete, which I also displayed the first time I was told that the Chronicles of Narnia was a Christian allegory. I mean really, who reads seven books about a talking lion and immediately thing, "Aha, that's Jesus!"

I've wanted to re-read His Dark Materials ever since I knew that I had missed something vitally important, and a decade after I first read the books, I finally sat down to the task. And I was simply blown away. From the very first chapter of The Golden Compass it is firmly established that this is a world that is run by the Church and is very much threatened by heretics and freethinkers. I suppose it was easier to see these references when I was actually looking for them. But aside from the religious commentary, I quickly found myself transported to my delighted teenage self, absolutely reveling in the lush detail of this unusual version of England, that seems so familiar, and yet so not. They have different names for everyday objects, they don't have airplanes but instead use zeppelins, their attitudes seem slightly Victorian, and most strikingly, every human has a daemon. I hadn't fully appreciated what a daemon represented, but essentially it is the person's soul, and instead of being inside them, it is a living, breathing, external part of them that serves as a constant companion from birth until death. Children's daemons can assume the shape of any animal and are always changing, but around puberty, they assume a fixed shape that reveals something about that person's nature. For example, a sailor who loves the sea might have a dolphin daemon, while most servants have a dog daemon because they are loyal and willing to take orders. These distinctly fantastical concepts in the otherwise normal setting of Oxford, England is what really made me love this series when I first read it, and again upon re-reading it.

Let's not forget the heroine, Lyra Belacqua, the willful, wild, and wonderful eleven-year old girl who storms through adventures and slowly matures and realizes the enormity of her task as the trilogy progresses. She is the kind of role model you want in a novel intended for young adults (although if my experience is any indication, this book, like all great fantasy series, has so much more to offer to adults). She questions authority, is fiercely independent, prizes loyalty, gets things done, and is brave beyond measure. In the second installment, The Subtle Knife, we are introduced to Will Parry, a boy from our regular world, who is as admirable as Lyra and has his fate entwined with hers. Armed with a knife that can cut openings into all of the myriad worlds that crowd the universe, they set off to complete their unfathomable destinies, and that brings us to the third book, The Amber Spyglass. And this is where I finally learned about what I had missed all those years ago. But before I launch into a discussion of the book's philosophies and my own, I must say one thing: this is a great fantasy series. Whether or not you care to delve into its underpinnings, it is a series worth reading simply for that pure joy of reading superbly crafted fantasy. So the rest of this post is going to be extremely opinionated and serious, but I cannot emphasize enough how much fun these books are if you just want to read a damn good story.

The books are too complicated to craft a thorough summary. So I will just focus on the pertinent "religious" bits. The ultimate battle that everyone is heading into in this trilogy, is one with God, or as the people in Lyra's world refer to him, the Authority. The forces of the Rebellion against the Authority have discovered that he is not the creator of all things. Rather, he was the first angel that was ever created. Who or what created him is not known, I suppose it could be the Big Bang or something equally out of the scope of this particular discussion. Anyway, when the rest of the angels came into being, the Authority tricked them into believing that he had created them all, and thereby established the Kingdom of Heaven that proceeded to rule over all of the worlds that existed in the universe. Priests were his "agents" doing his bidding, making sure that humans and other creatures were kept in line, and he banished any angels who dared to rebel against him. Even the concept of Heaven and Hell is a lie and the Authority has forced all dead spirits to spend eternity in an Underworld (very similar to Hades) where they are tormented by harpies and never get to see the outside world again. Lyra and Will journey to this Underworld and by cutting an opening into another world, they free these spirits, who just dissolve into the air and joyfully become a part of the Nature all around them.

I suppose the passage that best explains the entire philosophy behind the Rebellion is the following: 

"She said that all the history of human life has been a struggle between wisdom and stupidity. She and the rebel angels, the followers of wisdom, have always tried to open minds; the Authority and his churches have always tried to keep them closed."

This passage strikes me as a searing indictment of religion, at least when practiced by extremists. And while my naive 14-year old self didn't understand it, I certainly do now. In its worst displays, religion can bring about a complacent ignorance, a refusal to question and probe and accept differences. For example, a 2010 Gallup poll revealed that only 40% of Americans believe in evolution. Children who live in states where they have to be taught creationism in Biology class are being forced to participate in a religion that they may not even subscribe to. Worse than that, their careers as future scientists are going to be seriously hampered if they cannot divorce themselves from their creationist teachings and acknowledge years of scientific research. If that is not evidence of the "struggle between wisdom and stupidity," I don't know what is.

Many religious groups vehemently opposed this trilogy and its "heretic" messages. They don't want their children to read it - after all, it involves the death of God at one point. There's a lot more in the books about original sin, Adam and Eve, and so on, but you can discover that for yourself if you choose to read the series. One part that struck a chord with me was when a priest sets out to kill Lyra - he has received "Preemptive Absolution," i.e. he has performed sufficient penance to cover the sin of the murder he will eventually commit. This reminded me somewhat of the hoopla surrounding the Pope's visit to Spain earlier this year when he granted priests the right for one week to grant absolution to any woman who had had an abortion. For one week there were women desperate enough to travel to Spain and be absolved of their supposedly unforgivable sin that got them excommunicated from the Church in the first place. While people may argue that you need religion to establish morality, morality is really what established religion in the first place. Some actions are always right or always wrong (e.g. help others, but don't kill them), and such values became the basic tenets of every religion. However, humans are never satisfied with the basics and added tenets and rules regarding other actions that were not so clear-cut, as well as including loopholes (like absolution) for when they broke the rules. While morality and social mores can be fluid, religion usually is not - after all, the Ten Commandments were carved in stone, that's pretty final. This rigidity is why people still find their rights and freedoms infringed upon in this day and age as they are being subjected to the moral code of a bygone era. The supposed need for religion to impose moral order is an antiquated notion, and its power to actually impede scientific, political, and basic human progress is an ever present concern.

Ultimately the His Dark Materials trilogy has a positive message. Lyra and Will are tasked to build their own version of the Kingdom of Heaven in which they urge all human beings to make the most of their time in the world and embrace their lives, because when they die, they will be expected to tell stories of a well-lived life to the harpies and obtain their freedom from the Underworld. If living a good life is the kind of message that you get from your brand of religion, then good for you. But if being religious means being small-minded, proselytizing, and hurting others because they don't believe the same things that you do, you are not really getting the message. 

Drive: Sleek, Slow, Subtle, Stunning?

Drive, yet another movie starring Ryan Gosling, opened last month, and I didn't know what to make of it. Which is why I haven't blogged about it. But upon the request of a friend, I am officially laying down my opinion, and since I don't know what she thought of the film, this might incite a fierce discussion.

Having previously laid bare my love for Gosling in my Ides of March post, I will refrain from waxing lyrical about him now. However, the fact that he is in this movie, along with Carey Mulligan who I adore from An Education and her one episode of Doctor Who, certainly helps. The two of them have proved themselves to be quality actors and Drive is no different. Gosling's character, a stunt driver by day and a getaway driver by night, is a quiet man who as the saying goes is, "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma." And frankly, that quote from Churchill is probably the best I can do to describe my feelings about Drive.

The driver (he has no name so I'll just call him that) lives next door to Irene (Carey Mulligan) a woman with a young son and a husband in prison. The two of them strike up a tentative flirtation, which is rather touching considering that the driver otherwise seems to lead a very lonely existence. However, their budding romance is quickly cut short with the return of her husband Standard. He's an ex-con, but he's not really a villain and is portrayed surprisingly sympathetically by Oscar Isaac who makes it difficult for you to really root against him. As much as you hope the driver could be with Irene, you get the sense that Standard really does love his wife and son and will make good on his promise to keep them happy. And unfortunately, the driver has this sense too. He gets drawn into a plot to help Standard with one last heist so that he can clear up his debts with some gangsters and go back to living a normal life with his family. As you can already suspect, this does not go according to plan.

The gangsters in the film are portrayed by Albert Brooks and Ron Perlman with menacing swagger, and the driver's boss/friend Shannon (Bryan Cranston) manages to be scheming, caring, cowardly, and brave all in one go. Christina Hendricks has a short but powerful turn as Standard's accomplice, and it's nice to see Joan from Mad Men (or Saffron from Firefly if that is your preferred frame of reference) wearing jeans and getting tangled up in a heist gone wrong. This supporting cast gives the film its depth and although the story unfolds fairly slowly at first, these characters provide plenty of entertainment as you're waiting for the action to really kick in.

What is surprising about the characters in Drive is that you know so little about them. The driver has almost no back story (he doesn't even have a name for pity's sake) and you are very much just thrown into the present state of affairs and expected to go for the ride. And what a spectacular ride it is. The film is a visual masterpiece, playing with color and light that imbue every scene with a palpable mood. It is no wonder that the director, Danish filmmaker Nicolas Winding Refn, won Best Director at Cannes this year. His direction of the film is all the more impressive when you consider the fact that the man doesn't even know how to drive. Handpicked by Gosling to direct the film, he manages to painstakingly balance mind-blowing car chases and getaways with subtle character exposition and plot development. The driving scenes range from dizzyingly paced to languidly unhurried, and there's no doubt that the only time the driver is really in his element is when he is behind the wheel.

Drive is primarily a visual spectacle and an ode to what movies ought to look like. Despite a grimy subject matter and moments of ultra violence, the clarity and gorgeous look of every scene never ceases to amaze. I almost didn't care what the story was, I just wanted to see more driving and the vista of endless roads stretching before me. And really, isn't that the ultimate point of a movie called Drive?

Psych's Homage to The Hangover: Let the Hilarity Ensue

The USA network is a solid cable channel. The go-to place for never-ending Law &
Order reruns, they've also been trying to produce quality original programming for years. Their most successful venture was Monk, a fun procedural starring Tony Shalhoub as a detective with crippling OCD who nonetheless is a keen detective and manages to battle his various phobias while fighting crime in San Francisco. Shalhoub won multiple Emmy's, Screen Actors Guild awards, and a Golden Globe for the role and put USA on the map. Since then, USA has consistently been one of cable's #1 channels, garnering viewers for multiple hits like Burn Notice, Royal Pains, and White Collar. But for my money, the best show they have right now is Psych.

Currently in its sixth season, Psych stars James Roday as Shawn Spencer, the son of a cop who taught him how to be hyper observant and apply his deductive reasoning. Shawn is entirely too lazy to undergo the training and hard work it takes to become a police detective so he does the next best thing - he pretends he's a psychic. Through a series of unfortunate circumstances he finds himself suspected of a crime and to get out of it he pretends to be psychic and helps the police solve the case. By picking up on small clues littered about crime scenes, he puts on credible shows of seeing visions and spirits that tell him where the body is, who the murderer is, or anything else that needs to be investigated. The Santa Barbara Police Department is mostly skeptical, but the man gets results, and as a result he is hired on as a psychic consultant together with his buddy Gus (Dule Hill) who becomes his unwilling business partner in a psychic detective agency.

The premise is similar to the CBS show, The Mentalist (a fact that is briefly mocked in a Psych episode, since they had the idea first) but the execution is starkly different. While The Mentalist aims to be a serious crime drama, Psych is a goofy, hilarious, fun-loving show that places almost as much emphasis on random pop culture references and rapid banter than on the actual crime-solving. James Roday and Dule Hill have an easy camaraderie that makes them a pleasure to watch on screen, and the supporting cast of characters are a fun bunch who are alternately exasperated and impressed by the duo's antics.

This week's episode was remarkable. Shawn, Gus, Inspector Lassiter (who is not a fan of the duo), and Woody (the bizarre coroner who is friendly but creepy at the same time) all wake up in the Psych office with absolutely no recollection of what happened last night after they went to a cop's retirement party. The show is always referencing movies and TV and previously did an homage to Twin Peaks. This time, it's The Hangover's turn. Now I adore that movie and have watched it several times, so I particularly loved every allusion in the scene when everyone's waking up and discovering things that they have no explanation for. They find a video on Shawn's phone showing them making merry with a stranger in a Hawaiian shirt, and next thing you know, that stranger has turned up dead at the police station. Oh and he has 3 bullets in his chest, which is curious because Lassiter's gun looks like it has been fired and is missing 3 bullets. Desperate to piece together last night's events, the four men combine forces and try to figure out, "What the hell happened last night?!"

I won't spoil the rest: you can watch the revelations and hilarity unfold for yourself since the episode is available on Hulu (sorry non-US readers, I'm sure you can find alternate means of watching!) Needless to say, it's a fun spin on the old formula and keeps you guessing and giggling till the end. There's a brief Reservoir Dogs tribute too, which is always welcome (although Coupling will always be my pick for having the best Reservoir Dogs scene in a TV show - who knew getting suited up for a funeral could lend itself to such amusement?)

Psych is a perfect example of a simple procedural detective show done with a twist. It is witty, enjoyable, doesn't take itself too seriously, and delivers a solid episode every week. Every show ends with a short blooper reel, which always leaves me with the impression that these actors really enjoy their jobs. And that makes me enjoy the show even more.

Modern Family: Are the Jokes Getting Old?

The state of TV comedy is always in flux. Sometimes there are a plethora of great comedies and the laughs don't stop coming. Then there's suddenly a dearth of giggles as networks decide they want to make more serious award-baiting dramas and the comedy budget goes way down. Once the dramas flop, it's back to the drawing board, and the audience is faced with an onslaught of dated sitcom tropes and humorless one-liners as series developers furiously throw us every idea they have in order to see what sticks. This is the TV version of throwing the spaghetti on the wall to see if it's done.

When Modern Family began in 2009, it was a revelation. TV comedy was in a slump and Modern Family was like a breath of fresh air. Unlike other comedies that need some time to work out what their doing and start blossoming after a few episodes, or even a season (like the fantastic Parks & Recreation), Modern Family was an instant success, garnering critical acclaim and audience approval from Day One. And with good reason. The show was sharp, witty, warm, and good-natured. It also brought back the time-honored tradition of the sitcom family (or in this case, three whole families) at a time when comedies were very much focused on twenty-somethings and their careers and love lives. Instead Modern Family mined the genuine comedy that can be found when you throw together some hapless parents and precocious children - and it did so with aplomb.

The very first episode of Modern Family is a masterclass in the art of comedy writing. It effortlessly introduced the huge cast of characters by taking full advantage of the mockumentary style, gave every family a funny storyline, and then managed to bring all those characters together for the fantastic reveal that they were actually all related. The fact that this all took place within the time constraint of 22 minutes still seems miraculous to me. Throughout the first and second season, the show maintained its high standard of writing and originality, as well as imbuing the plots with a great deal of warmth and love. A lot of shows get increasingly dramatic in an effort to garner attention and the "dramedy" is a staple of TV today. But Modern Family's insistence on being resolutely funny and tidily resolving any acrimony with a hug and a laugh has made it award-worthy in its own right.

Now we get to the third season, and more specifically, last night's episode. If you haven't seen it, and don't want to be spoiled, read no further - you have been warned. Clare is keen to have a night out by herself since Luke and Alex are off at sleepovers and Haley is on a college visit with Phil to see his alma mater. So she decides that what she needs is to hang out with Cam & Mitchell - they're gay, they know how to have a good time, right? Tired sitcom trope #1. Also, this is the first time I've realized that Clare doesn't seem to have any friends. Seriously, we always just hear her complaining about the other mothers, does she actually have anyone to hang out with? Anyway, they all go out, and of course, Cam & Mitchell just want to have a quiet dinner with some chicken pot-pies and head to bed by 9:30. Clare is appalled because she wanted a splashy gay outing so they head off to a boutique show complete with booze, fashion, and Cam & Mitchell's fabulously-named friend, Longines who is there with a presumed boyfriend Julian (played by Frenchman Gilles Marini).

Can you predict what happens next? Cam & Mitchell are tired and want to go home so Clare ditches them to hang out with the fun Julian. And as we later discover, Julian is not Longines's boyfriend and is very much straight. Sitcom trope #2 - the man you thought was gay turns out to be straight. Trope #3 - you thought he was gay so of course you undressed in front of him while trying out new clothes. Trope #4 - he is offended and declares "I'm not gay, I'm French!" End scene.

I've increasingly noticed this sort of recycled material on this season of Modern Family and it bothers me because the show was always better than that. There were some fun moments in last night's episode, but just as Cam & Mitchell discuss how they are figuratively (and then literally) in a rut, it feels like the show is getting a bit too complacent with its characters. The hilarious Sophia Vergara is mostly just around to be mocked for her accent or to wear something flashy, Jay continues to resist and then submit to giving fatherly advice to Manny, Cam & Mitchell will bicker throughout the episode and then realize that they like their lives in the end, Phil will be an overgrown man-child and then bust out something heartfelt and grown-up to redeem himself.

These formulas are not a bad thing - after all, people are who they are, and they will behave in certain ways because that's how real life works. But a sitcom is not real life - it's supposed to be a little more ridiculous, more absurd, more vibrant. And your idea of a hilarious situation should not be "oh no, the gay guy's actually straight!" because we've seen that so many times before. It's a common problem with American sitcoms - when you have to do 20-plus shows every year, ideas start to stagnate, and relying on quick and easy jokes and scenarios is the only way you can get the show out on time. Luckily the show's writers are a talented and award-winning group - I can only hope that they will soon get out of their rut and bring back the laughs.

Homeland: The Latest Addition to the Pantheon of Great Cable Drama

HBO has always had a monopoly on gripping cable dramas that transport viewers from week to week and make network TV seem childish in comparison. However, over the years various other cable channels have started to get their foot in the door and this rivalry has resulted in a feast of well-scripted shows for the TV audience. AMC has been decimating the competition at every awards ceremony with their superb Mad Men, Showtime's Dexter has been long-revered and is going strong in its sixth season, and even Starz got into the act with the critically loved but short-running Party Down. Now the cable excellence continues with Showtime's latest entry: Homeland.

The show's two protagonists are Carrie Mathison and Nicholas Brody. Brody is a US Marine Sergeant, missing in Iraq since 2003 who is rescued after spending 8 years as a prisoner of war. Mathison is a mulish CIA officer, who is acting on a scrap of intelligence that suggests that Brody has been turned by Al-Qaeda and will be helping to further a terrorist plot on American soil. As you can imagine, these are two highly complex characters and you simply cannot figure out who to root for. The ultimate goal of the series will be to unravel which side is right - will Mathison's suspicions be confirmed, or is Brody a genuine war hero?

The series is slated for 12 episodes and if you think this means that each episode will be ploddingly paced, giving nothing away until the penultimate episode when everything starts to unravel, think again. There is a wealth of story here, none of it dull. The show is based on an Israeli series and has been developed by writers who worked on 24. Unlike 24, the characters on Homeland are free to express themselves rather more coarsely and nakedly (yes there's nudity, what do you expect from cable?) than the "Damn it" that was 24's go-to expletive. Like 24 however, Homeland is filled with urgency, plot twists, and mind games.  Brody has been tortured, he has recurrent flashbacks, he has clearly had dealings with the head of Al-Qaeda, he seems to be signalling some sort of code when he's on camera, but maybe that just a nervous tic, and so on. Every time you think he's a good guy, there's a flashback that makes you question it. On the other hand is Mathison. She is tenacious, rather unlikeable, beset by personal and psychological problems, and filled with an absolute certainty when everyone else is racked by doubt. Yet she has people who are willing to break the law for her, a mentor who supports her even when she lets him down, and as the episodes progress, her emotions escape her hard shell once in a while.

Aside from the two leads, the cast is rounded out with captivating performances like that of Morena Baccarin who plays Brody's wife. As a Firefly groupie, it is just a joy for me to see Morena back on my TV set, but even if you don't know who she is, you will now. She effortlessly portrays this woman who is struggling with the return of her presumed-dead husband, the secrets of what she did during those past 8 years, and trying to keep the peace with journalists at her front door and a rebellious teenage daughter who seems bent on undermining her. In the CIA, Mandy Patinkin (that's Inigo Montoya to you Princess Bride fans) plays the wise and venerable Saul, Carrie's mentor and her only confidant in the agency, while David Marciano is the surveillance agent who helps Carrie keep track of all of Brody's movements.

Homeland is a welcome addition to Sunday night TV and since it airs right after Dexter, it will keep viewers riveted on Showtime for a solid 2 hours of quality entertainment. I have no idea how the series will end, and who I want to be right. Both Mathison and Brody are compelling figures and I will be keen to see how the writers bring about the ultimate resolution of this series. If you want to catch up on the 3 episodes that have aired so far, Showtime will be airing a Homeland catch-up on Saturday starting at 9 pm. Let me know what you think - there's plenty of discussion to be had before the series concludes. 

Parenthood: A Realistic Look at the Workings of "Happy" Families

NBC doesn't have a lot going for it right now. The Thursday night comedy line-up is superb (as partially discussed here) but doesn't draw a lot of viewers and none of their dramas have really taken off. Their re-tooling of the British series Prime Suspect has not been a ratings juggernaut by any stretch of the imagination, and increasingly all their prime-time slots are being taken up by reality shows stretched to 2 hours to cover that yawning expanse of TV real estate. The one exception to this drama drought is Parenthood.

Based on the 1989 Steve Martin movie of the same name (which you should seek out because it is quite wonderful in its own right), the show revolves around the very large and very diverse Braverman family. The clan is headed by Zeke and Camille Braverman, a free-spirited couple that have raised their family with a great deal of love and make sure they gather everyone together for Sunday dinner every week. They have four children: Adam who has two kids (now three as of the last episode) with his wife Kristina; Sarah who has two kids from her disaster of a marriage with an alcoholic musician - at the beginning of the series she is divorced and has moved in with her parents as she figures out her financial situation; Crosby who finds out he fathered a now 5-year old child with an old flame and is trying to get his free-wheeling lifestyle into gear to cope with the responsibility; and Julia who, with her husband Joel, dotes on their only daughter. This is a huge cast of characters, each with their own strengths and foibles, and that is the kind of variety you need to make an hour-long drama week after week without losing the audience's interest.

The cast is filled with extremely talented people who seem to be completely in tune with their characters. The kids on the show are particularly notable because these are not your typical TV kids. They do not simply hang around in the background and get dragged out for a get-together or birthday scene. These kids have their own story lines, their own troubles and successes. There's Max who has been diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome or Amber who alternates between careless wild child and penitent daughter. Drew and Haddie are the "good kids" who nonetheless struggle to shrug off the awkwardness of adolescence and make their mark in the midst of this rather hectic family.

Part of the show's realism comes from the fact that the writers allow for a great deal of improvisation. Scenes are set up but the dialogue is more loosely scripted, allowing the actors to speak naturally and fill in pauses with "ums" and "ahs" like regular folk. They make up their lines sometimes and struggle to communicate, all which is very much in keeping with real life and the actual dynamics between husband and wife, grandparent and grandson, brother and sister. This looseness makes the show more alive, more vibrant, and as a result, you genuinely enjoy tuning in every Tuesday night to see what fresh troubles have befallen the Bravermans.

Some story lines are hugely dramatic and over-the-top, because that is the point of TV. But others are small yet significant, minor victories and minor failures that add up to a more complete picture of each person and each family. Tonight's episode featured one such moment: Joel (played to stoic and warm perfection by Sam Jaeger) can no longer listen to his father-in-law's incessant hectoring of his daughters, and firmly declares that they are grown women who should be allowed to make their own decisions. He does not raise his voice and this does not turn into a bitter argument that will rankle for episodes to come. He simply declares his views with an air of finality that closes the subject, and after a short pause, things go back to normal. The reason he is able to do this, however, is that Joel never speaks. He has long conversations with his wife Julia (the marvelous Erika Christensen) and adores his daughter Sydney, but when it comes to family gatherings, it is rare to see Joel do much more than ask someone to pass the salt. Therefore, these rare moments when he speaks sharply and can no longer keep his opinions to himself are surprisingly effective and a great deal of fun for the viewer. You can't help but cheer.

This is by no means a perfect show. It has its ups and downs like any other. But it is an incisive portrait of what it takes to make a large family love each other despite everything. They are into the third season and so much has happened that you would marvel that any of these people even speak to each other now. But they do. Because ultimately they know that all of their mistakes and squabbles can be forgiven and when they really need some help, their family will back them up 100 percent. So the next time you're on the lookout for some good old-fashioned family drama that is silly, poignant, warm, funny, heartbreaking, shocking, and so on, give Parenthood a try. You might find yourself wishing you could join in the big family dinner at the end. 

The Butterfly Conservatory: A Tropical Paradise For The Long Winter Months

Firstly, I apologize to the non-New Yorkers reading this blog. This is going to be a very New York post. But if you're planning a trip here, you'll get an idea of at least one thing to see, and if you're not planning a trip here, maybe now you will.

Yesterday, my friends and I headed over to the American Museum of Natural History to see the Butterfly Conservatory that began it's annual run on October 8th. The conservatory is a chance to see over 500 tropical butterflies fluttering about and being beautiful when outside the weather is cold and blustery. Unlike most of the museum's exhibits that are composed of dead animals, replicas, or ancient fossils, these butterflies are very much alive and swoop about unconcernedly whilst you desperately try to snap an un-blurry picture.

I have visited the museum twice previously but both times were in the summer when the Conservatory was closed. As a result, I have spent years wanting to see the butterflies but never quite remembering to do so at the right time. Having finally visited, I feel like this might become an annual pilgrimage. It's hard to describe what exactly makes this exhibit so delightful. Once you step into the vivarium you sense that you have left New York City behind. It is a relatively small space, but it is filled with trees and flowers and is swelteringly humid. Everyone's coats came off within 10 seconds of being in that environment, and after about 5 minutes, your face is rather shiny - really, it's like getting a quick facial and I'm sure you sweat out some calories before your visit is done. But this is the environment the butterflies thrive in and the air is full of them. Some are perched on the ceiling and once in a while one of the museum attendants grabs a feather on a stick and gently brushes the butterflies off so that they remember to drink some juice or nectar. Others are greedily slurping at flowers or orange slices, while others hang upside down from leaves and have a quick nap.

There is a riot of color and movement and somehow it never gets boring. The attendants are lovely people and will grab an orange slice in order to lure a butterfly on and then deliver a mini-lecture on the habits of that particular butterfly. There was a Malachite butterfly which likes to sunbathe so will spread open its wings when you bring it closer to a heat lamp but will fold up its wings to retain the heat as you move it to a darker place. A gorgeous Iridescent Morpho butterfly with startling blue patches on its wings flew around restlessly - apparently it flies quickly to avoid being eaten in the wild, and when it closes up its wings, the underside is colored brown and blends in quickly with the surroundings. On the other hand, species like the arresting black-and-white Paper Kite butterflies fly languidly (if at all) and are in no hurry because they are toxic when eaten and are left well alone by predators. Somehow it is immensely enjoyable to learn these facts when you are actually surrounded by these beautiful creatures and can appreciate their evolutionary genius.

Of course the greatest treat of all is getting a butterfly to actually land on you. There were several young children intent on doing just that and some managed to keep their hands still enough to eventually entice a curious butterfly. I tried multiple times and despaired of ever touching one, but finally managed to get one to land on my hand. This is an amusement that never gets old, and deep inside, I think we still carry ancestral genes that make us yearn to commune with Nature in some little way.

The Butterfly Conservatory is a perfect example of an educational experience that is by no means dull. Adults and children alike were captivated by these delicate fluttering animals and it was hard to leave the exhibit. Of course the museum is chock-full of other wonderful exhibits and one can easily spend a few days inside roaming through the hall of dinosaurs, staring up into space, and observing the depths of the ocean. But as winter approaches and life seems more barren, head over to the Butterfly Conservatory and remind yourself that spring is never far behind. 

The Ides of March: Never Have the Words "Political Thriller" Been Less Dull

The Ides of March is George Clooney's latest addition to his writing/directing canon, and for my money, this is the best. Admittedly I am a Ryan Gosling and (to a lesser extent) Clooney fangirl, but even without the dreamy actors, this is a riveting story of political idealism gone horribly wrong.

Clooney plays Governor Mike Morris, an idealistic left of the leftest Democrat who is gearing up for the Democratic primary in Ohio. The other Democratic contender is a Bible-loving Southerner, i.e. what would be a Republican in days of yore but can now count as a Democrat, and the two camps are battling to win this primary and gain a lead in the polls. Morris's campaign is run by his senior political consultant Paul (Phillip Seymour Hoffman), and the media whiz Steven (Ryan Gosling), who is a kind of boy wonder that knows how best to pull the strings to make a campaign succeed. However, Steven is only 30 years old, not yet corrupted and jaded by Washington politics, and he fervently believes in Mike Morris and that he is going to change the world. For him, winning the primary, and eventually the general election, is not a matter of doing a good job - it's a matter of making America a better place to live.

It's a little hard to imagine a politician like this even making it to the primaries in our current political climate (or even getting elected for that matter) because his ideas are rather radical. He also refuses to be religious, which would ordinarily kill his chances then and there. But you're willing to go along with it: clearly this is Clooney's ideal politician, and since this is a movie, you can suspend reality and pretend that this great man is a viable candidate. My initial impression was that this was going to a very dull treatise on politics and how we need high-minded men like Gov. Mike Morris in office. But boy was I wrong. As I mentioned in the title of this post, this is a political thriller. And one by one, those high-minded ideals come crashing down.

It's impossible to discuss this film without spoiling key plot points. So instead I will just discuss the various components that make this movie so superb. First, the actors. Ryan Gosling has been saturating the theaters with his work this year but unlike that horrible Year of Jude Law in 2004, I don't get tired of him. Yes, he's easy on the eyes, and the Feminist Ryan Gosling meme doesn't hurt, but forget that. The man can act. In this film, his character undergoes a complete 180 (and possible 360 depending on how you interpret the ending) and you're with him every step of the way. Clooney makes you love the Governor and then despise him in quick succession. Evan Rachel Wood effortlessly goes from sexy and endearing to fragile and desperate. And the stalwart Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti play rival political consultants with their usual flair.

Next, the editing. This film has been put together expertly and there is not a single superfluous scene. Every detail is crisp and gorgeous, from the first shot to the last, and of course credit must be given to Clooney. His directing often favors long close-ups that allow the actors to showcase their craft, and here, everyone is quick to put their best foot forward. The writing is also excellent. The dialogue is crackling, never superfluous, and extremely natural, all of which makes sense considering that the story is based on a play. And I would be incredibly remiss if I didn't mention the score. No thriller can succeed without a good score (just ask Hitchcock) and the score for The Ides of March does not disappoint. An anxiety-provoking, pulse-pounding, smoky, desperate thrill ride that knows just when to go silent, it helps to build tension and keep you on the edge of your seat for a scene in which you are just staring at a black van for 20 seconds, with no idea of what's being discussed by the men inside. The film's composer is Alexandre Desplat (I should have realized right away, the man can create the right atmosphere for a film in any genre), and I'm willing to bet he will chalk up more nominations for himself when awards season rolls around.

Finally, the ending. I had a debate with my friend about whether a person's interpretation of what was going to follow the ending of the film would tell you something about their politics or personality. I won't divulge my thoughts on the subject here, but suffice to say, this is a film that leads to further discussion, a hallmark of a great movie. This is a story that is told effectively and ends perfectly, in a way that makes the film feel complete but still leaves you wanting more. Watch it - you'll be surprised at how thrilling the mechanics of a political campaign can be.  

Community: The Strangest (Yet Still Brilliant) Sitcom on Television

NBC's Thursday night TV comedy block has been around for a while. From the 80s on, it has featured great sitcoms like Cheers, The Cosby Show, Friends, Frasier, Will & Grace, Seinfeld, etc. Of course, this block has also featured some heinous shows, but such is the world of TV sitcoms: you win some, you lose some. However, over the past few years, this comedy line-up has become a sophisticated critical darling (read: still low ratings, but damn good writing). Dutifully kicking off Thursday night's Must-See TV at 8 pm is Community, arguably the weirdest and most perplexingly hilarious 22 minutes of television you will encounter all week.

The show is currently in its third season, and while I thought the first two episodes were just OK, last night's episode was yet another revelation in a show that has long since ceased to surprise me with its ability to concoct some of the most brilliant episodes of TV in the history of the medium (yes, I realize I am being extremely hyperbolic, but frankly, I don't care). The show revolves around a group of students at a community college, including a former high school football star, a former drug-addicted over-achiever, a disgraced lawyer who got his degree in Colombia, not from Columbia, a religious single mother, a pop culture lover with Asperger's, and a ranting millionaire. These highly different individuals get together to form a study group for their Spanish class, and despite all their hang-ups and assorted issues, they become an incredibly tight-knit group of friends. The show is not some happy treatise on friendship. These people get into ridiculous fights, form alliances and enmities with regular abandon and are constantly at each other's throats. But ultimately they would rather annoy each other than anyone else and are the most cliquey bunch of lunatics you're likely to find on TV.

But now let's get to the good stuff. The actual joy of this show lies in the writing. Once the characters and settings were established, the writers just went nuts. They have created some of the most elaborate storylines I have ever seen on a TV show and are not afraid to push the envelope with their insane ideas. Sometimes these ideas fall flat - not everyone can be a genius all of the time. Sometime an episode is extremely polarizing, where half the fans love it and think it's a work of art, and the other half think it's sickening. And then sometimes, you get the episodes where everyone can just agree that the show is a masterpiece. Examples include the classic "Modern Warfare," where the entire school became a war zone due to a paintball competition turned deadly. There was the  the fantastic Halloween episode "Epidemiology" where students started turning into zombies with ABBA playing in the background. "Paradigms of Human Memory" was a delightful send-up of the sitcom tradition of clip shows, but all the clips of the characters's past exploits were brand new.

This brings me to last night's episode, "Remedial Chaos Theory." The show was centered around a predictably bizarre concept. In an attempt to decide who has to go downstairs to pick up a pizza delivery, Jeff rolls a die, with the number determining which character has to go down. By doing so, he creates six different timelines (ultimately seven, but we won't get into that), and we get to see what happens in each timeline. At first, the timelines don't seem particularly adventurous. Then they start building on each other, explaining comments that made no sense in the past timeline, developing characters's story arcs, and dealing with some kindling romances. And then in traditional Community fashion, the mayhem just escalates. By far the greatest timeline in this show comes when Troy has to get the pizza. By the time he returns, the apartment is on fire and Pierce has been shot in the leg. If that sentence did not convince you to watch this show, or at least just watch this episode, then I don't know what to say to you.

Community is the closest approximation I've seen to the brilliant writing on Coupling, the British sitcom I briefly discussed in my blog post on Steven Moffat. Its irreverent take on sitcom and movie tropes and joyful exuberance make it a great start to the Thursday comedy line-up, and it is a crime that more people are not watching this spectacular show. 

The Guild: A Celebration of Gamers, Comics, and Nerd Culture

I had never watched a web series until a friend told me about The Guild. This is a series about a group of gamers who are devoted to "The Game" (a MMORPG with an ardent following, similar to World of Warcraft and its ilk). Initially, it didn't strike me as something I would be interested in, as I wasn't a part of that fervent gamer culture. But I thought I should give it a shot at least, and I am so glad I did.

First off, if you have no experience with online gaming or MMORPGs (that's Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game for those of you who are truly lost in this discussion) do not fret. Yes, there are multiple gaming references and asides that mean something hilarious to avid gamers but just completely passed me by. But I quickly became drawn to this group of oddball gamers and became invested in their stories. The cast is led by Felicia Day, who I first saw in Joss Whedon's incredible Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog, and she does not disappoint. A gamer in a real life, this show was a passion project for her and she has quickly become one of the most influential people in the world of web series and entertainment. She plays Codex, a perpetually frazzled woman whose life revolves around The Game and her guild. Despite talking and playing with these people for hours on end every day, none of the guild members have actually met, and the first series starts with an endless round of webcam-style talking heads as you get to know the various characters that make up the Guild. They are too varied and complex to describe: suffice to say, these are some ridiculous characters, each with their own quirks and strengths, who continue to amaze me as the series progresses. Eventually, they find themselves in need of an actual real-life meeting, and as these disparate people come together, united solely by their love of The Game, you know that you are watching a hit show. In later seasons, the show picked up MSN as a sponsor, so you can watch every single episode on their Bing website. This is not a huge time commitment as the average length of an episode is 5 minutes, so you can easily finish the first season in an hour.

The show is wrapping up its 5th season and has evolved a great deal from its humble beginnings. Everything looks more "professional" and "shiny" (I lack the cinematographical know-how required to basically explain that they have better cameras and lighting now), the episodes last longer, there are different settings, and because of the series's growing popularity, there has been a particular abundance of guest stars that will thrill anyone well-versed in nerd culture. What hasn't changed though is the core belief at the center of the show, that people can be brought together by their love of something, whether it's The Game, comic books, or Neil Gaiman. In this way, it is a true depiction of the power of nerd culture and why we have huge events like Comic-Con to celebrate nerds and the things they love. Being a nerd is no longer a personality trait to be shunned - it is something to embrace, and The Guild expertly shows us how people can grow and change their lives, based solely on the fact that they made friends while playing a game. 

Happy National Coming Out Day!

October 11th marks National Coming Out Day, a day to celebrate coming out and to encourage more awareness and discussion of LGBT rights and issues. Whether you're gay, straight, bi, transgender, or questioning, this is an important day to let our LGBT friends and relatives know that they are not alone.

Stephen Fry (British author, comedian, activist, polymath Renaissance man who also happens to be gay) tweeted a link to this article on the Huffington Post. Written by Elton John and Johann Hari, it is a plea for people to fight back against the horrific injustice and appalling treatment that the LGBT community has to face throughout the world. It is a sobering read, detailing startling atrocities conducted against LGBT people in Uganda and Ghana, and the narrow-minded prejudice of American political candidates who continue to endorse homophobia without fear of recrimination.

Despite these horrors, there is also hope. The article very interestingly puts forward the case that you can't generalize who is homophobic. People might say poor countries disdain their LGBT citizens, but Nepal has introduced legislation to protect gay rights. Others argue that religious countries could never support homosexuals, but Argentina, despite being a largely Catholic country, has legalized gay marriage. We are often inundated with stories of the desperate plight of the LGBT community, who face bullying, social ostracism, imprisonment, and murder. But these examples from Nepal and Argentina illustrate that people can grow and realize that this is no way to treat other human beings. In fact, as Elton John mentions in the article, when he was born in England, it was a crime to be gay, but now he is happily married to his partner and can raise his son with relative acceptance.

The quote that most touched my heart was from Archbishop Desmond Tutu: "If God, as they say, is homophobic, I wouldn't worship that God." With such champions for LGBT rights in our corner, it behooves us to take a stand against discrimination and homophobia. This is where Kaleidoscope come in. This organization has been set up in London and has the single purpose of supporting gay people anywhere in the globe, in any way that they need. Read the Huffington Post article or go to Kaleidoscope's website to get more details, but essentially they aim to use the full force of the international community to fight back against incidents of homophobia and inequality. If you have been searching for some way to help the LGBT community, supporting Kaleidoscope is a wonderful way to have an impact not just in your own community but internationally. Maybe if enough people declare themselves as proud allies of the LGBT movement, we will build enough momentum to fight this backward thinking and prejudice that has no place in our world today.

On a personal note, National Coming Out Day always reminds me of the e-mail thread that used to be posted on the Wellesley College Community group every October 11th: "I support my queer Wellesley siblings because..." The thread would be filled with messages of support and acceptance, posted by students and faculty alike. I never posted on this thread because I never felt like I had anything adequate to say to express my admiration and love for my LGBT friends. I still don't feel I can adequately express myself, so I will rely on the oft-used but always true sentiment that best summarizes why NCOD and LGBT rights are so important: Love is love is love.

All Creatures Great and Small: A Vet's Loving Ode to his Patients

James Herriot's All Creatures Great and Small is an unlikely autobiography. After all, what could possibly be interesting about reading about the exploits of a Yorkshire vet in the 1930s? I didn't approach the task with much expectation but was pleasantly surprised to find a vibrant account of a man cheerfully going through the motions of a daily life that is both demanding and hugely rewarding.

The book begins with Herriot sprawled on the cold floor of a byre in the midst of a difficult calving. As he contemplates how he ended up in this position, you are immediately assured this is going to be both a humorous and warm story about a life well lived. Flashback to Herriot seeking a job. As a newly-minted vet filled with ambition but a depressing employment outlook, he is quick to seize the opportunity of working in the veterinary practice of Dr. Siegfried Farnon, a quirky character who is nonetheless well-established among his farmer clientele scattered about the wild and beautiful landscape of the Yorkshire Dales. Herriot is initially filled with trepidation - he has all the requisite knowledge for the job, but has limited practical experience. The first time he has to field a phone call from a farmer, he is perplexed. The Yorkshireman has his own vocabulary and Herriot cannot make head or tail of what kind of animal the man is referring to, let alone what's wrong with it. But he is a fast learner and starts to find himself in his element.

Then follows a series of vignettes about the larger-than-life characters he meets on his rounds, the initially doubtful farmers who are certain they know more than the young vet (and are sometimes right), and their gradual acceptance of this man who will do anything for his four-legged patients and passionately loves his profession. He has a great rapport with his boss, Dr. Farnon, who is somewhat scatterbrained but terribly amusing, and his boss's brother, Tristan, who is an unwilling veterinary student, constantly invoking his brother's displeasure. Of course the main focus of the book is on the animals that rely on Herriot's expertise. I didn't realise how close a cow's reproductive anatomy was to a human's, but on reading his various accounts of difficult calvings, I was reminded of my OB-Gyn rotation and could almost picture myself birthing a calf with perfect ease. Herriot complains about being dragged out of his bed at all hours of the night to attend to these animals, but ultimately he enjoys every minute and derives immense satisfaction from a job well done.

Herriot wrote several books about his experiences that follow his long career in this practice. I've ordered the remaining installments from the library and expect to enjoy each one just as much as the first. These books are joyful, funny, and simply a wonderful read, so if you're looking for something to lift your spirits and entertain you, look no further. 

Steven Moffat: Writer Extraordinaire

On October 1st, the season finale of Doctor Who aired. For those not in the know (shame on you) Doctor Who is a long-running science fiction show produced by the BBC centered on the character of a Time Lord called the Doctor. He travels through time and and the universe with his human companions, tries to right various wrongs, and continually saves various races of the universe from annihilation. Check it out, it's a lot better than I can describe.

The head writer on the show right now is Steven Moffat, a man who can only be described as a genius. I don't want to spoil last week's finale, so all I'll say is that it was a piece of TV craftsmanship that astounded me. In previous seasons, the finales have always been superb, but this one was particularly brilliant. It relied on every single one of the 12 episodes preceding it, bringing in characters, plot elements, and story arcs that spanned both the season and the series as a whole. Every twist and turn gave me a thrill and as the conundrum raised in the first episode of the season was effectively resolved with Doctor Who's traditional combination of dramatic and comedic flair, I couldn't bear to think that I would now have to wait several months before I saw the Doctor again.

Even before becoming the head writer, Moffat consistently wrote the most complex, dark, and inventive episodes of the show. Here is the man responsible for the Weeping Angels, easily my pick for the most terrifying monsters the show has introduced. They are stone statues that move when they're not being watched. The only way to stop them from attacking you is to keep looking at them, and you can't even blink. It's a terrifying prospect and the kind of idea that only a writer of Moffat's calibre could successfully execute. 

However, the reason I am particularly awed by Moffat's writing ability is because this is also the man who created and wrote every episode of the brilliant sitcom Coupling. Often touted as the British version of Friends, it is much raunchier, startlingly inventive, and always hilarious. The show played with time and story in a myriad of ways and had a host of characters that never stopped being funny. 

Most recently, Moffat along with co-creator Mark Gatiss introduced the world to the astounding Sherlock, a modern-day retelling of the classic Sherlock Holmes tale. The show is extremely funny, energetic, and dark, a combination that is Moffat's particular specialty. The classic "three-pipe problem" in the old Sherlock stories has now been transformed to a "three-patch problem" as Sherlock slaps on nicotine patches in our currently tobacco-eschewing world. John Watson is a veteran of the war in Afghanistan and while still somewhat slow on the uptake is a wonderful everyman in contrast to Sherlock's acerbic genius. 

My only quibble with Moffat is that he writes for these British series that never have enough episodes to last me through the year. Doctor Who only had 13 episodes, each season of Coupling ranged from 6-8, and Sherlock is a mere 3 episodes, with 3 more on the way later this year. Of course, the sparse nature of British TV is what makes it particularly well-crafted. Instead of American TV writers churning out an episode a week for nine months, British writers can pore over each episode, finely tuning it so that it achieves perfection every single week. If you are tired of your current television fare and looking for something new, look no further than Steven Moffat, a man who can write for any taste, and is raising the standard of television writing to an unprecedented level.