What Dave Letterman Means To Me

Yes, I have been a little Letterman obsessed lately. Yes. I did change my profile picture to Letterman. Let me explain why.

When Johnny Carson passed away, I wrote Dave a letter.  I searched the hard drive of my ancient desk top and could not find it. It was a great letter.  I don’t think I can convey my feelings as eloquently now as I did then, but I will try. (I am trying to rush this post prior to the last show tonight.)

I loved Johnny Carson.  I was a fan at a young age.  He was a master.  His greatness was based on two things:  his quick wit and his ability to listen.  Those are the two most important attributes for a great talk show host.  (Prior to the viral video generation anyway.)  My dream was to attend a taping of The Tonight Show to see Johnny live. Unfortunately, I didn’t make it to California until the year after he retired. I did make it to the show, but it was not the same, for me.  It was fun, but Jay Leno was not Johnny Carson. Jay may have a quick wit, but he is not a good listener.  During Jay's interviews, he always found a way to bring it back to him.  I am not going to go on about Jay here, my point is, his skills as an interviewer were lacking.

I also loved Dave Letterman.  I am one of the few that watched, and enjoyed, his morning show.   That was soon cancelled.  Probably the best thing to happen to Dave.  After that, he was given Late Night with David Letterman.  A show created for him.  He was to follow the great Carson. What a great double line up.

Dave had a quick wit and he was a good listener.  Sometimes it didn’t seem like he was listening, but he was.  When he showed disdain, he was listening and observing.  Dave brought something to Late Night that Johnny didn’t (he didn’t need to), he involved the audience and reached out.  He did bits with store owners, people on the street and people in their homes. He also added “antics.”  He donned a suit with Alka Seltzer and jumped in a giant glass, he threw items off the rooftop, and more.  He was doing the “repeat after me” bit way before Ellen. He also broke the fourth wall and engaged his staff during the show. (Johnny did that a little bit with Fred, but not stagehands and cue card guys, etc.)

I connected with Dave. I know he wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea. Sometimes, I believe some of those people didn't "get" him or understand him. That may be true, but to some, he just was not funny. That is okay.   I think a big reason I connect to Dave is that he reminds me of my Dad. He always has.  Most people did not know how funny my Dad was because he always had a serious, professional look about him.  My dad was funny.  He could’ve been on SNL or a host of his own talk show.  He was not overtly funny, just like Dave is not overtly funny.  His humor was subtle and smart. It is not just their humor they have in common, it is their practical, non-judgmental way of looking at life they share.  It is hard to explain unless you "witness" it yourself.

Dave was also at his best when he was not trying to be funny.  When he interviewed Tom Brokaw, or a former President or a medal of honor recipient, he had questions about real life issues and took them seriously.  It has been well documented that his first show after his heart surgery and the first show after 911 were very touching and heartfelt. I whole heartedly agree. I think people forget about that side of Dave sometimes.  I see that side of  Dave almost every night.  If you listen to the guest and listen to the questions Dave asks, that introspective side is there every night.

Dave also had low tolerance for tom foolery. When Joaquin Phoenix decided to pull his stunt on the show, Dave was not having it. I truly think the best off the cuff, one liner in HISTORY was when Dave said, “Joaquin, I am sorry you couldn’t be here tonight.”  GENIUS!

I think it speaks volumes that Johnny wrote monologue jokes for Dave and chose Dave’s show as the only post Tonight Show appearance he did.   I think it also speaks volumes that so many celebrities have paid tribute to Dave in the last couple of months.  Many were brought to tears or struggled to hold back the tears. (Worth checking out: Ray Romano, Norm MacDonald, Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon and more)  He touched many lives.   I will miss him.  This is sappy but it is like saying goodbye to my dad again.  (I know, that sounds over the top but I think of my Dad every time I watch Dave.)

I often think of another person when I watch Dave, my friend Mary.  Mary and I met in college. We bounded over a TV guide.  We both loved Johnny and Letterman.  (And I might add Mike Douglas, but will just stick to the late night guys right now.)  Mary watched the morning show too.  The first time I saw the Letterman show in person was with Mary. It was great.  (Fun fact: I saw The Tonight Show with Mary too.)  I have a feeling if we were born 10 years later, we would not be working at Aetna together, instead, we would be writing or hosting a talk show.  (I say that because I don’t’ even think we imagined we could try to have such a job when we left college.  I wish we did.)

My kids never had the pleasure of watching Johnny in his prime (they can watch clips) but I am glad they were able to watch Dave.  I am also grateful I had the chance to see Dave’s show live, especially the week before he retired.  It was a treat.

So, back to my letter to Dave.  The Letterman show after Johnny’s passing was another great episode.  If you haven’t seen it, try to find it.  It was an hour about how great Johnny was and what he meant to people.  The gist of my letter to Dave was to share what Dave meant to me and that he himself was just as legendary as Johnny. 

I am looking forward to Dave’s last show tonight. I wish it wasn't his last show, but after 33 years, he deserves to retire.  I know I will shed a tear, or two.

My Oscar Blahhhhg

The 2015 Oscars are a month away. It has been a great year for performances, better than most years.  As soon as nominations are announced, the talk of “snubs” begins.  Although, there are always people/movies that I think deserve nods yet they don’t receive, I don’t think “snub” is the correct word.  To me, a snub implies malicious intent.  In NO WAY do I think there is malicious intent involved in Jennifer Aniston , Ava DuVernay, Angelina Jolie or David Oyelowo not receiving nominations. In the history of the Oscars, I bet you can count on one hand when the term “snub” could be used, and even then I don’t malicious intent was involved. I do think the politics of Hollywood may be involved.  I also do not think race is involved (this year).  You will see why below. I believe we should have more diverse movies to choose from for the nominations. However, I do not think we should have diverse nominations for the sake of it.  I especially do not believe Al Sharpton needed to call an emergency meeting over the lack of diversity in the Oscar nominations. Seriously.  Below I will focus on the “snubs” commonly mentioned post nominations along with my personal thoughts on who should win and others I feel were left out.

Let’s take a look at the Best Actor Category.  Who would you take out to put in Mr. Oyelowo in?  I can’t think of one person I would remove. They were all fantastic performances.  In fact, even if we added an extra spot to nominate 6, I am not sure Mr. Oyelowo would make it. I think my vote would be for Jake Gyllenhaal to be in that category. His performance in Nightcrawler was superb.  If we had 7 spots, I would include Mr. Oyelowo.  So, with 7, I think if you could create a mathematic point system for acting---all 7 actors would be separated by .01-1.5 points between them. This is a tight year for Best Actor. Out of the 7, in my opinion the statue belongs to Eddie Redmayne or Michael Keaton.  However, I think they ALL deserve it.   It is not that I didn’t think Oyelow, Carrell, Cooper, Cumberbatch and Gyllenhaal didn’t give fantastic performances, they did. However, I think the complexity of Redmayne and Keaton’s characters stand out more.  I will also state, that during portions of Selma, I felt as if Oyelowo was trying too hard to imitate Martin Luther King Jr. if that makes sense.

Let’s move on to Best Actress. Who would you take out to offer Ms. Aniston a spot?  This is a more difficult category for me to discuss because I have yet to see Julianne Moore’s performance in Still Alice or Marion Coutillard’s in Two Days, One Night. They also seem to be the front runners for the win.  I also have not seen Ms. Aniston’s performance.  I have seen all of the others.  They were all very good. Just based on what I have seen, I would present it to Reese Witherspoon or Felicity Jones.  I hope I love Ms. Aniston’s performance once I view Cake.  However, even though I would so root for her to win an Oscar for all of the reasons not related to her performance, whom would I kick out of the category? I don’t know.

As for Best Supporting Actress, I do have two people I could replace for others (and no one is talking about this category).  Look, Meryl Streep was flawless as the witch in Into the Woods, but I think she was nominated based on the fact that she is Meryl Streep. If Tracy Ullman portrayed the witch and gave the same caliber performance, I don’t think she would have been nominated.  Who would I replace her with?  Carmen Ejogo from Selma.  Her performance as Corretta Scott King, was real, honest and moving.  Surprisingly, no one is discussing her omission from award season.  I think she gave the best performance in the movie.  Now, the second person I would take out of this category, (and believe me, I know, she is the front runner) is Patricia Arquette.  I am sorry, yes she has moving moments in Boyhood. However, her overall performance is not better than the others in this category. In fact, during the first few scenes of Boyhood, I would say her acting was less than award worthy.  She definitely improved as the 12 years went on.  I might replace her with Sienna Miller. She gave a gritty, honest performance in American Sniper.  My clear choice for the winner here is Emma Stone for Birdman.  I believe she is a standout amongst the nominees.  (My second choice for winner would be Ejogo).

Now, director. Al Roker keeps stating how he is surprised Ana DeVernay did not get nominated since the film was nominated. Well, there are 8 films nominated for Best Picture, so three directors will not get the nod.  In my opinion, this award belongs to Alejandro Inarrito, hands down. Not a contest.  In this category, I do think there is room for movement for other directors. I would remove Bennet Miller from the race.  Foxcatcher is a move filled with 3 great performances, but the movie itself, in my mind could have been better.   Who would I replace him with?  I am not sure.  Selma was well directed and from I have read Ms. DeVernay was a driving force behind this movie (once she took the realms).  I also think Gone Girl was well directed by David Fincher. So, likely, I would insert one of them.  It looks like this will be a race between Anarrito and Linklater.  Linklater’s movie was ground breaking in terms of concept.  I just think Mr. Innarito had a more complex movie to direct. (I cannot comment on Unbroken directed by Ms. Jolie because I have not seen it yet.)

Before we move onto Best Picture, I do want to mention that Channing Tatum has been overlooked this award season.  He was brilliant in Foxcatcher. It gets tough when you have two great lead roles in one movie.  By the way, I am purposely skipping over Best Supporting Actor. I will be shocked if JK Simmons does not receive it. (And frankly, although there are numerous choices for Best Actor, I feel there are less for Supporting Actor.)

Okay, my choice for Best Movie is Birdman. It has a power to it unlike many of the other nominees. I think my other choices would be Selma, Theory of Everything and American Sniper. (I have yet to see Whiplash). I would take Grand Budapest Hotel out of this category and replace it with Wild. I loved Wild, I think it is definitely deserving of the nomination.  I enjoyed Budapest, but this how I describe it: I enjoyed it, but if I never saw it, I would be okay with that too. Lastly, I truly enjoyed Boyhood but I do not think it deserves Best Picture.  I love Linklater movies because his dialogue is usually very compelling. I found the dialogue in this movie gave off more of an unplanned, “improvisational” vibe.  The concept is unique and compelling, but I don’t think that should be the driving force behind a win for the Oscar. I will be very disappointed if it beats out Birdman or most of the movies in this category.  

The last “snub” people talk about is the omission of The Lego Movie from Best Animated Feature. I will go one further, I think it deserves a nomination for Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay. The dialogue was crisp and spot on.  

Those are my thoughts. What are yours?

 

EMMY: Give Me Someone To Cheer For

I must be approaching the half century mark because I find myself yearning for yesteryear--the good old days.  A time when we only had 3 networks, no cable shows, etc.  You know what was good about that?  You actually had the chance to see almost every show nominated for an Emmy.  The Emmy’s are tonight and it is just not as exciting as it used to be (for me.).  Back in the day, there was also no summer programming. So, once May came and the TV season ended—reruns of the season would begin. This was your chance to watch other programs.  You had someone to cheer for---now I barely  have anyone to cheer for because I have not seen ½ of the shows!

Am I still going to watch? Of course I am!  However, here are a few of things that bug me about the modern day Emmy’s.  (I am sure Zeus feels the same way about the Modern Day Olympics..do you think he is really happy that Trampoline is now an Olympic sport?  I doubt it!)  Okay, okay, my list:

1). So many shows to watch, I wish I was Joel McHale and got paid to watch it all. For me, it is impossible to watch all of the shows to be excited about the nominations.  And, for those that do not know me—I log many hours watching TV.  It is a favorite pastime of mine.  I just can’t keep up.  We have shows on networks, premium channels, online sites, etc.

2) The network shows get SHAFTED. Yes they do.  Okay, some sitcoms get repeat noms (Big Bang, 30 Rock, Modern Family) but the EMMY folks seem to get stuck on certain shows. There are other great shows and performances out there. Forget a drama on network TV, unless your name is Julianne Margolis you can forget about your show or role getting a nod.  (Oh and now Kerry Washington, so glad to see another network nod).

3). A specific drama complaint:  PARENTHOOD should be nominated for best show AND Monica Potter should be nominated for an EMMY!  Particularly for her work last season!  Geez, what do you have to do to get noticed? Oh I know, kill someone, have sex in a cave or be an addict.  Actors in relatable roles needs not apply.

4 My specific comedy complaint:  personally, I would hand EDEN SHER the Best Supporting Actress statue for The Middle. Sorry, she may be the best female actress in a comedy series right now hands down. SHOW HER SOME LOVE EMMY!  WAIT! One more comedy complaint: THE MINDY PROJECT is hysterical and should have been nominated!!!

5) I am still harboring resentment because Steve Carrell never won for playing Michael Scott. WHAT?  Crazy! Oh and guess who beat him twice?  Alec Baldwin!?!!  Okay, I love 30 Rock and I like Alec in 30 Rock—but his character had the same depth season after season. He also lost to Jim Parsons.  I LOVE Sheldon and Jim, but three wins and no win for Steve?  Carrell was robbed! 

6) Why is new and edgy automatically viewed as GREAT?. I watch Silicon Valley.  I DVR Silicon Valley.  So, therefore, I do like Silicon Valley.  HOWEVER, it is not Emmy worthy for its first season.  I think in time it is going to be great, but it is not great yet.  Again, just mad because a comedy like The Middle gets overlooked. The show is hysterical. 

7.) Enough with American Horror Story being nominated in the mini series category.  I do not care if you change the words after your hyphen—YOU ARE A SERIES!!!  I actually don’t mind from the perspective that it will then clog up the drama category that is already overcrowded.

8.) In the same vein—when a series is cancelled, all of a sudden it becomes a mini series—like it was planned that way.  (FARGO).

9.) Oh, I LOVED when they added the guest star in a show category.  How great to recognize a one or two time performance.  I now HATE when they give that nod to a series regular.  Joe Morton, I LOVE you as an actor, always have.  However, you have now played Olivia Pope’s Dad for two seasons—you are not a guest star!!!!  I don’t mean to pick on him because he is not the only series regular that has won this award, but he is the latest.

10. ) I could go on and on but I won’t because what is the point?  I don’t think Mr. and Mrs. EMMY are reading this.  I have tried to brainstorm answers….like do we have a premium channel category, a streaming category?  I don’t know.  I would like that… but would the show then be 10 hours long. 

I am not sure what the answer is, but the television academy needs to think of something.  I mean, geez, this year the EMMY’s are on during the summer, before Labor Day?  I am beginning to think I not the only one whose interest is declining.

Rambling About the 2014 Oscars

2014 Oscars

I am cutting it down to the wire.  Here are my Top 10 movies of the year along with my thoughts on some of the nominees.  Note:  I did not see Wolf of Wall Street and Blue Jasmine.

Top 10 Plus (not in any order)

1.       Philomena
2.       Nebraska
3.       42
4.       The Way Way  Back
5.       Fruitvale Station
6.       Enough Said
7.       About Time
8.       Frozen
9.       12 Years A Slave
10.   Saving Mr. Banks
11.   Gavity/Her/Inside Llewyn Davis/August Osage County/Captain Phillips

 

I really enjoyed the 5 I have at 11. I think Her is one of the most original films in a long time.  I don’t think it gets enough credit for that.

 You will notice I do not have American Hustle on my list. I have to say,  I think that is one of the most OVER RATED films in a long time.  Was I entertained?  Yes. Were the performances very good?  Yes.  However, the story was not great.  In fact, it dragged for quite a bit.   Particularly, after the first 30 minutes until about the last hour.   Personally, I know many who enjoyed, but I don’t know anyone who thought it was great.   I don’t get the hype.  If it wins for anything tonight, I will be disappointed.  Well, of course if JLAW wins, her speech will be entertaining. There are far too many GREAT performances for an award to go to this movie.  Honestly, this is how I feel about American Hustle:  If Will Farrell played the Christian Bale’s character AND gave the same exact performance—people would look at this movie differently.  It was a bit of a sill story about a true incident. 

Personally, the movie I am pulling for the win doesn’t have a chance.  I think my favorite movie was Philomena.  It was a great story and the director told the story in a compelling way.  I think in the end, I like a story with people/characters that you can respect and root for.

 I think the performances in Enough Said were fantastic. For me, I am drawn to acting when there are no costumes, wigs, accents or gimmicks involved.  Julia Louis Dreyfuss and James Gandolfino played people we know.  Perhaps, people we are sometimes.  I think that is the hardest role to play and make it believable.  She made me forget she was Elaine, The New Christine or The Veep and of course  he made me forget he was Tony Soprano.

I think it is a shame 42 came out so early.  A fantastic movie with great performances.  Parents, have your children see 42.
 
Overall, a very good year for movies and better year for acting performances.   But for me, not a lot of standouts. My picks for tonight:

 Best Picture:  Philomena (I think 12 Years a Slave will win—I am happy with any win except Wolf of Wall Street and American Hustle.)

Best Actor:  Bruce Dern (I think it will go to Matthew or Chiewetel—all three deserve  it. I also believe Joaquin should be in this category instead of Bale. For that matter, so should Hanks for Captain Phillips)

Best Actress:  A tie for me with Sandra, Judi and Meryl. All great.

Best Supporting Actor:  Jared Lehto.  I will be surprised if he doesn’t win.  However, if Barkhad took it—what a cool win that would be!

Best Supporting Actress:  Lupita Nyong’, although would be very happy if June Squibb won.

Original Screenplay:  Her—if Her does not win this—it is a crime.

 

Enjoy the Oscars!

 

 

 

 

The Wacky AZ Bill

Okay, I wish I was inspired to write when I am not fired up.  I am fired up.  This may be the stupidest piece of legislation in the last 40 years.  This law opens the door to people to discriminate based on the false premise of religious freedom. If these “people” jonesing for their religious freedom would actually follow the teachings of the Savior they so adore—they would NOT CARE about the way others lead their life.  I am not saying we shouldn’t care about others—we should when referencing the true definition of “care” that includes words like “compassion.”  I hope that does not come off as mocking our Savior…I too am a believer. However, when I think of WWJD? I think, he wouldn’t pass this law.

Everyone is focusing on how this law  impacts the LGBT community, rightfully so—the genesis of this law involves someone who did not want serve a gay couple.  However, this law actually impacts EVERYONE!  I referred to Christians above, but there are 1,000’s of religions.  Heck, I can start one tomorrow.  Also, let’s get back to Christians.  (Again, not picking on Christians—I am one.)  If I was a single, divorced mom looking for a home—a realtor could choose not to take me on as a client because their religion forbids divorce.  Also, if I was part of a young, heterosexual couple living in sin, someone could refuse to sell us furniture for our house because their religion does not support intimate relations before marriage.  Do you see where I am going with this?  Remember our friends from the Westoboro Church?  Well, if one of their members owned a local hardware store, they could refuse a U.S. Marine because they believe our military is the root of all religious evil. Do you see where I am going with this?  These laws are very ambiguous and open the door for all sorts of discrimination.  No one is safe—even those who want this law.  Your local bar owner may deny a Christian  service because he does not believe Jesus is the Savior—he doesn’t believe in God at all.  Do you see where I am going with this? 

I will never understand why your religious beliefs have anything to do with mine.  I recognize they do for some reason—that is why there will always be conflict in the Middle East and now just about everywhere.  Why can’t we all believe in our own beliefs and not worry about our neighbor's?  As long as my neighbor is not harming, me, anyone else or even themselves, I am good with whatever they believe.  I do not have to be their friend.  However, it would be ridiculous if I couldn’t wave hello based on beliefs.

You know, back to my religion.  I have some beliefs—maybe I will start a religion.  I do not believe people should wear nylons with open toed shoes.  However, if I see someone sporting this look, I just cringe to myself.  The most important thing is I AM NOT WEARING IT, SO WHY SHOULD IT BOTHER ME THAT HE/SHE IS???  If I owned my dream bakery, I would still definitely sell this person a cupcake!( I highly recommend my Oreo Surprise!) Do you see where I am going with this?

Many supporters of this bill have brought up the Constitution. People like to hide behind the Constitution just as they like to hide behind religion.  The Constitution protects the FREEDOM and RIGHTs of all U.S. Citizens—so how does this bill do that?  Seems like you are protecting one and discriminating against the other? 

Another point shopkeeper who will not serve me,  how do I really know you are religious?  Now, I heard someone say should a Catholic priest be forced to marry a gay couple?  I would say NO.  At least we know he has devoted his life to his beliefs. (For the record, I am 100% for gay marriage).  How do I know that Sally the waitress has done the same?  She could be an atheist who does not like LGBT’s or people who are divorced, or people with tattoos-she could claim religious beliefs for all of these prejudices.

That is where these lines get crossed.  I also believe the wedding photographer should not have to sign the gay couple as clients.  Again, tricky. This profession includes art.  I do not why a gay couple would want an anti-gay photographer—I suspect he will not try his hardest to capture your special day. However, maybe the photographer could just say they were booked or washing their hair that day???  I haven’t figured all of this out yet.  I am just a mom after all.

To quote my friend Michelle on this topic:  If someone is truly religious then it would seem to me that no one would need to be discriminated against as we would just love all people and do unto others as we would have done to us.

Amen to that sister!

The Facebook Clown Police

Oh, how I have wanted to write this blog forever.  However, I have been hesitant.  I know some of you may recognize yourself and I do not want to offend anyone.  However, remember, these are just my opinions.  My opinions should not hurt anyone’s feelings; I should not have that power.  In addition, I am not delusional.  I know very few people read my blog! 

First, let me say overall, I love Facebook!  I truly enjoy hearing what new restaurant you’ve tried, I love seeing your first day of school pictures, vacation pictures and I enjoy reading about funny stories that happen in your everyday life. And contrary to public opinion of FB—I don’t even mind looking at pictures of your food!   I especially enjoy connecting with family and friends that I do not see on a regular basis.  That part of FB has been invaluable to me!  However, I think there should be a Facebook police squad.  They could enforce the rules in a fun way.  When someone breaks a “Facebook” rule a funny clown should appear on their screen with a caption that says “Are you sure you want to post that?”  Look, you are going to read this and say “Who does she think she is?  Do you think we enjoy when she posts an old song from the 80’s? Or, tells us for the 89^th time that she is cleaning her closet?”  I realize I make you all cringe sometimes too.  Facebook has its advantages and disadvantages. 

Here are some of the posts I would include as offenses to Facebook.  I also think you would be given X number of times before the clown pops up.  I do not mind the occasional breaking of the rules, but there are some MEGA repeat offenders out there! We are all human and will post something we later wish we did not.  If the Facebook Clown Police were on the job, maybe we would all harbor fewer regrets. 

Passive/Aggressive Posts

Listen, if you are going to post something, either post the entire story or do not post anything at all.  Better yet, confront the person you have an issue with directly vs. posting it on Facebook.  People create such posts for two reasons:  they want the person they are mad or upset with to see it and they want other people to comment and say things like “you are so nice, how could anyone be mean to you?” Prior to Facebook, where did you get your validation from?  Examples of PA posts:  “I give and I give and I am just taken advantage of” or “Some people never cease to amaze to me.”

Do not air your dirty laundry on Facebook

Remember how above I said tell the entire story? Well, I really didn’t mean it.  Do not air your dirty laundry on Facebook.  If you need to post it, if it makes you feel better just to get it out—post it so only you can see it.  (You can customize every post and specify who can see it).  Hopefully, you will feel the cathartic release you need—but you will not be subjecting your dirty laundry for all to see.  Think about it, would you stand in your town center and scream the details out loud for all to hear?  That is what you are doing on FB.  Let’s face it—you do not really have 400 close friends.  Many of those friends are simply acquaintances or people you have not seen since the third grade! 

Seflies! Aagh!

Okay, if you are older than 15—STOP with the selfies.  Seriously, if you want people to tell you how pretty you are or how young you look—just ask them.  I suppose a few selfies in a year is not a bad thing—but the typical selfie poster posts a new selfie at least once a week!  Seriously, when I turn on my camera and it is in selfie mode—I scream!!!  I scare myself! It is one thing if you are taking a selfie with the Lincoln Monument or Mt. Rushmore in the background—that is cool—but when you are by yourself in your living room?  I don’t get it. Especially when the next day a new one comes up—and guess what?  You are by yourself in your living room.

Chill With the Share Button

There should be a limit on how many “shares” a person can post a day. I would cap it at two.  I know people who reach at least 10 in a day.   I literally do not even read them anymore (or maybe ever).  If it is a quote, cartoon, etc. I just keep scrolling.  I will click on something once I’ve noticed a few people have posted it.  We know you love your kids, your sisters, your brothers, your cousins, your plumbers and newspaper carriers.  No need to post a lengthy quote to prove it.  If you are feeling a special kinship to a friend or loved one—post it to their wall or send them a private message--this will mean something to them. Better yet, use your own words to express how you feel.   Also, for you passive aggressive posters, no need to post the passive aggressive cartoons/quotes to express how frustrated you are with a friend or partner.  We already gleamed that through your posts!!!  (This also includes hot bodies, cute animals and all the jokes about how stupid people are!)

The Secretive Posts

Look, if you do not want the world of Facebook to know the details, just private message the person. A typical secretive post:  “I had great time last night with an old friend.  You know who you are.”  If this is JUST for that person, why are you sending it to ALL of your friends?  Just text the person or send them a private message.  I am sure that would mean so much more to them.  The friend you went out with is probably saying to themselves “I saw her last night, but I wonder if she is talking about me.  She could’ve seen another old friend yesterday too.”  Do not be ambiguous.  Either say it or don’t.

Commenting on Political and Religious Posts

I am not advocating ending all political and religious posts.  I am simply advocating kindness and respect when your opinion differs from others that are posting.  I think it is better to avoid these posts all together—and I typically take the approach that if I agree I will say so but if I disagree, I will pass on posting.  (This may not always be the case, but I try to use this approach.) For the most part, I witness respect more than disrespect—but when the latter is evident—it can get ugly.  What is hard with Facebook is you can't read inflection or tone and things can easily be misinterpreted.  So this is just the Hill Street Blues mantra….be careful out there!   (Yes, I am old.  I just quoted Hill Street Blues. Look it up kids.)

 

Negative Posts

Okay, I truly hesitated with this one because I feel two faced.  I feel like this is a negative blog--and I really do not like to be negative.  I am talking about the posts similar to this: “People are so annoying, I just don’t think there are any nice people left.”  Just take a deep breath and reflect.  I am sure you meet more nice people during your day than annoying people.  I know I do.   People are good.  Life is good. 

 

So, there it is.  I hope you are not offended or put off—just my two cents.   Some of you are now typing your “Blog Police Enforcement Rules”.    I get it, I get it!  I just hope you are not all wondering, is she talking about me?  If you are, no it is definitely not you!!  Enjoy your day!

 

 

Hi Friend! Do you really want to post that?

 

 

I'll Admit it, I Am Not A Fan of "Girls"

I so wanted to like this show.  I have now sat through 5 episodes and I don’t care if I see another.  Let’s just get the sex out of the way.  Yes, I think it is unnecessarily graphic; however, that is not why I dislike the show.  I could look past the ridiculous sex scenes and references if the characters were likable or funny.  (As the show is billed as a comedy.)  I find it to be dark and depressing with moments of comedy.  I went on to IMDB to read some reviews to see if anyone else felt like I did.  Funny, one person said she loved the first four episodes and thought it was very funny, and then it just got dark and depressing.  I don’t know-- it started out that way for me.

First, I understand how people in their twenties find it relatable from the perspective of relationships.  I get it.  I was once in my twenties.  I let a guy string me along because of his charm even though we broke up over and over again.  I look back and think, why did I stay in that relationship?  However, (to touch on the sex once more) I also grew up post the sexual revolution and I hope the way sex is treated on this show is truly not indicative of all people in their twenties.   Again, the sex alone is not why I am not attracted to DVR this show or watch the remaining episodes of season 1.  Whether I am reading a book or watching a movie or a show—I need to like the characters.  I semi-like Hannah (Lena Dunham’s character) I think I would like her more if we did not see her spoiled attitude towards her parents during the first episode.  When her parents delcared that after almost two years they were not going to pay her rent, her cell phone bills and give her spending money anymore, Hannah was stunned. WHAT???  You ungrateful BIATCH!  Why are your parents footing the bill for your life?  I guess this is more common these days compared to when I was in my twenties.  I would’ve been mortified to ask my parents to pay my bills.  In college, I did not even ask them to pay for Spring Break like many college students did, I just didn’t go.  I finally went my senior year, when I saved the money for it.  The thing is, they probably would’ve found a way to pay—but I would never have asked.  I think paying for my college education was quite enough.  So, episode one turned me off a bit to her.  I think if I started on episode two, I would feel more compassion towards her.  (Swirl Girl's kids:  I will happily pay your rent, the catch is, you have to be living under my roof.)

I also semi like Marnie and I actually do like Shoshanna.  However, they almost make her too cartoon like.  I dislike the British cousin and I despise Adam.  I was strung along by charm in my twenties.  Hannah mentioned that Adam’s charm strings her along.   What charm?  Perhaps I was completely blind too.  Adam does not have one redeeming quality about him.  He is rude, hurtful and completely vapid.  Watching Dunham’s character continually get reeled in by him and to not be true to herself  because of him is gut-wrenching and/or simply just annoying.  As for Charlie,  I just feel bad for him, not sure how I feel about him.

Is it a comedy?  I think it is a slice of life that shows the depressing side more than happy side. This is okay.  Depressing can be funny.  However, I don’t think they succeed.  So, if it was not billed as a comedy, I might also have a different perspective.  So far, in five episodes, my favorite scene was when Charlie and his band mate sang Hannah’s diary in front of them.  I thought that was sad, but also a tad humorous.

I also read a review that mentioned how surprised the writer was that a bunch of manly men she knew (the way she put it) also liked the show.  Honey, they are not interested in the dialogue—they are interested in the sex.  It is porn they do not have to pay for.  So, now that is the third time I’ve mentioned the sex.  Honestly, not the biggest issue I have with the show.  I’m just saying, I can see why some guys in their twenties will not mind sitting through this with their girlfriends. 

Almost every review mentioned how this was the anti Sex and the City as if Sex and the City is a bad disease you would not want to catch.  The main reason they say this is the anti SATC is because this is a true depiction of women in their 20’s living in NYC. They are broke and trying to find their way.  The SATC ladies led a bit more glamorous lifestyle.  The Girls ladies may be broke, but when parents are paying their way, how broke are they?  Also, let’s remember Sex and the City was about women in their late thirties and forties.  Perhaps Hannah and Marnie will be successful in ten years and able to afford their own apartment.  I cannot afford Minolo Blahnik’s like Carrie, but I could still relate to the friendships she had with the other ladies.  Carrie was also strung along by Mr. Big.  The difference is, they gave Mr. Big some likeable qualities and a mystery.  You always felt like he truly did like Carrie but was afraid of something.  Adam shows no signs of truly liking Hannah.  Aside from the back drop of Manhattan and the story being about friends, why do we have to compare the shows? (I know I just spent a good number of characters comparing the two, I guess it is easy to do.) I just figured out why—they each line up to one of the characters.  Hannah = Carrie.  Marnie = Miranda.  Shoshanna  = Charlotte (ironically, also almost cartoon like.  Seriously, who would wear some of those buttoned up shirts Charlotte wore?)  Lastly, British girl = Samantha. Okay, I will stop now.

I guess the last thing that bothers me about how popular the show is….do people just like anything because it is edgy?  Edgy is not always quality.  Oh and don’t tell me it is a typical Judd Apatow production, because I am a fan of Judd’s so I know what typical Judd is. At this point, I should have the desire to keep watching to see: when Hannah will finally rid herself of Adam, if Marnie and Charlie will finally break up (poor nice guy Charlie); will Shoshanna lose her virginity and will the British girl truly find her self-respect that she so proudly wears as a badge.

 

  I will say, whether I like it or not, I am happy for Lena Dunham’s success.  I think it is great that a female is making such a strong mark in the world of television.  Also, I have to like her, Mary Tyler Moore is also one of her all-time favorite shows! We share that.