R.I.P. Dennis Hopper

My favorite Hopper performance was his short but memorable appearance as Clarence's dad in True Romance (see below), with his Pabst Blue Ribbon loving madman in Blue Velvet a close second.

You Can't Know How Much the LOST Writers Didn't Care Until You Watch This

Watch this. The full 4:40.  It pretty much sums up every unresolved mystery ever to appear on Lost.  It's even more comprehensive than my list.




Just think about what it must have been like to be in that writers' room, inventing all those enticing little details with either absolutely no intent to follow up on them or no idea how to make sense of them.  Every episode, someone said: "hey, wouldn't it seem cool if..." and then they just threw in an act of symbolism, an arbitrary rule, a portentous dream or apparition, a shocking coincidence, or some vaguely mysterious talk.    And then, at the end of the series, the writers acted so pompously about being reduced to answer fans' questions (I mean, how childish of us to expect sense and structure?), and then producing answers in  backstories (Richard's, Jacob's, Smokey's) that would have been roundly ridiculed had they appeared on Lost fan message boards.

Don't listen to the pretentious Lost watchers (including you, Doc Jensen) who have fooled themselves into thinking that it's unintelligent or unimaginative or naive to want answers to some of these questions (or as I have said, not necessarily "answers", but a "framework"). Frankly, I find this kind of lapdog apologism to be embarrassing.  It's like having an ex-lover who dumped you and told you were stupid, but whom you continue to worship because the sex was amazing.  Pathetic, really.

Really, people, you can't honestly tell me with a straight face that none of these things matter, can you?  When you view all these mysteries collectively, it becomes painfully clear what the writers thought of us: we were suckers, just like John Locke. Tricked into thinking anything (anything!) on this show had meaning.

Ed. Note:  I know this might be a shocking departure from my earlier, more measured response to the finale, but it's all suddenly starting to sink in how little respect they had for the show they created.  And that's kind of offensive, from an artistic point of view.  

Lights, Camera, Press Start

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time opens in theaters this weekend, and I really have no intention or desire to see it. I am willing to sit this one out and let someone else take a stab at it... anyone? It looks as if Disney is whoring out the Pirates gimmick and hoping it sticks to a new franchise. They seem to be avoiding the issue that this film was spawned from a video game. A game that I am positive is better than this film could ever hope to be. In a backwards fashion this got me thinking: What are some of the best video games to come from movies? Now I am no video game expert, but films made from video games and vice versa usually tend to be a disaster. Here are a few exceptions to the rule:

• Aliens (Arcade): This side scroller worked like a flashier version of Contra on steroids. Playing as Ripley, the main object of the game was to simply walk from one end of the screen to the other (hence the term side scroller) blasting those face hugging, acid spewing beasts with weapons such as a machine gun, a grenade launcher, and of course your always trusty flame thrower. Who wouldn't want to hop into that sweet yellow loader while shouting "Get away from her you bitch!" at the final boss?

• Ghostbusters (XBOX 360): Because there isn't anything much more satisfying than getting to strap on a proton pack and trapping your first ghost. Just don't cross the streams... it would be bad.

• The Godfather (Playstation 2): A very interesting concept considering you don't play as any major character from the movie, but instead as a mob peon. Your mission in this game is to perform tasks parallel to the actions of the film. You drive mobsters around town to perform a hit, extort businesses for the Cologne family, and in a stroke of brilliance you even get to be the guy who tapes the snub nose to the back of the toilet for Michael. An offer that you can't refuse indeed.

• Goldeneye (N64): Let's face it. The only reason I ever owned a Nintendo 64 was because of this James Bond first person shooter. Even better than the movie.

• T2 (Arcade): This one brings back memories. As a kid the idea of loading up that futuristic gun and turning an army of killer robots into scrap metal was a dream come true. This game was one of the primary visions of what I wanted Terminator Salvation to look like. Way to screw it up McG.

• The Warriors (Playstation 2): One of the best beat em up games to one of the best beat em up movies ever. This whole concept works as a fascinating prequel to the film as you learn how the Warriors became a gang, obtained all of their members, and fought to claim their home turf of coney island. It is also remarkably faithful (a.k.a no guns). Bottles, bricks, and fists are thrown in amazingly brutal slow motion slugfests. As a final bonus the last remaining levels are a virtual recreation of the film that you can participate in. This is one game that will most certainly make you want to "Come out to PLAAAAAAY!"

Unofficially Faithful

• Lethal Enforcers: It is essentially the entire Dirty Harry series rolled into one game. All it consists of is shootouts at shopping markets, the airport, and the bank. Just look at the opening title sequences.

• Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (Playstation 2): Taking the best parts of Miami Vice and Scarface while having one of the best 80's mixtape soundtracks to boot. This game enslaved me the year of its release. One of my all time favorites.

LOST: An Evaluation

First off, let me just say the finale was very touching and very entertaining.  They replayed old motifs with the castaways' "flashes of memory", redeemed characters, and made use of familiar imagery for new action.  I have no thematic or aesthetic complaints.  It was all beautifully done, even ending with Jack's eye closing, Vincent cuddling next to him, Hugo giving Ben the attention he needed so badly, and Juliet and Sawyer having their moment.
However, they chose not to answer any questions. At all. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.  Let me explain:

While I have been what some might call an "answer zealot" for some time now, what I really am is a "context zealot."  I didn't necessarily want to know how everything worked, but I did want to know if there was a framework in which time travel, Widmore, Eloise, Dharma, and Smokey all fit.  There was not.  Given that, I am actually glad that they chose not to even try to answer any questions.  If they had, they would have been bad answers.  What we learned from the finale is that every device used, every reference and allusion, and every strange occurrence was a red herring, meant only to keep us interested while the writers were getting us attached to the great characters they created.  That being the case, I can't fault them for then choosing to ignore these mysteries in the final, and instead revisiting every major character from the series (minus Eko) and letting them have some satisfaction . . .

. . . even if it came at the hand of Purgatory. Yes, folks, that's what sideways-land was all along.  Purgatory. We weren't watching an alternate reality created by The Incident. We weren't watching the end result of Smokey doing anything. Just purgatory. That's fine, whatever.

Unfortunately, what that also means is that the writers chose an explanation to the sideways world that still doesn't make much sense. After all:

• If it was purgatory all along, why did they feel the need to show us a sunken island in the season premiere?  It had no significance.  
• How is it exactly that Desmond's being exposed to electromagnetism by Widmore allowed Desmond to enter purgatory temporarily before his death?

But that's not all.  The show's island resolution was just not internally consistent.  For example:

• What was Widmore's purpose in bringing Desmond?  As it turns out, his unplugging of the source does exactly what Smokey wants.  Did Widmore bring him so that Desmond could replug it if Smokey managed to unplug it? It doesn't seem likely, since the show suggested that Smokey couldn't do it himself, since he probably would have done it before.
• Shouldn't Jack's soul have been ripped from his body after being exposed to the Light Source, like what happened to the Man in Black in "Across the Sea"?  Like MIB, he was just a man, having transferred his Jacob-powers to Hurley before rappelling down into the cave.  Shouldn't he have emerged a smoke monster himself, the fate "worse than death" that Jacob's mother describes?  I mean, if you're going to attribute the origin of Smokey to magic, ought not that magic be consistently applied?

Incidentally, the only question that I would have really liked to have answered is what the Man in Black's long con actually accomplished.  Couldn't he have gotten Ben to kill Jacob in a less circuitous way?  Certainly one without having anyone turn the donkey wheel (twice), going back in time, or coming back to the island.  Also, why did Jacob let himself get killed so easily by Ben if it was so vital for someone to protect the island? We saw him kick the shit out of Richard, so we know he could fight. Also, who was protecting the island when Jacob was off-island molesting people and reading Flannery O'Connor novels? Also, what prevented Ben from killing Widmore when he snuck into Widmore's bedroom to tell him that he was going to kill Penelope?  And who was Tall Ghost Walt (the one that prevented Locke from killing himself, getting him to kill Naomi and almost prevent the Freighter from getting to the island), since I thought Smokey could only take the form of the dead?  And yeah, how did Smokey appear as Christian to Michael on the Freighter, which was outside the realm of the island (beyond the special bearing, and across the water)?  Oh, and why exactly did the Ajira flight propel the Losties to 1977, except for Sun, and why not Sun (yeah, she wasn't a candidate, probably because she was a mom, which disqualified Kate, but Kate went back, and what would being a candidate have to do with going back in time anyway?)?  Oh, and what about that magic box that saved Juliet's sister from cancer and made Anthony Cooper appear out of nowhere?  And Eloise preventing Desmond from marrying Penelope after he turns the failsafe key? And the what did Charlie's death accomplish, with respect to the endgame? And how did Dharma know how to keep Smokey out with those pylons (and why would it work)?  And what exactly made Sayid come back from the dead?  And all those island fertility problems, er . . .

If they could only have answered that one question.

But hey, the show was a great ride.  The answers it did provide during the course of the first five seasons were good ones.  Desmond was in the hatch.  Desmond's not pushing the button caused the Oceanic 815 crash. Dharma found the island using Foucault's pendulum. The runway the Others were building in Season Three was for the Ajira flight.  The castaways caused The Incident. Eloise and Widmore were Others.  The Black Rock destroyed the Statue.  All decent answers that will be remembered fondly before the sea change of Season Six.

However, I have but one last question for the producers:  If you knew it was going to end like this, then why limit the show to six seasons?  I mean, honestly, you could have given us a purgatory sideways flash at any time, and the action of Season Six didn't really directly lead us to the final moments (all you really needed was Ben, a couple candidates, and Desmond on the island, in any capacity).  A couple more seasons to explore New Otherton and Dharmaville would have been fun.  Perhaps even in an unforced, non-didactic mystery-resolving way.  Too bad.

Ed. Notes (5/24): Sideways-land was very similar to the plot of a feature film starring Anne Hathaway, called Passengers; The castaways were meant to interact together in what Kurt Vonnegut, in Cat's Cradle, called a karass (click the link for more info);  Commenters have suggested that Desmond was needed to unplug the source to make Smokey mortal/human again, so that he could be killed.  I'm not sure the risk of destroying the island would really make that worthwhile, though. I guess that's why they call it a failsafe; I'm thinking that since Widmore was trying to get Ben off the island, that everything Smokey did to try to get the island moved was actually just meant to keep Ben on the island.  That's why when he appears to Locke by the donkey wheel as Christian, he says that John should have turned the wheel, not Ben.  However, that's not a perfect explanation, since Smokey could have just killed all of Keamy's crew (instead of just a few).  

You Have The Right to Remain Cliched

Last night I managed to catch the pilot for Fox's new action comedy hopeful The Good Guys. This setup revolving around an odd couple of cops is overbearingly predictable, and yet it still manages to find its moments.

It stars Bradley Whitford as Dan and Colin Hanks as Jack. They are partners working in the minor crime department. Their first case is a doozy. It involves a stolen humidifier, a plastic surgeon, a golf bag full of millions in cash, spanish lessons, and the second best assassin in the world. The entire episode is full of slow-mo, jumping through the air, double fisted, shootouts (a la Hot Fuzz). There is also a ton of eye rolling, but sill funny one liners. For example: Jack: "Your going in there? You just drank a quart of bourbon in the car!" Dan: "It was a fifth!"

The pair work off each other well enough. Dan is the sleazy washout living on the fumes of his glory days as a cop. His biggest claim to fame is the story of how back in '85 he saved the governor's son. He doesn't believe in things like DNA, and refuses to trust those fancy "computer machines". Jack is the by-the-book, straight laced, rookie trying to work his way up to homicide. His job first and foremost is to keep a leash on his loose cannon partner.

Bradley Whitford is just one of those actors that I look at his face and I think: "Asshole." This is not bash on the actor or the characters he portrays. In fact, quite the opposite. He is just amazing at being unlikable, and that is why I like him. Think about it. Scent of a Woman = Asshole. Billy Madison = Asshole. I never watched The West Wing, but I would love to know if he gets typecast for a reason. Here he is not totally deplorable, but is certainly a great combination of dumb and egotistical. I like Colin Hanks, but kind of pity the guy. It must be really tough trying to begin your career in the shadows of others. He usually gets stuck playing second fiddle to a second fiddle like Jack Black (Orange County, King Kong) and the guy looks virtually IDENTICAL to his oscar winning old man. He plays the clean cut cop fairly well.

The entire pilot flows along at an all too familiar, but nevertheless mildly entertaining pace. Then something happened as this episode reached its climax. Just as it appears the main villain has escaped, Dan pulls up in a vintage Pontiac Firebird while AC/DC's Thunderstruck begins to roll in over the soundtrack. At that moment the show crossed over from being merely adequate to a full tilt guilty pleasure. What's even better is that it then cuts to a commercial, and when it comes back both the chase and the rock music are now in full effect.

All in all I enjoyed the pilot, but considering I already gave up on Justified a few episodes after its debut I really doubt I'll be sticking around here much longer. Then again considering this is a FOX show it will probably be cancelled in a few weeks anyway. B

A few other notes:

• I think a drinking game might exist here: Take a shot every time someone is hit by a car.

• Any mustache joke that doesn't involve pedophilia is alright in my book.

MacGruber: C-4 Silliness

"It works really well as a thirty second skit, but is horrible as a ninety minute movie."

As with most films adapted from Saturday Night Live segments, you should prepare to hear this a lot about their latest, MacGruber. The statement is not totally inaccurate. It turns out that this is in fact, a very bad movie. The reason it sill manages to find success (albeit very minimal success), is because it is totally aware of how terrible it is, and just decides to go for broke.

If you have seen any random episode of SNL in the past three years, then you already know the drill: Within a bomb silo Kristen Wiig shouts "Thirty seconds MacGruber!" A perfectly mullet-ed Will Forte then demands numerous household trinkets. Then instead of actually defusing the bomb he gets sidetracked into saying something sexist, racist, or discriminatory. Before the punch line can be giv-KABOOM! It is short and pointless, but usually scores a chuckle.

The plot of MacGruber seems to have been constructed with a paper clip, a gum wrapper, and a string of floss. A missile has been stolen by the dastardly villain Dieter Von Cunth (Val Kilmer) who has been given a last name with such a 'mind-in-the-gutter' appeal to the screenwriters they can't resist repeating it dozens of times. It is up to MacGruber (Will Forte) and his small team consisting of Lt. Dixon Piper (Ryan Phillippe) and the Farrah Fawcett haired Vicki St. Elmo (Kristen Wiig) to stop him. The sidekicks do most of the heavy lifting while MacGruber spends most of the time screwing things up and waddling around with a piece of celery sticking out of his ass (don't ask).

The humor that this film coasts by on is of the most embarrassing kind. I would be lying if I said I didn't laugh. At the same time I winced, cringed, shook my head, and covered my mouth with my hand. It was almost as if I was trying to resist that this juvenile tripe was kinda working on me. There is a ton of tasteless language, an above and beyond awkward lovemaking session between MacGruber and his deceased wife played by Mia Rudolph (yeah, you read that right). And as for the violence, it is not enough for a bad guy to simply be shot in this film. Here he has to fall off a cliff, get blown up with a grenade, and then have his remains urinated on. Of course all of this takes place after his throat gets ripped out. Needless to say MacGruber is wise enough to take full advantage of it's R-rating. Great use of the cheesy eighties music as well.

There isn't a whole lot more to it than that. It gets in, does it's job, and gets out. It is anything but high art, and I can see how certain people will flat out hate it. At first I expected it to be terrible, but after reading several great early reviews discovered this apparently had the potential to be the comedy sleeper of the year. It's not. If anything it got lucky, and I don't expect to see a "Gilly" feature film in the works anytime soon... Sorry. B-

Back from London Links!

Did you think that I wasn't posting because I was lazy or something? Hell no! I was vacationing in the parallel universe that is Great Britain, marching around sites full of history and religious significance, and hoping to evade a terrifying ash-cloud-smoke monster (Mt. Eyjafjallajökull) that was trying to keep me from leaving the island.

Anyway,  here are some links to keep you all busy until I begin the lengthy process of catching up on American television and movies:

• Why Roger Ebert is not a fan of 3D.
• Time Out on the top summer blockbusters of all time.
• Apparently, Babies is pretty hard-core smut.  As always . . .  the eye of the beholder.  
• George Lucas congratulates the Lost creators on making stuff up as they went along, just like he did with Star Wars.
• Cannes.  Just so you know, it's NOT pronounced like "con" in "icon" or Khan in the Wrath of Khan.  It's closer to can (like that can of peas you're eating from with a spoon right now), and really somewhere between CAN and KEN.   Everytime someone is talking about "CAHN," I look up to the sky and scream just like Cap'n Kirk.  

Killers

It's obvious why Killers was made: (1) Ashton Kutcher is one of its producers, and thought he needed a leading man vehicle to catapult him into the realm of Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise; an action film that has a sense of fun with its murders, and a witty hero who spouts off one-liners in the midst of action when he should be swearing and praying for his life. (2) Someone still thinks Katherine Heigl is worth something. (3) Someone wanted to cash in on the success of Mr. and Mrs. Smith by ripping it off, even though it came out five years ago and has long since been forgotten.

So that's why the movie got made, and that's fine. This material wasn't new when Mr. and Mrs. Smith did it, so it's fair game to rip it off whenever you want (hence Knight and Day, due later this summer). But none of these things explain why Killers went forward with such an awkward, horribly structured script with such obvious surprises.

Killers tells the story of Heigl's character, Jen Kornfeldt, who is vacationing in Nice with her parents (played by Tom Selleck and Catherine O'Hara, who seem pretty authentic for some reason). There, she meets Kutcher's character, Spencer Aimes (ha ha on the last name, you creative types! I would have called him Spencer Bangs - two puns for the price of one!). Aimes is a muscular, charming stud who tells her he works in construction. He goes off for a swim, ends up on a yacht, kills the man on board, then plants a bomb that blows up a helicopter. He is really an assassin, but she doesn't find that out till later, when the people she thinks are their friends start jumping out of the woodwork and trying to kill them.

After Heigl and Kutcher hit it off in Nice, which happens so quickly I literally almost missed it, there is a stupid scene where Selleck and Kutcher talk about father-in-law/son-in-law stuff while shooting clay pidgeons, and each is so good with a rifle, anyone but an unborn child will be able to predict the "twist" at the end of the film. (Besides the fact that they give it away in the trailer!) So after having maybe one date, which includes a montage sequence that shows the two talking about important things while touring the beautiful coastline of France, they decide to get married, and we get that THREE YEARS LATER title card that bad screenwriters use when they can't figure out how to get rid of unnecessary prologues. (And no actor/producer is going to get rid of an unnecessary prologue that takes place in Nice. I wouldn't.)

Anyway, so Heigl and Kutcher are married, and they live in one of those one and a half million dollar suburban homes that I'm sure a construction contractor and a personal assistant (or whatever Heigl's character does) would be able to afford. And it's in one of those neighborhoods that throws block parties. (They mention this fairly early, so you know where the climax is going to take place!)

Kutcher's former contact in the assassin bureau gets ahold of him, and wants to recruit him for one last mission. Kutcher says no, that he's retired and living the happy life of a wealthy suburban husband. The contact says you can't just quit being an assassin, and that whole rigamarole, and then the action and suspense begins, and it doesn't stop until the end credits.

The action in Killers is well-choreographed and staged, from the car chases to the intense, Bourne-esque hand-to-hand fights (or should I say Mr. and Mrs. Smith-esque). They are even pretty in a way, because they all take place during daylight, and the director, Robert Luketic, knows that in a fight scene, we want to see the actor's faces whenever possible so we know it's really Ashton Kutcher getting his nose plowed. So, rather than the incomprehensible elbows-and-knees in extreme close-up action of the Bourne films and the latest Bond films, the fight scenes in Killers puts everything in medium shot so we can tell what the hell is going on, and who is punching who.

And, surprisingly enough, it looks a lot of the time like it's actually Ashton Kutcher getting tossed around and thrown through walls and so forth. And, because I dislike Ashton Kutcher, I got something from that, which is more than I can say for any of the action sequences in Kick-Ass or Iron Man 2, so that actually puts Killers one up on the competition. How does a cliche-ridden rip-off like this, with two actors I do not like, get a one up over a couple of comic book movies? I don't know. Somewhere, a marketing analyst is crunching numbers.

That doesn't make Killers a good movie. The action scenes are pretty good, and believable, but the plot is ridiculous, and there are no surprises in it. Basically, everyone Kutcher and Heigl thought were their friends were assassins planted in their lives years ago to kill them if Kutcher misbehaved, and he misbehaves, and so everyone from the drunk on the couch to the timid intern at Kutcher's construction firm all of a sudden knows how to use a knife, knows martial arts, and has a submachine gun in their car. If Kutcher were anything like the assassin he is supposed to be, he would have noticed something was amiss, especially considering every person who tries to kill him turns out to be a moron.

Realism is not the point, and since the trailer is at pains to make it all seem hip and cool and a lot of fun, just going with it seems to be the filmmakers' intentions, and I didn't have a problem going with it. It certainly wasn't painful or boring, like most of the rest of the movies so far this summer, and Heigl and Kutcher didn't bother me for once. I like Tom Selleck, and it was nice seeing him on the big screen, and there's a joke about his mustache. So, if you must see Killers, rest assured, it could be worse.

Iron Man 2: Rusty

This is what everyone expects from Iron Man 2:

Now, here is what you get:

Two years ago the original Iron Man kicked off the summer with a bang. It was slick, refreshingly comic, and marked the comeback of the amazingly talented Robert Downey Jr. as the egomaniacal millionaire Tony Stark. It's sequel aims to up the ante with several new characters and explosive action scenes. Unfortunately, this film turns out to be not much more than a stainless steal of your time and money.

Iron Man 2 picks up six months later as Tony has made his superhero side a very public affair. He showboats his suit at his own expo, and is called in before congress to turn over his exclusive invention. We also are quickly informed that Tony's blood toxicity level is steadily on the rise, and unless a new element is found the suit might end up poisoning him. If that isn't enough to worry about a russian rival named Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) emerges to avenge the death of his father, a slimy competitor named Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) looks to steal Stark's ideas, and a mysterious yet seductive femme fatale (Scarlet Johansson) also pops up from time to time.

As has been the case with numerous comic book sequel slip ups this film is just too damn cluttered. The first film was wise enough to keep it limited to a single primary villain, and was even more clever by keeping his identity a secret until the third act. Iron Man 2 has too many characters that are lucky enough to be played by actors with considerable talent, but they are just not that interesting. Rourke is a freakish tattooed genius with the overly obvious motive of revenge. Rockwell is a whiney little worm that just wants to mimic a similar endgame as Jeff Bridges' original villain. (Yet he does have some great dance moves and a few funny one liners.) Johansson is just here to drool over. She does little more than kick ass in tight black leather. Mission accomplished on her part. I would have loved to see the originally planned Emily Blunt in this role.

You would think all of these characters would keep this film from being boring. Think again. There is surprisingly very little action throughout the course of the film. The iron man suit isn't even used in combat until the third reel, and even then it's only for about two minutes. The climax of the film in which iron man and war machine (Don Cheadle) team up to destroy numerous robot replicas has already been mostly spoiled by the trailer.

This film also manages to hit one of my biggest cinematic pet peeves. For all of the super advanced technological leaps that exist in this film's universe you would think it might be possible to effectively trace a blocked telephone call. Seriously, we are STILL using that gimmick? All that was missing from this film was Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) telling Tony after the signal was lost that "We needed ten more seconds." Lame.

Iron Man 2 is a pretty big disappointment when compared to it's predecessor. We have seen all of this before. What I find even more frightening is that this was supposed to be one of the major cornerstones of this summer movie season. If you still feel the need to see some comic book action, then I recommend the vastly ignored The Losers. It is half as long, twice as fun, and you won't have to sit elbow to elbow with fanboys who cheer at the mere sight of Thor's hammer. C-

One more gripe: Only two songs by AC/DC. One of them during the end credits, and neither of them are Thunderstruck. What the hell?

Community: Modern Warfare

Since this freshman series has started I have at least on five different occasions declared a favorite episode of the season. After last night's episode 'Modern Warfare' a clear and absolute champion has emerged. For all of the nude billiard playing, debate against the handicapped, and chicken finger/Scorcesse fun I've had all season, they all pale in comparison to this one. A paintball competition jam packed with action movie cliches and references.

Just after a single viewing I caught the brilliantly written episode paying homage to 28 Days Later, The Warriors, Predator, Die Hard, and every single John Woo film ever. It is hilarious, amazingly accurate, and even incredibly shot. As an added bonus Jeff and Britta FINALLY... well just watch it for yourself here. If you are an action film fanatic like myself, then you too will recognize that this is a homework assignment that goes above and beyond to earn it's A.

LOST Takeaways: The Candidate

[SPOILERS, if you are not caught up]
- I'm still invested in this show, but mostly because of the characters.  I now believe fully that the finale will be a letdown, from the point of view of anything making sense.  What really bothers me is that I think that the makers of the show don't care as much as its fans.  I'm rewatching season four right now, and I've found no less than three major discrepancies/inconsistencies, and several unnecessarily-planted mysteries that the show has no interest in explaining.  

- OK, this was the first shot across the bow.  I know now that everyone important is going to get killed.  I'm  primed for it.  Goodbye, non-sideways Sun and Jin.  You didn't deserve what you got. Neither did you, Frank.

- So the last four hours of this show will be Jack and Desmond against Smokey.  I'm predicting another donkey-wheel turn (this time by Desmond) that foils Smokey's attempts to get off the island, and puts everybody back in the pre-Black Rock days.  Kate and Sawyer are "The Skeletons" (Adam and Eve), and Jack will team up with Jacob to change the past to prevent Smokey from getting off the Island.  And that, my friends, will be the origin of Sideways world -- the time travel changes that keep Jacob from having to pick Candidates.  This is my last prediction, as I will not see another episode until the 18th.

- They've really wasted Michael Emerson in this final season.  One Ben episode, and it was lightweight.  Piss poor guys.  You must use your most valuable assets.

- My only question:  Writers, if you were going to end the show like this -- Smokey hunts and kills the candidates -- why did you feel you needed to create a limited timeline to finish the show?  I, for one, would have been happy to watch more of Sawyer & Co. in the Dharma Initiative or more behind the scenes from the Others/Hostiles -- two or more seasons of each would have been fine.  Instead, the writers decided to ignore these hotbeds of entertainment and remake a show that didn't need to be remade.  Disappointing.

Family Guy, Without All That Family Guy Humor

Family Guy has accomplished the impossible for their 150th episode: a show with absolutely no cut-aways or flashbacks*.  The plot basically involves Stewie and Brian getting locked in a bank vault, Stewie convincing Brian to toss his salad, both of them getting drunk, and discussing suicide.  Amazingly, it's all just dialogue.  It's like Mamet directing Family Guy.

* Incidentally, this is what South Park made fun of Family Guy for in "The Cartoon Wars", basically for drawing comedy from pop culture or non-sequitur references rather than from the plot itself.

What I'm Watching: Party Down, Happy Town

Party Down, Starz Channel

Just finished the first season of this show, created by actor Paul Rudd and Rob Thomas (Veronica Mars), on Netflix instant-watch.  The sitcom follows a failed one-hit-wonder actor (Adam Scott) as he returns to his old job with a catering company. Each show is focused on a different event being catered, setting up new circumstances that keep the premise from getting stale (similar to HBO's Extras).  The catering team is comprised of a great ensemble cast that includes True Blood's Lizzy Caplan, Judd Apatow alum Martin Starr, and everyone's favorite creepy aunt, Jane Lynch, in probably her most consistently funny performances to date.  The State's Ken Marino also stands out as the team's sad-sack, ex-alcoholic, entrepreneurship-obsessed boss.  Party Down is as dirty as a cable series should be (profanity and nudity abound), but contains the heart of The Office and cringe-comedy chops of Curb.  Recommended.  

Happy Town, ABC

This show's premiere was promising, if not spectacular.  The central plot points echo Twin Peaks: There's been a grisly murder in the small and peaceful town of Haplin, Minnesota, which is charming to the point that it is kind of creepy, complete with overly-friendly old ladies and a fragrant and iconic bread factory at the top of a hill.  Looking for a successor to Lost?  This show might fit the bill:  There is a central mystery surrounding a serial killer called the "Magic Man," who reappears after a five-year hiatus; the show makes use of strange and mystical symbology, including a question mark with a halo over it and a "Blue Door"; it includes characters who are not who they say they are, and it has a big ensemble cast featuring Lost's M.C. Gainey ("Mr. Friendly"), Abrams/Whedon alum Amy Acker, and everyone's favorite creepy British uncle, Sam Neill.  Tentatively recommended.