The TV Challenge continues…

On the whole do you feel most Special Reports are really that special? Or are they simply annoying? What special report has effected you most? (IE: (9/11, Reagan being shot…etc)

I assume that a “Special Report” is something that begins “We interrupt this program with breaking news…” and not “Tonight, the third installment of our six-part series…”

Here’s something interesting. I have learned of most of the past decade’s disasters through radio, not television. I heard about 9/11 from my clock radio, Hurricane Katrina on my evening commute, the Japanese tsunami on my morning commute. I learned of the Columbia explosion and the Gulf spill on the Internet, and most of us learned of the death of Bin Laden via Twitter.

I guess the point is that I don’t seem to get breaking news from the TV. By the time I see something there, I’ve usually already heard about it and so my reaction is either “good, finally some details,” or (usually) “not this again.”

As for the other sort of special report, the investigative news magazine sort of special report, there was something that affected me greatly for a long time. It was a documentary hosted by Orson Welles, called Nostradamus, The Man who Saw Tomorrow.

It sounds ridiculous now, but when I saw it as a wee child, it looked like news, or at least like a legitimate educational program. There was a very serious and solemn man sitting behind a desk, talking about historical facts and ancient scholars. Toward the end of the program, he began to discuss Nostradamus’ prophecies of the future, involving a blue-turbaned Muslim armed with nuclear missiles, and the arrival of Halley’s comet coinciding with “a famine so great and so long that man shall become… a man eater!”

Somehow, all these vague and sensationalized prophecies became muddled in my mind and I became certain that the world would end in 1986, due to a nuclear exchange that would turn its survivors into cannibal mutants.

That, as you may recall, didn’t happen.

I suppose that’s one reason why end-of-the world predictions based on poetry and numerology haven’t managed to convince me ever since. Astrophysics, ecology, economics, and psychology stand a better chance. I now imagine a very boring yet uncomfortable and all-too-plausible end to the world, if end it must. We simply deplete all of our resources while merrily polluting ourselves to death, all the while bickering over things that shouldn’t even be issues.

On the other hand, I also have hope that we somehow might just fix our problems, build the world of tomorrow, become an elder race, and stick it out until the sun blows up.

The TV Challenge Continues…

I’m not too inspired by the next few topics, so I’m going to fast-forward through them. You don’t mind, do you? No, I didn’t think so.

Who is your favorite game show host? Who is your least favorite?

I know I’m supposed to say Bob Barker, or Alex Trebek, or even Guy Smiley, but…

In the Doctor Who episode, “Bad Wolf,” the Anne Droid was was host of The Weakest Link in the year 200100. It was an ornery robot who blasted losing contestants into atoms.

Marathons, Have you watched any TV marathons? In part? In whole? Is there a show you’d like to see run an all day marathon? On the flipside is there a show you’d avoid in marathon?

I watched part of a marathon of Anthony Bourdain: No Reservations once. I don’t really have the patience anymore to sit passively in front of the TV for more than two hours. Has the modern age shredded our collective attention spans, or what?

Out of curiosity, what’s the longest you’ve ever watched TV in one stretch?!

I’m guessing it’s probably something like six hours, and probably happened when I had the flu or something like that. Of course, I wouldn’t really call it “watching.” I’d describe it more as “being barely conscious with my eyes pointed vaguely in the direction of the TV set.”

The TV Challenge continues…

Talk Shows. Do you watch daytime talk TV? If so, do you prefer the calm shows like Oprah or the wilder side like Jerry Springer?

It’s been a long time since I’ve watched daytime talk TV. I have this other thing that I do during the day called working.

I must say that I’d prefer to watch a thoughtful and calm discussion of a topic than a slap fight over cheated on who first. That sort of show isn’t much different than pro wrestling: Someone calls someone else out, that person makes a grand entrance to much booing, heated words are exchanged, fists are swung. Suddenly a third player barges in from offstage, and clobbers one or both of the others with a folding chair, to the gasps of a shocked audience. Who, really, is expecting to be shocked. Just about the only thing that tabloid talk TV doesn’t have that pro wrestling does is the beefcake.

You... you.. bitch! *slap*

Which daytime talk TV show would you like to be on? What would the topic be?

I wouldn’t really want to be on TV, but I suppose I’d prefer to go on a The View type show, with a subject of “Tell us about your fascinating new book,” And then I’d say something like, “I invented the hyperdrive engine while trying to hang a poster of Back to the Future in my bathroom. I slipped on a patch of sunscreen, and when I awoke, I had a vision of what I at first thought was a new form of waffle iron.”

Or something like that.

The TV Challenge continues…

If you were given a free ticket to be on any reality show, which one would you choose?
After my previous post’s rant about the worthlessness of reality tv, one might assume that I’d haughtily answer “none at all,” and be on my way. Well, as it turns out, there are a few not-so-bad shows in the genre that I suppose I could be convinced into participating in, if one were to twist my arm sufficiently. And here they are…

Number Three: Queer Eye for the Straight Guy

The reason I’d choose this show is because I could certainly use some fashion advice, as well as a new haircut, and also a new couch. Unfortunately, not only is this show cancelled, it is also called Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. It is not called Queer Eye for the Slightly-Less-Obviously Queer Guy. So I guess that’s out. I’ll just have to rely on Basic Instructions for fashion advice.

Number Two: Destination Truth

Destination Truth follows the adventures of host Josh Gates as he travels the world searching for mythological creatures. In my opinion, it’s really a travelogue with a paranormal theme. Often, at least half of a segment is devoted to the story of the journey to the investigation site, with the crew experiencing the local culture and scenery in a lighthearted manner. The rest of the segment shows the crew tramping about the wilderness Blair Witch style, in pursuit of the monster of the week. Though they rarely find conclusive evidence, never does an expedition seem to be a waste. And, Josh Gates seems like a fun guy. So, yes, I’d go on this show.

Number One: Mythbusters

I know, I don’t consider Mythbusters to be a reality show either, but apparently someone at IMDB does, so it must be true. So, why Mythbusters? Well, there’s welding, there’s robots, and there’s the blasting of random objects into smithereens just to see what will happen. I would love to have that job.

The TV Challenge continues.

Reality. Are you a fan of “Reality TV”? What’s your “can’t miss” reality TV show (or shows), or what reality TV show do you suppose the devil plays on the TV in Hell as punishment?

No, not a fan. “Reality” TV, means two things to me. One, tantrum-throwing pottymouths that I’d not care to watch in the first place. Two, tarted-up game shows. Sometimes, they’re both. Myself, I’d prefer a nice, scripted fantasy over an improvised popularity contest, but that’s just me. I, as you know, am just weird.

As for what reality show the Devil plays in Hell, I have not one but two suppositions…

The first would be a show called This Is Your Life, INSERT_NAME_HERE. This show would be a customized documentary of the life of the damned in question, detailing each and every decision that led to his or her damnation, and the negative impact that each of these decisions had on others. Exclusive interviews would show the damned exactly what everyone truly thought of him or her.

The second would be a show simply called Earth. It would document (in great detail) happy, well-adjusted people enjoying the company of friends in pleasant settings. For example, they may be joking over coffee, skipping down a beach with a beloved pet, or making arts and crafts with children. In other words, it would be a lot like every pharmaceutical commercial out there, with the omission of the rushed list of dire side effects. Having to watch Earth wouldn’t itself be the punishment, but it would make everything else seem a lot worse by comparison.

The TV Challenge continues…

If you went to a comedy club on amateur night, and they gave you some jokes and a microphone, would you go onstage?

It would depend on how much I’d been drinking, but yes. Probably. Telling a joke is mostly a matter of timing and delivery. So as long as they’re funny jokes and not just inane drivel, I think I could do all right. For that matter, if the material was bad, and I knew it was bad, and it was bad in the right way, that could work, too. I’d settle for making the audience groan and roll their eyes at bad puns. All in fun, right?

I’d have to be pretty darn drunk first, though.

The TV Challenge continues…

If your life was a sitcom, what would the title be?

I doubt anyone would watch it, but, very well. I suppose it would have to be a workplace comedy, otherwise it would just be 22 minutes of me sitting on the couch, staring blandly into the camera. (In sitcom houses, the television set is usually against the Fourth Wall.) The title of that show would have to be Erik On The Couch.

Hmm.

That almost sounds like the show would be about an endearingly neurotic (yet ever so handsome and clever) character who regularly visits his psychologist (an audience analogue whose back continuously remains to the camera). The office scenes would be bookends to the rest of the story, which would be told in flashback. Perhaps the titular character can even tell his nameless doctor a short story set in the present, which will frame a problem, and then go off on a tangent to tell a longer story set in the 1980′s, which surprisingly provides the solution to the problem.

No, wait. This is starting to sound a lot like Beautiful People. Scratch that. Back to the drawing board.

Okay, workplace comedy. Let’s see, we call it Erik Just Wants To Do His Job And Then Go Home. It’s about an endearingly neurotic (but ever so handsome and clever) character whose strategy is to keep busy and avoid workplace drama in general. The more obnoxious characters would, of course, steal the spotlight and relegate the titular character to the role of recurring minor character in his own show.

No, I don’t think that would work too well, either.

Okay, maybe we make it a comedy about a hangout, like Cheers. The only problem is that I don’t think that places like that really exist. Or if they do, then they exist only for a particular group of people, and the rest of us see only a tchotckie bar, a run-down burger stand, or a chintzy diner.

There is, of course, one last place where people hang out— the Internet. So maybe the title of the show should be “Erik Says The Darndest Things (On The Internet).” In this show, an endearingly neurotic (but ever so handsome and clever) character undergoes a vexing series of so-called first world problems, such as rude cashiers, bad drivers, and frustrating user interfaces. At the end of each episode, he distills the wisdom he gains in dealing with the problem into a pithy sentence or two, which he broadcasts over the Internet.

No, wait. This is starting to sound a lot like Doogie Howser, M.D. Scratch that. Back to the drawing board…. or not.

The TV Challenge Continues…

Comedies. How do you feel about sitcoms? Good, wholesome fun or saccharine inanity?

First of all, a pet peeve of mine. Some people use the word inane seemingly without being aware of its meaning. Inane has been misused to mean things like “offensive,” “irrational,” or “obvious.” The proper meaning of inane is “empty, meaningless, or pointless.”

All of which sitcoms are.

It’s been quite a while since I actually planned to sit down and watch a sitcom. Futurama was probably the last one to have that honor. As for unplanned watching, I’ve watched sitcoms in the past simply because it was time for whatever it was to come on, and it was either that or the boring drama on the other channel, or nothing. Nowadays, with time-shifting DVR technology, this is less of a constraint. I don’t have to be home at a particular hour to watch a beloved show, and I don’t have to pray that nobody calls the house during that show. (I also remember the days before voicemail.)

So does my DVR pick up any sitcoms? Yes, someone has programmed the household DVR to record South Park, Family Guy and American Dad, which are generally watched only once all more interesting material has been deleted. I find American Dad okayish, but I dislike Family Guy and have no interest in South Park.

This is not to say that I am a completely humorless sourpuss. I think it’s just that I prefer sketch comedy, comedy films, and standup routines to sitcoms. The way that writers sometimes use tricks to contrive situations for sitcom characters bothers me, and the fact that, no matter what happens, everything has to be completely resolved and put back to normal after 22 minutes really bothers me. Maybe your main character did “learn something today” during those 22 minutes, but it’s guaranteed he’ll have forgotten whatever it was by next week.

And that’s why I find sitcoms empty, meaningless, and pointless, i.e., inane.

The TV Challenge continues…

I’m really not too thrilled with the next two questions, so I’m going to answer them together and get them out of the way.

TV Moms. Which TV mom would you have liked to have had for your own? Is there a TV mom you would never want as your own?

First of all, I can’t even think of that many: Mrs. Cosby, Mrs. Keaton, Mrs. Partridge, Doctor Crusher, and Samantha from Bewitched. But I think if I had to pick one, I’d pick from this bunch…

… only because it would have been such fun to have visited.

TV Dads. Which TV Dad would you have most liked to have for your own dad? On the flipside, who was the TV Dad you’d have least liked to have had?

I’ve already used two of the worst dads on TV in previous answers.

and

One of them was such a beast that his family went into witness protection to hide from him. The other treats his kids as portable organ banks and purposefully isolates them from society.

Actually, there is someone from a previous post who wouldn’t be a bad choice, I think.

Dr. Lightman seems like a pretty decent guy when it comes to his daughter. He may be a jerk sometimes, but he has her best interests in mind.