Sunday, February 21, 2010

Annoying Things of the Week

These are the things that annoyed me this week:

5. Eating - While this was something that I clearly learned to do at a very early age, every once in a while my mouth just forgets how to do it and just decides to crunch down on the side of the inside of my mouth. It's amazing how this can happen. Yesterday I took a nice chunk out of the back of my mouth with my molars. And as you most likely have experienced, it's not just the pain that sucks. It's the fact that now I want to keep biting that part of my mouth when I eat. I think it's a conspiracy. That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.

4. Target - Speaking of eating, this is one of the best times of year. The Valentine's candy is gone. In its place is Easter candy. When I was a kid I HATED Cadbury Creme Eggs. Then about five or six years ago I had another just because it was handed to me. And that's what you do when someone gives you something to eat. You eat it without question, right? And now I love them. But it isn't the Creme Eggs that I love. It's the hollow chocolate bunnies from Target. They are in the pink and purple foil (Superior brand).

But I always have two problems. The first is that my mind builds up how good they are during the time they don't have them, April through the end of February. So the first one is always really good with the first taste, then that hit of - "That's it? No different from other decent chocolate." I get over that quickly enough and have a few more. Then a bunch more. Because I need to make up for missed time, you know?

But this year, Target jacked up the price. They used to be 99 cents. For something that's barely more chocolate than a candy bar, I was OK with that. But $1.59? Sorry. This economy sucks. So this year, I'll have fewer bunnies. Probably a good thing, since I wouldn't continue losing a pound a week if I were to eat a fleet of bunnies.

3. Olympics - It isn't the event itself that bugs me. I find some of the Winter Olympic Games to be interesting enough to watch for 15-20 minutes once every for years. The halfpipe thing was pretty cool. Again, for just a few minutes, and I've had my fill for quite awhile. Figure skating is possibly the most boring thing on TV. I'll take the test patter over that, thank you very much. And I know most people aren't watching because they like it. They're watching to see if they fall or not. The rest of their (what feels like) 30 minute each routines are horrifically dull.

And I'm also bugged by the time delay. I'm offended that NBC thinks that I need to watch the Olympics during prime time instead of when they actually happen. With their logic, and they going to delay the Super Bowl the next time they get it? I don't want to sift through four plus hours of coverage to see the one thing I want to see which I already know the results of because it's all over the internet.

But what annoys me the most is the lack of counter programming. Everyone is so afraid of the Olympics that there isn't much else to watch. It seems like the only shows showing anything new are Lost and American Idol. I've made the same complaint about American Idol in the past. Every other channel runs away from showing anything at the same time Idol is on. Come on, network execs. I like TV. Put something on that I want to watch and I'll watch that instead of making my way through season 5 of the Sopranos, something that you aren't making any money off of me watching.

2. Eighth Graders - So lazy. SO lazy.

1. At the Movies - This show started as Siskel and Ebert, two guys who love and REALLY understand movies. Then Siskel died. Richard Roeper took over. He took some time, but soon because a suitable replacement. Now I really, really miss him on the show. Ebert then went through a whole bunch of stuff which you can read about in this excellent Esquire interview that prevented him from returning to the show. Roeper went through a rotation of guest critics before the show decided to completely shift gears.

"The Two Bens" time period for the show was clearly the worst. I rarely watched. When I did, it felt like a high school newspaper really liked its own couple of critics and gave them a TV show. It's what you imagine a movie critic would be like who had no knowledge of movies prior to the 1980s. Now I know that one of the Bens was much brighter than the other - Ben Mankiewicz. But Ben Lyons was a joke. And the other Ben gets lumped in with the other. Too bad.

The makers of the show soon went back to the more tried and true version of the show, hiring Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott, two guys who were frequently in the critic rotation opposite Richard Roeper. I was exciting and actually started watching the show again. For the first couple months, I was trying to figure out which guy I agrees with more. And this was a problem for me. I really wanted to know which guy to "trust."

You see, with Roger Ebert, I don't always agree with him, but when I don't I know why. I can read one of his reviews and know whether I'll agree with him or now. And even if I totally hate a movie he loved, I'm going to learn something new about the movie. I'm going to look at it in a different way. So at the very least, I can use his reviews.

But A.O (Tony) and Michael? I just can't get their reviews. And I think I finally figured out why. Siskel and Ebert discussed the movies. When they argued, they were defending the movies. Roeper soon came around to doing the same thing. But these two guys, while they have some good movie knowledge, they seem to be defending themselves instead of the movies. And with this, I've finally come across the word to describe these guys. "Smarmy." I'll still watch the show because I enjoy being introduced to movies I wouldn't have known about otherwise. But I now can skip past most of their reviews because I know that it's going to be more about them than it is about the movies. If I want Smarmy, I'll read my own stuff, thank you very much.

So what annoyed you this week?

1 comment:

Nolan said...

Speaking of movies, have you seen "The Brothers Bloom"? I hadn't, until someone mentioned it on a blog as being one of the best of 2009. Definitely worth checking out. Great filmmaking by the guy who directed "Brick" (which is also worth seeing).