Re: Tru Calling

• Previous message: Ragnar Seton: "Re: Clearing data available bit in LSR?"
• In reply to: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Next in thread: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Reply: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Reply: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Reply: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 13:57:10 -0000

Evenbit wrote:
> You have created a whole new episode! ;-)

Yeah! And it's a whole lot less "cheesy" too..."learning leadership
skills", my foot! Since when was TV supposed to be a "how to live your
life" manual, anyhow? That stuff sounds a distinctly "fascist"
concept, in fact...ask any true (Tru?) leader and they didn't read a
single "textbook" on "leadership skills"...they developed them,
usually, through basically being dragged through the crap until they
realised what's "right" and "wrong" from direct experience (such as
how jail transformed Nelson Mandela from "some terrorist" to a true
leader of his people and a great man of peace) and by simply _LIKING_
people to know how to talk to them and getting them to let out that
stuff inside of them that they - under a barrage of advertising
telling them constantly how crap they are because they don't buy
products - didn't believe they were capable of but it was entirely
there all along...leaders don't sprinkle fairy dust on people, you
know...they simply know how to take out of people their best
attributes so that good things can happen...getting people to work
together, getting people to accept a _compromise_, yes, between
otherwise disagreeing people so that something gets done, etc.,
etc....a "cheesy" sub-plot about dumping a boyfriend is NOT, I'm
afraid to say, the "Path to Enlightenment" when it comes to "learning
leadership skills" to bring about great and good changes...it's merely
"psychological candy" to try to make people think that these things
come about by following _fascist doctorine_ in some "academic
textbook" world for middle-class people to learn to be "great" without
lifting a finger ("sweat and hardship are sooo not me!", they cry in
disgust ;)...rather than living through, yes, _crap_...and, in
learning to deal with the blows of life, you learn how to raise
yourself from that and then to raise yourself even further than that
still...to "leadership skills", if you so choose...but, anyway,
"leadership" sucks...actually try it and, like, it _ain't_ what it's
cracked up to be...being a "hero" is one of the crapest, ungrateful,
sucky jobs there is..."world domination" is the _worst burden_
imaginable, NOT some "great power"...everyone moaning at you about
everything...total crap...you don't really want to go there, really...

There is a _reason_ why "leaders" get the higher wages and it's NOT
because they read more textbooks than anyone else...it's because the
job _SUCKS_...it's "danger money", so to speak...an extra payment
because, without that, no-one would willing take the stress and crap
and heartache...

> Side-plots don't typically
> get that complicated unless there are a lot of main characters
> involved (like in 'Friends' or 'ER' or 'Days of Our Lives').

Aah, that's kind of the point I was making...sub-plots _CAN_ be
exceedinly deep and complicated without that effecting the main thread
or any less about "learning leadership skills" (and if you think _my_
version wasn't about "leadership skills" then you really need to read
it over once more...a few times, if necessary, until you see the
essential point...because any leader - most leaders who do good and
great works - will have to suffer the "backstabber" and "competition"
trying to ruin things for them...trust me, they are everywhere...it's
not paranoia, it's fact...you _know_ you're doing well, the second it
puts other people's noses out of joint that they start attacking
you...BUT, despite such an amazingly high level of betrayal (can it
get much worse?), Tru has to _put her own feelings aside_ for the
greater good...she has to learn to be a "team player" with the human
race...even though she feels like ripping out her friend's eyes, she
works alongside her and helps her to do something good...and if you
don't think "leadership" involves stuff like this - putting your own
needs temporarily second to the wider needs of other people and the
greater good...often with no-one realising your sacrifice, that you're
doing it for _doing right_, not because people will offer you "awards"
or pats on the back - then, sorry, you've learnt _NOTHING_ about
"leadership skills" or "heroism" from that "cheesy sub-plot" _AT
ALL_...

Actually, analysing the "cheesy sub-plot", it seems to be saying "yes,
other people are, indeed, _INFERIOR_ to you but you have to put up
with it as a 'superior' leader"...what kind of lesson is that? Sounds
like something out of "Mein Kampf" regards "leadership
skills"...tolerate the inadequacies of other people because you're so
much better than them? Geez Louise, that's a pretty _VILE_ "lesson" to
be teaching...

And that's what regularly comes from bad script writers dealing with
issues above their writing prowess...like how one episode of Star
Trek - a good one...not a bad script writer _for once_ on that
episode - had a "trial" to determine if Data - the robot - was a
"being" or merely a "servant"...and, in the end, Picard saves Data
from being taken apart by taking Guinan's "hint" - her being a black
woman just rams the point home for the terminally stupid - that
wouldn't this make Data a "slave" and if they copied him, wouldn't
they be creating an army of _slaves_? And, thus, wouldn't any other
decision imply a tolerance of _slavery_? Brilliantly done...until,
next episode, it's handed back into the bad script writers' hands and
Data's saying "I want to be human"...bloody hell, just get him to
smile, tap-dance and sing "oh lordy, yessa'...me's the poor happy
black slave wanting to be like them superior white folk!"...it's
telling that in some episodes later on - when it goes back into decent
script writers' hands again - they drop "hints" that Data shouldn't
really aspire to being human because, in all the ways that count, he
already is...they have NOT forgotten the metaphor that the bad script
writers just kept on doing...not understanding what metaphors they
were dealing with and, actually, how rascist they were being
unintentionally...as I say, this is what comes of _crap writers_ with
their silly "cheesy sub-plots" not realising what they are actually
doing...

What do you think is the real "leadership lesson"? Would it be my
"sometimes, you just have to grin and bear it...people will try to
bring you down but, as a leader, you have a job to do and things more
important than your own feelings to ensure happen" or their "Yes, you
are so much more superior than the lesser 'animals' around you who
dare to think they know better than the genetically perfect 'leader'!!
Do not tolerate their 'advice' as you are the acme of 'Master Race'
perfection!!" (shall we throw in some "Heil Hitler!" and Nazi salutes
after that to stress the point even more? ;)?

Then look at what you say about, say, "Friends" _does_ do this
stuff...and "Friends" is a big programme that people all around the
world watch because it really is good and funny...not particularly
"deep and meaningful" (sorry Annie) but then it isn't trying to be,
pretending to be or anything other...it's supposed to simply be some
"entertaining escapism" and, at that, it's a fantastic, funny show
(not everything can be - _nor should it be_ - some deep "neo-communist
manifesto" or whatever with every episode...just being "funny" or
"something to while away five minutes" _IS_ a good enough thing to be
:)...

It's an excellent show...it manages - and, trust me, this is
particularly difficult to do - to even overcome the permanently
_cynical_ attitude of British audiences...I mean, it's got the canned
laughter and the people "Ayrian Master Race" beautiful people and all
that "plastic" nonsense which so often _offends_ non-American tastes
(and, no, this isn't "snobbishness" or anything at all, really...it's
the implied "you're not any good unless you're perfectly 'cat-walk
model' beautiful" crap and "hey, we're going to _tell you_ when things
are funny with a laughter track because we think our audience is too
fudging _stupid_ to know what they should laugh at without being
explicitly told!" patronising nonsense...other nationalities aren't
being "snobby" to hate this stuff...it's just, well, how to put this
delicately? Our TV isn't projected as a fascist "how to live your
life" manual or anything...Basil Fawlty? He's a complete moron! You're
NOT supposed to aspire to being like him at all...but he's not really
a bad person or anything...you see, this _isn't_ about forcing some
set of _morals_ on people - spoon-feeding it 24/7 - until everyone
"complies" with the "magic plastic world" you must fall in line
with...America is more conservative and right-wing than Europe and you
can also see this in the style of TV...there's no "trust" that the
viewer can work it out for themselves what's "moral" or what's "funny"
or whatever...it's rammed home by perfect "Master Race" models until
you can't fail to be brain-washed by their message...to be fair, I
don't think the script writers and TV executives are doing this
delibrately...they themselves grew up on this stuff and have been
brain-washed that they must "comply" to all the conventions...

Which is why Friends can manage to break through this...but, in a
sense, the script writers are being a touch "subversive" in that they
have your typical "plastic world" moralistic programme with "beautiful
people"...but slip in their "subversion" almost completely
unnoticed...Ross - who fills in the "Fred" stereotype...that is,
"Fred" from Scooby Doo...Joss Whedon was playing tricks in calling
them the "Scooby Gang" from more than one angle (it was taking the
mickey that the "Scooby Gang" totally _aren't_ the stereotypes of the
real Scooby Gang ;)...the bland, "perfect" guy with no
personality...the kind of "hero" of the piece...a blank canvas -
delibrately - for men to project themselves onto so they can also feel
"the hero" of the piece too - breaks the stereotypes (as they all do)
from time to time, to sneak that "subversion" into what would
otherwise - almost suspiciously so - be the _perfect_ example of
"perfect young plastic people living happy, smiley lives!"
nonsense...Ross fudges things up...Fred would never do so!! Monica was
as fat as a big hot-air balloon before...so, actually, she's not quite
"perfect", is she? Joey - the architypal "fool" character - actually
had a _successful_, if "cheesy", acting career before...so, he's NOT a
total loser "fool" to laugh at...just someone down on his luck at the
moment...Phoebe is completely mental...ever so often betraying
complete almost "serial killer" insanity...she's the most "subversive"
character of the lot...and she comes from the streets and a serious
harsh life...Chandler is the cynical git that he is because, really,
he's actually kind of sensitive and lots of mistreatment has made him
that way...blah-blah-blah...

Oh, indeed...that's why "Friends" works where others fail...under the
superficial "gloss", the "Friends" are all a highly twisted,
crapped-upon, malformed bunch...and have you actually listened to the
lyrics of the theme tune? It's doing much the same...it _sounds_ like
a really happy-happy-joy-joy theme tune...but, other than the chorus,
permanently depressing "girlfriend in a coma" _Morrissey_ could have
written these "isn't life total crap?" lyrics for the Smiths or
something:

[ Cutting out the chorus - and mentally try to cut out the
"happy-happy-joy-joy" theme tune so you're only seeing what the lyrics
say without that "bouncey happiness" the music puts into it - which
goes back to the _pretence_ of "happy-happy-joy-joy": ]

"So no-one told you life was gonna be this way
Your job's a joke, you're broke, your love life's DOA [ "Dead on
arrival" ]
It's like you're always stuck in second gear,
When it hasn't been your day, your week, your month,
or even your year, but...

You're still in bed at ten, though work begins at eight,
You burned your breakfast, so far things are going great,
Your mother warned you there'd be days like these,
But she didn't tell you
when the world was brought down to your knees
that...

No one could ever know me. No one could ever see me.
Seems you're the only one who knows what it's like to be me
Someone to face the day with.
Make it through all the mess with.
Someone I'll always laugh with.
Even at my worst, I'm best with....
you - yeah!

It's like you're always stuck in second gear,
When it hasn't been your day, your week, your month,
or even your year, but..."

[ "I'll be there for you", the Rembrants..."Friends theme
tune"...check out that "no one could ever know me" verse! It's on a
slow decline to "suicidal", if it keeps going any further...kind of
seeing what I mean about "hiding" this stuff? The actual "bouncey
happiness" of the music and the "Friends" dancing around having fun
gives the total opposite impression to these words, doesn't it? They
are sneaking it in where no-one's directly looking ;) ]

Do you kind of get my point? It's _superficially_ full of
"gloss"..."beautiful people" living their young, care-free lives in
big apartments in New York...full of the care-free spirit of youthful
exuberance...it's like it's almost _trying to be_ the perfect example
of yet another bland, crap American "plastic" sitcom...giving the
pretence of following the conventions...

But underneath this, the whole point - as the theme tune lyrics
confirm - is that, actually, these people are all a bit crap...they've
been crapped on...life's not treated them particularly well...they're
a bit twisted and malformed because of those experiences in places
(Phoebe is clearly just outrightly "insane" - sometimes even sounding
like a serial killer or something ("Did I say that out loud? Crap!"
;) - from living on the streets)...the whole point of "Friends" is
that they overcome that _crap_ with their friendship...but really stop
to consider the hell Monica went through being constantly bullied
about her size...or Phoebe shivering on a park bench under newspapers,
which has ulitmately left her permanently a touch "insane"...or how
Joey (and his ego and his pride) feels to be reduced from successful
TV superstar to a failing nobody unable to even get a crap advertising
job dressed as a turkey or whatever...blah-blah-blah...under the
"gloss" that everything's "great", they are actually a pretty screwed
up bunch...the essence of the show being that their friendship
actually brings out the best in each other that they can get passed
these things...unlike all the other crap, bland, "plastic" sitcoms,
this one is actually saying "hey, don't worry if you're screwed up -
so were these lot - but with the right motivations and good, solid
friendships, _ANYONE_ can become one of the 'beautiful people'"...the
message is actually the _reverse_ of the usual "fascist doctorine" of
flawless, beautiful "heroes"...it's actually okay to be that "screw
up" that 100% of people actually are...

And that's why the "sub-plots" are as they are...because the main
thread is actually the "superficial nonsense" part of the show...it's
NOT the most important bit, like on all the other shows...just every
episode has to have some "focus" - a kind of "story" - for all the
other bits to cling onto...but it's the "other bits" that are the
_true story_...the "main section" is usually just the excuse for a lot
of jokes...after all, it _is_ a comedy, whatever may be lurking "under
the hood"...

And that's why this particular show gets all the ratings and manages
to break "cultural divide" to get amazingly high ratings in other
places, like over here...it knows that it has to put on the "pretence"
that there's nothing more to it than a string of jokes said by
stupidly "beautiful people", who look like are models straight off a
cat-walk...it needs to do this to lull the people brought up on the
"conventions" of this "plastic" nonsense into thinking it's "more of
the same"...the TV executives hear the names of the actors and see
photos of them and think: "aah, more of the same of the bland, crap
which gets all the ratings...sure, have all the money you want to make
the show!!"...and, mostly it is just a sitcom...but there's "other
stuff" hiding behind the superficiality which are actually somewhat
"dark" and not particularly "plastic perfect!" like everything else...

It's all in those theme tune lyrics...they explain the "raison d'etre"
 of the show better than anything else:

"No one could ever know me. No one could ever see me.
Seems you're the only one who knows what it's like to be me
Someone to face the day with.
Make it through all the mess with.
Someone I'll always laugh with.
Even at my worst, I'm best with....
you - yeah!"

Compare to obviously "very dark" lyrics in "Mad World" for "Donnie
Darko":

"All around me are familiar faces:
Worn out places, worn out faces

Bright and early for their daily races:
Going nowhere, going nowhere

And their tears are filling up their glasses:
No expression, no expression

Hide my head I want to drown my sorrow:
No tommorow, no tommorow

And I find it kind of funny
I find it kind of sad
The dreams in which I'm dying
Are the best I've ever had

I find it hard to tell you
'Cos I find it hard to take
When people run in circles
It's a very, very
Mad World
Mad World

Children waiting for the day they feel good:
Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday

Made to feel the way that every child should:
Sit and listen, sit and listen

Went to school and I was very nervous:
No one knew me, no one knew me

Hello teacher tell me what's my lesson:
Look right through me, look right through me"

[ "Mad World", originally "Tears for Fears", writing from the
depression of British '80s unemployment and darkness... ]

There's certainly a connection with:

"No one could ever know me. No one could ever see me."
[ The "Friends" supposedly happy theme tune ]

...and...

"Went to school and I was very nervous:
No one knew me, no one knew me

Hello teacher tell me what's my lesson:
Look right through me, look right through me"
[ "Mad World", obviously _dark_ tune scoring Donnie Darko ]

Sometimes, you see, the script writers delibrately _don't_ stick a big
neon sign flashing: "Look, it's 'dark' and about the harshness of
people's ordinary lives...aren't I really clever?"...sometimes, they
are delibrately sneaking things in without you seeing...showing you
things that are "unapproved" by the fascist "moral police" who control
content to avoid their audience thinking any "ThoughtCrimes"...but one
or two slip through the cracks and "Friends" but more so "the
Simpsons" are some of the most "subversive" TV, pretending to just be
"fun stuff" or the execs would never approve it...the execs pretend
their decisions are about "what the public wants" but the ratings and
approval actually shows that they don't want this crap anymore (when
"Friends" slots a little bit in, it shoots to the top of the
ratings...when X-files challenges many of the conventions (the show
never had a single "clean ending" once, always leaving everything "Up
in the air" against the conventions and breaking another one in having
an important "running plot" that the syndicates must have been fuming
that they couldn't show it out of order like all the other shows where
the hero's "Love interest" always dies so that thing "return to
normal" for the next episode..."the Simpsons" poked fun of this
directly in an episode where Skinner is discovered not to really be
Skinner ("Don't worry...we'll all completely forget by the next
episode, as if it never happened"...being very "post-modern" in
actually admitting the characters _know_ they are in a cartoon
;)...but then delibrately _broke_ the convention by killing off Ned's
wife _permanently_ and then having episodes revolving around that so
that, yup, can't be shown out of order...and knowing "the Simpsons"
folk, they did this _delibrately_ so that if a TV channel ever does
show it out of order they and their audience can _LAUGH AT
THEM_...because they don't get the joke on them at all...

When the shows break the conventions, the people _LOVE_ them, in
fact...like, when "the Office" actually won awards over in America, it
really wasn't an act...the cast were truly stunned: "how does this
show - full of silence, a "comedy of manners"...filmed delibrately
like a bad 'reality' documentary - actually do well in 'brash, bold'
America?"...this is the stuff we're told America "doesn't understand"
and hates watching...the truth is, that's not true and has _NEVER_
been true...it's the TV execs who insist on re-filming things from the
UK to make it "light and happy and plastic" for American
audiences...but I bet any money that you'd all prefer the original
"One foot in the grave" (it's a fantastically written farce with
excellent believable acting) to the American re-make, that's been so
changed to make it "light and happy" that I didn't even recognise it
until I read that it was supposed to be a "re-filming" of it: "the
Cosby Show"...yeah, those in the UK, Bill Cosby is supposed to be the
"permanently grouchy" Victor Meldrew(!!!)...it's amazing they actually
_even tried_ to "convert" what is actually a show about a retired
moany, horrible, evil git ("downsized" from his job to be replaced by
a robot) and the crap that keeps landing on his plate that makes him
even more and more horrible all the way through...

But I bet if Americans were given a chance to see the "real deal"
then, no, you wouldn't have the slightest problem with an episode
completely set in a waiting room or a car stuck in a traffic jam at
all, would you? Yeah, the entire episode just stuck in a car or just
waiting in a waiting room and it doesn't change to another location
_at all_...the comedy is completely in them talking to each
other...those TV execs think you're too stupid and have "the attention
span of a gnat" that you couldn't handle or appreciate a show like
that...which, basically, is very much done like a stage play would be
done (staying mostly or completely in one location and not "changing
sets" too often :) to an extent most of the time...

It's not the American people who can't handle this or don't want
it...it's the _ADVERTISERS_ who want massive ratings and loads of cash
and force TV execs to only select things that are _guaranteed_ to get
an audience...and, as we know, if a show drops even a point or two in
the ratings, it's _slaughtered mercilessly_ because it isn't getting
the viewers watching the ads (as we know, it was unbelievable that the
Buffy guys simply "tolerated" the drop in advertising money because
they thought the show was good to let the creator choose when to end
it, not the advertising money)...having a non-commercial channel or
two in the UK (no ads), this stuff is _blatantly obvious_...the
American channels are about showing adverts and the TV programmes are
merely an "excuse" by which to beam the adverts at you...well, of
course, that's where the money is and it's all about "profits", right?
And to sell the advertising space, they have to tell the companies
that this show has "such-and-such rating points"...the cost depends on
which show you're advertising next to, after all...so, they simply
_don't dare_ show anything that isn't a 100% ratings "tour de
force"...and part of that is that there's that moralising "Bible Belt"
to account for...hence, all the programmes carry only "Bible Belt
approved" morals and blast them at you with patronising blandness and
complete non-subtlety...

The only "good point" that can be said about the "profits" obsession
is that at least shows are properly financed...admittedly, "Dr.Who"
was as "cheap" as you get: "Doctor! Doctor! Save me from the painted
plastic cups! Oh no! We're being attacked by a badly-made model made
out of egg cartons!!"...but, hey, even that is a major "cult hit" in
America that "BBC video" are actually completely self-sufficient on
selling Dr.Who to America...really...none of my TV licence fee goes
into that at all because all those Americans "Dr.Who" nutters pay for
it all!! But what was interesting was that because of the success of
"Dr.Who" in America (admittedly, to a geeky audience but enough of
them to make lots of cash :), they actually comissioned a "Dr.Who"
film that, indeed, had these massive, expensive movie-sized sets and
cool special effects - how the show should have always looked, if they
could only have afforded it - but, oh dear, it _happened
again_...there's daft stuff about the Doctor having a "Love interest"
and it all falls into the "Hollywood cliche" from start to
finish...the fans - American included - _LOATHED_, rightfully, because
it was bland crap and totally NOT what that show was about...like
Buffy, it's universally agreed: "_ignore_ the film, it's total
crap!"...

And what's funny about this as well is that the BBC themselves were
kind of embarassed by the "cheapness" of Dr.Who and, basically,
delibrately killed it off...the "Director General" (the main BBC boss)
kind of outrightly said that he hated the show and kept changing it to
try to ruin the ratings and then, when even that didn't work, just cut
it off the airwaves...it wasn't a "ratings" thing at all...it was one
TV boss who didn't like it forcing his opinion on everyone...

And, guess what? To celebrate the BBC's anniversary (which is also
broadcast TV's anniversary because the BBC was the first boradcast TV
channel in the world), they had a "poll" thing...they asked "which BBC
programme that's no longer shown should be brought back?"...so, they
"celebrate" the anniversary by bringing back the public's choice...and
one show won by _double_ the next highest requested show to be
returned to the screen...

Yup, the Tardis and the Daleks are coming back!!! Literally "by
popular demand"...and, these days, CGI effects are something even the
BBC can easily afford...so, Hopefully, it won't look as "cheap" as it
used to (and the fact that it's back "by popular demand" can also mean
that they can squeeze the bosses to give it _proper money_ this time
around ;)...a whole new generation of kids hiding behind the sofa,
scared of the evil Daleks and Cybermen! All it needs is Orbital's
hardcore techno verison of the theme tune to make it complete...

> I think
> in this case, the writers wanted the viewer to notice that Tru was
> learning a leadership skill from her friend, who was after all, just
a
> follower.

*Yawn* :O :|

Really? Are we supposed to care or something?

Yeah, yeah...Tru's a "leader" and her girlfriend's a "follower"...and
everything in life fits into perfect, neat little pigeon-holes like
this...so everyone and everthing should be labelled, categorised,
treated according to the pigeon-hole it sits in, stuffed into a
hierarchy and the "lowly" friend should "learn her place" in the
"hierarchy of perfection" where Golden, perfect plastic people with
their bland, flawless personalities spring into action as "heroes"
because they learn of their "superiority" with these "lessons in
leadership", which seems to amount to: "Yes, your 'underlings' are
hypocritical cowards"...

Where's the interwingularity of _reality_ got to?

"Intertwingularity is not generally acknowledged --
people keep pretending they can make things deeply hierarchical,
categorizable and sequential when they _CAN'T_.

Everything is deeply intertwingled."

[ Ted Nelson ]

I mean, time travel, eh? Oh, come on, even something "innocent" like
"Back to the Future" acknowledges that you could, oops, accidentally
screw up time _permanently_ and erase people from history by simply
sneezing in the wrong direction...

So, how about in episode five, Tru messes it all up...yup, time is
screwed up _permanently_ and she can't fix it...these things happen to
even the best of us...and she just has to "get over it!", as miserable
as that is and move on with her life...a whole "sub-plot" of her
perhaps being _too afraid_ to use her time travelling
anymore...literally paralysed like a rabbit in a headlight until she's
forced by circumstance, kicking and screaming, to do it...that is,
after three episodes _featuring no time travel whatsoever_...

Yeah, it'll never happen because they are simply _too scared_ to try
it...and haven't got enough imagination to even think it up in the
first place probably...detached from reality for so long as they have
been, they don't realise that:

"_Everything_ is deeply intertwingled."

Beth ;)

• Previous message: Ragnar Seton: "Re: Clearing data available bit in LSR?"
• In reply to: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Next in thread: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Reply: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Reply: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Reply: Evenbit: "Re: Tru Calling"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]