Category: Columns

Pieces that don’t focus on reviewing a particular episode or season of a show. Think of it as an op-ed you would see in the Sunday newspaper.

In defense of television

I came across an article this afternoon entitled “11 Reasons You Should Stop Watching Television Now” that I found pretty dim. An outgrowth of the “I don’t even own a TV” fad I thought was dead, the article isn’t just smug, it’s wrong. Let’s count the ways.

Wasting Time

It’s pretty obvious that when you’re watching TV you’re not doing anything else. Time spent watching television is similar to being asleep (although you will see some other consequences below). The question is whether you want to spend even more time in your precious day asleep.

Oddly enough, the author posting in the “productivity” section of a life hacking website has apparently never heard of second-screening. Thanks to tablets and smartphones you don’t have to sit in front of a television screen like a zombie anymore. Second-screening is productivity. Some might even call it a life hack. Why, here’s a piece in a newspaper all about it, but it’s from someone who actually works in a television network, certainly not the the kind of expert productivity blogger you’d find on a life hacking site.

Missing Out on Social Interaction

Every hour you spend in front of the TV is another hour you’re not making the most of your life. You could be playing with your family, hanging out with friends or doing an activity you enjoy. Connection is one of the basic human needs we all have and it will never be fulfilled by your television set.

If you look to the left of the article you’ll see colorful little buttons with various symbols in them. Those are for sharing on social media. Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest and the like. Funny thing about those sites: You can use them while you watch TV, too. I know, right! When you’re watching — and I’m being totally hypothetical here — a show about a tornado full of sharks, you can talk about it on social media and — hold on to your butts — other people will respond. Are you sitting down? THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. 

Allow me to be serious for a moment to say that there is social value in watching television. This article appeared on August 15, an ordinary day in the Gregorian calendar…unless you’re a devoted fan of Lost, then today is 8-15 and you get to talk about it with complete strangers on Twitter. Or next year in Hawaii when you’re celebrating the 10-year anniversary of its debut: lost2014.com My life would be less without these conversations.

So in fact watching television isn’t costing you social interaction. It is actually increasing it in ways we couldn’t have imagined even on September 22, 2004.

I made my name on Twitter tweeting the most partisan political spew you can imagine. It was fun but it was a recipe for very isolated online interaction. I needed to branch out and chose television as one of the ways I would do so.  I tweeted as incessantly about Lost as I did politics and a bizarre thing happened: Democrats responded.  You see, television brought us together to create social interaction where there would otherwise be none. What a concept. But I’m sure our lifehacker’s life doesn’t need such richnesses.

Programming Yourself with Negativity

Just about every television show, from comedies to drama to reality TV and the news, is negative. If you look at almost any TV show there is a complete lack of positive redeeming messages. While there are exceptions to this rule they are few and far between, so choose carefully what you decide to spend your time watching.

Nice opinion, and in many ways it can be true. But in many ways, if television is where you turn for positive redeeming messages you are doing life wrong. There should probably be a hack for that.

TV Poisons Your Belief Systems

In comedies, we laugh at the stupid/overweight/socially awkward/racial stereotype/different people. The news is filled with stories of pain/suffering/disaster/death, and arguing and drama has to be about problems in order to create the drama. All of this is affecting your outlook on life and the way you see the world.

Wow, now that is some serious literary dissection. “Arguing and drama has to be about problems in order to create the drama.” Slow down, buddy, I’m not a computer. Yes that is what drama is about. Next you’ll be telling us to avoid watching the weather because it’s only notable when there’s a storm.

I’m putting the next two together…

It Creates Unrealistic Expectations

Television distorts our understanding of reality. It’s filled with beautiful people doing amazing things and having great adventures every show. Ask any TV or movie star with half a brain and they’ll tell you that the images you see of them on the screen and magazine covers are completely fake.

Careful going after the half-brained now. #mirrors

Feelings of Inadequacy

Life is never going to be like a TV show and this can make people very disillusioned when they compare it with their real life. The messages within television imply on a regular basis that we’re not pretty/smart/funny enough. Our lives can feel quite empty when compared to the perfection of the TV world.

I could not agree more, actually. Television is not real and viewers should never forget that basic fact. Even “reality” television is not real. Despite all the changes brought about by DVRs, online delivery and binge viewing, one foundation of television remains unchanged: It is made to sell. Ads, subscriptions, clicks, merchandise, DVDs. That’s why television exists. Television is not how most women look; it’s not how most men look. It’s not how most crimes are solved. It’s not what being president is like. It’s not the likelihood of surviving a major hull-loss incident. It’s only when your suspension of disbelief transforms into pure ignorance that a television viewer develops unrealistic expectations and feelings of inadequacy.

Subliminal Programming and Advertising

Make no mistake that there is only one reason why television exists, and that is to sell products. No one is producing TV shows because they want to create great art. Every single part of every single TV program is designed to keep you in front of the TV and prepped to buy the advertised products through traditional advertising or product placements.

I already said this.

Television is designed to make you feel bad so you will buy products that make you feel better. It’s the ultimate in mind control systems. Companies figured out how to get us to voluntarily brainwash ourselves for their benefit.

Why do I want an ice cold Coca-Cola all of a sudden? Seriously. Now you’ve added an anti-marketing screed to your arrogance. You live in the real Uptown, don’t you?

It Degrades Your Self Control and Discipline

Thanks to the incredible psychological hooks that television uses, it’s very hard to stop watching it. We lose our self control and cannot turn off the television even though we may want to. As this continues, our self control and discipline decrease even further and the harder the battle becomes.

I think this is what gets thrown in as part of the standard holier-than-thou smugness that comes from people who look down their nose at television. We’re not supposed to turn it on, therefore we cannot bring ourselves to turn it off. Prediction: People who don’t watch TV still masturbate.

The Health Effects of Sitting Down

We now live a more sedentary life than ever before with most people having jobs behind a desk. We compound this problem when we go home and sit down in front of the TV as well, because the electrical activity in our muscles stops when we’re sitting. Research is showing even the most basic movement of walking or moving our bodies in subtle ways can make a big difference to our health.

Ermagerd, I’m gonna furking die. Not sitting down is the new grass-fed beef so it does make sense that the War on Sitting gets included here. Let me guess, you also drive a hybrid, don’t think Chipotle is real Mexican and make your own detergent? If only there was a way to — again I’m being totally hypothetical here — do 10 sit-ups during every commercial break or sneak in some push-ups during a pitching change. Alas, the unfortunate truth remains that once you flip on the tube you are invariably bolted to the couch through your ass. It’s like prison. Comfy, comfy prison.

We Teach Our Children These Habits

Children are now being trained to watch TV and live a sedentary lifestyle. There is a lot of research showing the negative effects on a child’s development due to both inactivity and the influence of television. Your children will imitate your lifestyle. [sic] so any choice you make will be echoed in the generations that follow.

If all your children see is you watching television you’ve got bigger problems. Parenting is hard, maybe you should try a goldfish.

Is It Really Relaxing?

My personal argument for watching TV is that it’s easy. You stop working for the day and get to relax and turn off your brain for a while, but the reality is that what is good for us is hardly ever the best thing.

I also get to relax when I’m out at a kung fu or dance class. I get to relax when I’m hanging out with friends or spending time with my girlfriend. I also get to relax when reading a book, listening to uplifting audio or even watching uplifting videos (like TED talks or educational materials).

OMFG wait…you know kung fu, too! Jeepers! Let me guess, all your chicken is free range and your software is open source. You have a girlfriend?!? You can read?!? YOU LISTEN TO TED TALKS?!? Shit, bro, the Dos Equis guy has nothing on you, my friend! I cannot believe I have been wasting my life away for the past two decades talking with my mom about last week’s The Young and the Restless when I could have been sitting in the corner of a coffee shop with my nose buried in a book and my hand warmed by a free trade frappuchino mocha with non-fat. (Non-fat is still cool, right?)

Our life-hacker closes:

We get one life to live … 

Clever bastard.

…and it’s up to us to make the most of it. Every hour of the day is an investment that pays off right now and in our future. Invest wisely and your life will actually be filled with truly beautiful people doing amazing things and having great adventures.

It’s time to stop watching television and start living instead.

Sorry, I guess my life sucks. Even though what you’ve done here is waste my time, which I could have spent looking for a job, and blasted me with negativity that changed my belief systems in a way that left me feeling very inadequate about myself.

Worst of all, I read it sitting down.

Spoiler Policy

Prompted by a Twitter exchange with @markjwestpfahl this morning I decided to put my spoiler policy into words. Mark and his wife, @jenpioneerpress, just started watching Longmire, and I tweet about it often.

<blockquote><p><a href=”https://twitter.com/kwatt“>@kwatt</a> <a href=”https://twitter.com/wordpressdotcom“>@wordpressdotcom</a> trying. so. hard. not. to. read. this.</p>&mdash; Mark J. Westpfahl (@MarkJWestpfahl) <a href=”https://twitter.com/MarkJWestpfahl/statuses/359345867486007298“>July 22, 2013</a></blockquote>

//ahref=

<blockquote><p><a href=”https://twitter.com/kwatt“>@kwatt</a> I know. We have only seen two episodes in season 1. This is going to be tough.</p>&mdash; Mark J. Westpfahl (@MarkJWestpfahl) <a href=”https://twitter.com/MarkJWestpfahl/statuses/359346629087731712“>July 22, 2013</a></blockquote>

//ahref=

I don’t know if this is where it began, but I first started hearing “spoiler alert” on Lost podcasts. Most of the time it was used jokingly, as in, “When Oceanic 815 crashed on the island – spoiler alert,” for times when what you were about to say really wasn’t a spoiler. It was usually to mock people who claimed to be upset when they would hear something from an episode they hadn’t watched yet.

You see it more commonly in next-day reviews posted online. I have no beef with bloggers who want to put that in their posts. But after giving it some thought even before today, I am not going to. Let me walk thru my policy and explain why.

WHEREAS the rise of DVRs and online viewing means more and more viewers are not watching televisions shows as they air live; and

WHEREAS that is an individual decision no broadcaster, tweeter, Facebooker or blogger can anticipate; and

This is where the policy begins. If you have yet to watch an episode of Game of Thrones, you can’t possibly expect everyone you interact with online to shield you from the red wedding. By the same token, how can a blogger know if his or her readers have seen something? Do you give them a day? A week? A season to catch up? 

WHEREAS most stories are best experienced as a surprise; and

Can anyone argue that a television show or movie is more fun to watch when you know the outcome? 

THEREFORE The Wandering Lostie considers the first live broadcast of a television show to be the public unveiling of its content; and

This is the foundation for any spoiler policy; you have to define a point at which information is no longer considered a spoiler. I chose to take a position that is unassailable: Nothing is a spoiler after it airs.

THEREFORE The Wandering Lostie defines a spoiler as the publishing of content relating to a show or episode before the content has been broadcast; and

The deeper question is if we should define spoiler based on broadcast status or on viewing habits. Defining it based on its broadcast status is definitive. Mistresses airs Monday at 9 p.m. There, done. Defining a spoiler based on viewing habits is, as I established above, virtually impossible. You want to define a spoiler as anything revealed within one day of an episode airing? Why not 18 hours? Two days? I believe in basing policy on concrete information whenever possible, and there is nothing more concrete than the fact that Revenge was on. 

THEREFORE once a show has aired, the discussion or revelation of any content therein is no longer a spoiler; and

THEREFORE The Wandering Lostie is not a spoiler site; an

There are sites that divulge storyline details before they air. If you want that, you can seek it out. 

THEREFORE it is an individual’s responsibility to avoid spoilers; and

Again, no one can account for everyone else’s viewing schedule. The responsibility then has to rely on each of us. If you don’t want to be spoiled on this week’s Bachelorette, stay off the Internet. If you are on Twitter after it airs, you have assumed the risk of a spoiler for yourself and should be ready to accept the potential consequence.

THEREFORE The Wandering Lostie will not issue “Spoiler Alerts” or any such warning in advance of a discussion of content already broadcast; and

THEREFORE complaints from readers regarding discussions of already-broadcast content will be moot.

The spoiler policy is posted as its own page and will remain on the main menu accessible from every page and post within The Wandering Lostie. You are assumed to have read it. 

 

The policy contains further explanation of times when I might label something as a spoiler alert:

Casting news regarding existing characters whose fate is in doubt;

Casting news regarding new characters that may shed light on an existing character’s fate;

Comments from writers, producers, cast or others regarding upcoming episodes or seasons.

Let’s call this The Victoria Grayson Clause. After season one her plane had crashed and her fate was in doubt. Until not too long after when it was clear that Madeleine Stowe was back filming and Victoria’s survival was the worst kept secret on TV. But a worst kept secret is still a spoiler to someone who doesn’t read TV Guide. Here a tender hand is needed. Under The Victoria Grayson Clause I would allow myself to write about her fate with a spoiler alert before it airs.

So there it is. If you can’t watch a show when it airs and don’t want to know what happens, that’s your responsibility.

Even during the Olympics.

Finding their way after Lost

Not leaving, no. Moving on.

Where are we going?

Let’s go find out.

It’s been three years since Lost went off the air. It came along at the same time social media gave us a way to interact across the globe in real time and gave rise to what we now call second screening. The show’s sprawling mysteries and rich character development fed perfectly into these new platforms. Fans took online communities to more engaged levels than any show previously, debating theories and sharing background information on things mentioned in the latest episodes. In that way Lost was probably the first truly social television show. Its serendipitous timing helped it create some amazing bonds with its viewers.

That worked out marvelously for ABC and the show itself while it was on the air. How has it worked out for the show’s stars since May 23, 2010? Have their careers continued to grow or have they sunk like poor Michael’s raft? The answer is mixed.

Some found new lives with new characters. Michael Emerson is killing it as secretive computer genius Harold Finch on Person of Interest; Daniel Dae Kim is doing just fine on CBS’s remake of Hawaii Five-0. Emilie de Ravin floated for a while before landing on Once Upon a Time, which is led by former Lost writers Adam Horowitz and Edward Kitsis. Everyone’s favorite Scot, Henry Ian Cusick, found parts on Scandal, Fringe, The Mentalist and ABC’s recently canceled Body of Proof. Ian Somerhalder didn’t even make it to Exodus but will always be Boone, even though his star has risen on The Vampire Diaries.

Others (no pun intended) have roles in the works that could put them back on TV’s map. Naveen Andrews and Josh Holloway will be on CBS this fall. Holloway sans locks (again, no pun intended) as some kind of cyber cop in Intelligence, and Andrews opposite Stephen Lang in Reckless. Holloway improved as much as any of the actors who stayed with the show from start to finish so hopefully CBS is giving him something to work with. Andrews also has a huge role opposite Naomi Watts as Princess Diana’s lover, Dr. Hasnat Khan, in Diana, which will be released later this year.

Yunjin Kim, who doesn’t do much American work, co-stars with Alyssa Milano in ABC’s upcoming summer drama Mistresses. It’s hard to come to any conclusions about her post-Lost career because I simply don’t pay much attention to Korean entertainment.

A couple fan favorites landed roles on new shows that never made it beyond infancy. Jorge Garcia had a role in FOX’s Alcatraz in addition to three appearances on a Matthew Perry show you’ve never heard of. Terry O’Quinn starred in the short-lived 666 Park Avenue after appearing in 11 episodes of Hawaii Five-0 with Daniel Dae Kim. Elizabeth Mitchell did V and now co-stars in Revolution. Dominic Monaghan’s post-Lost career still hasn’t taken off after Flash Forward was unfairly canceled.

Matthew Fox tried his hand at a movie before Lost was even over. Since The End his most notable work has been the freakish way he transformed his body for the Alex Cross movie, not his role opposite Tommy Lee Jones in some World War II movie. He’s also in World War Z, a zombie movie. Yikes.

Evangeline Lilly is a face for L’Oreal Paris but her only acting work has been in The Hobbit, which she began just three months after giving birth.

This is surprising and probably disappointing to a lot of us who still want to see our favorite stars every week. I think the way we expect actors to move from one successful show right into another ignores how difficult it is to find success in Hollywood. Networks just finished announcing their fall lineups full of new shows that will most likely fail or sputter for a season or two before being put to sleep. Few will make it beyond that and fewer still will become legitimate hits. To expect this handful of actors to be in those few shows is asking lightning to strike twice.

I also have to wonder how much their strong identification with one character might hurt them. O’Quinn did well on 666 Park but will we ever see him as anyone other than John Locke? To his credit, Michael Emerson plays his character so well on Person of Interest that I rarely think of Ben Linus. (Much of that is probably due to his character’s limp.) It’s a sort of catastrophic success unique to Hollywood: Being so good at your job that no one can forget it. Time will tell if Josh Holloway can make us forget Sawyer or if Evangeline Lilly’s freckles will always make us think of Kate.

As Lost’s stars find new roles, on television or the big screen, they will find a dedicated portion of their new viewers who look quite familiar, thinking back and smiling at the show they shared together, with a simple message:

We’ve been waiting for you.

Make it for TV?

Do you want your favorite book made into a television show or a movie?

I thought about this when I went to rasalvatore.com to discuss his latest novel. There is a sticky thread about turning his Drizzt novels into movies, which is something a lot of readers apparently want. I’m not so sure I do. The reason is something Salvatore said when he came to the Mall of America Barnes & Noble in 2008. Once a story is put on screen and you watch it, he said, your imagination can never recover. He used Tolkien as an example. Anyone who watches Peter Jackson’s movies first will never have the experience of imagining Middle Earth for the first time through Tolkien’s writing.

That is exactly what I experienced when I read Lord of the Rings for the first time in 2009. My imagination could only see the characters as they appeared in the movies, and it did feel like I wasn’t getting the full LOTR experience because of it. My mind was also always on alert for any time the book deviated from the movies. I definitely feel like I robbed myself and my imagination. After that I stopped watching the movies every winter in an attempt to clear it from my mind. I’ve since read the book a second time and enjoyed it much more. Hopefully with a few more years’ time I will be able to read it again and get closer to a true imagination experience.

When I take that experience back to Salvatore’s point about his own books, I am not sure I ever want to see an actor cast as Drizzt Do’Urden. I have 23 books in my imagination. Stories, characters and settings all there to be recalled at the drop of a name or a word on a page. No one else pictures Menzoberranzan the same way I do. Isn’t that the magic of reading? Everyone’s experience is different because our imaginations draw words in a different way.

I recently read the book 666 Park Avenue. It, allegedly, sparked the failed television show of the same name but could not have been more divergent from what appeared on screen. Other than the names and being set in New York City, the two had nothing in common. Being so wildly different helped get past having already seen the book on television. I’m not sure if that makes it worth it or not. If your favorite fictional character came to the screen in name only, wouldn’t that still disrupt how you picture it in your own mind?

I don’t think Salvatore fans have to worry. The Drizzt story has grown beyond what a movie can portray. Our imaginations are safe.

Lost in The West Wing

Lost. The West Wing. We were treated to 13 seasons of great television between The West Wing’s debut in 1999 and Lost’s finale in 2010. Two shows with fabulous brilliance that can’t be truly compared, but can’t be separated either. 

The West Wing was an artful show. The dialogue with perfect timing and delivery gave it a rhythmic feel as if the characters were dancing their lines instead of speaking them. A lesser show could tip easily into ridicule. But The West Wing was so brilliant we accepted it, it actually made the show better. 

Its art played into our romantic notions of what the White House might be like; what a president might be like if he eschewed the fears that hem in our real life leaders. Jed Bartlet led from his heart in the way we hope all presidents do.  

These two things are what reached out from the rest of the show to bind it to viewers. There will always be movies and television shows set to the White House, but never one so endearing. 

The West Wing had a clear lead character in Jed Bartlet, which is what you would expect from a show about the presidency. Every other character’s actions were influenced by their proximity to him whether they intended them to or not. People in politics like to joke about how it is really nothing like The West Wing made it out to be, but in this one regard I think it did it right. You can’t escape from under the way working in politics will frame your life.  

They couldn’t escape it because of where the show put them: The White House. They did White House things and we saw how their personalities influenced their handling of those things and their decisions. The decision-making process is what revealed the characters. There is the source of drama — how are those decisions made? How does making them affect the people who do? How do their unique experiences influence their contributions? That was West Wing.

Lost was raw, a plane crash cutting a vein in its character’s lives that they had no choice but to stem. This was its White House. How they reacted, interacted and then reacted to their interactions. Who are these people? What life stories do they bring to this island? How will those stories affect the choices they make on this island? Their character was revealed through these interactions.

There was no balance or art to the dialogue between characters. It was drawn from within the characters in a way that The West Wing’s really wasn’t. You could take a lot of scenes from West Wing, shift the lines among characters and come out with the same scene, the same story and the characters would not be terribly disrupted. You could not switch Sawyer’s lines with John Locke’s. Sawyer didn’t seek destiny. He mocked destiny, denied it outright. Lost’s dialogue came from some place much deeper than The West Wing’s. 

We knew West Wing was going to be a show about the presidency and the people supporting it. Lost took our assumptions that it would be a show about escaping a deserted island and threw ’em away. It was not about that at all.

Lost was about characters. Deep, complex characters. Characters that change as they take a journey. None of them ended the show the same as they began it. They traveled toward something. Each had to come to a realization or find redemption, and they all did. No major character died or left the island without doing so. 

There was no dominant Jed Bartlet. Different characters rose and fell to drive the story from episode to episode. Using that structure allowed the writers to build each character such a deep background. If you try to think about Lost written in the format The West Wing was, you can’t see a way that it works. Lost needed four separate timelines to hold up its story. It becomes a pretty remarkable body of work when you think about it that way.  

There was no natural ending like what The West Wing ran into, not once Lost established that it was not a show about leaving an island. The drama came from what the characters did in this trying situation and the journey they took within it. The journey happened without the characters even realizing it as they faced one situation after another. Isn’t that what life is? We navigate thru the things that occupy our days and only when the journey is over do we have the wisdom to look back at where we were and know the end is where we belong. That is Lost. That is life. “This is the place you made together.” 

It’s no secret which show I like better but this isn’t about deciding between two shows. On the surface you would never think a show about politics and a show about castaways would be at all similar. Each’s greatness can be found there at the intersection of similar and different.