Appreciating Joss

I check out other blogs from time to time and one caught my eye recently.  Sufficiently impassioned, I felt obliged to respond to the author.  In a positive way. 

Kaye Dacus recently wrote about her favourite (new) shows which are currently airing in the USA.  One of these was the new Joss Whedon show, Dollhouse. 

I suspect it won’t be here (in Australia) for a while.  Some of my recent favourite TV series (Mad Men, Dexter) are actually here on DVD before they appear on our Free to Air television.

Nonetheless, I will look forward to the show – whenever it arrives.  

For those not-in-the-know, Joss Whedon is a director, come writer (etc) who created Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly and now Dollhouse.  I was thrilled to see that blogger and writer Kaye (a sane, intelligent woman and not a sci-fi freak, as you so often see with Joss’s fans) appreciated his work.  And, as a result, I felt obliged to add my glowing recommendation (in response to her and in my own blog).

I became a Joss fan during the Buffy years.  Not the early years, as a show about a vampire slayer wasn’t something I would have even considered watching.  As it happened, in 2000 I was living in Asia and – in desperation – I succumbed to cable tv and one night (for something to do) watched an episode of Buffy.  I was intrigued so went back for more.  I then bought the DVDs to see all of the earlier episodes and waited for new episodes with a surprising impatience. 

I am aware a lot of Buffy-viewers were ‘goth-like’ characters themselves and loved ‘all-things-vampire’.  I must admit to fast-forwarding through some of the fight scenes, and cringing at some of the other-worldly characters as what I loved most about Buffy was the dialogue.  The witty-repartee, the Buffy ‘catch-phrases’ were what stuck in my mind. 

It would be easy to write off the show as trite, light-viewing, featuring some teenage-superhero-wannabe. 

I was well into the series before I realized how incredibly talented Joss Whedon and his crew were.  Through interviews accompanying the DVD series’, I learned that Buffy’s mother (Joyce) knew that she was to be killed off years before she was (and the episode of her death is one of the most poignant things I have ever seen on tv).  The obscure references to her sister Dawn’s arrival a year or two before she appeared intrigued me as well.  I guess I had thought the writers sat around informally and randomly came up with ideas and scripts.  I hadn’t expected that much rigour, talent and intelligence around the process.  

I read later that Joss is known for mapping out his shows in advance, but the commitment and adherence to detail that must go with that level of focus is amazing.

I can only imagine then, how devastating it was when his (post Buffy & Angel) TV series Firefly was cancelled after one season.  He must have decided long before what would happen to these new characters he created.  The movie, Serenity which came out later, I suspect was an attempt to get some closure.  And not only for the fans. 

Interestingly Joss has a habit of re-using actors he favours in his shows.  Eliza Dushku appeared as the rogue slayer, Faith, in Buffy and now stars in Dollhouse.  Nathan Fillion went from creepy bad guy in Buffy to sexy lead in Firefly.

He creates strong female characters: from the slayers and witches in Buffy; to River (the brain-washed and reluctant superhero in Firefly); to the ‘dolls’ being programmed in Dollhouse.  In an era when so few female role models exist on our screens, and women still so-often play the sidekick to the lead detective, it is refreshing to see quirky and (slightly) flawed female leads. 

So, I have missed Joss from our screens – he has an eccentricity that is rare and tries things others wouldn’t dare.  He seems prone to some self-indulgence (writing his own theme songs, appearing in some episodes) and I gather he is a tad ‘precious’ – wanting things HIS way, which I suspect is usually the right way.  Who else would think to write an entire episode of a show (Buffy) where no words are spoken, or another where all dialogue is sung. 

But, it seems I can now look forward to Dollhouse, though gossip is that its network is considering axing it – already.  Perhaps like Buffy it takes some time to whet viewers’ appetites and incite their addiction.    In the interim, I will await its arrival here with anticipation.

Family SATC-style

I rely on my parents, a lot.  Even though they don’t live nearby, my mother is often the first person I go to when things are going wrong.  I have close friends, but sometimes there are things I can only tell my mother.  When things aren’t going well and when I feel like a failure.  I know my parents will love me – no matter what.  (After all, that is their job.)

 

I am sure I rely on them too much, though I suspect this would be different if I had a partner.  I suspect those with lovers or husbands or partners arrive home and whinge to them about their day; seek a hug when they are stressed or fraught with despair; or share their tears when they don’t get a job they expected to.    

 

I have some very close friends who know almost everything about my life, but sometimes I don’t go to them.  They are mostly there for me, but I am not their priority and sometimes it is too hard to admit failure to those who don’t HAVE to love you. 

 

I have a number of single and married friends in their 30s, 40s and 50s.  Some have kids, some don’t.  For most of these friends, their families continue to play a major part in their lives.  Parents and siblings feature often in our discussions - in both positive and negative ways. 

 

Like me, for some of my closest friends, their parents (mostly mothers and grandmother in one instance) remain confidants, offering constant and unwavering support and comfort.

 

As well as the emotional support family provides, there is also the practical assistance that comes from being a member of a family.  You babysit, even when it is inconvenient and you help out when someone becomes sick. You attend family get-togethers; from celebrations to annoying family requirements.  You make an effort even when you don’t want to.  After all, when everything else goes to hell in a handbasket, family is all we might have left. 

 

So, this is what I don’t get.  They don’t really appear in SATC.  Relatives that is.  In my recent spate of viewing random episodes on Pay Television, I watched Charlotte marry Trey.  She faltered just before walking down the aisle and grabbed Carrie to seek reassurance.  Concerns allayed, Carrie disappeared and an older man emerged from the wings and took Charlotte’s arm to walk to her down the aisle.  I can only assume this man was her father, or step-father, or equivalent.  But there he was – nameless and almost faceless.  Was there a mother I wondered? While planning the perfect wedding, I don’t recall Charlotte ever mentioning a father or mother. 

 

I know the show focused on the friendships, but it also focused on the girls’ lives – and I feel like there was a big chunk missing.  In some ways the show was a ‘manual’ for living (albeit in a more luxurious, fun-filled, exciting and extreme world).  So, while we learned lessons about men, relationships and friendships we were left in idle ignorance when it comes to dealing with our own families.

 

We meet Trey’s interfering mother and Steve’s annoying mother.  I even have a vague recollection of someone’s mother (Miranda perhaps) dying during the series.  But even from that episode, what I remember most is the support she gets from the girls, rather than the loss of a mother.   

 

So, where are they the rest of the time?   I mean, did Carrie even have parents?  I don’t recall them offering support when she had been dumped by “Big” (again and again), or Aidan.  Or any consideration of aging parents in her decision to move to Paris?   What about the man who walked Charlotte down the aisle?  Where was he during her stressful efforts to conceive a child and through her divorce? 

 

So, I am intrigued.  Where were their families?  Carrie’s, Charlotte’s, Miranda’s or Samantha’s?  We had the horror mother-in-laws, so what about the small-town mothers and fathers or siblings, not fitting into the girls’ NYC lives?  A few embarrassing relatives wouldn’t have gone astray - but they are largely absent.  Why I wonder?  Is family not sexy enough for the city? 

 

Did the four girls really emerge from their childhoods unscathed?  What about some residual baggage?  Sibling rivalries?  Or even some backstories to fill in some of the blanks?  After all, where did Samantha’s aversion to ‘love’ come from; and why was Charlotte such so desperate for Park Avenue and the perfect family?  

 

Perhaps a prequel is called for?!

SATC - The early years

There are a number of good things about this house-sitting gig.  Not just being away from the building site-that-is-my-home; the larder full of cooking stuff (like choc bits, which I will have to replace before I leave); the excuse that I am out of my routine and can’t exercise; but also having access to Pay TV. 

 

My brother doesn’t have the movies’ or sports’ channels.  The focus here is predominantly on all-things-Disney, for my niece (who has a bit of a thing for Avatar, Hannah Montana and some show about two boys who live in a hotel with their mother).  So I am spending most of my waking (and tv-watching) hours in front of ARENA and reveling in repeats of Sex and the City, which appears to be on constantly and usually in no logical order.  The other evening, for example, there were two episodes in a row.  The first one was the actual pilot episode (circa 1998).  The next was from Season Four.

 

Why I am glued to them I have no idea.  I actually have all of the DVDs at my place.  All six Seasons.  I could go and pick them up.  Or wait until I get home and watch them.  But instead, I am strangely transfixed to the randomness with which they appear on ARENA.  I have to admit, I had forgotten how many men Carrie and the girls went through over the years.  Samantha aside, the other three constantly dated with a never-ending stream of men through their lives. 

 

Is this why we liked it I wonder?  Not just for the clothes and fashions – and to see what strange combination Carrie would next don (and even more amazingly, pull off).  Or did we just envy their seemingly glamourous lives and the fact that they seemed to be constantly in demand by the men of New York. 

 

Critics railed at the realism of the show and the fact that – in the real world – similar women would be hard pressed to afford their apartments, let alone the lifestyle they portrayed; their clothes, their Jimmy Choos and constant stream of visits to the ‘happening’ restaurants and bars of NYC. 

 

But did we care?  Hell no!  Who cares if, in the real world, one pair of Manolo Blahnik’s would set Carrie back a year’s salary.  Instead we all envied their fabulous lives.  We all wanted to be them.  And, we’ve all done the Facebook quiz, wondering which of the four girls we really are.  I suspect we probably all wanted to be Carrie (around whom the SATC world revolves) and I think the Facebook doyenne believed me to be so, but I always felt more like Charlotte with a bit of Miranda thrown in.   Sweet but cynical. 

 

So, having been exposed to a veritable kaleidoscope of episodes in the past week, not only am I surprised at how little the women changed over the six seasons (yay for botox!), I am reminded of a few favourite moments (and seasons) and amazed at the things I had forgotten.

 

Very importantly, I had forgotten that in the first episodes (and perhaps a few to follow – I will have to check later) Carrie speaks to the camera and the show featured mock interviews, with little captions.  So, it started as a faux-documentary.  Watching it now, I cringe.  I resolve to watch the first season to see when this changes - when the producers realized they needed to go with engaging storylines, supported by narration, rather than a thought piece with a one-dimensional supporting cast.

 

I had also forgotten that ‘Big’ appears in the first episode. 

 

I have also seen the final two episodes in the last few days.  I remember – like hordes of others – being disappointed at the final episode.  Unhappy that, for a show about how it is okay to be single and alone, the four girls all ended up partnered off. 

 

I recall that when it first came out in 1998, the show was a celebration of independence and of strong single women.  So, while I sympathise with the producers’ desire for a happily-ever-after ending, it fell like a sell-out.  Carrie’s move to Paris was very much about her fear of being the ‘last-one-standing’ and being alone, rather than following her heart, or even her head.  Bringing in ‘Big’ at the last minute, seemed too contrived, with the producers obviously in a rush to wrap six-years up neatly, tie the bow and present it expectantly to adoring fans.

 

This aside, when I think of the show, I think of it being about relationships and most importantly, about friendships.  The scene I most remember from the movie, for example, is Charlotte’s anger (in the street) at ‘Big’ after he failed to show at the wedding ceremony.  Her distress for her friend felt real and devastated me more than Carrie being left at the altar.  It made me wonder about selfless relationships where true love, loyalty and devotion are fundamental. 

 

The episode I watched (The Agony and the Ex-tacy) after the pilot was about the girls attending an engagement party for a guy they had knew (and several slept with). 

 

The episode was about finding your soulmate.  I hadn’t remembered that the show had really articulated the level of desperation evidenced in that episode.  Miranda faking happiness at her singleness and Carrie’s despair (after everyone missing her birthday celebration) at perhaps never finding her soulmate. It ended with the girls deciding they were each others’ soulmates and the guys that came along were just a bonus.  A lovely sentiment – but in my self-styled Miranda-cynicism I wonder if they were saying the same thing several years later when they were all paired off. 

 

I have another week of house-sitting so who knows what morsels are before me.  Either way, it has given me a taste of a favourite-but-forgotten treat.  My appetite whetted, I will have to pull out the DVDs when I get home.

 

Finally, another perplexing question.  Whatever happened to Skipper?

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0159206/

 

Reinventing Justin

People reinvent themselves all of the time, but some do it better than others.  In my (humble) opinion, one of those who has achieved the great rebirth, is Justin Timberlake.

This came to me while ensconced in front of channel V last night (damn school holidays and the TV repeats they bring!  What, do TV executives think people don’t watch television while on holidays?!) 

But, back to Justin….The fact that he is even now (mostly) known at JT is a big change from the boy who started his career in the Mickey Mouse Club with the girl who was to become his high-profile ‘other half’.  In fact, what I remember most about JT’s earlier life, was the relationship with Britney Spears.  More than his successful career with boy-band ‘NSYNC’ and all of the teenage adulation (and hit songs) that came with that. 

Sure, it appeared that he could sing and dance, well as much as you expect of a boy band member.  But it was pretty much cookie-cutter stuff.  Nothing new, nothing amazing.  And then came the 2002 Justin-Britney bust up.  The childhood sweethearts were over.  Rumours flew, but they kept quiet about the why. 

But, rather than fade into oblivion, JT moved on to Cameron Diaz and a seemingly ‘grown-up’ relationship and, with his boy-band behind him, he struck out on his own.

I am not an huge music fan, but revel in Saturday and Sunday mornings with the papers spread before me, diet coke a-plenty, left over Chinese (if I am lucky) and music videos on tv. 

So, I was surprised when JT first emerged post-Britney and post NSYNC with Like I Love You.  There he was with some rappers, dancing and singing and looking kinda cool.  With them.  Not a boy-band pirouette/twirly-thing in sight.  The curls were gone and cropped hair hidden under a skull cap.  I wondered how the collaboration came about.  I was shocked: that legitimate ‘cool guys’ would actually deign to be seen with JT, let alone record with him; and even more so, that it seemed to be a good fit.  For him.

And then they kept on coming. The songs - as a solo artist and the collaborations – with very hip and legit producers and artists.     

He has had a stack of hits since he started his solo career in 2002, from Like I Love You, Senorita, My Love, Rock Your Body to the more melodic Cry Me a River and What Goes Around…Comes Around. 

But what I find interesting is that he has continued the collaborations with popular and obscure artists alike, from Beyonce to 50 Cent.  As well as a long-standing relationship with the way-cool Timbaland (Sexy Back, Give it to me), he has recently worked with Madonna (4 Minutes), Rihanna (Rehab) and TI (the current, Dead and Gone).  It interests me that, in some of these songs – Rehab, Give it to me – JT barely features.  In fact, on some occasions I am shocked to even discover he was involved.  I find myself admiring him.  A guy who doesn’t need the credit, or the adulation.  A guy happy to just get on with it, in the background.  Just doing the thing he loves doing.

I remember hearing feedback from a tour he did here a few years ago.  The die-hard (been-there-since-NSYNC) fans were disappointed.  The musos out there weren’t.  I gather that JT loves nothing better than just ‘jamming’ with his band, which is what he did on stage.  So, in my eyes his reinvention was complete.

He has pulled off what so many of his boy-band contemporaries have been unable to do.  While still able to ‘bring’ the moves, he seems content to focus on the music.  Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against boy bands, or performers (hey, I like the Pussy Cat Dolls for God’s sake), but I find myself bowing to this guy who has gone from clichéd boy-band member to cool and legit muso in a few short years.

The fine print

I have to admit to falling in love with people that I have never met. Well, not all of the people that I haven't met cos, well, that would plain silly. But a few of them.

I actually like to think that it is a sign of my maturity and sophistication that I am no longer drawn to men solely on the basis of cuteness. (Or a nice smile. Or nice arms. Or...)

In recent years I have found myself attracted to men based on their wit and repartee. Not in person or in conversations, but through their writing.

I first realised this when I came across a porn magazine while visiting a health retreat a few years back. The room's previous resident must have stashed it in a cupboard under blankets - presumably to hide it from the prying eyes of the cleaners - and forgotten it was there. Or something. Nevertheless, they forgot to take it with them and was left for my viewing pleasure.

While I have nothing against a sensible level of porn (the non-violent, not-involving-animals-or-other-weird-things-kind) I hadn't seen a magazine since discovering a stash at a relative's place 20 years before! It wasn't a well-known one and wasn't at all offensive. In fact, it was hilarious! Very tongue-in-cheek, rude but very witty. Mostly I ignored the pictures as the magazine gave a whole new meaning to 'buying it for the articles'.

The entire thing was obviously written by the one person. I suspect that, given the focus on the actual pictures, the article and caption-writing weren't overly arduous, so one person probably could have put it together in a month. But, there were enough words for me to completely become smitten with the author. I recall, at the time, pouring through the editorial info wondering who this author was. There was even a tone of irreverance for the target audience. I (very briefly) thought about writing to them to confess my undying love, but decided that would be, well... weird.

A year or two later (and magazine left for next health retreat resident) I discovered the next object of my desire. Reading a free inner-city weekly magazine I came across a weekly column spoofing political events (state and national). It was hilarious. The writer sarcastic and witty. Again, very tongue-in-cheek and obviously intelligently written. With no name on the column I scoured the editorial pages and the fine print wondering who authored it. I didn't go so far as to contact the paper to find out, but I did secretly hope the author was actually male. The fantasy wasn't as attractive otherwise. Each week I grabbed the paper, wanting my next fix until - suddenly there was a note to say the column was finishing. I thought of contacting the paper then to ask why, but again.... weird!

My latest fetish is for a cartoon called Vimrod (see link in my Favourites list). I know the authors are actually a couple, but my enamourment of the cartoon and the wit of its authors reminded me of my evolving taste when it comes to men.

I haven't 'fallen' for anyone for yonks. Once upon a time, all it took was a cute face, nice smile and nice set of biceps. From my discussions with friends, it seems common that - as we get older - we look for something different. My own 'wish list' has changed drastically over the past 20 years.

Intelligence, wit and sense of humour are at the top of that list (as well as a devotion to me, obviously!). I wondered once if it was just that (as we aged and the men-market dried up) we were becoming more desperate and were prepared to 'settle' for the less-attractive, but nicer guys. But it seems obvious that as marriages falter, the sizzle fades, the friendships become more important.

Last year I had the exact conversation with one of my best friends. As we bemoaned the state of our lovelives, I said that the most important thing for me now, in looking for a man, was that we had to have that 'banter'. I needed someone smart, witty and quick-minded, rather than just pretty to look at, or even just 'nice'. My friend said that she had accepted the fact that she wouldn't get that 'stimulation' from a man. It didn't matter if he wasn't her intellectual equal or able to 'chew the fat' on certain matters. She said that she could rely on her friends for that and no longer expected that in a potential partner.

The same friend has diligently dated over the enusing 12 months. Three months ago she had her first date with a guy she met over the internet. I met her the next day for a debrief. She liked him. Her only concern was that he was too much like her. He was her intellectual equal. She wasn't sure if that was what she wanted.

But, she perservered and they are still together. She sounds happy. I am yet to meet him, but am looking forward to it. My friend has always been a 'saver' and I love the fact that this time around, someone is there to meet her half-way. It is no more than she deserves.

So, what of this new revised wish list and my love of the witty writers.....? I have hung up my saddle on the relationship front for the time being. Not given up entirely, but am tired of 'looking'. Tired of not-finding and feeling rejected and alone.

In the interim, my love of the written word will continue and I will remain smitten about these men I come across, but don't come across (if you know what I mean).