Luke Cage: Putting People In Boxes

Luke Cage has all the dressings of the rest of the Netflix Marvel shows. They have a pacing and tone to them that, if maybe a bit predictable, is enjoyable. The fight scenes are wonderfully choreographed, and the editing is tight. There is a devilishly likeable villain. Luke Cage is, in many ways, just another arm of the behemoth that is the Marvel Cinematic Universe. With an ever expanding list of shows and movies, it’s becoming a monster. What’s interesting is not the similarities that Luke Cage shares with its counterparts, but the difference. Luke Cage places an unprecedented focus on color. Now that’s a double entendre.

The show has vibrant and recurring hues that it creates its own meaning for through repetition. The foreboding red and heroic yellows are ever-present, and stylistically this sets it apart from the pack. However, this isn’t the focus I mean. Luke Cage is the first black superhero to grace the face of the MCU. That’s not a problem; a black hero is a wonderful change of pace from the rather monotoned lineup. It’s the manner in which race is portrayed in Luke Cage that seems out of touch to me.

From the beginning, I felt something was up. The opening starts with flashing images of Malcolm X boulevard and Harlem, set to a soulful groove. In the first scene we are shown a barber shop in which a group of black people are arguing about basketball. The rich villain has a giant painting of Biggie. Luke Cage is not a superhero who happens to be black, he is a black superhero. The extreme focus on race makes Luke Cage feel like a token character, rather than a well developed individual. In the dramatic scenes of Daredevil or Jessica Jones, the music is reflective of the context. With Luke Cage, it is invariably soul, funk, or rap. Things like this cheapen the show, making it and the characters somewhat one dimensional.

The inclusion of black culture is not a problem. However, they employ a set of stereotypes that I find very limiting. The line between showing black culture realistically and making race seem to define people is thin, and tricky to navigate. People are not just the color of their skin, but it is a part of what makes them who they are. To deny any racial focus would be just as unrealistic to the setting of Harlem. There is a middle ground that should be strived for, in between pretending culture doesn’t exist and making caricatures of people.

Nick and Marty, One and the Same

In Netflix's Ozark, I think there are a few key pieces that parallel your life, Nick, or the pieces that you shared for us.  For one, more broadly, the show is about a family that has to completely unroot their life to move elsewhere to start anew, which resembles your transition from living in Kirksville, to Texas, to Los Angeles.  Next, an overarching idea that was prevalent during your talk with the class was one concerning working without the expectation of money.  When Marty moves his family to the Ozarks, he has quite a bit of trouble with that concept, at least at first.  These two ideas which are expressed throughout episode two of Ozark each share some resemblance to you and your journey through life.

The idea of picking up everything and moving elsewhere is a cause of many of the problems that Marty and his family, especially his children, struggle with.  One key similarity between your transition from Kirksville to Texas, Nick, and the Byrde family's move is that both transitions were done to look for different opportunities that depend on the location of the where you were moving to.  For example, you mentioned that one of the reasons you moved to Texas was because of the vibrant artistic community that was present there.  Marty needed to move his family in order to look for a way to wash dirty money covertly.  Fortunately, your impetus to move was far less severe and less illegal than Marty's; however, the location that you moved to was largely influenced by the aspects of the new environment.

Next, the topic of working without the expectation of money is an idea that is explored throughout the second episode.  In your own life, you said that you would be happy to help any friend make any film they wanted, despite if you thought it was good not; you said that if you thought you could help, you would and would invest your own time and effort into making it something to be proud of.  On top of all that, you stated that you expected to not receive any payment for any of the work you did even while investing your own money out of pocket.  In Marty’s case, he needs to invest into the businesses around the Ozarks in order to get a return afterward; he is strictly in it for the money.  The episode shows his growing desperation by displaying him nearly begging store owners all around the area to give him a chance.  At one point he even ends up at a strip club asking the owner to give him a shot, at which point the owner comes right out and says that he knows Marty is just trying to wash some dirty, laundered money and that the owner wanted no part in it.  Where it gets interesting, though, is near the end of the episode.  Nick, I think Marty may have taken a page out of your book when he goes into this bar and hears a patron bullying the bartender.  Keeping in mind the man doing the bullying had to be in his thirties, while the bartender may have been a kid just over 21.  Right before Marty confronts the bully, he glances over his shoulder to look out a window and sees a client that he was recently trying to invest in, but she had previously turned him away, because she doubted his ethicality.  Marty then confronts the bully where he promptly gets knocked out cold; however, in his short spiel to the bully, Marty explains that the bully had absolutely no right to say such rude things to a stranger and that Marty always taught his kids manners.  In short, it appeared that the short spiel was enough to get Marty’s potential client to have some grain of sympathy for him.  Being able to work, without pay, but while building relationships is an extremely valuable trait to have that almost always pays dividends.  

The second episode of Ozark allows Marty’s character to develop further while exploring his desperate situation.  In his struggles, the similarities between your story, Nick, and his are apparent.  Learning how to handle a transition from one living space to another while also learning how to build relationships through good nature are both major overarching ideas that appear to have largely influenced your life as well as Marty’s.  

To The Bone

WARNING I will be reviewing “To The Bone”. This movie is graphically based off a girl’s struggle with anorexia. I will be including heavy subjects in my review. Please keep that in mind before reading on.

Dear Nick,

Today I watched a movie, “To the Bone”. I have never been more disappointed in a movie before.

I’m not too sure if this movie would fit into any genre you seem to fancy, that being horror, surrealism, or documentary. This movie is a drama, and well, it sure was dramatic. And maybe a little too dramatic at that. In fact, it’s so incredibly dramaticized, that I am angry with it. I’m extremely angry with this movie. In this movie, we follow Ellen, or Eli, who is struggling with anorexia to the point where she could die. However, like any other drama starring a female, all she needed was a pretty boy to save her life. I know you don’t usually focus much on the “moral” of the story, so this probably wouldn’t affect you much. However, as you take a step back to look at the story as a whole, one of the main influences that pushes Eli to fight her eating disorder and start working to better herself is the love of a boy. At the end of the day, whatever motivation someone may have in order to fight a mental illness is probably a bigger benefit to them than anything else. However, as someone who’s dealt with mental illness before, both personally and from close friends, this isn’t a topic I would romanticize the way the creators did.

While the overall moral of the story isn’t the best, and while they romanticize mental illness as something beautiful-when it’s actually quite the opposite-the movie wasn’t entirely awful. One of my favorite characters was Dr. Beckham, played by Keanu Reeves. He seemed to be one of the most realistic characters. He uses harsh truth on his patients, and isn’t fooled by a majority of their bullshit. The creators used this as a tool, in order to put the viewers into a better sense of how the patients feel. While they live in their own heads, Dr. Beckham does his best to bring them back down to Earth. In a movie plastered with fantasy, he serves as a break from the unrealistic setting of the movie.

Overall, this movie tried and failed. The creators aimed it towards audiences that could relate to the topics presented, and yet I feel they did it in the worst way possible. They set unrealistic standards for how one should go about dealing with their mental illness, and don’t give sources as to who people could contact if they were feeling the same way as some of the characters shown in the movie. As this is Netflix’s second attempt at addressing mental illness in media form, I hope that either third time's the charm, or the third time simply doesn’t happen. It’s a difficult topic to truly justify and present in an accurate way, and too often, it goes glamorized. I hope someday there’ll be an accurate portrayal that won’t leave people thinking they want that sort of lifestyle.

Heroin(e)

“I will help them if I think I can make it better.” This quote comes from Nick Toti, a graduate of Truman who came and spoke to our Writing as Critical Thinking class. He is a pursuing a career in film out in Los Angeles, and spoke to our class about his journey and the morals and visions that he has developed along the way. One of his ideas is “I will help them if I think I can make it better”. This is a vision that many people share, especially those who devote their life to healthcare and community service. A Netflix original documentary, Heroin(e), fully embodies Nick’s idea. It follows three women in Huntington, West Virginia, who are dealing with the heroin and drug crisis in their city. Each of them does their job to the fullest, while simultaneously going above and beyond the job description. One of these individuals who follows Nick’s philosophy exceptionally well is the deputy chief of the Fire Department, Jan Rader. She tirelessly works to moderate the heroin and opiate issue their city is facing.

Nick’s quote “I will help them if I think I can make it better” is references the way he aims to play a supporting role to be able to help those he works closely with. His thought is aimed at helping others succeed, so they ultimately can finish their project, and if necessary in the future, assist Nick when he is in need of help. The women give to others without expecting anything in return, the idea is still applicable to the attitude the three women have in their community.

The documentary is shot up close and personal, like an interview. It shows the raw emotions of these strong women, and the way their are influencing their community and every life they touch. Most of the camera shots are bouncy, not always smooth and sway to different people, mimicking the turning of a head so it feels like you are there in the room with them. Additionally, the perspectives are mainly shot from the passenger seat of the car with them while they are talking, giving it a deeply personal feel and allowing the women to talk about more of the emotional aspects without making direct eye contact. Throughout the entire documentary no eye contact is made with the camera at all, potentially showing that while the people are doing well at working with people, however are still affected emotionally by this issue. When the fire department responds to an overdose at a gas station, the camera is back behind a row of candy, similar to your perspective if you were there in person. This assists in making the overdoses and emergency situations dynamic and serious. Additionally, some identities of users are concealed with the camera. They either stand out of shot, or the shot is dark, only capturing their silhouette. This added dose of security makes it seem like a bigger production than a documentary, while also piquing your interest about their identity and what their end situation is. I would have liked to see more of a finale to the documentary. The deputy chief was promoted at the end, but other than that it left you hanging about the people you met throughout. However, this probably was the best choice, as with life, there is not really an ending to a story, and may also relate to the opportunity of people being able to change their life.

The Other One: The Long, Strange Trip Of Bob Weir

Well, Mr. Toti, it seems I am writing this blog post to you (though I don't know if you'll receive it). So, I decided to do a documentary since you seem to be very much interested in that genre judging from your presentation on Thursday. I also saw your film at Baldwin Hall, The Complete History of Seattle, so I decided that I should also make it a musical documentary. So, it was either a choice between a documentary about Nina Simone or Bob Weir, and given the band you did your documentary on was a punk band, I decided to go the more "alternative" route.
For those that do not know, Bob Weir was the vocalist and primary songwriter of one of the most influential bands in music history: The Grateful Dead. This documentary follows the musician in his old age and what he's doing now, as well as provides the history of the man and his time in the band. It starts from his youth, where he was adopted shortly after he was born, growing up a troubled kid and getting kicked out of numerous schools. He'd later eventually end up meeting and hanging out with future bandmate, the late Jerry Garcia. That's where they start out as The Warlocks and eventually end up as The Grateful Dead. The documentary goes into the details of the events the band goes through during their fame: drugs, sex, fans, the stuff, before culminating in the death of Jeffrey Garcia and the dissolving of the band. I'm being scant on details because that's what makes the documentary, and I dare not spoil a lot of it because it's worth the watch.
As the cinematography and the way it's shot goes, it's nothing really home to write about. It's filmed just like your standard, day-to-day documentary. It follows Bob around modern day to places of interest from his past (the house he grew up in, the place he first met Jerry, where the band lived at the time, etc.). It shows archived footage of the band performing, their fans, interviews, and news relating to the band, while also showing vintage photos of the band members (particularly Bob), standard stuff. However, it does keep cutting back to an interview between ex-talk show host Tom Snyder and Bob and Jerry, which I though was an interesting note.
So, in the end, I recommend this as not only a great documentary for real Grateful Dead fans (obviously), but also people who are big fans of psychedelic rock or alternative genres of rock in general. Hell, I'd even recommend it to people who are big into documentaries in general. And with punk basically being THE alternative genre of alternative rock, I figured you might interested in this, Nick, especially since your documentary focused on the rise and fall of a punk band, as does this documentary, although more-so for tragedy rather than any religious reason.

Gerald's Game

To Nick Toti:

This week I watched the Movie Gerald’s Game which was just released today and is based off of a 1993 Stephen King novel. Jessie and Gerald are a married couple with a downhill marriage hoping to spice things up with a kinky weekend away in the countryside. Gerald has a fantasy that includes him handcuffing Jessie up to the bed. Things turn bad when Jessie feels uncomfortable and Gerald has a heart attack. Still tied up to the bed Jessie has to get away before she ends up just like him.

I think that you would enjoy this film for its thrilling qualities. You tend to produce films that have some horror it may be clowns or ghosts but this movie did not have that. What it did have was a lot of realism. This movie was depicted in a lot of planned out and thoughtful detail so much to the point you could imagine being there. The portion of the movie leading up to Gerald’s death was very quick, just letting you know what you needed to.  Shortly after his death the small details come into play. For example, while on their way to the house in the woods they see a stray dog that’s hungry and she tries to feed. Then there’s the door that they accidentally forget to close on their way into the house. These two details lead up to the hungry dog coming in to snack on Gerald putting Jessie in a lot of shock and horror as the dog tears pieces of him off to eat. But these details are only one reason the movie was so enjoyable

Throughout the movie Jessie begins to see things which include her and Gerald talking to her and telling her what she can and cannot do. This really goes in deeper and gives you an insight of what is going on mentally. Through this the story gets so much deeper even going back to her childhood and why she felt so uncomfortable with Gerald’s requests. Also shown through this was her thought process leading up to her escape. It runs through everything she did to escape and her thought process leading up to that idea that pulled you in deeper and deeper. It’s one thing to see a movie on just the outside but to see the people and see the thought and contemplation really allows you to put yourself in that person’s shoes. All of this made me love this movie so much more, I felt like I was right there with her tied to that bed, scared and afraid of what could happen next.

I think that with your experience and what you like in your own movies you would really enjoy this movie. It’s a great movie that you can really get into and enjoy and I would suggest it to anyone that likes suspenseful, thrilling movies.

Heroin(e)

This week, I viewed a program on Netflix titled Heroin(e). This program in particular was a documentary detailing the major heroine issue of a town in West Virginia. The documentary didn’t exactly differ from any other average documentary; it was educational and attempted to pull at your heartstrings so that you care about the subject matter. While the subject of drug-related deaths and heroine addiction are sad and concerning matters, this documentary in particular wasn’t exactly the most emotional or skillfully directed one that I’ve ever seen.

This week, I also had the opportunity to view the documentary titled The Complete History of Seattle by Truman graduate and underground film director, Nick Toti. Toti's documentary in particular employed many abstract filming and editing tactics that could be characterized as a cross between surrealism and dadaism (it's a bit of a stretch, I know). The documentary about a punk band composed of "alternative" Christians is definitely not one for the [extremely] faint of heart, but also is not one to regret viewing.

Heroin(e) didn’t employ any abstract camera uses or anything experimental or genre-deviating. Though after viewing The Complete History of Seattle, I can’t help but imagine what the lovechild between these two works of art would look like. I’m sure experimental cinematic masterpieces detailing hard drug abuse have been done, but the thought of the combining the documental style of Heroin(e) with the experimental surrealistic style of Complete History is an interesting one.

The way that this documentary is filmed is dry and straight to the point. This isn’t a bad thing whatsoever, considering that the subject matter is enough to catch and hold the attention of the viewers. Many camera shots in this 40 minute installment are taken from inside of cars. I once read somewhere (and no, I cannot remember the source) that conversations inside of cars hold high importance. I also know from experience that I’ve conducted many important conversations while in either the driver or front passenger seat of a car. Since the camera holder in these car scenes is usually in the passenger seat, the angle of the shot comes from below the person speaking in the driver seat. This contributes to a unique sense of intimacy and urgency required for a documentary like this.

I suppose that as a person who views more feature films than documentaries, I was expecting some type of structure: introduction, story, and resolve. However, I was disappointed when the program stopped seemingly abruptly. We, as an audience of cinema, have become so attuned to the notion that every narrative of every type needs an ending, preferably a happy one, but if not, any ending. This documentary didn’t just end, and that isn’t as problematic as it may sound. The drug problem in this town in West Virginia hasn’t been “resolved.” It hasn’t “ended” and this is where that hanging feeling comes from at the conclusion of this documentary in particular.

Secondhand Danger

Dear my friend who shall not be named,

This week I watched Travelers. That thing was freaky. It had the longest intro I think I have ever experienced of a pilot and I felt anxious and confused throughout it. It had a very thriller-esc mood or vibe to it. They kinda just throw the audience in the middle of it. We jump from one unpleasant situation centered around one character to an entirely different unpleasant situation with another character. This show uses a wide array of tools to influence the audience's experience. In the first scene, we see there is a blonde girl that seems the be the character of focus. She seems to be a grown woman. She is in a dim lit building. We subconsciously infer that it is closing time based on the conversation she has with another woman and the window that depicts a dark night and the ground wet from recent rain. We get a little short scene of her trying to read, telling us that she has some sort of mental handicap. Before a group of at four men start physically harassing her female co-worker as she watches and yells in horror. She starts banging on the glass yelling at them, but then seems a little disoriented when they turn their attention to her as her friend escapes. Like somehow she didn't realize that if she did that, it would call her to attention. She runs away from the big glass window after they throw a bottle of alcohol at it. Now, this is all just a play by play of the first sequence we see and I haven't even finished it. The sounds, the lighting, and camera angles make the audience feel as if we are there. We hear muffled screaming as her friend is attacked until it catches the main character’s attention, then the audience is suddenly outside of the building watching and hearing the assault first hand and then back inside as the main character responds. Which is pretty explanatory of my own personal discomfort watching the intro because the audience experiences four different scenarios with four different characters that are equally dangerous, but two of them are particularly frightening. The first is the one I began describing above which we will just summarize in short as Woman almost getting gang-raped and the second, we will just put in short as BabyDaddy under the influence smashes Young Mother’s head into the wall. Now the other two scenarios were just as dangerous but didn't have as much power to them. Now some might say that the reason the other two aren't as significant is because the main characters are guys and I disagree. The reason why the other two aren't as powerful is because the two characters are in danger by choice or at least more so than the other two. In the two scenarios where the main characters are guys, the first is a guy that looks to be getting his ass handed to him in an underground fighting ring and he chooses to ignore his friend urging him to stop and the other is a guy in a house or something with a friend sitting in chairs and injecting themselves with what I assume is heroin. Now I stopped watching not long after that, but I thought it was very interesting and frustrating how they put the audience in and make us feel scared, helpless, anxious, and confused. At least that was how I was feeling watching all these horrible situations play out and not being able to intervene. Whelp, that's all I've got for this one. I could probably talk a ton more about this show, but considering how it's not my favorite I think I'll end it here.

Till next time,

happylittlepenguin

Black Mirror and iBoy: If Only Tom Were There

Tom, I'm not sure if you've ever heard of the Netflix show Black Mirror, but I bet you'd be itching to jump through the screen and help. I watched the first episode because I thought it looked "techy" and relatable to you. I really didn't know what I was getting myself into, but while I was watching I tried to pay attention to one thing that I knew would be comparable to your film, iBoy, which was elements of technology and how they are portrayed compared to the iBoy universe from which you dwell. What I found out was quite interesting: technology is portrayed as a MEGA disadvantage and various elements help to heighten that disadvantage throughout the episode.

"Well, if there are hacks sniffing' around, shut them down. Bright red D NOTICE. Super-fucking Godzilla injunction with ten-inch Whitehall fangs" is what the Prime Minister is quoted in reply to one of his team members when he learns that the kidnapping video of Princess Suzana has gone virtually viral. Boom. Right away there's a sense of, in a very British accent, utter annoyance with the technology brutes. Furthermore, in the background of nearly every shot there are phones ringing and cell phone buttons being pressed to blanket the subconscious into thinking that the source of the anxiety is coming from the phones, i.e. technology. Additionally, the premise of the episode is set around media coverage, so naturally there are many shots of televisions all over the UK as well. The Prime Minister does NOT want the press or public to learn of the video, however, it is totally out of his hands and, thus, something that exasperates the hell out of him and his whole team.

Tom, I feel like you can sort of relate to this premature annoyance, as you did not ask to be shot in the head and have permanent phone fragments take over your life, however your take is quite different than that of Black Mirror. Any time the phone beeps, buzzes, or rings creates a certain unspoken tension. For example, at one point in the show the Prime Minister receives a phone call from the Queen. His immediate response is to have someone stall her while he frantically figures out his plan. Later, his wife calls as he is in route to... Meet the kidnapper's demands (I'm choosing not to state what the demands are; you'll have to watch and find out!) and after a brief handful of seconds he decides to send her to voicemail, most likely because he is ashamed of what he's about to do. Again, that evokes a sense of disappointment on both ends of the phone line.

This is the case for this show, but in iBoy you take advantage of your situation and make it an advantage rather than the opposite. By turning it into a sort of superpower, you use your tech-brain to help people and solve problems that seem impossible. They sure could've used you in Black Mirror, Tom.

Sherlock can you uncover the Naked truth?

Sherlock can you find the Naked truth?

The moral of the story is never take any one second for granted and do not rush through life.

The general person would effortlessly say to you that “only a sociopath would manipulate someone like Rob Anderson (the well mannered groom),” but Vicky (the jealous best friend/ ex hook-up) steps out of that “average person” relm of people and does that exact thing.  

I feel as if this is your kind of movie Mr. Holmes. A movie with a beginning and end and a whole lot of jam in between. The genre of Naked has been like no other movie I have ever laid eyes on before. I am not sure on what to label this one. Either a chick flick, thriller, mystery, or a romantic comedy would all be perfect genera labels. If one were to label this movie a chick flick I would not be calling you, Mr. Holmes, into an investigation. Urban dictionary’s definition of a chick flick is:

“A film that has the following formula:

Two people fall in love

They get along fine

There is some kind of misunderstanding

They break up

They get back together

The end.”

Although Naked does not follow this exact flow of things there are still key points that the director hits in order to receive this fine label. The first scene is a great example of this because Rob Anderson walks into the airport running late to his wedding, about to miss his plane flight, when he says he will do anything for a ticket to his destination wedding. This is a key point in the story, that while watching it, I did not realise it meant anything, but now looking back, “time” itself played a huge role since the very first scene. As said earlier Rob was running late to his flight and therefore almost missed leaving for his destination wedding. Rob struggled throughout the whole movie with growing a relationship with Megan’s (soon to be wife) father. He never knew the right timing to say things, or how to bring anything up because the father was so judgmental of Rob. But in the end things simmered down and everything ended up happening for a reason.

I am sure as the ultimate logical reasoner that you are, you could have seen a mischievous act coming from a mile away. There is something about you and your methods of reasoning that is intriguing and would do the viewers very well in throughout the movie. Rob Anderson would have also benefited from your deduction skills. If Rob used the same methods that you use, he would have found the culprit a whole lot sooner than he actually did. Hey, you even said yourself, “A related word to deduction is induction, which means inference of a generalized conclusion from particular instances.” Mr. Holmes sir, Rob Anderson needed you. He could have easily inferred “the general” from “the specific” as often as he inferred “the specific from the general”. Although that goes in one ear and out the other ears of most people, someone with an investigating/ detective mind would understand that statement exactly.

Lastly, that brings up to solving the mystery of why Vicky would have called a prostitute to try and get Rob in trouble. Many could easily conclude that it was because of jealousy or because she did not want a man taking Megan away from her, but the world may never know. Also another thing that we are left to evaluate on our own is why was Rob living the same day over and over again? In fact this nervous man was forced to relive the same nerve- wrenching HOURS over again. The only thing that broke the “spell” was him getting the wedding day right. I will leave you with one question Mr. Holmes, and that is, why were these specific hours repeated over and over again? Why didn’t Rob just get stuck in the elevator once and then had to get out and make the day right? What caused the spell keep occurring or even start in the first place?

Trailer Park Boys Out of the Park: Europe

Even as someone who has watched the series beforehand and loved it, I was unaware of this little "spin-off" of the show until I saw it on the Netflix Originals page on Wikipedia. Now, I have to admit again, Trailer Park Boys technically isn't a Netflix Original either (it was first premiered on Canadian TV channel Showcase), but the show, like Arrested Development, got a lot more popular globally once it aired on Netflix (although unlike Arrested Development, TBP was popular while it was still running (though mainly in Canada,), even getting its own movie in 2006), thus making Netflix commission not only a few extra seasons, but also 2 more movies and apparently a spin-off miniseries, which we will talk about now.

For those out of the know, Trailer Park Boys is (also like The Office) a mockumentary about a group of people living in a Canadian trailer park (some ex-convicts). And this miniseries in particular centers around the 3 main protagonists of the show, Ricky (a fun-loving, dim-witted lowlife) Julian (who is probably the most selfless and honorable out of all of them, though he commits the same amount of crimes with Ricky), and Bubbles (who I honestly can't even describe because he's just so weird), as they were supposedly getting a paid vacation to Europe. Or so they thought, as Julian failed to realize that they were to perform a series of tasks for money, due to him failing to read a contract all the way through. So, the first episode, being set in London, has the trio doing numerous ridiculous tasks, including imitating the famous Beatles walks on the Abbey Road crosswalk, attempting to get an autograph from famous British comedian Noel Fielding (whose performance in this I dare not spoil), and even stealing Queen Elizabeth's underwear.

The show's style is, as established, largely a mockumentary, with cameramen being acknowledged and even excess cameras (hidden cameras, security cameras, etc.) being used. The humor is equally as raw. To put it lightly, the show is vulgar as fuck. The main trio used the F word like it was the word "the," along with other swear words. But the humor is very much like that in It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia, where the characters act hilarious stupid/oblivious or do something horrible that's bound to give them their comeuppance. So the humor usually relies on vulgar humor, black humor, or just general stupidity. However, whereas Always Sunny's main protagonists are outright horrible people with almost no redeeming qualities whatsoever, TBP's protagonists are generally more sympathetic and human.

Overall, TBP OotP: Europe (as well as the general show to a lesser extent) is possibly one of the best modern comedies running today, combining the worlds of other comedies like The Office and Arrested Development with Always Sunny. And the best part is, it did this LONG before any of these shows (it premiered in 2001, with the movie it spawned from in 1999), so it may have very well been the inspiration of these comedies. It's a show that I very much enjoy and my brothers very much enjoy. And hopefully, if you like the sound of a vulgar/black comedy mockumentary, you'll enjoy it very much.

A possible Narcoleptic watches Narcos

Narcos is a show set during the infamous and questionable war on drugs. The show follows not one, but two the opposing in this pseudo documentary and drama. Following and narrated by the DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) officer Steve Murphy who is stationed in Columbia with his wife and child. The other half of the cast is the disturbing yet oddly charming Pablo Escobar. The two make for a duo that indirectly mirrors each other

The story starts on a police raid in a karaoke bar. After the DEA use some old fashioned tracking to locate their target they call the police. Remember they're the DEA they can track and condemn the drug traffickers, but they can't take any legal action against them. The police gun down every single person for the righteous cause. The targets were all given little pet names like Poison, and Big Badmouth. Gives a fantastic removal of the human element to make the people seem other worldly, this has been done for various reasons over the years, but in this case it's done to make the targets more identifiable and easier to shoot. This is just the opening of the story.

The rest of the episode mostly follows Escobar's rise to power through trafficking cocaine. This was done through the aid of his business partner Cockroach, and his many business dealings. Escobar manages to make the idea of drug trafficking seem like a clever and legitimate business venture through his mannerisms and dealings. In fact the entire episode begins to build up both sides as people you want to see win. Until they begin to do things that call both people into question.

Murphy is the DEA officer and narrator. He serves as a sort of window into a pre-cocaine Miami. He recounts how before the events of the show 1 kilogram of weed was considered a huge bust and cause for celebration. When Escobar began importing the cocaine into the U.S his job became a lot harder and more dangerous. His scenes show the effects that Escobar has caused on Miami. Talking about how he had to shoot a seventeen year old kid in self defense. The drug war officially started after Reagan's speech on the dangers of drugs. Although, rather cynically Murphy points out that it may have been because wealthy business men were concerned with their lack of profits that the war started. He still willingly went to Columbia out of patriotic pride and a sense of duty.

The difference between the two characters that makes us see Murphy as the “good guy” and Escobar as “the villain” is what actions they take and how they can justify them. Murphy has only acted in self defense or because it's his job. While he doesn't make any excuses for shooting a 17 year old drug dealer he does try to deflect any criticism that the audience might direct at him. Saying that is essentially his job, and that good and evil are relative concepts. Escobar, however doesn't make any excuses for what he does. Maybe it's because he's not the narrator, or perhaps he doesn't care what people think, because when he's as wealthy as he is, who could challenge him?

Narcos seems to take this idea of there being no true good and evil, and run with it. I'm beginning to think Netflix has some sort of fetish or secret business deal with it's directors to make this a central theme in most of their Netflix Originals (could be both). The series itself has me captivated and may distract me from the far more important things I have to do, like get an education. The series seems to be trying to capture the spirit of the many humans who fight in a war, and to serve as a criticism of the Drug War.

What Year Is It?!.jpeg

Disjointed is a Netflix Original about a medical marijuana dispensary. This show is created by Chuck Lorre, the creator of The Big Bang Theory and Two and a Half Men. I find interesting the depth of similarity between this show and The Big Bang Theory. They play out as the same dated sitcom through the lens of whatever pop culture trend is current, whether it be nerdiness becoming “in” or weed. I believe these two also feature a fundamental dishonesty in advertising.

One character of Disjointed, in a tongue in cheek joke, labels herself the “token asian”. Unfortunately, this show is composed of stereotypes all throughout. In fact, she is the asian archetype who is really anxious about her strict parents. The show also features a black character described as being “thirsty for white woman.” Cue laugh track. Of course, all the stoners of the show are complete morons. And where would we be without the will-they-won’t-they romantic tension between two coworkers? These stereotypes don’t offend me, they just aren’t funny. Offensive would be a welcome change of pace. They are so played out and tedious that they bore me. This follows the formula shown in The Big Bang theory, a show featuring a dumb blonde and socially awkward nerds. Do I even need to tell you there is a will-they-won’t-they? This layout is by no means only practiced in these two shows. This is 90s cheap sitcom material being dyed in a new shiny dye.

These shows give the expectation and image of being subversive, but really have the reaffirmation of typical values in nauseating, over the top “moral of the story” sitcom style. I never before realized the importance of my friends and family! Disjointed is so not subversive, that by the third episode they had illustrated how weed is a gateway drug. Disjointed gives off the promise in its image of being a show for stoners, as The Big Bang Theory does with nerds. However, these shows aren’t designed for the groups they represent; they spend the entire show mocking these groups. They are the weirdos who are socially awkward and dumb whom we laugh at. The “other.” Who would want to relate to that? As a nerd, The Big Bang Theory felt like it was against me, not on my side. Disjointed suffers from the same failings.

I have expressed worry that with Netflix being so guided by analytics, they would continue to create content that gets the most bang for its buck, and favors the lowest hanging fruit. Disjointed only follows this trend. It’s impressively by the numbers. However, it’s not all bad: If you are a fan of Chuck Lorre’s other works, you’ll probably enjoy this show. Seeing as how, you know, they are the same show.

Bojack, stop messing it up

Hey Bojack! Glad you're reading this out of all of the other things you could be doing right now! I know you tend to be busy, with your trip out to Chicago to promote your movie and all. I have some advice though. You have made some mistakes in your life, but now, you have the choice between making the mistakes again or not. You got everything you wanted; fame, fortune, and acting in the movie of your dreams, Secretariat. Yet, you still look to destroy everything you've worked for.

While you weren't really the horse acting in the movie and it was just the computer, you still made most of the scenes. You believed in your show Horsin Around, and yet, you've turned your back on it because of this new movie. Everyone around you is telling you that an Oscar is what you need to be happy. I disagree with that statement because you can be happy the way you are now. You just need to stop fighting yourself and everyone around you who cares.

I think you're a funny guy and I really enjoy Bojack Horseman! I enjoy how everything you do, really does happen to you. It isn't just a show where you can create mayhem, and then return to the normal part of life. Everything done is permanent. There is no immediate and unknown fix. I'm glad that you're in an animated show that is setting the standards for other shows.

When I think of you, Bojack, I think of a person who has the capability of being a good person, but you do bad things in the fear that if you try to be good, you won't be. I believe in everything you do and I hope that you can find peace in yourself and the actions you did in the past. Maybe those actions in the past were bad, but it's even worse to make new mistakes because of the old ones. Accept that you made mistakes and try to grow as a person. That is all you can do.

From Cartel to Crime-fighting (Blaine reply)

Dear Daredevil,
  My name is Pablo Escobar and I am one of the worlds biggest drug lords of history. Setting that aside, let us talk about yourself. I have read the comics, and i have played the games. Let's be honest, you are a crime-fighter that no drug lord wants to cross ever in their life. My question is why haven't you ever come to Columbia. There are tons of drugs here, plenty of people being killed, and plenty of families being destroyed. Is it because you are afraid of what people might do to you? No, that can not be it. You are a renowned crime-fighter who has endured countless wars. That is why I am angry with you, I almost despise you and hate you. You are Daredevil, and you can easily put a stop to all of the  madness.
   What madness you may ask? The madness that is the drug industry. As a kid I would always read your comics, hoping to become just like you as I grew up. Not only this but I hoped that possibly you would come to my town and stop the crime that oppressed my family. But you never came through, and you never showed. I grew up around cartel members so I did not have choice but to become one. These members ran our schools, our hospitals, even the workplace and politics. There was no way out, but I thought you would have been the way.
   I will always and truly admire you Daredevil, but I have lost all respect for you. You say you are a crime-fighter yet you have never showed up to Columbia where even the USA is combating our activity. I do not think you should call yourself a crime-fighter because true crime-fighters do not select certain crimes to stop. Once they hear a single sniff of illegal activity, they are on their way to halt any further deviance of the law. Therefore I have made sure all of the children in Medellin, Columbia, my hometown, do not ever get a hold of your comics. And it is not because I am evil, it is to save them from the false hope that is the Daredevil. I never want them to think Daredevil is coming to save them from the horrific tragedies that await because the daredevil won't actually save them.
   Thank you for the comics, and games, and movies daredevil. I know you can't do everything by yourself but Columbia really needed the  help, so much that the US attempted to bring aid to our country. With much hate and disrespect. Yours truly.
                                                              -Pablo Escobar

Beau, be Honest

To Beau,

I sat down and watched the first episode of Netflix’s Ozark, and there are a few things that I would definitely think you would absolutely despise about the.  For one, the main characters are all from the city, born and raised.  Second, the main character seemingly has no regard for traditional values such as family and honesty.  As the story progresses, however, it becomes apparent that because of the main characters disregard for honesty and love of money, it places them in a situation that puts their families in harm’s way.  

The main character, Marty, is a businessman who apparently got stuck laundering money for cartels.  Inherently, the “job” itself is dishonest.  Quickly, the show flings him into a situation where he must make an extremely difficult decision where he must put together a very large sum of money or him and his family’s lives are at stake.  It’s probably much more difficult to get in a situation like this in the south, but in Ozark, in order for for Marty to escape the trouble he’s having, he decides to move his family to the Ozarks in Missouri.  Beau, I don’t know how you would feel about a family like this moving closer to where you are, but the Ozarks give Marty and his family another chance at life.  

The tension that slowly manifests throughout the first episode seemingly is drawn together through dishonest actions.  First, of course, Marty launders money, plain and dishonest.  Twofold, however, Marty has had to maintain a lie to his entire family that he is a financial adviser; I guess, in a way he is a financial adviser, but to cartels, not to normal clients.  Third, it becomes apparent that Marty is not enjoying his marriage as much as he has in the past, so there are a few shots where he struggles to stay true to his ceremonial bond.  In many places around the world, family is of the highest importance, but that is clearly not the case with Marty.  Concerning Marty’s wife specifically, however, later it is revealed that she is in the same boat as her husband; she is not loyal to her marriage either.  Beau, if you get a chance to watch the show, you will see how much trouble this gets Marty’s wife into.  Infidelity is truly an ugly monster to have to deal with.  One last aspect of dishonesty in the show concerns Marty and the cartels he works with.  When Marty initially begins to handle the dangerous situation he’s in, where his family becomes endangered, a twist on his character can be seen.  Instead of being dishonest to his family, like Marty normally does, he begins to tell the truth to them, and instead is dishonest with the cartels in order to protect the lives of his family.  Once again, however, even this turns out to put his family into even deeper trouble, as the episode continues.  Beau, if you get anything out of this, it should be that there is a clear reason why honesty is such a highly valued personal trait; honestly really is the best policy.  

Ozark explores how serious monetary dishonesty can bring someone to an extremely dark place.  Throughout the first episode, it is exhaustively evident that no matter what Marty does to try to escape the reality that he brought himself into, he cannot find a way out.  The lies that he has lived for years are all finally coming back to get him.  This not only puts his own life in danger, but his immediate family and even his extended family.

Friends from College

Molly McGrady

Eleven,

            How are you? I thought I might write to you and try to get your mind off of everything that is going on and tell you about the TV show I most recently watched. Sadly it was terrible. It is called, ‘Friends From College,’ a new Netflix series that just aired recently. I’m sure you could guess what it’s about: some friends from college who are now in their 30’s and trying to figure out their lives with lots of drama and twists.

 I don’t know how much you know about college, being so young and never having experienced it yourself, but it’s definitely nothing like the portrayal of it in this show. Part of that could have been because the people in this show went to Harvard (a fact that they are all obsessed with). Still though I just think regardless of this fact they way they made college seem was all off.

            Another part of this show that really bothered me is that they just aren’t very good people. One of the biggest plot lines of the show is that two of the friends from college got married and the wife is having an affair with one of the other guys they went to college with. I hate when media normalizes things like this and tries to make them out to be ok. I don’t find things like this ok at all. I know you are young and these are the last kinds of things running through your mind, I just don’t ever want you to have to go through the horrible and heartbreaking experience of being cheated on. That is something that I have not experienced directly, but has affected my life greatly because that’s what ended my parents marriage. It’s just a very sad thing that I won’t delve into too much, but at the end of the day I will never understand it.

            A big part of what initially drew me to watch this show was the characters I saw on the cover of it, several of whom were actors I recognized, especially Cobie Smulders. She is in another show that is one of my all time favorites called How I Met Your Mother. I also figured that because of this all-star looking cast the show would be super funny. It wasn’t funny at all. I’m not sure if they were going more for a drama or comedy, but I’d say they failed in both of those genres. I think such an important part of being able to connect with a show is being able to connect with the characters, and I don’t think I could see myself connecting with any of these characters. This isn’t the fault of the actors portraying them at all though, but rather just bad writing. The show had a lot of potential, but they did not execute the ideas well or do this amazing cast justice.

            I’m not sure if you even have time these days to watch any TV with trying to figure out how to get out of the upside down, but if you do I’d say you should not watch Friends from College.

BoJack for All

Cartoons may have typically been geared towards children in the past, but considering the adult content inside of BoJack Horseman, it’s not hard to see why it premieres on Adult Swim and has a more mature rating. While the animation is nothing particularly special, the mass appeal is in the wide relatability to the characters and the problems they face. Despite the fact that not a lot of people can relate to the specific life BoJack leads, there are a few issues that people can relate to on an individual basis and that helps to expand the viewership of the show.

Following the mid-life crisis of an alcoholic Hollywood has-been horse, we open to find our main character, BoJack, in the midst of his old TV show. We travel through a small conversation and a terrible joke within the show and then we pan out into an interview that he is a part of, and very drunk at as well. As the questions continue on in this interview, we find BoJack unable to answer the final, simple question of “What have you done since the show was cancelled 18 years ago?” This brings us into the electric and jazzy introduction, which features a detailed idea of how BoJack’s life has been since the cancelation of his old sitcom. In just a few cut scenes, we see his life spiral out of control as he gets drunker throughout the opening. By the time the opening credits finish, you almost feel sorry for BoJack for the things he goes through up through that point and every day included.

The specific type of humor employed in the show helps to break down some of the politically correct speech we are faced with in our society. By disregarding those walls of what is “okay” or “not okay” to say, you can almost forget the rules of society. There are multiple scenes that address binge-drinking, alcoholism, anxiety, financial situations, and the sense of confusion many actors feel when they have stalled out. While it can address some historically hot-button issues, it still manages to go about them in a way that isn’t particularly heavy and dark, but not entirely light-hearted and lackadaisical. This is a good way to approach these topics from a production standpoint because you don’t run the risk of scaring your customer base off, but you also don’t face the complete demise of your show by being insensitive to the issues in our world.

Overall, BoJack Horseman is a unique TV show in that it uses itself as a platform to address some of the harder-hitting social problems that many people face today. Its specific type of humor is employed to attract a wide variety of viewers as well, which makes it diverse in that it can bring about a connecting point for many different people. While it takes some getting used to at first, it slowly becomes a favorite in the arsenal of comedic television shows that many adults choose to watch.

Film Shimmer Lake

Introduce Movie Shimmer Lake to Winston Schmidt in New Girl

Hey Winston Schmidt, I know you are the wealthiest person within your roommates, I doubt that you never worried about money in your life. I would like to introduce a Netflix original movie whose main clue is money to you. It is a thriller and suspense film about how a sheriff revenged for his illegitimate young son and ‘robbed’ the bank without being suspected.

The movie was narrated from the end, which makes the story more interesting. Unlike some flashback movie, which required you to have a strong logic, the director made this movie easy to be understood by splitting it into different days and well labeled. If the movie was told by chronological order, the movie would be tasteless.

The story started from Friday, and went back to Tuesday. Each day had a data label with a short description of the day. On Friday, the sheriff Zeke’s brother got the money and was killed when he met Steph Burton the prime culprit’s wife in the Shimmer Lake. The only information about the shooter was an arm with obvious tattoo. Zeke talked to his little nephew that he was going to wash the dirty people, who made mistakes, in this town which turned out be very ironic in the end of the movie. The story was a little confusing on Friday.  

On the Thursday, the story got a little clearer that Zeke’s brother got the money from the Judge, who was the owner of the bank they robbed. A young naked boy shew up in Judge’s house which explained why Judge was menaced by the prime culprit Ed Burton, and caused the death of Judge indirectly. On that day, there were couple flashback of the Little Ed. who died in a fire in Ed Burton’s drug lab near the Shimmer Lake, which was significant to the whole story.  

On the Wednesday, the movie talked about how the other partner was killed by Steph Burton indirectly. Steph asked the Judge to take care of the bag of money otherwise she would leak the male Judge’s tape with young naked boy. So far the story was pretty clear, but it was still unclear that where Ed Burton went.

On the last day, or the first day, the whole story was uncovered. Ed Burton got the bank code and got the money with the help from Zeke, the sheriff who looked like a very decent person. After Ed got the money, Steph shew up and told him about the truth that little Ed was Zeke’s son not Ed’s. Zeke killed Ed and hurt his arm deliberately to confuse people. A same tattoo appeared on Zeke’s arm, which was saying that it was Zeke killed his own brother. Staph buried Ed in the Shimmer Lake and started their plan to kill whoever evolved in this case.  

The story was very clear if we start from the end of the movie. One interesting about the movie was that, these people used to be good friends. Because of little Ed and money, Zeke and Staph killed all of them including Zeke’s brother. I knew you something have conflict with your roommates and friends, but you are lucky that no one wanted to kill you.

Pablo, From Your Biggest Fan

Hi Pablo! I'm, like, your biggest fan and I'm so glad that you're reading my blog post right now! I just got finished watching the first episode of your show Narcos and I have to say that I'm absolutely amazed by your performance! I've watched a lot of Netflix shows and I would have to say your show is by far one of the best!

A Narcos Letter

Dear Titus Andromedon,

This week I watched something that I can’t decide if you would like or not. I watched Narcos. Narcos is a show based off the true story of Pablo Escobar and his drug trafficking ring. While I think you would like this show because the entire thing is a drama, and therefore dramatic. I don’t know that you would enjoy the violence and greed that come with the show.

Anyone who knows you knows how much you love drama. Drama makes you happy. This show, while not the epitome of drama, is pretty dramatic. The way the camera follows Pablo and shoots quite a few of his scenes from below, makes him seem more powerful. Now don’t get me wrong, he was powerful. The camera angles just make him seem a little more dangerously powerful. When the camera isn’t shooting from below it is shooting at eye level. This makes Pablo seem more approachable because you see him at the level you would in everyday life.

The other thing that intensifies the drama in Narcos is the voice over. The voice over, that is supposed to be one of the DEA agents, is very intense. This intensity would be great, if it weren’t going overboard sometimes. Don’t tell me, show me. The voice frequently tells you things that you could have inferred or would be better just shown. People say a picture is worth a thousand words. Well, what is the point if you aren’t just experiencing? Suspense. The DEA agent is trying to build the suspense to leave you on the edge of your seat. This is great. But, in the intensity it is  good to also have someone filling you in. Without the voice some scenes might lose their touch or leave you confused.

Stories can be confusing sometimes, especially true ones. This is where I think you would not enjoy this show. While, dramatic, it is based off true lives. Albeit, the show has taken some liberty with the story. That doesn’t make it any less true, and in that regard, I find myself almost wanting to look up where they took those liberties. I don’t think you would enjoy that by it being a true story, that means other people know it, and that you could easily just look up the information and spoil the entire show for yourself. That waiting, the suspense, is what you live for in a TV show. Having the information available about what could be next  whenever you want it is a dangerous game to play.

The thing I know you would have the most though is the fashion. The show is set in the 70s-90s for the most part. That means that all of the following were in: big hair, tight miniskirts, horrible prints, and other things from the 70s. The wardrobe in this show, while accurate was not very appeasing. Pablos wears sweaters to go to drug related activities. The moms/women are all wearing dresses, skirts, or pantsuits. The police wear hideous prints and Pablo does too. While I appreciate the authenticity, I don’t appreciate the every changing patterns and colors. I think if you looked at some of the outfits the characters wear you would cry and refused to watch.

Overall Titus, it is a good show and is dramatic enough to be up your alley. There are some downsides but everything has those and so I say try it. Give it a shot.

Sincerely,

Taylor Shanders