Archive

Archive for the ‘stars’ Category

Banking on One Pony: The New Girl, Last Man Standing, Ringer, Whitney

September 13th, 2011 | Jonathan Gray

Four of the new shows’ advertising, promos, and paratexts have been pretty much dedicated to a simple message: our show stars this one person. It’s a risky move, since you’re banking on the audience caring about that star, and you’re going all-in on the hope that he or she is enough enticement for enough people to watch the show. Compare, for instance, with Person of Interest, which mixes Jim Caviezel and Michael Emerson, which is a pretty decent pairing – Christ and Ben Linus! – but its publicity has been quite keen to let us know its creator, too, namely Dark Knight’s Jonathan Nolan.

So which are these shows that think they only need the one star, and what can we say about their chances?

Neatly, they divide into two groups of two: the two that are bringing back television stars of yesteryear (even if that yesteryear is just 8 years ago) – Last Man Standing and Ringer – and the two that are working with relatively new talents – The New Girl and Whitney. Read more…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

new shows, poster art, stars, trailers , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jay at 10: Bad for Business, Good For TV?

December 14th, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

By now, you’ve likely heard that Jay Leno will be taking over a third of NBC primetime next year. Most of the reaction I’ve read is along the lines of David Bianculli’s, that this will be “good for business, bad for TV.” I disagree.

The “good for business” line looks at the relative cost of production. Jay himself costs a lot, but the show is dead cheap in Hollywood terms. The “good for business” line also counts on Jay being able to bring his Nielsen audience to NBC primetime. Bianculli adds that this helps NBC keep Jay (though at what price?). And Derek Kompare speculates that NBC could lock down an older audience rather than chasing a fickle younger one with various scripted options.

But, as I said, I’m not convinced. Why? More below …

Read more…

Tags: , , ,

ads, ratings, stars , , ,

Deposing Boston Legal

December 2nd, 2008 | Derek Johnson

Last night marked the penultimate airing of ABC’s Boston Legal.  Before its finale next week, I thought I’d offer some thoughts about the end of a series that has proved so compelling yet also incredibly frustrating to me over the past five years.  Though I’ve never missed an episode (see my earlier comments about commitment viewing), the formulaic repetitiveness of the last three seasons long ago led me to believe that Boston Legal had run out of creative terrain to explore–”outrageous” and “shocking” (to quote Henry Gibson’s Judge Brown), but content to be predictably so.  In moving towards a definitive end, however (ABC made it clear at the beginning of the season it would not go beyond its initial 13-episode order), this final season has shown growth, giving me a picture of what Boston Legal could have been all along.

Read more…

Tags:

sequels, stars

WWKD: What Would Kermit Do?

October 23rd, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

Okay, so to summarize, we have endorsements for Obama from Clair Bennet from Heroes, Dan and Serena from Gossip Girl, The Fonz and Richie Cunningham from Happy Days, Opie and Andy Griffith from The Andy Griffith Show. Jed Bartlet is for Obama, or for Paris Hilton, depending on who you ask. Which got me thinking about which other television characters might be inclined to endorse. Some suggestions:

  • I see McCain as likely to be able to count on endorsements from Lucille Bluth; Boss Hog; Dr. Bob Kelso; Dwight Shrute, Angela Martin, and Andy Bernard; Victor Newman; Daniel Linderman; Eric Cartman; and Statler and Waldorf.
  • Maybe not so keen on McCain, but brought in by Palin are Michael Scott, Borat, Denny Crane, and the one person who will always find something positive about something horrific, Paula Abdul.
  • Jessica Fletcher was swayed by Joe Biden.
  • John Locke’s in it for Bob Barr.
  • Tobias Funke is all about Ralph Nader.
  • And I see Lester Freeman, Kermit the Frog, and Lisa Simpson as Obama voters.

Joking aside, how does Roseanne Conner vote? If Andy Griffith can pack a punch like few other than Ralph Stanley, Roseanne and Dan’s endorsement could be a neat one.

Tags: ,

stars ,

Opie for Obama

October 23rd, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

Yet another celeb endorsement video using the actors’ characters as the centerpiece. In the midst of the McCain campaign’s insistence that Obama isn’t like you, isn’t a “real American,” isn’t from a “pro-American” part of the country, etc., there’s particular extratextual power at work here. First, surely if Palin and McCain think that anywhere’s the “real America,” it’s Mayberry, and so Andy Griffith and Ron Howard hail their simple, decent, smalltown folk characters’ images to endorse Obama. Then Howard channels Richie Cunningham from the ultra-schmaltzy Happy Days, a show straight from the nostalgia zone, full of teens who come home before curfews and rebels as unrebellious as The Fonz.

See more Ron Howard videos at Funny or Die

I find it interesting that it’s the pro-Obama side that’s calling up images of the all-white sitcom (supposed) wonderland. As amusing as the clip is (and as surprised as I was to see Griffith endorse Obama), I find it a little worrisome that the strategy aims to make Obama seem safe by surrounding him with these images of white small town nostalgia. It’s a little too close to the insistence that Obama is not a Muslim — ideally, just as I’d love to hear more of a defence of Muslims as real Americans who aren’t all hell-bent on destruction and spousal abuse, rather than a quick “no m’am, no m’am, he’s a decent family man,” I’d rather that we fight for the image of a diverse, open America that I think Obama represents, rather than surrender to the Mayberry model (cf. Pleasantville). I’m not blind to the rationale behind the strategy, or to its tactical importance when it’s the independents and undecideds who are left, but I’d rather see and herald a Lt. Cedric Daniels, Sergeant Carver, and Detective Freeman for Obama PSA.

Tags: , ,

ads, stars, viral videos , ,

Save the Cheerleader, Vote Obama?

October 15th, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

I’ve been amused by two recent political ads, one including Gossip Girl stars/adverbs Blake Lively (Serena) and Penn Badgely (Dan), and the other with Heroes’ Hayden Pannetiere. Celebrities making political appeals is hardly anything new, but both ads play quite cleverly off the shows and the characters to aid their cause.

Lively and Badgely’s ad mocks the “talk to your kids about drugs” PSAs by imploring young viewers to talk to their parents about voting McCain. Lively and Badgely are Gossip Girl’s resident good kids (well, as good as one could be in that show, I guess), and their make-believe school suffers from substance abuse aplenty. Thus, one can imagine them to be called upon to deliver the “don’t do drugs” message; instead, a more sinister behavior concerns them – voting McCain. One could imagine a more conflicted ad if the stars were replaced with Gossip Girl’s resident bad kids, Leighton Meester (Blair) and Ed Westwick (Chuck).

See more Hayden Panettiere videos at Funny or Die

Hayden Pannetiere’s piece also plays with her character. In Heroes, she’s invincible, and fighting to save the world. Moreover, as anyone aware of this thing called “popular culture” knows, Heroes’ catch-phrase in Season One was “Save the Cheerleader, Save the World,” and Pannetiere was the cheerleader in question. So, when she warns of how “we’ll all probably die,” there’s a (playful) added level of horror, as if the only thing worse than Sylar, Adam, or another Ali Larter character is McCain.

I realize now that my last post was also about stars using their characters to add weight to a political message. And, of course, the obvious other example is Martin Sheen, who got many years worth of political rallies and stump speeches out of being the beloved Jed Bartlet. All are interesting examples of how to use one’s stardom as para/inter/extratext.

Tags: , , , ,

ads, satire, stars, viral videos , , , ,

Authoring the Candidate from the Paratextual Margins: Tina Fey’s Sarah Palin

October 5th, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

This coming week, I’m off to the Flow Conference in Austin, TX. I’m on a panel about women in comedy, and my primary interest lay in discussing women in animation. But I’ve been wanting to talk about Tina Fey and her excellent Palin impression instead. And so I thought I’d write on that topic latter here.

Let’s start by making something clear. I am not a fan of Saturday Night Live. Most of its humor is tepid and puerile. They might have a funny nugget, but it’s five seconds worth of a five minute skit. SNL has had some funny people, yes, but they’re nearly always considerably funnier off the show. Also, while I’m sure its defenders will point out some of its fantastic skits over the years, and while I too think they’ve had some brilliant moments, their failure to success ratio is huge.

More specifically, I have a beef with SNL‘s fans who misuse the word “satire,” by suggesting that many of the show’s rather lame impressions are in any way satirical. Dana Carvey did a good George H. W. Bush, but there was no satire. Fred Armisen’s Obama isn’t even good, let alone satirical. Satire scholar George Test notes that satire must have play, aggression, laughter, and judgment, and too often SNL lacks all but play. I could put on a dress and say I’m Laura Bush, but that wouldn’t make it satire. Perhaps the best test of an impressionist’s satiric skill is whether the person being impersonated would be offended or uncomfortable watching it; if yes, bravo.

But Tina Fey’s recent impression of Palin is a refreshing change of pace for SNL. As a result, she’s become what a good satirical impression should be: a nasty, unshakeable paratext hanging around the candidate’s official appearances, and standing between the citizen-viewer and the candidate. I don’t think it’s too much of an exaggeration to say that Tina Fey is, right now, the most socially relevant and important comedian on television because of her impression.

More after the fold…

Read more…

Tags: , , , , ,

satire, stars , , , , ,

Malawian Media Consumption, Part I: Film

July 10th, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

I am now back from Malawi, where I’ve been for the last month. It was a fantastic trip. I’ll spare you the long, rambling travelogue here, instead focusing on Malawian media consumption. I’m aiming to write three descriptive posts, on film, on television, and on music, and a fourth post with reflections and analysis.

Just to situate things a bit, though, this is drawn on observations from myself and from my research assistant. I was in one town (Liwonde) in the South for two weeks, with small visits to Balaka, Mangochi, and Monkey Bay, then in another town (Rumphi) in the North for another two weeks. I hired my research assistant, Stanslous Ngwire, in Rumphi, and hired him for a month of visiting video shows (more on these below), places where television is played, and CD/DVD stores/stalls, and to conduct, translate, and transcribe interviews in English, Chichewa, or Chitumbuka (the first two being Malawi’s national languages, the third the main language in the North). Stanslous has experience interviewing and is a marvel. But I also chatted a heck of a lot with many people: Malawians are some of the warmest people I’ve met on the planet, and anytime I walked anywhere, I would often end up with someone accompanying me on an ad hoc basis, simply to chat. That said, I’ve yet to really dig into the interviews yet, so these are rudimentary observations. And they’re not based on years in Malawi, so take everything with a grain of salt, yeah?

FILM

Movies in Malawi are seen either via satellite, or in “video shows.” Both usually involve small televisions (ie: if you’d consider it for the foot of the bath, that’s the one). The video shows are usually in a one-room mud-brick building with a few plastic crates or planks of wood for the adults to sit on, and a piece of cardboard for the kids. A few that I went into shared the space with a rat or two, and with the occasional hornet or wasp nest. They usually house around 20 to 30 viewers at any given time. Admission is either 5 or 10 kwacha (3.5 or 7 cents). Usually, “show times” are outside, with a makeshift piece of cardboard telling you the times and the DVD or VCD covers telling you what’s on. You pay to walk in, not for the show, and I found it rare for people to arrive dutifully on time, instead walking in or out as time commitments or interest dictated. Malawi only has five films of its own (I’ve yet to confirm this, but about 6 people gave me this number independently), so almost all movies were American or Nigerian, in English (English is widely spoken in Malawi, though not at an advanced level). English subtitles were usually left on, which helps because the sound systems are pretty awful and cranked up to the point of creating audio crackle. People tended to watch observantly, the quiet in the room interrupted only by occasional comments, by kids coming in to sell snacks such as beans or sugar cane, or when the funny-looking azungu (white person) entered the room, becoming cause for intense amusement and curiosity.

Read more…

Tags: , ,

Malawi, stars , ,

His Name is His Name: Marlo and I

March 20th, 2008 | Jonathan Gray

Marlo and Carver

[spoiler-free]. Thanks to the tip-off from Jason Mittell, I braved the wind and a long line forebodingly underneath a pigeon fly-over to see three of The Wire‘s stars today. The billing promised Seth Gilliam (Carver), Michael K. Williams (Omar), and Tristan Wilds (Michael), though we were quickly informed that “Tristan couldn’t be here, so Marlo is instead.” [I love the mixed register there: "Actor A can't be here, so Character B will be instead" ... but it's also fun to think of Marlo playing second fiddle to anyone] Fine with me: Michael’s great, but to be in the presence of Marlo? Cool. More below

Read more…

Tags: ,

stars ,

Arm Chair Casting Directors

December 5th, 2007 | Jonathan Gray

As casting news for the J. J. Abrams Star Trek continues to be released, amidst much fan discussion, derision, anticipation, and debate, I’m quite fascinated by the anticipatory joys of casting, and of what this says of stars as texts, intertexts, and brands.

Significant pleasure exists simply from combining actors and projects in one’s head. Who would you cast in the Star Trek movie? Or, if Trek isn’t your thing, pick any movie and recast it, pick your favorite novel or comic book and think of who you’d cast in the movie version, or simply think of who you’d like to replace in an existing television show or movie. Speaking personally, for instance, I remember well the joys of discussing who should play whom when Lord of the Rings and X-Men were announced; and though I liked X-Men, I probably had more fun casting the film than watching it. Even hearing about upcoming new films’ casting can be intriguing (a buddy film with Dolly Parton and Snoop Dogg?? A new drama with Kevin Spacey, Steve Carell, Javier Bardem, and Denzel Washington? Etc.)

Hence, in part, the huge industry of entertainment magazines, television shows, and websites that peddle casting information, and “exclusives” on what projects are occurring. See Comingsoon.net, in particular. And hence in part the popularity of trailers, not only ensuring that many an audience member gets to the theatre twenty minutes early, but also that many go surfing for trailers online, making trailer viewing one of the more common activities on YouTube, IFilm, and company.

What the joys of speculative casting seem to speak to, on one hand, is the degree to which star images can operate as texts independent of even a film, scandal, or latenight talk show as site, and, on the other hand, the significant pleasures of anticipation.

Regarding star image, though it is the acting projects and public appearances that largely author the star as text, the meaning and utility of that text extend far beyond those projects and public appearances. Stars come to represent ideas, ways of being, styles of acting, beloved or detested genres, political causes, personal motifs, and so forth, all or many of which have value and meaning outside of the moments of performance.

This then leads to the pleasures of anticipation, since combining actors is an act of combining these ideas, ways, styles, genres, causes, motifs, and so forth. While not as dramatic or camp as the late television show Celebrity Deathmatch, there is nevertheless the element of a battle of images and texts. Or a dance and an intricate, artful mixing (Dancing with the Stars?). Much of the most important cultural work of stories lies in how they make us think or conceive of the world, and thus anticipation of stories, and of casting combinations, often engages front-on with that cultural work. While we contemplate what it would be like for Pacino and Keaton to share a scene again, for instance, their acting histories to date are summoned, complete with potentially all of the textual meanings of their work, and thus the contemplation of what we think of such casting stands to invoke and focus a vast collection of textual responses.

In this respect, thinking about casting, and playing the casting game, can be quite stunningly intricate tasks, important correlates to the work of stories, even if they seem mundane and trivial. It can be fun to play this game not just because it can quickly get silly (my all-time favorite being someone’s pre-Peter Jackson Lord of the Rings suggestion that Calista Flockhart should play Golem), but also because it’s in the thinking about casting that we continue the work of stories.

With this in mind, here’s the task. Recast Star Wars. Or find a fresh cast for a West Coast Avengers or Excalibur film. Or any other project. Clive Owen as Captain Britain, and James Marsters as Nightcrawler, perhaps? Or Christian Bale as Han Solo? Clint Eastwood as Obi-Wan Kenobi? Okay, just kidding with that last one. Your thoughts?

Tags:

previews, stars