TRAZALCA'S HOVEL

ABC plus CBS plus NBC equals ACNBCS???

(Wed 05/28/2008 02:31pm)
I perused through IMDB.com this afternoon, and came across this blurb about the
Big 3 networks working together for a cause. Read on.

Three Networks Set To Air Cancer Telethon
28 May 2008 10:38 AM, PDT

In an unprecedented one-night hookup, three major TV networks, ABC, CBS and NBC, have agreed to air a joint telethon on the first Friday night in September to raise money for cancer research. To demonstrate the networks' unity, the three evening newsbanchors appeared together on each of their networks' morning shows today (Wednesday) to promote the telethon. The fund-raiser was reportedly the brainchild of Katie Couric, whose late husband, Jay Monahan, died of the disease in 1998.

After reading this, it brought to mind something that had been brewing in my head for
quite sometime now: the networks uniting as one network.

Okay, so maybe that is a bit far fetched when you consider that NBC is backed by
Universal Studios, ABC with Disney, and CBS is partnered with Viacom, which runs Paramount
and Dreamworks. The Big 3 joining forces as one network would probably never happen,
but it if did, no one on God's green earth could ever accuse me of being surprised.
Sure, they've been bitter rivals to each other forever, each vying for your attention span with
sit-coms, endless crime dramas, and reality shows. Their battle for ratings has been a losing one.
Ratings for network TV overall has been suffering for many years, and it's getting desperate.
Unless a show has the ratings bonanza of an American Idol, or Lost, it's lucky to last a season,
no matter how well-produced, acted or intrigueing the series may be.
I wrote a letter to Nina Tassler of CBS regarding my disdain for good shows like Moonlight getting
the boot, but it was never with the belief that it would make a difference. I knew better than that.
I understand many did NOT like Moonlight for several reasons. Whether I disagree with
them or not is irrelevant. I liked the show, and that's enough for me.
But because the ratings did not justify it's stay on the eye network, ratings that other
smaller cable networks would love to claim, it's gone.

The truth is Moonlight remains a victim of how the Big 3 are running things season-in, season-out. Ten
years ago, had Moonlight been out then, it would've stayed a few more seasons if the numbers were
the same, but that is no longer the case. The number of new shows coming in and out of all the networks is near dizzying. It's really hard to keep up. The more new shows announced, the more turned off I become with
each title. My reason to care has dramatically dropped. Why should I give a new show a chance if it's
going to be cancelled within a few months? I'm sick of it.

I even read that Joss Whedon's new TV show on Fox, Dollhouse, is already getting campaigns to save the
show before it's axed, and it hasn't even aired yet! The case of desperation for good TV shows to last
a while longer continues erode the our patience. We, the TV viewing audience, is suddenly asked to
work harder to watch and keep watching at the bequest of the TV networks. That's insane.

Legally, financially, and thanks to no small measure of pride from each, the 3 networks getting together
may never happen. Yet in a climate where so many corporations are merging and partnering up for the sake of surviving in a volatile market, it's a wonder that it hasn't happened yet. Even if two of the three were to
join forces, would it make things better? Would there be less cancellations of good shows?
Who knows? Would it decompress the desperation level that results in axing-off shows with ratings
just below acceptable? Doubt it.

But with each year that passes, it's clear that this is not a cyclical problem that will go away, with all
3 networks back up in a high-flying upswing of success in another year or two. They can no longer claim
each other as the biggest competitor, which is a title now shared between cable, the internet, and gaming
consoles. And just like I touched on in my last rant, time has become more valuable a commodity than
ever before.

With so many choices before us on a daily basis, from playing GTA4, mastering Guitar Hero,
chatting away with family members online while completing a POGO.com challenge, laughing at
the latest exploits of Monk on the USA network, watching movies commercial free on any number of
channels, the Big 3 have their work cut out for them.

But the premature cancellations of good shows continues to plague the Big 3 to a degree that more
and more viewers are being turned off. No one watches free television to be frustrated. All they care
about is to be entertained while relaxing from the hectic insanity of their day. At its best, television can
be a lot of fun to watch and enjoy. But killjoys from the Big 3 continue to popup up, and it's only getting
worse. Sure, TV shows die off, and life goes on. I get that. But this is at an unprecedented level.

Can anyone here remember a time where so many fans of recently cancelled shows are pissed off
at once?

Sooner or later, something's got to give. And when it happens, the Big 3 may wind up on the losing
end of the deal. Unless, of course, they decide to strap their boats together to stay afloat.

You never know.

My Moonlight letter.

(Mon 05/19/2008 03:39pm)

The following below is a letter I will be sending to the addresses listed below concerning the TV show Moonlight being cancelled. I know well enough this show hasn't had many fans. In fact, I know quite a few of you hated it, or regarded it as an Angel knock-off. On its own merits, I dug the show, rather than criticized it for not being Angel. However, underlying this letter lies a deeper problem that affects many good shows that deserved a better fate than given. Shouldn't there be a better way to handle this? There has to be.

Read on.

CBS Network
Nina Tassler
7800 Beverly Blvd
Los Angeles, CA 90036

CW Network President
Dawn Ostroff
4000 Warner Blvd.
Bldg 168
Burbank, CA 91522-0002

Over the last few days, I've had to explain to my lovely wife,
over and over again, the show was dead. Dead, dead, dead.
It's over. No season two. Not a chance. Not happening. Moonlight is gone.
It's teeth have been yanked from its one-season-old gums.
Does she have an understanding as to why? Believe me. I try to explain to her how
Hollywood works, but I'd have a better chance explaining to a 5 year old
why she can't go to the moon on a pair of roller skates. And even if she were
to finally get it, the heartache from the truth remains inevitable.

When Moonlight started, reviews were not so pleasant. It seemed too derivative
of past shows, the acting was so-so, and so on. Even when I started watching
the show, I had my own misgivings. From the first episode, I'd watch with arms
crossed, and my face in full smirk mode. "Go ahead. Impress me," I dared.
But since my wife loved Ghost Whisperer, and Numb3rs, the in-between filler
seemed good enough to sit through. Within weeks, our interest in the show grew.
And by the writer's strike, we were very eager to see more episodes.
It had gained its legs, and had improved a great deal.

You see, I understood the show had to have its own voice. Its own unique take on
the genre and separate itself from the others, and sure enough, it was developing
one. A really good one. By then, it seemed a perfect fit between GW and Numb3rs.
At last, my wife and I can sit together and enjoy 3 hours of TV we didn't have to
argue over. We loved it. But then, the numbers weren't enough for CBS, and they
decided to ax the show. (By doing that, it also showed, at least to me, how pathetically
little weight the People Choice Awards had with any network considering a show's
chances. It makes me wonder what point there is in such an award show at all,
especially if it is held in such low regard. But that's a gripe for another day.)

But to convey to you why the cancellation of this show broke my wife's heart, and
severely disappointed my own, goes back several years, over several shows and
several networks. We've come to enjoy many shows that we really did love, only to
find it killed off after only one or two seasons. After a while, it made us wonder
if we should bother to watch TV at all. NBC was the worst in cancelling shows that
we genuinely cared about, with Journeyman being the latest. Outside of Heroes,
she now has no interest in anything NBC puts out. None. She's sworn them off
and had enough.

I will say this: CBS rocks da house far better than NBC ever will, in my book. They
had the heart to give Jericho a chance, and that spoke volumes to me. They cared
about their audience enough to listen, and it was far more than NBC would ever think
to do. But from what I understand, CBS learned from its Jericho experience, and is
loathed to repeat it.

I understand its business, but damn it, why Moonlight? So many far less interesting
shows were put to rest. Grouping Moonlight with them was shameful. It deserved better.
And when it came to giving it over to CW, why all the bureaucratic red tape between the
two of you? (if indeed the stories about it circulating the net are true - don't worry.
I keep my salt shaker handy) Hollywood decisions are a beast to comprehend,
even with all I've come to learn over the years, but how many good shows have
to continue to get killed off because the numbers aren't stellar?
Regarding Moonlight, why the trouble with so many showrunners for it?
That's enough to kill any TV show, no matter what it is. You'd think,
in spite of any success it had, you wanted it to fail.

And now I learn it's being replaced with the "Ex-List"? The premise is about as
fascinating as an hour-long episode on the history of drywall. My wife refuses to
watch it, determined to just watch GW, then go on the internet while Numb3rs is
taping. The cool triumvirate of tv watching has been killed for us. Thanks a lot.

I wanted to write a letter, pleading and begging you not to do this.
I wanted to write a letter on just how much I love this show, and how much of a mistake
I think you're making in axing it.

But quite frankly, the problem is far deeper than that, and instead, I'm writing about
my disdain for how television is being run.

It's things like this that discourages viewership of network TV.
And with so many things to choose from when it comes to spending time,
as valuable as time is nowadays, we chose to watch Moonlight, and loved it.
Thanks to this cancellation, without any second shot given to it from other networks,
I'm now apt to spend that time elsewhere.

I don't know about you, but I am sick to death of this. I'm so freakin' tired of
falling head over heels for a show, regardless of ratings, and then watch it get
kicked to the curb. You see something new and wonderful, it blossoms, though it may
start off as an ugly duckling, the beginnings of its swan-like grace begins to show,
then it gets put out of its misery right before your very eyes, with no hope of rescue.
And then you're ask to simply live with its demise, and accept a new one to take its place.
And all because not enough people are watching.

I can't make people watch. The move to put Moonlight to another network that could
better benefit from its current ratings level would be the best thing for it, and for its fans.
Just because a baseball player doesn't make it in the big leagues, he's not told to
give up playing the game forever, but instead is put somewhere in the Minor leagues.
At least he's given a chance to still play the game he loves. He's downgraded, but not out.
And if he has fans, at least they're not cheated from seeing him play.

The sad thing is, even if Moonlight was moved to CW, it would no longer
be a part of the cool triumvirate on CBS Friday nights. It was a nice tradition to enjoy,
even if for one season. Oh well. You can't have everything.

Do I believe anything will come of this letter? No.
My voice is too small against an issue too big.
My expectations, therefore, are like this vampire tale that had
heart and soul: dead, dead, dead.

Thank you for your time.

Trazalca

Will somebody do something about this? PLEASE?

(Thu 05/01/2008 10:08am)

I cannot stay silent on this any longer.

If I wanted to study how to design a webpage,
particularly one with many elements attached to
it, then I would go no further than to compare
one that succeeds, versus one that is, well,
trying to.

Understandably, design includes, not only
a clear display of content that avoids
the risk of clutter, but employment of a
smooth, thematic style that does not
irritate the irises on one's eyeballs,
or make one feel more comfortable staring into
the gaping maw of a final exam on Quantum Physics.
It should be distinctive.
It should have that uber-cool uniqueness
that makes you want to visit again.
However, it would be all too easy for me to
name the one I'm talking about that sucky;
one that currently shows a display that is,
how shall I say, akin to witnessing an epilectic
wrestling match between claustrophobia and
schizophrenia, with fingers clawing
each others neckbone, desperate to rip out
and gnaw on the opponent's cerebral cortex
like a twizzler, eager to mash and crack
the ribcage, remove the heart and perform
a flamenco dance on it, all for the sole
purpose of gaining a timeslot from your
attention span.

This particular website has, fortunately,
a devoted fanbase that continues to thrive.
It has its loyal fans and its steady reputation.
It has character, as well as devoted
bloggers, writers, and developers working hard
to put out hip and relevant content. Bravo there.

But one wonders if someone on staff was
short of cash, and decided to hire
the tattooed dude from Memento as the new
web designer, instead of one with
an eye for art, panache, and general common sense.
Visiting this website, you are thrust headlong
into a world of overlapping images,
gif files, slideshows unsure whether to stay
within the lines of a frame,
and a long column of boxes you'd have to scroll-scroll-scroll down to visit.
It's width is an enigma,
teasing you with the idea that
it might go on forever in either direction.
In short, it's headache inducing.
It's a jumbled mess.

It's aweful.

For once, instead of complaining about
movie-ad popups that try to attack and slash
your soft-touch screen, it's about the
new designs being applied here.
Now, if the attempt is to mirror the soul
of this site's moniker, then I'd say that
they've far outdone themselves.
Confusion is the bed insanity loves to sleep in.
And just trying to stare at this main page
is enough to make me think it is content to do nothing more than fluff the pillows,
and dream nightmares for pure fun.

Now, if I was to go to RottenTomatoes website,
sanity returns. Everything is evenly placed,
and spaced, accordingly. There is beauty
in discipline. Labels are clear,
with nothing overlapping. The top menu bar
is in plain view to all in large letters
that are pleasing to behold,
adhering to that treasured bit of wisdom:
keep it simple, stupid.
I don't have to scroll forever to reach
favored segments, or wonder why everything
looks so squished together like a stack of shoeboxes. At RT, not only does this tell me that
the website designer respects the
contents it serves to display, but it shows
that it respects the audience that comes to visit.

But getting back to ugly, unless its
main webpage changes to something
far easier on the eyes,
whatever plans the owners had to making
this place standout as something special
in a sea of movie fansites, those plans
were rightly kicked hard to the groin
with a hard-a$$ steel-toe boot.
It's the gaudiest F-U to surfers and movie fans yet.

Okay fine. I understand that I should wait
until the design is finished. But really.
It's like asking me to tolerate getting
an eyesore with each visit to this site.
It's just not welcoming. It's more of a deterrent. And what's worse is that I'm afraid of what
this place will look like
once everything is done (or is it?).
Once finished, will this arthritically
twisted cave of batshit be worth hanging
upside down in?

Just like that new title for the X-Files sequel,
I want to believe. I really do.
But my faith is waning. The hemorrhaging
is bad from the loss of common sense.
There's blood on the dance floor, and the DJ
is too busy picking his nose to change the music.

And for the record, regardless of whether
this thread is moved or not, I'm posting it in a
blog that is unforgiving as it is determined
to kill paragraph breaks for easier reading;
yet another ugly side-effect of the designs being
placed upon this wonderfully gregarious website
that doesn't even have the good sense to
put out an UNDER CONSTRUCTION SIGN
on the corner to let others know the design
is still under transition.
Instead of courtesy, the designer is content
to let the visitors to this site just simply DEAL.

How rude.

Do I really NEED to own it on DVD?

(Fri 04/25/2008 03:50pm)

After visiting the IMDB website, I noticed a banner advertising
the film for Charlie Wilson's War, just released on DVD, with the statement at the bottom
reading "OWN IT NOW ON DVD". I think to myself, why? Why own it now?
I haven't seen the film. A quick look at RottenTomatoes.com confirms
it's been reviewed highly. Heck. Even Hoffman got an Oscar nod for his work in it.
I'm sure all signs point to it being worth seeing. But do I really need to own it?

                   

 

This rant is by no means a slam to the film. Quite the contrary, I truly
believe that if I do take the opportunity to see it, I'll like it very much.
I see no reason to think otherwise. However, this introduces the idea of what
DVDs are worth owning, versus a one-time rental. What is off-putting to me
is the statement the ad makes. First of all, why should I bother to come to
the conclusion that I should own this DVD? Second, why do I have to own this
DVD now]?

 

                           

On the first point, I would want to own a DVD if I know for a fact that it's
a film I would love to see again and again, and relive the experience it may give
to me, the simple moviegoer. Lately, not a lot of movies have given me that kind
of experience, or deliver on it enough to warrant me wanting to relive anything.
Another reason would be if I was a true fan of a particular actor/actress/director.
For example, if it's a Woody Allen film, and a really good one, I'd like to own it.
I own quite a few already. Not all, mind you, as I'd like to stick to the good
stuff...at least to the ones that work for me. I'm a fan, but not die hard.
I'm more casual, but I like what I like.

                           

 

With that said, there are many films that I've seen once, enjoyed them,
but never cared to see them again. As good as Charlie Wilson's War may be,
I'm afraid that one would be as such. I can easily imagine that I'd get a kick
out of it, but unless it gives me an experience that really challenges me,
or makes me wish for more, my expectations remain neutral.
One that comes to mind is Quiz Show. A brilliant film I saw in the theater.
It was thought provoking, and I wouldn't mind seeing it again.
But I don't feel the need to own it. True, it was good. But it didn't leave me
feeling a desire to run out and see it again.
So I think for the most part, it's my own personal preference.

 

                             

 

On the second point, the marketing demand that I own a DVD now is ludicrous.
Once it is out, that's all I need to know. There's a short list of movies I do want to own,
but the need to do it right now is not feasible. At the moment, I need gas money,
so first things first. I'm a patient person when it comes to owning movies. My need to get
it once it hits the shelves is rare.
It's not like for a comic book, which is different all together.

 

                            

 

I used to be a serious collector, with the understanding that if a comic book hits the shelf
that I know will be in high demand, I had better be there the day it touches that shelf,
or I can forget about it, (unless I go to ebay, and pay far more than original retail. Yuck.)
To this day, I have yet to own Green Lantern #47, which is hard to find. It's from the
story arc of when Hal Jordan loses his mind. It's a comic book I'd love to own NOW.
But outside of paying a few bucks, I'll wait. If the marketing demand to "own it now" were
applied to comic books, as I think they should to a more realistic extent, I'd be more
apt to agree. Once it's gone from the shelves, it's gone, and then your left chasing
websites, online bids, collectors that might sell, blah-blah-blah.

 

                            

But back to DVDs: should I follow my former comic book M.O. for them? I don't think so.
Example: I'm a big fan of Sweeney Todd the Musical. Having heard it on cassette
countless times, seen the broadway production on TV, and experienced the Tim Burton
film on the last day it was shown in a dollar-theater I go to, the DVD is a must have.
I want it. I would love to have it.

                             

 

I will one day get this DVD. I just don't see the need to have it right now.
That's a lie marketing wants you to swallow. If it's got a popular
name or rep to it, it has to be something I should buy right now.
Another example: I have yet to see the movie 300. I want to see it.
I kick myself for not seeing it in the theater. I've seen enough to know that I'd even
want to own it. However, I do know if I wait a couple of years, a sale will come by,
and then I'll get it. Just like the sale I came across a few weeks ago for a video
store going out of business. DVDs were marked down to seven bucks a pop.
VHS? A mere buck-fifty. I walked out of there with a box load of movies, rich
with titles I was curious about, and a few I wanted to own. A couple that I've
seen so far are set to be thrown in the trash.
Others, like Shaun of the Dead, I'm keeping. I loved that one.

 

                             

 

Unless those brilliant-minded money marketers can deliver a way to reduce the price
per gallon at the local gas station, my money spent will go where it has to.
And unfortunately, with priorities in tow, when I pull up to the gas station,
look at the cost per gallon risen to $3.60, I'll cringe, take a deep breath, and
unscrew the gas cap. The needs of my livelihood, for the sake of getting
to work and back, demands that I get these several gallons to
add to my tank right now. No marketing is necessary for me
to come to that point, because sadly, it sells itself.

(If this blog entry looks warped, don't blame me. I tried to make it look presentable. I really did!)

Signs Of The Apocalypse Upon Us - AGREED!

(Tue 04/22/2008 10:59am)

I had to respond to the well-written Mania article "The Mania Manifesto: Five Signs the Apocalypse is Upon Us" from Damon Brown. And in the end, it proved to be a decent rant, so I've added it here:

These signs couldn't be more apt, but I think it ought to be far bigger than it is. I'm just too tired think of them. Long story worth blogging later about...eh. Maybe not. There's only so many interesting blogs that can be entered concerning one's sleep deprivation. Unless it's the Altered States kind, then that'd be kinda cool. Anyways....:

Reason 5: Yahoo! owned by Microsoft simply scares me. I see nothing good in it. It's only another step in Microsoft's attempt to ruling the world. I own a few accounts on Yahoo, and the idea of Microsoft touching them sends ice water down my spine.

Reason 4: "Chevron gas is made of people." Genius!

Reason 3: I'm kind of glad Mr. Petersen is getting the kind of moolah he's signed up for. But no matter how many times I see him, his acting just doesn't warrant it for me. It always seems just enough for the job. The question I have is where's Keifer Sutherland's money? I mean, come on! His acting chops are da bomb, yo.
Seriously.

Reason 2: Church-goers are a social lot. That said, the Wii fits them to a tee. However, the idea of using technology or a game to draw people in seems terribly gimmicky. The idea may sound great on paper, but the reality may prove something else entirely. It raises the level of being disingenuous to such a high glare, the threat of ruptured corneas would abound. It's just not a good idea.

Reason 1: When I read about this, I nearly gagged on a Pringles chip. And in kind, I would love nothing more than for DiCrapio to go choke on that Heart of the Ocean sapphire ala Titanic. Leonardo producing Akira???? And what city pray tell is he going to place this in? Manhattan. Oh yeah. That will make a WHOLE lot of sense. As if we need yet another movie to crash through and blow up New York City to smithereens. What is it with this love/hate relationship with NYC that it has to be so abused by SO many movies??? Cloverfield was the latest one, and the hits just keep on coming. There is just simply no let up. I've lost count on how many sci-fi/action/thriller/disaster movies to come out with an all out cinematic epic-scale abuse of that city. With all the other cities to choose from, that's the only one worth demolishing in a special effects studio? Sure, I can hear other people across the country in their city saying "Hey! You leave my city out of this. Don't you DARE mention my neck-o-the-woods buster." But still. It's getting old. And the American version of Akira can only wind up being wrong on SO many levels. I see nothing right about it at all. And I blame the Wachowski brothers for that. They set the stage for the floodgates to bust open on live-action based on oriental plots to the insane degree it's at. Do we really need a live action version for EVERY ANIME/MANGA ever RELEASED??? The best line in that whole article summed it up for me:
"Hollywood is pimping the hell out of our childhoods."

Sad, but true.

You know, when I was a kid, I loved the heck out of my Micronauts collection. They were awesome, with interchangeable parts that Lego hadn't the idea-machine to dream up of yet. How cool was it to turn a working, battery-powered engine that could act to turn parts for a spaceship AND a submarine that actually worked under water? And shoot missiles? It was too sweet.
[sarcasm]So, where's my movie? Where's my mega-million franchise for them? And for that matter, from the bowels of that forlorn arcade era, what about a TV mini-series for Tempest? I know I plunked down more than a few bills of quarters for that one. And for that matter, Hollywood is taking WAYYYY too long for kicking Discs of Tron out of pre-production hell. I mean, really. They need to get on the ball.[/sarcasm]