“When I started doing my solo show one of my good friends, Martha, said to me, she’s like, ‘Kamau, you can’t end racism and make sexism worse.’ And I was like, ‘What do you mean by that?’ And she went through my solo show and pointed out all the different parts of it that she felt were sexist. And that’s a good friend, a friend who will tell you that in a way that you can hear. And that was a real revelation for me is that you can’t sort of pick your issue over other people’s issues — that if you want to end the ignorance of something, you have to end all the ignorances or at least not make some of the ignorances worse.”
WKB is good people.
Paul Scheer on auditioning for SNL, from our extensive Lost Roles interview with him in which he tells amazing stories of auditions and parts gone wrong. (via splitsider)
“Mitchell and Webb are to star in a new BBC Two comedy-drama series set in a British Embassy… [read more]”
Additional info. here.
Well then. Still a long way off, but something to look forward to
Hurrah! Sounds good.
I really needed to read this right now.
Welcome to Britain
Works for me.
GOOD: Is HBO's 'Girls' the Voice of Our Generation? Nope, and That's OK
Most critics end their rants about Girls with a call for, well, better girls. “We deserve more” than a white, privileged, “hot-mess protagonist,” writes Julianne Escobedo Shepherd in Alternet. “We need a show that can appeal to all ‘girls,’ not just some,” writes Sarah Seltzer in the Jewish Daily Forward. But it’s time we stop waiting for that perfect show. If networks allowed more directors and screenwriters to strip away the gloss and reveal the nuance and rawness of young women’s experience, we’d have room for both Girls and its less privileged, less white, less New York counterparts. We wouldn’t get so angry that a voice of a generation doesn’t reflect our lives.
If we acknowledge that the details are what make Dunham's show great, we shouldn't be pushing for the show to appeal to and reflect every girl. What we should be wishing for—nay, pushing for—is a lot more shows made by a lot more girls.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Dunham shouldn't be saddled with being the sole unique voice of her mid-20s woman cadre. She's one of many. To reduce "young women" to one person or one show or one friendship or one sex experience is, frankly, terribly narrow-minded and begins with a faulty premise.
It never felt dark to me, though, because I love the cringe-y comedy, because that’s the stuff you relate to. I love laughing at stuff where you go, “Oh, that’s happened to me, and it’s so funny to see that.” It just felt very real to me. The moment I realized we were in trouble—I’ve told this story before—I was talking to one of the critics, and he had watched that episode, and he goes, “You know, Nick walks into that audition, and I just had to leave the room, I couldn’t watch it.” I was like, “Why? That’s the funniest thing in the world, to watch a guy tank an audition.”
Paul Feig and Genevieve Koski continue their magnificent walkthrough of Freaks And Geeks.
This is SO GREAT!
Times’ Television Critic Robert Lloyd on the upcoming season of “Mad Men.” (via latimes)
The amount of work described herein is mind-boggling but also SO EXCITING. I want this job.
Here’s a quick little promo for BUNK. It’s the silliest, weirdest show I’ve ever seen. Check it out June 8, along with Comedy Bang! Bang!
Yaaaaay, it's BUNK!
It may seem unfair to pick on Mad Men for its language inaccuracies; after all, Shakespeare’s characters spoke highly untraditional English, and great shows like Deadwood routinely ran roughshod over any form of linguistic accuracy. But the careful balance of anachronism, in all its forms, is at the heart of the Mad Men’s mechanics far more than Shakespeare’s. We watch the show to revel in the foreignness of the recent past. The drinking, the smoking, the leering, and even the personal reserve all remind us that the modern world isn’t the only one. (This can be a problem, as Benjamin Schwarz wrote in The Atlantic after season two; it can be hard to be enveloped in a world so deliberately off-putting.) Weiner even deliberately plays with anachronisms: At the very end of the show’s first season, set in 1960, Don Draper returns home hoping to see his picture-perfect family in front of him. Instead he finds an empty house, and the season fades to black to Bob Dylan’s “Don’t Think Twice, It’s All Right.” It works perfectly well as a score for an abandoned husband; but knowing that the song wasn’t released for another three years adds the weight of the shift in decades to Draper’s plight. Weiner explained the choice to the Times as an attempt to outline the future of the show if it were cancelled.
Given that, the modern sound of Mad Men is certainly a flaw, if a minor one. It makes us feel more at home just where we shouldn’t. That raises an interesting question: can even the most common phrases disturb the environment if the vocabulary is too heavily weighted towards the modern? What seems to be the most ubiquitous mistake in Mad Men is so frequent as to be invisible: the phrase “I need to.” Modern scripts set in 1960s, including Mad Men, use it constantly: it’s about as frequent as everyday words like “good,” “between,” or “most.” But to say “I need to” so much is a surprisingly modern practice: books, television shows, and movies from the 1960s use it at least ten times less often, and many never use it all. Sixties dialogue written back then used “ought to” far more often than modern imitators do. I checked several movies and TV seasons from 1960 to 1965, and all use “ought to” more often than “need to”; every modern show I could find set in the ’60s does the reverse.
Read more.
I noticed this myself even in the first season. And I specifically remember an internal alarm going off at hearing the word "leverage" in season four (as the article notes).
The language/history nerd in me wishes the writers had tried harder to be accurate, but the fan part of me is more or less OK with it. Shrug!
Good point here:
Even more than anachronism, a core theme of Mad Men is the lost art of personal reserve, self-effacement, and mystery. When Don Draper says, "Tell Jimmy I need to talk to him" in season 2 instead of "I have to talk to him," it hits a slightly more narcissistic, self-revealing note than it should. A baby boomer might set up a business meeting by invoking his personal needs; but a member of the "silent generation"—particularly one living a double life like Draper—doesn't talk about himself quite so readily. If Mad Men used "need to" at the 60s rate, all those characteristics would be stronger.
Given today's breaking news about Jason Russell, now is an especially appropriate time to watch Charlie Brooker skewer Kony 2012 and Invisible Children on 10 O'Clock Live.
UPDATE: Invisible Children's official statement on Russell's arrest:
"Jason Russell was unfortunately hospitalized yesterday suffering from exhaustion, dehydration, and malnutrition. He is now receiving medical care and is focused on getting better. The past two weeks have taken a severe emotional toll on all of us, Jason especially, and that toll manifested itself in an unfortunate incident yesterday. Jason's passion and his work have done so much to help so many, and we are devastated to see him dealing with this personal health issue. We will always love and support Jason, and we ask that you give his entire family privacy during this difficult time."
I’ve never been prouder to work at Vulture at than this very moment.
The Jenna Maroney Name-Droppin' Supercut!