

Conan’s soundcheck take on Radiohead’s “Creep”…
Sometimes saving the princess is not the right thing to do…


Conan’s soundcheck take on Radiohead’s “Creep”…
Sometimes saving the princess is not the right thing to do…


I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.
In this episode, Ken has a bit of a chat with writer/comedian Rob Delaney…
Hope you enjoy…
Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Rob Delaney“:
[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-rob_delaney.mp3]
SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Drop Ken a line HERE.
##
You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.


Siskel & Ebert Bloopers…
Carl Sagan and The Pale Blue Dot…
We Are Here: The Pale Blue Dot from dmahr on Vimeo.

I’m not going to mess around this week. I have no soapbox to stand on or issue I feel the need to rant about. Instead, I’m just going to nonchalantly dismiss some musicians in a self serving manner. Who needs therapy when you have a column on FRED?
Once again, all bands reviewed are done so solely on the basis that they tried to add me as a friend on MySpace.
The fools.
————————————————————————
M T M
www.myspace.com/mexicantimemachine
The Mexican Time Machine look like 3 homeless dudes. There is a possibility that they really are 3 homeless dudes and this is some sort of community outreach program: getting hobos to play music in order to relieve their smelly blues. The thing is, they’re the best homeless guy band I’ve ever heard. I just wish they’d wash.
I honestly don’t know what I expected to hear when I clicked play. The name was weird. They looked weird. I expected something weird. I got something great. I’ve decided I’m going to give you a play-by-play of the setlist.
The first few songs are live recordings and are pretty damn clear compared to some of the live crap I’ve heard on here before. In The City-Brown Cow took me by surprise as it goes from being a nice old fashioned bluesy kind of feel to some crazy metal highs. Car Chase does what it says on the tin, it’s a great instrumental soundtrack to an imaginary drag race (I’m half tempted to dub it over the Grease end-of-movie race to see if it fits).
The next two tracks take me completely into Presidents Of The United States Of America territory. Crystal is instantly catchy and fun. 2 In The Oven ,while sticking out like a sore thumb as being the biggest sound departure, has the exact same effect. Honestly, listen. I dare you not to tap your foot and hum it for the rest of the day. I love dirty beats and this has a filthy one. I’m talking Jenna Haze filthy.
We’re then given another movie soundtrack style instrumental in Waltz and Valley. It’s funny how a song with no words can give you such a clear picture in your head. It does really show off the guitar playing, which is very impressive.
Then we get the demo version of Crystal again, which is slightly different as it’s stripped down to almost only vocals.
So that’s it. I liked it. I had fun. We shared some laughs. Had a few beers. Hugged a little towards the end. It was emotional. I went back to my house and they went back to their cardboard boxes in the alley. Who could ask for more?
Presentation = 0/5
Content = Drab looking page but enough songs and some videos with bad sound.
Music = 4/5
Friend Request = ACCEPTED!
————————————————————————–
EDEN
www.myspace.com/edenofficial
Eden are the duo of Ian Henderson and Mark Power. They plan on burning your face with their neon electro-pop straight out of the 80s via a fucked up Delorian. If you like synthesizers or gay bars you’ll absolutely love Eden. My problem is that I’m not excited by either.
Sure, I love my 80s pop but the Pet Shop Boys didn’t really do it for me and Erasure were fun for the campness but where are they now? The thing about Eden is they’re slightly too serious about their euro-dance shenanigans for my liking. There is nothing wrong with taking your music seriously and this is obviously a genre they hold dear to their hearts as it is clearly a great example of it. But I don’t take the genre seriously myself so without a tongue in any cheek here; I just don’t care.
I’ve got to hand it to them though, they have the aesthetic down. The page looks exactly how you would want a band like this to look. The music is solid too with a nice hook to most songs. If I Was A Pet Shop Boy is still stuck in my head a week later. I’d be lying if I said the vocals didn’t annoy me though. They’re weak, not out of tune but just powerless. If Eden had someone with a big set of pipes behind them, I think this might have made a bit more sense. Or at least had that impact weapon available, which could make things interesting.
Again, these guys seem to love what they do and they’re a good example of it. I would just rather not listen to it myself. They’re not good enough to be as po-faced as they are and they’re not camp enough to make it fun. Which is a shame.
Presentation = 4/5
Content = Enough songs but no videos.
Music = 3/5
Friend Request = DENIED!
————————————————————————
JUNKIES SWEET TOOTH
www.myspace.com/junkiessweettooth
What’s in a name? When it comes to bands, not a hell of a lot. The Beatles would have been just as awesome if their name was The Petunias. On the flip side, no kind of amazing name would cover the fact that The Script are horse manure. In the end, it’s the music that talks.
I have to say though, the title Junkies Sweet Tooth for a band does conjure images. I expected some sort of punk or death metal band. It’s on the wrong side of pretentious.
To their credit, the music is better than the name. It actually doesn’t have much of a connection to it. It offers this strange juxtaposition though because at the top of the page is a massive logo which is even worse. A photoshopped image of a guy hanging his head in the middle of a grimy alley. The band are obviously trying to convey an image, an attitude or raison d’être. But they’re fooling themselves in their attempt to fool us.
The music is lively, toe-tapping, bluesy kind of rock. There are solid, catchy guitar riffs and toe tapping rhythm. The singer has a good tone to his voice even if the lyrics are awkward and pedestrian. It’s not bad, I enjoyed listening to it.
But I’m left with that question. Why are they trying to be what they’re not? The only connection I saw was in their self titled song. And while this is a clunky story telling ramble it still comes across more preachy than tough.
It’s all a bit of a conundrum. I’m mostly nitpicking but that’s my job. Besides, they withdrew their friend request before this article was put up. You don’t reject me, I reject you!
Presentation = 3/5
Content = A couple of songs.
Music = 3/5
Friend Request = DISAPPEARED!
————————————————————————–
SELBY GREEN
www.myspace.com/selbygreen
“The best up and coming rock’n’roll band in Yorkshire”. I laughed and laughed and then I laughed some more. It’s not that their claim is wrong, they could well indeed be the best up and coming rock’n’roll band in Yorkshire. I’m not going to tell them they’re wrong. It’s the need to clarify exactly what they mean that made me chuckle. There is so much bravado and then so little all in the same sentence. I am also the greatest MySpace music reviewer on the whole internet who is typing this on a train. That’s how great I am. No one else on a train, typing a music review of bands from MySpace, is better than me.
When it gets time to actually listen to the music (as I wipe away my tears) I’m pleasantly surprised. They’re not bad. Nothing revolutionary but definitely listenable. The lead singer does sound slightly Americanized (which is a pet peeve of mine) but every now and then you’ll get a word or two with the Yorkshire twang. The sound is pretty clean if slightly generic but it doesn’t grate and I think I could sit through a set of theirs at a show without a complaint.
The key word is “think” though, as they only have two songs available to play on their profile. It always irks me a little that a band can create a Twitter page but can’t put more than two songs up on a MySpace page. You’re a band, I don’t want to read about what you’re doing in 140 characters or less, I want to hear your music.
Because of this stumbling block it’s hard to rate the music of Selby Green. It’s ok, I guess, but I don’t think I know enough to care.
Presentation = 3/5
Content = Fuck all.
Music = 3/5
Friend Request = DENIED!
– If you’d like to make Aaron’s life even more boring than it is by inflicting your music upon him, send him a friend request at www.myspace.com/aaronhbp. The next time he has a free moment he’ll curse your name as he includes you in this column.

# 240 (VOL. 2 #12): WIMPY IN LOVE
In his introduction to one of Fantagraphics Books’ earlier set of volumes reprinting E. C. Segar’s Popeye comic strips, comics historian Rick Marschall argues that Popeye’s supporting player J. Wellington Wimpy is a “scoundrel” with a “lack of conscience” who can and does “betray” everyone. But in reviewing the Sunday strips in Volume 3 of Fantagraphics’ current series of Segar Popeye reprints, I’ve discovered that Wimpy is more complex than that. He does indeed have a conscience, though it is repeatedly overwhelmed by his animalistic appetite for hamburgers.
There are a month of 1933 Sunday strips about Popeye’s boxing match with the enormous Bullo Oxheart, in which Wimpy acts as referee, though he keeps being distracted from the fight by his efforts to mooch a meal off a friend, Eddie, who is sitting in the audience off-panel. But Popeye is the central character of this sequence of Sundays, each of which Segar uses to underline how “the well known weed called spinach” boosts his strength. Indeed, at this point Popeye’s strength has clearly reached superhuman levels. At the end of the June 18, 1933 strip Popeye, with apparent ease, lifts an entire house up from its foundation. “”˜Sa good thing I been eatin’ spinach lately,” Popeye comments, laughing. In the June 25, 1933 strip Popeye commends a boy who yells “I want spinach!” so Segar may be emphasizing spinach to induce his younger readers to follow their hero’s example. Popeye has become a role model, whereas Wimpy decidedly has not.
After winning the fight, Popeye tells Wimpy in the July 16, 1933 strip that he intends to donate half of the prize money “to a institution wich’ll buy spinach and cod liver oil for poor kids.” Wimpy asks him “Pardon me for being so personal, but how does it feel to give away money like that?” Note Wimpy’s unusual level of politeness here. He seems genuinely intrigued by Popeye’s generous nature, and has enough insight to recognize that this is a very personal matter to the sailor. Wimpy’s politeness may also be another sign that he genuinely regards Popeye as his friend.
When Popeye asks him, Wimpy implies that he has never given away anything himself. (For the purposes of this particular Sunday strip Segar has intentionally or not ignored the earlier sequence in which Wimpy selflessly gave his mother thousands of dollars.)
Though he isn’t articulate in a conventional manner, Popeye’s way with language has its own sort of vivid poetry. Popeye tells Wimpy that “Givin’ charity makes ya feel swell inside. . .It’s hard to explain, but right now I got tickles in me chest wich tells me I done sumpin wort’ while, see?”
Surprisingly, Wimpy decides to experiment: he says he has a dime (an unusual occurrence for him) and will use it to buy a hamburger for an impoverished man sitting at the counter in Rough-House’s diner. (Now there’s a sign of how much inflation there has been since 1933!) There is no reason to doubt Wimpy’s sincerity: he could easily buy a hamburger for himself instead. Moreover, Wimpy’s portly build is evidence of his continual success in feeding himself. In contrast, the thin stranger sitting at the counter has his tongue hanging out; Wimpy notes that this is a symptom of starvation. Indeed, the stranger seems genuinely to be in a sad state: “I have no money and no friends,” he tells Wimpy, and “I haven’t had a bite for days.” Keep in mind that this is 1933, so the stranger may very well be intended as a victim of the Great Depression.
Wimpy puts his hand on the stranger’s shoulder, tells him, “You may not have money, but you have a friend. J. Wellington Wimpy is your friend,” and orders a hamburger for him. Again, there is no reason to doubt Wimpy’s sincerity at this point.
But matters change when the hamburger arrives. Holding the burger, Wimpy begins snapping his teeth furiously, like a wild animal. Yet he simultaneously speaks in a calm tone, as if he were dispassionately observing his own behavior: “Isn’t it odd how my teeth snap at it? I have to hold it with both hands to keep it from going into my mouth.” He speaks as if the hamburger would force itself into his mouth if he didn’t stop it.
It’s also as if Wimpy’s appetite, his animal nature, is at odds with his conscious mind and better nature, as if he has a kind of split personality. Since Wimpy is a variation on the archetype of the glutton, it should be no surprise which side of his personality wins. The surprise lies in how quickly and completely that battle is won. Distraught, his tongue hanging out once more in hunger, the stranger asks his newfound friend, “Didn’t you buy that hamburger for me?”
Expressionless as usual, Wimpy replies, “I beg pardon? What’s the name, please?” It sees that Wimpy is pretending not to know his new supposed friend in order to keep the burger for himself. But is it possible that the gluttonous side of Wimpy’s personality has submerged his weaker, charitable side, and that Wimpy has to some extent actually forgotten about his promise to feed his starving acquaintance? Wimpy’s conscience had briefly awakened, but once he is exposed to the presence of a hamburger, his hunger proves dominant. Wimpy’s id overrules his superego.
Then Wimpy begins licking the hamburger with his tongue. In part this may be to partially satisfy his hunger, but it may also be that the trickster aspect of Wimpy is surfacing. Now he has an excuse for not giving the hamburger to the stranger, but the starving stranger says he still wants it. “What kind of fellow are you, anyway?” Wimpy asks, acting shocked at what he clearly considers the starving man’s loose attitude towards hygiene.
Once again putting his hand on the stranger’s shoulder, as if reverting to his former attitude of friendliness, Wimpy says he will just take one bite of the burger and then give it to him. Perhaps Wimpy still means to be generous, by his own standards, but then he opens his mouth wide, devours virtually the whole burger in a single bite, and hands the stranger what amounts to a mere scrap.
This wouldn’t be funny if the stranger were left to starve, but the genuinely generous Popeye gives him some money. Popeye scowls disapprovingly at Wimpy, who says, as if nothing had gone wrong, “I don’t know whether it was the bite of the hamburger or the charity–but I feel very lovely inside.”
I like Wimpy’s use of the word “lovely.” Popeye says two Sundays later about Wimpy that “No use gettin’ mad at him–he jus’ don’t know no better.”
When his mother came to visit, Wimpy’s conscience and sense of shame did overrule his usual greed for food. But ordinarily Wimpy doesn’t have an ordinary kind of conscience; he sees nothing wrong in mooching food from his friends, or starving strangers, or anyone else. He idealizes food, especially hamburgers, so satisfying his hunger is to him “lovely.” Perhaps Wimpy also finds it “lovely” to exercise his trickster skills in procuring food; mooching is his talent, his vocation, and perhaps even his artform.
In the July 23, 1933 strip Wimpy goes to the aquarium “for some relaxation,” and Popeye comes along. While Wimpy distracts a guard with chitchat, he surreptitiously hooks a fish in a tank behind his back; Wimpy then smuggles the fish out of the aquarium in the back of his pants. Was Wimpy lying to Popeye when he said his goal at the aquarium was “relaxation”? Maybe Wimpy does find employing his trickster skills in this way relaxing, just as other people do fishing where it’s legal to do so. It’s notable, too, that Wimpy ends this strip by inviting Popeye to dine on the fish with him. After all, Wimpy does indeed seem to regard Popeye as his friend, although he also wants Popeye to supply the tartar sauce for dinner himself.
So far Popeye feels both disgust and amusement at Wimpy’s mooching ways. But now Wimpy, surprisingly, becomes an antagonist to Popeye. Just as Wimpy does not allow friendship to get in the way of his quest for burgers, it is no barrier to his sex drive, either. You might have thought that Wimpy had sublimated his libido into his lust for hamburgers, but no. In the July 30, 1933 strip Rough-House has hired a pretty new waitress, who, we learn the following Sunday, is named Lucy Brown. Popeye immediately starts flirting with her, whereupon Wimpy literally comes between them and starts chatting with her himself.
In my research on tricksters, I’ve learned that the trickster is typically himself susceptible to being tricked. That may seem unlikely, since tricksters are so clever, but it appears to be true. For example, Superman traditionally thwarts his own trickster nemesis, Mr. Mxyzptlk, by tricking him into saying his name backwards. Perhaps the point is that the trickster can be so confident of his own cleverness that he underestimates his target’s ability to best him at his own game. So here Popeye tells Wimpy he’s wanted on the phone, and Wimpy not only believes him, but says hello into the phone over and over again before finally giving up. Apparently it never occurred to Wimpy that he hadn’t heard the phone ring.
So Wimpy returns to Popeye and Lucy the waitress. Popeye in effect tells Wimpy to go away, Wimpy turns his back, as if in defeat, and then Popeye proposes marriage to this woman he just met!
In the Fleischer and Famous Studios Popeye animated cartoons, it is Olive Oyl who often comes off as fickle, switching her affections between Popeye and Bluto. So it is quite a surprise to see from the original Segar comic strips that, early on, at least, it is Popeye who is the fickle one.
Hearing Popeye propose, Wimpy immediately sees his opportunity, turns around, and simply asks, “How’s Olive Oyl?”, shocking Popeye. Wimpy may not be able to fight the super-strong Popeye physically, but Wimpy can fight effectively with words. Wimpy quickly moves in, bending over the startled Lucy, as if enacting a love scene out of a movie, although Wimpy’s idea of romantic dialogue is distorted by his usual preoccupation: he invites her to duck dinner, adding “You bring the ducks.”
Then Popeye plays trickster again, advising Wimpy that he has forgotten to put on his pants, and wrapping a tablecloth around Wimpy’s waist. The trusting Wimpy believes Popeye, feels too embarrassed even to look down to see if Popeye is right, and rushes out of the diner. Once again, Popeye’s amusement supplants any anger he may have felt at Wimpy: laughing, he tells Lucy, “I was go’ner ast ya to marry me, but I kin not get serious on account of laughin’ at ol’ Wimpy.” It would seem that Popeye’s attraction to Lucy wasn’t that serious since his amusement at Wimpy proves the stronger emotion.
At the beginning of the following Sunday strip, August 6, 1933, Wimpy asks Popeye why he won’t let him talk with Lucy Brown. “Is this not a free country?” By Wimpy’s lights, it seems he thinks he merely wants a fair chance to compete for Lucy’s attentions. Alpha male Popeye declares “she’s gon’er be my sweety” and tells Wimpy to “beat it.” (Since this is 1933, neither man considers Lucy’s opinion about this.)
So Wimpy seeks out Olive Oyl and tells her that Popeye has a “new sweetheart,” Lucy Brown. You might think that Wimpy intends to get Lucy for himself. But no: sticking his nose literally in Olive’s face, Wimpy declares, “If he don’t want you, I want you.” Having decided “it is time I should take unto myself a wife,” Wimpy is determined to get one, and it doesn’t seem to matter whom. (It does appear as if Wimpy is only going after women whom Popeye has already picked out, as if he considers Popeye a guide in such matters.) But the comics Olive is considerably less fickle than her animated counterpart, and far from being as passive as Lucy: she knocks Wimpy down (So that’s why she’s such a good match for Popeye!) and declares, “I want Popeye and nobody but.”
Olive races to the diner and angrily confronts Popeye, who, shaken, resorts to the Wimpyesque tactic of denial: “What girl?” Popeye asks, though Lucy is standing right there. Seemingly guilt-ridden, Popeye pleads the Fifth Amendment, but Wimpy urges Olive, “Let’s you and her fight”: maybe Wimpy considers two women fighting to be a turn-on. He soon gets his wish, and Popeye, seemingly forgetting his rivalry with Wimpy, asks him to help break the fight up but each taking hold of one of the women. Perhaps showing his true loyalty, Popeye grabs Olive, and advises her not to start fights; Olive looks bewildered and distraught, now that she’s coming out of her fit of rage. And then both Popeye and Olive discover that Wimpy not only took hold of Lucy but now has clasped her in his loving embrace, as he radiates cartoon hearts. He’s back to fixating on Lucy as his sweetheart. (Lucy looks somewhat annoyed.)
But on the following Sunday, August 13, 1933, we learn that Popeye is now conducting a clandestine romance with Lucy. Back to treating Wimpy as his friend, Popeye asks him to act as if Lucy is Wimpy’s girlfriend if Olive Oyl turns up. This is a big mistake. Olive does indeed turn up at the home of Lucy and her father, whereupon Wimpy, radiating more cartoon hearts, begins cuddling Lucy. But whenever Olive attempts to leave, Wimpy persuades her to stay. So Wimpy gets to cuddle Lucy for hours, until Olive finally leaves at midnight. “Popeye, you are, indeed, a fine fellow,” says Wimpy. “There aren’t any men who’d allow me to pet their sweeties.” Possibly Wimpy is just trying to placate Popeye. But it also seems quite possible that Wimpy sees nothing wrong with manipulating the situation with Lucy and Olive and that he genuinely considers Popeye to have shown generosity in letting him hug Lucy for hours. (Again, Lucy’s own opinions are not consulted.) But this time Popeye erupts in rage, punches Wimpy in the jaw, and throws him out the window. And thus begins a series of Sundays in which Segar physically punishes Wimpy for his trickery.
But in the following Sunday strip, for August 20, 1933, Wimpy is back to mooching food from Popeye. Wimpy keeps calling him. “Old pal of mine,” but Popeye, perhaps reacting to the last few Sunday strips, angrily refuses to give him any food. But then Popeye holds up a potato, which appears to have two eyes and a nose, and Wimpy claims it is the image of his late Uncle Hymie. Breaking down in tears, Wimpy goes on and on about what a wonderful man Uncle Hymie was. “Surely you would not eat that potato,” Wimpy says. Popeye, now in tears himself, agrees to give Wimpy the potato as a memento of his uncle. The final panel finds Wimpy sitting under a tree, eating the potato: “‘Tis a pity that I have no gravy to put upon Uncle Hymie.”
The simplest interpretation of this episode is that Wimpy was simply conning Popeye out of the potato and made up the whole Uncle Hymie story. But I’ve come to think of Wimpy as a complex, ambiguous figure. I think it is entirely possible that Wimpy did have a beloved Uncle Hymie and was genuinely moved to tears by his memory, but that still would not stop Wimpy from devouring a potato that looked like his dead uncle. As usual, Wimpy’s appetite overrules his emotions.
Wimpy referees Popeye’s next prize fight in the Sunday strips, which is noteworthy for the way that Popeye’s opponent literally twists Popeye’s body out of shape, but without causing him any real harm, in a further display of Popeye’s superhuman power.
In the September 17, 1933 Sunday strip, Wimpy returns to the aquarium, having accepted Rough-House’s bet that he can’t catch another fish there. This time Wimpy has overreached, perhaps because he is trying to win a wager. He hooks an eel, which slithers in and out of his pants, in a weirdly phallic gag (which is shown on the cover of Popeye Vol. 3). The guards see this, and they start kicking Wimpy. It’s as if Segar now feels that Wimpy can’t always get away with his trickery, even though these punishments don’t deter Wimpy at all.
Just how far will Wimpy go in the service of his appetite? In the September 24, 1933 strip Wimpy tries his usual mooching tricks on Popeye, Rough-House, Geezil and other diner customers, who all furiously refuse. Unperturbed, Wimpy starts reading the paper and then, uncharacteristically, his eyes go wide. Then, even more uncharacteristically, he punches Geezil in the face. As a policeman arrives, Geezil reacts with his usual angry bluster (“Could he smush me in the schnozzle? Could he? Could he? COULD HE?). But after Wimpy hits the policeman too, Wimpy is taken to jail. And then Rough-House, Popeye and Geezil see what Wimpy read in the newspaper: hamburgers are now on the jailhouse menu. Wimpy has exchanged his own freedom for a steady supply of burgers!
By the following Sunday, October 1, 1933, Wimpy has regained his freedom. So how can his appetite drive him still further? Wimpy has just inherited a cow, and attempts to trade it to Popeye, who is substituting for Rough-House at running the diner for a day, for hamburgers. But Popeye keeps saying no, even as Wimpy whittles down his request from ten burgers down to one, and keeps calling Popeye, with increasing emphasis, “old pal of mine.” Nothing works, and for once Wimpy, despite his deadpan demeanor, seems desperate. Finally Popeye agrees to lend Wimpy some bread, an axe and some kitchen utensils. After Wimpy leaves Popeye says, “I kin not help feelin’ sorry for ol’ Wimpy” and leaves to invite him to have a hamburger. But it is too late. In the final panel Popeye is so surprised, perhaps shocked, that he levitates off the ground. Wimpy has killed and butchered the cow, whose head lies grotesquely on the ground, and turned its body into a tall mound of hamburgers! Of course we all know that hamburgers are made from dead cattle, but it’s still startling, and even macabre, that Wimpy would kill the cow himself and grind it up into food.
Segar must have liked the idea of Popeye running Rough-House’s diner in this Sunday strip, because on the following Sunday strip he and Olive open their own cafe. But after the first month of this new storyline, Wimpy reclaims center stage. When Olive gets sick, Popeye hires Wimpy to fill in for her as a waiter. Initially, Wimpy resolves to do the right thing, even when serving a hamburger steak to a customer: “Get behind me, Satan. . . it is my duty to deliver this bit of beef to our patron.” But once again, the id of Wimpy’s appetite overwhelms the superego of his conscience. He talks the customer into thinking the hamburger is infected with bugs, and after the shaken patron leaves, Popeye lets Wimpy eat the steak. “He is, no doubt, a peculiar person,” Wimpy tells Popeye about their lost customer. In this case Wimpy is clearly, consciously deceiving his “old pal of mine.”
Popeye’s charitable feelings towards Wimpy have resurfaced, and the following Sunday, November 12, 1933, Popeye gives Wimpy a tryout for a job as a waiter, but this time carefully keeps an eye on him. Wimpy again tries to do the right thing, repeating his “Get thee behind me, Satan” mantra while bringing a hamburger to a customer. But once again, when one side of Wimpy consciously resists his hunger, his unconscious forcefully emerges, and he finds himself instinctively snapping his teeth at the burger and then devouring it, seemingly in one gulp. “Sorry, sir, I’m indeed sorry this had to happen,” Wimpy says, and he may indeed mean it. Wimpy tries to bring him another burger, but says, “Heavens! I feel that great desire again–the urge to gobble it down!” Is Wimpy putting on an act, or is he in the grip of a comedic but real addiction to food? He gobbles this burger, too. Finally, the disgruntled customer fetches his own burger, whereupon Wimpy hurls a pot at him, knocking him out. “A hundred percent,” says Wimpy, holding the burger; “Not a single one got away from me.” Watching all of this, Popeye confesses, “I kin not bawl “˜im out on account of laughin’.”
But by the following Sunday, Popeye has grown so angry at Wimpy’s mooching that he pays a policeman to put him in jail. “It isn’t right to treat poor old Wimpy that way,” says Olive. “Shame on you, Popeye.” But Popeye goes down to the prison to literally laugh in Wimpy’s face.
Then Wimpy begins weeping: “You laugh at my sorrow. You hurt me.” As Wimpy goes on, talking about his mother, and about how “life hasn’t been very kind to me,” Popeye finds himself weeping in sympathy, and finally bails Wimpy out of jail. Wimpy expresses his gratitude to “my friend” and then resumes trying to mooch a hamburger from him. Once again the reader may wonder to what extent Wimpy is consciously manipulating Popeye’s emotions and to what extent Wimpy’s sadness at being “hurt” by a friend is real. My hypothesis is that both possibilities are true and that they coexist. I suspect that Wimpy’s stoic, expressionless demeanor covers real pain over his poverty and loneliness. Popeye may be Wimpy’s dupe, but he also really is Wimpy’s only friend.
Segar’s exploration of Wimpy’s character reaches a climax with the November 26, 1933 Sunday strip, the last in this volume. Popeye’s friend Bill Squid bets Popeye that Wimpy would “choke his grandmother for a hamburger.” Despite Popeye’s disgust and even cruelty towards Wimpy in past strips, Popeye seems more naturally to look on the bright side, and contends that Wimpy has “good qualities, too.” Popeye even tells Wimpy, “ever’body seems to be down on ya an’ tha’s why I got sympthity for ya–I yam always for the underdog.”
Popeye goes so far as to dress up as an old lady and pose as Wimpy’s grandmother, whom Wimpy hasn’t seen in thirty years. Bill is amazed that Wimpy cannot see through Popeye’s obvious disguise (“Is he dumb?”), but Wimpy is a trickster who is easily susceptible to being tricked.
As Wimpy’s grandma, Popeye sits down to eat a hamburger. Wimpy flatters her and asks for a “bite” of the burger but “she” says no. Then Wimpy begins snapping his teeth at the burger, and “Grandmother” is outraged that Wimpy has “absolukely no self-control.” Thwarted again, Wimpy goes further than we’ve seen before in this book and, yes, actually begins choking his “grandmother.” His id is in full control: Dark Wimpy is unleashed. “Grandmother” rebukes Wimpy, who begins weeping with shame: “I’m sorry! Heavens! What did I almost do?” But his dark side overwhelms Wimpy again: he snaps at the burger, jumps on “grandmother,” demanding the burger: “Curse you, grandmother!” The disguised and disgusted Popeye finally stops Wimpy by hitting him.
However rough and violent in his manners, Popeye is an idealist and a true hero who adheres to and enforces his code of morality. Wimpy is neither hero nor idealist, but a flawed man driven by his natural drives, notably his appetite. Yet somehow they belong together as a team, like the similar pairings of Cervantes’ Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, or Tamino and Papageno in Mozart’s The Magic Flute.
And in the grand finale to my Wimpython, I will turn to the renowned “Plunder Island” storyline in Fantagraphics’ Popeye Vol. 4, in which the team of Popeye and Wimpy faces its ultimate test when both confront the strip’s archvillainess, the Sea Hag.
Warning to my faithful readers: I am in the process of moving from New York City back to my home town near Boston. So there may be a week or two when I won’t be posting a new “Comics in Context.” But rest assured that once I have Internet access set up at my new home, “Comics in Context” will be back!
–Copyright 2010 Peter Sanderson
Follow me on Twitter (@PeterJSanderson) and at Facebook Comic Con.


I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.
In this episode, I have another chat with the actor behind THE VENTURE BROS’ own Dr. Thaddeus “Rusty” Venture and AMERICAN SPLENDOR’s Robert Crumb, who’s also a bit of a net bon vivant/commentator, James Urbaniak…
Hope you enjoy…
Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & James Urbaniak 2“:
[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-james_urbaniak_2.mp3]
SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Drop Ken a line HERE.
##
You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

Oh no! Just when you thought it was safe to hang out at the FRED…
Cabin Fever (hosted by the twisted souls Brian Fitzpatrick and Aaron Poole) is the result of having too much time on your hands and access to your local community radio station.
Over the course of an hour, they manage to trawl the depths of good taste, plus throw some music in. How much more could you want from a podcast?… Quality? Oh… we didn’t think of that.
Enjoy! And we hope our cross Atlantic friends can understand the Irish accent 😉
Hugs and Kisses,
Aaron P. + Rev. Fitzy
CABIN FEVER #91: Riding In Cabins With Leftover Fever – This week it’s Aaron’s turn to sit one out due to internet retardation. Hosting duties fall to the Rev. pHitzy pHitzpatrick, and he is joined by his favourite cabin boys – Instant Leftovers’ Colin, and Mike & Kasey from Riding in Cars With Boys. They discuss the culinary delights of KFC, paedophile ‘staches, and the greatest unfinished movie of all time.
For those playing at home, here is a YouTube link… You’ll know when you need to look at it.
[CONTENT WARNING]: Explicit contents! We say every naughty word you can think of. You have been warned!
DOWNLOAD: (right click to save)
Episode #91 (MP3 format)
[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/cabinfever/cabin_fever_91.mp3]
SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Got something to say? E-mail Aaron & Brian at the Cabin Fever mailbag.

CLICK HERE FOR THE CABIN FEVER ARCHIVES

##

The weekend’s here. You’ve just been paid, and it’s burning a hole in your pocket. What’s a pop culture geek to do? In hopes of steering you in the right direction to blow some of that hard-earned cash, it’s time for the FRED Weekend Shopping Guide – your spotlight on the things you didn’t even know you wanted…
(Please support FRED by using the links below to make any impulse purchases – it helps to keep us going…)
I had no expectations and little knowledge of the first season of Party Down (Anchor Bay, Not Rated, DVD-$29.97 SRP) going in other than it being produced by Paul Rudd and co-starring The State’s Ken Marino as well as the great Jane Lynch. Well, turns out it’s a wonderfully dry single-camera sitcom about a group of LA caterers whose minds are on the non-starter careers as actors and writers. Just watch the set and enjoy. Bonus materials include audio commentaries, featurettes, outtakes, and a gag reel.

Do you have far, far too many items requiring a USB port and far, far too few of them to accommodate all of the gadgets and gizmos you’ve accumulated? Well, the fine folks over at Thinkgeek have heard you crying in the night (to be honest, we all did) and have brought you the mighty USB Super 16 Port Hub ($159.99). As the name clearly indicates, it’s 16 fully-powered USB 2.0 ports. Not only that, it also features a switcher which allows you to change which computer can access the ports. Cool, right? Right.

I’ve spoken many, many times in the past about the wonderful work being done by the fine folks at Twomorrows – those perfect purveyors of pure comics appreciation fun. Well, they continue their relentless drive to release must-have books, and I’ll start with the latest editions of their Modern Masters series of artist spotlights – this time featuring Mark Buckingham & Guy Davis (Twomorrows, $15.95 each). There’s also an in-depth appreciation of artist Sal Buscema titled Sal Buscema: Comics’ Fast & Furious Artist (Twomorrows, $26.95). Finally, there’s a comprehensive look at the live action adventures of everyone’s favorite comics characters in Age Of TV Heroes (Twomorrows, $39.95). Get them all.

If you’ve ever been a fan of Love & Rockets, you must, with all due haste, pick up a copy of The Art Of Jaime Hernandez (Abrams ComicArts, $40.00 SRP), which delves into the history and archives of the notoriously private artist, providing a wealth of artwork and insight.

If you’d like a textbook example on how to take a cheesily fun flick and turn it into a plodding, pointless remake, look no further than Wolfgang Petersen’s Poseidon (Warner Bros., Rated PG-13, Blu-Ray-$24.98 SRP), which took Irwin Allen’s Poseidon Adventure and made it oh-so-dull. Bonus materials include a trio of behind-the-scenes featurettes and the History Channel documentary Rogue Waves.

For those impatient for Lord Of The Rings in high definition who aren’t willing to wait to get the extended cuts in a few year’s time, the Lord Of The Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy (New Line, Rated PG-13, Blu-Ray-$99.98 SRP) contains all three theatrical cuts, with a port of the documentaries originally featured on the standard DVD theatrical edition releases (mainly the TV specials, not the uber-deluxe making-ofs found on the extended sets. The picture and sound are ace, so if you simply can’t wait, or you’re a completionist, by all means get it.

Though I’m sure he was trying his best to make a faithful, impressive adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s massive epic, Ralph Bakshi’s animated Lord Of The Rings (Warner Bros., Rated PG, Blu-Ray-$29.99 SRP) is just a boring, ugly mess, marred by poor voice-acting, roto-scoped animation, and a script that forgets its supposed to keep the audience’s attention. This new high-def edition contains an in-depth interview with Bakshi about his vision for the film.

One of the standouts of Playing For Change’s beautiful music documentary Peace Through Music was New Orleans own Grandpa Elliott, who gets an equally beautiful debut album in the form of Sugar Sweet (Playing For Change Records, $12.98 SRP). Just go get it.

Lionsgate has jumped into the catalogue Blu-Ray release pool with a trio of new-to-high-def discs, including David Caruso in Jade (Lionsgate, Rated R, Blu-Ray-$19.99 SRP), the goofy fun monster flick The Relic (Lionsgate, Rated R, Blu-Ray-$19.99 SRP), and John Milius’s Flight Of The Intruder (Lionsgate, Rated PG-13, Blu-Ray-$19.99 SRP).

Warners unleashes another pair of catalogue titles to their Warner Archive Collection sure to satisfy someone’s cult cinema desire – one good and one not-so-good. The not-so-good is the Shaquille O’Neal superhero flick Steel (Warner Bros., Rated PG-13, DVD-$19.95). The good is Irwin Allen’s production of The Amazing Captain Nemo (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$19.95), Robert Bloch’s tale of a cryogenically frozen Nemo (Jose Ferrer) revived after 100 years to hunt down a mad scientist (Burgess Meredith) threatening modern-day humanity.

Spend some time with the likes of Peter Cushing in the Icons Of Suspense Collection: Hammer Films (Sony, Not Rated, DVD-$23.99 SRP), which contains 6 of the legendary studio’s chillers. The flicks includes are Stop Me Before I Kill!, Maniac, Cash On Demand, Never Take Candy From A Stranger, The Snorkel, & These Are The Damned.

True story – as a kid, I used to think Simon & Simon (Shout Factory, Not Rated, DVD-$49.97 SRP) were actually Simon & Garfunkel. It was years before I could disassociate the two… And Gerald McRaney occasionally sings “Bright Eyes” in my mind. The 4th season set contains all 22 episodes.

It’s pure 80’s sci-fi schmaltz, but the performances by the geriatric cast is what makes Cocoon (Fox, Rated PG-13, Blu-Ray-$24.99 SRP) a flick worth watching at least once. Certainly not for Steve Guttenberg. The new high-def edition features a commentary from Ron Howard, a quintet of featurettes, TV spots, and trailers.

If you didn’t have the cash to pick up the complete series set and are instead going at it a season at a time, then you’ll probably want to pick up the complete second season of Ally McBeal (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$39.98 SRP). The 6-disc set contains all 23 episodes, all of which contain the original music.

Since every Stephen King story must eventually be adapted into a film, it was only a matter of time before they got to the short story Dolan’s Cadillac (NEM, Rated R, DVD-$24.98 SRP), about an even-keeled school teacher (Wes Bentley) that becomes a cold-blooded vengeance machine when a mobster (Christian Slater) kills his wife. Bonus materials include behind-the-scenes footage.

A series featuring a female private detective who finds an unlikely partner in a 450-year-old undead vampire, that complicates not only her professional life, but also her long-time relationship with her detective ex-partner sounds like a slam-dunk in these vampire obsessed times, right? Well, sadly for Blood Ties (Eagle Rock, Not Rated, DVD-$39.97 SRP), it came out in 2007, before the craze hit. You can watch the entire series via this 7-disc box set , which also features a behind-the-scenes documentary.

So there you have it… my humble suggestions for what to watch, listen to, play with, or waste money on this coming weekend. See ya next week…
-Ken Plume
##

The Archives, Right Here
Check out my new column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp
YOUSSOU N’DOUR: I BRING WHAT I LOVE – DVD Review
This has been a wild couple of weeks with the number of documentaries I’ve been watching about musicians as of late.
From a couple of Blu-ray releases of live concerts, a movie about the Doors, and now this, it has been a whirlwind of performances that showcase music of all kinds. The thing about YOUSSOU N’DOUR: I BRING WHAT I LOVE is that I was not expecting to like it as much as I did. Ballasted by the fact that this movie has come out under the Oscilloscope Laboratory banner, becoming required viewing simply because it has so far had an unbeaten track record of films that have a unique way of telling a story, I quite didn’t know what to expect other than this was going to be a movie about music. It’s much more that, however, as I found out.
Youssou is a musician that many know but probably didn’t realize. Heck, I didn’t realize. He’s the chanting voice you hear in the song In Your Eyes by Peter Gabriel. A man who embraced music from all over the world, Gabriel help push Youssou into greater prominence among those within the industry. It was shocking to see that as a Senegalese pop star he received worldwide acclaim for his music and recognition for it as well all the while I was blissfully unaware of this man for decades.
This movie goes beyond just capturing Youssou’s time on the road, and we get many live performances in venues all over the globe, but it charts the time when he had to deal with an album he made called Egypt, a record that was deemed incendiary because of its content. Not that it had blasphemous, dirty language but it contained his own thoughts and feelings about a religion and faith not many were too keen on learning more about in 2004: Islam. This movie captures his feelings on the matter and it’s rather gripping and forces you to reflect about what it would be like for anyone to believe something so fervently and want to share that joy with the world only to have your native land, here Senegal, turn away. Heartbreaking and sad, Youssou’s determination and love comes though in one the films that I have been able to watch about musicians which doesn’t make me think that all the world’s musicians are in it for themselves. Youssou genuinely seems passionate about the things he’s been allowed to do and to share with the rest of the world and you simply do not see that in today’s crop of entertainers.
Wholly refreshing, wonderful to look at, director Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi’s film captures the essence of Youssou’s music that you can feel come through the screen. I had never heard of the man before seeing this film but I was a fan by the end and I think that’s the point of any good movie like this. You don’t necessarily have to be enthralled by the music but you cannot help but to be in awe of one man’s perseverance to be the best man he can be in the face of so many who would try and change that course.
If you have a chance to rent it or buy it you could not do yourself a better favor than picking this title up and seeing some music come alive.
Synopsis
YOUSSOU N’DOUR: I BRING WHAT I LOVE is a gorgeously photographed, music infused cinematic portrait of world famous Senegalese pop sensation Youssou N’Dour. Best known in the West for his collaborations with Bono and Peter Gabriel, N’Dour is one of the most beloved musicians in pop music and his legendary career has spanned decades.
In 2004, responding to negative perceptions about his Muslim faith, N’Dour recorded EGYPT, a deeply spiritual album dedicated to a more tolerant view of Islam. In a critical and career-defining moment, the album was awarded the 2004 Grammy® for BEST WORLD MUSIC ALBUM. While Western audiences embraced N’Dour’s brave musical message, it encountered a serious religious backlash in his native country of Senegal where N’Dour is considered a national hero. Local critics and the media accused him of insulting Islam, arguing that pop and religious music should not mix.
Combining unprecedented images of Senegal’s most sacred Muslim rituals, vibrant concert performances filmed around the world, and intimate access to N’Dour and his family, I BRING WHAT I LOVE chronicles the difficult path this remarkable artist must take. It is a stirring journey of faith, redemption, and the power of music to overcome intolerance.
Tom DiCillo – Interview
The documentary is endlessly fascinating, let’s get that right out of the way.
Using footage from Jim Morrison’s own film HWY: An American Pastoral from 1969 the new Doors documentary When You’re Strange also uses footage never before seen of the band that ignited a generation. For any fan who thinks that Oliver Stone made the definitive Doors movie this doc sheds some light on the figure that is Jim Morrison the legend and dispels the ideas that he walked around in a constant drug-fueled stupor. In fact, this film shows Morrison as a rather humorous individual capable of so much more than just being a part of a cliche.
Using footage never before seen and utilizing Johnny Depp’s silken vocals to narrate the story of how the band came together to take over a nation, then the world, you get a new perspective on a band that most feel like they already figured out. It’s endlessly fascinating from a documentary perspective, like reading years of biographies on one person only to find their autobiography and putting the two together. Comparative literature it is not but there is a story here that you have to open yourself to in order to wade beyond all that you already think you know. When You’re Strange is a brisk foray into a brief period of time when music could rattle a population of listeners and a glimpse into a band that never sold their rights to have their music played in a car commercial. And they never will.
WHEN YOU’RE STRANGE opens today
CHRISTOPHER STIPP: Hey, Tom. How are you doing?
TOM DICILLO: I’m good man. How are you?
CS: Doing fine. Hopefully this hasn’t been a long press day for you.
DICILLO: Well, it has been but it’s been really enjoyable because people are really digging this film and that’s just exciting to see.
CS: I really dug it.
DICILLO: Good.
CS: I did a search for Doors films or documentaries and I was floor by the lack of them out there. Did you immediately look at this project and immediately jump on it?
DICILLO: Well, the project was presented to me as a possibility and then I was asked if I wanted to direct it. And I said yes immediately without question. I didn’t know what I was getting into. In fact, I hadn’t seen any of the footage. After I said yes, then they began the process of them showing me stuff and asking me to come up with the concept. I just think it was the right timing. They had been trying to make something with this footage for sometime and I don’t know, I think perhaps they just didn’t have the right combination of people. And, something about my idea about only using this original footage just freaks them out and just freaked The Doors out too. They said, “How can you make a film about the Doors in which we don’t have The Doors talking?” I said, “Because I think if you look at this footage it’s so astonishing that it will ultimately be better.” When they saw the first half hour I put together, they were floored. Let’s just thank the Lord”¦not the Lord, because there is no Lord”¦
(Laughs)
Thanks to whoever that it worked out and all came together.
CS: I’m interested to get your take ““ as a filmmaker ““ you’ve done feature film, you’ve done television, was there a learning curve as a documentarian when you had to sift through this info and try to create a narrative?
DICILLO: Oh, absolutely. Are you kidding? Very good question, man. My experience is with writing and directing and working that way. Creating every image and then choosing the best image and then editing it. This one ““ I had to go, “OK, here’s the footage, here are the dailies from the film”¦What can I do with it?”
Certain things hit me immediately.
I didn’t know that this footage of Morrison walking through the desert was from his own film HWY. I just thought they were random shots of Jim walking through the desert. So I felt free to use them. I knew that they were going to go in the film and I knew they were going to be kind of a framing device immediately. Almost like, there’s a shot of him getting out of a car stuck in the sand. I said, “That’s going to be Morrison.”
It’s the spirit of Morrison ““ re-emerging, so to speak.
But then I had a whole story to tell and your probably could make six stories about The Doors, they did so much in that short period of time. In some cases, the footage helps me. It was easy to do it because I had great images. In other cases, I had to do a little bit of explaining or somehow bridging gaps in things. And the narration became critical and I realized immediately that the narration was going to have to sustain this film. It was going to have to pull it together and I think Johnny Depp brings such an amazing intimacy and sense of belief in things he’s saying that he becomes almost as a fifth character in the film.
CS: Right. And he does. I was read in a previous interview with Ray [Manzarek] who said that Oliver Stone got it wrong when he made The Doors. That he wasn’t that drunken, wacked out of his skull 24/7 kind of guy people saw in that film. Do you think you saw a picture of the real Morrison as you went through this footage?
DICILLO: I saw several pictures of the real Morrison. That’s what I wanted to do, was to not limit the ones that I saw. I think that Stone’s movie limited severely the dimension of what Morrison was. I really do. And I’m not disrespecting Oliver Stone but saying he probably gave a thumbnail, a fingernail of what this guy really was. He was an immensely complicated guy. Immensely complicated. At times he was, yes, the drunken ass that was just pissing in his pants in the middle of a recording session. And then I had this footage of him dancing in the sand in the middle of the desert with complete strangers, these kids and the look on his face, it’s absolutely convincing that he’s enjoying the hell out of himself and that he’s really there, dancing with those kids. That’s as much a part of his character as the other stuff, and I wanted to try and show that.
You know what? I just feel there was something deeply compelling about him and that, for me, it wasn’t just the drinking, it wasn’t the excesses, it was the more personal things. Because if you talk to any of these guys, they’ll tell you the same thing. He was immensely articulate. He enjoyed life. I don’t think he had a death-wish. I don’t think so at all. I think he just got caught up in something and could not get out of it.
CS: And I think he comes off ““ I was surprised to see he was quite erudite and scholarly as a young man ““ completely different than public perception of what people “thought” he was.
DICILLO: Yeah. It’s pretty phenomenal that at 16 he was reading Nietzsche and Kerouac and this was before he even took acid. He was an intensely intelligent man and I think to only show one aspect of his character does him a huge disservice. And also, the same for the rest of the band members. They were hugely involved in the creation and development of the band. All of them. And each one was critical to the band and all of them amazing musicians. That’s what I wanted to show. I wanted to go from the more basic sort of misunderstanding that a lot of people wrote Light My Fire. Well, I wanted to clear that up and say well, “No, he didn’t.” Actually, it was Robby Krieger.
CS: I was shocked to see that was the first one out of the box as a writer and it gets the guy a number one slot on the charts.
DICILLO: Isn’t that amazing? It’s just astonishing. And then he had a number of other number ones.
There’s a lot there that you can appreciate that you don’t have to build up a myth about, do you know what I mean? And I wanted to try to create a new myth but one based on reality.
CS: Do you think it was important to know the band deeply before working on this? Did you pour yourself into the mythos, what people had to say, or did you intentionally go in there blind and create something from what you had?
DICILLO: I went in blind but I did a lot of research. I had to be careful though to avoid simply paraphrasing what other people had said. I didn’t want to do that. A lot has been written about this band, some of it really amazing, intuitive. Some of it is conjecture and some of it bullshit. I just said, “Listen, I’ve got to try to find something new for myself, something new for myself to drive me through this entire process.”
That’s all you can do as a filmmaker is to have such a belief in the subject that it pulls you through every single agonizing moment of nightmare and terror when you feel like it’s all meaningless. And for me that was showing them as they were. Just letting the material speak and allowing the audience to experience the band as if they were alive in 1966 and they happen to walk in and here’s a new band called The Doors.
That was the thing that kept me going.
And I talked to the band members and I read the books of Ray and Don and I talked to a lot of people and essentially decided I would only try to use stuff that had been collaborated ““ stuff that would be true ““ as far as people knew.
Ray Manzarek – Interview
I don’t own any Doors albums.
CHRISTOPHER STIPP: Ray, I don’t know if I should start out with Your Highness, Your Holiness, I don’t know which one you would prefer”¦
MANZAREK: Your Obsequiousness. That’s what you should call me.
(Laughs)
CHRISTOPHER STIPP: Well, I’ve got so many questions and only a few minutes.
MANZAREK: You don’t have that much time so you can’t have sooo many!
(Laughs)
“I’ve got quite a few questions for you””¦OK, go ahead, dude!
(Laughs)
CS: I want to start kind of lighthearted but getting ready to talk to you I was reminded about William Shatner’s Saturday Night Live sketch where he tells people to grow up or get a life and find something else to talk about with regard to fanatical nature of the fans who obsessed over Star Trek. Are The Doors like that for you in that, yes, it was a part of your life but you’ve gone on and accomplished other artistic things. Is this something you really love talking about again, and again, and again?
MANZAREK: Absolutely, because it was The Doors. You know what, if I don’t talk about The Doors how can I thankfully work in the word psychedelic into our conversation?
(Laughs)
And I can if I talk about The Doors and I can talk about The Doors, I can talk about opening the doors of perception and if I talk about opening the doors of perception I can talk about psychedelic substances to wit, LSD.
CS: Exactly
MANZAREK: So, it’s a great opportunity to bring the message of psychedelics to the 21st century.
CS: Please. School me on something. I was reading previous interviews with you and I was absolutely amazed, as you just mentioned, the psychedelic, the opening of one’s mind. And how the current crop of what we call musicians that flail themselves around on purpose, have no real similarity to what Jim was. I was at fault when I thought it was just Jim flopping around when it was really him internalizing the music. Can you talk a little bit about the misconception about Jim vs. what other people are aping?
MANZAREK: It’s hard for me to talk about yours or the people’s misconceptions because I don’t know what the hell they’re thinking about. I know what I’m thinking when I’m making music with Jim Morrison is entering the ineffable oneness, the zen, peace and time. That’s what you do as a musician. You surrender yourself to all that goes into creating a song and you give up your ego and you become one with the music, the chord changes, the rhythm, the lyrics, the beat, all that stuff.
That’s what you are. You are nothing else in time. People are watching with their eyeballs, Jim Morrison but Dionysus, the spirit of Dionysus, the spirit of madness and chaos and wildness that enters through the ears. As far as what Morrison did on stage, I’m hardly even aware of him. I know the singer on stage, the performer but I don’t know the mad character people are watching on stage. So, it’s virtually impossible for me to answer that idea.
CS: Understood. Absolutely understood.
MANZAREK: I’m on the inside looking out. I’m not looking in. I’m looking out.
CS: Jim, when he started, humble beginnings, you and him, he had no form of musical training. What did you see in each other that you said, “You know what, we need to express ourselves.” What was that moment that you two shared that really started the genesis of the band?
MANZAREK: Well, that moment was Moonlight Drive. He sang Moonlight Drive to me. I heard the lyrics, and I heard his rephrasing and his singing and he was right on pitch and he had a good sense of timing and a good sense of space and I said “You know what, I can play all kinds of funky Ray Charles kind of stuff and Jimmy Smith organ behind that” and Jim said, “That’s cool man, that’s what I hear too. If you can do that that would be fabulous.”
And then he did My Eyes Have Seen You and Summer’s Almost Gone and those were great songs, I could play Bach behind Summer’s Almost Gone. My Eyes Have Seen You I could play all kinds of Latino jazz, southern California Latin style stuff. And Jim says “Sounds great to me, I love that” and that’s what we shared. We shared those ideas ““ those complimentary ideas.
CS: Was there a theology with the band? Was there ever an overarching theme to what the band should be about?
MANZAREK: The band should be about entering a state of transcendental consciousness. Yes. The band should be about LSD. The band should be about rising up out of the mundane, ordinary state of consciousness into a higher state of consciousness, that virtually the entire generation of the 60’s was into and that’s what we tried to do.
CS: I was reading previous articles about how I think people ““ I don’t think in our current time people ““ there is not a rising up of the youth against the oppressive nature of government and what have you that we’ve become a little soft. Do you see yourself, or at least your place in musical history, as something more powerful than just music but you were a force of social and political change?
MANZAREK: Just being in The Doors. A lot of people said “You guys didn’t participate in the marches” and whatnot but I always thought The Doors were political just by their nature. Morrison was the son of an Admiral, for God’s sake. For him to be a rock and roll guy and the son of an Admiral at the same time was virtually unheard of. Everything we did was political. Everything everyone was doing was political. We were in Vietnam just like we’re in Iraq and Afghanistan. The only difference between now and then was there was a draft and anybody could go at any moment. Just pick you up and you’re gone ““ you’re gone off to Vietnam. Now it’s a volunteer army so I suppose that people who haven’t volunteered for the army are, “Cool, I’m not going.”
I didn’t volunteer.
If you want to volunteer to go fight ““ go ahead ““ go fight. It’s like, man ““ we got to make love here not war. I’m getting a little tired of waiting. It’s the 21st century. When do we make love and not war? I don’t think that we’re going to. We like war. We love killing. We think death is great. Kill the bad guys. Aren’t we the good guys by the way? I hope we’re not the bad guys.
CS: I think it gets blurred and I’ve seen it in the idea of capitalism. I think that wraps that up really tightly ““ killing and capitalism. I think the two have gone hand in hand and I think the youth have gravitated to greed and their ideas are in things ““ not ideas of ideas.
MANZAREK: Well, Jesus was a capitalist I think. So, it’s OK to be capitalist. I always thought Jesus was a lover. He loved humanity. He said love the Lord thy God, etc. and love thy neighbor as thyself. Somehow I think we’ve abandoned that idea of love but maybe we’ll get back to it. Who knows?
CS: I don’t know if he ever said anything about being untruthful but in an interview with you I read that your feeling about Oliver Stone’s film was his take of Jim was completely, off, false, not right.
MANZAREK: Yes. Oliver Stone movie”¦.no good. It makes Jim Morrison an alcoholic and a wino, a drunkard, a crazy man. He was actually very intelligent, very sophisticated, very funny. He was a funny guy. It’s entirely the wrong portrait. That’s what so much fun doing When You’re Strange. You are going to get the real Jim Morrison being Jim Morrison and you will see the real Doors. It’s nothing but Jim Morrison as Jim Morrison and that’s what’s so great about When You’re Strange.
CS: Great film.
MANZAREK: That’s cool. Thank you, man.
CS: I was blown away ““ and I’ll tell you straight up that I am just a casual fan, not just a guy who says, “I love The Doors!”, but I got a deep appreciation for the real thing. It wasn’t a fictionalized representation. I was, however, curious about a couple things: One, your involvement was limited. I was expecting to have you and the other band members talking every so often, that didn’t happen, and, two, I was also really floored that Jim’s movie was incorporated into this documentary.
MANZAREK: See that. He was brilliant. He was a brilliant filmmaker. He was a filmmaker, and a writer, and he was Dionysian and wore leather and he was a poet. So there you are.
CS: Was there any part of you that wanted to ““ was it Tom [DiCillo’s] idea not to have you talk on screen or have anybody else talk on screen?
MANZAREK: No, the idea was we don’t have to talk. Just watch the footage. We’ve got plenty of footage. What do you want to see me talk for?
(Laughs)
I want to watch Jim Morrison and if I see Ray Manzarek”¦.I want to see The Doors. So why should we see old guys saying, “When I was a youngster”¦” I don’t want to see that. The only time that was interesting was in Warren Beatty’s movie, Reds.
CS: Good movie.
MANZAREK: It is a good movie. You see the actual people who are being portrayed. But I mean, we got The Doors. Let’s just watch The Doors. To hell with watching the guys comment.
CS: And one of the special things about the band and you might agree or disagree is that The Doors feel like band that was never corrupted by a money man, a corporation. Do you feel it was always true to its own self?
MANZAREK: Incorruptible. The Doors were pure. The Doors were rock and roll. The Doors were artists. They would not sell their souls to the man. No way.
CS: Is that a point of pride for you? That you get to say, “We were what we were and we never compromised?”
MANZAREK: Never compromised. Absolutely it’s a point of pride. Absolutely man. You bet it is.

A little Flip camera test featuring Tim Monster lip-syncing Tim Minchin’s “Canvas Bags”…


Adult Swim’s Dana Snyder and FRED’s Ken Plume set out to have a literate conversation between two pals, but inevitably devolve into a verbal, and funny, free-for-all full of bickering, infighting, and the special kind of male bonding that comes from conflict expressed through the podcast medium.
Actor/comedian/raconteur Dana Snyder, you’re certainly aware, is Aqua Teen Hunger Force’s Master Shake, Squidbillies‘ Granny, Minoriteam’s Dr. Wang, and The Venture Bros.‘ Alchemist. Available for weddings and bar mitzvahs (bat availability pending), you can keep tabs on him via his website, www.eyeofthesnyder.com.
Ken Plume is the editor-in-chief here at FRED. He is a friend of Dana’s, as well as his arch-nemesis.
VISIT THE SNYDECAST EXPERIENCE

KEN P.D. SNYDECAST #142: iFail – Ken & Dana return with a revelation from one of them that completely overwhelms any other discussion that might have occurred. And it doesn’t occur because they talk about that revelation. The whole time.
[CONTENT WARNING]: This podcast may contain some foul language and horribly off-color jokes. Don’t say we didn’t warn you.
DOWNLOAD: (right click to save)
Episode #142 (MP3 format)
[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/snydecast/ken_p_d_snyde_cast-142.mp3]
SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Got something to say? E-mail Dana & Ken at the Snydecast mailbag.

CLICK HERE FOR THE SNYDECAST ARCHIVES

##

Welcome to our weekly round-up of featured giveaways here at FRED. Every week, we’ll present a new clutch of DVDs, books, and other cool stuff you can take a shot at winning. All you have to do is click on the graphics below to be taken to their respective contest pages. And good luck!

In conjunction with Walt Disney Home Video, we’re giving away two (2) copies of THE GREAT MOUSE DETECTIVE on DVD.

In conjunction with Summit Home Video, we’re giving away a copy of ASTRO BOY on DVD.

In conjunction with BBC Home Video, we’re giving away three (3) copies of SHARPE’S PERIL on DVD.

In conjunction with BBC Home Video, we’re giving away three (3) copies of SHARPE’S CHALLENGE on DVD.

In conjunction with BBC Home Video, we’re giving away three (3) copies of THE 39 STEPS on DVD.

In conjunction with Titan Books, we’re giving away five (5) copies of KICK ASS: CREATING THE COMIC, MAKING THE MOVIE.

In conjunction with Spin Master Toys, we’re giving away HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON Action Figures. We’re giving away one (1) of each of the following: GRONCKLE, GOBBER, FISHLEGS, NIGHTFURY, SNOTLOUT, HICCUP, TERRIBLE TERROR, and DEADLY NADDER.

In conjunction with Spin Master Toys, we’re giving away HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON Action Figures. We’re giving away one (1) of each of the following: GRONCKLE, GOBBER, FISHLEGS, NIGHTFURY, SNOTLOUT, HICCUP, TERRIBLE TERROR, and DEADLY NADDER.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

In conjunction with Titan Books, we’re giving away five (5) copies of KICK ASS: CREATING THE COMIC, MAKING THE MOVIE.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

In conjunction with BBC Home Video, we’re giving away three (3) copies of THE 39 STEPS on DVD.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

In conjunction with BBC Home Video, we’re giving away three (3) copies of SHARPE’S CHALLENGE on DVD.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

In conjunction with BBC Home Video, we’re giving away three (3) copies of SHARPE’S PERIL on DVD.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

In conjunction with Summit Home Video, we’re giving away a copy of ASTRO BOY on DVD.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

In conjunction with Walt Disney Home Video, we’re giving away two (2) copies of THE GREAT MOUSE DETECTIVE on DVD.
Contest ends at 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.

No member of FRED Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.
No Purchase necessary to win.
Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.
One entry per day, per person.
All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Wednesday, April 28th.
The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after notification of win to receive the product.

Wow, what a week of TV we had.
The week kicked off for me with CHUCK (I know, big shock). The entire season of CHUCK has been building towards something and we finally made it to that point. I was very pleased with the way the episode played out and how it tied so many of the hanging strings of plot elements together. SHAW is finally gone, CHUCK and SARAH have finally gotten together, CASEY was able to get himself re-instated and even got MORGAN brought into the mix as an agent. If you watched it the episode played out exactly like a season finale, which it was originally intended. Chuck originally was only coming back to a 13 episode order and this 13th episode would have had to tied us over into a (hopeful) 4th season. Now instead we have to deal with three weeks of repeats while the finishing touches are put on the final 6 episodes of the season. Since they weren’t part of the orignal order I’m hoping at least 4 of the six are “stand-alone” episodes where we just get some good ol’ fashoin spy fun without getting too bogged down about subversive myster organizations and rogue secret agents. Fella can dream, can’t he?
LOST had an episode that had me blown away. I don’t know what is in the water when they are writing those DESMOND episodes but HAPPILY EVER AFTER next week brought a lot to the table. I was happy to see that my prediction of DESMOND being an element in play for use in the energy pockets that WIDMORE is looking for. Tonight also had the first ‘flash-sideways’ story that I actually cared about and, of course, once again the DESMOND/PENNY angle made the whole story very compelling.
The second part of the MEDIUM two-parter on Friday night gave me everything that I’ve come to expect from the smart writing of the show. The girl that was having dreams about the murderer was written in a way that made sense, both the main story and JOE’s job woes had me hooked in, and once again I was almost holding my breath at the very end. The only point of dissapointment was in the way that ALLISON found the killer’s vehicle. I really hope this isn’t the last season for this show.
If you weren’t watching FOX Sunday night than you probably didn’t notice the fact that SONS OF TUCSON wasn’t on. The network cancelled the show after the first four episodes aired. The remaining nine episodes will play out during the summer and we’ll have to wait and see how TYLER LABINE does on the CBS show TRUE LOVE if it gets past the pilot.
Enough about all the stuff that I watched last week. Instead let’s look at what is happening THIS week to watch.
MONDAY
FOX – 8:00 PM: HUGH LAURIE directs himself in tonight’s episode of HOUSE.
CBS – 8:00 PM: LILY wants to get a hand gun after MARSHALL gets mugged on HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER. Why doesn’t she just use some of that witchcraft stuff she did on BUFFY?
FOX – 9:00 PM: The President tries to do a Hail Mary play by bringing in disgraced former PRESIDENT LOGAN to come in and save the day. I know, it makes a lot of sense when I put it like that. Ready like brining the former heads of Lehman Brothers to come in and solve the economic crisis for us.
CBS – 9:30 PM: SHELDON and the evil WIL WHEATON bowl on tonight’s episode of THE BIG BANG THEORY.
ABC – 10:00 PM: Ever wanted to kill TOM BERGERON after two hours of DANCING WITH THE STARS? If so than tonight’s episode of CASTLE will be right up your alley.
TUESDAY
NBC – 8:00 PM: Two contestands win new cars on tonight’s episode of THE BIGGEST LOSER. The contestants also get almost as bored as we do by hearing SUZE ORMAN explains to them about financial health (which sounds like code for “how much money you were wasting by being over-weight).
ABC – 9:00 PM: Tonight’s episode of LOST is titled EVERYBODY LOVES HUGO and I have to wonder if HURLEY finds true love tonight and gets the same type of enlightenment that DESMOND and CHARLIE did in the flash-sideways world?
FOX – 9:30 PM: After far too long of a break those whacky kids from GLEE are back and it turns out that rival glee club VOCAL ADRENALINE is coached by WICKED star IDINA MENZEL.
WEDNESDAY
FOX – 8:00 PM: Find out how the boys got the group together in tonight’s episode of HUMAN TARGET.
THE CW – 8:00 PM: Nothing says glamour like the smell of human waste tonight as the models must attend a photo shoot on the subway tonight on AMERICA’S NEXT TOP MODEL.
ABC – 9:30 PM: Anyone that remember show good the story revolving around the fencing competition episode of MODERN FAMILY probably knows why I’m excited for tonight’s episode where JAY and PHIL compete to fill the spot left vacant by MANNY and LUKE‘s basketball coach.
FOX – 9:00 PM: Well, the judges used their “save’ last week so tonight two contestants get the heave-ho tonight on AMERICAN IDOL. Can’t we all just say BOWERSOX wins so we can skip all this nonsense?
ABC – 10:00 PM: It’s the series finale tonight of UGLY BETTY. Best of luck BETTY, I never knew you.
THURSDAY
FOX – 8:00 PM: How will things play out this week after BRENNAN shot down BOOTH on BONES? My guess is better than we think.
CBS – 8:00 PM: How will the VILLAINS fair this week after their horrible decision to bounce COACH last week? I have to admit I’m really digging SURVIVOR: HEROES VS. VILLAINS.
NBC – 9:00 PM: SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE in the 2000’s: TIME AND AGAIN is yet another clip show. I’ll put good money on the fact that we’ll once again see DICK IN A BOX and SCHWETTY BALLS (did I really just type that?).
FRIDAY
THE CW – 8:00 PM: Nothing says whacky like when CLARKE gets infectedwith red kyrptonite so tune in to SMALLVILLE for all the fun.
NBC – 8:00 PM: According to the press release NBC, WALMART and PROCTOR & GAMBLE are trying to bring “family movie night” back with tonights TV movie SECRETS OF THE MOUNTAIN. One secret is that RANDY JACKSON produced the soundtrack. I’ll give a whirl with my six year old to see if they pulled it off or not.
ABC – 9:00 PM: Tonight on JAMIE OLVER’S FOOD REVOLUTION he asks high school kids to choose between fresh healthy food and processed junk food. Good luck with that one man.
STARZ – 10:00 PM: It’s the finale of SPARTACUS: BLOOD AND SAND and rest assured that it’s filled to the brim with half-naked people just like you’ve come to expect.
SATURDAY
BBC AMERICA – 6:00 AM E: If you don’t mind watching a few things over you can literally sit around for the next 14 hours and watch DOCTOR WHO all the way up to….
BBC AMERICA – 8:00 PM: It’s a brand new DOCTOR at 9:00 PM so to help us get ready they’ve made THE ULTIMATE GUIDE so we can learn who this DOCTOR WHO is and get us ready for the 9:00 PM premiere of the newest incarnation of the good DOCTOR. If you’ve always wanted to check the show out but were worried about what you need to know than the perfect time is here since this is a fresh start for us all to enjoy.
NBC – 11:30 PM: Well the MACGRUBER movie was pushed back but RYAN PHILLIPPE‘s appearance wasn’t on SNL. I’m sure there won’t be a single MACGRUBER sketch or commercial planned to air this night at all.
SUNDAY
CBS – 8:00 PM:Â Get out your biggest belt buckle and settle in for THEÂ 45TH ANNUAL COUNTRY MUSIC AWARDS.
NBC – 9:00 PM:Â CELEBRITY APPRENTICE tries a hand at counter programming as the teams have to reinvent the images of country music singers EMILY WEST and LUKE BRYAN. The first order of business would be to make me know who those two are.
ABC – 9:00 PM: In order to subvert her son’s marriage plans LYNETTE finds out the truth about her future potentila daughter-in-law on DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES. I’m sure that won’t blow up in her face at all.


What happens when two young men let their love of movies, comic books, and all things “geek” take over their lives? They run away from their families, bringing only the most essential DVDs and comics to their secret, highly fortified underground bunker in sunny Southern California, where they start recording podcasts that will change the world.
Are they heroes?
No.
Are they geniuses?
Far from it.
Are they the future of this planet?
I sure hope not.
Simply put… Matt Cohen and Jesse Rivers are “Bagged and Boarded”.

BAGGED & BOARDED #52: Something About CyberDyne – In which Matt and Jesse take a look at the history of Easter and facial hair trends, and get lost in a role-playing exercise involving a southerner, an alien, and an eccentric billionaire. Spring has finally sprung… Dig it.
[CONTENT WARNING]: This podcast may contain some foul language and horribly off-color jokes. Don’t say we didn’t warn you.
DOWNLOAD: (right click to save)
Episode #52 (MP3 format)
[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/baggedboarded/bagged_boarded-52.mp3]
SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Got something to say? E-mail Matt & Jesse at the B & B mailbag.

CLICK HERE FOR THE BAGGED & BOARDED ARCHIVES

##


For those who missed it, Craig Ferguson & Geoff Peterson meet the Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band…
[ad#contestbox]

After a very endearing run by both DAVID TENNANT as the 10th Doctor and the exit of RUSSELL T DAVIES as show runner for DOCTOR WHO I was very curious but not exactly hesistant about the forthcoming changing of the guard in the revival of the UK classic show. After having seen the episode I can definitely say that the DOCTOR is IN!
Change is something that is completely inevitable. DOCTOR WHO is no exception. Back when fans of the revival of DOCTOR WHO foudn out that CHRISTOPHER ECCELSTON wasn’t returning for the second series the Internet was abuzz with people swearing off the show completely. Over the course of four years DAVID TENNANT had proved himself to be one of the most endearing of the TIME LORD’s incarnations. Keeping this all in mind I went in to the first episode the 11th doctor, aptly titled THE ELEVENTH HOUR, with an open mind. Thankfully, even if I hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been terribly dissapointed.
Since here in the states we’ve got to wait until BBC AMERICA airs THE ELEVENTH HOUR on April 17th at 9 PM I won’t go into the details of the story (too much) in order to keep it fresh for you all. As the blurb that lead you hear described there are fish fingers. Within the first 20 seconds of the episode I was happy to see a mini-homage to the opening of the first series episode ROSE. Within the first 13 minutes of viewing I enjoyed an unfolding story that somewhat echoed the MOFFAT second series episode THE GIRL IN THE FIREPLACE. By the end of the episode I was pleased to see an homage to the previous incarnations of the DOCTOR as MATT SMITH firmly and definitively took over the reigns and solidifed himself as THE DOCTOR.
I will admit that, after viewing, the story itself wasn’t the strongest. I’m sure it doesn’t give too much away to say that there is a high-pressure situation that requires the DOCTOR’s attention. Truth be told, however, it is the least important part of the story that we are told. It’s a vehicle that only exists to move us from point A to point B, which is to get an idea for who this new DOCTOR is, who his new companion is, and get them into the TARDIS to kick off this new series. We are introduced to all the players, we are given a cyrptic message that will undoubtedly unfold as the series progresses.
In interviews STEVEN MOFFAT has said that at the core of the show the real character is the DOCTOR’s companion and not the TIME LORD himself. This is very apparent in THE ELEVENTH HOUR as we learn that there is a certain level of complexity in both the new companion and her history. Unlike companions of the past AMY POND is not a regular person thrown into extraordinary circumstances as they’ve been around her for most of her life (whether she’s known it or not). This has a heavy influence and effect on her. Her decision to accompany the DOCTOR comes along at a critical moment in her life and it is sure to be one that will play out interestingly in a future episode. By the episodes end you have to ask if he really found a companion or did he inadvertantly make one? Be the judge yourself.
Since this episode is about new beginnings the TARDIS itself also goes through a self-repair that ends with a new appearance. Through this the DOCTOR gets a new sonic screwdriver. This one is equipped with a green light that seems to mirror the transition of LUKE SKYWALKER’s lost blue lightsaber being replaced by a green one.
All-in-all I think this regenerated version of the revival of DOCTOR WHO (complete, I might add with a new logo and opening sequence) will be a good one that will uphold the tradition that we’ve all grown familiar with these past few years.
Now let’s take a quick few moments to get LOST shall we?
Last week’s episode, titled THE PACKAGE, didn’t contain a lot of forward momentum for the story of LOST but it did let us in on a few more bits of information. I didn’t write my thoughts last week becuase of this reason. I was also thoroughly confused by a Tweet done by Damon Lindelof:

Does he mean ours or the shows?
This episode brought back the flash-sideways world where it would appear that SUN and JIN weren’t married but they were still getting it on. The cash that we saw JIN bringing into the country, it turns out, was the payment to have a hitman clip him because he was diddling the bosses daughter. SUN thought she had a hidden bank account she could use to run away with JIN with but it turns out daddy knew about that too. SUN and JIN get out of the predicament alive but SUN is shot in the stomach and it turns out she was pregnant.
The stuff the rest of us care about happened on the Island. We found out that SMOKEY JOE needs all of the candidates to get off the Island. This instantly raised a question in my mind though: Does he need them to get off the Island or does he need them DEAD to get off the Island? Since he doesn’t seem to care about KATE’s fate after he gets all the canddiates together I might lean towards the latter.
Back on that smaller Island we find out that CHARLES WIDMORE’s crew needs more info about pockets of energy on the Island. This knowledge, coupled with the fact that they have brought DESMOND back with them (the only man we know to have survived one of those packets of energy going ka-boom) makes me wonder if maybe the DESMOND that we saw on the plain in this season’s opener was maybe there because he was thrust into a pocket of ENERGY to some how do the bidding of CHARLES WIDMORE under the pretense of “the greater good.” I know, kooky concept but if you put a guy that was ungrounded in time into a pocket of energy what else can happen (except maybe the discovery of a human microwave that can pop your bag of popcorn in the palm of his hand)?
The last thing that we find out is that back in the JACK camp our good friend RICHARD has come back (with HURLEY) to tell everyone that it’s time to head over to the smaller Island and blow up the plane that’s sitting there so that LOCKE MONSTER can’t get off the Island.
So out of all of this I think the two important things are the question of dead or alive candidates and hunt for energy pockets + DESMOND. The latter, if you believe the previews, plays heavily into this week’s episode HAPPYILY EVER AFTER. Here’s hoping the title isn’t ironic.
Wow, I sure had a bit of stuff to say. Makes you wonder if there’s a bit of stuff to watch too, doesn’t it?
MONDAY
FOX – 8:00 PM: It’s two hours of JACK BAUER as the final season of 24 begins to completely unravel and another something or other is about to hit the fan “within the next hour.”
NBC – 8:00 PM: According to Exec. Producer JOSH SCHWARTZ tonight’s episode of CHUCK is the episode we’ve waited all season for. After last week there’s no way I’m not tuning in.
OXY – 10:00 PM: I would love to see a head-to-head match between tonight’s premiere of TORI & DEAN: HOME SWEET HOLLYWOOD and the A&E show GENE SIMMONS FAMILY JEWELS for the most staged reality show on television.
TUESDAY
TNT – 5:00 PM: If you haven’t watched the second season of SOUTHLAND than here’s your chance to sit down and watch it all as a marathon takes you all the way to the season finale at 10:00 PM:.
FOX – 8:00 PM: GLEE returns next week so this must mean that this is the last of the painfully long two hour AMERICAN IDOL episodes to air. I really hope I’m right because it means I’ll be able to finally DVR LOST this time last week. Wait, I’m supposed to actually say something about AMERICAN IDOL? Uh… Team GARCIA!
NBC – 8:00 PM: Is this week’s swimming challenge on THE BIGGEST LOSER the first swimming challenge they’ve ever had? I’m only asking because I don’t remember seeing one.
ABC – 9:00 PM: Tonight DESMOND finds out he’s actually back on the Island and I’m sure he gets all kinds of pissed on LOST.
WEDNESDAY
SYNDICATED – 4:00 PM: The cast of GLEE grovel before the house of O this week as they peddle their stories and hope to remidn the whole world of their return next week with today’s OPRAH appearance. Oh well, as long as it gets them ratings.
DISC – 9:00 PM: ADAM and JAMIE explore the best way to lose a car on their tail in tonight’s episode of MYTHBUSTERS titled SPY CAR ESCAPE. Some of the cars blow up though, right?
TNT – 9:00 PM: Man, you know TV sucks tonight when you have to choose between the AMERICAN IDOL results show on FOX or THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS: TOKYO DRIFT here on TNT. Not an easy decision, is it?
THURSDAY
FOX – 8:00 PM: Tonight it’s a very special BONES that shows us when BOOTH met BRENNAN on their first case together. I’m sure during the episode no one will say, “I’ll have what she’s having.”
NBC – 8:00 PM: Nothing. There’s nothing new to watch at all. The entire night is filled with repeats. WHAT THE HECK NBC?!? Really love that fourth place spot don’t you?
ABC – 8:00 PM: Tonight on FLASHFORWARD they try to find out who the mole is in the FBI and blah blah blah…. I just want to see the rest of the tape that D.GIBBONS made from way back in 1991! Allow me a moment to also rant a bit on the stupidity of a group of people asking how those towers that were designed in 1992 could be built in 1991 when they’ve all already gone through a blackout that SHOWED THEM THE FUTURE! C’mon people, someone else did the same thing but just on themselves. Am I, the lowly TV critic, really smarter than your ENTIRE CREW?!?!? :: whew :: Sorry, had to get that out.
NBC – 10:00 PM: Sorry, I was wrong earlier. THE MARRIAGE REF is new tonight with a well known for their great relationship history panel: NATHAN LANE, KATHY GRIFFIN and TRACIE MORGAN. Wow, I might actually watch this show tonight.
FRIDAY
CBS – 9:00 PM: After last week’s incredible first of a two part episode of MEDIUM I can only hope this second part lives up to the first. It saddens me the show again could possibly face cancellation. It’s been really creepy good this year.
ABC – 9:00 PM: Tonight on JAMIE OLIVER’S FOOD REVOLUTION a bet is placed where JAMIE says he can teach 1,000 people how to cook in just one week. With his name being in the title of the show I’d put easy money on JAMIE after lots of created-in-editing tension.
SATURDAY
E! – 2:30 PM: I usually like to highlight weekend marathons that occur but just don’t feel right mentioned a marathon of KEEPING UP WITH THE KARDASHIANS. Maybe instead a better thing to watch might be….
BBC AMERICA – 4:00 PM: If you want to get a DOCTOR WHO refresher than you can catch the second part of the series 4 finale followed by the tenth DOCTOR’s swan song in THE END OF TIME. Might be a good thing with next week’s premiere of the 11th doctor in THE ELEVENTH HOUR next week.
ABC – 8:00 PM: I can’t even begin to imagine what an edited-for-TV version of ANCHORMAN: THE LEGEND OF RON BURGANDY would be like so I may be tempted to watch this.
NBC – 11:30 PM: It had to happen eventually. TINA FEY returns to SNL, but this time as the host! Even more mind blowing is Twitter Trend setter JUSTIN BIEBER is the special (ahem) musical guest. Good thing for FEY that SARAH PALIN just won’t show up, there’s one easy sketch right there (if not the show opening).
SUNDAY
CBS – 2:00 PM: It’s the “LET’S ALL GAWK AT TIGER” special, also known as THE MASTERS golf tournament! Will he win his fifth green coat or just suffer more public humiliation?
BRAVO – 8:00 PM: I may just tune in to watch A FEW GOOD MEN tonight. Nothing gets me more than that court room scene where they do that holding close-up on the glass of water right before all heck breaks loose. That glass of water made me BELIEVE it was holding a refreshing and cool beverage.
SHO – 9:00 PM: It’s the season premiere of THE TUDORS. If only KING HENRY THE VIII came off this cool in real life.
ABC – 9:00 PM: A special two hour BROTHERS & SISTERS promises to keep me out of my own living romo from 9 to 11 PM. I’m sure my wife will love it.
CBS – 9:00 PM: It’s the season finale for UNDERCOVER BOSS with the CEO of 1-800-FLOWERS hand-picking an assignment within the company. I thought they were just a phone call center that sub-contracted local florists.

Welcome to Hands Down, FRED’s own look into the world of the folks that frequent this sordid world of geekery. Follow Aaron, Brian and Colin (and a menagerie on the way) as they traverse the light fantastic or some such nonsense… What? It’s an online fortnightly comic strip, what kind of description did you expect?


Written by Aaron Poole. Art by John Merker. Copyright 2010.

I was able to sit down for a couple of years and pump out a book. It’s got little to do with movies. Download and read “Thank You, Goodnight” right HERE for free.
Check out my new column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp
Michel Gondry – Interview
There is absolutely no question that if I were to make a Top 10 list of films for the decade that just past Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind would, without question, has a place in the top slot. A movie that takes the tired and broken trope of what happens when boy meets girl and it goes horribly awry, the movie makes visual the pain and discordance you feel when despondency is your only emotion. Michel has a way of making emotions feel like you could reach out and caress them and his latest film, The Thorn in the Heart, is no different.
It’s a documentary that follows Suzette Gondry, Michele’s aunt, as we see how this matriarch was a vanguard in her time, a teacher who had progressive thoughts on education, and how as a mother she struggled to find peace with her son who just seemed lost after the death of his father many decades ago. The fact that his cousin would years later leave his wife in order to live the live of a gay man, the way he always should have, is pedestrian compared to the caustic relationship he had with his mother, sweet aunt Suzette.
The movie, shot over the course of many years, is a snapshot of one family’s troubles and what it took for them to find some peace and a little bit of solace in the commonality of life. There’s nothing earth shattering about the movie, you expect there to be some kind of deep secret to be let out into the open, and it’s a function, I believe, of the form as of late that seems to implicitly state that a documentary like this has to have a great reveal. It does not. Its reveal is that even in the depths of rural France there aren’t a lot of things that separate these people with people you know across the street. We all have drama of some kind in our lives, the documentary shows, but it’s finding the threads that connect us and weaving them all together to show a portrait of humanity we all can recognize is really this movie’s strength.
Michel Gondry spoke with me this week about the film, which is slated to open today, April 2nd, in New York and shortly after that in Wisconsin and next month in Los Angeles. Check the film’s website for specific locations and times.
MICHEL GONDRY: Hi Christopher. How are you doing?
CHRISTOPHER STIPP: I’m good thank you. How are you?
GONDRY: I’m good, thanks.
CS: I watched your film last night and I have to tell you it’s one of the more moving documentaries I’ve seen this year.
GONDRY: Oh, thank you. Please share your views with the world.
CS: I absolutely am. I think, and that was the first question I wanted to lead off with, was that the film feels very personal”¦
GONDRY: Yeah.
CS: Was there any hesitation on your part in telling the story which felt so private?
GONDRY: I initially had hesitation to put it out but I wanted to tell my own story because Suzette mirrored French history in the schools and I thought that deserved to be shot. Now, when it became more personal I felt maybe it was too personal to show but I think it was more interesting this way because we had the real drama that we explored even though there was some sadness in it. There was a sort of good conclusion and something healthy in doing that.
I think people who have seen it enjoyed it because they could find themselves in it.
CS: I think the movie paints her out to be very tough, very stern, but when I think about the teachers I had, at least the ones that really affected me, those are the ones I remember fondly. Suzette has old students who absolutely remember her, and remember the way she ran a classroom. But I think that toughness ““ that was an important part in order for her to keep going.
GONDRY: I think her toughness is one of the things that I liked. When you are a child, to feel the strength of a parent is very reassuring and I think my parents were lacking that. They gave us lots of great things ““ they were great parents ““ but the strength Suzette had was something I was craving. Because I find my mother to be very weak and I didn’t want to be like that. And I know some people in my family didn’t really like her because she has this sternness about her but I liked her for that. The teachers I liked when I was young was a teacher that was strong but had a sense of humor. And it’s the same with my son. The teacher that he like the best are not the weakest, it was the stronger ones.
CS: That’s interesting. Your son ““ you literally bring your family into the film as well ““ did you have to struggle with that as a parent of trying to find that balance of where to be tough or try not to be too loosey-goosey or too soft with your kids?
GONDRY: Yeah, well, we can talk a long time abut that.
(Laughs)
I think it’s very hard. You have one child ““ I think what’s difficult is to find where to give up and where not to give up in your strength. Many parents set the bar too high when you raise a child ““ let’s say no TV. Too hard to achieve. You say, “No TV”¦No TV”¦No TV” and then after a lot of nagging you say, “OK, TV.” All the thought you put into “No TV” is collapsing. I think one of the keys ways is to pick you battles and stick to them. It’s a problem to be too loose and it’s hard to teach and could be just propaganda. But I found my son was watching too much TV when he was in France and it was all about video games and I recommend that to all the parents just not have the video games at all.
(Laughs)
When it’s there you always have to fight to stop it and it’s so much work. You say “OK, only a half an hour a day” but it’s going to be tough. You are going to spend all your energy fighting with a little person. So, I thought of that and I know that Suzette was way too strict with her son. It’s very difficult to know what indication ““ it’s just who people are. It’s a combination. I don’t know what is the denominator.
CS: And that strikes to a point I was going to ask, Suzette at times seems hesitant to answer your questions that become too personal but you keep prodding her and keep poking her and you stay persistent with it. Did you feel you knew there was something there and you had to get it out of her?
GONDRY: Oh yeah. I just wanted it on camera because I thought that was the real subject of the film. It became clear it was about her son and her. It was very difficult to talk about it. It’s a very difficult problem. Jean-Yves has a daughter because initially he was married and he didn’t come out until he was my age and his daughter was ashamed. It’s a difficult problem.
CS: By the end of the film I’m almost, I don’t want to say confused about how Jean-Yves feels but do you think that because he’s come out he’s gained a little bit more perspective, a little bit more healing because of it?
GONDRY: Yeah. He just sent me an email. May I read something I received from him this morning?
CS: Absolutely.
GONDRY: He says in his email:
My dear Michel,
I transfer from French“¦You helped me a lot since 2004 and thanks to you I pull though my problem. I am still unemployed but hope to find work”¦Moreover, I find happiness with Mark”¦Thank you infinitely and I am very happy for everything you have done for me and I can’t find the words to show my gratefulness towards you. I hope one day I hope I can live with Mark”¦His boyfriend.
CS: That’s sweet.
GONDRY: It’s very sweet. He really made me cry when I got it.
CS: Michel, I just have one last question for you. I know my time is short. Suzette in the film, she says she doesn’t fear death anymore. She just seems more concerned with the things that came before this. I’m curious to know whether you as a person have perspective on where you’ve been and not so concerned with where you’re headed.
GONDRY: I’m a very anxious person.
(Laughs)
I think it’s very scary to get old because you know you’ll be dying soon. My hope is that when it’s my time I can figure it out. At the end of my life I hope to figure it out. But I have a great fear and I would be lying to not admit it.
Powered by WordPress