September 1, 2005, when I commented on the tv coverage. In light of what has happened to NBC anchorman Brian Williams since then, my comments in that post feels a little ironic.
September 3, 2005, all of us at triscribe ended up commenting on what was going on in the Gulf coast in our posts.
September 4, 2005, I noted how there was hope in seeing the efforts to help the region, especially from NYC.
September 16, 2005, I noted on the commentary to the foreign view of the American handling of Katrina.
Well, if you don’t mind the commentary on other stuff from that (the usual triscribe commentary on tv, politics, law, and travels), feel free to check out the above links! They’re good writing, if I may say so, and pardon any broken links!
So… the US Supreme Court got down the wire, as it always does during the last week of June, before it goes on its summer break. Looks like the case on marriage equality is about 100 pages (majority and dissent opinions). They sure know how to make things interesting…
Considering how I had done a couple of housing discrimination cases, I like the idea of having some more tools in the arsenal that would be helpful and housing discrimination is tricky business without effective tools. Disparate impact would really approach it in a broader but targeted way (even if people feel uncomfortable about not looking for alleged intent, disparate impact really digs deeper into addressing social injustice by examining the effects).
Any lawyer can tell you that the constitutional cases aren’t short reads, but trying to get through them and make sense of them – well, not the simplest of reading, but it means something to me. Fortunately, e-readers make that a little easier – at least, I’d like to think so, but I barely got to really reading last year’s decisions after downloading them and as a news junkie, I’d like to try better and as a lawyer, at most, I end up reading the decisions most relevant to my area of work – but as a US S.Ct. curiosity seeker, well, there’s a weird fun to all of this, whether I like how a decision goes or not. (I’ve been a sucker to read Slate’s Supreme Court Breakfast Table feature every June the last couple of years).
And, while I’m not sure how the future will go, I’d like to think that the decisions this week were positive steps to a better and fairer society. Keep hope alive, everybody!
Oh, and otherwise: my current reading is Ian Fleming’s Casino Royale, the first James Bond book. Probably not legal-related as I can get this week; I need a break…!
I mentioned some of these thoughts earlier over on Facebook, and figured I’d expand on some thoughts in a blog post. Think of this as a supplementary to my December 2014 post on the future of Star Trek.
What happened was that I had seen the link to this post over at Startrek.com, “Kirk vs. Picard: An Enduring Debate” by David McDonnell, on my Facebook newsfeed, and I thought it had an interesting look at the history of the debate of Kirk vs. Picard. But, then again, my initial reaction to the article was, “Good Lord, the Kirk vs. Picard is a never-ending debate since ST:TNG started. Can’t we just agree that they’re two very different styles of captains?”
Generally, it always seemed to me to come down to Kirk, Man of Action, versus Picard, Man of Contemplation. But… on further thought, if one looks at the overall evolution of both of them, they’re probably not that different from each other…
After all, young Picard started as a Kirk-esque guy, but matured from his experiences (as Picard and Q realized, “Johnny” Picard was a boat-load of fun, but losing his (physical) heart and growing up made him the man that he became), and Kirk probably wished he had a Picard maneuver to deal with Khan in another way back in “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” (TWOK), which reached ridiculous Picard-level of Shakespearean tragedy.
Moreover, during TWOK, Kirk’s love for antiques and dead tree books was a plot factor – and he clearly had his leanings to be contemplative, but for the lust for action (hence, he lost Carol Marcus, as she had implied during TWOK). I was always curious about how TWOK explored the intellectual and thoughtful sides of Kirk, the parts of him that were more than the rash and romantic space cowboy. Could a parallel universe Kirk become a Picard-esque man?
Well, the rebooted J.J. Abrams-verse ST has yet to suggest that – he’s still the Man of Action, even though he tries to keep in mind the principles of Starfleet and all that – but the new version of Kirk seems to have a greater yearning for family more than original Kirk did (considering what J.J. Abrams did to his biological father and his father figure, which didn’t happen to original Kirk). Hmm…
Then, a Facebook friend (J) posted a response to my sharing the link on the Kirk vs. Picard debate, along the lines of, hey, forget Picard and Kirk; there’s Sisko and how far he went in the episode of “In the Pale Moonlight” on “ST: Deep Space 9.” That got me thinking: Sisko did the things so many wouldn’t do to save the Federation, as shown during the Dominion War arc (and even the Maquis storyline, when the Federation entered a real gray moral territory over how it treated Federation citizens and how Sisko was so determined to uphold the Starfleet way). What does that say about Sisko as a Starfleet leader? Is he the “better” man? Or were the others “better”?
Picard sure wouldn’t do what Sisko did, even if he might understand and empathize with Sisko. Picard had a darker man in him (I think his Borg trauma probably only enhanced it; see the example of the movie, “Star Trek: First Contact”), and he went through more than what most normal men would have gone through (besides the Borg trauma, there was torture by the Cardassians; essentially mental rape when the alien entity made him live a whole life in the episode, “The Inner Light“; and losing lots of his friends, relatives, and at least two ships), putting aside for the moment Sisko’s own tragic loss of his first wife and the personal revelations about his mother. But, Picard’s darkness tended to be reined in by his principles and respect for basic things, like life, love, nature, and free will (especially free will, since he and Q had ridiculous interactions about that).
And, Kirk…? (original Kirk, that is). Hmm. Is it weird that I’m not sure if Kirk would do what Sisko did? Maybe Kirk would have turned away from everything, to be the cowboy, ride his horses, keep having adventures, and save the universe when he wants to do so and feels he was the one to do it. Did Starfleet and the Federation mean that much to Kirk? Or did he just live in such a different era than Picard and later Sisko? New Kirk might be different, since Starfleet gave him a life worth having, but original Kirk was still quite the heroic figure (almost in that Greek mythology sense, which the original series and the movies certainly pushed).
Or is Sisko such an outlier to the Kirk vs. Picard debate because he’s not an Enterprise captain? He was, in some ways, both action and contemplation, and beyond either – more the whole person – or “being,” especially if one accepted the final arc he had on “ST:DS9.” (I can’t say that I did – but primarily because I appreciated Sisko as a human being, and believed that he liked that about himself too, despite or because of his bond to the planet Bajor).
But, then again, the Star Trek novel, The Serpent Among the Ruins by David R George III (Amazon link here), at least posits one Enterprise captain would pull some conspiracy stuff to save the Federation, where John Harriman (generally the guy in the movie “Star Trek: Generations” who allowed Kirk to save the day) pulled off quite a stunt to give himself and Starfleet a clean conscience while manipulating a war (see here for the post to my reaction to that book).
Kathryn Janeway of “ST: Voyager” and Jonathan Archer of “ST: Enterprise” — well, I could go into a whole rant, but I won’t. I liked both shows on their own, but for me, it’s harder to say whether their lead characters quite match the explorations of socio-political issues and character development the way Picard, Kirk, and Sisko did. I’m not even sure if Janeway and Archer quite fit that whole debate of action versus contemplation or the “screw that” schema that Kirk, Picard, and Sisko have.
Janeway should have been “the scientist,” but I don’t think the writers of ST: VOY did her favors by not fully fleshing out her journey through the Delta Quadrant (at least not in a more satisfying way for me). Archer was very much a character of his times, reflecting the early roots of Starfleet and the Federation – and his journey got derailed by the Time War arc (I could try to explain that, but I can only say that it made things very messy in a needless way; you’re more than welcome to search “Star Trek: Enterprise” on triscribe’s search function and see what I thought back when the show was on). Overall, I’d say that the journeys of Kirk, Picard, and Sisko made for a good range of leadership to check out.
By the way, I looked it over and I think my list of what I think of as ST moments still holds for me (mind you, that post was just my opinion of what I had liked; different people might have different takes on what they feel is an ST moment). Feel free to check that out.
Meanwhile, I had seen this this article over at Deadline by Mike Fleming, Jr., about director Justin Lin, who is tasked to direct the next reboot movie of the J.J. Abrams-verse. The article gave me hope that Lin could pull off a good ST movie, especially since he said he grew up watching ST. I think if Lin can tell a good story while highlighting the development of the bonds that the crew of the Enterprise has (yep, that group of professional, stubborn but open-minded, multi-racial, multi-species of people), it’d be fun.
Honestly, I didn’t think I’d enjoy the Fast and Furious franchise until Lin had stepped in and tweaked it, not that I’d compare F&F and ST… Not exactly, anyway. But, a fun series that moves the viewer’s emotions… that’s surely what ST is, isn’t it?
Dusting around triscribe. FC/P family are abroad. I am in need of yet another staycation.
Life’s a funny thing, except when it’s not that funny. Just sayin’.
A triscribe project is in progress, or the like. I’ll leave it that for the moment. Stay tuned!
I thought that this was an interesting item: “How Panda Express Grew From Family Business to Global Empire” by Vanessa Hua (h/t Museum of the Chinese in America’s Facebook pagepost). Andrew and Peggy Cherng’s family business – with Andrew’s restaurant experience insight and Peggy’s engineering background – took them far; and their daughter, Andrea, is a lawyer/business person, who’s Chief Marketing Officer. I can’t say that I’m big on Panda Express food – Chinese American cuisine indeed, rather than “Chinese,” however that might be defined – but it’s definitely quite an enterprise and a Chinese-American success story.
I mostly watched the Tony Awards on Sunday night, switching back and forth to Game 2 of the NBA Finals (Cleveland vs. Golden State) and the triscribe project to be discussed another time.
Now, I’m no theater follower, but I thought it was mostly entertaining, even if a little bit of the Broadway infomercial feel and the broad campiness of hosts Kristin Chenoweth and Alan Cumming could have been dialed back a little. I missed some of the bits from “On the Town” and most of the opening stuff (well, I did catch a bit of the “Something Rotten” medley). I totally missed the presentation of the scene from “Fun Home” and saw it later online; that Sydney Lucas is such a talented young person! The medley from “An American in Paris” was a pretty to watch.
I like award speeches (Kelli O’Hara’s winning speech for her role in “King and I” was great and spirited; how has she not won a Tony before?!). I thought that there were some surprising moments. I didn’t think that the British talent would win so much (Helen Mirren, winning it as Queen Elizabeth II, again, but for the stage).
But, overall, as television, the Tony Awards this year was a little awkward. The Tony Awards ran on time, but some things were a little off-putting, like how Josh Groban sang “You’ll Never Walk Alone” for the “In Memoriam” portion – his singing was fine and the chorus was great, but the production seemed to have delayed the images of the honored deceased and worse, the television screen could not capture the images of the honored deceased in a discernible way, as noted over at the NY Times Live Blog of the Tony Awards, between Charles Isherwood and Dave Itzkoff (and I had no idea if the Radio City Music Hall audience were any better able to see those images).
Ken Watanabe had his moment during the “King and I” sampling, doing the “Shall We Dance” scene with Kelli O’Hara. I’ve read critics’ concerns about his English-speaking ability (at least with respect to stage work), but as the tv critic Mike Hale noted (link below), Watanabe’s grace and charisma came through – as appropriate for his playing the King. Plus, I liked how he was thrilled for Kelli O’Hara’s win (who wasn’t, frankly?).
Closing the show with “Jersey Boys” was just odd (as Itzkoff even noted on NY Times live blog). I mean, I liked “Jersey Boys,” and yet “Fun Home” just won and their whole cast and crew got on stage, and the Tony Awards closed it with “Jersey Boys,” which is celebrating its 10 anniversary on Broadway… does that make sense? Not really.
I’m hoping to catch some outdoor Shakespeare soon, but that’s a thing in NYC – lots of choices for that around here! I’m just amazed that it’s June and time flies by.
Some season finale observations or overall season overviews. There might be more television posts later; we’ll see. Anyway, spoilers ahead, or if you don’t care, read on.
As I’ve said before about “Elementary” (see my 2014 year in review commentary), I wish the show did a better job at being an ensemble show. The acting is great, but the reality is that the show is very much the Sherlock Holmes and Joan Watson show (and even then, more the Sherlock show, as well it should be). However, the moments with Detective Marcus Bell (Jon Michael Hill) and Captain Thomas Gregson (Aidan Quinn) have been notable and they sort of had arcs this season. I’d like to see more of that – to see a coherent expansion of the Holmesian universe.
For instance, Bell slowly developed a friendship of sorts with Sherlock and he realized that he deserved a life (to avoid, as Sherlock pointed out, the life of personal isolation that Sherlock, Joan, and Gregson each seemed to have carved for themselves).
Meanwhile, Gregson got confronted with how his daughter was a victim of abuse from a failed romantic relationship with another cop, and how her ambition as a cop might not make her the most upstanding cop. And, maybe some amount of corruption or power play might push Gregson to a promotion he didn’t seek or want, which might lead to problems for Sherlock, Joan, and Bell.
But, the arcs of Bell and Gregson felt a little flat ultimately (it didn’t help that the season finale didn’t touch on their mindsets very much, beyond Gregson’s frustration that Sherlock was putting himself in danger).
And, even Joan’s storyline was troubling for how her boyfriend died and how that led to her moving back to the Holmes brownstone and socially isolating herself (or, as she put it, fully committing to detective work).
The most recent season finale didn’t really end on a cliffhanger note (not to me, anyway), when it concerned the threat of Sherlock’s addiction relapse. Sherlock’s addiction problem was left hanging (or never went away) since the season finale of the previous season, when he took the heroine from his safe. And, I would have to go back to the season premiere of this season, but I really thought he had relapsed already, and he never denied that relapse was a threat that still haunted him (the never-ending problem of being an addict).
On the other hand, I was kind of hoping that Sherlock’s realization that he needed friends and his growing acceptance of Joan, Bell, and Alfredo (Sherlock’s former Narcotics Anonymous sponsor) as friends meant more for his character development – especially since he was as someone who was so flawed and rejected his family.
And, I could have sworn that we viewers were left hanging as far as the state of friendship between Sherlock and Gregson (or what passes for friendship). Way back in Season 1, Sherlock pretty much burned Gregson by doing some really dubious things, and Gregson has been left with the thankless role of Supportive Boss of Authority over Sherlock, Joan, and Bell (a fairly stereotyped role of police procedural tv series and movies). There could have been some fleshing out of this whole friendship theme of this season.
I ended up liking the “Kitty as Sherlock’s new protege” storyline far more than I expected, because it made Sherlock aware of how he impacted lives. Even Kitty, as a jarring character during the 1st half of the season, grew on me (even if she was pretty brutal). What I like about Sherlock Holmes of “Elementary” is that he is so human. But… the big but…
But, as the A.V. Club‘s Myles McNutt noted in his reviews of the 2nd half of this third season, things got weird. McNutt got frustrated that the episodes seemed so determined to have a murder as a hook, even though the plot would get very meandering and away from the original murder. I agree that, with such rich characters, there could and should be an easier way to have the procedural part, than what often felt like incoherent messes with terrific Sherlock dialog.
(also, I enjoyed McNutt’s season finale critique, and I’m sorry that he’s moving on from the “Elementary” assignment on the A.V. Club! Hope his successor goes as deep).
When a series makes it obvious that the guest star is the suspect and did do the murder, I would strongly suggest going back to the drawing board. This ain’t Columbo (and even the “Elementary” episode that was in a Columbo style – where the viewer knows who did the murder, even if the why has to be unfolded – didn’t exactly work all that well, because the why still made no sense).
I have hope for “Elementary,” since the cinematography is great (I love how Long Island City ends up being a stand-in for just about every part of the city, and how the city just looks good on the show) and the cast – I like the cast! But, come on, writers: be focused and use the strengths of your cast!
Meanwhile, “Dancing With the Stars” managed to be its usual fun. I don’t think I’ll ever understand how the adapted music on that show works for the ballroom dancing stuff, but the pro dancers are so talented. I have enormous respect for Derek Hough as a choreographer, but I was rooting for Val Chmerkovskiy to win finally. The time when he and Artem Chigvintsev did the trio paso doble with Rumer Willis – whoa. Hot stuff. I couldn’t get my eyes off of Val and Artem! See below!
But, yes, in dancing with Val during this latest round of “Dancing With the Stars,” Rumer has done a great job showing us viewers that she is more than the daughter of Bruce Willis and Demi Moore. She has a lot of talent and hopefully this can help her with whatever her next gig is. The season finale was pretty bloated though, dragging out the tension while still being entertaining.
I watched the farewell to David Letterman on the “Late Show with David Letterman” on CBS this past Wednesday. It was actually David Letterman Day in the City of New York (well, “Late Show with David Letterman” Day, per the mayor’s proclamation for that day).
I’m not much of a late night tv viewer, but I admired how Letterman became such a New York City icon, from his days of returning to work after 9/11/01, and how he made his return from the writers’ strike. Letterman was funny about his sarcasm and candidness (his skewering certain politicians could be fun to watch), and his human moments (his family, his heart surgery) were human. And, those odd bits (Rupert Jee and the South Asian guys from the early days of the series’ CBS incarnation) were … odd bits.
Anyway, I thought that the farewell episode was sweet for remembering old guests (especially those who passed away). Also, the Top 10 was hilarious, just for being a fun roast of Letterman (not a new thing, but a nice way to end things).
It’s not clear what Letterman plans to do in his retirement, other than spending time with his family. He’s entitled to do nothing during retirement. But, as I’ve mentioned before, I could easily imagine him doing a Charlie Rose-style of project, covering topics he wants to do or whatever he cares about. Best wishes and congrats, Letterman, and be good in whatever you’ll do next.
Sidenote stuff: See here on FC’s post on Calvert DeForest, who was best known as “Larry (Bud) Melman” on the old “Late, Late Night with David Letterman” on NBC (the Melman name couldn’t go to CBS during Letterman’s transition); I thought it was nice that a clip of him was on the finale.
Don’t forget to take some time this Memorial Day weekend to remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice for the country while serving in the armed forces.
A friend of mine shared on Facebook this link from the NY Times, an article by David Gonzalez, “When Every Day is Memorial Day,” regarding the photography of Andrew Lichtenstein, and the photo slide show of his photography of acknowledging those who died in service. I’m passing it on. The photos are moving stuff, telling stories in images.
A review of past Memorial Day posts here at triscribe, which have also asked readers to think about the meaning of Memorial Day (and observing Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, and other stuff):
Well, it’s been awhile since we have last blogged, so let me dust things off a little bit.
And, anyway, around here at triscribe, everyday is APA Heritage Month.
We ended up making it to the 36th Annual Asian American and Pacific Islander Festival in Chinatown on May 3, 2015, although I totally missed seeing FC there. I thought it was smaller than past events, but the performances still had great energy (well, admittedly, I missed the final performance and the late morning/early afternoon ones, but I liked what I saw!). The folks of Asian Cinevision and the Asian American International Film Festival had a presence, and so we each scored our discount for this year’s film festival this summer (we triscribers are committed to that event, of course!). The weather cooperated; beautiful weather!
I got to say: the May temperatures have been nicer and not crazier so far than the weirdo weather of the past couple of months.
One of the really interesting items I saw on the Internet on the eve of APA Heritage Month: a profile on NPR of Brig. Gen. Viet Luong, US Army, on duty in Afghanistan, and reflecting on the parallels of the previous long-running conflict America had (which led to the general’s emigration to America from Vietnam) and the long war against terror. Listening to the profile was also worth it to really appreciate the emotional aspects of what Brig. Gen. Luong experienced and what it means to be an Asian American in public service.
Unfortunately, FOX has canceled “The Mindy Project” (see here for Entertainment Weekly’s list on canceled shows), although there is a possibility that “The Mindy Project” might still live on in Netflix or other means. I haven’t seen it be considered as an Asian American show despite starring Mindy Kaling (possibly because the show isn’t exactly an Asian-dominant cast and more of a romantic comedy, and it’s more Mindy Kaling-driven than anything else), but it’s worth noting for what it is.
ABC canceled “Selfie,” also not considered an Asian American show, but again probably because it wasn’t Asian-dominant, but worth noting because John Cho got to be the romantic comic lead (honestly a very rare thing). That the show managed to stay on Hulu and apparently did get better by the end of its one season might give hope for something.
And, hey, ABC – don’t give up on the experiment in diverse tv! (well, a message to all the broadcast networks, really).
I meant to put this on triscribe earlier, but had shared this on Facebook awhile back in February, when “Fresh Off the Boat” started: a fascinating item by Kat Chow on NPR about past Asian American shows. A lot of the shows on her list pre-dated my memory of mediocre tv.
In the item, Chow mentioned David Carradine’s “Kung Fu,” but she forgot about Carradine’s “Kung Fu: The Legend Continues,” which was on syndication back in the 1990s. Strangely, neither of the actors who played the descendants of the original Kwai Chang Caine were actual Asian Americans (forget that even the original Kwai Chang Caine, a half-Asian, was played by David Carradine, who played his own descendants on “Kung Fu: The Legend Continues” and, oh, whatever). But, I remembered the “Kung Fu” sequel show was strangely campy, with actor Kim Chan (an actual Asian American) as a Caine family sidekick. Not that I watched “Kung Fu: The Legend Continues” in any consistent way back in the 1990s.
Oh, and I liked that Chow referenced that other 1990s syndicated show: Russell Wong’s “Vanishing Son.” Wong was hot in that show, even if (of course) the plot made no sense (yes, another tv series that I did not consistently watch, but did catch some episodes). I didn’t realize that it got replaced by “Xena: The Warrior Princess,” which transformed 1990s syndicated tv. And, yeah, I probably watched a lot of weird tv back in the 1990s.
Well, a slight disclaimer: I had to check on that wonderful source of info, a.k.a. Wikipedia, to confirm details about “Kung Fu: The Legend Continues.” It wasn’t like I remembered most of that stuff. Honestly, I almost wanted to call the show “Kung Fu: The Next Generation.” Not that I’d compare David Carradine to Patrick Stewart…
On another triscribe note, check out this Tribeca Film Festival review that FC wrote for Meniscus, on the documentary “Steak (R)evolution.” FC had a lot of thoughtful things about the film and the state of steak. Actually, now I’m starting to feel hungry.
Oh well. Back to your regularly scheduled non-blog-related living…
Happy Mother’s Day to all the moms, stepmoms, grandmas, and mom-figures out there!
(The following was written as I was more or less watching the Oscars; what a nutty, agonizingly long night).
Oh, Hollywood!
JK Simmons, for Best Supporting Actor! Nice, brief, touching speech, to remember your parents.
“Everything is Awesome” – the song from “The Lego Movie” – had a powerfully weird presentation.
I suppose this is the Year of the Weird Oscars. Hmm!
People are going to ignore the music and do their speeches. It’s their moment, gosh darn it. (this is still tv; timing, people).
Liam Neeson presenting the clips from “Grand Budapest Hotel” and “American Sniper” for Best Picture.
Shirley MacLaine had a nice grace in presenting “Boyhood,” “Birdman,” and “The Theory of Everything.”
Is it me or is it agonizingly longer than ever? (well, I stepped away; I know – very bad). Perhaps lengthiness is the Oscars thing; it’ll never go away.
Terrence Howard was strangely quite dramatic in presenting “Whiplash,” “The Imitation Game,” and “Selma.” It was as if he had watched the movies, got so teary, and was so pushing for all of them. Uh…
“Glory,” the song by John Legend and Common for the movie, “Selma” – quite a presentation for that stage. So powerful.
And, “Glory” won! Powerful speech by John Legend and Common. The fight for social justice is a never-ending one, indeed.
Why is Lady Gaga singing “Sound of Music”? Am I missing something? It’s beautiful, but… wait, is it the 50th anniversary of “Sound of Music”? Is this just to make the Oscars long as usual? It just doesn’t feel very necessary, and very anti-climactic after John Legend and Common’s making a big Oscar moment.
Sometimes someone gets to make a good speech – short, sweet, inspirational. Graham Moore, for “The Imitation Game” in Best Adapted Screenplay, said that it’s okay to be weird and to “stay weird”; one, day, that person will be on the Oscars stage one day too. That was a lovely Oscar moment too.
“Birdman” won for Best Director and…?
Patricia Arquette, Eddie Redmayne, Julianne Moore – lovely speeches.
“Birdman” for Best Picture! (“oh” to Sean Penn for dragging the moment out!).
Lots of moving speeches, with the attention to the families, the producers (yep, them), and social issues.
I just wished they’d cut out the unnecessary stuff. It didn’t feel like they did as much of the usual “Let’s learn about the history of films and have film appreciation” as much (which they usually do for the viewers who are unfamiliar to the Oscars and/or films). Neil Patrick Harris’ opening was nice and encapsulated the appreciation for movies in one full swoop.
But, as I said, Lady Gaga’s moment was just oddly needless, even though she sang well. And, the clips of the acting moments of the nominated actors and actresses – well, they were spoilery of the films they were in. The Oscars just went on and on. Well, it was still something to watch and we’ll see what this year’s movies will make us say!
Happy Lunar New Year! It’s the year of the sheep/ram/goat. (take your pick, since the Chinese character is apparently hard to translate. Apparently, there are people sheepish about saying “sheep” because of the Western connotations about sheep. I don’t think goats are particularly nice animals or look particularly lucky and prosperous, so I could go with “ram,” since they’re practically bigger, bigger-horned, and more aggressive sheep anyway).
Museum of the Chinese in America has a Lunar New Year family event on Feb. 28, 2015, complete with lion dance performance by my alma mater’s lion dance troupe, along with arts and crafts.
I believe I saw this on triscriber YC’s Facebook page: the NBA wishes us all a happy Lunar New Year, complete with Jeremy Lin (always remembered for Lin-sanity for New Yorkers) and NBA All-Stars James Harden, Dwayne Wade, and Stephen Curry, as well as that Chicago Bull mascot (Benny the Bull – I forgot that he had a name). Funny and cute video. The video almost made me like the NBA again.
(not that I’m a real fan; just a casual sports viewer; the All-Star Game turned out to be a no-defense points-a-pollooza at Madison Square Garden that I didn’t watch on tv. I did watch on tv the pre-All-Star game festivities at Barclay Center in Brooklyn. Well, I liked it at least to the extent that I watched the the Three Point Shot stuff; Stephen Curry was fun to watch).
Sports Illustrated had a post on the NBA Lunar New Year video, and a video of blooper reel for the making of the video (including Houston Rocket cheerleaders trying to speak a few lines of Chinese (well, “Happy New Year,” I think – but I don’t speak Mandarin Chinese, so… I’d probably have as much trouble too).
I’m glad that the Chinese American exhibit took advantage of the contributions of others (like Museum of Chinese in America and people in the NY community, including federal Judge Denny Chin). Much more legal take than I expected, but hey, Chinese people were the first people excluded by law from emigrating to the US, so American law and the Chinese are tightly bound. I do recommend the exhibit as something worth checking out!
Meanwhile, the northeast USA (and a good part of the rest of the country) was in deep freeze. I propose that since last year was “polar vortex,” this year is “frozen hell.” Kind of catchy, don’t you think? But, according to the NY Times, it turned out to be the “Siberian Express,” so… go figure. Maybe that’s a step up from “polar vortex.”
While the cold in NYC has been ridiculous, at least we don’t have as much snow as last year (although the remnants of the snow from the not-Blizzard of 2015 at the end of January had still not been chiseled off in some places). And, hey, we’re not Boston, where they have a whole winter of snow (or Chicago’s amount of snow) in only a couple of weeks. I think we should be glad of the reminder of (sort of) four seasons while we have the four seasons. But, don’t say that I didn’t warn you of climate instability if we get a ninety degree Fahrenheit temperature in May.
(The following was written as I was more or less watching the game, posted belated due to some server connection problems…).
Get ready for some football!
The commercials so far haven’t been too awful. (and they can be). Paralympic snowboarder Amy Purdy was inspirational as ever in a commercial (I believe it was for a car; I’ll check again later), with the commercial depicting her snowboarding, dancing, and modeling.
The Minions (from the “Despicable Me” movies) are getting their own movie this summer (called – what else? – “Minions”). The cute commercial was making fun of both the Minions and the ridiculous antics of fans in the stadiums.
1st quarter ends with no points. Someone ought to remind Seattle that you need some points on the board. But, at least their defense is holding up. (umm, speaking as a casual fan, that is).
Such a cute Budweiser commercial, with the Clydesdales’ missing their lost puppy and then saving the puppy from a lone wolf. Aww!
It doesn’t make me want to drink beer, but – puppy! Clydesdales! Aww!
The commercial for the upcoming Terminator movie did not motivate me to want to watch the upcoming Terminator movie. Maybe it had to do with the “Let’s see if we can bring Arnold Schwarzenegger back again!” part. It didn’t interest me at all.
Coca Cola tried to make us stop bullying and being insanely partisan, as well as tried to encourage us to drink Coke. I liked that commercial, even if it was a little odd.
The “1st Draft Ever” commercial, where God was announcing what country got what species was hilarious for reminding me why we all like avocados. Also: too bad Mexico did not draft the polar bear (who even wore a sombrero to get drafted for a warm country).
Wow. Half-time ended on a tie (awesomely competitive); half-time show was pretty darn good (Katy Perry! Lenny Kravitz! Missy Elliott!); and Seahawks are doing well as the 3rd quarter began. Commercials – not awful.
Odd, snotty Budweiser commercial about how they’re a popular brand of beer because they’re made for drinking, not for tasting like some namby-pamby pumpkin microbrew ale. I thought people accepted Budweiser because it’s bland enough to be handled by everyone. That it’s not a microbrew doesn’t make it better or worse, or make the microbrews terrible. Can’t we all just get along? (Notably, I don’t drink beers anyway, and if I do drink, I end up drinking cider because I’m boring. And, I think that I’ve tried a lager. Evidently, I’m not a Bud drinker). That also made me miss the old Bud Bowl ads. They were fun, not snotty.
New England Patriots are not giving up in the 4th quarter.
OMG. New England takes the lead, with two minutes left.
Come to think of it, why hasn’t Lenny Kravitz been given a half-time show? Hmm!
Can’t believe this. Seattle makes some dumb mistakes; interception?! The frustration is believable and palpable. Don’t fight now! Ugh.
Then, Seattle loses. So close. I guess I’d say congrats to New England, but man…
Ugh. Quite a game, even if it was not the way (or the team) that I wanted. So weird and crazy. Maybe it’s me – why is it that the teams I root for lose? Eh. At least the commercials were a nice distraction, except when they were morbid. But, even the morbid ones were not badly done. They just did not fit in a Super Bowl context. Feel free to check out the pretty comprehensive commercial overview on Slate.
The pre-pre game coverage was something I generally ignored (seven hours of what…?). But, I did catch some Bob Costas bantering with Johnny Weir and Tara Lipinsky, bringing back some flashbacks of Costas’ Sochi Olympics 2014 and how Weir and Lipinsky were so popular with their mix of professional and campy analysis of figure skaing. Oh, wait, this was football. Never mind.