The Nice Stalker

            I once saw this funny picture of Mario from the classic Nintendo series by the same name. It was a cartoon in which the character Toad told Mario that the princess was in another castle, which of course is the classic line from the original game that you’d be told every time, until you actually rescued Princess Peach in the last castle. The joke of the comic was that Mario told Toad that he was actually looking for him, and not the princess. The two walked off into the sunset, thus eliminating the need for Mario to continue adventuring. It was pretty funny. However, that’s not the point. The point is that Mario would actually go through eight castles to rescue this girl.

            Now, it’s impossible to really tell how much the two of them knew each other. However, we can probably assume that they weren’t married. Still, Mario was one persistent dude. It’s respectable, but incredible when you think of it in the context of a normal human being. I can definitely think of married men off the top of my head that I am certain would leave their wives for dead if asked to raid castles and fight a dinosaur monster. Honestly, even if I went through the trouble of rescuing my wife from such a monster, I’d probably crap my pants right off the bat and die at the first lava pit.

            But what’s most interesting is that it’s totally normal for us to see these guys (and sometimes girls) that go REALLY far out of their way to help or rescue someone that they barely know, or hardly should even care about. Is it because we know that it’s fiction that we can call it romantic rather than insane? It’s somewhat relatable to when we watch action movies and feel that we can assume what we would do in the dire situations that the characters have to face. Most of the time, we glorify the image in our head of what we would do. If in a movie we see someone do what we would probably do during a shooting, which is hide, we get upset at them even though it’s totally understandable. Is rescuing the princess the same? Do we imagine ourselves being these heroes, and expect these heroes in movies, despite the fact that most of us would have no idea what to do. People that would willingly fight through a series of treacherous obstacles in order to save random people probably don’t exist, or they are mentally disturbed.

            If you look at the main character from the (awesome) children’s television show adventure time, Finn the human, the stoic and tenacious hero, we see someone else who is very intense in their pursuit of justice. Finn is a character that lives in a post-apocalyptic world that constantly has him face monsters and the other stereotypical challenges associated with the good guy growing up.

            I recently saw an episode of the show in which Finn was turned down by his love interest; she coincidentally is also a princess that likes to wear pink, like Princess Peach. Anyway, the princess from Adventure Time is 18, and about five years older than the main character. It’s not really a surprise that she’s not really an option for him. It’s totally understandable that she wouldn’t want to lead him on or anything like that. You’d think that Finn would just come to terms with this rejection.

Finn decided not to give up. At the end of the episode I saw, Finn made a quick phone call to his best friend Jake while still at the princess’s castle. Jake gave him a pep talk, as all best friends are prone to do in such situations, telling Finn that he’s a great guy and that he shouldn’t let the rejection bring him down. Finn thanks Jake for the consolation, and then looks at the castle, assuring himself that he won’t give up on the princess.

Is that realistic? Hardly. If someone were to get turned down and refused to give up in real life, we’d probably label that person as a stalker that can’t get a hint. It’s admittedly a difficult situation, because caring enough about someone to not give up on them is endearing, but not giving up on someone that doesn’t want the attention is inconsiderate.

I’m not going to sit here and tell anyone that they should give up on someone their interested in, because sometimes it does work out for the best. I’m also not going to sit here and tell anyone that they should give their stalker a chance, because sometimes that REALLY doesn’t work out for the best. It’s just that sometimes it’s important to try to look at such a situation with an impartial point of view, instead of an obscured kind like television gives us. Don’t trust television. As plausible as main characters can be, they’re hardly ever authentic enough to be someone you’d actually meet.

A Reason to Watch

Wrote another guest article! This time it was for popgive.com. Recently I heard that Keeping Up with the Kardashians was renewed for three more seasons. This article tries to explain why:

A Reason to Watch

Love That 90's Fashion

So this time I wrote a piece about how clothing trends from the 90's have basically become as ridiculous to look at as clothing trends from the 80's. It's pretty entertaining. Check out the author bio too.

Love That 90's Fashion

The Sound of Emotion

I wrote a guest article for this website called Only Instrumental Music. It's about how important scores are in movies. Check it out!

The Sound of Emotion

Does Death Wait?

It’s kind of funny how much finality there is to both scripted television and reality television. Many people suspect that reality television is heavily scripted, and I’m really not going to deny that; it probably is. But the thing is that something that’s consistently added to most reality shows is the proper ending. You see it in virtually all sitcoms, and in most popular films, but interestingly not very often in indie (or artsy) films. A similar trend exists in literature. Tons of novels, especially the popular ones, have a firm or obvious conclusion. The exceptions are usually the really artsy ones. Still, the more obvious examples are in film/television, and this is a pop culture blog, so lets look at those.

I have always been a fan of those cheesy 90’s sitcoms even after the 90’s finished. Boy Meets World; Sister, Sister; and Saved By The Bell were all just fantastically cheesy. They had a lot of heart when they came out, and they still do. At this point their charm has morphed from being witty depictions of growing up into a clear view of a different past (and still with a lot of wit). One of the funny things about those shows is that everything always worked out in the end. Most of the time the situations were somewhat ridiculous. If the situations were actually likely to ever happen, they definitely wouldn’t happen on the weekly basis that they did in the shows. Unless I’m remembering high school wrong, it wasn’t consecutive weekends that we’d crash our parents’ cars, throw huge parties, and then beat our rivals in the talent show.

Everything usually did work out though. However, there was rarely an obvious lesson learned. Things just don’t really work that way in real life, though I probably don’t have to tell that to whoever is reading this. Still, we watch these shows and shows like them regardless of how implausible they can be.

Movies take it an extra step further as they often take advantage of their budgets and the time given to tell their stories to create something really special. Again, the chances of most plots from most movies actually happening are slim to none, but they’re still somewhat relatable. Most of the time we can still imagine what it would be like to be cast into these situations and speculate what we would do, and that makes us feel more involved. Plus, like in television shows, we often are presented with an ending that we know for sure was meant to leave you with a certain feeling. Even if it’s incredibly vague, and maybe unnecessary, like the ending of Inception, we feel settled because we’re given a true conclusion.

Indie films don’t do that. They tend to avoid situations that would never happen to a regular person, and when they end, they tend to just end without making a big culmination obvious. The most recent indie film I’ve seen is Terri, which according to Rotten Tomatoes got an 86% from the critics and a 60% from viewers. Getting a better score from critics than from casual fans is pretty common from not only indie films, but also almost any film nowadays that requires a commitment to paying attention. However, another thing that probably impedes them from achieving really high ratings is, as I mentioned, they have a tendency to lack really concrete endings.

When an indie film ends, it just sort of ends. In Terri, the main character had a good heart to heart conversation with another character, and then not that long after, the movie just ends kind of suddenly. If you’re interested in seeing the movie, do it. It’s really good and I didn’t spoil anything.

ANYWAY, the ending was significant. There was more left to the story. Terri copied real life storytelling in that most stories we tell are only a glimpse into a person’s complete life. That is pretty realistic, almost more than reality television in fact. A lot of times the stories we tell don’t even have proper endings either. Yet for some reason, stories having definite endings are very comforting. I certainly like them.

There are a lot of times where I have the choice to watch an absorbing movie like The Kids Are All Right (another indie film that just sort of ends), or a movie like Zombieland (you can just jump right into at any point after someone explains it to you in about fifteen seconds), and I chose the latter. Not just because I didn’t feel like starting from the beginning, but because I know movies that are known for being easy to like will have a satisfying ending. It’s just comforting to know that events will transpire, and then something will wrap everything up nicely and signal that a conflict is over.

It’s the same premise as people saying, “I’m too young to die.” Admittedly, I myself have said so when I thought my home was being broken into. We all want conflicts to be resolved before the ending comes, and we want clear endings to give us the assurance that conflicts are over.

However, it’s not realistic. Young people who could have had bright futures die all the time without their problems being resolved. I’m not saying this to be depressing, or to make anyone cynics. I’m just saying that we can’t always expect for everything to work itself out before we die because a lot of times things just won’t without active influence, and we can die at any moment. Death isn’t going to wait for you to find the person of your dreams, or finish getting your degree, or finding inner peace, or anything else that you may hope comes with time. I’m not saying go wild every night, but I am saying people should try to live well enough to die content tomorrow.

Pinkerton's Honesty

I wrote another guest article! It was for the blog of the website Earbits This time I wrote an op-ed about how honesty shows up in art. In the article I specifically used Pinkerton by Weezer as an example. Here's a link:

Pinkerton's Honesty

Smashing Pumpkins 'Oceania' Review

I wrote another guest piece that was just posted. This time I wrote a review for the newest Smashing Pumpkins album Oceania (which is awesome). Check it out:

Oceania Review

The Rise Fall and Resurrection of the Simpsons

I wrote another guest piece! This time it was for popgive; a cool site for killing time/pop culture. It's about The Simpsons' rise and fall.

Here's a link:

The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the Simpsons

Saying Goodbye is Hard to Do

I wrote a piece for a music website called Hardcore Troubadour. It touches on the sadness that is the finale of an album, and it's awesome. Here's a link:


Saying Goodbye is Hard to Do

The Problem with Human Products

            I’ve been to L.A. three times now, and I have yet to see a celebrity. It just seems like something that people are supposed to do when in L.A./Hollywood, but it’s yet to happen for me. You’d think it would, considering the slightly cheesy name of their soccer team. In fact, there are certain default questions you’re asked when you travel to certain places. If you go to New York, you can expect to be asked the following: “Did you see the Statue of Liberty? How about the Empire State Building? World Trade Center?” Ironically I did none of those things when I was last in New York, but that’s beside the point. When you go to L.A., one of the questions you’re asked is if you saw anyone famous, as if it’s such a common occurrence.

            I’m not too sure that I’m affected by the fact that I have yet to see a celebrity in person. It seems to me that every time I hear of someone meeting a celebrity out of the blue, specifically not at an event where they’re expected to meet and greet, the person is disappointed. A coworker of mine who lives in southern California recently told me that some of her friends have actually seen celebs at the gym. Basically, her friends saw them in normal environments being normal people. What really struck me however, was the fact that she said that her friends were underwhelmed when they saw them. Apparently they just weren’t what they imagined they’d look like in person.

            Obviously, the stars not shining as bright as the friends of my coworker thought had to do with the sweat, body heat, and raw humanity that are ubiquitous in gyms. If you show up to the gym wearing high quality clothing (or at least such that’s not designed for absorbing sweat), or in full make-up, you’re clearly going to distinguish yourself in a bad way. So to assume that a famous person would follow the same general unwritten rules of society in the gym isn’t that big of a leap.

            All that’s to say that when you remove the designer clothing, makeup, and hair stylists, these people actually look normal. They still might be gifted with certain physical attributes, such as good height, a symmetrical face, and good genes for aging; but a lot of what makes them look exceptional is the help of the people backing them up and marketing them. They’re human products.

What might be the biggest problem with that is that people end up feeling like they can relate and lead similar lives, but that’s just unrealistic. I read the autobiography of Slash from Guns N’ Roses and Velvet Revolver when I was in high school. There was one point in the book that Slash fell asleep in a class in high school and flipped over his teacher’s desk when the teacher woke him up and made an example of him. He was expelled and went on to become a world famous and extremely successful musician. As much as I would’ve liked to go down the same path, there was no way I would get away with that. The funny thing is that I was still tempted to do that when I was in class after reading that chapter. Yes, Slash was a rock star, but I rationalized that he was once bored in class like me and he turned out fine when he did something about it. My rationale was, “If Slash could do it, why not me?”

When simply asked out loud, my rationale from that time sounds absolutely ridiculous. It was definitely one of those things that sounded better in my head. Yet don’t a lot of people do that? Don’t they rationalize that if this celeb from a random midwestern suburb can turn out happy and successful, they’ll turn out fine as well? We never really see every process that turns these human-coals into diamonds. People see these products that are still human beings, and they feel that they can relate. It’s something else entirely when people run into these products after they’ve reverted to coal to go to the gym.

I’d still like to see some famous people in L.A. someday though. If nothing else, I’d be able to brag about the experience. However, it’s still disconcerting to think that not everyone realizes that these human products that you see on TV are supposed to be relatable, but not people you emulate. Maybe someone sees the moms on Teen Mom, and find comfort.

Or maybe they see those moms and think that everything will turn out okay if they get pregnant early.

Lady Gaga vs. The parameters of pop

A lot has been said about Lady Gaga, but comparatively little has been said about her newest album. At least compared to her earlier major-label work. Musically speaking, they’re both pop albums, though if you took away the distinctive vocals of Gaga, it wouldn’t be that crazy to assume that different artists made the two albums. Yet it’s not like that’s never happened before, so why has Born This Way not had the same buzz? It very well could be a transition album suffering a sophomore slump, or just one of those albums where the artist basically decides to abandon their past and do what they want, thus alienating fans of earlier work. Either way, Born This Way doesn’t have the same star power as her last efforts, and her preference for the 1980’s impeded her matching her own benchmark of popularity.

When The Fame started getting played on the radio, it started off with a warm reception. The leadoff single, “Just Dance”, persuaded you to do as the title told you to, unless you’re like me and live in shame because you can’t dance at all. It made the listener go, “Wow, this artist could be a really good one hit wonder!”

But then Gaga scored another hit.

And then she put out five more hits or so, thanks in part to the release of the accompanying The Fame Monster.

Gaga’s meteoric escalation to fame was capped off with the general consensus that she was a bona fide star. Her song “Paparazzi” probably became even more relatable for her to sing about. In 2009, she no longer was the quintessential starving artist in New York/LA trying to make it big. With the explosive personality of her music (mirrored appropriately by her public appearance), Gaga had joined the ranks of other pop rulers such as Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera in their heyday. The most incredible part of all of this was that she was still so… fresh. She was a noob, some might say.

Possibly the most amazing thing about Gaga’s strangeness and her music was how quickly people snatched it up. But how much of each had to do with Gaga’s outlandish getups and loud actions? There is no denying that she’s a very talented and very skilled individual, so that definitely scored her some points. Yet that’s not the most important thing with popular musical artists; just look at Blink-182. No offense to Blink fans, I’m an active listener, but their music is simple and easily digestible. That’s not a bad thing. In fact, keeping it simple pays off far more often. The Fame (Monster) pushed boundaries but stayed within the parameters of what pop music was supposed to be.

Yes, her seemingly infinite amount of shock value helped, but she has made really good music. The Fame was well received, according to Metacritic. Critically, Born This Way racked up similar reviews on Metacritic. However, it’s worth noting that the latter received less sparkling adulation from the common listener. This implies multiple things, with one of the most prominent and most important being that while the quality of music was still there, the charm wasn’t.

Great pop artists are the ones that can recognize those parameters I mentioned of what would be well received by the masses and what won’t. I can’t really confirm it, but I once read Rivers Cuomo of the band Weezer made a reference book to use that noted what worked in pop songs and what didn’t. Assuming this is true, Cuomo had figured out that those parameters existed and tried to catalogue them. Weezer fans probably would argue against the lack of experimentation and darkness in newer Weezer music, but that’s a whole other essay/blog.

The problem that’s stopped Born This Way from achieving the same success as it’s predecessor isn’t that it stepped out of the parameters of what pop music is supposed to be, the problem is that Gaga used the parameters that were established in the 1980’s. It’s hard to be mad at her for being true to her influences, because really, that’s not a valid reason to dislike someone. However, not liking 1980’s music is a good reason to not like music influenced by that decade, and that’s what’s happened with Born This Way.