what i like (and don’t like) about the biggest loser
April 2, 2008
i got into a conversation with a musing julius about the biggest loser. this reality show holds a ton of potential. granted, i don’t watch it, but i get the premise, and i see advertisements for it in between my other shows.
so last night i caught the second-to-final episode of the season, and i walked away with the following:
crying. lots of people cry on this show. and they’re grown men and strong women. or so they appear and say. i can’t imagine spending twelve weeks completely consumed with the natural emotions that come from committing all your energies to a goal, having every resource available to help you, and finally “turn the corner” into a seemingly snowballing path of success. toward the end, i’d probably be drained, too. there’s something i can appreciate that’s very real in that kind of raw emotion; honestly, it makes me feel proud to be part of the fitness industry, trying to help other people feel and live better. if i could do that every day — help people who want change to find it — and pay my bills, that would be unbelievable.
on the flipside, a suck thing about the show are the fabricated sets with cupcakes and other assorted sweet nasties there to tempt the contestants. it’s making a mockery of something they undoubtedly struggle with — but not in a kind of “ok, we’re making it seem like you’re at a grocery store having to make a choice between BUYING cupcakes or an apple. you know, to test you for real-world challenges after you get kicked off!” it’s more like “we’re placing you in a totally unrealistic scenario in which producers of a reality tv show line your home with every one of your favorite foods in massive quantities FOR FREE,” which doesn’t happen in the real world that much. or at least in my world.
but if it did, i’d choose to have gelato line my world.
chocolate, please.
how i met your mother = awesome
April 1, 2008
how i met your mother continues to be a hilarious sitcom. i can’t figure out why shows like my name is earl or two-and-a-half men gain such notoriety when the likes of ted mosby are cracking me up so hard each monday night. man i’m glad the writer’s strike is over (a) because i’m a writer so i want people in my profession to get what they deserve and (b) because i seriously only watch — in terms of scripted shows — this one, plus the office and 30rock.
so much for reading and trying to find new outlets for my monday and thursday nights — the boob tube is back and better than ever!
but what’s particularly awesome about how i met your mother is NOT NOT NOT that britney spears made a cameo on one episode, but instead that (a) ted is wearing a totally radass vintage ohio state shirt in the bar scene of the sarah chalke cameo episode (also the britney spears episode) and (b) the show’s producers actually go beyond the episode to make things a reality; like creating a fake site called tedmosbyisajerk.com or having slapbet countdown available for its biggest fans.
watch it. you’ll thank me later.
why project runway is the best reality show on tv
March 4, 2008
it’s creative, against all odds. here you have regular people who are passionate about something. their talents — or their personalities — make them stand out above other designers. they transfer a vision into something tangible and beautiful (or attempt to), most of the time within 48 hours. less than, even. to be given restrictions, know you’re being watched (judged) by millions, and still manage to crank out couture, wearable art is totally rad.
heidi klum isn’t annoying.* i want to be her. imagine being like a six-foot-tall woman who is known in her industry as “the bod,” be able to listen to seal sing everyday, crank out a few babies and STILL look that good. it’s almost unbelievable. maybe she’s just superimposed. maybe she’s a robot. yep, probably a robot.
it’s consistent. i know when i watch that show that i’ll see something new each time. i also know i’ll see something hideous, which is fascinating in and of itself. how do people who make beautiful things make such tragic outfits sometimes? then, they get the chop. or they don’t, and i’m left telling will (who probably won’t ever admit he loves PR but he does) that michael kors and nina garcia should have sent home ricki instead because kit was way better. point is, i’m consistently seeing cool things, and i’m consistently surprised. that’s good tv.
tim gunn is brilliant. i love his blatant reactions to the contestants’ work. unlike the judges, who are obviously more conscious of the cameras and trying to make tv, tim just says whatever he wants. the designers’ reactions are hilarious, too, because they’re trying to NOT act like his feedback is making them uncomfortable. they get embarrassed and immediately act like it doesn’t bother them. then he just says the characteristic, “make it work,” and glides away. (ps i saw him tim in nyc about a year ago. i was struck by how thin he is. the pinstripe suit was gorgeous. i was coming out of my hotel, on the way to chelsea market, and blammo i look across the street to see THE tim gunn. i turned to my co-worker at the time, starstruck and trying to get him to understand, but to no avail.)
it’s easy. a bunch of opinionated, talented artists? a camera or twenty? the greatest city in the world? a host who seems relatively funny?
why not?
* at least not annoying like tyra banks is annoying — but only because she’s so obtusely dramatic ALL THE TIME.
a kiss is not a contract, but it’s very nice.*
January 31, 2008
urban dictionary told me a new word the other day: choreplay. this apparently is when women get turned on because their men are doing things around the house, like taking out the recycling, which is not foreplay but is still very important.
yes, there is so much that goes into making for good sexual chemistry. maybe chores is among them. but i contend that kissing is at the core. often overlooked for the bigger payoffs, but absolutely essential nonetheless. in fact, i postulate that you can tell everything about the potential of a lover based on how s/he kisses. (e.g. a passive kisser is a passive lover).
i think kissing is marvelous. i love doing it. i kiss everyone, to varying degrees of course. it’s fun, it makes me feel warm, and it’s ridiculously endearing. it can connect people like hugs (except for the “A” hug, where you both push your butts out and make no pelvis contact, which is appropriate for forcing platonic relationships or with grandparents. but still.) an unbelievable kiss can change your whole perspective. even if you’re not a part of it.
for example, josh kisses chicks on camera. when we were together, i got comfortable with it initially by pausing, rewinding, and watching again in curious agony. but, then, at one point, i thought, “dang, he looks like a good kisser.” i could appreciate the art of it! in fact, i bet the actresses he kissed (or will kiss) — even though they’re in character and reportedly not at all invested in the emotion of the kiss because it’s allegedly fabricated anyway — thought, “nice.” (then proceeded to email him off-set opening their homes in los angeles to him.)
i can be completely moved to adore an actor i see onscreen if he looks like a fantastic kisser. it’s so hot! like jake gyllenhaal, who looks uncannily similar to this douchebag i knew from high school — i can look past that resemblance during his kissing scenes because seriously that dude must be amazing to make out with. other top performers include leo dicaprio and brad pitt. maybe being ridiculously hot makes you automatically a hot kisser. but probably not, because losers include zach braff (who i find attractive, but who is clearly a passive kisser, which is sad because his lips are terribly full so you think he’d make more assertive use of them. maybe he should take me on as his coach.) and elijah wood (again very sadly).
i pay attention to the basics. they’re the blocks from which all other things are built, no?
* (oh jemaine, i would like to kiss you.)
