Ian Thomas Malone Ian Thomas Malone

Tuesday

13

January 2015

0

COMMENTS

Celebrity Apprentice Recap: Episode 3

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Celebrity Apprentice, Pop Culture

Before we tackle part one of this episode, which once again featured two tasks, I thought I would clarify that Trump was wrong in saying that allowing the Project Managers to keep their own money had “never been done before.” This was also done in the fifth task of season 3, which featured John Rich against Marlee Matlin, arguably the two most impressive fundraisers in the show’s history. More on that later.

I tweeted last night that Jamie Anderson might be the worst player in Celebrity Apprentice history and having slept on that, I still find that to be the case. Comic relief contestants like Gary Busey, Rod Blagojevich, and Dennis Rodman all drew the ire of their teams time and time again, but that was the singular least impressive Boardroom showing in Celeb Apprentice history, potentially of all time. You’d have to go back all the way to season one, where Omarosa knocked off a few of the women to find comparable instances.

Jamie made three horrendous mistakes. She admitted early on that she was bullied into the concept that she didn’t quite believe in. More importantly, she didn’t set anyone up to take the fall. This was problem one.

Problem two was that she was completely indecisive in the boardroom. Her team was chaotic in deciding who to set up for the fall. Kate, Brandi, and Kenya were all targets. Jamie could have made a case to plea for any of their firings and probably could have knocked off Kate or Brandi. Kenya would have been tough considering she’s the only competent player of these four.

Had Jamie picked a target, maybe she could have survived. She could have even defended bringing Kate and Kenya back as Kenya was responsible for the loss and Kate is disliked. But then she admitted she made a mistake. Then she tried to see if Trump would bring Brandi back. It was over for her before that, but this was just embarrassing. LaToya Jackson made a similar mistake during All-Stars in not bringing back Omarosa, but at least she put up a fight.

Jamie? No, there was no fight here. After years of this show, it’s clear that certain contestants come into the game knowing how it’s played. Jamie wasn’t one of them. She made nearly every basic mistake in the book and this was no surprise.

Let’s go back to the money predicament. Geraldo and Ian collectively raised close to $600,000, a figure that Trump later raised to that exact sum. Jon Rich and Marlee Matlin back in Celeb Apprentice 3 raised over $1,600,000. Big difference, right?

It can be easy to forget that the whole “winning team gets all the money” is highly problematic when you’re hitting your big donors up. Especially when you’re a D list celebrity like Ian Ziering, who probably doesn’t have many rich friends. His charity, The EB Medical Research Foundation, needs that money. The person who gave the $165,000 check probably had ties to that cause. It would have been pretty awkward had the money gone to Geraldo.

We saw this in Celeb Apprentice 5, where Patricia Velasquez lost her $126,962 to Paul Teutul Sr. In that season’s finale, she tried to explain to Trump that a school couldn’t be built because her donors spent their money only to see it go to a different charity. That was awkward for many reasons and the truth of the matter is, these are the rules.

But the way they framed the narrative with Ian’s emotional plea would’ve made it difficult to see his money go to Geraldo. While Trump (as usual) exaggerated the significance of his decision to allow them to keep their money, it was the right call. This show is mostly about entertainment, but it’s nice to see them act like human beings every once in awhile.

Fundraising tasks aren’t very interesting. It’s fun to watch the people who barely raise any money look awkward, unless it’s Ian trying to get Terrell Owens to do something. Despite making close to $70 million in the NFL not counting endorsements, Owens is broke. It’s no surprise he has no rich friends.

The show usually adds some sort of contest element to the task to get the participants to actually care about their product to raise some extra cash. That’s rarely a difference maker. Ironically, it would have been the case here. I’m not really sure if there was a single element to this task besides selling, which is unusual.

It’s rare that the two weakest players in the game get fired consecutively. Trump made the right calls. Athletes have rarely made for interesting contestants on this show. Damon is just as boring, though not entirely incompetent. He made for a decent PM, albeit one steamrolled by Geraldo.

If I had to pick the final four now, I’d go with Geraldo, Ian, Kenya, and Leeza, though I fully expect at least two of them to screw things up for themselves. Leeza is a dark horse, but one that Trump likes. Sig Hansen looks to have most of Paul Teutul’s negative traits in that he’s quiet and awkward, but also doesn’t have the large Rolodex. He could be a dark horse, Jesse James type sleeper candidate, but that’s also because there are far worse contestants still on the show.

Brandi’s meltdowns resemble NeNe Leakes’ too much for me to care. Leakes quit. I imagine Brandi might as well. This is a weird season without any overly dominant players aside from Geraldo, who’s too bold for his own good. But we get to see Joan Rivers next week! I miss her.

Sunday

11

January 2015

7

COMMENTS

Pedophilia Accusations Undermine the Brilliant Performances in Sia’s “Elastic Heart”

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog

While music videos experienced a bit of a dry lull between their banishment from MTV and the rise of YouTube, the medium has shown it still has the capacity to be relevant in mainstream popular culture. Well-constructed videos frequently get millions of hits and can work wonders for the artists’ careers. In less than a year, Sia’s “Chandelier” music video has close to half a billion views. One might argue that this exposure is worth far more than MTV ever was, considering you can purchase the song with the click of a button while you’re watching the video.

“Chandelier” was an accomplishment more for its risk than anything else. The video cast then eleven year old Maddie Ziegler, known for the Lifetime series Dance Moms, a reality show known more for its argumentative spinster star than the actual dancing. For close to four minutes, Ziegler carries the video with a mesmerizing performance through a decrepit building in a nude leotard, a performance that has won numerous awards.

For Sia’s follow up video, it made perfect sense to bring Ziegler back into the fold. The young performer has demonstrated artistic maturity well beyond her years. It would have been a mistake to cast her alone once again. Ziegler needed a partner to differentiate the video from “Chandelier.” Enter Shia LaBeouf.

The video for “Elastic Heart” is much more minimalistic than “Chandelier” and features Ziegler and LaBeouf cage fighting for close to five minutes. Ziegler once again dons the nude leotard, which looks a bit dirtier than before, while LaBeouf wears nude briefs that are effective in their goal to make the Even Stevens, a show that ended its run before Ziegler’s first birthday, star appear naked. The video has drawn criticisms for its romantic elements between the 28-year-old movie star and the 12-year-old reality television star. A certain word has been thrown out there especially.

Pedophilia.

The outcry has been enough for Sia to respond publicly, via Twitter . Both the outrage and the public apology have the same unfortunate result. It undermines the brilliant performances given from two unlikely sources.

LaBeouf’s struggles have been well documented. From plagiarism to arrests to paper bags, LaBeouf is clearly a troubled man. But unlike other child stars like Lindsay Lohan and Amanda Bynes, he hasn’t let that affect his work. As shown in the recent film Fury, LaBeouf still lands top roles alongside other A List actors. Why? Because despite how bizarre he’s become, the man is still immensely talented.

Both performers deserve ample amounts of praise for their work in “Elastic Heart.” Ziegler once again shines, shedding the trashy cable reality show image to outshine a man who’s shared the screen with the likes of Harrison Ford, Michael Douglas, Cate Blanchett, and Optimus Prime. LaBeouf manages to hold his own against the far superior dancer while delivering the emotional intensity that channels his own personal demons. To denounce this as pedophilia is insulting to both of these performers, whose combined efforts could very well make this the most relevant music video of all of 2015 despite its release in the first week of the new year.

Part of this falls on Sia, who should never have apologized. There’s nothing explicitly sexual about the video. Yes, it’s weird that LaBeouf is more than double the age of the girl who’s jumping on his back while he’s wearing a dirty speedo. But art is often weird and the natural inclination to apologize for that which draws discomfort should be repressed. We shouldn’t undermine the work of one girl primed for stardom and a man who wants to show the world he still has something to offer. Perhaps Sia should’ve listened to her own lyrics and let her thick skin deflect the unfair criticisms levied against this work of brilliance.

Success stories like Maddie Ziegler are rare. Reality TV stars typically don’t amount to much. But this is a girl whose talent transcends her age and we should applaud that rather than express concern that she’s making hissing noises at Shia LeBeouf. Anyone who wants to find genuine cause for concern for Maddie’s wellbeing should watch Dance Moms, where she experiences far more dangerous situations each episode.

Ziegler and LaBeouf should be applauded for showing the world why music videos are still worth watching. No one should apologize for the fact that two performers delivered a work of art that defied their ages and backgrounds. The only real concern is that this might be the apex of their careers. Sia should appreciate that instead of catering to the PC police.

Saturday

10

January 2015

3

COMMENTS

Analyzing the Impact of Matthew’s Death on Downton Abbey

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Downton Abbey, Pop Culture

Note, while I dislike spoiler notes immensely, as Downton Abbey is currently airing in America, I thought it was polite to note that this article contains minor spoilers through season five as it’s completed its run in England already.

It’s hard to believe it’s been two years since the abrupt car accident took Matthew Crawley away from Downton Abbey at the tail end of the season three Christmas Special. Perhaps it feels longer because of the drop in quality since the heir to Downton left the show. The excellent season five Christmas special shows that DA does have some life left, making now an appropriate time to take a look at how Matthew’s death changed the show.

Downton Abbey, being an ensemble drama, means that it’s hard to argue that Matthew’s death changed the storylines for every single character on the show, even though he was a main character. Matthew didn’t frequently interact with everybody on the show, making it hard to really say that his death impacted everyone equally. You could argue that he might have played a part in Mrs. Patmore’s dead nephew storyline, but you wouldn’t really say that his death altered her arc in any substantial way.

I’ve organized the impact of Matthews’s death on the cast by five tiers. I’m going to exclude Lord Gillingham, Charles Blake, and the rest of Mary’s suitors who were introduced post season three as it’s unlikely they would have been even introduced had Matthew stayed on the show.

Tier 1 (Major): Mary, Molesley

Tier 2 (Secondary): Lord Grantham, Isobel Crawley

Tier 3 (Unknown): Lady Rose, Tom Branson, John Bates, Anna Bates

Tier 4: Everyone else.

Tier 1 is fairly straightforward. Mary’s entire storyline was completely altered because of her husband’s death. No Matthew means no suitors. It’s possible that either Lord Gillingham or Charles Blake could have been introduced in a similar fashion to Simon Bricker, but most of her storylines would be in conjunction with Matthew’s. Maybe she would be a better mother.

Molesley is the other one whose entire storyline was impacted by Matthew’s absence. Matthew’s death caused Molesley’s complete fall from grace, going from valet to second footman. This might have been for the best from a screen time perspective, but he was already comic relief. He might have been in a better positon to court Miss Baxter, but Fellowes has always found ways to screw Molesley. Matthew’s death took much of his dignity, but perhaps it made him more endearing to the audience.

Tier 2 might be a point of debate for some, especially considering that Isobel is Matthew’s mother. But his move to Downton set up Isobel’s relationship with Violet quite nicely and I think that would have happened regardless of whether or not Matthew died. Obviously there were grief moments that wouldn’t have happened, but I don’t think her storyline took the drastic turn that Mary and Molesley experienced.

Lord Grantham fits largely under the same category. Aside from the will stuff, Robert’s storylines would have happened anyway. Matthew would have been involved with the business matters, but you can mostly swap Mary out with him to see what would have happened there. I don’t think Matthew’s death necessarily precluded him from any particular storyline.

We can split up the Tier 3 Unknowns into two categories. Lady Rose and Tom likely experienced slightly larger roles due to Matthew’s death. But I don’t think it’s fair to say that Matthew’s presence would lead to any major changes for either one. Rose could have still come to Downton to represent the younger side of the aristocracy. There was the role of Sybil to be replaced as well, though she was hardly a major character in season three.

Tom is a bit trickier. There’s no denying that he filled some of Matthew’s role, both in Lord Grantham’s eyes and the viewer’s. But would Matthew’s presence prevent his relationship with Miss Bunting or interfere with his desire to move to America? I don’t think so. Matthew meant a great deal to Tom, but his path wasn’t blocked by having a friend and similar (relative) outsider.

As for the Mr. and Mrs. Bates, they seem like an interesting choice to put in the mix considering neither shared much screen time with Matthew. But Matthew’s death lead to Lord Gillingham, which led to Mr. Greene and Anna’s subsequent rape. If Greene hadn’t done it, there’s certainly the possibility that someone else could have. But Matthew’s presence and the need to give him something to do might have cancelled that one out entirely. We don’t know. Hence the unknown.

Which is sort of the same for the rest of the cast. You could say that Matthew might have developed a rapport with Carson, but that’s pure speculation that isn’t really rooted in anything. He could have gotten caught up in a Barrow plot or maybe not.

One element worth speculating on is whether or not Alfred, Ivy, and Jimmy would have left if Matthew hadn’t died. While Matthew didn’t really have anything to do with those three, he was at the forefront of Downton’s “youth movement” in season three, as he and Tom worked with Lord Grantham to modernize things from a business perspective. Entering season six, that youth moment is largely gone, though there’s a new footman in Andy who could bring down the servant’s average age by quite a bit.

One could point to Matthew’s death as indirectly causing Alfred’s departure as Molesley took his place as footman. I wouldn’t say that necessarily needed to be the case and the subsequent departures of Ivy and Jimmy suggest that if that hadn’t have happened, something else might have. Unless you want to make the argument that Matthew’s death elevated the importance of Molesley as a character, rendering some of the servants redundant since there’s only so much screen time to go around.

Which isn’t an unfair point. Matthew’s death took much of the “let’s bring Downton into the modern times” away and instead created a sort of holding pattern that did the show no favors in its lackluster forth season. It’s fair to suggest that the show would have been more business related if for any other reason than it would’ve needed something to take the place of all the grieving over Matthew’s death.

Matthew’s death may not have created much of a visible “void” considering Downton’s large cast, but it had a tremendous impact. Shows like DA tend not to get better with age, but much of the complaints over the past two years fall on Mary’s storylines and the stunting of the plot that was forced by his death. That was avoidable, but it still happened because Dan Stevens wanted off the show before Fellowes could figure out how to adjust properly.

Tuesday

6

January 2015

0

COMMENTS

Celebrity Apprentice Recap: Episode Two

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Celebrity Apprentice

If there’s one thing we’ve learned about the boardroom from fourteen seasons of Apprentice, it’s that Trump hates when people don’t play by his rules. His tendency to alter the game at his whim blurs this quite a bit (like when he decided to fire two people when Adam Carolla refused to throw Michael Andredi under the bus), but he’s never missed an opportunity to punish someone who prevented his boardroom from turning into all out warfare. Even though I christened Kevin Jonas as the frontrunner last recap, simple mistakes prove how little that means in the grand scheme of things.

The boardroom was almost reminiscent of Celebrity Apprentice 1 episode three where Gene Simmons was fired essentially for trying to oust Omarosa when Trump basically told him that Nely Galan would be a good choice to bring back into the boardroom. It’s clear that Trump would have preferred to fire Lorenzo Lamas over Kevin, Geraldo Rivera, or Ian Ziering, but Jonas took that away from him. As such, he must be punished.

The concept of bringing someone like Ian Ziering back to “advocate” for you has been tried before. It’s never worked. Trump hates it. For good reason. You’re supposed to bring someone back who deserves to be fired. Bringing someone back who doesn’t deserved to be fired bothers Trump. Not good.

Jonas was also naïve to think that he could knock out Geraldo the week after a big win with basically no plan in place to unify his team against the man. Trump loves Fox News and doesn’t love Lorenzo Lamas. Kevin should have known this.

The tasks themselves weren’t very interesting. I think both tasks this episode were a bit of a toss up. Aside from Gilbert’s horrendously inappropriate joke, both teams were fairly on par, both hovering on the plane of mediocrity without being standout performers.

Which is sort of shame for the second task, since a board room centered around menstruation would have been more interesting than watching Gilbert Gottfried fall on his crude sword. Whether or not that’s more inappropriate that ousting the moon cycle of one of your own teammates remains to be seen.

Watching Vivica A. Fox tell Donald Trump that Olympic Gold Medalist Shawn Johnson was lazy because she was on her period is why this show is still worth watching in its seventh incarnation. Johnson was right to call her out afterwards. A potential fight between the two is the only reason why putting two tasks in the same episode looked to be a mistake. I might have rigged that one in favor of the men just to watch Fox defend the crudeness of her revelations.

Despite the Geraldo/Kevin antics coupled with Johnson’s moon blood, I don’t actually think this episode was negatively impacted by the decision to squeeze two tasks into one episode. The hour-long boardrooms work when there’s material to carry them. Neither boardroom in this episode looked like it would benefit from being twice its own length.

Kevin’s early exit throws a wrench in determining who the real contenders are. It’s obvious at this point that it’s Geraldo’s to lose. That’s a far cry from saying he actually will though.

We’ve seen uber-alpha contestants before like Piers Morgan, Omarosa Manigault-Stalworth, Annie Duke, Jon Rich, Star Jones, and Aubrey O’Day. What separates Morgan and Rich, who won, from the women who lost was that they had friends on the show. Morgan had Lennox Lewis and Carol Alt while Jon Rich had Lil Jon and Meatloaf. Geraldo has some people on his team who don’t appear to hate him, mainly Terrell Owens and Johnny Damon, but having two enemies this early on is going to be a problem.

Despite two victories, the women still didn’t look terribly dominant. Given the lack of talent on the men’s team, this isn’t a huge problem but Gosselin and Fox were both unimpressive project managers who probably would have both been fired if they’d lost. Brandi Glanville and Leeza Gibbons showed some flare as contenders, but it remains to be seen if they have what it takes to really separate themselves from the pack. I’d give Gibbons more of the benefit of the doubt that Glanville given her extensive Hollywood background.

If Geraldo is taken out, we’re likely looking at a repeat of season five, where Arsenio Hall and Clay Aiken flew under the radar to the finals. The vast majority of the contestants are neither standouts nor clear stinkers. Kevin’s firing should serve as a wake up call to Geraldo that simple mistakes can lead to one’s termination, but when the major force of opposition is from two primetime soap opera stars, I find it hard to believe he’ll actually care.

Monday

5

January 2015

0

COMMENTS

Celebrity Apprentice Recap: Episode One

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Celebrity Apprentice

It’s hard to believe it’s been two years since Celebrity Apprentice All-Star. Which means it’s been three years since we were introduced to an entirely new cast of D list “celebrities” to participate in Donald Trump’s faux reality competition. With stars like Kevin Jonas, Gilbert Gottfried, Shawn Johnson, and Terrell Owens on board, this season looks to be a strong one for the venerable rigged contest.

First episodes are always more about the contestants than the task itself, which makes fundraising challenges the perfect type to start with. It’s important to note that at no point was pie making a central focus of the task. The money is the only thing that matters.

Over the years, we’ve seen Trump and the show itself try to circumvent the fact that the battle of the rolodex doesn’t exactly make for suspenseful television. The past two seasons have featured project managers Paul Teutul Sr. and Trace Adkins bring in such large donations that they barely cared about the task itself at all.

This is where naivety can really come to bite you in the ass. It was pretty clear about thirty-five minutes into the two hour show that not only would the women lose, but that Keisha Knight Pulliam would be the one to go. What was unusual was how blatant Piers Morgan was in essentially telling her that social media didn’t matter at all. Not very Celebrity Apprentice-like to be upfront about it being all about the big money.

Starting off with a money challenge also shows the audience who the real players are right off the bat. It’s an unwritten rule that the PM has to pull most of the weight in a money challenge since his/her team is the only beneficiary of the money that people are presumably saving for themselves. Lorenzo Lamas isn’t going to hit his mother up for two hundred dollars if it’s going to Geraldo Rivera. Surviving a task like this is all about bringing in enough to not draw attention without wasting any of your own high rollers.

The task was pretty straight forward. No one expected Pulliam to beat Rivera. The boardroom was a little more interesting than expected. The Rivera/Jonas dynamic is one to watch out for, especially when Rivera is no longer PM next week. But there was a ton of potential for a Pulliam battle with Kate Gosselin, who had the weirdest boardroom rants since Lou Ferrigno and his 110%.

Raising chump change on a money task when you’re the project manager gets you fired plain and simple. But Gosselin could have been taken down by a savvy player like Omarosa. Problem was that Pulliam was boring. Gosselin had a chance to sink her own ship, but she’s entertaining and that’s what matters. There’s a reason why the show keeps people like Gary Busey, Dennis Rodman, and Rod Blagojevich around as long as humanly possible. They make for good TV.

It’s hard to see who the real frontrunners will be moving forward. Rivera’s attitude doesn’t seem like it will help him in the long haul. He looks destined for more of a Gene Simmons type tenure. Jonas is the most complete package of any of the contestants. He’s outspoken and has a lot of money. Johnny Damon could be a darkhorse, but the men don’t appear to have a ton of juggernauts on their team. It remains to be seen whether Sig Hansen will resemble Paul Teutul or Jesse James in terms of usefulness.

The women’s team is complicated. With two Real Housewives, two Olympic Gold Medalists, and two has-been TV personalities weighing down the team with contestants who have neither star power nor rich backers, Team Infinity doesn’t look very strong.

I don’t think the money will flow quite like it has without a deep roster of money laden celebrities. But the personalities are certainly there. Gottfried delivered right off the bat, looking like savvier Adam Carolla. Snowboarder Jamie Anderson showed charisma and personality. Even Gosselin was surprisingly likable until she started rambling in the boardroom. It should be a very exciting year for The Celebrity Apprentice.

Recaps will continue every Monday throughout the season. The best way to insure you never miss a post is to subscribe to ianthomasmalone.com or to like my Facebook page. Thanks for reading!

Saturday

27

December 2014

2

COMMENTS

The Case of the Cutter at Dunkin Donuts

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Social Issues

While much of Curb Your Enthusiasm’s humor is derived from the predicaments that Larry David gets himself into as a result of his inability to keep quiet when in the presence of a faux pas, we should take note that the world needs more people like him. Too often, we find the internet to be a dumping ground for instances where a person was wronged yet took to social media when the battle should have been waged in reality. Never being much of a hash tag activist myself, I decided to live the Larry David mantra and engage a man who wronged me at Dunkin Donuts.

The incident occurred at the Old Greenwich Dunkin Donuts, my personal favorite franchise of the popular Northeastern chain. I was second in line to a woman, who had finished her order and paid for it. The employee made the coffee and handed it to the woman, signifying a completed transaction to most who understand how businesses operate. Unfortunately for me, someone thought otherwise.

A man walked into the Dunkin Donuts and proceeded to the front of the counter. Being a regular at the establishment, the employee shot me a confused glance as I starred at the man, disdainful at the thought that this man had clearly not paid attention in kindergarten on the day that the concept of lines was explained. Before the employee could explain the breach of etiquette, the man said, “I’m with her,” pointing at the woman, who was presumably married to this rude piece of existence.

He proceeded to order a bacon, egg, and cheese. Patrons of Dunks know that these sandwiches are not only gross; they slow down the line especially when only one person is behind the counter. This being around noon and Old Greenwich not being a peak location at all hours of the day, this sandwich meant that it was going to be another couple of minutes before yours truly could get his large iced dark roast with a splash of milk and one sugar.

The problem was, being “with her” no longer signified anything for this man. The woman had her coffee and had already paid for it. This was a separate transaction. Sharing a bed with the woman who had just ordered does not represent a sense of ownership over all future orders at a business. But this man was either not aware of this or did not care. Perhaps a mixture of both?

Now I found myself in a predicament of my own. The employee had clearly demonstrated that she too, felt this man was demonstrating an abuse of power over his wife’s limited domain. But she’s a coffee shop employee. Not Pontius Pilate. This was my battle.

The man was pacing around Dunkin Donuts in the long duration between ordering a gross breakfast sandwich and receiving it. When we made eye contact, I decided to air my grievance at this abhorrent human being. Little did he know he was in for a bout of social justice.

“You know when you pay separately, you’re not really together,” I said to the man. Firm, but non confrontational. I wanted to give the man a chance to right his wrong. Sadly that was not to be.

He looked bewildered at this long haired brightly dressed young chap who called him out on his nonsense. “It’s not a big deal,” he said to me, clearly showing that he has final say on my opinions.

“Well, you ordered a sandwich which takes a couple of minutes to make,” I replied. Pausing for a second, I added, “I could have ordered and left in this amount of time. You sir, are a cutter.”

Those words must have melted into his heart of stone for he did not respond. He walked to the other side of the Dunks, clearly saddened by his bruised ego. His wife stood a few feet away from her, possibly contemplating divorce after witnessing what the public perceives of the man she agreed to unite with in Holy matrimony. We’ll never know.

I got an apology only from the employee, who hadn’t done anything to be sorry for and could not speak for the man, who declined to voice a further opinion of his actions. She and I have joked about the incident several times since. It’s good that laughter could come out of tragedy for I will never get those minutes back. I only hope that when I’m old and on my deathbed, thoughts of bacon, egg, and cheese’s are far from my mind.

I suppose the question you might ask is, was it worth it? Was the man right in saying it wasn’t a big deal? Should I have kept quiet with regards to the injustice?

The answers to those are yes, no, and no.

I feel great about the whole thing. That probably wouldn’t have been the case if I had just tweeted about it. The man did something wrong and now he knows that it didn’t go unnoticed. If the whole world were this vigilant, there would be far fewer things to complain about. Catharsis was achieved. Maybe that man changed his ways or maybe he was kicked out his house. Let’s hope he doesn’t cut again.

If you see something, say something.

Wednesday

17

December 2014

0

COMMENTS

Ranking The Office Christmas Episodes

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Pop Culture

While Christmas episodes are common for many TV shows, there aren’t too many that have them as seasonal mainstays. Perhaps it’s especially appropriate considering the original UK series ended with a Christmas Special. Christmas at Dunder Mifflin represented a time for humor, plenty of feels, and an excuse to congregate under the mistletoe, while usually drunk off of vodka or beet wine.

This list ranks the seven Christmas episodes. Note seasons one and four did not have Christmas themed episodes, as one was only six episodes and four was during the Writer’s Strike. As with all of these sorts of lists, the rankings are somewhat subjective. I encourage you to debate my findings in the comment section if you disagree.

“Christmas Wishes” (Season 8)

Surprise, surprise! “Christmas Wishes” was actually a high point in an otherwise terrible season, but it pales in comparison to most of the other Christmas episodes. The Jim/Dwight plotline deserves credit for putting a new spin on a tired gag, but ultimately the Erin/Andy mess drags the episode down.

It’s easy to forget how much of the show’s later seasons were tied up in the Andy/Erin romance, which was never as interesting as the show wanted it to be (it’s also featured prominently in “Secret Santa” and “Dwight Christmas,” despite the latter’s lack of Andy). This is an entertaining episode, but it’s easy to see why it’s at the bottom of the list.

“Moroccan Christmas” (Season 5)

“Moroccan Christmas” is another Christmas episode that doesn’t get much of its laughs from its A plot. Michael’s attempted intervention for Meredith wasn’t as funny as it could’ve been and probably should have been relegated to a different episode. Phyllis seems somewhat uncharacteristically mean in this episode, though as “Secret Santa” also shows that this tended to happen in isolated cases.

Dwight’s unicorn toy plotline provides the laughs from a storyline perspective. This episode is fueled by superb Kevin and Creed lines and also from Michael’s attempt to invent new mixed drinks such as the orange vod-jus-ka. Depending on how you feel about Andy, his embarrassing moments are also quite entertaining.

“Classy Christmas” (Season 7)

Being hour-long episodes, “Classy Christmas” and “A Benihana Christmas” are somewhat difficult to place as it’s harder to compare them to the regular length episodes. “Classy Christmas” is light on laughs as it focuses primarily on the return of Holly. As her return signaled the beginning of the end for Michael, this is certainly understandable.

It’s effective in its mission to tug at the heartstrings. The Jim/Dwight dynamic is hilarious while the Daryl subplot falls flat. Ultimately there’s enough here to like, but not as much to love. Besides Jim freaking out in the parking lot as he anticipates a mass snowballing from Dwight of course.

“Secret Santa” (Season 6)

This might be the best episode of the Michael and Jim as co-manager era, depending on how you feel about the morality of “Scott’s Tots.” Michael’s reaction to Phyllis as Jesus is Michael at his best. Angela supporting the presence of Jesus at the party was also a great subtle gag.

The episode also does a great job of showcasing some of Dwight’s subtleties. He’s not sparring with Jim or acting especially crazy, but he’s entertaining nonetheless. Phyllis threatening to bring Bob Vance into the equation was also hysterical. The big news of the sale of Dunder Mifflin was a nice touch and didn’t take away from the jokes at all.

“A Benihana Christmas” (Season 3)

The other Christmas episode to feature Michael feeling sad about a woman is also the other double length episode. This episode is also the first to really showcase Andy’s true character to someone other than Jim and Karen (which isn’t always a good thing). Jim and Pam pull off one of the most memorable Dwight pranks, which was surprising since Jim was dating Karen at the time.

The Jim/Pam tension along with Michael’s somber tone had a lot of potential to derail the laughs. But they’re pretty consistent through the extended episode. The highlight is without a doubt when Michael marks his date with a sharpie to tell her apart from her friend.

“Dwight Christmas” (Season 9)

This is the pick I’m going to get the most slack for without a doubt. While the show took a dive after Michael left, season 9 had quite a few standout episodes. But with the exception of the finale, none were as memorable as “Dwight Christmas.”

This episode serves as both a tribute to past Christmas episodes and a reminder as to why these were so cherished in the first place. Dwight’s “traditional” family Christmas was hilarious and the Jim/Pam moments were their highpoint in an otherwise shaky season for the couple. Daryl also shines as he drunkenly broods over Jim’s apparent neglect with regards to the Philadelphia sports job.

“Christmas Party” (Season 2)

This one doesn’t need much explaining. Yankee swap is classic Michael as is his overspending on a gift coupled with his disdain for Phyllis’ homemade oven mitt. Creed’s old man coat rivals Kevin’s foot bath (a gift for himself) for best gift of the episode.

“Christmas Party” also features some of the best Jim/Pam moments and played a big part in their eventual courtship. This episode is more than just the best Christmas episode, it’s one of the best of the whole series. The only thing that could have made it better is if Dwight kept the teapot to use nasally in future episode.

So there are the rankings. Disagree with my order? Comment below. Since it’s the Holiday season, I figure I can get away with pointing out that my book, Five College Dialogues, makes a great gift. Cheers!

Friday

12

December 2014

0

COMMENTS

Top 40 Radio Stations Do Not Belong in the Yoga Studio

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Social Issues

Like the countless styles of yoga, there are many choices for music to accompany one’s practice. Being largely a matter of personal preference, it’s hard to really reject certain genres entirely. I know teachers who frequently play rap music and heavy metal and it works. That might not be for everyone, but an instructor that makes that choice typically understands that it must work toward the larger image that they wish to project for their class. If you want to play Judas Priest or Wu Tang, you need to own that decision.

I recently took a class where the instructor put the radio on to a top 40 station to accompany her class. Being somewhat of a countercultural figure, naturally I wasn’t too amused by this decision, which was initially exacerbated by the instructor’s tardiness. This played into the bigger problem that was radiating from said instructor.

Carelessness.

Music is a big part of a yoga class. It sets the tone and is the constant presence that lingers over each student when the teacher isn’t speaking (which should happen at times). It isn’t more important than say, the actual yoga, but it’s easily something that can derail an entire class.

Adam Levine makes headlines for his love of yoga. That’s great. Doesn’t mean that Maroon 5’s “Animals” with lyrics like “You’re a drug that’s killing me I cut you out entirely. But I get so high when I’m inside of you” belongs in a yoga studio.

Which doesn’t mean that Maroon 5 needs to be banned entirely. Just that songs that reference obsessive tendencies, drugs, and coitus should be screened and promptly removed from any playlist destined to be played in yoga. That’s the downside of playing a radio station. You don’t get to pick what comes on and with something like top 40, you can be sure that much of it is inappropriate for your class.

I put a great deal of effort into my playlists, which are generally a mix of 60s rock, 80s New Wave, and Indie music. It’s not effort that every instructor needs to have, but it makes a difference. Over the years, I’ve got as many compliments for my music as the yoga itself (make of that what you will). As a big fan of The Smiths, I know that they only have a couple of songs that can be played in a yoga setting. So “Stretch Out and Wait” gets played while “Some Girls are Bigger than Others” does not.

That’s not to say I haven’t made playlist mistakes. Once I played “Yesterday” by The Beatles, which came on during seated poses which didn’t help matters. Needless to say, I made the room laugh by apologizing for playing a sad song during hip openers.

Each yoga class should in some way, shape, or form reflect the personality of the instructor. What does Top 40 radio reflect? The United States of Generica? Something you can hear anywhere? I think so.

You might at this point think that I’m being too harsh on Top 40, especially the songs that might be acceptable. What if the instructor loves Taylor Swift? That’s fine. The presence of TSwift should be because the instructor wanted her there. Not because she happened to be on the radio (which oddly enough didn’t happen in this class despite the low odds).

Yoga classes take effort. They should also look like they take effort. People are giving you their money and their time for a service. Throwing on the radio shows that you couldn’t be bothered to be in control of your class. Which in turn might inspire a student to stay home with a yoga DVD and Ms. Swift.

When you don’t put any effort into parts of your class, it shows. Who wants to hold a balancing pose while the insufferable Calvin Harris is blasting in the background? Not I!

Friday

5

December 2014

0

COMMENTS

Could the Onion Knight Bring a Belated Gift to the Bastard Wedding?

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog, Game of Thrones, Pop Culture

While the separation of the Stark children can lead one to forget about the importance of the North in general, excluding The Wall, much of A Dance With Dragons alludes to the depth of the Northern conflict. There’s been plenty of blog and podcast speculation on the Battle of Ice and for good reason. At first glance, we tend to forget about minor houses like Ryswell, Dustin, and Cerwyn in favor of speculation surrounding the more important characters. I initially set out to write an overview of my thoughts on the outcome of the battle, but instead want to focus on a more specific x factor in all of this who could change everything.

This article will approach things more from a literary/storyline perspective. There isn’t a lot of textual evidence so most of this should be treated as educated speculation. I’ll include some links at the bottom for more information on the Battle of Ice.

When we left Davos Seaworth in A Dance With Dragons, he was about to embark on a dangerous mission to secure the loyalties of House Manderly for Stannis’ cause. This involves traveling to the dangerous island of Skagos to retrieve Rickon Stark, who set out there with Osha and Shaggydog after A Clash With Kings. We don’t really know if they’re actually there, but for the sake of the storyline, I think it’s fairly safe to assume they made it.

There’s something odd about the placement of Davos’ chapters in A Dance With Dragons. They’re over well before the end of the book. Now you can argue that this doesn’t have to mean much because there’s a ton of characters and other major POV characters like Bran get similar shafts. But Davos’ quest has immediate ramifications to the story line while characters like Bran and Arya play more into the bigger picture.

The real question is, could Davos have enough time to go to Skagos, get Rickon, and make it to Winterfell before the battle?

Let’s look at a map and see.

Credit to James Sinclair of A Wiki of Ice and Fire

Skagos is a bit far from White Harbor. Davos doesn’t really know anything about the island. It’s also kind of far from Winterfell and we don’t know that Osha and Rickon even want to go with Davos. It’s also winter and Davos isn’t an expert in Northern geography. Things rarely go perfectly in these books and they would need to for Davos to factor into the equation. Doesn’t look too promising, right?

Maybe.

Time is tricky in A Song of Ice and Fire. The events of Robert’s Rebellion are supposed to take place in just a year, which leaves plenty of discrepancies that haven’t really been explained. Factor in the fact that Davos is an experienced smuggler and Osha knows the area and you’ll see that we have what appears to be the best makings to pull off a job like this. Davos is the man who got past the Tyrell blockade to save Storm’s End after all.

The other kicker is the start of the battle itself. It hasn’t started yet and doesn’t appear to be completey imminent either. Stannis has his hands full with what to do with the Karstark’s and the Greyjoy’s. To answer the question of where or not its possible Davos to make it, the best answer is that it can happen if Martin wants it to happen.

Another thing to consider is what would happen if The Winds of Winter picks up with Davos in Skagos or even further behind in his journey. That pretty much takes this particular plotline out of the equation for the whole book, as we’d likely be treated to another traveling narrative. This plotline isn’t completely needed to fuel the Northern story, but its absence would create somewhat of a holding pattern that doesn’t seem too terribly likely with what’s happening at the Wall and in Winterfell.

Davos isn’t the only x factor in all of this. There’s another character whose placement is important when considering the likelihood of the return of a Stark to Winterfell.

Wyman Manderly

What’s he doing at the Bastard Wedding? Why does this obese man want to make the long trek in bad weather to attend a wedding of people he hates? Couldn’t he have sent someone else with his Frey pies and added that to the list of things he does to piss Roose Bolton off?

Yes, but he didn’t and that means something.

Davos’ quest is all about securing Manderly’s loyalties and yet Manderly seems to have a death wish at Winterfell. Bolton knows he’s up to no good. Is there really a scenario where Manderly isn’t a surefire goner in this battle?

It’s right up Martin’s alley to have Davos show up with Rickon right as Manderly bites the dust, or snow if you will. Which doesn’t really mean that Manderly’s army doesn’t defect, but the cause would be without its biggest Northern supporter still alive save for the captured Greatjon Umber. If Manderly is a goner and Davos doesn’t show up, doesn’t that sort of take some of the fun out of the White Harbor chapters?

Outcomes of the Battle of Ice are tough to speculate. It could go many ways. It’s hard to envision a scenario where Stannis loses, but doesn’t die. What does Davos do without Stannis? It’s not like he’s a throwaway character. With what’s happening at the Wall and with Mance fooling around, winning doesn’t necessarily mean all is well in the land of the Mannis either. Having Rickon doesn’t mean that all of the other houses will flock to his cause either. This whole thing is a mess, but that’s a big part of why it’s so entertaining.

Here’s my simple speculation for the outcome of the Battle just to give you an idea where all I think all of this could go (I am not at all confident that this is how it will actually go). Stannis wins after the Umber’s and Manderly’s unite behind him, Roose dies, and Ramsay flees back to the Dreadfort after seeing that Rickon’s presence ruins everything and they Frey’s won’t support him. This gives the fans an outcome without concluding anything in the North.

But I am confident that Rickon will be a factor. Why? Because now is the time where he matters. Wizard Bran, Azor Azai Jon, and Littlefinger backed Sansa aren’t part of the equation just yet, but likely will be down the road. Stannis needs some sort of boost to keep him in the picture, unless the Battle of Ice is his last stand. Which it could be, but if it is then where does Rickon come in at all? The Onion Knight should deliver because that’s what Davos does. He’s one of the series more bankable characters and easily the best person for this particularly job besides possibly Drogon.

So here’s my speculation. Is any of this hard evidence? Not when you compare it to something like R + L = J. But the depth of those theories is a big part of why ASOIAF is so special and not every single thing that happens requires a prophetic foreshadowing. This one’s foreshadowing comes from surface level logic. Thanks for reading and please leave a comment with your own speculation/thoughts if you feel so inclined.

Here are some links to check out for Battle of Ice related content

https://cantuse.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/the-mannifesto/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syFM7936yMs

https://bryndenbfish.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/a-complete-analysis-of-the-upcoming-siege-of-winterfell-part-1/

Thursday

4

December 2014

0

COMMENTS

Christmas in ‘Nam: An Alternative Pageant Narrative

Written by Ian Thomas Malone, Posted in Blog

The Christmas Pageant play is a staple in churches around the world. While the second greatest story ever told (naturally deferring to the original Star Wars trilogy) certainly deserves such widespread attention, I thought a modern update might be appropriate for children to perform this Christmas. Enjoy!

Narrator: December 24th, 1974. Joseph, an American journalist, leads Mary, a pregnant nurse, away from the swamps of Saigon, where U.S. forces are under siege from the Viet Cong. Mary fled her company once for fear of punishment and for the safety of her unborn child and found Joseph, whose anti-war sentiments lead him to be cast away from the company he was covering. Fearing the birth is nearing, Mary and Joseph trudge through the swamps in search of shelter.

Mary: Joseph, it’s dangerous here. Are you sure you know where you’re going?

Joseph: Yes, we trudged through this area a couple of weeks ago. I remember it vividly. There’s an abandoned camp somewhere around here. We should be able to find shelter and maybe a MRE if we’re lucky. Those things last forever you know.

Mary: And what if we’re captured?

Joseph: What would the enemy want with a reporter and a pregnant nurse? It’s the Americans we should be worried about. They’ll spin this somehow. Say I knocked you up and hang me.

Mary: Oh Joseph, you can’t think like that. You’ll be a hero when we get home. Everyone will know it.

Joseph: Yea that’ll be the day. Look, up ahead. A tent. Maybe someone will help.

Joseph approaches the tent. An old Vietnamese man appears.

Joseph: Excuse me. My wife and I are traveling and need shelter for the night. Is there room in your tent for us?

Old Man: No. No room.

Joseph: Please, she’s pregnant. I’ll help you forage for food and firewood. Just let us stay.

Old man pulls out a gun

Old Man: I said no room. Go away American scum.

Mary: What did he say?

Joseph: He said he was having people over to watch M*A*S*H later and doesn’t have any room for us.

Mary: Oh dear. I don’t think I can go on much longer.
Joseph: We’ll find something Mary. I know we will.

Joseph and Mary walk for a few steps until they see a makeshift campsite.

Mary: Joseph, I think I see something up ahead. It looks like a campsite of sorts.

Joseph: It looks too disorganized to be the work of the army. Unless something happened. I don’t like the looks of it.

Mary: We have to try. The baby is coming soon. I have a good feeling about it.

They approach the campsite. An army officer appears from a tent.

Soldier: Civilians? What are you doing out here? It’s dangerous.

Joseph: Please, my wife is pregnant and we need shelter. Do you have any room in your tent?

Solider: This is a warzone. The Viet Cong could show up at any moment. An outpost is no place for a pregnant woman.

Joseph: We have nowhere else to go. Please. We’re tired and hungry.

Soldier: Well all right. There’s room under the tarp for two more. It’s not much, but it’ll keep you dry.

Narrator: Mary gave birth in the middle of the night to a baby boy. Joseph, the soldiers, and various wildlife gathered to celebrate the joyous occasion. Danger lurked as the Vietcong approached.

Scout: Sir. The enemy is approaching.

Soldier: Load up men. Let’s do what God put us here to do. Wait until they’re out of the swamp.

Splashes in the swamp are heard as the Vietcong approach

Solider: Fire on my mark.

The Vietcong cry out

Angel: Don’t shoot. I bring you tidings of great joy. The boy that was born here tonight, the baby to be known as Jesus. He is the savior that will end this war and all wars after it. Lay down your weapons and share the good news.

Solider: We must go to command and tell them what we have seen.

The Vietcong nod in agreement. A rustling in the bush is heard. Three men appear.

Red Cross Volunteers: Don’t worry. The Angel guided us to you. We bring the gifts of Playboy magazines, MREs, and toilet paper.

Mary: Hosanna in the highest!

The cast sings, “Light my Fire” by The Doors

← Older Entries

Newer Entries →