The Son of Feeney

Teen Wolf as Conformist Propaganda

2010-05-31T12:25:13-07:00

All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment…

- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Recently I had a conversation regarding a previous review wherein I questioned the plausibility of "Doing the Urkel." As presented in that review, my main contentions with Doing the Urkel is the allegedly spontaneous nature of the dance and the fact that the dance was performed to an original song performed by Urkel himself. The ridiculousness is beyond comprehension. My cohort, however, challenged me to come up with any movie that presented a choreographed dance sequence that was indeed plausible. Dear Readers, I hereby present the first of two. As you have probably guessed, I am talking about Teen Wolf.

In the scene embedded below, the Teen Wolf arrives at the spring dance to much fanfare. The D.J. quickly puts on the record "Big Bad Wolf" by Bunny and the Wolf Sisters and the Teen Wolf begins his dance routine. Soon the whole dance is performing along. How is this any more plausible than Doing the Urkel? First, in the scene leading up to the dance, Boof laments that she is surprised they had not renamed the dance "Teen Wolf Ball." Clearly, Teen Wolf's appearance at the dance was widely anticipated. Excitement regarding Teen Wolf's possible antics was likely the talk of the town. Accordingly, the D.J. likely knew all about Teen Wolf and searched his collection for any songs containing the word "wolf."

Second, Teen Wolf's dance moves are not complicated and could fit with nearly any song the D.J. had selected. It takes the assembled masses only a couple of seconds to catch on to the dance and emulate the moves. Unlike the Urkel, no vocal instructions are required. Finally, while the rest of the dancers perform only the basic maneuvers, Teen Wolf brilliantly freelances, incorporating leaps and spins into his routine. This makes sense as presumably he has practiced at home - knowing he would perform - and, as demonstrated on the basketball court, he is far more nimble than his classmates. Unlike the Urkel, Teen Wolf's choreographed dance routine is logically satisfying.

But the above dance scene raises substantial and troubling questions regarding the film's theme. In fact, for all of the film's magnificence, the film's message seems to be decidedly conformist. To grasp this point, first we must establish what the film is NOT saying. The film is not an exaggerated metaphor for puberty. Clearly, Scott is going through some massive changes in his body. Though Scott is ashamed of his condition at first, soon he is embraced - neigh, celebrated - by his classmates. Similarly, Scott's wolfman condition does not represent a handicap he must overcome. Instead, the Teen Wolf makes Scott wildly popular and a far superior athlete. Further, as suggested in the above scene, the Teen Wolf may represent a struggle with drugs or alcohol. Scott laments that everyone "expects" him to be the Wolf and that "everyone likes" the Wolf. By comparison, Scott is only "average." One could argue that Scott's struggle is a metaphor for drug and alcohol abuse where substances become a social lubricant on which one relies. But other than some fearful - or even hateful - reactions, the Wolf does not seem to pose any real downside. To the contrary, the Wolf heightens Scott's senses and abilities. Finally, Teen Wolf is not a tale of being comfortable with one's self. Quite the opposite. Though the Teen Wolf is a part of Scott, he is constantly challenged to simply be Scott. To do things as "himself" and not the Wolf.

But why? The Teen Wolf is a far superior athlete. Scott can turn from the Wolf and back at will. By the end of the movie he is in complete control of his gifts. Yet in the penultimate scene, Scott gives into all of those who clearly envy his gifts and plays his final basketball game in his human form. The Wolf could easily dominate the game. Sure, the Wolf became selfish and took things too far. But why couldn't Scott learn that lesson and still play as the Wolf? Couldn't the Wolf use his new understanding to make his teammates better? Better yet, why should the vastly superior Wolf defer to teammates like Chubbs? Chubbs is destined to be a life-long loser. The Wolf is a winner. But that line of thinking would undermine the filmmaker's odious message.

Clearly, the the film would rather promote conformity and the acceptance of mediocrity - even weakness. In the above scene, Boof tries to convince Scott to take her to the dance instead of the Wolf. Scott laments, "Why do I have to be like everyone else?" But he is undeniably unlike everyone else. Indeed, Scott is one of the few humans with the capacity to, using Nietzsche's words, "overcome man." He has the capacity to be Nietzsche's Übermensch. The Teen Wolf has limitless gifts. His Teen Wolf form is vastly superior to his human form. Notably, Styles is cast as a clown because he encourages Scott's gifts. But in the end, Scott submits to Boof's and the town's wishes to hold him back. Shamefully, he plays his final game as Scott instead of the Wolf. By notable comparison, Superman is an American cultural icon. But not because he hides behind Clark Kent. It is because he uses his superior gifts. Teen Wolf encourages us to ignore our gifts and toil in mediocrity. It asks us to submit to the shackles of mankind instead of striving to be something greater. As such, it is a conformist piece of trash.

Patrick Swayze: A Reflection on a True Professional

2009-09-15T21:19:38-07:00

"Nobody puts Baby in a corner." He actually said that line. In a movie. And it worked. Such was the genius of Patrick Wayne Swayze. He took on borderline preposterous roles and approached them with such an earnestness, such an emotional depth, that he was able to create cinematic brilliance. He formed fully fleshed out human beings from characters other actors would have made a cartoon. The roles he took were unconventional. The bouncer with a philosophy degree from NYU. The zen master leader of a gang of surfing bank robbers. A teenager leading the counterattack on Russian soldiers. A Catskills resort dance instructor with an edge and a heart of gold. While many of these roles seem like a potential punchline, Mr. Swayze made them into real people. And he did so with a commitment and determination that Hollywood too often lacks. Mr. Swayze approached even his humorous roles with the same sense of purpose. When he hosted Saturday Night Live in 1990, Mr. Swayze starred in a legendary skit in which he competed against Chris Farley for a spot with the Chippendale's dancers. What makes the skit so remarkable is the level to which Mr. Swayze commits to the moment. He seems legitimately threatened by Farley's antics. It is brilliant television.

At the same time, Mr. Swayze seemed to approach the industry with a wide eyed wonder that suggested he may not even be aware of the magnitude of his accomplishments. He may have been oblivious to the shadow he cast among his peers. None of Mr. Swayze's contemporaries could have played Dalton convincingly. The same holds true for Johnny Castle and Bodhi. His career was remarkable yet under appreciated.

Simply put, on Monday, September 14, 2009, the world lost an incredible actor and a true professional. We here at the Son of Feeney will miss him deeply.

TSOF Reader Emails: The Mortgage Crisis, the Engel Hate Machine, and Natalie Imbruglia

2009-07-28T21:32:21-07:00

Hark! I present another addition of Reader Emails!

From Jack:

Son of Feeney:

I have noticed a marked absence of new posts lately. Your performance is shameful and a complete disgrace. You should be flogged in a public square.

Good day sir!

TSOF:

It is true that I have been letting you down, kind reader. But in my defense, this country is in the middle of a crippling recession. As you can probably imagine, this dire economy is particularly hard on a self-employed media scholar focusing on the under-appreciated sitcoms of the 1990's. Unfortunately, the grant money has run dry and the Son of Feeney has been forced to return to his day job as a claims adjuster for a national insurance conglomerate. There, your faithful reviewer is forced to work under the oppressive regime of the manager Bob Ewbanks. Mr. Ewbanks is a man who finds nothing comical about his own name because he and the game show host "spell our last names differently." Apparently, pronunciation is of little value to our fair Ewbanks. Worse, this particular operation has a rather restrictive Internet policy that prevents this reviewer from carrying on his more important tasks in this blog while at the office.

It is this unfortunate situation that lately has kept this reviewer from fulfilling what is obviously his destiny - providing long overdue analysis of important television programs. If anyone out in reader land has the power to rectify this sad state of affairs, please email solutions to sonoffeeney@gmail.com.

Faithfully submitted,

The Son of Feeney

Speaking of the recession -

From Earl Johansson:

Son of Feeney:

You were spot on in your mailbag when you addressed the living situation of the Tanner family. There is no way the Tanner clan could afford that house. I mean, how much money could Joey and Jesse contribute from heir radio gig? How do you think the mortgage crisis impacted the Tanner household?

TSOF:

Earl,

You are spot on. I am guessing Danny talked his way into some kind of 15 year ARM and then when the crash hit, was buried underneath his horrible financial planning. I am guessing he looks back at his decision in the episode "A House Divided" with deep regret. In "AHD," Mr. Bond, a wealthy industrialist, wants to buy the Tanner house because it is the house where he grew up. He offers a sizable amount of money and the entire extended family is excited about an impending move. All except Michelle that is. Michelle wants everyone to stay under one roof and refuses to let go of the obviously cramped arrangement. She, therefore, employs her gang of friends to play tricks on Mr. Bond to make him believe that something is wrong with the house. Mr. Bond is not fooled by their chicanery but Danny is moved by Michelle's devotion to the house. Danny foolishly calls off the sale.

Of course today Michelle would have long since left the house. But now Danny is upside down on a house he can no longer afford. Worse, the bank may have foreclosed.

Your question also raises the interesting question of whether the sitcoms studied in this blog may have facilitated the mortgage crisis. Certainly Danny Tanner could not afford his home. But neither could Carl Winslow. Carl lived in a large two story house in a good neighborhood in Chicago on a police officer's salary. In Boy Meets World, the Matthews lived in a large three bedroom house in a nice neighborhood in Philadelphia on a grocer's salary. Clearly these fictional households raised the expectations for an entire generation of Americans. That generation followed in the footsteps of Carl Winslow and Alan Matthews and bought similarly outsized homes. With these role models, it was only a matter of time before we achieved market failure in the real estate sector.

From William, Bethel, CN:

Dear Son of Feeney,

Don't you think you were a little harsh on Peter Engel? He may be misguided at times but I would hardly call his empire a "hate machine."

TSOF:

I disagree rather harshly. The only way that Engel could have possibly risen to the top of Saturday morning is if a number of NBC executives shared your apologist attitude. Peter Engel spewed forth hateful rhetoric on a regular basis. My recent column is merely the tip of a very large ice berg. Seeing that you apparently need convincing feast your eyes on this hateful display:

Clearly Engel is making a strident attack on the homosexual community. Not only do Slater and Zack each use a derogatory slang, but they direct the slur towards Screech. As discussed in this blog, any comparison to Screech is an insult standing alone.

Furthermore, this reviewer is disgusted by the fact that Engel's hateful rhetoric toward the homosexual community certainly served him well at at Pat Robertson's Regent University. The whole thing is a travesty.

From ???:

TSOF,

While I enjoy your analysis of bad sitcoms, have you ever considered analyzing music?

TSOF:

As an initial note, I must dispute your categorization of the programs addressed in this oeuvre as "bad." Clearly these shows express a rich tapestry that works on levels you have not considered.

More importantly, however, I will admit to dabbling in some amateur analysis of popular music. For instance, the other day I was traveling with a co-worker, Gayle, to investigate a car accident so I could do some groundbreaking claims adjusting. Gayle insisted on driving and further insisted on playing an easy listening radio station. At one point during the trek, Gayle's interesting story about her sick cat was interrupted by the song "Torn" by Natalie Imbruglia. Gayle squealed with delight, declaring that she "love[d] this song." I then sat as Gayle performed her own admirable rendition of the vocal track along with Miss Imbruglia. At the end of the song, Gayle stated that she believed the song was "about lost love" and asked what your faithful reviewer/claims adjuster thought that the song was about.

"Gayle, it is fairly obvious that the song is about lost love," I stated. "More precisely, however, the song is a tale of an unchaste woman who pursued a relationship with a puritanical suitor. While the narrator of the song was fully aware that her puritanical suitor believed her to be unsullied in the ways of love, she never told him the truth until it was too late."

"What does that mean?" queried Gayle.

"It means the girl lost the guy because he thought she was a virgin and she wasn't. OK, Gayle?"

But it was not OK with Gayle and she pushed the issue, insisting that I was wrong. Gayle then refused to talk with me for several hours, though occasionally she accused me of having a "filthy mind." Honestly this arrangement suited me fine. But, in order to prove my point, I present the bridge and chorus of Torn with my analysis in brackets:

There’s nothing where he used to lie [He's gone - obviously]
My inspiration has run dry [Pointless filler]
That’s what’s going on, nothings right, I’m torn [Crudely put, nothing is right because her hymen is torn. The guy took off, her inspiration has run dry, etc. It sounds like a pretty bad day and all because she is not a virgin]
I’m all out of faith, this is how I feel [The puritanical nature of her suitor makes her question her religion and faith when he dumps her]
I’m cold and I am shamed lying naked on the floor [Note that the narrator is feeling a lot of shame while naked. Once again pretty obvious stuff here]
Illusion never changed into something real [Her suitor's illusion that she was a virgin could not undo her promiscuous past]
I’m wide awake and I can see the perfect sky is torn [Unlike the suitor, who operated under an illusion, the narrator sees things clearly - her hymen (the perfect sky - a rather forced metaphor) is torn]
I’m all out of faith, this is how I feel [addressed above]
I’m cold and I’m ashamed bound and broken on the floor [Now she is bound and broken. An allusion to her licentious past]
You’re a little late, I’m already torn [The narrator's bitter words of parting to her lost love. The guy is too late. She had already fornicated with several men prior to the suitor in question's arrival]

From John Wilkes Poof:

So is Screech the most pathetic character in television history?

TSOF:

JWP,

This question got me thinking. Screech hangs out with the cool kids, is almost always included in the gang's activities, and even scored Violet. There are definitely more pathetic characters. The question is who. Therefore, over the next few months, the Son of Feeney will present a countdown and analysis of the most pathetic characters in history.

With that, I must close this edition of Reader Emails. The Son of Feeney will be attending a conference for the rest of this week so posting may be sparse over the next few weeks.

Peter Engel's Relentless Assault on Urban Culture

2009-07-14T07:44:28-07:00

In 1988, Peter Engel produced a television series for the Disney Channel entitled Good Morning, Miss Bliss. GMMB starred English actress Hayley Mills as Miss Bliss, a teacher at a middle school in Indianapolis, Indiana. It is hard to imagine a premise less likely to offend or intrude upon the sensibilities of urban culture. One year later, however, Engel retooled GMMB for NBC's Saturday morning schedule. The resulting show, Saved by the Bell, launched an understated but clear attack on urban culture as SBBT would consistently incorporate lamentable attempts at urban culture into an otherwise overtly suburban show. After four seasons of subtly undermining urban culture, Engel used the success of SBTB to unleash a more direct assault with the ridiculous City Guys program.

Saved by the Bell focused on the adventures of a group of suburbanite teenagers living safe and comfortable existences in Palisades, California. None of the characters faced the struggles that define urban culture. The setting, Bayside, appeared almost wholly caucasian. The notable exception to this rule was Lisa Turtle, the lone African-American in the main cast of characters. Strictly avoiding urban overtones, however, Lisa is the daughter of two surgeons and is perhaps the richest character on the show. Lisa is the school fashion plate and several episodes revolve around Lisa's notorious excesses at the mall.

The only other recurring African-American character is Ollie Creekly, a gravelly-voiced nerd who often wore suspenders and a bow tie. Needless to say, neither Lisa nor Ollie represented anything remotely close to urban sensibilities. Despite the lack of urban culture at Bayside, the school delighted at engaging in hip hop music. The Bayside gang's rapping is so horrible, so mortifying, that Engel clearly intended their efforts to be cruel mockery.

One example of this derision occurs in "Cream for a Day." In that episode, Bayside holds a pep rally at the Max. In an effort to get the school fired up, Jesse, Kelly, and Lisa perform perhaps the lamest rap ever performed by anyone under the age of 25 while Slater lays down a beatbox. The rap includes inane lines such as "B buh B buh B, Go Bayside!" It is awful beyond words. In another reprehensible example, and as previously discussed in this oeuvre, in the episode the "Fabulous Belding Boys," actor Raf Mauro performs what is easily the lamest rap ever.

Despite these onslaughts against urban culture, Engle's desire for horrific rapping remained unabated. Accordingly, on November 14, 1992, SBBT produced the episode "Snow White and the Seven Dorks." In "Snow White," the drama club must come up with a play. When Screech suggests the story of Snow White, it is readily dismissed as child's play. Mr. Bainbridge, however, challenges the gang to reinvent the tale into a more modern presentation. Kelly then suggests that they perform a "rap version" of Snow White. Stunningly, Mr. Bainbridge declares the idea "brilliant." Strangely, the rest of the drama club quickly falls in line with this decidedly un-brilliant farce and produces Snow White and the Seven Dorks.

The episode reaches the peak of its absurdity during Jessie's audition for Snow White. Feeling uncomfortable with the perceived sexist overtones of the role, Jessie changes the script, concocting new lines like "Well you better wise up because you're way outdated; and this Snow White is liberated." From there the episode devolves into a banal love triangle as both Kelly and Slater believe that Jessie and Zack are falling for each other as the two leads in the play. Slater even joins the play as the eighth dork, "Studdly." The episode ends with all of the gang's problems resolved through the magic of rapping theater. It is one of the true low points of the entire series.

The problem is obvious. Engel let his zest for ridiculing urban culture trump the creative merits of the show itself. Not surprisingly, filming of the original Saved by the Bell wrapped within a month of the taping of Snow White and the Seven Dorks. Apparently the series simply could not survive Engel's perverse need to degrade other cultures.

The end of SBBT, however, did little to slow the Engel hate machine. Not satisfied with occasionally mocking urban culture, Engel launched a direct attack with the ludicrous City Guys program. Airing on Saturday morning from 1997 until 2001, City Guys revolved around a diverse group of good looking teenagers in an inner city high school. The show came complete with a rap theme song (C-I-T-Y you can see why; City Guys!) and intense urban situations. For example in one episode, Jamal is visited by his uncle, a former Black Panther. Jamal quickly becomes militant and turns his back on his white friend Chris. By the episode's conclusion, however, the whole gang learns an important lesson about reverse racism and tolerance. This episode is callously entitled "Jamal X." In another episode, Jamal buys a gun after he is robbed. That episode is entitled "Jamal Got His Gun."

The only word to describe these episodes is "outrageous." Mr. Engel's contemptuous message is delivered loud and clear - urban culture serves only as fodder to entertain children on Saturday mornings. The question remains, however, why did NBC tolerated Engel's ever bolder disdain? And why did NBC allow Mr. Engel to shape Saturday morning programming where his hateful ideas were most likely to find an impressionable audience? Thankfully, in 2001 NBC pulled the plug on City Guys and Engel's Saturday morning reign of terror. Notably, Engel moved on from television to serve as the dean of the School of Communication and the Arts at Pat Robertson's Regent University. The Son of Feeney would be fascinated to hear tales of his teaching style.

TSOF Rants: On Michael Bay

2009-07-10T08:11:23-07:00

Editor's Note: Like many readers, the Son of Feeney was out of town for the holiday weekend. During his travels he had no access to his muse, the television. Accordingly, this week the Son of Feeney will be presenting a series of off-topic Rants. For reasons unknown, this rant seems particularly acerbic.

Currently, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is the top box office draw in America. This situation is unfortunate for America. You see, every time someone buys a ticket to a Michael Bay movie, the terrorists win. Undoubtedly, Mr. Bay's movies are mindless pieces of trash. If this were the only problem, his films would have no impact on the destiny of this country. Unfortunately, the problem lies much deeper.

Granted, this reviewer recognizes that he is far from the only critic of Mr. Bay's movies. The blogosphere is replete with angry rants and harsh condemnation levied against Mr. Bay. I am unique, however, in the specificity of my hatred. I hate Mr. Bay because he is seemingly incapable of human empathy. In each of his films, he depicts scenes of cataclysmic human carnage, often completely peripheral to the story (i.e., collateral damage), without a trace of heartbreak, sorrow, or any other human emotion. He then routinely uses only animals, not humans, in order to drive home an emotional point.

Mr. Bay often defends his films (if that is even the correct word) by arguing that they are mere "popcorn movies." The problem with this categorization is that it allows Mr. Bay to shift the argument away from the most offensive aspects of his movies. This reviewer does not have any problem with the idea that a filmaker can make a movie to which audience members can mindlessly snack while being entertained. My problem exits in the fact that Mr. Bay believes that this is what he is doing. Untrue. In addition to being mindless, Mr Bay's movies are completely devoid of compassion and tear at the very social fabric underpinning our society. Mr. Bay hones this craft to such a degree that it borders on sinister.

This reviewer was first disturbed by this phenomenon in Mr. Bay's movies during a viewing of Armageddon. Near the beginning of Armageddon, there is a scene in which a meteor shower hits New York City. The destruction is profound. Immediately prior to the meteor strike, however, the audience is introduced to a man walking his dog. In a moment of comic relief the dog is attacking a street vendor's wares. Once the shower hits, panic fills the street. In a vivid and horrifying moment, Mr. Bay depicts the Chrysler Building ripped in two by a meteor as human bodies rain from the sky. It is a truly disturbing image. As the shower subsides, Mr. Bay does not somberly show the wreckage or any survivor story. Instead, Mr. Bay shows the dog's leash extending down a wide hole in the street where a meteor struck. As the camera pans down the hole, we see the dog is safe and sound and is gently hanging from its leash. Mr. Bay clearly intends the audience to feel awash in relief. Apparently we are supposed to ignore the fact that the street vendor - a human being - has clearly been vaporized by the meteor. We are not supposed to give a second though to the families of the people flung from their desks in the Chrysler Building only to plummet to their ultimate demise. Apparently as long as the dog is fine, nothing truly bad could have happened. It is twisted outlook on the world.

It is clear that Mr. Bay suffers from some form of anti-social disturbance. It is possible that he suffers from alexithymia. Alexithymia is a state of deficiency in understanding, processing, or describing emotions. The other, more likely, possibility is that Mr. Bay is a psychopath. Here, Mr. Bay can appear to possess and/or understand emotions - he clearly manipulates the audience's emotion through the dog - but lacks an ability for the compassion or sympathy that leads to empathy.

Based on the insensitivity present in Armageddon, this reviewer was outraged when Mr. Bay took on the story of Pearl Harbor. At that point, even Mr. Bay's "popcorn movie" excuse fell by the wayside. Mr. Bay was now taking his warped perception of human emotions and applying it to actual tragic events. How could a man whose only emotional hook is the use of a seemingly-dead-dog-who-somehow-survived tackle such a harrowing and historical event? Through the use of a dog of course. After the attack on Pearl Harbor in the movie, Mr. Bay pans across the harbor. There are the bodies of sailors everywhere in the harbor. But out of this carnage we see a dog that had been introduced earlier swimming to safety. He is fine! Never mind the bodies floating there!

The problem with this scene is obvious. This is not a fictional Chrysler Building or street vendor. 2,350 people died in that harbor on December 7, 1941. There are still survivors from that event who surely relive that horror in their nightmares. Families who lost loved ones in that event surely saw this film. And Mr. Bay's response is to reassure the audience that everything worked out because a fucking dog survived the attack. It is simply insane. The only thing that makes the existence of Mr. Bay's movies tolerable is the thought that if he was not making his twisted films, he would likely be torturing hobos in ever more elaborate and expensive situations. In the end, his movies are a small price to ay to keep a mad killer off the street.

Curiously, this lack of an ability to feel makes Transformers, a franchise about intelligent space robots, a perfect vehicle for Mr. Bay's twisted perspective. It seems as if he would identify much more easily with unfeeling robots than he can with human beings. This reviewer, however, refuses to see Mr. Bay's violent robot porn. That is what the terrorists want me to do.

Finally, as one last commentary on Senator Larry Craig, this reviewer cannot stop marvelling at the fact that Senator Craig is wearing a flag lapel pin in his mugshot. What a tremendous way to honor the flag. Unlike the media flap over President Obama's lack of a flag pin in April 2008, no one can ever accuse Senator Craig of being unpatriotic. Depraved, yes. Unpatriotic, no. Well played Senator Craig.

TSOF Rants: On Senator Larry Craig

2009-07-07T08:17:15-07:00

It seems that the sordid tale of Senator Larry Craig has slipped completely off the pop culture radar. Outside of the great state of Idaho, the media seems to have completely forgotten - or actively ignored - this man's bizarre and seemingly fantastical account. I, for one, have not forgotten - nay, cannot forget. It simply strikes this reviewer as too astounding to disregard. If it was fiction, I would not accept it. Simply put, how could a United States Senator get arrested for soliciting sex in an airport bathroom? It is practically inconceivable.

It is, however, a reality of which I am reminded every time I travel by air. Over the course of the holiday weekend, this reviewer spent several hours in various airports, leading to more than one inevitable trip to the airport lavatory. With every trip, this reviewer's disgust is born anew.

As a quick recap, on June 11, 2007, while in the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport, Senator Craig entered the lavatory. While in a stall in said restroom, he apparently reached his foot under the partition between stalls and began tapping his foot, apparently a signal indicating a desire to participate in lewd conduct. Senator Craig then reached his hand under the partition and waved it. At this point the undercover police officer in the next stall arrested Senator Craig on suspicion of lewd conduct. He eventually plead guilty to disorderly conduct (though he later attempted to recant his plea).

The tale of Senator Larry Craig disturbs this reviewer for at least three separate reasons as outlined below:

Airport Bathrooms are Disgusting

I am not sure if there is a more loathsome place than the airport lavatory. Simply put, they are vile. If given the choice, this reviewer would gladly pay handsomely to use more appealing facilities. Due to the nature of the locale, until Senator Craig's arrest it had never occurred to me to perform any act in the airport lavatory that was not strictly excretory. After his arrest, I am suddenly forced to confront a reality that sex acts are performed in this revolting location. Furthermore, it was not just any man who brought this startling truth to light, but a United States senator. Why a rich and powerful man would choose this route to arousal is unimaginable. The level of depravity he must desire to take such a risk is beyond the comprehension of this reviewer.

Senator Craig is a Preposterously Bad Liar

The only concept more outlandish than the idea that a United States senator routinely seeks sex in airport bathrooms is the justification that Senator Craig employed in an attempt to deflect accusations. According to the police report, Senator Craig tried to tell his arresting officer that the whole incident was a misunderstanding and that the reason his foot was under the partition was because he has a "wide stance." Apparently Senator Craig believes that it is entirely plausible that someone - anyone - sits on a toilet and, in order to defecate, must spread their legs to such a degree that their feet are splayed out into neighboring stalls. If this reviewer had legislative authority, it would be a felony to slide anything under the partition of an airport restroom stall, regardless of the guilty party's intent.

Furthermore, Senator Craig rightly lost his senate seat due to this incident, but not because he was attempting to solicit sex in an airport bathroom. Instead, he should have lost his seat for giving so little regard to the intelligence of the good people of Idaho that he thought they would believe his "wide stance" story. It is also possible that he is monstrously stupid. Either way, there is no room for him in the halls of Congress.

It is Someone's Job to Sit in an Airport Bathroom Stall Awaiting Solicitation

Apparently, there is a police officer in Minnesota whose job consists of sitting in an airport bathroom, presumably for hours at a time, waiting for perverts to tap their foot under a partition. This reviewer does not like to spend any more time then he has to in the airport bathroom. The idea that this is someone's job is truly horrifying.

This fact is actually disturbing on two levels. In addition to the above stated reason, apparently lewd acts are so rampant at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport lavatories that the police force must send officers in to the stalls to await the perpetrators. Furthermore, this "bathroom scene" is so notorious that it came to the attention of a United States senator who then wanted to check it out. As a side note, this reviewer is still trying to determine why Senator Craig of Idaho was in Minneapolis in the first place. I like the idea that he was there on a lay over and decided to check out the infamous bathroom scene.

In conclusion, Senator Craig has instilled a new level of horror to an otherwise unpleasant experience. Considering that this incident will forever haunt this reviewer, it only seems right that I use this space to recount the incident.

TSOF Musings and Commentary: Step by Step and Brad Pitt

2009-07-02T07:42:03-07:00

It is with great shame and embarrassment that this reviewer must admit an egregious error. In the previous post, I identified the reviewed episode as "J.T.'s World." While the episode "J.T.'s World" introduces the audience to J.T.'s cable access show, it is the episode "No Business Like Show Business" that carefully traces the plot of the feature film Wayne's World. To the numerous readers who showed me the error of my ways, I thank you.

More importantly, upon a subsequent viewing of "No Business Like Show Business," this reviewer could not help but think of Brad Pitt. Why you ask? The thought stems from the fact that Step by Step's pervasive derivative nature extends even to the production itself, most notably the casting department. Inexplicably, Step by Step repeatedly used the same actors to portray completely different characters. For example, in the above scene, producer Phil Jones is played by actor David Graf. Two seasons later, Mr. Graf played the character Mitch Crawford in the episode "The Flight Before Christmas." Two seasons after that, Mr. Graf played Dave Roberts in the episode "Just Say Maybe." Notably, in the latter episode Dave Roberts is a police officer who is nearly cuckolded by the inexplicably heterosexual Jean-Luc. The late Mr. Graf clearly had a talent for playing buffoons.

Mr. Graf is far from the only example of this bizarre practice. Mary-Pat Green played Cody's Russian mail order bride in "Don't Ask" and then played a mother at basketball game who fights with a cross dressing Carol in the episode "Walk Like a Man." Melanie Wilson plays Aggie, the woman whom Frank hires to work on his construction crew, in "One of the Guys." She then plays two more roles in the series including the prospective buyer of the Lambert home, Cathie Adler, in the series finale.

Which leads us to Growing Pains, the sitcom that provides perhaps the most stunning example of an actor playing multiple roles in one series - Brad Pitt. Mr. Pitt portrayed Jeff in the episode "Who's Zoomin' Who?" in 1987. In "WZW?" Jeff is the new kid in school who scams Carol into dumping her beloved Bobby in favor of his mysterious charms. Two years later, Mr. Pitt played a very different role in the episode "Feet Of Clay." In that episode, Mr. Pitt played Jonathan Keith, a cool rock singer who seemingly befriends Ben. But when Ben catches Jonathan cheating on his wife backstage, Jonathan shows his true nature and lashes out at a hurt Ben.

The strangest aspect of this casting is that it resulted in Growing Pains launching the career of both Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt.

Finally, numerous readers questioned the accuracy of the previous post's representations. Several followers of this blog insisted that Step by Step could not have borrowed from Wayne's World as liberally as your faithful reviewer stated. To those readers, I provide this exhibit. Skip ahead to the 3:30 mark for the truly damning footage.

"J.T.'s World:" An Examination of Step by Step's Ambiguous Philosophical Perspective

2009-06-30T07:50:18-07:00

"Andy Warhol is the only genius I've ever known with an IQ of 60." - Gore Vidal

"Dada began not as an art form but as a disgust." - Tristan Tzara

If there is such thing as a percipient television theme song, it is the theme to Step by Step. In the song, the singer astutely asks "Will there ever be a second time around?" The significance of this line derives from the fact that every aspect of Step by Step is recycled from other television programs. While sitcoms are often criticized as formulaic, Step by Step stands apart due to the sheer pervasiveness of its unoriginality. Indeed Step by Step is essentially a collage of television history. The premise of the show borrows liberally - some would say copies - from television icon the Brady Bunch. The show's stars Patrick Duffy and Suzanne Somers attained stardom on Dallas and Three's Company. Even supporting actors and characters borrow from other media. Stacey Keenan played a similarly wise cracking daughter on the show My Two Dads. The character Cody is constructed from Keanu Reeves' Ted "Theodore" Logan in the Bill and Ted films. Notably, Cody is the nephew of Patrick Duffy's character, Frank Lambert. This is significant because Sasha Mitchell, the actor who plays Cody, previously portrayed Bobby Ewing's nephew on Dallas. Absolutely everything about Step by Step is derivative.

It is this derivative nature that makes Step by Step perhaps the most challenging of the sitcoms addressed in this blog. The challenge stems from the fact that it is impossible to discern the philosophical nature of Step by Step's derivative approach. For instance, one could interpret Step by Step by concluding that the show is taking a Pop Art sensibility to the sitcom. Like Warhol, Step by Step's writers simply view the pop culture landscape and liberally incorporate elements into a new whole. Seen through this Pop Art lens, Step by Step brilliantly acknowledges what is obvious to any viewer - no sitcom is remotely original. Instead of avoiding this truth, Step by Step embraces it.

It is also possible to view Step by Step as portentously cycnical - a ridiculous farce that levies a harsh criticism on the sitcom form itself. Like the dadaist movement, perhaps Step by Step's derivative nature arises not from an appreciation of the sitcom, but a disgust. Clearly, Step by Step's imitative nature makes it a fascinating, though troubling, study.

Nowhere is Step by Step’s dedication to unoriginality more prominently displayed than in "J.T.’s World," the fourth episode of the second season. Originally airing on October 9, 1992, in "J.T.'s World," J.T. has a cable access show where he and his sidekick Cody discuss attractive females from their living room couch. At the beginning of the episode, J.T. is excitedly preparing for the arrival of a big time producer who may want to syndicate their cable access show. As a side note, one of the more intriguing aspects of this scene is that J.T. declares that the producer is looking for the "next Wayne and Garth." This statement is interesting in that J.T does not reference the movie "Wayne's World." Instead, J.T. speaks of the characters Wayne and Garth as if they are actual people within his reality. The statement creates the possiblity that Step by Step exists completely within the continuity established in Wayne's World and that J.T. is attempting to emulate the success of two indivduals within that reality.

But I digress. After the producer's visit, J.T. begins making plans for his new found fame and fortune. Frank even makes a deal with him that if the producer calls back, J.T. does not have to do his paper for school. As luck would have it, the producer calls and J.T.'s World will seemingly hit the big time. As they begin preparations for the show, J.T. and Cody arrive on a set that is an exact replica of the Lambert living room. Throngs of adoring women crowd the set hoping to get a glimpse of J.T., the new star, even seeking to have J.T. autograph their undergarments. On the second day of shooting, however, the producer tells J.T. and Cody that they are fired and will be replaced by actors who will portray them on the show. Apparently, J.T. signed away all of the intellectual property rights to the concept, characters, and set of the show, retaining nothing for himself. Embarrassed, he learns a valuable lesson about not counting your chickens before they hatch and has to do his homework again.

As should be evident, except for the ending, this is the exact plot of the movie Wayne's World, a film that premiered just eight months prior to the air date of the episode. It is impossible to accept that Step by Step's writers were simply lazy and decided to steal the premise from a highly successful and recently released film. Instead, the show must have had a deeper significance for appropriating pop culture elements in such an obvious manner. This reviewer finds it highly vexing that he cannot discern the philosophical purpose the writers intended.

In the end, however, Step by Step's philosophical perspective may not matter. Whether the show is the height of Pop Art or cynically dadaist, it is unquestionably brilliant. As Gore Vidal suggested, the difference may not lie in the show's genius, but merely in its measurable IQ.

TSOF Reader Emails: Saved by the Bell, Urkel, and the NBA Draft

2009-06-25T08:11:29-07:00

As an initial note, I observe that a great number of minor fictional characters from long cancelled television programs decided to drop the Son of Feeney a line. I guess that is only fair considering that this reviewer uses a nom de plume from a long cancelled television series. That foolishness aside, it is with great pleasure I present to you the first TSOF Reader Email Post. Behold!

From Buddy Lembeck:

Dear Sir:

I enjoy your analysis of these oft-loathed cultural icons. Few see the deeper meanings--nay, the life lessons--contained in the work of such visionaries as Jeff Franklin, San Bobrick, and Patrick Duffy. You do. Would that we all might see this genius disguised as buffoonery. The world would be better for it.

I climb the mountaintop seeking your insight. One aspect of the subject shows that has long bothered me is the choice of locale. Specifically, a show creator's selection of an existant city vs. a fictional place. Some shows choose major cities, where the city itself becomes a character, as much a part of the opening credits as the actors themselves (Full House:San Francisco; Family Matters & Perfect Strangers:Chicago; Boy Meets World:Philadephia, and the like). Other shows select a made-up place, often an amalgamation of middle America, where the city is only peripheral to the characters' (mis)adventures (Saved by the Bell:Palisades, CA; Charles in Charge:Pembroke College, NJ; Gimme a Break:Glenlawn, CA; Designing Women: Atlanta).

In your esteemed opinion, why do show creators choose fictional locales? Is this because the fictional locale takes a backseat to the story, permitting more character development? Does it permit a certain creative license where the show is not bound by known geographic constraints? Or does it reflect the sinister megalomania of the shows' creators, their independence from the superego, where they feel qualified to play God not only with the characters but also their entire environment?

Your insight is much appreciated.

TSOF:

Buddy,

First, I enjoyed that you mentioned Designing Women. I further enjoyed that Atlanta was listed as pure invention. A confederate Narnia if you will. Your mention of Designing Women also led me to think of the character Anthony Bouvier, played by Meshach Taylor. In the context of the show, it is clear that the writers originally intended Anthony to be homosexual. Due to the prevailing television morays of the time, Anthony's character suddenly became straight even though he hung around all day with four women in a design studio. Anthony became the most inexplicably heterosexual character on television. This title was later held by Bronson Pinchot's French hairstylist Jean-Luc Rieupeyroux on Step by Step. Oddly, ten years later nearly every show on television featured homosexual characters almost exclusively.

To answer your question, however, I find the creation of a fictional setting far less megalomaniacal than twisting an existing city into the bizarre fiction seen in many of the programs you mention. Full House is the perfect example. According to Full House's writers, it is perfectly reasonable to believe that a local sports anchor (Danny's job at the inception of the show) can own a four story row house with four bedrooms, a converted garage, and full attic apartment. San Francisco is one of the most expensive real estate markets in the United States! Furthermore, despite being a massive media market, the audience is to accept that a radio station gave Jesse, a high school drop out and former exterminator with absolutely no experience, their rush hour program. Finally, despite the fact that Danny, Jesse, and Joey live together in a house with (initially) no women, no one in San Francisco ever questions their sexuality. That is more inexplicable than Jean-Luc and Anthony Bouvier being straight.

Short answer - it is the shows set in major cities that test the boundaries of the creator's ego.

From ???:

Dear Son of Feeney,

Whatever happened to Screech's robot?

TSOF:

It's a good question, but undoubtedly one that highlights Screech's gradual descent into madness. At age thirteen or fourteen, Screech invents a sentient robot but by age 25 he is working as an assistant principal and ruining several of his business ventures with Mr. Belding. I firmly believe that if we knew the whereabouts of Kevin the Robot, it may provide some important insight into Screech's various afflictions. My theory is that Zack sold Kevin at some point, more likely than not to Maxwell Nerdstrom, in order to fund an otherwise doomed scheme.

From Kristy in Phoenix:

While I enjoyed the column "Is Zack Morris a Serial Killer," I felt it missed an obvious victim. In the episode "From Nurse to Worse," Zack falls for the school nurse and even dumps his beloved Kelly to be with her. We never hear from her again.

TSOF:

Kristy,

The nurse's fate is an interesting subject. On the one hand she toyed with Zack's emotions and sexual desires. Clearly this is a dangerous proposition and it would not be surprising if it cost her her life. On the other hand, in order to help Kelly get back at Zack, the nurse flirted with a student and made sexual advances on him. It is just as likely she was fired, hence I did not include her on the list of Zack's victims.

Perhaps the rumored Saved by the Bell Reunion will involve exhuming Zack's crawl space and we will have our answer. We can only hope.

From Warren Weber:

Son of Feeney:

What are your thoughts on the NBA Draft?

TSOF:

My thoughts are many, Potsie. Here is how I see the top five picks in the draft proceeding:

1. Clippers - Blake Griffin

Griffin is the A.C. Slater of this draft. He simply has superior skill and athleticism when compared to his competitors. Appropriately, this analogy makes Tyler Hansborough Marvin Nedick, the doughy wrestler from Valley who Slater thoroughly and repeatedly dominates.

2. Memphis - Hasheem Thabeet

The Urkel of the draft - though awkward and somewhat one-dimensional, he is somehow oddly effective. Like Urkel he will have a surprisingly long career in the primetime spotlight.

3. Oklahoma City - Ricky Rubio

Rubio is Zack Morris. He is young, cool, and charming. Furthermore, like Zack, his athleticism is underrated. Many forget that in the episode Running Zack, all of Bayside had to hope that Zack could recover from his grief over Chief Henry's death so he could run the mile against Valley. Unfortunately for Zack, his accomplishments athletically were overshadowed by Slater's superior feats and brawn. Rubio has the same relation to Griffin.

4. Sacramento - Stephen Curry

Curry is Shawn Hunter. Shawn has a reputation as a bad boy. Curry is a reputed lights out baller. The problem is that this reviewer has a hard time taking these reputations at face value because each appears to be twelve years old.

5. Minnesota - James Harden

Harden is Cory Matthews. He floats under the radar. No one is wowed by his game but he gets the job done and even has flashes of brilliance. Similarly, Cory is not the most engaging lead character but somehow maintained titular billing on a show that aired for seven seasons. Cory also married Topanga.

Significantly, there is no Jesse Catsopolis in this draft. That is because no potential draftee was tutored by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and can only make shots from one "sweet spot" on the floor.

From Bruce Leeroy:

Dearest Son of Feeney,

I am convinced that Peter Engel is the most brilliant mind to grace the television landscape. I am guessing that you agree with me.

TSOF:

Dearest Bruce Leeroy,

I do not. It did not take a genius to create a sitcom about a group of middle school kids in Indiana and their teacher. It did take a genius to recast the show, move it to California, and put it on Saturday morning. That genius was Brandon Tartikoff. For his troubles, he earned a role as himself in "No Hope With Dope," a truly inspired episode.

Peter Engel is more of an idiot savant. Engel produces insightful, brilliant, and amusing programs, but they are not insightful, brilliant, or amusing for the reasons that Peter Engel intended. Listen to the commentary on the SBTB DVD anthology. Peter Engel's idea of comedy is having Screech wear a "loud" shirt. If you need more proof, watch his next endeavor - City Guys.

From Brian in Tallahassee, Fla:

Dear Son of Feeney,

Do you see any parallels between the episode of Saved by the Bell where Jessie gets hooked on speed and the Family Ties where Alex P.Keaton does the same thing? I mean didn't Saved by the Bell just rip off Family Ties?

TSOF:

Its an interesting theory, Brian, but I see these episodes as very different. As an initial note, and I do not mean to split hairs, but in the episode Jessie's Song, Jessie is addicted to caffeine pills, not speed. In addition, I am not sure if sitcoms can truly "rip each other off." Clearly there are storylines that nearly every program explores. Drug use is one of them.

More importantly, however, these episodes have very different messages. The Family Ties episode "Speed Trap" is an episode about the dangers of drugs and follows the classical "learning theory" model. Alex takes speed, enjoys the effect, and spirals out of control. "Jessie's Song" on the other hand is quite clearly about the exploitation of women. While Jessie certainly takes caffeine pills and spirals out of control, her motivation is different. Whereas Alex took speed in order to get through a hectic school week while still meeting his own high expectations, Jessie is overwhelmed because she is trying to meet the expectations of others, most notably Zack. In the episode, Zack believes he can use the girls' singing to propel himself to fame and fortune. He even has Screech dress as a woman so they can covertly record the girls singing together in the locker room. Even though Jessie is already overwhelmed with her schoolwork, Jessie begins using drugs so she has enough energy to serve Zack as well. Significantly, Zack is only using Jessie for his own financial gains. Soon Jessie can only function while she is under the influence of drugs. Instead of presenting a social learning message, the episode makes the broader point about how a male dominated society and its exploitation of women debases those women and leads them down a dangerous path.

A final note on the Family Ties episode: One of the more interesting aspects of "Speed Trap" is the fact that Family Ties used not one, not two, but three clips from the episode in the opening credits. Each features Alex P. Keaton in a manic state. The subversive message is that speed brought out the true essence of Alex and represents him in his most actualized state. The logical progression is that each of us would exist in our most heightened form under the influence of the same drug. Sha-na-na-na, indeed.

From J. Walter Weatherman:

Is this for real?

TSOF:

What a brilliantly existential question.

TSOF's Open Complaint to the FCC

2009-06-22T08:47:38-07:00

As stated in a previous post, the otherwise laudable Saved by the Bell episode "Pipe Dreams" has long disturbed this reviewer. This disturbance stems from an inexplicable dream sequence in which Screech portrays a man of Arab descent. The scene is simply reprehensible and TSOF cannot imagine why this episode continues to air in syndication. Today, TSOF took his outrage directly to the FCC. Considering the rather narrow definition of "indecent," this reviewer does not have high expectations for this Complaint. The FCC has defined broadcast indecency as “language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities.” Apparently, the FCC is far more concerned with jokes about diarrhea than it is scenes that are aimed at offending an entire region/religion.

"The following is a true and accurate account of TSOF's Complaint to the FCC:

June 22, 2009

Dear Mr. Commissioner:

This morning at 7 a.m. I began my day by watching Saved by the Bell on the Turner Broadcasting Station. Usually I find this show charmingly inoffensive. I am sad to report, however, that what I saw this morning simply appalled me. During the episode "Pipe Dreams," an otherwise whimsical farce in which Bayside strikes oil on the football field, there is a dream sequence in which one of the characters, one Samuel "Screech" Powers, performs an imitation of a man of Middle Eastern descent. Said imitation was both mocking and cruel and cannot be tolerated. Surely such a display constitutes an indecent broadcast under the standards of your fine commission. Accordingly, I am requesting that the FCC see to it that this scene is removed from all future airings of "Pipe Dreams."

The scene in question occurs approximately eight minutes into the episode and entails the Saved by the Bell gang engaging in a joint dream about how their lives would change if Bayside struck oil. In the vision, they are all rich. The classroom now has wood paneling and leather chairs and the gang is dressed in the trappings of wealth. At the beginning of the dream sequence, Screech is notably absent. The tone of the scene, however, takes a drastic turn upon his arrival. Screech enters the scene dressed as an Arabian sheik. He speaks with what is apparently actor Dustin Diamond’s feeble and insulting attempt at a Middle Eastern accent. Furthermore, Mr. Diamond plays the part cross-eyed and accompanied by two belly dancers. He then commands Kelly to join him on a camel to travel to Saudi Arabia, a land he claims he now owns. Needless to say, I was disgusted. There is no place for this kind of disgusting bigorty on television today.

I do not need to tell you that improving this great nation's relations with people of Middle Eastern descent is at the forefront of all of our goals. We are fighting a war on terror both home and abroad. Since the Iranian revolution of 1979, this country's image in that important and strategic region has been, to say the least, tarnished. It seems at this very moment in our history, it is important that we take strides towards a greater understanding with the Middle East and its people. That goal seems impossible as long as Screech is ridiculing the region in a popular syndicated children's program.

What alarms me most is that this offensive episode first aired on October 26, 1991 - on Saturday morning television no less! In the seventeen years since its first airing, "Pipe Dreams" has undoubtedly aired hundreds, if not thousands, of times on the numerous broadcast stations carrying Saved by the Bell in syndication. The airing of this insidious bigotry simply must be put to an end. Now I am not usually one to promote censorship but clearly market forces have not allowed this sad moment in Hollywood history to quietly slip from the airwaves. Instead, after a long and painful seventeen years, it is time for the government to save us from ourselves and pull Screech's antics from the airwaves.

Thank you for your consideration and good day to you.

Sincerely,

The Son of Feeney