Project Runway at this Old House

Nifty title, no?

I just wanted to comment on 2 TV shows I watched this week in the same post. So, sue me.

Project Runway

I have really tried not to be sucked into this reality show. I am not a fashion person or even care about the fashion industry even though I do know something about the history. Simply put I watched a few episodes of the Season 3 of Project Runway because Bravo repeats it so often – talk about roadblock programing.

I did watch the finale and I was not shocked that Jeffery won. Couture isn’t about what regular people will buy and wear – it is all about art and style. Jeffery had the trendy and arty part down. A woman wearing a dress that makes her look like peppermint candy has to be arty, no? The judges on the show were looking for that and that is why Jeffery won. Why else would they ignore the fact he went over budget on his finale designs.You knew he would win the show when he won the couture challenge in episode 9.

If the criteria was about what practical people would buy and wear then it was a tie between Uli and Laura. I liked a number of their designs. Laura’s bead work was stunning and the swimsuit Uli designed was nice.

Project Runway


This Old House

One of my long time favorite shows is finally getting back to basics – at least for this season.

The crew of Norm, Tommy, Richard, Roger, and Kevin began work on renovating an East Boston duplex that was built in 1916. This time money is tight and they have a strict $250,000 budget to use on both units.

Some recent projects had moved away from the formula that made the show a great watch as money became no object. It is great seeing what someone can do with unlimited funds but that gets boring and doesn’t relate to what many regular rehabbers go through on their houses.

For example, in a scene in a recent episode of the East Boston project had Tommy, Norm, and Kevin looking at the stucco on the outside of the house and an expert told them the stucco was original. They learned that totally redoing the outside would require a good chunk of the budget and only patching the cracks would be the least expensive option. Another episode had an electrician explaining to Norm that the house still had active knob and tube wiring that would need to be replaced. The homeowner also learned that the cost of removing a street tree that has clogged up the sewer main to the house would be the same as if they just dug up the sewer and relocated it.

The other part of the return of the show is the homeowners would do some of the labor to save money.

The refocus on the basics seemed to start this past spring, when TOH helped renovate a burned out row house in Washington DC that would sold to a moderate income family through the group Mi Casa.

I remember one episode when Kevin is told the budget for that rehab would be $200,000 he mentioned they spent that on just a kitchen on another project.

It is great to see it back. Now if I can just get my local PBS station not to interrupt it for their pledge drive so I can watch whole project it might be better.

This Old House

Peter Jennings 1938-2005


The “face” of ABC News died today and I really miss him.

I was a Cronkite kid, growing up with Uncle Walter who I trusted as much as my mom. Then when he retired and Dan Rather took over I was a bit lost. For some reason I just never cared for Dan.

Then I found Peter on ABC’s World News Tonight. His confident delivery and focus on World news fit in with my needs at the time. I wanted to know and felt I needed to know about the world outside the US. In the days before cable news and the Internet, the main source of world news was one of the nightly newscasts.

I was alone in my love of World News Tonight. My Mom was a stick in the mud CBS News viewer and we use to have arguments over watching Rather or Jennings. I lost those battles but when she would be napping after work or wasn’t home, the TV was on Jennings.

Peter Jennings reminded me of Peter Mansbridge on the CBC and if you squinted they looked like twins. I also liked Jennings Canadian accent as it gave him a non-US allure like the presenters on the BBC.

It is a sad day for me.

How REAL is Big Brother 6????

Reality TV is a fact of life currently. It is a way for TV networks to avoid producing actual programing and it is cheap for them as well.

I admit that I do watch a couple of the shows. One is The Amazing Race and the other is Survivor. The rest of the crop is either all about desperate dating or making someone with no real talent famous for 15 minutes.

The largest unkept secret is that reality TV is not unscripted as they advertise. Most are taped weeks before you see them and themes or story lines are worked out either in general before the show tapes or as the show is produced. The editing process then creates the drama from what is really a boring thing to watch in the raw. In some cases the participants are “guided” into doing what the producers think will make good TV.

Case in point is the show Big Brother on CBS. Unlike most of the reality shows, it is live one night a week and the 13 week season is in real time – that is what you watch in the taped segments happened since the last live show. The show is aired 3 nights a week so two showings (Tuesday and Saturday) are clip shows from the few days before the show.

Logically, one would assume the highlights you see and the drama you conclude from what you see is what is really happening. With Big Brother that is not the case.

How do I know?

Because unlike other reality shows, CBS allows you to view the house guests (aka Hamsters) via a live video stream. Now the video feed isn’t always available. It is shut down when crucial segments of the show are taped – like a competition or if important information is talked about. You also don’t get to see the hamsters diary remarks until they show up in the show. You do get to see and hear a good portion of what passes for life in the house. You find out what the actual story line is and when you compare to the clip shows on the network, one can tell quickly what the producers are doing.

The prime example is how the two main factions in the house are portrayed. This was particularly evident in Week 5 with the eviction of Kaysar.

One faction led by Maggie included April, Ivette, Beau, and Jennifer. In week 5 James and Sarah double crossed Kaysar and joined Maggie’s group.

The second faction was led by Kaysar and included Howie, Janelle, and Rachel..

If you watched only the network version one would think that the Kaysar group were nasty people, that Kaysar had broken promises, and the Maggie group were the good guys needing the audience support. The main reason for this view is that the founder of the group Eric, voted off the previous week, is getting the royal treatment by CBS. They decided to pick him as their champion or main story of the season.

If you had the video feed you would be able to tell that the CBS version was a complete lie.

Maggie’s group are the nasty ones. While they sat around all week talking smack about the other side, Kaysar and his group were not doing that. They were trying to have some fun while he was still in the house. Maggie picked Kaysar out of revenge while letting the real enemy James off the hook. In fact, this week, Maggie and company now know that James is the real enemy.

April and Ivette are two of the worst people I have ever met. They never have anything nice to say about anyone and a lot of the comments Ivette said about Kaysar in the feeds were about as racist as one can get.

The network audience is never given a clue how the real dynamic in the house works or how real the hamsters are.

So much for reality.

P. S. A site that summarizes the live BB feed and offers commentary is Dingo’s Hamster Watch

A Couple of Funnies

If you enjoy life then you like to laugh at the absurd. I got a couple for you today from the past week.

Item 1

Finish this line:

“Guess what? I’ve got a fever. And the only prescription is… “

If you shouted “More cowbell!” then you too remember the sketch on Saturday Night Live 5 years ago.

“More cowbell” is the punch line to a “Saturday Night Live” skit that originally aired five years ago this month (April). The guest host was Christopher Walken, and one of the skits spoofed VH1’s “Behind the Music” by imagining what happened when the 1970s band Blue Oyster Cult went into the studio to cut “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper,” its best-known song.

Walken plays producer Bruce Dickinson, a preening rock “legend” who turns hacks into hit-makers. Will Ferrell, who wrote the sketch, plays pseudo-Cult member Gene Frenkle, whose sole talent consists of beating on a cowbell with enough force to stun a bull elephant. Real-life BOC members are portrayed by SNL’s Jimmy Fallon, Chris Parnell, Horatio Sanz, and Chris Kattan, none of whom can keep a straight face as Ferrell maniacally pounds away while prancing around with his belly hanging out of his shirt.

It’s Walken, though, who steals the show by uttering the phrase that’s achieved cult-worship status. “I gotta have more cowbell!” he pleads when annoyed bandmates complain that enough is enough. In a bit of lunacy that would do “This Is Spinal Tap” proud, a crazed Walken exclaims, “Guess what? I’ve got a fever. And the only prescription is more cowbell.”

http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/04/30/more_cowbell_yes_please_weve_got_a_fever/

I saw the sketch 5 years ago and several times since then and it cracks me up everytime.

Will Ferrell has been the best SNL cast member since Eddie Murphy in the 1980’s. I believe he is the only one to have a 2 volume DVD set in the “Best of SNL” collection.

Christopher Walken as host is always a hoot because he seems so mental in real life that seeing him do comedy is really funny. The other Walken bits I love is where he is a smarmy lech trying to seduce a woman and we see the sketch from the POV of the woman (a cameraman with a dress glove on). The other is when his character can see into the future of anyone he touches and the future has nothing to do with the person.

Item 2

Fun with the Queen

This week Queen Elizabeth and The Duke of Edinburgh are on a state visit of Saskatchewan and Alberta (Canada), as part of the celebration marking the centennial of these provinces’ entry into Confederation.

They have the itinerary for May 18th posted on a website about the visit and while browsing it – one of the items cracked me up:

11:35

The Duke of Edinburgh arrives at the site and acknowledges War Memorial Fund Raising Committee and assembled veterans.

The Duke of Edinburgh, accompanied by Mr. Jones, proceeds to the site of the sod-turning.

The Duke of Edinburgh turns the sod.

The Duke of Edinburgh unveils a plaque, commemorating the sod-turning on the occasion of the 2005 visit of Her Majesty and His Royal Highness.

En route, The Duke of Edinburgh views the adjacent World War I Memorial.

The Duke of Edinburgh views the sign depicting the future Saskatchewan War Memorial.

Brigadier-General Walker, Mr. Lyons, Mr. Harasen, and Mr. Jones say goodbye to His Royal Highness.

http://www.pch.gc.ca/visiteroyale2005/detail_mai_may18_e.cfm
—————-

The line about the Duke turning the sod was funny then the line refering to the plaque about the sod turning had me on the floor peeing my pants…..

Well Christmas time is here

It is the time of year when people shop till they drop or indulge until they pass out from all the food and drink. It is a time to hang out with the family even when they hate you on the other days of the year.

One of my favorite Christmas activities is watching the classic Christmas cartoon specials on TV. Most were produced in the mid to late 1960’s but even 40 years on they haven’t really become dated.

My favorite of the bunch is “A Charlie Brown Christmas”. From the lame tree Charlie buys, to the hip jazz music from Vince Guaraldi, I love the show.

There is a point near the end where a frustrated Charlie shouts about being told what the real meaning of Christmas is. He is mad at the crass commercialism of the holiday represented by Snoopy winning the decoration contest. Linus then recites the Christmas story from the Bible and peace is restored.

Actually Christmas has little to do with the birth in the manger 2000 years ago and never has. The holiday is a collection of religious and non-religious mid-winter celebrations.

You have your winter solstice – used to mark the deep of winter and hope for the coming spring which included putting evergreen trees inside your house. Then you have “Wassailing” – an early version of trick or treat, with drunken singers banging on doors, demanding food, drink, or money in exchange for going away. The part that included the birth of Jesus was added by the Romans to replace the pagan celebrations of the time.

The debauchery got so prevalent that when Puritan Oliver Cromwell became dictator of the UK, he outlawed Christmas. Puritans in Massachusetts banned Christmas observances in 1659.

It wasn’t until 1822 that the Christmas in the form that we know it was introduced. That form is Santa Claus and crass commercialism.

So Linus was wrong. Happy Xmas!