The "You know what?" thread

[D'Snowth]

Weird Al is finally getting a star on the Walk of Fame.

 

[D'Snowth]

Don't even know what thread to post this in, but I guess this one's as good as any or whatever. But even though I'm a grown man, and we're not even Facebook friends, my mom tells me I'm not allowed to comment on anything on Facebook anymore. How pathetic is that?

 

[Pig'sSaysAdios]

Don't even know what thread to post this in, but I guess this one's as good as any or whatever. But even though I'm a grown man, and we're not even Facebook friends, my mom tells me I'm not allowed to comment on anything on Facebook anymore. How pathetic is that?

Are you gonna listen to her?

 

[D'Snowth]

I really need to stop anyway, I've been trying to, but as I said in the other thread, it's hard not to react to all of the stupidity that's happening in the country right now; especially if it affects people I know.

 

[minor muppetz]

Been watching the Vacation movies tonight, and there's a few things I've thought about...

I've read on many sites that they originally wanted the Griswald's to actually go to Disneyland but changed it to the fictional Wally World because Disneyland is open all year round. So... really? That's the only reason? Not because they couldn't get the rights to use Disneyland? I'd be surprised if Disney would allow the parks to appear in a non-Disney movie, especially an R-rated movie.

Also, Wallyworld was closed for repairs. Couldn't Disneyland be closed for repairs if repairs are needed?

Which brings me to something else: Mr. Wally mentions a bad trip he had driving his family to a park in Florida, which I always thought was meant to be a Walt Disney World equivalent of Wally World but watching it tonight I don't think he ever specifically named Wally World when talking about the Florida trip. Anyway, after this, Clark asks if he'd do the same if they went to Florida and were closed, to which Mr. Wally says that they don't close in Florida. Not even for repairs, like at that Wally World?

In European Vacation, the man who steals the Griswald's video camera sure does look similar to the thief from the final act of the movie. Considering the credits refer to the guy from later as "the thief", I wondered if they were the same person. When he appeared near the end and interacted with the Griswalds, I kept wondering this, noticing that they didn't seem to recognize each other (though the thief seems to make some kind of reaction upon hearing their names, as if maybe he recognized them from the video). And it is in that location that Ellen finds out that the video of her dancing in a towell was being sold as an adult film (though that was only about two minutes long, he was really able to sell it as a stand-alone movie?). I checked the credits and saw that they listed "the video camera thief" and "the thief" as different characters played by different actors.

And Clark got Ellen to do a musical performance under the false pretenses that he would erase it later. But why have her do it if he was just going to erase it and not show it to anybody?

And in Vegas Vacation, when the Griswalds decide to win back all the money Clark had lost but had very little money, why didn't Russ think to sell one or more of the cars he had won? On a similar note, I remember when I first saw the movie, and at the end, each of them drives home, I was surprised to see that both Russ and Audrey were of driving age. I felt like at least one of them should have been too young.

I've also noticed tonight that the first two Vacation movies seem to be a collection of loosely related scenes, like a bunch of short sketches with the same characters. They may have connecting elements, but for the most part, many of the scenes could easily be rearranged without making a big difference.

Weird Al is finally getting a star on the Walk of Fame.

Can't believe I missed this news until now.

 

[mr3urious]

I've read on many sites that they originally wanted the Griswald's to actually go to Disneyland but changed it to the fictional Wally World because Disneyland is open all year round. So... really? That's the only reason? Not because they couldn't get the rights to use Disneyland? I'd be surprised if Disney would allow the parks to appear in a non-Disney movie, especially an R-rated movie.

And yet in his epic freakout when the car gets wrecked, Clark states that he's so determined to give the family a great vacation that "[they'll] be whistling 'Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah' out their a-holes". So it implies that Disneyland exists alongside Wally World. Maybe Wally World is like the dollar store equivalent or something?

 

[minor muppetz]

And yet in his epic freakout when the car gets wrecked, Clark states that he's so determined to give the family a great vacation that "[they'll] be whistling 'Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah' out their a-holes". So it implies that Disneyland exists alongside Wally World. Maybe Wally World is like the dollar store equivalent or something?

I noticed that. My thought was, "wrong theme park".

 

[ErinAardvark]

Why do you bake cookies but cook bacon?

Maybe it's similar to driving on the parkway and parking on the driveway?

 

[D'Snowth]

I'm really not sure where else to post this, but whatever.

So, anyway, a digital subchannel from my cable provider was playing one of the I DREAM OF JEANNIE reunion movies from the 80s, and truth be told, despite my love for the original 60s show, I'm quite mixed about this thing.

For starters, while they did bring back most of the original cast, we ended up with Wayne Rogers instead of Larry Hagman as Tony, and I have to say, watching this was like watching Jeannie suddenly hook up with Trapper from M*A*S*H . . . and would it have killed the production staff to get him a darker wig or something to wear during the flashback sequence of when Tony first found Jeannie on the beach, instead of him already being gray-haired? And Hayden Rorke as Dr. Bellows was practically a no-show in the movie, I think he only had like one glorified cameo, and that was it; too bad, his cluelessness and befuddlement over the messes Jeannie gets Tony into were part of what made the original series so great. Bill Daily was just as wonderful as Roger as he was during the original series, in fact, Roger hadn't changed a bit: his passing remark about being divorced five times was a hilarious touch - might have known ol' Rog would have commitment issues, lol. Then, of course, there's Jeannie herself. Barbara Eden was, of course, wonderful as Jeannie . . . as for her evil twin sister, Jeannie II, on the other hand . . . that seemed really off to me. Of course she's back to trying to break up Jeannie and Tony and stoops to her usual tricks, but the characterization seemed more akin Serena from BEWITCHED, in that Jeannie II was otherwise depicted as trying to be a hip and trendy free spirit with an unlimited wardrobe of painfully 80s fashions, much like Serena would rock the hippy outfits of the 60s on BEWITCHED . . . and not only that, Jeannie II's harem outfit was red instead of green. Huh? There's also a subplot involving Tony and Jeannie's son, T.J., having a crush on a girl at school that was clearly an after thought, because it really wasn't executed well, and sort of just abruptly ended after T.J. makes a mistake in his attempts to impress the girl of his dreams.

Other than that, the movie did, otherwise, have a certain charm to it: certainly not as strong as the original 60s series, but still a certain charm nonetheless. There's still some funny moments throughout, including a prolonged scene in a fancy restaurant where Jeannie has dinner with her new boss who has the hots for her (a spell brought on by Jeannie II) and Roger, but after gulping wine and getting the hiccups, crazy things start happening, such as Jeannie accidentally making the clothes of all the other patrons disappear. And the emotions during the climax in which Jeannie had to erase herself and T.J. from Tony's life in exchange for saving his life from certain death was written and performed very well - so well in fact, that the casting difference of Tony becomes less of a concern.

The way I see, if you're a fan of I DREAM OF JEANNIE, this is certainly something you would want to see at least once, but it lacks the lure and draw of the original series that I wouldn't recommend repeat viewings unless you just really wanted to.

 

[fuzzygobo]

I'm really not sure where else to post this, but whatever.

So, anyway, a digital subchannel from my cable provider was playing one of the I DREAM OF JEANNIE reunion movies from the 80s, and truth be told, despite my love for the original 60s show, I'm quite mixed about this thing.

For starters, while they did bring back most of the original cast, we ended up with Wayne Rogers instead of Larry Hagman as Tony, and I have to say, watching this was like watching Jeannie suddenly hook up with Trapper from M*A*S*H . . . and would it have killed the production staff to get him a darker wig or something to wear during the flashback sequence of when Tony first found Jeannie on the beach, instead of him already being gray-haired? And Hayden Rorke as Dr. Bellows was practically a no-show in the movie, I think he only had like one glorified cameo, and that was it; too bad, his cluelessness and befuddlement over the messes Jeannie gets Tony into were part of what made the original series so great. Bill Daily was just as wonderful as Roger as he was during the original series, in fact, Roger hadn't changed a bit: his passing remark about being divorced five times was a hilarious touch - might have known ol' Rog would have commitment issues, lol. Then, of course, there's Jeannie herself. Barbara Eden was, of course, wonderful as Jeannie . . . as for her evil twin sister, Jeannie II, on the other hand . . . that seemed really off to me. Of course she's back to trying to break up Jeannie and Tony and stoops to her usual tricks, but the characterization seemed more akin Serena from BEWITCHED, in that Jeannie II was otherwise depicted as trying to be a hip and trendy free spirit with an unlimited wardrobe of painfully 80s fashions, much like Serena would rock the hippy outfits of the 60s on BEWITCHED . . . and not only that, Jeannie II's harem outfit was red instead of green. Huh? There's also a subplot involving Tony and Jeannie's son, T.J., having a crush on a girl at school that was clearly an after thought, because it really wasn't executed well, and sort of just abruptly ended after T.J. makes a mistake in his attempts to impress the girl of his dreams.

Other than that, the movie did, otherwise, have a certain charm to it: certainly not as strong as the original 60s series, but still a certain charm nonetheless. There's still some funny moments throughout, including a prolonged scene in a fancy restaurant where Jeannie has dinner with her new boss who has the hots for her (a spell brought on by Jeannie II) and Roger, but after gulping wine and getting the hiccups, crazy things start happening, such as Jeannie accidentally making the clothes of all the other patrons disappear. And the emotions during the climax in which Jeannie had to erase herself and T.J. from Tony's life in exchange for saving his life from certain death was written and performed very well - so well in fact, that the casting difference of Tony becomes less of a concern.

The way I see, if you're a fan of I DREAM OF JEANNIE, this is certainly something you would want to see at least once, but it lacks the lure and draw of the original series that I wouldn't recommend repeat viewings unless you just really wanted to.

Back in the 60's, when hippies invaded Sitcom-Land, the results were hysterical.
Snowthy, you could appreciate on Bewitched, one episode ("Hippie Hippie Hooray") with Samantha belting out "the Iffin' Song".

A few local L.A. groups, like The Seeds or The Standells, would turn up and rock the house.
In one episode of "My Three Sons", the oldest brother (whose name escapes me) joins a band, grows his hair long overnight, much to Uncle Charlie's chagrin (he hates that "Yeah Yeah Yeah" music).

The biggest culture clash happened on "Hazel". The two young kids (again, names escape me). join a neighborhood band, The Leaping Lizards!
Acoustic guitar, drums, sax, and accordian, ready to blow the Beatles out of the water.
They don't grow their hair out, just comb it down on their foreheads to look more girlish. And befuddling their dad with vernacular like, "Groovy, Daddy-O!"
They actually land a record in the charts, play a few gigs, appear on tv, have girls screaming at them. Superstardom is within their grasp.
But at the last minute, they give it all up, deciding middle-class Squaresville is the place to be. Screw those hippie freaks.
For the last 50 years, I bet they're still kicking themselves over that move.
I'm sure there are other examples, but just a little taste of network tv's version of grooviness.