Captain Pike's Ship Log II

The other day, little Mrs. wonderful and I got into a little squabble. She likes to watch that house flippers show, I don't know, it's on that HG TV channel, it has all kinds of tips on transforming a rundown old house into something freshly marketable, in today's fast-paced real estate market. I'll admit, the show has some very ingenious ideas: it's not the show itself I disdain, but the format. Many commercials have elected to go this way too. There's some fast-moving techno pop music going in the background, along with lots of video zooms and sound effects. Somebody is talking fast, on top of some getting-way-too-busy computer drumbeat, heightened sense of urgency synthesized music. It is as if they don't want to let you think anything of your own while their information is attacking you.

She kind of likes to sleep with the TV on, or with the music going. I can tolerate this if it's a low enough volume, but would prefer darkness and silence. Somehow, when the music is playing or Sanford and Son is on in the background, she can wind down and fall asleep. But with me, I'd rather do this little quiet mental debriefing: considering the day, where I goofed up, or would have behaved little differently; maybe I need to remember a couple things for the next day -- stuff that needs to be done, so forth. This works best with no artificial stimuli. Very shortly, my mind clears of the daily garbage and flows quietly over a mildly undulating sea.

These new shows though, that use this snap, click, pop, zipper down-rattletrap until your mind snaps, format to hold your attention, just make me feel really uneasy. Why can't they just say what they're doing, show me with the audiovisual on my TV screen and be done with it? Why must they bombard my senses with the continuing collage of audiovisual filler material: a fast-moving stream of bright flashing colors and scintillating computerized segue sounds? Anything that's pumped out with that amount of crap stuck to it, raises my skeptic flag and has a good chance of being 90 proof bull, and I ain't buying any! (Okay, okay, I'm getting a little excited here, that last phrase, stolen from Somerset Maughm, big Daddy talking to Brick, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof).

And now, getting back to the fight, or rather the ruffled discussion between my wife and I. Here is her gripe, as I see it, it was as if my preference came across a little bit holier than thou. Did I think I was better? Better because I like things the old way instead of how maybe things are today? Maybe I'm pompously holding on to yesterday, unable to go with the flow. It's true, movies and TV have changed a lot. The other night I watched a movie: The Shooter. And you girls check this out, this guy Mark Wahlberg, now he's a hunk! Not some pretty boy like Leonardo DiCaprio or some made up, make-believe pirate like Johnny Depp! No, this guy, he's the real deal. All of a sudden he is headlining all the good movies. I first saw him in Invincible, never having even heard of him before. He was really credible as a working-class, beer drinking, vacant lot football hero magically turned pro. And then, in this movie last night, he's this survivalist hermit, ex-gunnery Sergeant who has this heartbreaking vein of patriotism which is so rare. I don't wanna give away the plot, if you don't mind a little blood and guts, you should see The Shooter. Contrasted with another one of my old favorites from yesteryear: The Shootist. This is an old John Wayne flick, which is kind of the same, in a way, to The Shooter. John Wayne is this aging federal marshal (JB Books) with a bit of a dubious past who winds up going out in one last shoot 'em up hurrah. Back 40 years ago, people lined up to see this movie, and the most exciting moment was when John Wayne jumped out of bed and shot both of his attackers dead. Back then, they didn't show the bullet, in slow motion, snapping to someone's skull, and blowing the back of the head off like a kicked overripe watermelon.

See, part of me hates the level of special effects the movies today use. I think all these special effects dumb down our ability to imagine something. When I read The Count of Monte Christo, my own imagination creates the terrible cell conditions along with the incredible escape. Watching the movie, the conjuring part of my mind gets no exercise. The thing is, if I haven't read the book already, sometimes the movie seems pretty good. Invariably however, having read the book before hand almost surely means I won't like the movie. I've sort of gotten off the track here, I guess. It seems like I'm saying simpler is better or some kind of Amish thing like that.

One more thing though. My 15 year old son sometimes watches Pimp My Crib (that's not the right name, but you get the idea) they show these recently rich rap stars or sports heroes, how their houses are decked out with huge TV screens and outrageously expensive stereo equipment -- stuff like that. I once asked my boy "do they have any books?", you know, since we see where they relax in their overstuffed sectionals, surrounding by gaming screens and home theater, but no bookcases. Not even one. Not even a nice little, narrow one. I laughed when my boy sort of mumbled under his breath "Dad, he can't read."

I guess I'm getting to that age where my mantra has shifted from "question authority", where my merry prankster friends and I figured we knew everything, 180° to an attitude of mistrust of the youth of this world just because I don't understand the new music and the toys kids play with.