ChaseMCP

That was my mom's reasoning too, for the same movie. She would make sure to skip the pregnancy scare scenes but was fine letting me watch the rest of the movie...although that proved to be a problem once 4 year old me started singing "look at me, I'm Sandra Dee. Lousy with virginity". Had no idea what I was singing, but still, oops. A lot of my other movies have already been mentioned, but Forrest Gump, The Shawshank Redemption, Remember the Titans, Ferris Bueller, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, The First Wives Club, The Birdcage, most Disney movies, and so many more.

I'll be honest, the reason I originally couldn't stand Taylor Swift was because I was just so sick of hearing her everywhere. whether it would be her songs or who was in her squad or whatever. But what made me actually start to dislike her was when I found out that she was suing people who made stuff with the line "haters gonna hate" cause she had trademarked it - because really the woman is richer than God knows how many people, and the people using the line are her fans so I don't see the need for the legal action, AND it's a saying that was around before she sung it. So I find this amusing, even if it doesn't end up going anywhere.

Lady Gaga's "Dance in the Dark" mentions a few random names, like Marilyn (Monroe), Judy (Garland), and (Stanley) Kubrick.

I'm tired of radios playing remixes of popular songs, especially for ones that don't need it. For example, the song 'The Hanging Tree' from The Hunger Games. I can't imagine why someone would listen to a song like that and then think "you know what this needs? Remix beats." Add in songs from Lorde and Lana del Ray and it just confuses me cause it takes away the originality given to said songs.

"Hope-watch" is a good term and explains how I approach certain shows. Like House. It was one of my absolute favorite shows in the early seasons, and it was because of that that I let some things slide in the third season (like the Tritter arc). Then season four came where half of the cast was replaced by less interesting characters. And the whole time I'm thinking "oh, they have to bring the old characters back soon. Who just dumps a bunch of established characters?" But it was all just a mess. For some reason Foreman stuck around, and poor Chase and Cameron were bumping around with no real purpose (I didn't even like Cameron much but I felt bad for JM for having to deal with that). It was like the writers only thought about how shocking it would be to replace these characters...and then had no idea what to do with said characters for several seasons. Then bring in all the House/Cuddy crap, and by the end of season 7 I was gone. The only things that had been keeping me were Hugh Laurie, Wilson, and the hope that the Chase character would survive the bad writing (nope). I did come back for the last few episodes of the show just to see how it ended, but it was almost a relief once I stopped watching. That's the worst, is watching a show you used to love get worse and worse each year and hoping for it to get better but then it doesn't.

God, I couldn't stand the friends in The Devil Wears Prada. Not to mention that during the "holding the phone away from her" scene I'm pretty sure Andy had just given them some free fancy purses, and their response was to risk getting her fired? Some friends.

I guess my UO for Game of Thrones would be that the top three favorite characters (aka the ones who get the most promotion) aren't in my list of favorites. I'm of course talking about Tyrion, Dany, and Jon Snow. That's not saying I don't like them - I do. But it really is a large cast of different characters, so my top favorites are some of the ones who don't get the focus, which is why it's always been disappointing to me that Tyrion in particular (even though Peter Dinklage does a great job) remains the "face" of the show. Especially because even though some characters are more important than others, it really is an ensemble show (Ned Stark dying proved that) but promotion-wise, you'd think Tyrion was 70% of the show. I'm not surprised, but again it is disappointing since despite any of the shows flaws, it has a talented cast that gets overlooked because of this. Also, I in no way blame PD for this. He's a great actor and deserves all the praise, but I'm tired of his character getting so much.

At this point, I've seen so many women in TV news wearing sleeveless dresses that I've seriously wondered if they were allowed to wear something else. It's gotten to a point where that's all they wear. I remember seeing Savannah Guthrie wearing a dress with long sleeves two days in a row and it stood out to me, when it really shouldn't have, because it was so rare. I've never watched Fringe so I can't comment on the wardrobe choices there, but one thing that NCIS always did right was even when they had Ziva wearing more makeup than she needed towards the end before she left the show, she always dressed appropriately for work. Yeah her fashion choices were weird sometimes, but (especially when in the field) her hair was up, her shoes were flat, and her clothes were reasonable. I actually remember in an earlier season when, it was a really hot day, Kate wore a basic dress to work, but when she was in the field later in the episode, she was wearing sneakers and her hair was up. And I'm not saying women can't do these tasks if they weren't dressed this way (on Burn Notice Fiona kicked a lot of ass while wearing different types of shoes and outfits), but I do hope for something reasonable when watching women in a professional setting. Or at least it'll help me take them more seriously. I never had an interest in Castle, but I caught a glimpse of an episode where the female lead has her hair down and is wearing spike heels (which seem SO practical when chasing suspects/sneaking up on them) and I couldn't take her seriously. And I agree so much about Sarah Shahi on Life. I absolutely hated how much they changed her for the second season, especially because Reese in the first season is one of my all time favorite female characters. In the first season she was so unique because she did dress like a real cop and had no problems with it...only for the second season to change all of that. And on a shallow note, I just saw a commercial for that Playing House show, and I really wish female characters could have a new hairstyle besides the "wavy, very loose curls that don't have a hair out of place". It seems silly, but so many characters have that hairstyle (which, granted a lot of real females have) that they blend together. And it makes it less believable when they're in the middle of some action...and the hair is still flawless. But I know, it's TV. Lack of flaws is to be expected. Some things never change.

Something I've noticed with female characters lately is that not only do they suffer heavily from critics who have always dislike female characters, but they also suffer heavily from critics who want more female characters. When a female character suffers from poor writing, people say it's an example of how the show must hate women as a result, not only ignoring the poor writing some of the male characters receive, but also dismissing all of the other female characters in the show. For example, Ani on True Detective. Like the other characters, people pointed out their disappointments with her character, but unlike the others she faced more scrutiny because she was a female. People commented on how her character was proof that True Detective didn't know how to write female characters. Why, when arguably ALL of the characters were written terribly, does she get the additional critique? People were quick to point out how as a female she was given the messed up sex life story, but seemed to ignore the positives of her character. She dressed appropriately, she knew how to defend herself in a reasonable way, she was serious about her job, she was good at her job, etc. I found her female detective character a breath of fresh air in the sea of female cops who wear 6-inch heels on the job and who are somehow able to kick ass for no reason other that to be a sexy bad-ass. She was a mess - like all the other characters on the show. I just wonder why people look at her character and insist that she's an example of the writers not being able to write female characters well when in this season the writers proved they couldn't write ANY of the characters well. As for the latter, in The Walking Dead (which did suffer in writing for females in the first couple seasons, but bounced back in season 3) when Beth died, people said it proved that the show can't write for female characters because she had a crappy story-line. Never mind that the other female characters included: Michonne who is one of the shows more unique characters, as well as a huge bad-ass, and Carol who has shown the greatest example of slow character development in the entire show. Because one female character had a death that became about Daryl in the end, the rest of the females are suddenly terrible too. When Glenn's story-line completely revolved around finding Maggie, how come people weren't accusing the show of terrible writing for all the males? And lastly, Game of Thrones. Yes, it does rely on rape too much, but because of what happened to Sansa last season, suddenly the show is terrible at writing women in general. I know it goes beyond Sansa a bit, with Cersei's rape the season before and Dany's a few seasons before that, but this is a show with a large variety of female characters. From Brienne to Cersei, from Arya to Melissandre, from Sansa to Dany, this show has a lot of different female characters. True, this is obviously because of George R.R. Martin but if the people behind the show hate women so much, how come they wrote in a scene with Brienne and the Hound (that wasn't in the books) and allowed Brienne to win? How come they softened Cersei up in the show and gave her more depth? Yeah, female characters have suffered from poor writing, but so have the males. Jaime suffered especially last year, as did Tyrion. Shows deserve criticism when they write terribly for female characters, I am completely for that. Especially as a woman myself, I want better female characters. However, I think it's a shame when hearing comments about these shows that dismiss some great female characters based on the poor writing of a few. It kind of becomes backwards, when with our efforts to push for better female characters we end up ignoring some of the great ones that are already in front of us. I just don't understand how people can look at shows like The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones, with so many unique female characters, and say the writers hate women. They need to write better for females, but they don't hate women. If they truly did, they could do a whole lot worse.

I just started watching Drunk History a few weeks ago, and I absolutely love it. At first glance I'd thought it'd be drunk people who would cover history events we already knew but because they were drunk there would be more silliness so I didn't expect a whole lot of history. Didn't it surprise me then that not only do they cover some lesser known events, but for the most part each segment is historically accurate, but still with silliness because drunk people. I can't stand being around drunk people in real life, but the history nerd in me decided to go for it and check out the show - I'm glad I did. And it helps that they have an impressive list of guest stars who aren't afraid to act completely ridiculous.

Bob's Burgers. I won't say I hate the show, because I don't, but I've watched it a couple times and I'm not feeling it. I just can't get past the two female characters who obviously have male voices, it's too distracting. It's still something I'll put on in the background occasionally, just in case it draws my interest at some point, but I'm not seeing it happen anytime soon. Archer. Another show I'm still sort-of trying but haven't gotten into. Sometimes I'll laugh at it, but I guess it's too...out there, maybe? As with Bob's Burgers, I'll keep Archer on in the background because I want to give it a chance, but nothing so far. And I watch South Park too, so I have nothing against these types of cartoons. I guess they're just not fitting me.

It may be more on the modern side of history, but I was thinking how if there's a Massachusetts episode they could do a bit about Jaws. From the behind the scenes disasters, to it becoming the first blockbuster/the movie that began Steven Spielburg's career, to its impact on shark hunting/shark studies, there's a lot that someone could work with.

Two performances from Pirates of the Caribbean: First, Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow, of course. Ignore for a minute how many unfortunate sequels were created from the first movie and how this character probably overstayed his welcome. His performance as Jack Sparrow was really unique and a truly original character. I kind of wish Johnny Depp had won the Oscar that year because say what you will about how long the character has been around, I doubt there's been another Oscar-worthy performance like it. Second, Geoffrey Rush as Barbossa. Johnny Depp gets all of the attention for the movie (for good reason) but whenever I re-watch the movie, I'm finding myself enjoying Rush's performance more and more. He just looks like he's having a blast playing the character. He's a villain, but isn't a Big Bad character so he's allowed to have more fun. He's in a fun pirate movie and he knows it. He and Depp had a great chemistry and I'd say he gets the biggest laughs from me in the movie (after JD, of course).

As a history major, I like the fact that for the most part each bit is historically accurate, and the bits that aren't are completely obvious so it's still enjoyable. Also, I like that it's informative and shares bits of history people may not be aware of. And I hate drinking/being around drunk people so I'm very surprised at how much I like this show.

I'll second Leverage, and I believe it's also on Hulu Plus and the ION channel airs reruns of it. Now that it's finished its first season a show I'll recommend to anyone is The Brink. I don't hear many people talk about it, which is a shame because it's actually a fun show - as long as you know what you're getting into. It's vulgar and has a fair amount of sex, but it's hilarious and has a great cast. It's a political show and the best thing about it is that all the characters are given personalities, including secondary characters. It's not just "Americans are good, other countries aren't". All of the characters are given chances to shine which makes it more of a diverse show than you'd expect, especially since a lot of the great lines come from said secondary characters. And Jack Black isn't as...Jack Black as usual in it (I think he actually does a good job). It's ridiculous, it's fun, and is surprisingly original. Just something to watch if you've got a few half hour breaks to kill and want a few laughs.

I'm glad I'm not the only one noticing that the show seems to be relying too much on sexual humor. I know the previous version had some sexual humor as well, but (probably due to the censors) it was more hidden which made it more funny, IMO, and clever. Wayne Brady actually gave an interview recently about how for an improv class he's teaching (or something like that) he has them work without swearing because it allows them to try harder instead of relying on the easiest humor. That's why bits like "things you can say about your [blank], but not your partner" and "if you know what I mean" are so great - they essentially make the same joke but the way they get there is much more impressive (I still can't believe Colin got away with saying "come!" after the "things you can say about your dog, but not your girlfriend"). I guess I just expect more from this particular show. Though at least they didn't do Dead Bodies this episode. That's another one where I'm just uncomfortable watching now because even though I know the guest must be aware of what Colin may do, it's so predictable and a bit creepy which is why it's better when it's not used so much.

Just watched the end of season 2/beginning of season 3 and I wish the show had spaced out the time between Kate's death and Ziva's entrance. For one, it would have been interesting to explore the aftermath of losing a colleague/friend in such a sudden manner (she's laughing and then boom, dead. No dying words, nothing). They did a little bit but it got overshadowed by Ziva and Jenny's entrance. For another, it felt like the show was shoving the new characters in before it finished saying goodbye to the old one and it was too distracting. On that note, I also hated Ziva's second entrance when she comes back to work for NCIS mainly because of the last scene when she's at Kate's desk. Nevermind whatever his reasons are, Gibbs is her boss and says she can't sit there so she should accept it as a newbie and sit at the other desk. She's only been there for one case and she thinks she's entitled to snoop through the desk of the dead colleague, whose death her new team is still coming to terms with, and then demand to sit there. It would've been a better sell to me if she had been there for a few cases and then her reasoning for wanting to sit there be from wanting to be more involved with the team or something. But she's only been there a few days, and her new team doesn't trust her yet because her half-brother murdered said dead colleague. Again, had she been there for a few more cases this would've been easier to swallow, but the fact she does all of this after one case reeked of entitlement and threw me off of her character before she really started. I don't care if she and Gibbs had a special bond, had I been him I would've found that more disrespectful than endearing.

I like Mamma Mia! I am in my twenties, not a middle aged woman (as every punchline to every joke about the movie tells me) and I enjoy it because it is a silly, fun movie. It's gorgeous to look at, has a lot of recognizable actors who look like they're just having fun and aren't taking themselves seriously, and has catchy tunes. It's ridiculous and cheesy but it doesn't try to be anything different. You'd think it had committed a crime with how vicious some people are about it. It's a fun movie, and is great to watch with a group of people and I don't think anyone watching it expects it to be a grand masterpiece. I also enjoy Grease and think people take the ending of the movie too seriously. Fat Amy was my least favorite part of Pitch Perfect and is the reason I've held off on watching the sequel. I hate the new style of Disney movies and wish it would go back to 2D animation. The animation is impressive, but with Pixar and Dreamworks, I feel like Disney needs to go back to it's roots. Leonardo DiCaprio is a good actor and I'm sure he'll get his due someday, but I don't think it's a crime that he doesn't have an Oscar yet. Frankly, I dread the day he gets a make-up Oscar that someone else who deserves it for a better performance should get instead. I am growing tired of all the remakes, sequels, franchises, etc.

Tom Hanks is my five movie man: Forrest Gump, A League of Their Own, The Green Mile, Catch Me If You Can, Toy Story movies (they count!). Then there are movies of his like Philadelphia and Saving Private Ryan that I'll watch but not in a marathon because those are emotionally draining. And then there are ones like Big and You've Got Mail that I wouldn't seek out to watch but would totally watch if they were on because they're fun. Then there's the "I may or may not be interested in this movie, but I will totally see it because [insert actor] is in it and is bound to give a great performance" test and Tom Hanks is one of those actors for me. So is Meryl Streep.

Everything about Brooklyn Nine-Nine fits this for me. Probably because all of the commercials advertising it when it first aired were only showing scenes from the pilot, which I think most people agree was not its strongest episode. That said, it was mainly the characters that surprised me: - Jake, because his character looked like he was supposed to be childish and obnoxious and because he was played by Andy Samburg. Not only does Samburg play him well, but the show finds a nice balance between childish/obnoxious and caring/competent that it works out. - Rosa, because from commercials she looked to be the typical mysterious hot girl cop, but she actually proved to be more than that, by being bad-ass, funny, and serious about her job. - Boyle, because if he were played by a different actor he could be an incredibly creepy character but the actor plays him just right so that he's more naive and innocent than creepy. - Amy, because she looked to be stuck in the "no fun allowed" role but is actually allowed to have fun without compromising her character. And... - Gina, who wasn't as bad as I expected (though could be taken down a notch) and while she's my least favorite of the bunch, it doesn't mean I don't like her. I expected to like Andre Braugher and Terry Crews, so it didn't surprise me that they played great characters. And I'm glad I checked out this show because it's now one of my favorites. The characters get to be silly while being good at their jobs. Each person has a defined personality. The girls especially get to play three unique characters who provide just as many laughs as the boys and aren't relegated to being the tits and ass of the show. There's a lot of diversity. And while the plot points are pretty ordinary, the way they're executed is different and refreshing.

There have been a lot of Family skits on lately and while watching them I've realized the main reason I didn't like them was because they ran too long. There were other skits on the show that would run long, but it seemed like EVERY Family skit just dragged after a while and I can only stand watching this obnoxious family for so long. However I have been appreciating the performances more with each skit. It's almost like the more obnoxious the character, the more oomph the performer can give so I do have fun watching that.

I just watched Get On Up and for the first half thought it was a decent movie mostly because I thought Chadwick Boseman did a great job. But in the second half all I could think of was that the movie was too damn long and it caused it to drag as a result. Even CB couldn't save it for me. Could've been under two hours. And speaking of that, there was NO way in hell The Wolf of Wall Street needed to be three hours long. None. Especially with such a horrible group of people. I ended up hating the movie so much more because of that and I was actually enjoying it at first.

Looks-wise, Richard Dreyfuss is more cute than hot for me, but I absolutely LOVE his laugh and it gives him extra points.

April from Parks and Recreation. I actually stopped watching the show because I couldn't stand how surly she was. I could only listen to her say she hated everything so often before I wanted to smack her. Brennan and Booth from Bones. I stopped watching it years ago, but even early in the show I couldn't stand them. Brennan reached a point when she seemed too stupid to live and Booth was way too full of himself. Then I have a couple that I don't really hate, but I'm not as in love with them as many are so sometimes I find myself disliking them because of it: - Carol from The Walking Dead. She's actually had the best arc because she's grown so much, but I agree that something had to happen when Rick found out she killed the people at the prison. Neither Rick nor she came out of that plot looking good, but I see Rick get most of the blame from fans who seem to forget she killed two unarmed people. - Alex Cabot from Law and Order: SVU. I don't really hate her but I don't like her either. She was just...there. I never understood what made her so special that people demanded she come back. I'll also add to the Phoebe from Friends comments. Thing is, I've never watched Friends specifically because any time I've decided to watch an episode and saw a scene with her it put me off from watching the rest of the show. I just can't stand obnoxious characters and that always appeared to be her trait. I may try again, but I'll have to swallow through her scenes (and I'm not sure I'll enjoy Joey either - I tend to not like characters who seem too stupid to live).

One of my dream adaptation movies I've always hoped for (but will most likely never get) is an adaptation of Sophie Scholl and the White Rose, which is based on the group of German students who opposed Hitler's rule during WWII. Steven Spielberg would direct and Emma Stone would star (because even though she doesn't look like her really, there are some photos of Scholl where they look similar). There's already a great movie about the White Rose called Sophie Scholl: The Final Days, but it's in German and I don't know how large an audience it reached and it's a story that I think deserves exposure. Sure, it's another WWII story, but there aren't many that focus on a female, and this is about Germans who did fight back. And if it ever came about (without Stone, because I have to accept that she's probably too old for it anyway) it would be a great role for a young actress.