True Blood

I started watching True Blood this week because I kept hearing that it was freaking amazing. I'm behind the times, I know. Even though I'd heard good reviews, I wasn't entirely keen on watching it because 1) I've been burnt out on vampires since before Angel went off the air, and 2) it seemed like a depressing show. Although I'm only two episodes into the first season, I'm already really into it.

 

One thing I always appreciate about fantasy/science fiction is when it approaches an old idea in a new way. I don't need more Buffy the Vampire Slayer-esque shows and movies where vampires are all evil and in hiding, and there's only a select few who can save us; we already have seven seasons of that. And I certainly don't need the melodramatic teen angst of Twilight; I'm not twelve.

True Blood, however, is very different. I won't say it's completely different, because it definitely utilizes the vampire cliches that have made the whole genre a big fat cliche; but it's the differences that make this show so compelling. Though vampires have been in hiding for centuries, they live out in the open now and are even working towards establishing civil rights for themselves as people. So far, each episode shows this political battle going on in the background in the form of pundits talking on CNN and Bill Maher. While they do need blood to live, there's a synthetic product on the market called "True Blood," apparently manufactured as a way to ensure that vampires and humans can live side by side without fear.

Apparently, this is his only expression.

I like that the show sets up vampires as sort of a downtrodden class of people who just want civil rights, but it still makes a point of showing that they're dangerous. They look like normal people until their fangs drop down, and even then that's the only change in their appearance (unlike in Buffy where their entire face becomes more demonic-looking). For the most part, they aren't super pale, wasted, emo people, which is emphasized in the opening scene of the series wherein a portly Southern guy in a hunter's cap and camo reveals himself as a vampire.

However, the main vampire character, Bill, plays up every cliche in the book, constantly staring down Anna Paquin's character, Sookie, with a smoldering gaze beneath hooded eyes. I don't know if it was their intention to make it so ridiculously over-the-top, but I found myself laughing at just how often he stared at her like that. I suppose being immortal and seeing everyone you know and love grow old and die would make a guy depressed, but his angst is overplayed. The character is primarily saved by the fact that Stephan Moyer is undeniably hot, and he has incredible chemistry with Paquin.

Since the show revolves around Sookie, it makes sense that her character is the most well-written and complex. The audience needs to sympathize with her right away, and this is accomplished very well by her courage and sense of right and wrong. She isn't intimidated by Bill, and actually teases him because he can't fly or change shape (which I guess some vampires can do). In those situations, Bill's character is redeemed because he is so obviously out of his depth around Sookie, easily embarrassed and flustered by her teasing. I really appreciate that the writers threw that into his character development because it shows vulnerability and that he's more than just a brooding hot guy.

Though I've only seen two episodes, I like where it's going; and there are lots of little hints that suggest there may be more than vampires out there. If you've already seen a ton of True Blood, NO SPOILERS!!! Even though I can usually anticipate what's going to happen because I've consumed so much fiction over the years, I still like to get there on my own without it being told to me before hand. If you haven't seen it, then I would recommend it, especially if you like shows such as Dexter and Battlestar Galactica.

WARNING: Since this show is on HBO, there are a ton of graphic sex scenes. That's actually another thing I don't especially like about the show; in my opinion, a good story doesn't need graphic sex, but I guess they felt that they might as well write it in since they're on HBO and they can get away with it.

Romantic Regrets

A couple days ago, a study was reported on in which 44% of the women surveyed had regrets about their romantic relationships. I thought it was pretty remarkable that so many people are unhappy in their relationships or felt that there was a "one who got away" that they wished they were with. However, it first bears mentioning that the only methodology mentioned was that 370 adults were surveyed ranging in age from 20 to 80, but no details on how many of those people were women or how many women were in each age range.

In any case, this story made me think about society's expectations for romantic relationships, and whether we're getting in our own way. If you see your significant other as a "stomach-scratching blob," I could see why you wouldn't be happy; but regretting the one who got away just keeps you stuck in a fantasy world of what might have been. In all likelihood, you would still have had the same number of problems with "the one" that you do with your current partner, you only think things would be better because you weren't with "the one" long enough for those problems to arise. Many people have this strange notion that the right relationship is supposed to be easy, but that's just wishful thinking. No relationship is like that because everyone has their flaws and faults. The real question is whether you love that person enough and have patience enough to work through it.

Sometimes, things just can't be worked out, which is well and good when you're dating since you can go your separate ways and deal with your issues or not as you see fit. But what about what this means for a marriage? What if you have children? How do your regrets play into that scenario? Do they get so in the way of your relationship that you don't try as hard to be a good spouse and parent? I've heard it said that if you're married without kids, then you're really just dating; you don't know what a marriage is actually like. Obviously I can't speak to that with experience, but it makes some sense to me. Maybe so many women had regrets about their romantic relationships because they didn't consider how kids would change the relationship? Maybe both sides are just so tired from raising their children that they can't even think about romance?

I think maybe the real problem is that people change. It's unrealistic to expect yourself and the person you're with to stay the same for forty years or more. Every experience we have changes us a little bit, and maybe it happens that couples change into people that they don't want to be with anymore. We place so much weight and importance on falling in love and feeling that strong connection, but maybe we should be thinking about whether we can change along with the person we're with rather than grow apart. That's not to say that I don't believe in falling in love or that I think we should settle for the best that's currently available. I feel so sad for people I know who settle for someone who's obviously wrong for them because they don't believe in real, honest love. Even though I don't believe in "the one," I do think it's important to hold out for someone who not only makes you feel good, but makes you feel good about yourself.

So are people making bad decisions with their relationships that they regret? Or are they just not working hard enough to keep the romance alive, and so they regret their choice? It's difficult not to look back and think, "I should have done that differently," but could you have? I guess this "study" bothers me because I don't see the point in dwelling on regrets. You can't know how things will turn out, and it's statistically impossible to make the right decision every time.

I am at a disadvantage here, however. My longest relationship lasted a little over two years, and that ended over four years ago, during which I haven't been in a relationship at all. So maybe those of you in long-term relationships could weigh in? What do you think about the high instance of women who regret their romantic relationships?

My Mom

I think that I'm a pretty self-aware person; I can recognize things within myself and their origins, and I've spent a remarkable amount of time considering the reasons for why I am the way that I am and how it affects my life. All of that probably stems from acute feelings of insecurity from being alone a lot when I was growing up, and by alone I mean that I didn't have many friends and I was virtually incapable of making new ones even if I wanted to. Those who knew me in college can attest to the fact that I changed a great deal from freshman year to senior year, primarily in that I broke out of my shell of insecurity and actually tried to be a little more outgoing (which does wonders for your friendships, let me tell you).

More than anything, though, the key factor in shaping the person I am is my relationship with my mom. If you know me well, you know that my mom is the most important person in the world to me, but I don't think I even understood how important she was until about a year or two ago. I realized that many of the decisions I made in my life, and the idiosyncrasies that I have, are a result of my mom's influence. For those of you who advocate the nurture over nature theory of parenting, it probably comes as no surprise that my mom has shaped the person I am to such a great degree. That's not to say that my mom was intentionally trying to guide my life choices, aside from just wanting to raise a decent human being; I made decisions and I act in a way that's reminiscent of my mother because she is such an important part of my life.

For example, my interest in Japan is entirely because my mom is Japanese. I have never had any desire to look into the Armenian language or culture, and I don't even really think of myself as Armenian because I have always felt closer to my mom. That's not a reflection of how I feel about my dad's side of the family; I just have always felt closer to my mom, and so the desire to be closer to that side of myself took precedence. She never insisted that I take Japanese or even implied that it would be good for me to get in touch with my background, but I cannot recall a time when I did not want to learn Japanese. So in a sense, I got my Masters in Japanese because of my mom.

Other things are less obvious, such as the way I write my checks or the word choice I use when I talk. As a kid, I even tried to like the same foods that my mom liked, the most notable of which is mushrooms. However, I still hate mushrooms with an undying passion, so I don't copy my mother in everything. In fact, as I grow older, I become more aware of the person my mom truly is and why I don't want to be exactly like her, which in turn grants me new insights into my own character. There are aspects of myself that I believe arose in direct contrast to the way in which my mom behaves, but whether she raised me to think this way or I developed that thought process in reaction to her influence is kind of a moot point, I think.

Whatever the case, though, I would attribute any successes I have as a person to her. Seeing the sorts of relationships people I know have with their parents, it becomes more and more apparent to me that my mom has afforded me with a remarkable level of independence and freedom that a lot of parents don't grant their children. I am ridiculously lucky to have a parent like her; and if I ever change my mind about having kids, I hope that I've learned enough from my mom to be at least as good of a parent as she is.

Expanding My Horizons

This weekend, I saw Dirty Harry for the first time, and I was completely blown away by my friend’s observation that Clint Eastwood’s character, Harry Callahan, bears a striking resemblance to Spike Spiegal from Cowboy Bebop. They don’t just dress similarly, but the characters also share certain idosyncracies in the way they carry themselves and address the people around them. While watching Clint Eastwood’s performance, I could see little things that more than likely inspired Spike’s character, especially when it came to one-liners and stand-offs with the villian.

Uncanny, isn't it?

The correlation between these two characters probably isn’t surprising to people who are well-informed fans of Cowboy Bebop, but it was to me. I even searched out an LA Times article from 2003 that shows Cowboy Bebop director Shinichiro Watanabe making a direct correlation between the two. So why do I think this is interesting? For one thing, I absolutely love Cowboy Bebop, but I would never have watched Dirty Harry if not for the fact that it just happened to be on TV while we were waiting for our Chinese take-out to arrive. While I enjoyed seeing where some of the inspiration for Spike’s dress and attitude came from, I did find parts of the movie campy; but that has to do with the fact that I’m accustomed to a production value that movies of the 70s can’t really deliver. In any case, Cowboy Bebop has it’s share of camp as well, but I love it anyway.

Before this weekend, I wouldn’t have given a movie like Dirty Harry a chance because I would have assumed that it wasn’t my type of film. How many films, shows, books, etc. do we pass over because we think we aren’t interested in them? Dirty Harry embodies a lot of the elements of Cowboy Bebop that I enjoy a great deal—such as Spike’s cavalier attitude towards his chosen profession even though he genuinely believes in what he’s doing—but I might never have known that it was a movie I would like even though it’s so highly acclaimed.

So I’m taking this as a challenge to myself to go back to the things I enjoy, figure out where the creators found their inspiration, and maybe discover a few “new” things to love. If you find yourself with a dearth of entertainment, this could be a good way to get rid of your boredom without resorting to reality television.

Awesome Photo of Awesomeness!

My friend, Joey, alerted me to the existence of this photo. I don't remember him taking this; but sure enough, there's my hand and DS in the upper right.

I firmly believe that this is pretty frickin' awesome because it brings back particularly fond memories of my time at PAX Prime this past year. When I went to PAX for the first time in 2009, I pretty much just worked the whole weekend because I didn't really know anyone else there. In any case, I didn't even know what I wanted to do--I just wanted to *be* there. So, I did my volunteer work, but did not play a single game until the volunteers' after party the day after the show ended. I know, shocking!

Last year, however, I got in on a game of Metroid Pinball; and though we didn't play for very long, it's still one of my favorite moments of that PAX. Before then, it had been something like three years since I played with someone else, let alone three other people. It's interesting how much satisfaction we get from playing games with each other. I imagine human beings have been creating games to entertain ourselves for thousands of years, and having that interactive element is half the experience. As social creatures, it isn't nearly as satisfying for us to play a game alone. In fact, I often forgo logging time on my DS in favor of reading; but I'll jump at the opportunity to get in on a game with other people.

So, in honor of PAX East, which is starting tomorrow in Boston, I think I'll try to play some games with friends this weekend. Who's in?