I don't know your kid - my (longwinded) thoughts on censorship.

One thing I've come across in two of the jobs I've held (movie theatre, video store) is parents who want to censor their children, but don't really know how, and seek my advice in doing so.

 I need to say: I'm not a fan of censorship. I believe that people reach a certain age (and not necessarily the "18" the government and film board believe) where there's just no sense sheltering them anymore.

The problem is, that age varies depending on the individual. For example, I was never censored in what I watched/read/listened to. I used to get ridiculously scared when someone would get stabbed or hacked in movies, and mom would consistently repeat, "It's not real, you know." It took me a few years to catch on to this fact, but eventually, I was fine with violence and gore and "scary" things.

 As far as language went, where I live, everyone's got a foul mouth on them. In most cases, far worse than anything you'll hear in the movies. I've said it before and I'll say it again - I swear like a sailor. It's not ladylike, it's not polite - but I just plain ol' don't fucking care. I know when it's inappropriate to curse. I don't do it at work (at least, not around customers), I don't do it around the elderly, I don't do it around small children. So I don't consider it a problem. My filthy mouth has nothing to do with movies or television or rap music (LOL always the scapegoat, right?), it was environment and the kids at school and basically every other factor.

I wasn't even censored from "sexual content". This seems to be the one thing parents who censor their kids are concerned with, and I agree with them, for some reason I can't put my finger on, though I don't necessarily know if it's the right thing to do. I was allowed to watch movies with sex scenes. I didn't grow up promiscuous; far from it. I was actually the most moralistic person I knew, and still am. There was not and never will be casual sex in my life, I understand the consequences as well as the value of having a solid relationship if you're engaging in such things. No one will ever call me a slut. I won't get a disease. I won't get pregnant from a one night stand. I'm not saying that this has any relation to the fact I wasn't treated as a child and was never taught that sex was dirty or wrong, I'm just saying, it's possible. 


I've known plenty of over-protected children who have grown into one of two things:
1) Socially awkward young adults or
2) Rebellious young adults who make poor life decisions.

The former is preferable to the latter, but neither are the ideal. In 6th grade I had a silly little website. I'm talking pre-Piczo days. It was an Angelfire site, all text, not a single picture. On it I mentioned my friends - by first name only. One of my friends had a ridiculously common first name. Not only was it a common name, but the most widely-accepted spelling of said name. Anyway, I remember her parents contacting me, referring to it as "this so-called website" and telling me I had to take her name off of it or they'd take legal action.

Yep, they email-intimidated an 11-year-old girl because their daughter, whom they'd named something that a dozen girls in every grade are named, was mentioned in passing on my website. Looking back, it was a lulzworthy event, at the time, I was terrified.

Long story short, their little girl they worked so hard to protect got pregnant and had a kid in high school. Again - I'm not saying there's a direct correlation. Maybe it would've happened either way. But my point is, their extreme protective measured didn't prevent it.

This has just been my personal experience - I was uncensored, unsheltered, and turned out just fine. Anyone who tries to argue otherwise would only cite my lack of post-secondary education, which is something that is all about the $$$$ and has nothing to do with my un-censored upbringing, thankyouverymuch.

Video games are a hard point. The Call of Duty games are ridiculously violent, come with a 17+ rating, but the majority of parents let their kiddies play them. My 10-year-old brother loves them. They've got bad language to match the violence, too. Despite this, my brother isn't a senselessly violent kid; he knows the violence is just a game, and such bizz doesn't fly in real life.

I think it's an intelligence and awareness thing, at the end of the day. Disturbed people who watch violent movies or play Grand Theft Auto might go out and kill someone, however not only are they the minority, but if you're that messed up mentally, if it wasn't the movie/game/song/book that triggered your outburst, something else eventually would've been your breaking point. There's no sense blaming media and pop culture.

That being said,  I don't doubt for a moment my kids will be smart (because I won't mate with anyone who isn't at least as intelligent as I am, I have a very low tolerance for stupidity, in case you can't tell haha), and if they mature at the rate myself or my siblings did, I will treat them as my parents treated me: a human being with real thoughts and opinions, capable of discerning what is real and what isn't, what is acceptable and what isn't, who can watch a movie like Boys Don't Cry or Law Abiding Citizen and be able to handle it, comprehend it, and discuss how it made them feel.

I should mention that, in case you think I sound crazy, I'm not talking about eliminating boundaries for little kids. 10 and under is a whole different ball game. But once you're 11 or 12, you're capable of so much more mentally, and have been exposed to your fair share of how un-pretty the world can really be.

Last year, a woman called looking for recommendations for a horror movie for her 11-year-old daughter. I initially jumped to movies like The Grudge or The Ring. Silly little thrills with minimal violence and language, and no sex. I also mentioned PG-rated titles like The Sixth Sense. She deemed all too scary, and The Sixth Sense, "Had that scene where the boy was a ghost and missing part of his skull for a second, didn't it? Not until she's at least 13!" Had the movie been released in 2010 instead of 1999, her daughter could've went to movie theatre and seen it herself without an adult. That case just seemed a little extreme for me.

You get the other end of the spectrum where people think Pirahna is appropriate for their 9-year-old. Some movies are just filled with gratuitous nudity and gore and language that aren't conducive to the plot, and although a 14 or 15 -year-old would see the entertainment value, it's just exploitation for smaller kids. But what can I say? I don't know your kid. S/He might be insanely mature, who am I to judge? I can only warn.

Which brings me full circle to the top of this blog; sometime, parents ask me to be the deciding factor. Sure, I've seen most of the movies they're asking about. I know what's in them. But how do I know if a movie like, say, What Lies Beneath is going to meet their standards? My sister and I were 12 and 9, respectively, when we watched that movie - every weekend, I might add, we loved it. It's not overly-objectionable, but what if I say it's perfectly fine, and it turns out I ended up with helicopter-Mom who thought The Sixth Sense was inappropriate for a kid going on 12?

Parents, don't put me on the spot. I know what kind of movies I'd let my future kids watch, depending on their maturity. I know people in high school who shouldn't be watching certain movies because they're so immature. And yet my brother sat through the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy with me when he was 5-years-old, and was no worse for the wear - in fact, he loved it. I don't know a damn thing about how you raised your kid. I don't know what your values are -vs- my own.

The only thing you can really do is sit down, watch the movie first, and decide for yourself. Or go on IMDb and read their Parental Advisory pages - it has every detail in each category (sex/nudity, language, violence, scary/disturbing images) written out, just the facts, totally unbiased, so you can make the call.

However, as any kid will vouch for - if there's something they really want to see, and you're not letting them. They'll find a way. Just keep that in mind.

I could go on a completely separate tangent in literary censorship (not a day goes by I don't feel terribly for what Judy Blume went through), but that's another rant for another day.

*glove slap* I challenge you - well, actually, myself - to a duel (and by duel, I mean, let's be responsible and update the blog!)

I always try to construct what I'm saying in a coherent, neat, pretty, easy-to-follow manner, so all you lovelies can follow it with ease (also, I just found out via spellcheck that Google Chrome considers "lovelies" a word; that's kick-ass), but I've gotta say, it always makes me feel like I'm writing an essay. I think I'd update this bitch far more often if I kept it to one fairly organized, possibly list-form'd entry per month, and just let the word vomit... ew, spew*? the rest of the time.

I feel like I'm slackin', and that's one thing I must admit I'm terribly awesome at. If being a slacker were considered a professional position, it would be my full-time job and I'd be raking in the dough. Unfortunately, quite the opposite is true in life. And that's why I'm broke as a joke - I'm lazy. I really am.

But, I don't wantttttttttttt to be slacking, which is why I'm going to ease up on the heavy format of my rants and raves. I pinky-promise to post 3 times this week. As in, from today til next Tuesday. There will be 3 updates. Not one. Not even just 2. THR33. Like, not including this. What I'm typing right now is useless, and you're not even reading it. Don't lie to me!

It's go-time, fuckers. Let's see if I can do this.

PS, Twitter. Follow me. herpderp.

*that's just gross.

CHRISTMAS IS EATING MY TIME/HYPOTHETICAL SOUL

So, I'll give you two things this week:

First, this is the picture my grandparents are getting framed copies of /easiest gift ever/ (they loves them some kitties).

Getting a picture of them together in their Christmas garb proved to be an impossible task.

And secondly - and this is terribly un-Christmassy, but a Thing nonetheless - My People You'll See in Hell article, about the McDonald's murders that happened in my town in '92. Seriously sad stuff. I wrote this for them back in October, am insanely proud of myself (a LOT of work went into it), but never got around to linking it til now. For those of you who don't know. PYSIH is on my "linkage to awesome" page, and is one of my favorite websites. It's fantastic if you like reading about criminals.

And that's all I have for you. I turn 22 next week, ew. I'll try to get something up here before then. Happy holidays, bitches!

How I keep the holiday spirit; in the form of movies, music and mayhem.

*before I lose anyone, I'd like to mention I'm back on Twitter, http://twitter.com/brittanimac ... follow me.
The thing about Christmas (well, I guess there are a lot of things, really, but in relation to me and this blog) is that you either love it or hate it. Even though it's one of those things that is fairly black and white, I will admit that Christmas completely and utterly stresses me out, as I stated in my last post. It's expensive, it's messy (especially with a live tree and two cats that are insistent it is their jungle gym), and busybusybusy - but I do still love it. I've been decorated for a few weeks now, and my shopping is about 40% done (I realize that's not much, but people - it's Decemeber 8th. The last two Christmases I was still shopping Christmas Eve. This is progress.)  I had to delete dozens of songs from my iPod to fit all my Christmas tunes, and have watched both versions of the Grinch more than once, Fred Claus twice, and A Christmas Story four times (before finally purchasing it at Wal-Mart for $10 a few days ago) - all over the last two weeks.

I am so into Christmas this year, it's scary.

Marcus, however, is not. He hates me for this.

At least Max is entertained.

That being said, what does one write about Christmas? As I said; you can either rave maniacally about how wonderful it is, or you can tear it to shreds.

I could really do either - I hate how commercial Christmas is, as I've said time and time again, it's stressful, it's annoying, and it just makes me fucking tired. I'm not religious in the least, so I don't WANT to put the "Christ" back in "Christmas", stop asking me to.

Or I could go on about how pretty the snow is (though it's like +8 degrees CELSIUS right now... are we sure it's December?), and how wonderful the songs make me feel, and how happy every damned Christmas special makes me, and how I could stare at the lights or a snow globe forever (not to mention the free drinks I over-indulged in at my work Christmas party! /me pukes... everywhere... sorry wonderful boyfriend who has to deal with that.).

OR! I could do what I do best: List things. Mini-lists, mind you, with minimal explanation, just to show you how I roll this time o' years.

How I spend my Christmas vacation*, in list form.

*the only vacation I've had in the last 3 years was a 3-day trip to PEI with the boyfriend, so this is a filthy lie.

A Trip Down Memory Lane: Checking on some old favorites to see if they withstood the test of time.

Now to interrupt your regular programming of ranting and general dragon-lady yelling, with something a little different. As awesome as it feels to get some Legit Issues off my chest every week, sometimes, you just gotta slow it down, sit back, and examine something a little less serious.

You may recall that I dedicated a large portion of my time to the absolute unbridled horror and confusion that today's children's entertainment sparks in the hearts of people my age.  When I was young, nothing I watched really had any educational value. Did it impact me negatively? Well, my spelling and grammar skills are on par if not above and beyond that of the average person, I'm certainly well-read and well-spoken, and I can string together a decently-worded and (mostly) error-free sentence with ease. Therefore, I conclude that the terrible movies and cartoons that essentially babysat me in my youth haven't impacted my development negatively. Sure, there were plenty of "moral" lessons in the form of a gigantic purple* Dinosaur who liked to sing**, and I'm sure Full House had some sort of... wholesome... something.

*First of all, that is NOT purple. Barney is magenta, plain and simple. Today actually happens to be Day of Purple, to raise awareness of the recent string of gay suicides, and I am wearing 4 different shades of the colour, none of which are even close to the weird, pinky-reddish thing that is Barney.
** On another Barney note, the other day a middle-aged customer was discussing Barney with me, and how he always really, really unsettled her, and how she didn't like her now-13-year-old son watching it, because in her opinion, Barney is just a Big "Purple" Child Molester, and who the hell sings about loving kids he barely knows!? She brought up many valid points, I must say.

Lack of any educational value aside, were the shows we watched growing up actually any good? I'd love to pretend like came out of the womb with a deep appreciation for Scorcese films and Meryl Streep's acting, but it'd be a filthy fucking lie. I watched Power Rangers. Religiously. And this weird, muppet-laden show that was only on at 5AM called Kingdom Adventures. Sometimes, I'll go back and watch something I enjoyed as a tyke, like Good Burger, and, though stupid - still find it uproariously funny.

So, with the help of YouTube and Retro Junk, I'm going to put some of the old favorites to a modern-day test, and see if they really were as awesome as we, as 5-10-year-olds thought, or if our tiny brains just didn't know "epic".

***

What has withstood the test of time?

A tribute to the greats: Movies that are SO BAD they're good.

It seems like every movie I have seen in the past month since Christopher Nolan's magnum opus of a film, Inception, has been awful. Actually, to be fair, "awful" isn't the proper moniker; I believe "mediocre" is more fitting.

It doesn't matter if I saw it at the drive-in or rented it; whatever it was, was not good. The problem is, I may have "Post-Inception Syndrome" (which is NOT a real term, obviously something I just decided upon), being that in comparison to the sheer awesome, epic nature of Inception, everything else seems to ooze mediocrity in comparison. I don't know if that's the case, or if these movies are just that forgettable.

As I said, these are not bad movies. Nope. See, bad movies are actually kind of fun. As I've worked in customer service my whole working "career" (if you can call it that), I know that one thing people love to do is complain. Hell, I'm a whiner myself. The good thing about bitching about TV or movies is that no one gets hurt (unless you wrote or directed the damn thing, that is). It's a healthy way to vent. The problem with mediocre movies is that they don't even have the entertainment value that goes along with making fun of the terrible flicks.

I've seen my fair share of bad movies (Open Water being the absolute WORST). I've also seen a myriad of So-Bad-It's-Good types. They are awful, often-times low-budget, usually "horror" movies, and so ridiculously impossible to take seriously that they are 100% fun.

I haven't seen one in ages. So here's a short list of some of the
Best of the Worst:

***
(PS, I've made them clickable so you can check 'em out on IMDb!)

[1] The People Under the Stairs (1991):

I first saw this movie when I was 14. I think my sister (who is 3 years younger and has been watching slasher flicks since she was about 6-years-old) rented it. I had the misfortune of watching it with her... I was TERRIFIED! Upon watching it again at 20, I now find it HYSTERICALLY FUNNY. The whole thing is just plain silly; there are gaping plotholes (are the People Under the Stairs alive or dead? I'd say they're like zombies, but then one dies?).

RUN-ON SENTENCE SUMMARY -Basically there's this little black kid named Foo who needs to rob these people to pay for someone's operation but gets trapped in the house and the people are crazy and called Mommy and Daddy but they're actually brother and sister and they steal children and cut out their eyes or tongues or ears if they see, speak, or hear evil, they can't find the perfect boy-child because of it and they keep them locked up under the stairs in the basement, and they have a daughter named Alice they abuse the shit out of and keep locked up... IT'S RIDICULOUS.

That being said, it's also CLASSIC. You get some hilariously over-the-top performances, a completely unbelievable plot, some good, jumpy scares, and overall, just a really fun, trashy cinematic experience. It's constantly rented out at my store. A cult-classic, for sure. Oh, and it's a Wes Craven (Scream, anyone?) film.


[2] Clash of the Titans (1981)

I spoke of terribly mediocrity before, and the 2010 remake of this movie is the perfect example. After I saw it, I promptly forgot it. This little gem from the early-80s, however is unforgettable, for one reason: It has THE WORST special effects known to mankind. You could argue that they were top-notch for 30 years ago, but in all honesty, that would be a lie. Movies like StarWars proved that special effects were starting to come around, and there's just no excuse for this. Monsters that look like they're claymation, that random glowing god (he's more "flaming" than "glowing", or so it seems... if you know what I mean). Overall, it's impossible to take it seriously, despite the fact it's got some HUGE names (Maggie "Professor McGonagall" Smith! for instance). It's extremely fun. I watched it in Latin class in high school and was fully entertained the whole time, and recently picked it up in the $5 bin at Wal-Mart.

[3] Frogs (1972):

It seems like I'm pulling out one awful/awesome (awsul? awfum?) movie per decade here. Okay, a friend of mine showed me this in high school. She spoke highly of it; once I saw it, I understood. Frogs pretty much defines the so-bad-it's-good genre. Officially categorized as "horror" (subcategorized as a nature horror, where nature or animals turn against humans, e.g. Jaws.. yeah, I spent too much time on Wikipedia the other day), I would consider it more of a comedy. Like Clash of the Titans, the "effects" are laughable; but so is the plot. And the acting. And... everything. Basically, frogs attack. At one point I think they're literally just THROWING frogs at a window. It's an all-out laugh-fest from start to finish, and if you can get your hands on it, you MUST watch it! Oh, and SAM ELLIOT IS IN IT. Yeah, the same Sam Elliot that is now old as hell and whose perfomance's take backseat to his EPIC MUSTACHE nowadays.

[4]Deep Blue Sea(1999):

I know there are people out there who legitmately love this movie and think it is amazing. I actually really, really like it. But not because I think it's good. Unless there's AMAZING acting and a really strong story, I can't stand action movies, as I find them mindless. This definitely has neither the acting nor the story.

RUN-ON SENTENCE SUMMARY - There is this research station that's located primarily underwater and they're studying sharks and like injecting them with shit to try and cure Alzheimer's but all it does is make the sharks super-intelligent and they go crazy and decide to kill everyone in the station and a rag-tag group of people gets picked off one-by-one and the only black guys are the chef and of course he lives and has a parrott and Samuel L Jackson who has the MOST HILARIOUS DEATH SCENE, EVER.

Like the others on this list, it's fun from start-to-finish. Like The People Under the Stairs, it horrified me (and enthralled my sister, who would watch the VHS daily) as a child, and now makes me laugh SO HARD. The scene where Sam Jackson bites it is hilarious both in execution and CGI-effects... it was 1999, there is NO WAY the effects should've been as bad as they were. Overall, good fun!

[5]Good Burger(1997):

I have a small problem with Good Burger: I am not entirely sure if it's actually bad or if I think it's amazing. I watch it at LEAST once a month (I'm not kidding), and I find it just as funny now as I did as an 8-year-old kid watching it when it first came out. I'm not sure if it's a So-Bad-It's-Good sorta deal, or just plain-old nostalgia. There are a ton of terrible, terrible comedies from my childhood that I treasure like this, and I can't be certain if they're actually bad, or just mediocre movies I love simply because they bring me back. Like Spice World. Oh well.

***

As with my other lists, consider this volume 1. These are my absolute necessities for bad-movie viewing that'll make you laugh, or maybe just cringe. What are you favorite heinous but hilarious movies>

"I'M GOING TO THE JERSEY SHORE!" No, not really... luckily.

It's easy to hate MTV's Jersey Shore. It's "entertainment" that is clearly marketed towards girls ages 16- 25 who tyPeEE LiKkKEEee DiSS! and talk about "haters" and love to "show their goods" at "clubs". Those of us who are at least marginally intelligent and possess the ability to string a (properly-worded and error-free)sentence together are supposed to scorn their antics, refuse to watch their adventures, and wonder just what a "Snooki" is.

Unfortunately, during season one, many of us stumbled upon an episode or two. Within the first 5 minutes, we wanted to turn away, scoff these fake-baked, over-the-top morons, and forget what we'd seen. However, those of us who made it past the first 5 minutes? I call it "trainwreck-syndrome"; it's horrible, it's scarring - but you just can't look away.

I fell in to this trap, shortly after season one had finished. And thanks to MTV.com, I spent 9 HOURS IN A ROW WATCHING THE ENTIRE THING.

Since then, I've spent the last 6 months waiting patiently for Seson 2, which premieres in just 3 days! Seriously, did they have subliminal messaging in the audio? Now, the friends who got me into JS - all intelligent, non-shitty human beings. How did we get sucked in? I blame some sort of Harry Potter-level witchcraft, on this one.

That being said, here's some quick (hopefully) thoughts on the "characters" we encoutner:

They're orange, they drink, they are (kind of) Italian.


[1]Mike "The Situation":
I hate this man. I'm broken; I find nothing appealing about shirtless men, no matter what they look like. I don't know what the problem is, but I don't find it attractive. The Situation's abs are his claim to fame - but he is ONE HELL of a butterface! Therefore, not being attracted to his chest/stomach + having a hideous face = I find him repulsive. Backtracking, this is not why I hate him, I'm not that shallow. Not only is he 100% full of himself, but he ws mean to Snooki in season one, refers to himself AS "The Situation" (are you kidding me!?) and is just overall a huge douchenozzle. That being said, the show would be very, very boring without him.

[2] "DJ Pauly D: Yeah, they mostly all have nicknames. Okay, Pauly... well, for starters, hairgel went out in the 90s. He doesn't seem to realize this. He has a tanning bed in HIS HOUSE. Apparently, he's some sort of DJ. I don't know of he's any good; I don't know anything(or care) about DJs, I really don't. Pauly is far less of an up-front asshole than Mike, but I think he's just as bad a person. When they're going out to get some ladies, Pauly is usually the charmer when Mike starts letting the asshole within show on the outside. Less annoying, and also less necessary, but he's wildly popular? I don't get it.

[3] Nicole "Snooki": Snooki is by far my favorite. Other websites and bloggers have likened her to a troll-creature, but I think she's wonderful. She's something like 4'11", chunky as anything (just because of her height, she probably weighs like 40 pounds less than me), likes to wear a "slut-bump" in her hair (everyone else refers to it as a "poof"), and is 100% ridiculous. She is a drama-queen, a sook, a whiner, she got famously punched in the face by a dude... she is entertainment in one tiny, orange package, and for that, I love her. I think she's the star!

[4]Jenni "JWOWW" Farley: JWOWW gets a last name because I can actually SPELL hers. Okay. When she first went in the house, she introduced herself as "JWOWW", which pissed people off. She's a nasty drunk (they all are, really) who gets in to fights, has had fake boobs since she was 21, and is basically the trashiest whore, ever. I follow her on Facebook anyway. I like her! I'm not sure why. She and Snooki team up a lot, she stood up for Snooki many times, they got in fights together. AND! ANNNNND! She punched The Situation in the face. She also cheated on her boyfriend (BIG FUCKING SURPRISE, ARE YOU KIDDING ME?) But yeah. Also entertaining.

Now, the "other ones".

[5]Vinny: Okay, Vinny is the most popular and least-annoying of the 4 "other ones". He was 21 during season one, so he had less experience with being a douchebag, and for the most part he seemed kinda like an okay-person, but it didn't take long for him to be just as much of a douchebag womanizer (I'm all for the monogamy, I think that's why I hate everyone? lmao). He had some altercations with t

[6]Ronnie: Okay, Ronnie - musclebound moron that seemed all sweet and stuff at first when he hooked up with Sammi (more on that dumb bitch in a minute), but liiiiiiiiiiiiiiike 4 episodes in you realize he's got the 'roid-rage to the max, and he's crazy jealous and has a horrible temper. He's basically a shitty person. He's useless, I hate him.

[7]Sammi "Sweetheart": One of those girls that is just SO annoying, and overdramatic when it comes to boys, and is all obsessed with Ronnie (why!? dear God, I don't get the appeal of muscles), and takes sort-of abuse from him (well, he enver hit her, but STILL), and gets way too drunk and cries because of ... her toe? Was it something to do with her toe? I can't really remember. I can't fucking STAND her. She adds nothing to the show.

[8]Angelina: Yes, that's the dumb bitch that quit 3 episodes in, hjad a huge mouth, tried to intentionally "cockblock" everyone, cheated on her boyfriend, and carried her clothes in garbage bags ... AND GOT ASKED BACK FOR SEASON TWO ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

And that's it.

They're obsessed with their Gym, their tanning, and their Laundry. They drink more than Newfies and Capers combined. They fight. And they wear more makeup than I thought humanly possible.

They have absolutely no point; and yet we love them. Or love to hate them...

So, here's to Season Two, starting Thursday!

This is not a rant. TV on DVD; one of my greatest love affairs.

I went a good three years of my life without watching television, between the ages of 17 and 20. My reasoning had no deep meaning; I hadn't swore to start reading more, hadn't decided to put an end to the corrosion of my cerrebellum (just how misspelled is that, PS?). It was far simpler than that - I didn't have a TV. Now, for the some of that time period, I was living with a friend and spent every waking moment that I wasn't at work hiding in my bedroom, with my laptop. I moved back in with my parents, and again - hid in my room. By the time I'd moved out, I'd lost all desire to partake in the televised arts (would you even call them that? ... I didn't think so. I tried, whatever). Don't get me wrong; I'd check out The Simpsons and Family Guy from time to time, re-runs of Frasier and the Golden Girls. But that was the extent of it.

That is, until one of the greatest inventions of the past 20 years was brought to my attention: TV on DVD.

Now, many people think that the, "Wow! No commercials!" aspect is the greatest argument for watching TV on DVD. I beg to differ. I work random hours. Shiftwork. I have a life (really, I swear). I can not dedicate an hour or half hour of my time on a certain day each week to watch anything (with the exception of Big Brother). So I missed out on the first half of Glee, the entirety of the Friends series, the first two seasons of The Big Bang Theory. But I'm caught up. On all of it. Simply because I could rent the discs and watch them at my leisure. Whenever I want! And I can pause it and go to work and come back and pick up exactly where I left off. And like a movie, there were bonus features. Friends gag reels, Glee music videos. countless commentary and interviews.

One could argue that you can get the same benefits (save for the bonus features) with a PVR. To that, I must counter: I can't afford a PVR! Hell, I can't afford to actually BUY seasons of a TV show (if they're new, that is), I have to rent. But that's the beauty of it; I can spend an evening with my Friends, watching how they lived out 1999, and it'll cost me less than $6. I'd have to get Digital Cable to even get a PVR and wanna know a secret? I don't even pay for the cable I have here! It was hooked up when I moved in. (shameless, sure, but can ya blame me? Free things are good.)

Now, a new season of a TV series usually runs between $30 and $60 depending on how many discs it is and how popular the series is. The Tudors Season 3, for example, was running a steep $55 everywhere I looked. But give it a couple years, and it'll be in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart for 12 bucks, where Seinfeld is right now. Less than the cost of actually GOING TO SEE A MOVIE, you get HOURS of a TV show!

DISCLAIMER: I don't sell TV on DVD, I have nothing to do with it. I just love it to pieces, it's one of the things in the world that I am truly jazzed about.

Stay golden, Ponyboy(s).