Reading the Sunday funnies yesterday brought me to an important moment of self-realization.
No, really.
You see, yesterday’s edition of “Get Fuzzy” turned on a disparaging reference to the TV sitcom Two and a Half Men, a series that seems to be deeply loathed by a not-insignificant number of people. I like it, myself; it’s not remotely deep, but I find it is consistently laugh-out-loud funny, at least to my sensibilities, and I’m frankly baffled by the level of ire I often see directed at this amiable — if admittedly crass — little show.
So I was thinking all of these things about Two and a Half Men and suddenly it struck me.
OMG… I like crap.
The things the sophisticates, connoisseurs, intellectuals, and hipsters generally decry as lowbrow, superficial, or — how I have come to loathe this word! — cheesy are often the things I most enjoy. And in turn the things that make them gush with enthusiasm and sweet, sticky joy tend to leave me, well, unimpressed. Consider the evidence:
- Two and a Half Men makes me laugh. Critical darlings such as Arrested Development and The Office do not.
- I prefer the version of Battlestar Galactica that has a chimp in a robot-dog suit to the dark ‘n’ gloomy version where the lead Cylon looks like a Vegas call girl.
- Most days, I’d rather listen to The Monkees than The Beatles. And I never want to listen to Pink Floyd.
- I think Bono is a pretentious twerp.
- So is Bob Dylan.
- I’d rather look at a Vargas than a Van Gogh.
- I’d rather read pulp than Pynchon.
- I don’t think the hair-metal bands were all that bad compared to the shit that followed them.
- I actually liked the clothing, hairstyles, and general aesthetics of the Eighties. And those of the Seventies, too. At least those decades had an identifiable aesthetic.
- I think Benny Hill is funny. There, I’ve said it.
- A Googie coffee shop is cooler than any design Frank Gehry has ever so much as winked at.
- I have never “read” Mark Hamill’s performance in Star Wars as “whiny,” at least not inappropriately or irritatingly so.
- I liked Darkman.
And now for the big one… get ready…
- I think William Shatner is actually quite a good actor. When he puts his mind to it. Which admittedly isn’t often. But there have been moments…
And there you have it. Incontrovertible proof of my low standards. I’m sure there are other examples. Feel free to note any you can think of in the comments below. I can take it…
Except for the Monkees (Why not Monkeys?) I agree on all of the points with you.
Oh, and I’d rather watch anything by Mel Brooks to Woody Allen.
Shatner is God.
Enough said.
I don’t watch sitcoms, other than “Frasier.” Man, I think I have seen every “Frasier” episode about four times and I just keep watching. That’s my show. But that said, years ago I caught quite a number of episodes of “Two and a Half Men” and I found it surprisingly amusing (surprising not because of who was in it, but because I really don’t care for sitcoms). Charlie Sheen is perfectly cast, and the kid is funny, too (which is saying something, because generally I find kids to be the worst part of any show).
I admit that I can’t stomach 80s styles, but I will give you that at least the 80s had a style. It drives me crazy that the decades haven’t had an identity since 1990 rolled around.
And while I’m an English major, and do actually enjoy a lot of classic literature, I’m into pulp first and foremost. Hey, it counts: there are words. You have to read them.
Konstantin: I’m with you on Mel Brooks vs. Woody Allen. Brooks’ early stuff, especially, is brilliant and still works. I’ve never gotten the fuss over Allen.
As for The Monkees spelled with two e’s instead of an “ey,” well, that’s how they spelled it. No doubt in imitation of The Beatles’ misspelling of “beetles.”
Amber: Love your rationalization of pulp. “Hey, there are words.” 🙂
Don’t forget: Shatner has won two Emmys and a Golden Globe. And he’s been nominated many more times. He can act, people. He really can.