People I’d Have An Affair With (Spring 2015)

I haven’t done one of these in a good while.  2012 to be exact.  Since then, a few new worthies have made their way to “the list,” and while I wouldn’t actually have an affair (as in, cheat on the hubs) with all of the people on these lists, the lists are still great fun to make, especially when you factor in cartoon characters, “unlikely crushes,” and sexy “old” men.  So, with only a little of my standard long-winded introductions and/or explanations, I shall unveil the lucky inductees onto this year’s list.

As some of my regular readers may remember, I am somewhat of a TV binge viewer.  I think Netflix is the shit.  Never again will I willingly subject myself to regular cable or network TV.  I barely have patience for the 15 second commercials on YouTube or Hulu now, and when I had to watch the third season of The Walking Dead on “regular” TV, I about died of boredom between commercials, and if the episode was a slow one, I ended up feeling cheated out of an hour of my life.

Anyway, one of my last TV series addictions was Sherlock.  I was hesitant to watch it at first; I don’t even really know why except that maybe I assumed it would be like every other mystery/procedural crime drama.  It wasn’t.  And I spent the rest of the series alternately wishing I could put Martin Freeman in my pocket and trying to figure out if Benedict Cumberbatch was hot or weird looking.  I finally decided he’s both.

sherlock-benedict-cumberbatch-246519-500-401_large

sherlock-holmes-benedict-cumberbatch

He has a curiously long face and narrow jaw area and his eyebrows border on out of control, but he has the clearest blue eyes, and his character’s simultaneously child-like naivety and arrogant insouciance is at least part of his appeal.  Oh, and brains, of course.  Because we’re not shallow here.  So, maybe given that combination of his oddly appealing face (my best friend’s exact words), and his withering intellect and attitude, it’s not so much Benedict Cumberbatch, as it is Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock.

Alright, moving on…

Again, courtesy of my beloved Netflix, I binge-watched the first three seasons of The Killing, and then after greedily awaiting the fourth, I devoured that too.  It was depressing, by the way, especially the last season.  Depressing, but a very good show, and my favorite part of it was Joel Kinnaman’s portrayal of Det. Stephen Holder.  Again, attitude goes along way for me in terms of sexy, and Holder had attitude in spades.  But what was so unique to me about his performance was that I didn’t feel like I was watching a performance.  I even told my husband, it’s like he was a real person, someone I actually might know.  That feeling of familiarity, of “realness” was in everything from how he talked, to how he carried himself, and even to an extent, in his (scripted) character faults.  Plus, he’s sexy as hell.

Photography by Chris Large

I’m not a big fan of ‘staches on guys, but check out that smolder.  And besides, if you need any other reason to like Kinnaman, he’s also the lead in the new Robocop movie, and he’s buddies with Alexander Skarsgard (who also graces one of these lists. )

That’s a whole lot of hotness in one place, people.

Last but not least, is Eric Balfour, especially in Haven.  I say “especially,” because I’m actually fairly new on the Eric Balfour bandwagon in that while he’s been around a while, in movies and TV series alike, with bit parts and recurring characters, he never did much for me until he played Duke Crocker in the supernatural series Haven.  Again, character personality likely has a lot to do with this.  And the longer hair.  (It’s definitely not that goofy little ‘stache.  Haven’t I already mentioned how I feel about ‘staches?  Well, I guess it just depends on the owner of said ‘stache.)

Eric Balfour O12 Visionarios_xl

thumb (1)

Anyhow, that concludes the list for today.  Nothing more to see here, people.  (But, Lisa, I’ll expect your list forthwith.)

Advertisements

In Which I Comment About A Movie I Haven’t Yet Finished

Bored with your DVD collection?  Try watching a subtitled movie with a toddler.  You’ll likely get a different plot every time.  Last night hubby and I started watching The Sorcerer and the White Snake.  We’ve had this on our Netflix queue for a while and I figured it was just a typical Jet Li martial arts movie.  Don’t get me wrong, I like both Jet Li and martial arts movies, but I haven’t been in a martial arts movie mood lately.  But hubby put it on last night for a while, and although it’s definitely a challenge watching a movie that required actual reading of subtitles, I got the gist of most of the plot, just missed some convos between characters here and there.  But we never got to finish the movie, and who knows when we will…

images

In many ways this was a typical martial arts film, but it had a lot of Chinese mysticism thrown in there– talking animals and shape-changing demons– as if it were the most natural thing in the word.  Now for your entertainment (and my own,) I’ll extrapolate some possible “interpretations” of scenes from the movie… and, shockingly, virtually no spoilers.*

"We are having so much fun frolicking in this field!"

“We are having so much fun frolicking in this field!”

"You only want me for my body..."

“You only want me for my body…”

"Mmmm...it really does taste like chicken..."

“Mmmm…it really does taste like chicken…”

Now this scene…pretty easy really.

A look like this usually says one of two things: 1) I'm dying, or 2) I love you and I'm gonna suck your face off now.

A look like this usually says one of two things:
1) I’m dying, or
2) I love you and I’m gonna suck your face off now.

What about this one?

"Be gone, foul temptresses!"

“Be gone, foul temptresses!”

"Ooooh! Jet Li!  Can we get your autograph?!"

“Ooooh! Jet Li! Can we get your autograph?!”

"Mah bitches..."

“Mah bitches…”

And lastly…

"mmmmm...boobies..."

“mmmmm…boobies…”

So anyhoo…sorry I’ve been lazy with my posts and comments lately.  I’ll try to be better…maybe.  In the meantime, maybe check out this movie.  Maybe even watch it without the subtitles…

Police and the Use of Force

Watching a little more mindless entertainment on Netflix.  Crossing Jordan.  I love crime dramas, and I watch a lot of different ones, (much to my husband’s dismay.) But it’s interesting to me how often this so-called “mindless entertainment” actually leads to thought provoking…er…thoughts.

So this particular episode of Crossing Jordan deals with an alleged cop killer who dies in police custody.  (*I say alleged because there is no question in the scope of the show that the suspect did kill a cop, in real life he is of course presumed innocent until trial.)  Upon examination by the coroner  it’s discovered that the suspect has petechial hemorrhages in his eyes, which although possibly indicative of many things, often indicates strangulation.  Upon opening his head, it’s discovered he has a bruise on his brain, basically the result of hitting his head/being hit in the head so hard that his brain slaps against the inside of his skull.  Though he is alive when apprehended, he dies sometime during transit to the station and is instead taken to a hospital.

There is pressure from all sides to either discover or cover up what happened.  There’s a coroner’s inquest.

In the end it is revealed that one of the arresting officers did indeed kneel on the suspect’s back to (in his own words) maintain control of the situation.  The suspect was, according to the officer, acting erratic (as if on drugs), and was also quite large (6’4″,) and a known* cop killer.  It is implied that perhaps a stranglehold was used to subdue the suspect, something that is against police policy, according to a senior officer.  There were no drugs found in the suspect’s blood, so again it is suggested excess force was used.

Eventually, it is discovered that the brain injury sustained by the deceased suspect occurred three days before the arrest (essentially around the time the suspect killed the officer victim.)  Not only is the injury the cause of the suspect’s erratic behavior, but likely contributed to his death in custody.

And as often happens, a TV drama leads hubby and I into a serious discussion:   Why is it against police policy to use force?

I know a lot of people mistrust cops.  I know a lot of people hate cops.  Lastly, and most importantly, I know there are bad cops.  However, I have immense respect for cops.  You may not trust them, or like them, but chances are, if you’re in trouble or need help, you will call them. And you expect them to come, and to protect you.  So why do you expect them to do this, essentially without being allowed to use force to defend themselves?  There is necessary force, and unnecessary force, but in a given situation, it has to be up to the persons involved to decide what is necessary.

Sadly, incidents like the Rodney King incident in 1991 taint the reputation of the police force and have far reaching and damaging repercussions on police procedure.   And with suspects able to file even illegitimate claims against officers for brutality, police officers are daily in situations where they may face bodily injury or death if they run across the wrong suspect, but face inquest, job loss, and possible criminal charges for using “excessive force” to defend themselves.

Am I alone in feeling that if a person violently resists arrest, tries to harm an officer (either intentionally or due to drugs or mental instability) that an officer should be able to use force to defend themselves and keep themselves and their partner safe, even as a preemptive measure?

Am I the only one who feels like most people know that cops have guns and can use lethal force if a weapon is waved at them, and consequently, if a suspect becomes violent or resists, it’s their own damn fault if they get their ass kicked or killed?  To be clear, I’m not advocating cops beating on people for no reason, or using excessive force on non-violent offenders, or in any way taking advantage of their position of authority, but I do believe we expect police to do a generally dangerous and thankless job for relatively little pay, and we should give them the benefit of the doubt in most situations where force is necessary.

I don’t know much about the supposed blue wall.  I’m sure it does exist in some departments, among some cops.  But is it at all possible that if those officers felt safer in their jobs, and felt as if they were backed up by the law in cases where force was required, they might not need to “cover” for one another in some cases?

In conclusion, these are just my personal thoughts and feelings as related to police– they’re not backed by statistics or science, that I know of.  But since police are essentially civil servants with whom virtually everyone has either tangential or direct contact at some point in their lives, I figure we are all entitled at least to an opinion (as I’ve said before, opinions are one of the only true rights humans really do have!)

Police Brutality?  Bitch, please!

Police Brutality? Bitch, please!

TV: End of Season Grief

As hubby and I work our way towards the end of yet another much loved television series (at least, the most current season that is available,) I have that familiar feeling, a sort of sadness and disappointment that’s a little like grief.

I know, it sounds silly.  But after a whirlwind journey through the extremely entertaining British comedy-drama, Misfits, I have been mulling over the effect our entertainment can have on us.  If you’ve ever read a really engaging book, (or even better, a series like The Dark Tower novels or Harry Potter), you are likely aware of how you can become transported to another world, and how you can become attached to and love the characters with whom you’ve spent so much time.  I think our television can have a similar effect on us as a good novel.

The original cast of Misfits-- "Kelly, Simon, Alisha, Curtis, and Nathan"

The original cast of Misfits– “Kelly, Simon, Alisha, Curtis, and Nathan”

So, as we began season (series) 4 of Being Human, amidst some seemingly very rapid (and unceremonious) cast changes, I mentioned to my husband the fact that how we view our favorite television programs can actually affect the way they affect us.  

When you watch a particular show on a service like Netflix or Hulu, you can become immersed very quickly.  There is an instant gratification sort of effect.  You don’t have to wait a week for the next episode.  There’s not anxious anticipation, rather a desire to bull through and watch as much as you can (if you’re really into the show.)  If you’re like hubs and I, you’ll watch three or four episodes a night.  You reach the end of a season or series fairly quickly. Consequently, twists in the plot, changes to the cast, and deaths of main characters often seem very abrupt and are a bit of a shock to the system.

Conversely, if you watch a series as it airs on television, obviously it’s going to feel like you spent even longer with the characters…however, if you’re like me, and you get behind on a series, or even just waiting until next week’s episode, sometimes the sense of urgency you feel to see the next episode kinda of gets muted with time. (I went through this when we went without cable for a while; at first I thought I’d just about die if I didn’t see the next episode of True Blood, but after a while I was just like, Meh.)

Still, I think I prefer to be able to watch a series consecutively (thank you, Hulu!)  In addition to having my instant gratification, I never have to wonder “what’s on TV tonight?”  There are less commercials, you can pause for snack or a bathroom break, and rewind when your kid’s screaming (or you have to yell at them for pulling the cat’s tail) and you’ve missed a bit.

funny-pictures-baby-will-pull-cat-tail1

What is your favorite way to watch your favorite shows?  Do you think the way you view your programs effects how they impact you?