5 posts tagged “tv”

Miro

One of the absolute best things about the internet, for me, is that it lets users time shift content to match their schedules, rather than being dependent on a network timetable.

To that end, the one product I use more than any other is Miro. 

Miro is an open source project that allows users to download videos from anywhere on the net as channels.  Users can create channels from favorite searches on engines like YouTube, or they can subscribe to video podcasts who enable Miro.  The technology behind Miro is quite impressive, combining torrents, open source video, and RSS feeds to put together a free, open, alternative to the tv.

Geek Brief

Today has been very long and I still have work to do.  So, for today's NaBloPoMo entry, I'm going to post this quick link to GeekBrief.tv.  If you consider yourself a geek, and you have internet access, I'm sure you already know about this site.  For the three of you who don't - Cali Lewis brings the latest and greatest in tech news via a well made video podcast, every Monday through Friday.  It's good stuff.  Check it out.

Reason.tv is one of the new slew of content providers based solely on the web.  And they're political. 

I found out about the channel because of Drew Carey.  I admit it, I'm a fan.  I loved the Drew Carey Show and the U.S. version of Whose Line Is It Anyway, hosted by Carey.  Hey, I even liked his book.  On Reason.tv, however, Carey is not being funny, well, at least, the program he's hosting is not a comedy.  Instead, Carey is hosting a series of short political pieces for the channel.

The first, titled "Gridlock" address just that - the key issue of horrible traffic conditions in the Los Angeles area.  The next issue?  Medical marijuana.  Carey's, and by extension, Reason.tv's, politics are fairly liberal, with occasional swings to the conservative that could best be described as the common man approach.   For example, the solution to the gridlock problem in L.A., privatization of roads and freeways, seems to come from the Republicans' bag of tricks, while the issues surrounding legalized pot are clearly Democratic.

One reason I find this interesting is that this show is online.  I am unclear on who created the show, or how, but I wonder if it is online to avoid censorship regulations or because a show this politicized will only reach a niche market.  Either way, it is one show worth watching.

It seems as though historical drama is one of the hip genres at the moment.  In the past few years, we have had Deadwood and Rome on HBO and The Tudors on Showtime.

All three of these shows have boasted elaborate sets and costumes, incredible writing and acting, and compelling stories.  On the other hand, they are also (Rome, Season 2, I'm looking at you) full of historical inaccuracies and misrepresentations.  Many critics have lamented over the years that t.v. viewing has replaced proper study of history for many people and the counter argument is that watching t.v. is just more fun in most cases.

Both sides have valid points and I find myself, as usual, somewhere in the middle.  I have watched, and enjoyed, all three of the shows listed above; I enjoy needing to rush over to Wikipedia the second an episode is over so I can research who was who and what was what and where exactly were they talking about exactly...  On the other hand, sometimes the lengths to which writers feel they can re-write history for the sake of the story gets on my nerves.  (Ahem, last episode of Rome, ahem.)

But I think the middle ground, the reasonable space is when people realize that most, if not all, historical fiction is designed to show us how things could have happened, not how they happened.  After all, if you're looking for the truth, you'll need a time machine and lots of spy gear as we all know that history was written by the victors.  So, when we watch the Tudors and we see how King Henry VIII divorces Catherine and marries Anne Boylen, we know that this did happen.  When we turn on Deadwood and see the bad guy riding out of town, we know that this did happen.  When we grit our teeth at the backstabbing in the Roman senate, we know that this did happen.  It is the minor details that are left to the writers to make a story that we want to watch.

And this is only on my mind because I finished watching Rome last night and some of the lengths they went to with dropping characters, extending lifetimes, or avoiding historical truths of how some people died, really annoyed me.   On the other hand, when I watched Deadwood, I knew that they were making many, many mistakes with the history and the characterizations and I didn't care.  So I have been wondering what the difference was, and I have no answers.  Just what I wrote above - most of us exist in a middle ground most of the time and that's where we want our stories to be.  Not a documentary and not pure fiction, but the best of both.  Which can be a very hard line to walk.