CD Review: Sara Bareilles, The Blessed Unrest

I'm usually not much for singer-songwriters, but Sara Bareilles has really won me over. The Blessed Unrest is her strongest album yet, with moments of beautiful sadness and clear determination. The way she sings "so fill up your lungs and just run" on "Chasing The Sun" makes you feel like you could actually run for miles. "Manhattan" is a gorgeous tribute to love lost, filled with vivid imagery. "I'll gather up / the avenues / and leave them on your doorstep. I'll tiptoe away / so you won't have to say / you heard me leave." It's her "Someone Like You" and it's just as showstopping.

"Satellite Call" is another standout. There's a clear Enya influence in the echoes. It seems to create an entire landscape within itself, roaming all over the night sky. The song that left its mark the most was "Islands," especially the chorus. "It's like I'm standing on the edge / of just a telephone wire / trying to get to you first / to say the world's on fire." It evokes the awful fear of rushing to save someone you love, heart in throat. It's an album about reaching out to other people to show them that they're not alone, and also to prove it to yourself. It's about the frustration of having plenty of ambition and nowhere to drive it. It's about running away before the clock runs out.

There is no one answer, no way to put an end to the frustration for good. But if you try hard enough, you can at least gain some solid ground. It's brave to embrace an imperfect solution when it seems easier to just keep searching. Her message is clear; the time is now, you alone can make it or break it.

Concert Review: AM & Shawn Lee, U Street Music Hall

The first time I stepped foot into U Street Music Hall, I made a mental note to myself while exiting that it would be a great place to see thrashing garage bands trying to claw their way to the top. The cavernous underground labyrinth you wind through on your way down eventually spits you out into a surprisingly roomy and well set up show area with excellent sound. That is probably why I had my doubts about a band that, while interesting and noteworthy coming over my earbuds, seemed like such an unlikely fit for this grungy gutsy space.

Turns out I couldn't have been more wrong.

AM & Shawn Lee may specialize in foot-tapping retro electronic tunes but if I expected that not to translate well live, I was quickly reeducated. The set was crisp, pleasantly aggressive but not too reliant on the resonant noise that sometimes permeates live music when the synthesizer is too involved. The pair, touring with a full band, switched styles and showcased tunes off of La Musique Numerique and even a few off of Celestial Electric which I'd been enticed to listen to only hours before showtime.

Demonstrating a cool ease and a real joy in performing these tracks live in front of a delighted and receptive audience, they won over even an old bitter curmudgeon like myself and even had me humming their infectious melodies on my way back up to the street.

Upcoming Shows

06.20 Brooklyn, NY @ Knitting Factory
06.21 Chicago, IL @ Schubas
06.22 Rochester, NY @ Lovin' Cup
06,26 San Francisco, CA @ Rickshaw Stop
06.27 Westwood, CA @ KCRW Summer Nights Hammer Museum
06.28 Los Angeles, CA @ The Echo
06.29 San Diego, CA @ The Griffin

More AM & Shawn Lee: Official | Facebook | Twitter

In Memoriam: Smash

This past weekend Smash came to end, bringing to an end a two-year saga that chronicled what it takes to get a musical to Broadway.

I myself am a big Broadway lover. Each year, I make several trips from DC to New York and binge-view three shows over a weekend. I'm able to do this thanks to an old student I.D. or a general rush policy. I don't make the kind of money it takes to see these shows full price.

All this to say, I was likely the target audience for the show; beyond my love for the great Great White Way, I'm also in the highly coveted 18-34 demographic.

Unlike many, I never hate-watched Smash. Sure, some episodes were better than others, but overall I was entertained every week. The big question many journalists and pop culture bloggers are asking themselves is "What went wrong?" How did a show with one of the strongest pilots in history, a plum time slot after The Voice, and great buzz thanks to a Stephen Spielberg producing credit crash and burn in a little watched Saturday time slot?

There are many theories out there and I want to throw my two cents in on the issue.

Casting

I know I'm going to put myself at the risk of some hate messages, but casting Katharine McPhee as Karen was a mistake. Sure she can sing and dance (somewhat), but her acting remained one-note regardless of her circumstances, whether that be awkwardly declining a marriage proposal ("I'm in tech!") or hanging out at her apartment. Her face rarely changed. This was a big problem as a central premise of most of the show was who should play Marilyn Monroe in the show within the show Bombshell. Megan Hilty as Ivy killed it every week (her performance of "Let's Be Bad" was a watershed TV moment in my opinion) and it was ludicrous to me that this question spanned almost two seasons.

The show also seemed to severely struggle with casting love interests for its characters. Tom (Christian Borle) never got a love interest he had an ounce of sexual chemistry with until Patrick Dillon (Luke Macfarlane) and he didn't show until the last episode. Same goes for many of the men they paired with Julia (Debra Messing).

DVD Review: Don't Let The Riverbeast Get You!

When I was little, I watched an endless parade of highly unbelievable but engrossing horror and monster movies. The list was endless and questionable: Toxic Avenger, Swamp Thing, King Kong vs. Godzilla, Rodan, Konga... What this said about my parents' propensity for using the television for extended babysitting sessions was one thing, the other important aspect of all this was the eventual sharpening of my instincts and ability to spot quality kitsch. I spent the better half of my weekend watching and dissecting Brain Damage Films' Don't Let the Riverbeast Get You! and I'm certainly glad I did.

The Riverbeast is like the strange but warmly familiar hybrid of your cast-off Return Of The Jedi Admiral Ackbar Halloween costume from 1983 and the Creature From The Black Lagoon. He appears only after (and a kindly narrator warns you of this previous to the movie's start) two quick bright red flashes on screen that could potentially send anyone prone to fits of epilepsy into a bit of a spiral.

You have your usual horror movie archetypes: the man that returns to his hometown after a long exile, his group of lifelong friends that will help him along during his journey, a woman who seemingly appears out of nowhere like a deus ex machina to help him locate a creature that is doling out destruction and terror in heaping tablespoons, and a final showdown that made us all cheer while scarfing down the last bowl of Orville Redenbacher.

Sure, I had a few complaints. The Riverbeast, while deadly to the townspeople, actually grew on us and we found ourselves cheering for him to decimate the entire population or at least most of the cast. The women were a bit too hypercritical, a few plot lines seemed to go nowhere, etc. But who the hell cares? The Riverbeast was afoot and he was getting ready to use his somewhat odd but still effective brand of movie monster terror to slow-walk his way right over your ass and own this movie.

I don't want to give away too many plot points, because honestly there aren't that many of them, but if you love goofy horror flicks and a good solid menace rising from your local waters, Don't Let The Riverbeast Get You! is worth a watch.

I'm Watching These Three New Comedies And So Should You

Comedy is king right now. With the anticipated return of Arrested Development, Saturday Night Live finally finding the season's groove, and some of the top-rated shows as comedies, there's never been a better time to be funny! Recently, three new and/or upcoming comedies have caught my attention.

Your Pretty Face Is Going To Hell

One of the things going for this show is that it airs on Adult Swim, already home to much sublime shows as Childrens Hospital and NTSF:SD:SUV::. Adult Swim has had the genius idea of producing comedies that are only fifteen minutes, and although you don't get a lot of time with the show, it almost guarantees that it can be funny as there's no filler and nothing to be dragged out. Your Pretty Face Is Going To Hell follows the daily happenings of Gary, an associate demon in hell along with his horned and bespectacled intern, Claude.

Already on its own, the premise is funny: even in hell, the workplace is an Office Space type of monotony. In the first episode, Gary and Claude's task is to convince a baseball player to start praying to Satan instead of God. One thing I will need to adjust to is the gag-worthy premise that these hell underlings for some reason have to spend time with their faces in the urinal and toilet of the big boss, Satan himself. But a little (literally) potty humor is expected.  

A Beginner's Guide To The Films Of Harmony Korine, Part 2

Since the release of Spring Breakers, you may or may not have heard of writer/director/auteur Harmony Korine. Since Spring Breakers was an amazing film (fact), you may be interested in his previous work. I'm here to guide you through his career. Last week, we looked at Kids, Gummo, and Julien Donkey-Boy, and it just gets better/worse from here, depending how you look at it.

Ken Park (2002)


For reasons that I can't discern (i.e., Wikipedia didn't elaborate), Korine and his Kids director and collaborator Larry Clark had a falling out. However, Clark still completed Ken Park with Korine's screenplay. Korine may have not been intricately involved in the making of the movie, but his mark of young people acting abhorrently is all over this movie.

Ken Park was never officially released anywhere, except for a few film festival screenings. And you know what? It's probably for the best. Ken Park is, well, I'm not even sure how to describe it. A hot mess? Aimless? Unlikable characters? Stories that don't need to be told? Unnecessarily sexually gratuitous? Exploiting teens sexually? Answer: all of the above. I nabbed myself a copy because I am a rabid fan of some Larry Clark films (1999's true crime film Bully and of course, Kids), but I wish I could erase this from his oeuvre. And my mind.

!-- more -->Ken Park resembles an anthology film, with three different stories being told about three different teenagers. I say resembles because the stories are very loosely related. Teenager Stephen and his father fight constantly; his father puts him down for being unambitious and lazy. His pregnant mother enables the father and just sits idly by. One night, his father enters his room at night and sexually assaults him, and Stephen beats him up and leaves. And thus ends Steven's journey in this film.

Shawn is a punk-esque skateboarding kid who is having a secret sexual affair with his girlfriend's suburban housewife mom. He performs graphic oral sex (believe me, it's way more uncomfortable than arousing) on her while she's in the house folding laundry. Shawn is obsessed with this older woman, who clearly is in control of these relations. Oh, and also, it's rape. His teen girlfriend's family accepts Shawn and often has him partake in family dinners, and the wife does her best to hide it from her husband. And... that's it.

Peaches is an only child raised by her single, fundamentalist father who showers her with nothing but love and praise because she is so "innocent and pure." Her father walks in on her with a boy from school, who she has tied to her bed and has proceeded to perform oral sex on. Her father goes berserk, beating the boy almost to death, and forcing Peaches to engage in an incestuous wedding ceremony with her father, in some sort of messed up way to keep her purity. Peaches's story had the most closure, however horrifying.

Finally, Tate is a mentally disturbed teenager who lives with his grandparents, who are nothing but loving. Tate is violently abusive to them without remorse. He also engages in auto-erotic asphyxiation (again, very uncomfortable and in no way arousing for the audience), and ultimately bludgeons his grandparents with a knife while they sleep. The end.

The stories do not intersect at all, except at the end when Peaches, Shawn, and Claude engage in a threesome at one of their houses, spouting some supposed words of wisdom and musings on their life that are not at all coherent or relevant to anything we've seen. Again, the sex is graphic but hardly erotic because although all the actors were of age at the time of filming, they look incredibly young. They finally recount the death of Ken Park, a mutual friend of theirs who shot himself at a skate park because his girlfriend became pregnant. We see nothing of the titular character except showing up at the skate park and putting a gun to his head. Finally, the end.

I'm not against watching graphic sex or violence in a movie, especially if it adds to the film or has cinematic value, but Ken Park just feels exploitative . After Kids, Larry Clark was accused of exploiting teens in his movies, so it's almost like he did this film as a response to prove that the critics were right. The stories of these kids didn't need to be told. There's no insight, no resolution, no changes in characters' essence. We learn nothing of them, learn no lesson, don't gain visual aesthetic from watching their stories. Believe me, I don't need a clear narrative or traditional storytelling in movies, but there's nothing special about the acting, directing, or cinematography that makes this compelling either.

To Korine's credit, I can see the idea of this anthology to be stronger as a series of short stories, illustrating the landscape of boredom among the teenagers in central California, the expectations of suburban life, and in written form may provide more character insight. Alas, this was not work-shopped in an MFA program, but committed to film, which luckily, not many will have to experience.

Should you see it? A thousand times no. It's not released anywhere on DVD or online, so don't even worry about it.

Mister Lonely (2007)


At this point, Harmony Korine had not released a film in five years. Here's the story I'm making up (not verified). His other films were anything but commercially and critically successful, and would only get support and funding for writing a more conventional film. My research (Wikipedia) indicates that he was not happy with this film, both during filming and with the results. This was also co-written with his brother.

The film centers on a Michael Jackson impersonator living in Paris, played wonderfully by Diego Luna (who is also a skilled dancer), who is lonely and unfulfilled by performing his craft only for street change. By chance, he meets a Marilyn Monroe impersonator (played by the always amazing Samantha Morton) who invites him back to her commune in the Scottish Highlands where she lives with other celebrity impersonators, including Abraham Lincoln, Charlie Chaplin, Buckwheat, James Dean, and the Pope. Here, he finds his community as they work to put together the world's best variety show. Marilyn and he fight their attraction for each other while she also deals with an abusive husband. However, after she hangs herself after the show is a failure, Michael returns to Paris and starts to live as himself and not an impersonator.

I can imagine how this sounded as a pitch for a movie. Pretty great, right? Charmingly indie? Quirky? Sure. Sadly, it doesn't work in practice. There's not much stake for the characters, and although I am certainly capable of suspension of reality, but there was no sense of purpose of why these characters lived together, other than for the purpose of providing Michael with the experience of living with them. The characters were only given surface-level introductions, so there was no connection or no stakes raised for them. The idea itself is a sort of magical realism, expecting the audience to suspend disbelief (Why do these impersonators all live together? Are they ever out of character?), but the story plods on without any real effort made for the audience to invest. There's an ongoing conflict about whether to shoot their heard of sheep because they are diseased, which, you know, means something.

Despite being known for purposely making films that defy the traditional movie aesthetic, this film shows that he can do those things exceedingly well. The cinematography is the highlights of the film, showcasing the Scottish Highlands and the contrast of characters in colorful, unique costumes. Shots of the interior of the castle are stunning. Still, that can't make up for a superficial connection with the story.

There was a secondary storyline that was intriguing, but just seemed out of place. A nun accidentally falls from a plane during a food drop, and miraculously survives. The rest of the nuns start jumping from planes to experience the miracle, which provides for some shots of skydiving nuns with pseudo-philosophical voice-overs. In a bout of irony worthy of a hit Alanis Morrisette single, they prepare to travel to the Vatican to meet with the Pope about their miracle, they all perish in a plane crash. SYMBOLISIM! IRONY!

The film seems sluggish and going through the motions. It's sad for this sake, and not really because of the character's so-called journey. Again, this movie makes me feel as if Korine's visions may actually work better in the written form, and I wonder if he has any aspirations for producing literature, which I would gladly read.

Trash Humpers (2009)


Allow me to school you about the "found object" movement of Modern Art, which I am qualified to do since I was three classes away from an Art History minor in college. Found object art is when someone takes a pre-existing object from the real world, which has little or no meaning, but puts it in the context of art (i.e., displays it in a gallery) so then its very presence makes it the art. The art becomes more than the object, it's a concept. Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain" is an exemplary piece of found object art. I see much of Harmony Korine's films like a found object: the quality of it is negligible because it is presented as a film. The quality or purpose is not as important, because it is presented as an indie film and there is justification for finding meaning and interpretation.

Such is the case with Trash Humpers, Let me first explain what it is. Believe me, this is not a lie: three people wear masks and wigs that portray them as senior citizens. Two men wear a contraption that makes them look as if they are joined in the head by a large growth. They go to dumpsters and trash containers and literally hump them. They force each other to eat pancakes covered in dish soap. They destroy electronics. They dance the jig and do yoga poses. They have nonsensical conversations. They fellate trees. For 85 minutes. To top it all off, it's filmed on VHS, making it appear as the worst found footage film ever.

If there ever was a fuck you to the art form, it's this. Korine explains that he made this as a reflection on growing up in Nashville among vagrants and peeping toms. Using the found object theory, the art comes not from the aesthetic of watching it, but perhaps from the visceral reaction viewers will have when watching this. It's a type of performance art, more for the performers and for the viewer. It's a notch in the culture snob's belt for seeing this and for him for making it.

It's actually shocking that Spring Breakers was the next film that he made, considering it is the most commercial. Perhaps he needed to make Trash Humpers to get it out of his system before going too commercial.

Worth watching: Are you crazy?

Lotus Community Workshop (2012)


This is a 22-minute vignette that is part of the anthology film, The Fourth Dimension, produced by Vice.com (you can watch it here). It is worth mentioning here because it is definitely worth knowing about (and can easily be viewed online). If Saturday Night Live were to make a parody sketch of a Harmony Korine film (if only), it would be Lotus Community Workshop. That's to say that it has all the elements of a Harmony Korine film (neon lights, a rambling diatribe, a small unsophisticated town, questionable morals, mundane activities filmed as important, etc.). These are things he can do really, really well.

The scene is a neon-decorated roller rink in Anytown, USA. Hector, played by Val Kilmer, is introduced as a motivational speaker selling his way of life. Val Kilmer, looking very much like a Val Kilmer who has let himself go, spouts rhetoric about changing his life, punctuated by the bleep-boop sounds of old video games, provided by the house DJ. They are unrelated, but put together, it never stops being great. Intercut are scenes of Kilmer riding his bike at night around the deserted town, trying to convert the locals. He meets up with a corn-rowed Rachel Korine, real life wife of Harmony and future co-star of Spring Breakers, where they wander a video rental store deciding what to rent. They decide on a video game, which they play in silence at his well-off home. Are the two scenes unrelated? Maybe. Maybe the juxtaposition has meaning. It's hard to tell, and the stark differences is what Harmony Korine does best. It's tempting to make meaning of this, but even if you can't it's visually pleasing and somehow the characters are worth trying to figure out, at the very least.

Is it worth watching? Sure, it's even just as long as it needs to be without getting belabored.

There are only a mere few of his films that I would objectively say are "good," but there is definitely something fascinating about the personality of Harmony Korine, and it's entertainment in itself to see what he does next. If Spring Breakers is any indication of the direction he is going, I am on board and will be the first in line on opening weekend. Korine has joined Lars Von Trier in filmmakers I love to hate the most.

[image 1 | image 2 | image 3 | image 4]

A Beginner's Guide To The Films Of Harmony Korine, Part 1

There are three categories of people based on their reactions to Harmony Korine's latest film and future cult classic, Spring Breakers: those that loved its chaotic storytelling and dark themes, those that asked "what the hell was that about?," and those that have never even heard of the film. I am leading the charge of the first type; I was enthralled by the filming techniques, ambiance, and downward spiral into madness. This was a film that stayed with me several days after, and I have done a lot of pontificating on the internet about it. I've read and mulled over several theories including a feminist interpretation of the loss of innocence, a parallel to the Greek myth of the Manaed, and an ode to the decay of civilization. Then again, when I love a film, I want to read about it like crazy.

Now that Spring Breakers has officially made is mark on our cultural lexicon, and is very likely to inspire many Halloween costumes this year, it's worth noting that this is writer/director Harmony Korine's most conventional attempt at film making in his career. Conventional in the sense that there is a linear narrative and characters have a place in the real world (well, in the first half of the film, anyway). Certainly, as compared to mainstream movies and box office top fives, it is anything but Harmony Korine has never been concerned with "typical" storytelling in his films, and ostensibly doesn't seem to care about critical praise. Perhaps enjoying Spring Breakers has prompted you to check out Korine's earlier films. I feel it is my duty to help you through this journey, because you could really tread in some bizarre territory.


Kids (1995)


Kids is Korine's first film and probably best known although it's been seventeen years since its release. Nineteen-year-old Korine penned the screenplay about a day in the life of teenagers living in New York City. They drink, have lots of unprotected sex, smoke, fight, steal, get diagnosed as HIV positive, and prey on deflowering young virgins. Kids made an impact for two major reasons: one, it showed teenagers actually doing those things, which made the MPAA award the dreaded NC-17 rating. Okay, fine, that was to be expected.

Secondly, independent films were not as easily accessed by your average moviegoer and unconventional filming techniques and storytelling were not often seen in mainstream films. Kids does have a story and a plot, but the film was largely a collection of uncut vignettes about various interactions and behaviors. The lack of editing provided a "I dare you to watch" type of vibe, because there was a lot that was uncomfortable but the action continues well after the point of first discomfort. For instance, there is a violent brawl in Washington Square Park that seems to never end. (Ten years later, I attended graduate school at NYU and thought of that scene when I walked through the park daily.)

Movie Review: Disconnect

The 2005 documentary Murderball, about the US men's basketball team in the Paralympic Games, is one of my favorite documentaries, if not films. Therefore I was eager to go to a screening of director Henry Alex Rubin's first "fiction" film, Disconnect, opening in theaters this Friday, April 12.

Disconnect is an ensemble film focusing on several characters in different stories whose lives intersect, albeit briefly. Sound like a certain Oscar-winning film? The comparisons to 2005's Crash are warranted. It follows almost the same buildup, but instead of race, the focus is the internet and technology.

Two boys harass the school's loser by creating a fake Facebook profile and posing as a potential online bully; a grieving couple are coping with the loss of their infant son while trying to find justice on the man who stole from them using identity theft; an opportunistic journalist exploits her relationship with a teen sex worker to get a story on a teen runaway prostitution ring who perform "personal webcam" services. (The pimp and ringleader, is oddly played by fashion designer Marc Jacobs because... why not?)

Here's the thing about ensemble/anthology films: we spend less time with each character overall, so the writer has the challenge of making us care about each set of characters with less time. Therefore, each story escalates rather quickly, and in a predictable way. (I'll bet you can guess what happens to the kid that was bullied.) They all must lead up to some sort of climactic ending that will bring the stories to a closure, and teach the viewers the lesson learned. But therein lies the contradiction: I believe this film's intention is to warn us that the dangers of technology/social media can end in severed relationships. However, in the film, the aspects of technology only are connected by being present in the narrative, but don't actual cause the characters to act the way they act. This is one of my biggest pet peeves about criticism of social media: it doesn't directly cause the breakdown of communication, it's the way people choose to use it. It's not automatically bad.

Event Coverage: BBQ Films' American Psycho Screening

The opening act of what appeared to be some sort of top-end '80s power meet and greet unfolded this past Saturday night at the luxurious but cozy Tribeca Hotel Underground in NYC. But if you peeled away the shiny high-gloss veneer, you saw the splattered blood, the clear raincoats, a few axes, and at least one chainsaw.

This is how film lovers spent their Saturday evening, in loving tribute to one of the most polarizing yet well-remembered gory tongue-in-cheek homages to male vanity, '80s excess, and a frighteningly unhinged push back against conformity by everyone's favorite well-tanned maniac, Patrick Bateman.

The movie we'd all come to honor was American Psycho, and while this gathering wasn't your typical movie going experience, these cinema social club members spent the evening wading in '80s Wall Street excess, exchanging business cards, rocking shoulder pads, and donning more than one killer suit.

The movie has stood the test of time, its lines now well-memorized classics, and most of its stars have gone supernova. However, it's still a great feeling to see The Batman lose his shit when Paul Allen's card and apartment trump his own and his philosophical rants on Huey Lewis And The News and Whitney Houston are now the stuff of legend.

Female Troubles: The Walking Dead

You'll often hear me criticizing shows for not having good female characters. Let's be clear, I don't mean "good" in that I want to see female characters who are good in that they volunteer their time to homeless shelters and are well-behaved. It means I want to see female characters that are interesting, multidimensional, and independent. They have flaws and make mistakes, and deal with the consequences, because that is the full range of human experiences. I can count on one hand the shows currently on television with “good” female characters.

Often, this is also described as "kick-ass" female characters, especially in the sci-fi, horror, and fantasy genre. This is often translated almost literally as female characters who slaughter, kill, and fight the enemy/ghost/dragon/vampire bad guys. Their "violent fighting skills" make them kick-ass. It seems as if one of these females exists, it fills some sort of quota of female "bad-assery." This alone does not make good female character. It doesn't leave you off the hook, writers.

The character of Michonne is the perfect illustration of this token "kick-ass" woman. In a show where the female characters have either been killed off, are dealing with a love triangle, taking care of babies, sleeping with evil dictators, or doing laundry, I guess it is a relief that Michonne is out there fighting to survive among the walkers. Sure, she saved Andrea and helped her survive for several months out in the world. She can wield that sword like no one's business. But her perpetual scowl is really goddamn annoying. Sure, she joins the group of men in clearing out a prison yard of Walkers. She killed a bunch of people in order to rescue Glen and Maggie from Woodbury. But that's about it. She shows barely any emotion except anger and resentment, with no reason. In the past season, she has shown a hint of compassion and and desire for community when she helped Carl rescue the picture of his parents, and tried to help out at the prison, but you know what? Too little, too late. The supposed "strong" woman is portrayed as nothing but a one-dimensional killing machine. And thus, boring.

Unfortunately, the other women of the show have been relegated to the background or objects for plot devices among the men. Season Three turned into a big cock-swinging contest among the men with constant threats to kill each other and who can shoot a gun better in order to murder lots of extras in the name of being a hero. This is in contrast to the first two seasons, which were more about the relationships among the survivors and their decisions about survival. In Season Two, Maggie took charge of her family and was a strong advocate of unification among the groups, but this season she's there mostly for Glen to have an internal struggle about fighting. She was sexually assaulted by the Governor, yet the focus is on Glen's struggle about it and need for revenge. She actually apologized to Glen for not talking about it. Carol was the hysterical wife in Season One, hysterical mother in Season Two, and now she seems there to do the group's laundry. Beth, Hershel's daughter and a minor character from Season Two, doesn't seem to have any other purpose then to soothe the group with her Taylor Swift singing sessions around the campfire and to take care of the baby. I'm reluctantly grateful for Lori's death, only to stop the incessant drama about her love triangle with Rick and Shane.

And then there's Andrea. Sigh. Andrea, who came out strong in the beginning, serving as surrogate family for Dale (RIP), a voice of reason as well as a strategist for the group. It seems the writers wanted us to hate her. She falls under the Governor's spell because he sleeps with her. Stupid Andrea! He's just not that into you! She tries to solve the Woodbury v. Prison Group saga by using non-violent means, and is laughed out of the room and essentially told "let the real men handle this." Stupid Andrea! Running a community is for men!

I am fully aware that this show is based on a long series of graphic novels, and "this is how it happened in the books" is no excuse. This show is an adaptation, giving the creative right to develop the characters independently. The good news is that there is the ability for the group to encounter new survivors at any time, thus introducing new characters at any point. I sincerely hope that Season Four introduces new people, both men and women, that bring the show back to a show about characters managing in this environment, instead of the mainstream guys-with-guns-shooting-at-each-other action movie it has become.