The BillPages

After two seasons with the Huffstodt family, I feel like I need counseling myself.

Sunday evening saw the series finale of "Huff", where Hank Azaria plays a psychologist with more issues than his patients, and a family that all need a shrink. Although I can safely say that very little was actually resolved, all of it is now at least over.

Huff may have been the fastest nosedive from good to bad I've ever seen a show take. Even the recently demised Joan of Arcadia took a good twenty episodes to from great to crap. Huff went from an unbelievably compelling first season cliff-hanger in its thirteenth episode, to an I-don't-think-I-can-stomach-these-people-for-another-hour debacle in about six episodes.

Affairs, alcoholism, drug abuse, dead hookers, lies and deceptions - all of these I can deal with. Heck, I watch Sopranos. But in Huff, everybody is so damn whiny and self indulgent about their hard, hard life (hey, is that a Lexus you're driving?) that I feel absolutely no sympathy - and certainly no sense of identification - with any of them.

But I stuck with it to the end, for two reasons. The first is the whole compelling nature of a train wreck thing.

The second is Andy Comeau.

As Teddy Huffstodt, Andy Comeau is eye-poppingly brilliant in every single scene he's in. His character is the older brother of Azaria's titular Craig "Huff" Hoffstodt, and suffers from paranoid schizophrenia. At the start, Huff's end-of-the-episode visits with Teddy acted as a Mork-calling-Orson style wrap up and reflection on what had just occured, but soon Teddy embarked on his own journey.

There's a beef I have with actors who play handicapped, disabled or emotionally challenged characters. I find that too often, the performance becomes about the handicap, rather than being about the character. We find a tell-tale tick, mannerism or other performing "crutch" substitutes for the type of character work an otherwise talented actor would normally do.

(I'll rant about how Dustin Hoffman owes Tom Cruise an Oscar some other time.)

But Andy Comeau's Teddy is multi-layered, rich in emotion and personality and his mental problem informs his performance, rather than dominating it. He gets to play a full range, from being on the right meds, to being on the wrong ones, to not being on any at all, in good situations, bad ones and indifferent, laughing crying, the works.

In the finale, Teddy has had a really bad time, and is once more in a hospital under strict observation, and when his mother comes to visit him, he says nothing of his actual feelings or troubles. Instead, he talks of irrelevant details, and lies unmoving in bed. Literally 45 seconds prior to that scene, I was ready to turn the show off and not bother watching the last five minutes of a show I had seen every single episode of until now. Suddenly, I couldn't turn away.

He is human, and real and is doing some of the best work on TV today.

Or he was. It's cancelled now. And overall, I'm relieved. But I'll miss Teddy.

Robert Duvall can bite my shiny metal ass.

Duvall made some comments about the poor calibre of Canadian actors while shooting "Open Range" in Alberta with Kevin Costner. Now the native Califonian spouts off about Deadwood being "a provincial New Yorker's concept of what the West was like."

Bobby? Buddy? Bite me. You want your series to do well? Try making it good, not making something else seem bad. Loser.

Seriously, I love Duvall's work. He's been fantastic in film after film after film. But to hear him spout off like this is so disheartening. It's not that he's not allowed to dislike Deadwood. But it seems so transparently self-serving when he makes a pronouncement like this on the eve of his own Western series debuting.

As far as his opinion on Canadian actors go... well, let's play a hypothetical game. Let's say the supporting actors on Kevin's film were, in fact, terrible. (And let's also assume that they were, in fact Canadian). So why would should they be extra terrible? Try this idea on: You were shooting in Alberta! not exactly known for it's thiving film industry. I would imagine going anywhere where they essentially don't have a film community would make it difficult to find experienced supporting players. The same is probably true of Billings, Montana, or Ottumwa, Iowa or... hell, I don't know... the Channel Islands .

But I think it's more likely that Duvall was doing then exactly what he's doing now... hyping his new project (Secondhand Lions) at the expense of someone else. It's just that in that case, he was involved in both.

Anyway's, Duvall's a jerk. Good actor, though.

The countdown is on for the new James Bond film, Casino Royale. Personally, I can't wait.

I've always loved the Bond films. The early Connery pics are my favourites, but I like 'em all. Yes, I even like George Lazenby. I'm currently in the midst of re-watching the whole lot of them, in order, as a sort of refresher for the new film. At the same time, I'm going to re-read at least a couple of Fleming's original novels.

So I'm just brimming with James Bond minutiae right now. Let me share a few of my favourite bits of 007 trivia with you:

Contrary to the devilishly handsome Hollywood version of the super-spy, in the novel Casino Royale, author Ian Fleming describes Bond as resembling popular musician and songwriter Hoagy Carmichael. I'm not sayin' Hoagy was ugly, but he's no matinee idol...

Sean Connery may be the most popular of the actors to play Bond, but he wasn't actually the first. In 1954, CBS Televsion ran a live (live!) version of Casino Royale as part of their series "Climax!". Far from the slick affairs we've come to know and love, the show was apparently riddled with technical gaffes, flubbed lines and other mishaps. And in that adapatation, James was an American CIA agent played by Barry Nelson (they should've gotten Hoagy...)

Gert Frobe, the German actor who portrayed quintessential Bond villain Auric Goldfinger, barely spoke English when he was cast in the role. Although he learned all his lines in English - reportedly phonetically - in the end, every line of his dialogue was over-dubbed by English actor Michael Collins, who had to fake a German accent to do it.

Keep your browsers on this site for more of the Countdown to 007. Look for a review of 1967's Casino Royale, why I think Daniel Craig will make a great Bond (hint: look at his picture, then Hoagy's), and ranked listings of the best and worst Bonds, Bond movies and Bond girls.

Two big Canadian news stories today, and both deal with the justice system, teenagers and sex.

In 1959 Stephen Truscott was convicted of the rape and murder of Lynn Harper. He was sentenced to be hanged by the neck until he was dead. He was 14 years old.

Now a review panel is examining the Truscott case, widely heralded as one of the biggest failures of the Canadian justice system, to determine what exactly may have gone wrong.

At the same time this specific case is undergoing much-delayed scrutiny, the federal government is toying with the idea of changing Canada's age of consent laws. Currently the age of consent is 14, absent other factors. The proposed revision would change that to 16.

So, here's a thought. Put these two ideas together. We, as a people, have determined that a fourteen year old boy is capable of committing a crime so heinous that he should be put to death, but that he is somehow simultaneously unable to make an valid decision to have sex.

I know that I'm drawing extreme examples, here. These occurences are nearly 50 years apart. We don't even have the death penalty anymore. But I think a fairly fundamental issue is still in play.

How old are we when we are actually an adult?

I've always found the age of consent laws kind of hilarious. Of course, I'm thrilled about any law that makes it more difficult for greasy old perverts to get their grubby mitts on little kids. But at the same time, I've always found it to be ridiculous that it's totally okay (legally speaking) for a 15 year old to be HAVING sex, but that the same kid can't WATCH sex (i.e. a dirty movie) for another three years.

Not even an instructional video?

Age-based laws are, of course, arbitrary. Not everyone matures at the same rate. And they don't really seem to be logical when compared one to the other. At 16, we can pilot a multi-tonne hunk of metal at 100kph down a crowded highway, but we aren't responsible enough to have a beer in the privacy of our own home. We can help select the leaders of our town, our province and our country at 18, but we can't have a glass of champagne to celebrate their victory for another year.

But, in the two situations before us today, it seems fundamentally imperitive that we ask ourselves the question: when are our children adults? If we let them screw around, are they adults? If they can be punished for screwing around, are they adults?

It seems that's it's all the same question.

Are you mature enough to take responsibility for your actions? If the world around us is any indication, some of us never reach that age.

Legend has it that they both hated this. Sinatra didn't really like Elvis being on his show, as Elvis was - at that point - more popular than him. And the King hated wearing a tux. Me, I love it. It's like chocolate and peanut butter, two great tastes that taste great together. (Or peanut butter and bacon.)

Checked my humour profile out at this place. Seems I'm "The Wit."

the Wit (52% dark, 38% spontaneous, 21% vulgar)

your humor style: CLEAN | COMPLEX | DARK You like things edgy, subtle, and smart. I guess that means you're probably an intellectual, but don't take that to mean pretentious. You realize 'dumb' can be witty--after all isn't that the Simpsons' philosophy?--but rudeness for its own sake, 'gross-out' humor and most other things found in a fraternity leave you totally flat. I guess you just have a more cerebral approach than most. You have the perfect mindset for a joke writer or staff writer. Your sense of humor takes the most thought to appreciate, but it's also the best, in my opinion. You probably loved the Office. If you don't know what I'm talking about, check it out here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/theoffice/. PEOPLE LIKE YOU: Jon Stewart - Woody Allen - Ricky Gervais The 3-Variable Funny Test! - it rules - If you're interested, try my best friend's best test: The Genghis Khan Genetic Fitness Masterpiece

My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender: You scored higher than 52% on darkness You scored higher than 29% on spontaneity You scored higher than 11% on vulgarity

Link: The 3 Variable Funny Test written by jason_bateman on OkCupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

Craig (who needs to update his Blog) sent me a note mentioning that my evil rating had dropped to 27%. That's what it said in the Gematriculator, anyway (look left). I did a quick double-check, and found that it had actually dropped to 19%, but I hadn't updated the link. Apparently, I was being well behaved, lately. I would have thought the article about Jesus bangin' Asian chicks would have spiked my rating, but I guess not.

My 19% rating came when the latest article was "I'm Posting This Now...". Soon afterwards, I posted the thing about Elvis eating peanut butter and bacon sandwiches. Then I checked my rating again.

39%.

That's right, Elvis' eating habits caused a 20% spike in Evil on the Billpages. I guess that's what they mean by "bad" cholesterol.

But stop and think about this for a minute. If 100% denotes, as it supposed to, complete evil, then the simple act of Elvis eating fatty foods is one fifth of that, all by itself.

That's...

(...wait for it...)

...one hell of a sandwich.

Just checked. After this post, my rating is now 18%.

Here's a little light reading, so that you can amaze your friends with you're scholarly biblical knowledge tomorrow.

Oh, and the remake is going to suck. I promise.

T. Gregory over at Cabbages and Kings has found yet another way to get people to read his writing. Putting on plays and selling books wasn't enough, so he's enlisted The Brampton News. Next, he's hoping to have his words on gum wrappers and tattooed on the backs of boxers.

T.G.A.'s article is about the The Bramalea Backstage Drama Festival, a worthy event with a long-standing tradition of supporting new talent. Countless writers, directors and actors have gotten their first crack at their craft in the BBDF over the years (my first attempt at directing was a BBDF play - written by T. Gregory Argall, no less).

But this isn't just a showcase for fledgling talent. It's also an extremely rare thing: a suburban venue for expiremental theatre. Over the years, a number of more experienced people have used the BBDF as a showcase for things that would be harder to find an audience for as a mainstage event. I've seen shows staged entirely in black and white, silent shows, productions of shows by Harlod Pinter and David Mamet, one-man or one-woman shows. The BBDF was the first community festival in Brampton to feature (gasp!) swearing.

So kudos to T. Gregory on his new career as newspaper columnist. And kudos to Bramalea Live Theatre for staging the BBDF (although they need to update their website). And kudos to you for shelling out your hard earned $5.00 to support local theatre.

'Cause you're going. You know you are. I'll be there, and I'll know if you don't show up.

This clip has been popping up a lot lately on various forums and blogs. I'll add my voice to the multitudes. Fred Rogers was a pioneer, a tireless advocate of the welfare of children and a really, really nice guy. His kind are rare, and he is missed.

And props to Sen. Pastore, for recognizing the greatness in front of him.

Stick with the clip to the end. It's a kind of public discourse we don't see much of anymore.

A while ago, Gord did a bit about The Worst Show Ever. He was talking about magicians who were unprepared and as a result were unappreciated.

But sometimes, the unappreciated part comes no matter how prepared you are. Do yourself a favour and check out the Penn Jilette Radio Show from May 31st. You can download it, or listen to it streaming here.

After all the discussions about vasectomies, magician Mac King tells of doing a show at a community college in Mississippi. He was prepared, but he had an insurmountable obstacle to overcome. Seriously insurmountable. He did not surmount it.

Is it wrong that, like Penn, I find the story hilarious?

Remember Hapland? How about Hapland 2?

And I never did manage to Escape From Rhetundo Island.

And now of course there's Hapland 3.

But all of this pales against the fury of the WARBEARS!

Sigh. I will be fired.