The Screaming Viking

Apparently there is some ruling involving FCC and “indecency” for networks.  It seems to have to do with live broadcasts and things that would be labeled “utterances”.  I’ve no idea what this means.  It seems like the U.S. is far behind (what seems like) most of Europe when it comes to attitudes on nudity as it relates to T.V.  Maybe that’s not true, but it’s definitely the impression I get from my brief exposure to European T.V. and commercials.

link

A three-judge panel in New York says a rule on unscripted expletives on live broadcast TV and radio creates a ‘chilling effect’ in violation of the 1st Amendment. The ruling is a major victory for broadcast networks.
A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down the government’s longstanding prohibition against indecency on broadcast television and radio, ruling that the policy was “unconstitutionally vague” and created a “chilling effect” that violated the 1st Amendment protection of free speech.

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York is a major victory for the broadcast TV networks, which jointly sued the Federal Communications Commission in 2006 in the wake of a tougher crackdown on indecency over the airwaves.

The suit stemmed from an FCC ruling in March 2006 that unscripted expletives uttered impromptu on live broadcasts, such as awards shows, violated indecency rules and were subject to fines.

The same court found in 2007 that the FCC’s policy on such so-called “fleeting expletives” was “arbitrary and capricious.” The FCC appealed the ruling and the Supreme Court upheld the crackdown on fleeting expletives that began in 2004.

But the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling was focused on the way the FCC enacted its tougher policy and sent the case back to the New York court to decide the broader issue of the constitutionality of the ban on profanity on the broadcast airwaves.

That policy dates back to a 1978 Supreme Court decision stemming from the radio broadcast of comedian George Carlin’s “seven dirty words” monologue. The FCC began a tougher crackdown on indecency in 2004 under the Bush administration.

Congress voted in 2006 to boost the maximum fine for each violation tenfold, to $325,000, in the aftermath of singer Janet Jackson’s so-called wardrobe malfunction during a performance in the Super Bowl halftime show in which one of her breasts was briefly exposed on live TV. Each station that airs an indecency violation can be hit with the fine, putting networks on the hook for as much as $35 million for each incident.

“Under the current policy, broadcasters must choose between not airing or censoring controversial programs and risking massive fines or possibly even loss of their licenses, and it is not surprising which option they choose,” U.S. Circuit Judge Rosemary S. Pooler wrote in Tuesday’s decision. “Indeed, there is ample evidence in the record that the FCC’s indecency policy has chilled protected speech.”

The court cited the failure of several CBS affiliates not to air the Peabody Award-winning “9/11″ documentary, which contained some expletives in audio footage from firefighters responding to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Fox Broadcasting Co. cheered the ruling.

“We have always felt that the government’s position on fleeting expletives was unconstitutional,” the network said. “While we will continue to strive to eliminate expletives from live broadcasts, the inherent challenges broadcasters face with live television, coupled with the human element required for monitoring, must allow for the unfortunate isolated instances where inappropriate language slips through.”

There have been two episodes of True Blood season three so far and it’s really started off with a bang.  They introduced the werewolves, you find out whom they are being controlled by..which is interesting.  Apparently vampire blood has the same effect or possibly even magnified on them compared to humans.  There is a -really- uncomfortable homoerotic dream sequence between bill and the shape shifter (I don’t remember everyone’s name).  The shape shifter finds his family and that they are like him.  We also find out that someone has been keeping tabs on Sookey for a very long time…I suppose because of her telepathic abilities…which I expect we’ll find out are only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to her abilities.

I found myself a little bit bored with this series around mid last season.  The story seemed to drag on a bit and meandered around.  I was so disappointed that Godrick was killed off right away, his character in just the couple of episodes he was in was so fascinating to me.  He was/is so revered by Eric and a few other vamps and was such a bad ass…in a 17ish year old boys body.  Sooo bad ass.  It was nice to see him in a flash back in this last episode.  It would be interesting if they told a little more back story via these flashbacks al la highlander.  Since these characters have been around so long it stands to reason there there is some rich history between them.  The audience is now hooked on the series…it would be a good move to take some time now and then to build some of this history and see how these characters interact and why they interact the way they have.

If you haven’t watched this series, catch the past seasons on DVD and tivo the new episodes…it’s worth watching.

Patrick Stewart has been knighted.

link

LONDON – Patrick Stewart has been upgraded from captain — to knight.

The actor — famous for playing Capt. Jean-Luc Picard on “Star Trek: The Next Generation” — officially became Sir Patrick Stewart when he was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace on Wednesday.

While “Star Trek” introduced him to a different group of fans, Stewart is also a widely respected stage actor.

The 69-year-old actor discovered the theater as a child, and said “my heroes were Sir Laurence Olivier, Sir John Gielgud, Sir Alec Guinness.” Being “in that company is the grandest thing that has professionally happened to me.”

Stewart joined Britain’s storied Royal Shakespeare Company in his 20s, and in 2008 was nominated for a Tony award for the leading role in “Macbeth.”

The season 5 finale was a milestone for supernatural.  If you’ve been following some behind the scenes details online you already know that Kripke intended to end his story here.  He had planned from the beginning that this series be on a 5 year story arc.  Supernatural was picked up for a 6th season, but he came out right away and said he wouldn’t be involved in the series anymore.  Maybe the additional season influenced how he ended his story…but I don’t think it did really.  They had shown before they weren’t afraid to kill people and have them brought back, so why change that now?  My review is obviously my interpretation of the story…who knows what kripke artistically meant for the viewer to take from the story…and who really cares?  I like a story best when there are multiple interpretations and people come away with different feelings.

My take on this whole series has been influenced by my experiences, the idea of two brothers setting out against the world strikes a chord with me.  I thought the final scene was subtly meaningful…maybe more so from my perspective than from most.  I think even if there wasn’t going to be a 6th season this would be a good ending for the series.  I think anything they do from here will sully the overall story and take away from the cumulative message I’ve taken away from the past 5 years.

The style of the last episode was a bit different than the other episodes.  They decided to use the profit’s (I’m horrible with character names) perspective and voice over to narrate the story.  I thought, given kripke’s departure, this was a very fitting choice.  He talks about the significance of the impala…which at first seemed odd..but whatever.  He told the story of the brothers growing up with the car and the various things they did that left their mark on the vehicle.  The significance of this will be shown in the final battle, which was a bit of a cheese dick move…but whatever.  There was one decent conversation between the brothers where sam tells dean not to come after him if he ends up in the pit.  I thought it was going to come off as a bit tongue in cheek…and maybe season 6 will show dean chasing after sam…but the feeling from the end of 5 is that he’s done.

The battle between Micheal and Lucifer in some ways mirrored the bickering between sam and dean over the course of the series.  I assume this was intentional.  Micheal was the “have to do this” type that reflected deans mentality and the devil was more of a “lets walk and do our own thing” which reflected sam’s mentality.

In the end, we see the devil in sam’s body beating the living hell out of dean…only to see one of the affor mentioned “marks” left on the impala…which seemingly empowered sam to take control and jump into the pit with micheal.  Strangly enough…micheal wasn’t interested in locking up the devil, he -needed- to fight him as he felt he was directed to by his father (god).  That was an interesting point upon reflection.  Micheal wasn’t interested in saving humanity or containing the devil…he needed to fight as he felt he was directed to do by god.

The series made a few interesting religious points throughout it’s 5 years, but one of the more interesting to me were the ones it made about Christianity compared to other religions or conventional beliefs.  One point that has been made over and over again was that the angels really don’t give a damn about the humans…and in fact resent them.  This is nothing new as far as religious writing is concerned…many shows/movies have passed on the idea that angels resent humans.  In the 3rd to final episode this season they demonstrated the power that the christian angels had is superior to the power of other religions gods.  This seems like an odd statement to make…but whatever, it was a good story.  The last one that really piqued my interest was the idea that the horseman “death” was eternal…possibly being older than “god” and also existing longer in the end, eventually taking god with him.  Maybe that’s a statement about all religions eventually dying out…who knows, I just thought it was interesting.

Now, the final scene….

This scene hit pretty close to home for me.  Sam is dead, dean finds his “woman” from a previous season and she basically takes him in…we assume to be part of the family.  We see dean, her and her child sitting down to dinner.  Strangely, this hits really close to home for me.  We then see sam standing by a light post outside the window looking in on this scene.

Some people are speculating that the devil escaped from his prison, or that god brought sam back.  I think that misses out on the overall point of this scene.  I think Kripke was trying to show a final act of “brotherly love” as it were.  That letting go is the final, and hardest thing to do.  If sam is going to give dean a shot at a normal life, he can’t see him again…if dean is going to have a normal life he can’t go looking for sam.  Also, on the way over to this chic’s house, dean was in the impala with castiel and he says that god gave dean “more of the same, no heaven…no hell…just more of the same”.  I think that’s a wrong assessment, given that he’s now separate from sam it’s more of a hell than the same it was before.

Like I said earlier though, my take on the story is pretty colored.

We’ll see what season 6 has in store for the brothers.  I’m a bit disappointed they are going on with the series…I think this would be a very good way to end it.