WHAT'S THE BUZZ - Bond, Kramer, Family Guy & More

CRAIG, DANIEL CRAIG

There's been alot of talk about whether Daniel Craig is worthy to fill Bond's shoes - but my question is whether the character of Bond is worthy of yet another incarnation. Seriously, isn't it about time to retire this character - just how much longer are they going to drag this series out? I can't even remember the last Bond film I saw.

It's not surprising there's been so much chatter about this because finding just the right Bond is the key for giving the series more leg power. And it's definitely the key for me in terms of coming aboard the Bond bandwagon - which incidentally explains I haven't seen a Bond film since the late 80's, because they just never seem to get the casting right. Because, let's face it, Bond is not one of the more likeable action heroes around - he's sexist, he's a ruthless, cold blooded killer, he treats women like objects, he's full of himself, etc. If Bond were a woman, there's no way the character would be so beloved, especially if she behaved in the same way as her male counterpart. But I for one would love to see a female James Bond - a Jane Bond if you will. Now that would be a welcome direction to take this character.

What's equally annoying about the Bond debate is how everybody always talks about Sean Connery being the best Bond ever - whatever. My favourite Bond was Timothy Dalton - the one no one else seemed to like. But to me, Dalton had the right balance of edginess and suave. Connery was good and he had great screen charisma, but he was too heavy on macho and too short on likeability. Roger Moore was simply too boring. And except for his great performance in the underrated film from last year, The Matador, I have yet to see Pierce Brosnan create a likeable or interesting character. Daniel Craig, although he wouldn't be my first choice to play Bond, is a welcome change to Brosnan's reign of mediocrity. Having not seen the film, I would still rank Craig second or third on the all time best Bonds list. But off all the actors that were in the running, I would have chosen Clive Owen. Owen is a good actor, with lots of screen presence - one who can be cool and edgy, without being an asshole.

KRAMER'S MELTDOWN

Although I consider Seinfeld to be one of the ten greatest television shows of all time, truth be told, Kramer was not one of my favourite characters. To me, the real stars of Seinfeld were George and Elaine. In fact, George and his parents alone were so funny they could have had their own show. Richard's characterization of Kramer relied too heavily on physcial comedy for my taste. Don't get me wrong, Kramer is a funny character and he definitely had some stellar moments, but the true stars of Seinfeld, apart from the great writing, will always be Jason Alexander and Julia Louis-Dreyfus in my book.

Having said that, Michael Richards' meltdown was not completely surprising to me. Even though comedy is serious business, Richards always struck me as someone a little too tightly wound to be a comedian. I'm not sure why I had that impression - maybe it's because he was known to be the most solemn performer of the four; or maybe it's because of the rumours he gets quite irate when fans affectionately call him Kramer in public. Whatever the reason, I wasn't completely surprised. What did surprise me was the timing of his meltdown - right on the heels of Seinfeld's Season 7, DVD release. Was Richards subconsciously trying to sabotage the DVD release or was it a publicity stunt to draw more attention to the DVD release - the old adage there's no such thing as bad publicity coming into play here. But evern more surprisng than all the above, was his less than stellar satellite appearance on Letterman afterwards, which in my opinion made the matter worse. Someone should've given that idea some more thought. Not that Richards' apology didn't seem sincere, but that his stint on Letterman was the most awkward, uncomfortable, rambling, non-sensical and incoherent public apology I've heard in quite awhile. It was truly painful to watch. Why Richards chose this venue to do some spin doctoring instead of having his publicist issue a statement is beyond me.

In addition, I found Richards' claim that he's not a racist to be quite amusing. Much like Mel Gibson's claim that he's not anti-semitic, their attempts to deny their prejuduices just doesn't hold water . I hate to break it to Michael & Mel, but stress and alcohol don't create racism, they simply reveal it. Having said that, few of us could hold up to the scrutiny if our most secret thoughts were ever suddenly revealed to the world. Most of us would probably have alot of explaining and apologizing to do.

FAMILY GUY VS. SANDRA OH

There's been some discussion about whether Family Guy crossed the line by making ethnic jokes about Sandro Oh on last Sunday's episode. When I heard about this, I was stunned. Of all the things that Family Guy has done to elicit reaction, I can't believe that this is the one that made 'headlines.' First of all, the joke wasn't offensive because the intent was not to deride a culture but rather to elicit a laugh by highlighting the character's stupidity and ignorance - in the same way Archie Bunker's ignorant statements only served to elicit a laugh at the character's expense and not at the culture he was denegrading. Second of all, Family Guy has done things much worse than that - things that should've elicited some reaction, but did not. It's amazing to me how jokes making fun of child molestation and the Holocaust, jokes that denegrade sacred symbols and poke fun at physically challenged people, jokes that were really in bad taste and only served to reveal the show's ultimate driving philosophy: a laugh at any cost, don't seem to get any reaction. As I've said before, Family Guy is a brilliant show with the potential to surpass the comic genius of The Simpsons. Unfortunately, the producers' unwillingness to draw the line at appropriate points is something that continually undermines the show's comic genius. Part of what makes The Simpsons so great is the show's ability to push the boundaries while still respecting that great divide that separates brilliance from bad taste. Family Guy has crossed that line too many times for my liking, but the Sandra Oh segment wasn't one of those times.

PAMELA, PAMELA, PAMELA

It's only because I like her so much that I'm even bothering to comment about Pamela Anderson's divorce from Kid Rock. Anderson may be a smart and saavy business woman but she's completely clueless when it comes to men and relationships. So I've taken it upon myself to give her some much needed advice:

• Enough with the rockers! They aren't working out! Date an accountant or an insurance salesman or something. Generally speaking, rockers don't make great life partners. If you can't let go of your thing for musicians, then date a crooner or a classical musician - but NO MORE ROCKERS!
• Don't marry someone who've only known for 4 DAYS! And especially don't marry a rocker you've only known for 4 days.
• Don't marry someone repeatedly in different places over a short time span. It will only come back to haunt you.
• Keep your relationships, affairs, etc. out of the pubic eye. Don't comment on them - ever! Again, declaring your love publicly will only come back to haunt you.