Jobs That I Would Love To Have

1. Bookstore owner. It is my childhood dream to become a lawyer but it is my grown-up dream to be a bookstore owner. So to dovetail these two, I decided that I will become a lawyer to earn enough money to put up and maintain a bookstore. For me "living the life" does not mean partying or drinking. It means waking up each day to go to my own bookstore to talk about books to people that are as equally passionate with them as I am.

2. Basketball (or women's volleyball) court side reporter writer or photographer. I get to watch the games free. Meeting the players is not a remote possibility. I get to write about something I am genuinely interested in. With photography, I'll have a "reason" to walk court side during games and/or photograph beautiful people, wonderful places, and precious moments.

3. Basketball coach. For kids, of course; around 5 to 8 years old. I am not a super fan of kids but I may have the patience if I'm teaching them something I really like doing.

4. Journalist (read: "serious" writer). The job commands respect, and who doesn't want that?

5. Tour guide. Free travel + practicing my undergrad course (albeit in small ways)

6. Hotel/Restaurant Reviewer. I will experience hotels and restaurants and I am licensed to judge them, and they're not allowed to lash out. Well, they're not supposed to, anyway.

7. Writer. I started this list in 2010 when I kept making drafts of topics I wanted to write about but may forget. Guess what, I am a writer now and it is refreshing to know that I "would love" to be a writer 2 years ago.

8. Book/music/TV critic. I love music, books and TV shows. I go crazy just by talking, writing about them. This blog has served as my avenue for writing/publishing my critiques about music, books and TV shows. I love reading other people's critiques too.

9. Chef. I make a mean breakfast, and that's about it. Creating something that tastes heavenly is something to be proud of.

10. Judge (at any performing competition). I love watching people perform something they're good at (or, at least, they think they're good at it). I love criticizing people and their performances.

11. Astronaut. Who didn't dream to be an astronaut at any point of their life?! The thought of being in outer space (zero gravity and that stuff) just sounds amazing... even to a twenty-two year old.

12. Painter. Imagine the luxury of not having to work, in the traditional sense, and just paint, and still live comfortably. It's a luxury I would love to have.

13. Gallery person or the modern (read: younger) counterpart of a museum curator. I love paintings--making, seeing and being around them.

14. Stage/theater director. It would be such a pity to put my Best Director awards for various class/school plays back in grade school and high school to waste. Directing is a good way to channel my inner bully.

15. Lawyer. I wouldn't be wasting 5 years of my life reading literally tons of stuff and allowing my professors to "teach" me law if I did not want to become one. Faults and all.

W - - - ing for a living

When I met a law block mate who worked as a writer, I instantly thought, "I want that job." I was thinking that if one writes for a living, on a daily, regular basis, he/she would be well-versed and well-skilled in writing. Something that I aim for. But surprise! surprise! When I finally got a job as a writer--two failed and one successful interview later--I realize that writing for a living would lead to the opposite of what I was expecting.

My writing "gig" mandates me to write letters, messages (for graduations, anniversaries and other celebrations), draft bills and resolutions, and make explanatory notes (these should give you an idea where I work) around 4 to 5 hours a day. I write and re-write these materials twice or thrice. One would think that I am skilled in writing since I have had this gig for 17 months now. But no, I'm still learning the ropes of writing clearly and formally. Sometimes I need to write with drama (when writing speeches in Filipino and letters asking for fund allocation) but oftentimes what I write should be clear and straightforward. No ifs and buts.

For a blogger who draws more on ones' opinion, it takes time to get used to structured writing. So as to not confuse my writing styles--for work and for leisure--the need to compartmentalize my writing arose. Yes, I do write some of my blogs when I'm at work, or I write work stuff when I'm in school or at home, but compartmentalizing is not about the place where I'm writing but it's about properly setting up my state of mind--how I need to think, to feel, when writing about a specific thing.

Sometimes, all this compartmentalizing confuses me; tires me out. Sometimes I mix my styles. Sometimes I don't know what style to use at all. It's stressful. It truly feels like work--in every sense of the word.

Little things I miss

I miss the days when I could just say and mean it, 'Mag-a-absent ako bukas.'
I miss the days when my concerns were limited to passing Math1, Math11 and Philo1.
I miss the days when I were a recluse. As if I ceased to be one.
I miss the days when dancing, for field demonstration or cheering, was required. Not that I was ever good at it.
I miss the days when I enjoyed people's company without other people impugning malice or coming to conclusions.

Circumstantial Hotness

Often times we are blinded, like a deer to a pair of headlights on a dark, dull evening. We feel that we like--in some cases even love--someone or something "like we've never liked/loved before." This may seem cliche-ic or too romantic-comedy/drama material, but really, when we think about it, every person who falls in love or "falls in like" (if there is such a thing) claims to loving/liking like he/she never have before. But when the next opportunity to/for love/like strikes, almost everybody plunges into it with the mindset, "I love like never before"--promising his/her self "this will be it." As if that "it" is ever tangible to its seeker. 

Watching How I Met Your Mother's Girl Versus Suits episode, Robin mentions the "concept" of circumstantial hotness when she defended her hotness against the "sexy" new bartender at MacLaren's, who, according to her, seemed hot because of her position, her job--a bartender. She further states that such hotness is "superficial" and that anyone put in such position will appear to be hot. And she did prove her point.

To further explain, circumstantial hotness, for me, is liking/loving someone not because of who/what he/she is but because of where that person is in your life. Whether who that person is, no matter how unappealing he/she may seem at first but once he/she arrives at a point, a place, which makes you think differently about that person. That is circumstantial hotness, my friends.

Example. I thought Sarah Chalke seemed "appealing" as Elliot Reid in Scrubs but not as Ted's would-be wife, Stella. I liked Jim Parsons as Sheldon Cooper but not that robot-costume-wearing guy in Garden State. Get my point? It's the circumstances that "decide" whether someone/something will be seen as hot or not.

So, who you think is circumstantially hot?

Happiness

Seeing an eight year relationship crumble before your very eyes is sad. But seeing how it all happened, what the reasons were, and why it did happen, you realize, like that famous relationship cliche, it's all for the better.

You come out proud not because you were instrumental in making this happen. You are proud because for once in her life since she was 13 years old, your friend has made a tough, life-changing decision for her own good. A decision that makes her extremely happy. It may seem to be a selfish choice to others but happiness is about selfishness, after all. You have to want happiness for yourself to be happy. Life is about being happy, isn't it?

You don't know if they will be back together or your friend will find someone else--someone better, you hope. What is important now is that your friend is happy. She has decided to be so.

QNBS: Freaks and Geeks

Chuck has ended and Once Upon A Time won. But the opportunity to criticize in a justified manner is so addicting that I have decided to continue my Quest for the Next Best Series. I will not rename it because I don't have enough creativity to think of a new one.

I will adopt the original QNBS method for judging a show. 1. A friend recommends a TV show or I see an interesting review or a sarcastic rant about it in the Internet. 2. I watch two episodes. 3. Write down what I think, Pros-Cons style.

--------------------------

Many series exist in TV world but today I will write about Freaks and Geeks.

Plot: Two siblings deal with the awkwardness of being in high school in 1980, from homecoming dances to leaving the Mathletes.

PROS:
1. The Weir kids. Linda Cardellini as the Army-jacket-wearing Lindsay Weir and John Francis Daley as Sam Weir deliver good performances in this 1999 TV show. They have the chemistry of siblings, and exude enough individuality to carry out their stories: Lindsay is an awkward girl having identity crisis and joins the Freaks, and Sam is a lanky 103-pound boy labelled as one of the Geeks despite his efforts to shed the image.

Lindsay Weir is the Juno of the 1990s (sans teen pregnancy).

2. The Freaks. The cool guys of the 2000s are the Freaks of the 1990s. High school is so awkward that even the cool guys were labelled as Freaks. Chuck was correct when he said that nerds are this millenium's jocks. Geeks have inherited the Earth.

Buddies: James Franco, Seth Rogen, Jason Segel

Super gwapo!

3. The Geeks. Sam's buddies, Neal Schweiber (played by Samm Levine) and Bill Haverchuck (played by Martin Starr), are the perfect high school buddies--funny, honest and supportive.

(l-r) Neal, Bill and Sam

4. When people say things like, "You gotta find your big, gigantic drum kit." to refer to finding one's life passion or his/her essence, I am definitely hooked. Metaphors are my favorite figure of speech. Metaphors from occasionally stoned drummer kids are just magic.

"You gotta find your big, gigantic drum kit."

5. It's fun to see today's actors in their teens. John Francis Daley is the most improved while James Franco, Jason Segel, Seth Rogen and Samm Levine looked the same.

The Freaks and Geeks: then and now

6. The show lasted for 18 episodes only. It's easy to catch up to when compared to Friends, Scrubs or Doctor Who.

7. It's funny hilarious. From the main characters to the supporting ones like Kim Kelly (Busy Philips) and Millie Ketner, who says things like: "I am going to have more fun than all you... sober." Yes, Millie was speaking to drunks at a party.

8. A decent soundtrack. First, the fact that a show has a soundtrack--whether decent or otherwise--is a plus. Second, the fact that the songs range from fairly decent to fantastic is a double plus.


CON:
I am too biased to notice. Sorry.


THE VERDICT:
If Rushmore and Juno had a child, that kid will be Freaks and Geeks. Yes, that's how impressed I am by this show, only after watching two episodes. I was a goner, so to speak, after Nick delivered the big, gigantic drum kit line. This show is made of stuff that good movies (or movies that I like) are made of. Paul Feig and Judd Apatow are my heroes now.

Too bad the show was shortlived. All things I like others don't find too amusing. That's a fact.



----------------------------
You may want to look back on how other TV shows fared on the QNBS scale:

Bent
Once Upon A Time
The Inbetweeners
Game of Thrones 2
Sherlock
Suits
Game of Thrones 1
The IT Crowd
Rizzoli & Isles
Community
Awkward
New Girl
Outsourced

QNBS: Bent

Chuck has ended, and after 11 reviews, I decided to watch Once Upon A Time. But having the opportunity to criticize anything in a justified manner is so addicting that I have decided to continue my Quest for the Next Best Series. I will not rename the title because I don't have enough creativity to think of a new one.

I will adopt the original QNBS method for judging a show. 1. A friend recommends a TV show or I see an interesting review, or hear a sarcastic rant about it in the Internet. 2. I watch two episodes. 3. Write down what I think, Pros-Cons style.

--------------------------

Many series exist in TV world but today I will write about Bent.

Plot: A recently divorced uptight single mom wants to redo her kitchen and hires the services of a carpenter contractor to do the job.

Yes, that's basically the plot. I wonder how the writers will milk this story for what it's worth. Maybe they'll redo the living room after the kitchen's done.

PRO:
Amanda Peet. The only reason why this show is worth watching.

Jenkins is now a mom! 

CONS:
1. The guy lead aka Pete. I hate him. No words will suffice to convey my hate.

2. The story is kinda shaky. I don't see where the characters will be or how they will get there. Realistic endings are important for me. If the ending is not realistic, the road to the ending must at least be fun or funny. Neither is the case for Bent.

3. I got tired of the sexual tension-filled bickering between Amanda Peet and Pete eight minutes into the second episode. Yeah, I wonder how I lasted Bones and Booth for 5 seasons.

4. No offense but I'm not a big fan of carpenters contractors. And stories involving them or their friends who're also carpenters, electricians, plumbers etc.

5. Characters, like the story, seemed pointless. The surfer dude contractor gambling addict (yeah, a lot has been going on in this guy's life), the recently divorced uptight single mom, the frustrated-actor and 50 year old dad, and the crazy ex. All boring characters. Give me some Abed. Heck, I'd appreciate even a Shirley.


THE VERDICT:
This is a series that is bent and broken, and feels wrong in so many ways. 


----------------------------
You may want to look back on how other TV shows fared on the QNBS scale:


Once Upon A Time
The Inbetweeners
Game of Thrones 2
Sherlock
Suits
Game of Thrones 1
The IT Crowd
Rizzoli & Isles
Community
Awkward
New Girl
Outsourced

QNBS: Once Upon A Time

Chuck has ended. I am still reeling from its oh-so-perfect ending but I have yet to decide on its replacement. So I continue my Quest for the Next Best Series. Many series have been recommended but today, I will write about Once Upon A Time.

To recap, here is how I come up with these QNBS reviews: 1. A friend recommends them or I see an interesting review about it in the Internet. 2. I watch two episodes. 3. Write down what I think, Pros-Cons style.

Plot:  This is the story of how Snow White's and Prince Charming's daughter, Emma, saves (or, at least, tries to) the fairy tale characters from the curse of the Evil Queen, who has stolen their happy endings and transported them in present-day Storybrooke, Maine. They are all oblivious to the fact that they are characters from fairy tales. But before all the saving can start, Emma's son Henry, who she gave up for adoption 10 years ago, must convince her that she is Snow White's daughter.

PROS:
1. That Aha! moment. Have you experienced the feeling when after looking for your One Great Love for a long time in all the wrong places, you see this person standing in a spot you've constantly looked at but missed in the past, and you say to yourself, "There you are."? I've experienced that with Once Upon A Time, albeit in a less romantic/dramatic manner. In all the ten QNBS reviews I have done so far, it is only while watching Once Upon A Time did I say to myself, "This is it." I cannot point out the exact reason that made me love this show. I just do.

2. Henry Mills. There are only two types of kids that I love: the chubby-cheeked kids and those who talk to adults like they are grown-ups themselves. Henry Mills (Jared S. Gilmore) is obviously the second kind. He's endearing in a non-forceful (read: di masyado pa-bibo) way. He's a simple kid who for some reason found his birth mother's present address and knocked on her door on her birthday, only to convince her to bring him back home to Storybrooke. All this using his teacher's credit card. I want to believe in something as strongly as Henry does in Emma Swan.

The lovable Henry Mills

3. I am a big fan of fairy tales. I am old enough to know--or be convinced by the cynics around me haha--that fairy tales are not true but 'modernizing' these fairy tales and turning it into a TV series is a brilliant idea. It is a brillant excuse for grown-ups to relive their childhood and root for their favorite characters again.

4. Jennifer and Ginnifer. I was never a fan of Jennifer Morrison when she played Zoey in How I Met Your Mother (not because she played it badly but because, for me, the character was unnecessary). She wasn't on House when I started liking the show in Season 4. I only liked her in one House episode when she and Dr. Chase were stuck at a hospital room, forcing them to deal with their impending divorce. But in Once Upon A Time, Jennifer Morrison performs really well.

Morrison leaves Princeton-Plainsboro Teaching Hospital to be a bail bondsperson

To Ginnifer Goodwin, I only have this to say: Who are you? I honestly thought Morrison and the show's make-up team were doing a super good job portraying one actress as three characters: Snow White, Emma Swan and Mary Margaret Blanchard. It turns out they just really look alike.

She looks like Morrison and almost has the same first name 

5. The how-will-they factor. Even if I know most of the fairy tales and I, sort of, expect the writers to follow the originals, I find myself interested in how the writers will adapt a particular story. I loved how confident the Game of Thrones writers are in killing off Ned Stark and how adventurous How I Met Your Mother writers are in providing silly fast forward moments (ex. Ted in a green dress saying 'Now We're Even') that drive them into corners they have to get out of using brilliant writing. I hope the writers of Once Upon A Time deliver as well as them.

6. Good villains. Lana Parrilla is very effective as the Evil Queen. We Filipinos always claim that we have the worst and most corrupt public officials in the world, I agree with that. But when I see the Evil Queen, my resolve shakes a little. I can just imagine how frightening it is to have the Evil Queen as our city mayor. In that case, our OTOP will be apples--red, shiny and poisonous.

Apples--red, shiny, poisonous

Robert Carlyle as Rumpelstiltskin is amazing. Seeing this Rumpelstiltskin character, I told myself, He's cool. Why didn't my parents made me read his story?!!! Why did I waste my time on Three Little Pigs?

The glittering Rumpelstiltskin

7. It is not a comedy. While I require that the TV shows I watch have some kind of comedic quality or at least an occasional funny joke, I appreciated Once Upon A Time for making me realizing that, Hindi lahat ng nakakatuwang bagay, dapat nakakatawa. I had to thank The IT Crowd for showing me: Hindi lahat ng nakakatawa, nakakatuwa.


CONS:
1. I'm afraid that the show will run out of fairy tales to tell, to adapt. Imagine if Once Upon A Time lasts as long as Friends or (god forbid!) Doctor Who, I bet the writers will need to borrow stories from Aesop's Fables.

2. An episode lasts about 40 minutes on average, longer than my 20min-ish requirement. I guess this is negotiable as long as Once Upon A Time manages to keep me interested and awake for 20 more minutes.


THE VERDICT:

After 10 TV shows and 11 QNBS reviews (because I did Game of Thrones twice), I found Chuck's replacement! THIS IS IT. Yay! You may have sensed that Once Upon A Time is the one after reading item No. 1 on the Pro List... and seeing only two cons. (FYI: The second Con is, in fact, an afterthought.)

Bye, Chuck. Hello, Once Upon A Time.


----------------
You may want to look back on how other TV shows fared on the QNBS scale:

The Inbetweeners
Game of Thrones 2
Sherlock
Suits
Game of Thrones 1
The IT Crowd
Rizzoli & Isles
Community
Awkward
New Girl
Outsourced

QNBS: The Inbetweeners

Chuck has ended. I am still reeling from its oh-so-perfect ending but I am unable to find its replacement. So I continue my Quest for the Next Best Series. Many series have been recommended but today, I will write about The Inbetweeners.

To recap, here is how I come up with these QNBS reviews: 1. A friend recommends them or I see an interesting review about it in the Internet. 2. I watch two episodes. 3. Write down what I think, Pros-Cons style.

Plot:  A story about a transfer student aka "one of the freaks" who tries, and succeeds, according to the opening credits, to be friends with three other not-so-school high school boys. "Anyone can be your friend if you hang around them long enough."


PROS:
1. It's British. The British accent blows me away. Constantly.

2. The opening credits. It reminds me of Juno, and I liked Juno.

3. It's a story about geeks or not-so-cool high school students. I am a big fan of geeks--no, nerds, as Chuck and Morgan like to be called--like Chuck, Troy, Abed, Sheldon, Leonard, Howard and Raj, and the Glee kids who were not into a sports varsity team or the Cheerios.

4. It's a little funny, especially the part in Episode 2 where the boys spread the rumor that Neil's dad is gay. Not cool if it's your dad they're talking about. But if it isn't, it's hilarious.

5. I noticed the dialogue and the boys do use the word "fuck" a lot. I guess British TV is liberal enough to allow it. I should looked at the British dictionary when I was punished for uttering "fuck you" when I was a kid. Haha

6. The boys (Simon Bird as Will McKenzie, Joe Thomas as Simon Cooper, James Buckley as Jay Cartwright and Blake Harrision as Neil Sutherland) have chemistry. However, the lead character, Will, annoys me but so did whiny Ted in Season 6 of How I Met Your Mother.


CONS:
1. It's The IT Crowd for high school, and I hated The IT Crowd. The Inbetweeners had less violence and was less slapstick but I found the lines outrageous and the reactions too over the top.

2. I had the time to write about a QNBS review months after I watched The Inbetweeners, and I barely remember a thing about it. This is bad.

3. Do British kids normally whisper or shout insults to newbies as they pass him in the halls wearing a blazer or weird shoes and carrying a briefcase? It's like an American high school movie, only longer.


I am too disappointed by this TV series I will not bother to add photos. Or maybe doing a review of Game of Thrones just before this one has something to do with my disappointment. I guess Game of Thrones is a tough act to follow--even in reviews.


------------
You may want to check other QNBS reviews:

QNBS: Game of Thrones 2
QNBS: Sherlock
QNBS: Suits
QNBS: Game of Thrones 1
QNBS: IT Crowd
QNBS: Rizzoli & Isles
QNBS: Community
QNBS: Awkward
QNBS: New Girl
QNBS: Outsourced

QNBS: Game of Thrones 2

Chuck has ended. I am still reeling from its oh-so-perfect ending but I am unable to find its replacement. So I continue my Quest for the Next Best Series. Many series have been recommended but today, I will write about Game of Thrones.

Photo from Wikipedia

Plot: Following the death of the Hand of the King through a sudden and mysterious cause, the King of the Seven Kingdoms travels to the North to ask his friend to be the Hand of the King, at a very tumultuous time of his reign. External and internal conflicts complicate the Seven Kingdoms. External: the threat of the re-emergence of the Targaryens, the House of the former Mad King, to reclaim the throne from the King. Internal: the King's wife's incestuous relations with her twin brother brings the Queen's House, the Lannisters, against the new Hand's House, the Starks.


PROS:

1. It is highly recommended by the Chuck Bartowski, Zachary Levi, and... well, almost every person I know. The enthusiasm people have with Game of Thrones reminds me of the enthusiasm that my friends had with How I Met Your Mother. I was hesitant to try it at first but convinced myself to try it, and I have never looked back since.

2. It is very well made. An episode seems like a movie in itself, in terms of production. In my virtual ranking of best produced series,  Game of Thrones  rank second to Sherlock. The setting, the costumes and the props (hello, the swords look like real swords, the ones that could really cut someone) were perfect.

3. The show is blessed with good actors. Producers should thank their casting director for a good job. I loved the strong performances of Sean Bean as Lord Eddard "Ned" Stark, Lena Headey as Queen Cersei Lannister, Emilia Clarke as Daenerys Targaryen, Aidan Gillen as Lord Petyr Baelish, Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister, Michelle Fairley as Catelyn Stark, Isaac Hempstead-Wright as Bran Stark, Kit Harington as Jon Snow, and Maisie Williams as Arya Stark.

(clockwise from top left:) Daenerys Targaryen, Lord Petyr Baelish, Lord Ned Stark and  Queen Cersei  Lannister

4. The story is very well written and the characters are so promising that the writers are not afraid to kill off the main character. Yes, the death of Ned Stark was written in the George Martin books but still, following conventional TV series writing, the writers could have not followed Martin and let the only upright character in the whole of Westeros live. They choose to defy the conventional and didn't care whether they get crap for killing off the main guy. Sometimes I wish other writers have this confidence the writers of Game of Thrones have. But, then again, other shows are not blessed with the open mindedness viewers of Game of Thrones have. Just look at what happened to House when Cuddy, Cameron and, to an extent, Thirteen left.

The show's still underdeveloped characters show promise:
(Clockwise from top left) Arya Stark, Jon Snow, Bran Stark and Robb Stark

5. The direwolves. When I convinced my brother to give Game of Thrones  a try, I found myself highlighting the fact that the five Stark children each had a direwolf, which served as the Stark's sigil, to take care of and protect them. These direwolves played (although I doubt it if they are aware of it) important roles in the Stark children's lives. Bran's Summer defended him from his hired killer. Nymeria almost ate off Joffrey's hand after he attacked Arya. Sansa hated her father for letting the King take Lady's life in replacement for Nymeria's. Even Jon Snow's albino direwolf Ghost and Robb's Grey Wind have been given ample screen time.

Bran holding a very young Summer

CONS:

1. Although I am a history major--well, sort of--the whole medieval-kingdoms-against-kingdoms plot does not appeal to me that much. Mind you, I fell asleep in the first few minutes of the first movie in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and I am not even sure if it was about kings. I'd rather watch science-y stuff the boys of The Big Bang Theory rant about over this. Yeah, I know, kill me now, Game of Thrones  fans.

2. After watching eight episodes, I came out of it with a strong hatred towards the characters rather than love. Usually, after I finish watching two episodes for my QNBS review, I focus on the show's positive aspects and what I love about it. But with the Game of Thrones, the dominating emotion was hate. I hated Viserys Targaryen, Jaime Lannister, Joffrey Baratheon and Jon Arryn's son who loves violence and his mother's colostrum (come on, the boy looks ten years old!). I don't want to watch a show because I strongly hate its characters and slightly like the others. Although as cheesy as this may sound, I remained loyal to Chuck,  How I Met Your Mother and The Big Bang Theory because I loved its characters.

The guys I love to hate: (clockwise from top left) Jamie Lannister,
Joffrey Baratheon, Jon Arryn's son and Viserys Targaryen 

3. Too much gore, sex and scheming. I was thinking my sensibilities are, well, liberated enough to endure the explicit violence and sexual content of Game of Thrones. But, no. The way the show treated sex and violence casually was something I cannot get used to. I am young barrio lass after all. Haha I can just imagine what my reaction will be to Spartacus.


Game of Thrones is good yet somehow I don't find myself liking it enough for it to replace Chuck in my regular TV series viewing. I think of Game of Thrones as my family's traditional, special Christmas Eve dish. We love it but we do not eat it regularly because it is best served during special occasions. Its quality will not be appreciated if served regularly.

So it is decided that I, Jo Ann Frances, first of my name, of the House of Madarang, shall watch Game of Thrones after every season is finished to enable me to appreciate its plot, actors and story properly.

(Yeah, the inner geek in me has wanted to do that since I heard the characters speak these lines)


----------------------------------
You may want to check other QNBS reviews:

QNBS: Sherlock 
QNBS: Suits
QNBS: Game of Thrones 1
QNBS: IT Crowd
QNBS: Rizzoli & Isles
QNBS: Community
QNBS: Awkward
QNBS: New Girl
QNBS: Outsourced

The William McKinley High School in a Decade

Out of the many possible names for a high school, the writers of Freaks and Geeks (1999-2000) and Glee (2009) chose William McKinley High School. Amazing?

What is more amazing is that both TV series use the same "M" logo, with different school colors (green and white for the 90s kids, and red and white for the Gleeks):

What is even more amazing is that given the 10 years apart, the show still features the game of dodgeball which, according to Kurt Hummel, is a modern form of stoning. In Freaks and Geeks the geeks went up against their more physically gifted classmates while in Glee the members of the two competing glee clubs in school go against each other.

Oh, how times have changed...not!

Welcome to the William McKinley High School!