AMC's Hit Show Premieres Mid-Season Resurrection

            AMC’s “The Walking Dead” was resurrected on Sunday from a nearly 3-month hiatus with the premiere of a brand new episode. The break began on Nov. 27, 2011, when the network first aired the series’ mid-season finale, “Pretty Much Dead Already”.

            Since then, viewers had been waiting for 11 weeks to finish drawing conclusions and tying up loose ends. They were given that opportunity with “Nebraska,” “The Walking Dead’s” return episode, and the seventh in season two.

            “I’m glad to see that the show is back,” said Alex Williams, student at the University of the Cumberlands and zombie fan. “It’s a favorite of mine.”

            The mid-season return of “The Walking Dead” broke its own record, first set late in 2011 by the first episode of season two. According to the “Huffington Post,” more than 8 million viewers tuned in to watch “The Walking Dead,” topping the 7.3 million that watched previously at the season’s debut. The accomplishment is made more impressive when compared to its competition; both “The Walking Dead” and the Grammys aired at the same time on Sunday.

            Charlie Collier, president of AMC, released a statement congratulating this feat: “It’s a great night for AMC,” Collier said. “We’re thrilled to see this record-breaking response to “The Walking Dead.”

            There will be no more breaks from now until the end of the season, as season two of “The Walking Dead” is set to finish up in March of this year, and season three is planned to hit the airwaves shortly after in October.

UC's Cumberland Idol Begins New Season

            Season five of Cumberland Idol, a singing competition held annually at the University of the Cumberlands, kicked off with excitement on Tuesday. Featuring new contestants in addition to some from previous seasons, Cumberland Idol offers young and talented vocalists around campus the opportunity to grow as performers and showcase their skills.

            “It’s a good opportunity to get better,” said Jonathan Carmack, a returning singer. Carmack has participated in the last two seasons. “I like to perform and improve.”

            The event is sponsored by the university’s Campus Activities Board and offers plenty of incentives for those willing to participate. The first place finisher is promised $700, while second and third place get $200 and $100, respectively.

            “It’s probably the biggest event of the year for us,” said Lisa Bartram, Director of CAB. “Students really love it.” With attendance reaching nearly 500 some weeks, that is easy to believe.

            The competition began on Tuesday and will feature six shows in total, including a finale. This season features more talent than any before it, and it promises to be packed with crowd-pleasing performances. One such performance came in the very first show when Jonathan Carmack performed a duet with Chris Brown. They sang Adele’s “Someone Like You,”  accompanied by a live pianist.

            When asked about the abundance of talent in this season’s contestant pool, Carmack said, “It’s really intimidating. There are so many good singers. Anyone could be eliminated at any time.”

            But that suspense is part of what makes Cumberland Idol so engaging. It is a show packed with talent, great music, and plenty of uncertainty.

            Cumberland Idol looks to set new records this season in both talent and attendance. For six weeks, students at the University of the Cumberlands will be treated to a slew of stellar performances, and you can bet they are eager to watch. Let’s just hope they can find a seat.

Student-Inspired Publication Set to Return from Hiatus

Contact Information(University of the Cumberlands):

English Department    (606) 539-4414

(Pensworth):

Jamey Temple             (606) 539-4603

jamey.temple@ucumberlands.edu

Cory McClellan           (606) 539-4445

cory.mcclellan@ucumberlands.edu

         The University of the Cumberlands’ department of English and creative writing is set to release  “Pensworth,” its on-campus creative writing and art publication, for the first time in two years this April. This is the publication’s first missed date of release since its revival in 2003.

            “We ran out of time,” said Jamey Temple, assistant professor at the University of the Cumberlands, when asked why the publication didn’t reach the hands of student last year. “Pensworth” is scheduled to be published once each school year, and always in the spring semester. “Regrettably, we couldn’t get it out in time then.”
           "Pensworth" is a blessings to students of creative writing, as it provides them with an opportunity to submit and publish their works locally before branching out into bigger publications. It also gives them the chance to read the works of other aspiring writers.

            Temple is one of two faculty members who are primarily responsible for handling submission, publication, and distribution responsibilities for “Pensworth,” along with several selected graduate and undergraduate students. Under their collective supervision, the 2012 edition of “Pensworth” will see a successful release.

             Since its first issue in 1985 and its revival in a “New Series” in 2003, “Pensworth” has provided an outlet for students’ creative work by publishing original poetry, fiction, personal essays, photography, and artwork. It is published once annually. Submissions are accepted in the fall semester, and selection and publication work begins in the spring semester.

            University of the Cumberlands is located in Williamsburg, KY on a campus that spans approximately 70 acres and includes 34 buildings and 2 sports field complexes. Here, approximately 3,300 students choose from over 40 different majors, minors, and pre-professional programs, all while developing leadership skills through a Leadership/Community Service Program. The University of the Cumberlands boasts a student to faculty ratio of 15 to 1.

###

"The Truman Show": Hidden Camera Social Commentary

1998's poster for "The Truman Show".

“The Truman Show” (1998), directed by Peter Weir, is a film fixed on deception. It opens with a scene reminiscent of 1950s “Leave it to Beaver” – picket fence and all – as viewers follow Truman Burbank (Jim Carrey) through the beginnings of what seems to be a normal day. He exits his one-story ranch style home with briefcase in tow, waves at his neighbors, bids farewell to his wife (who, of course, is staying at home to eagerly await the return of her bread-winning husband, and perhaps bake or sew), and leaves in his Buick for work. He never stops smiling.

                But soon, things seem to change. The film begins to reveal to the viewers that things are not as pleasant in the town of Sea Haven. We witness actors leaving for breaks, set pieces being moved, and hidden cameras following Truman everywhere he goes. In time, Truman begins to catch on too, and before you know it, everything that he had ever thought was true has to be questioned. His wife, boss, best friend; they’re all fake. Actors. Everything is a lie. The bulk of the film comes when Truman realizes and begins to react to this.

                “The Truman Show” isn’t afraid to make you ask questions; or, if need be, ask them for you. It is a satire that makes no qualms about urging you to question your surroundings, the things you trust. It is darkly humorous in the way that it highlights and exposes the natural compulsion we all feel as humans: the one that gives us the ability to cheat, steal, lie, and hurt others for our own personal gain. With the help of a stellar performance by Jim Carrey, ”The Truman Show” is largely successful in poking fun at these desires, but I assure you that the lesson that is present at the film’s core won’t leave you laughing.

                And it isn’t supposed to. The irony within “The Truman Show” is that it uses dishonesty to remind its viewers of one universal truth: people, in general, are inherently bad. These qualities are on display in nearly every character in the film. Truman’s best friend Marlon (Noah Emmerich) is only an actor who has pretended to grow up alongside Truman, living in the same world that he does for Truman’s entire life. And the savage director of the television show that Truman unknowingly stars in, who pulled him from the crib at birth and made him a test subject for millions of people to watch, sees Truman through eyes with dollar signs in them. To him, Truman is nothing more than a cash-cow. Even Truman himself shows flashes of badness, from the way he so easily accepts the world he has been given, to the way that he reacts once he finally discovers that something is up.

                The film’s biggest success is that it manages to communicate these ideas without being overbearing or trying to say too much. The social commentary tucked beneath the humor of Jim Carrey and the unique plot are so tasteful that they are barely noticeable. The cast is superb and the plot is second to none, and it all combines to create what seems to be a timeless classic film.

The rest of the world sees Truman through hidden cameras like this one.

                “The Truman Show” is nothing if not unique. It warns viewers of the dangers of complacency, demands that they question the world around them, and it reminds us all that people, no matter how close, are still people, failures and all. It is successful as an entertaining film, featuring a high profile actor that is guaranteed to make you chuckle from beginning to end. What really makes it soar though – the thing that will keep people watching over 12 years after its initial release – is the delicacy with which it handles the touchy subjects, the way that it encourages folks to want better, and the way that it does all of this without you even realizing it.

"The Walking Dead" are Treading on Thin Ice

AMC's "The Walking Dead" on Sundays at 9:00 pm EST.

Like the world it takes place in, AMC’s “The Walking Dead” features a plot-turned-upside-down that offers hope to zombie fans, but continues to drag viewers along from nightmare to nightmare of poor pacing and melodramatic writing with only hints of rescue.

At its inception in 2010, Frank Darabont’s “The Walking Dead” (adapted from the ongoing comic book series by Robert Kirkman) aimed to offer viewers something that few chapters of zombie-lore had before: an intimate and ongoing glimpse into the lives of a small group of survivors during zombie Armageddon. The series set its sights on going beyond the movies of George A. Romero and crew; the cameras don’t stop and the credits never roll on “The Walking Dead,” and everyone knows it.

There are times throughout “The Walking Dead” where the series achieves that goal. The pilot episode features a captivating, if slightly worn (pulled almost directly from 2002 film “28 Days Later”), exposition that paints a likable character in main protagonist Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln) and provides an engaging beginning to what could be a great series. More than once during this hour and a half-long installment will you find your guts churning at something other than the ultra-realistic gore – like the scene where Rick stumbles into what used to be his home in search of his wife and child, only to find some empty drawers and a few missing photo albums. The mental breakdown he experiences then is effective and believable; Rick’s sadness becomes your sadness (thanks to some decent acting by Lincoln), and this small town sheriff adds depth to his character by showing some vulnerability.

Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln) sees his family for the first time.

The following episode loses some of its shine, though, but still seems to charm you into watching by introducing new characters and threatening to kill them; these additions add a new dynamic to the show – just like real people would – but are largely archetypical and one-dimensional in scope.

The series continues to dull in episodes three, four, and five, and then, by episode six, like the day you had to take a baseball bat to your best-friend-turned-zombie’s head after already watching him be eaten, the series has gone from bad to worse.

Surprisingly, what plagues “The Walking Dead” most are not the zombies (called “walkers” in the show) – it suffers from a slew of hitches brought about by its failed quest for identity. The series swerves drunkenly back and forth on the very thick line between high-profile action shows like “24” and “General Hospital”-like soap operas, stopping at each briefly to imitate it in a sometimes embarrassing public-display-of-insecurity.

But this balance is not unobtainable (see: episode one), which is why it must be frustrating for viewers to shamble through several episodes filled with poor pacing and forced melodrama. For every one thing “The Walking Dead” does right, it’s bound to do three or more things wrong, and the brilliance of each success makes the following failures all the more inexcusable.

Some characters make bonehead decisions – like the time when Glenn (Steven Yeun) drives a stolen car back to camp with its alarm blaring, knowing damn-well that walkers are drawn to sound – and others are just unlikable or too one-dimensional to care about. In a series that is character-driven and uses tension between survivors or an unfortunate death to advance the plot, this should not happen.

“The Walking Dead” is now in its second season and looks to have clenched a third, but nothing has changed. The series still suffers from an unevenly paced plot – the cast has spent the last four episodes searching for the even-less significant daughter of a minor character, even though it took less than two episodes in season one for Rick to find his family – and the characters are largely the same, with a few welcome exceptions. Much of what seemed promising at the beginning of season one has been squandered thanks to a staggered search for identity, and, if something doesn’t change soon, it won’t be the zombies that scare viewers away from “The Walking Dead”; it’ll be the disappointment of its unreached potential.

Frugality: How to Spend the Little Money You Don't Have

                “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.”

-          1 Timothy 6:10

Paul was right. History has shown that money and its pursuit have ended, time and again, in hatred, hurt, and destruction. Kings have killed those with larger fortunes and taxed the impoverished to fund a life of luxury. Stores are robbed and people are killed because people have come to value wealth more than the life of another. Lawsuits are filed daily when folks are afraid they’ve been cheated of even the smallest amounts in the race for property and privilege. Yeah, Paul had it right when he said that money is a root of all kinds of evil.

But Paul never attended a modern-day university. He wasn’t aware of just how much it costs now to get an education; my tuition alone this year (before books, gas, meals after 7 p.m., and any source of entertainment) was $25,826. How much did Paul have to pay before getting his job as the most featured author in the New Testament? Nowhere near that amount, I bet.

But where does all of that money come from? Every college student in America knows that the four years you spend in a classroom after high school are both the busiest and most expensive years that one may ever live. That’s why, in this blog, I am going to offer five seemingly-simple-but-often-overlooked concepts for saving money while in college, including things like how to save on common dorm room items, how to make your own impressive cuisine, and how to recycle your leftover trash. These tips are easy and direct, and, with them, you might just save yourself from becoming one more root on the tree of evil. Or, at the very least, you might make it through school without being so broke all the time.

One can only hope.

Saving on the Little Stuff

College is, for most people, a first-try at being on your own.  That means you wake yourself up, make your own schedule, do your own laundry, and spend your own money. Usually.

                The latter of that bunch is always the hardest. It is surprising how quickly money disappears when you not only have to buy the normal things like food and movie tickets, but also the small but very necessary items like toothpaste, trash bags, and shampoo. It all adds up, and, before you know it, you’re out of money and you can’t afford to buy laundry detergent.

                But there are ways to avoid this tragedy. Not every college student is doomed to the pitfall that is overspending. In fact, using modern technology and the tips in this blog, you can morph from a typical first-time over-spender to a frugal smart-shopping machine. Then you can make all of your dorm buddies jealous over your keen ability to afford toothpaste, or your laundry detergent collection.

Tip #1: Ditch the name brands

                According to Walmart.com, the difference in prices between the Hefty (Name brand) EasyFlaps 13-gallon trash bags (80 count) and the Great Value (Walmart brand) FlapTie 13-gallon trash bags (80 count) is $0.90 per box. Now, while that might not seem like a lot of money saved, think of it in this way: to buy the name brand instead of the generic brand is to spend an extra dollar on something that is meant to be thrown away.

The difference between these two items? $0.90.

                To make a long story short, if both products function in the same way, springing for the generic brand instead of the name brand will save you some bucks.

Tip #2: Make everything count

                Every time I do laundry, I see first-time guys doing their laundry. They make a habit of overloading the washers and rarely separate by color. Then, it comes time to add detergent, and they dump the bottle upside-down over the washing machine without ever bothering to measure. There is a reason that the cap on your detergent bottle has a few lines on the inside for weighing out your pours.

                This is not a way to make your hard-earned dollar last. Instead, you should try measuring everything: there’s a reason the manufacturer suggests a particular amount for each use. This could be said for shampoo, soap, and conditioner too, as well as deodorant, mouthwash and other items.

                To maximize your time between buys, use only what you’re supposed to. No more.

Tip #3: If you can do it yourself, do it

                How much does a haircut cost nowadays? How about a car wash? I don’t know the answers to those questions exactly, but I do know this: it’s more than the average college student needs to spend. Instead of taking the easy route by paying someone else to do things for you, do them yourself.

                By doing this, you’ll not only save money, but you’ll also learn skills that can help you later on in your life. Does your car need an oil change? Why not try it yourself? Save your money and instead invest a little time. You'd be surprised how easy it is to make a birthday gift for your roommate instead of buying something expensive or how little it costs to make your own meals instead of eating fast food.

That doesn't seem so hard, now does it?

                And there you have it: the best tips money (or no money) can buy when it comes to saving in the little areas of college life. And, guess what? You got them for free, which means you’re doing better already.