I'm sure by now you've seen the new Scott Pilgrim trailer. If not, stop what you're doing right now and watch it. Here I'll link it for you.
So obviously, the trailer looks awesome. I'm super excited about the movie, it looks really good, blah blah blah, insert some generic hyperbolic statement where I equate severe head/facial trauma to goodness, etc, etc, etc.
Despite making me want to see the movie muchly, the trailer has made me do a lot of thinking about Ramona V. Flowers as a person. For the record Ramona Flowers is not a real person, but as I make little distinction between real people and fictional people (I classify both groups of people into the category of "people who are not me") I have no problems spending ridiculous amounts of time trying to figure her out. More specifically, whether or not Ramona is a good girlfriend.
I'm going to start with my conclusion and work my way backwards from their. I will warn you, Pete, who, let's face it, is probably the only person still reading this at this point, I haven't read the books in a little over a year, so I don't have a lot of specific references to make, and the ones I do have will most certainly be wrong.
So simply, No. Ramona is not a good girlfriend. At least not for Scott Pilgrim. Ramona is Scott Pilgrim's dream girl (literally and metaphorically). She represents Scott Pilgrim's ideal woman; She's cooler than him, but doesn't mind, smarter than him but only because she's lived a more "storied" life, she's attractive, a good fighter, and an American Citizen (which I assume is what all Canadians look for in a potential mate). She is pretty much better than Scott in every way except for her baggage, which in this case is 7 evil exes. She likes Scott because he's adorable and he likes her, loves her even, despite her baggage, but she still pushes him away at times. I'm not really sure why she does this, probably because Scott can be clingy at times and she likes the fact that she has parts of her life that Scott isn't a part of and resents the fact that he's insinuating himself into her life, regardless of what she wants, but I might just be reading something that isn't there in that regard. I get the feeling that when the conflict is gone, when there is no one to fight for Ramona's attention, Scott will feel a lot less compelled to be with Ramona, although at that point, the comic will be over, so it doesn't really matter. For some reason the idea of Scott and Ramona getting together at the end and living happily ever after just seems like kind of a letdown as well as being unrealistic (I may be taken to task for trying to look for realism in a story where people fight each other with flaming swords and giant Anime Mallets, but the emotional content in the Scott Pilgrim series has always been incredibly authentic). So I guess what I'm saying is, Scott should dump Ramona and marry Kim Pines. The End.
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
The End of the Season
Thursday night was the end of an era, that era being the 2009-2010 television season. Although there are other shows with new episodes left this season, since I only watch TV on Thursday nights and only watch four shows on that night, this was the last night of the season for me.
Thursdays on NBC have been the most consistent two hours of programming I've ever had the pleasure to enjoy. The Community/Parks and Rec/The Office/30 Rock comedy powerhouse has been a joy to behold since September.
This season saw the beginning of Community, a show I really enjoy and hopefully will continue to enjoy for seasons to come (but realize it will probably hit a slump about halfway through next season, kind of like it did this season). The paintball episode is one of the finest half hours of television I've ever seen.
Parks and Rec went from being a show I kind of hated for being a lazy rehash of The Office, from the people who made The Office, to being a show I genuinely like more than I like the Office, which I do like, deep down inside, if only because I hate it so much.
The Office didn't entirely suck this season. In fact, I liked a lot of the episodes. This season also featured two of the worst episodes in The Office history; the wedding episode and the episode where Pam and Jim have a baby. Are people over The Office? Do people still like it? I think I might have started liking it again, which due to my anitpopulist nature, probably means it's becoming unpopular. Next season seriously needs to be the last season.
And finally 30 Rock. Oh 30 Rock, what can I say? 30 Rock was once the next Arrested Development. It's first season is probably the second best first season of any television show I've seen ("Tracy Does Conan" being in my top five best episodes of a television ever), then the writers strike happened and there was that epsiode that ended with the musical number. The beginning of the third season was pretty weak, but the back half brought it hard and salvaged a lackluster year. The then the fourth season happened. 30 Rock stopped being a show about people making a TV show. It became a show about a ruthless executive, his lovable protege and their pet, an annoying toeheaded creepster named Kenneth. It lost its grounding as an ensemble show with two bright stars, and around that time the jokes just started falling flat. There are still some good episodes in the fourth season, but compared to it's peak, 30 Rock was pound for pound the weakest link on the Thursday night chain of comedy awesomeness (which is what NBC should start calling their Thursday night lineup. It's much catchier than Must See TV).
Thursdays on NBC have been the most consistent two hours of programming I've ever had the pleasure to enjoy. The Community/Parks and Rec/The Office/30 Rock comedy powerhouse has been a joy to behold since September.
This season saw the beginning of Community, a show I really enjoy and hopefully will continue to enjoy for seasons to come (but realize it will probably hit a slump about halfway through next season, kind of like it did this season). The paintball episode is one of the finest half hours of television I've ever seen.
Parks and Rec went from being a show I kind of hated for being a lazy rehash of The Office, from the people who made The Office, to being a show I genuinely like more than I like the Office, which I do like, deep down inside, if only because I hate it so much.
The Office didn't entirely suck this season. In fact, I liked a lot of the episodes. This season also featured two of the worst episodes in The Office history; the wedding episode and the episode where Pam and Jim have a baby. Are people over The Office? Do people still like it? I think I might have started liking it again, which due to my anitpopulist nature, probably means it's becoming unpopular. Next season seriously needs to be the last season.
And finally 30 Rock. Oh 30 Rock, what can I say? 30 Rock was once the next Arrested Development. It's first season is probably the second best first season of any television show I've seen ("Tracy Does Conan" being in my top five best episodes of a television ever), then the writers strike happened and there was that epsiode that ended with the musical number. The beginning of the third season was pretty weak, but the back half brought it hard and salvaged a lackluster year. The then the fourth season happened. 30 Rock stopped being a show about people making a TV show. It became a show about a ruthless executive, his lovable protege and their pet, an annoying toeheaded creepster named Kenneth. It lost its grounding as an ensemble show with two bright stars, and around that time the jokes just started falling flat. There are still some good episodes in the fourth season, but compared to it's peak, 30 Rock was pound for pound the weakest link on the Thursday night chain of comedy awesomeness (which is what NBC should start calling their Thursday night lineup. It's much catchier than Must See TV).
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Character Development
I've recently discovered something about myself... well not really discovered but more of found a way to describe something that I've known about myself for years. I have a tendency to like people I shouldn't like, and when I say "like" I mean enjoy on a purely superficial level. I've always had an affinity for curmudgeony people, people who are by their very nature unlikeable, people who are rude to me, or are arrogant jackasses, or are pretentious douchebags. Generally speaking, I like people.
This might be surprising considering I like to call myself a misanthrope, but hypocrisy has always been one of my most defining characteristics (in addition to my remarkable candor, my almost constant self-deprecation and incredible sense of direction). But as I stated earlier, I've figured out why I like people I shouldn't like (and dislike people I shouldn't, to some extent). I view other people a lot like I view characters in TV shows and movies. I don't judge them based on how I feel about them personally or how they relate to me, I judge them based on what they add to the world around them.
So here's a for instance; My boss and I don't really get along. We aren't adversarial to each other, I think we both like each other well enough, but we have nothing in common. We are completely different types of people. If we are alone in a room together we don't talk. We have nothing to talk about. Very little in common except for the fact that we both work in the same 50' by 10' box. However, if Jackson Wal-mart Pharmacy was a TV show, Keith, my boss, would be my favorite character. He has great rapport with pretty much every other person that comes into the pharmacy. He's funny and engaging and very three dimensional. He's a great character.
I've pretty much always viewed my life as a movie, and I've never considered myself to be the hero, which might sound kind of like a passive aggressive attempt for sympathy, but it isn't. The hero is rarely, if ever, the best part of a movie; Han Solo is way cooler than Luke Skywalker, Frodo is the worst part of Lord of the Rings, Sonny and Vito are both cooler than Michael (especially if we're counting all three Godfather movies, which I am) and Chaucer steals every scene form William Thatcher (Knight's Tale reference bitches!) (DOUBLE ASIDE!: RDJ might be the exception to this rule, Iron Man, Sherlock Holmes and that dude he plays in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang are all pretty much the best parts of their respective movies, also Harrison Ford is pretty good as Indiana Jones... but other than that... and Joe Go Lev, but of the four movies I've seen with him as the lead, he only carried two of them...no, I stand by my original statement. RDJ is the only exception.).
So I guess my big revelation is that I like real people for much the same reason I like fake people, which is why sometimes I like people who are complete douche-bags, and dislike people who are completely fine people (I can't think of anyone like this at the moment but I'm sure there are plenty of people like this that I've met). Not too surprising I guess.
In other news, I still can not figure out how to get songs from my computer onto my I-pod. Fuck you apple, and your proprietary software.
Oh! I just thought of someone I hate that I hate for no reason! Anyone who owns an i-pad. I-pad owners are all douche-bags beyond salvation. That is all.
This might be surprising considering I like to call myself a misanthrope, but hypocrisy has always been one of my most defining characteristics (in addition to my remarkable candor, my almost constant self-deprecation and incredible sense of direction). But as I stated earlier, I've figured out why I like people I shouldn't like (and dislike people I shouldn't, to some extent). I view other people a lot like I view characters in TV shows and movies. I don't judge them based on how I feel about them personally or how they relate to me, I judge them based on what they add to the world around them.
So here's a for instance; My boss and I don't really get along. We aren't adversarial to each other, I think we both like each other well enough, but we have nothing in common. We are completely different types of people. If we are alone in a room together we don't talk. We have nothing to talk about. Very little in common except for the fact that we both work in the same 50' by 10' box. However, if Jackson Wal-mart Pharmacy was a TV show, Keith, my boss, would be my favorite character. He has great rapport with pretty much every other person that comes into the pharmacy. He's funny and engaging and very three dimensional. He's a great character.
I've pretty much always viewed my life as a movie, and I've never considered myself to be the hero, which might sound kind of like a passive aggressive attempt for sympathy, but it isn't. The hero is rarely, if ever, the best part of a movie; Han Solo is way cooler than Luke Skywalker, Frodo is the worst part of Lord of the Rings, Sonny and Vito are both cooler than Michael (especially if we're counting all three Godfather movies, which I am) and Chaucer steals every scene form William Thatcher (Knight's Tale reference bitches!) (DOUBLE ASIDE!: RDJ might be the exception to this rule, Iron Man, Sherlock Holmes and that dude he plays in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang are all pretty much the best parts of their respective movies, also Harrison Ford is pretty good as Indiana Jones... but other than that... and Joe Go Lev, but of the four movies I've seen with him as the lead, he only carried two of them...no, I stand by my original statement. RDJ is the only exception.).
So I guess my big revelation is that I like real people for much the same reason I like fake people, which is why sometimes I like people who are complete douche-bags, and dislike people who are completely fine people (I can't think of anyone like this at the moment but I'm sure there are plenty of people like this that I've met). Not too surprising I guess.
In other news, I still can not figure out how to get songs from my computer onto my I-pod. Fuck you apple, and your proprietary software.
Oh! I just thought of someone I hate that I hate for no reason! Anyone who owns an i-pad. I-pad owners are all douche-bags beyond salvation. That is all.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Gentlemen Broncos: Perhaps the Worst Movie I've ever Seen
I've seen a lot of bad movies; Pirate Radio, For Your Consideration, Cloverfield, The Order, Angels and Demons... and those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head. I'm not the kind of person that watches bad movies on purpose (usually), and I'm usually kinder on movies that are bad movies by their very nature. I don't go into movies like "Megasnake" or "From Paris With Love" thinking I'm about to see something outstanding. But when movies that have a certain pedigree turn out to be awful, I am ruthless to them. Such is the case for a film called Gentlemen Broncos.
Gentlemen Broncos is the third feature from the auteur Jared Hess. His previous outings, Napoleon Dynamite and Nacho Libre, were both competent if not outstanding films. Gentlemen Broncos, however, is a pointless, ambling mess of a film. It is a tedious, grueling display of some of the most unpleasant characters to ever be put on film. There is no redeeming part of this film. I watched it because I like Sam Rockwell and Jermaine Clement. It is not worth it. Their additions to the film are too fleeting and too weird to be entertaining, and really, their presences aren't that fleeting, they just don't have anything to work with, and as such, when they're onscreen, I just wanted them to get off, because the movie was so terrible. . There is no humor in this movie. There is nothing pleasant about this film at all. Please, whatever you do, do not see this movie.
Iron Man 2 is pretty good though. Not as good as the first one, but still very good.
Gentlemen Broncos is the third feature from the auteur Jared Hess. His previous outings, Napoleon Dynamite and Nacho Libre, were both competent if not outstanding films. Gentlemen Broncos, however, is a pointless, ambling mess of a film. It is a tedious, grueling display of some of the most unpleasant characters to ever be put on film. There is no redeeming part of this film. I watched it because I like Sam Rockwell and Jermaine Clement. It is not worth it. Their additions to the film are too fleeting and too weird to be entertaining, and really, their presences aren't that fleeting, they just don't have anything to work with, and as such, when they're onscreen, I just wanted them to get off, because the movie was so terrible. . There is no humor in this movie. There is nothing pleasant about this film at all. Please, whatever you do, do not see this movie.
Iron Man 2 is pretty good though. Not as good as the first one, but still very good.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Maybe it's not completely unjustified...
A few years ago, I was introduced to a television show called "Firefly". I loved it wholesale. It was a space western, with an incredible cast and a great story and it was more or less my introduction to Joss Whedon. In edition to creating Firefly, Buffy, Angel and Dollhouse, Joss Whedon also wrote a run of Astonishing X-men that came out around the time I was getting into Firefly. I picked up the first two trades and kind of hated them. I hated them so much that I thought that my love for "Firefly" might have been undeserved, that "Firefly" might actually suck and I was just remembering it to be good (like most things I liked when I was a child and Kevin Smith movies). So I spent a year or so thinking that I might not actually like "Firefly", but when I watched it all again last summer I realized it was legitimately good. This led me to think that I might've been too hard on Whedon's X-men run, so I gave it another try and borrowed the two books of his run I hadn't read from Mason. They were still terrible.
Whedon's X-men is terrible for a lot of reason, but the thing that bothered me the most about it was how he would end scenes. Almost every scene in the book was ended right before some sort of big reveal or a character getting shot or something that is supposed to be suspenseful, but really just comes off as annoying (Dan Brown employs this technique, or at least he did in the first 45 or so pages of Angels and Demons, which is about as far as I got in the book when I realized that it was not going to get better). Also I didn't like how he wrote Kitty Pryde. Which is weird because I've never read any X-men books with Kitty Pryde, ever. I have no affinity for the character whatsoever, and yet, I felt that the words coming out of her mouth were an insult to her character. So those things and the almost Pirates of the Caribbean levels of backstabbing and deal making were a little much.
So I think Firefly might be the only Whedon property that doesn't annoy me, which is a shame because he's doing the Avenger's movie, and I really like the Avengers and I think he's going to screw them up.
Whedon's X-men is terrible for a lot of reason, but the thing that bothered me the most about it was how he would end scenes. Almost every scene in the book was ended right before some sort of big reveal or a character getting shot or something that is supposed to be suspenseful, but really just comes off as annoying (Dan Brown employs this technique, or at least he did in the first 45 or so pages of Angels and Demons, which is about as far as I got in the book when I realized that it was not going to get better). Also I didn't like how he wrote Kitty Pryde. Which is weird because I've never read any X-men books with Kitty Pryde, ever. I have no affinity for the character whatsoever, and yet, I felt that the words coming out of her mouth were an insult to her character. So those things and the almost Pirates of the Caribbean levels of backstabbing and deal making were a little much.
So I think Firefly might be the only Whedon property that doesn't annoy me, which is a shame because he's doing the Avenger's movie, and I really like the Avengers and I think he's going to screw them up.
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
I hope they aren't becoming a thing
There is a band called Avi Buffalo. They are sort of unpleasant to listen to. I think they might be becoming indie music darlings. I do not dig them.
As much as I hate to admit it, I am a hispter... sort of. I certainly love irony and "indie" music enough, but there are certain things that hispters are supposed to like that I don't much care for. Musically, the list would include Radiohead (which I think non-hipsters are supposed to like too), Bon Iver, Phoenix, and all "good rap". I think my taste in movies might exclude me from hipster status, (although I think the hipster do's and don'ts of film are a bit more nebulous than their musical requirements) and if that doesn't my dislike of coffee, tea and alcohol of any kind certainly would. My most telling quality that might qualify me for hipsterdom is my hatred of hipsters. That is probably a hipster's most defining characteristic. Hipsters can not stand other hipsters. They hate their pretentiousness and their smugness and their aloofness. I might be safe from hipsterdom though, because I think I might just be a misanthrope, and just have a special place in my heart for hating people who think they're better than everyone else.
Whatever label other people ascribe to me, one thing's for sure. I really do not like Avi Buffalo.
As much as I hate to admit it, I am a hispter... sort of. I certainly love irony and "indie" music enough, but there are certain things that hispters are supposed to like that I don't much care for. Musically, the list would include Radiohead (which I think non-hipsters are supposed to like too), Bon Iver, Phoenix, and all "good rap". I think my taste in movies might exclude me from hipster status, (although I think the hipster do's and don'ts of film are a bit more nebulous than their musical requirements) and if that doesn't my dislike of coffee, tea and alcohol of any kind certainly would. My most telling quality that might qualify me for hipsterdom is my hatred of hipsters. That is probably a hipster's most defining characteristic. Hipsters can not stand other hipsters. They hate their pretentiousness and their smugness and their aloofness. I might be safe from hipsterdom though, because I think I might just be a misanthrope, and just have a special place in my heart for hating people who think they're better than everyone else.
Whatever label other people ascribe to me, one thing's for sure. I really do not like Avi Buffalo.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Summer Pre-Season Spectacular!
Tomorrow is the last day of April, which means Saturday is the first day of May which means summer is pretty much almost here, which means it's time for a list. Here's a list of things I'm really looking forward to this summer and some (hopefully) humorous remarks about them. (in chronological order, when appropriate).
1. Iron Man 2
I mean, look at this guy. For some reason, I always liked War Machine more than Iron Man. I think it was probably because War Machine is a lot cooler name than Iron man, also the color scheme is a lot cooler, also, he's black. I love Don Cheadle (I mean, LOVE him, love him). Scarlett Johannson is also in this movie and is also awesome (of course by awesome I mean hot,ex: "Careful, I just took that pizza out of the oven, it's very awesome."). And let's not forget about RDJ. So much has been said about the man the little else can be said to describe him other than this; he is the Johnny Depp of the years 2008 thru 2012, and maybe longer depending on A: how much the next Pirates movie sucks and 2: How many Avengers movies they make.
2. The 48 Hour Film Festival: Year 2.
Ok, so Brian Trainmayer and I's web series idea never happened. We made a go of it, but it just didn't happen, and probably never will. But we are going to work together on something called the 48 hour film festival. We were on a team last year and the results of that teams effort was mixed at best (it was mostly a mixture of sucking and terribleness). Fortunately this year, we have group of more like-minded people. We'll see how well it works out.
3. Musica!
There are some new albums from bands I like coming out this summer. The only ones I can think of right now are The Black Keys and The Arcade Fire. I like both of these bands with muchness, and hopefully their new albums will worthy additions to the respective bands' already quite auspicious legacies. Also if they tour near here, I would like to see both of these bands live. Speaking of concerts (which I was) Jeff Tweedy and She and Him are both going to be playing in St. Louis this summer!
4. Family
Most of my family lives within 120 miles of my house, so I get to see them with some regularity, but there are a select few who live outside that tri-state bubble, and when they make it back to Cape it is always a joyous occasion that involves more than a little amount of boardgame nights and ice cream parties. Joe is coming home for a week in May and Katie will be home this weekend (I haven't heard whether or not Joshua will be making an appearance this summer, but it's sadly, unlikely), so that will be exciting.
5. Pete and Kaylen's Wedding!
In addition to being one of the cutest couples I know, (although, to be fair there's not a lot of competition, assuming that I'm only counting couples that are my age and are friends of mine, which I am, so really they're one of the cutest of about 10 couples, which is still something, I suppose)
Pete and Kaylen and just about the swellest people I know. So I'm about as happy as I can be for them as I can be for people that are not me. I think it's pretty well known that empathy isn't one of my strong suits, so I yeah, I think that says something. By the way, the above picture is one of their engagement pictures. It's not part of some sort of creepy stash of photographs I have of Pete and Kaylen just lying around on my computer (although I do have some of those, but they're mostly of Pete, dressed as famous dead painters and are for my eyes only).
6. Scott Pilgrim Book 6/Scott Pilgrim vs the World
There really is nothing else in this world that I am more excited about the the Scott Pilgrim movie. I think I've mentioned before that I enjoy the work of Edgar Wright. He is my hero. And the Scott Pilgrim comic book series is pretty much a pitch perfect love story for hipster nerds like myself. The marriage of these two properties is something beyond perfect. Plus after seeing Chris Evans movie stealing performance in The Losers last week, I became even more excited about the prospect of him being involved in this film. In short, this movie will rock and there's nothing you can do about it.
Ok that's all I can think of now. It's entirely likely that I will blog about this things more when they happen, but I think it's entirely more likely that I won't, so there you have it.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
The Old F***ing West
Over the past two weeks I watched the Television program Deadwood in it's entirety. Being a show with an all too brief 36 episode run, this was not an incredibly difficult task, but it was also an not easy one (How's that for a thesis statement!). Due to the intricacy of the plot and the engrossingness (Spellcheck doesn't believe that "engrossingness" is a word. It also doesn't think "spellcheck" is a word. There's probably some sort of joke in there...) of the show it was hard for me to do anything else while watching, which means I spent approximately 30 hours doing nothing but watching television over the course of two weeks (although I actually finished it last Sunday, which means I watched 30 hours over the course of 10 days). That is almost as much time as I spent working during the same period of time. I'll let the loserishness implied by that previous statement sink in a moment.
NEXT PARAGRAPH!
The first two seasons of Deadwood are some of the best television I've ever seen (although to be fair, since it was on HBO, it's not technically television (it's HBO)). The show builds, literally and deliberately. The first two seasons tell the story of a group of people that all happen to be in the same place at the same time and how that group becomes a community that becomes a town on the cusp on legality in a territory that doesn't really belong to them that becomes a bonafide town recognized by the United States Government. The pacing of this growth and it's affect on the central characters of the program is incredible to watch, this is do in large part to one of the most talented ensemble casts ever assembled (we're talking Star Trek TNG levels of talent here), but also due to the sheer fascinating nature of the story, which is mostly based on real people and events. The third season is about how the community bonds when threatened by an outside force in a storyline that, unfortunately, vastly overstays its welcome. The third season is also the last season of the show, but it seems like this came as a surprise to the creators, as it doesn't really finish as much as it stops. There's not a lot of closure at Deadwood's conclusion, and that's a shame.
The vulgarity is Deadwood is something that gets talked about a lot, and well it should be. The profanity bandied about in Deadwood is outstanding, both in its prevalence and it's eloquence. I have no problem with profanity. I think the idea that some words are assigned some sort of negative significance or infamy is an incredibly ludicrous concept. The idea that we as a society agree to find some words offensive based purely on tradition is comical. There are things that are unpleasant by their very nature, and to bring them up in certain situations can be inappropriate. I don't think talking about feces is every really appropriate, but if and when I do, the idea that poo, poop, doo doo, etc. are acceptable words to describe it around some people, whereas "crap" and "shit" would not be around the same people, is ridiculous. You can't say "asshole" on broadcast television. Everyone who has every lived has one of those, but you can't call it by that particular name on television because it's offensive. You can say murder on television, which is something that is far less common and a lot more offensive. Now don't get me wrong, I love profanity, and wouldn't want to speak a language that didn't have swear words, I just don't think people should act scandalized when they hear it, because that is exactly what they are doing; acting. People are conditioned to respond negatively to those words, and to be "offended" by their use isn't a rational reaction, it's a conditioned response. So I guess what I'm saying, is that if you have a problem with swear words, scrote up, and watch Deadwood anyway, and you will learn how much vulgarity can elevate conversation when used deftly.
So yeah, Deadwood. It's good.
NEXT PARAGRAPH!
The first two seasons of Deadwood are some of the best television I've ever seen (although to be fair, since it was on HBO, it's not technically television (it's HBO)). The show builds, literally and deliberately. The first two seasons tell the story of a group of people that all happen to be in the same place at the same time and how that group becomes a community that becomes a town on the cusp on legality in a territory that doesn't really belong to them that becomes a bonafide town recognized by the United States Government. The pacing of this growth and it's affect on the central characters of the program is incredible to watch, this is do in large part to one of the most talented ensemble casts ever assembled (we're talking Star Trek TNG levels of talent here), but also due to the sheer fascinating nature of the story, which is mostly based on real people and events. The third season is about how the community bonds when threatened by an outside force in a storyline that, unfortunately, vastly overstays its welcome. The third season is also the last season of the show, but it seems like this came as a surprise to the creators, as it doesn't really finish as much as it stops. There's not a lot of closure at Deadwood's conclusion, and that's a shame.
The vulgarity is Deadwood is something that gets talked about a lot, and well it should be. The profanity bandied about in Deadwood is outstanding, both in its prevalence and it's eloquence. I have no problem with profanity. I think the idea that some words are assigned some sort of negative significance or infamy is an incredibly ludicrous concept. The idea that we as a society agree to find some words offensive based purely on tradition is comical. There are things that are unpleasant by their very nature, and to bring them up in certain situations can be inappropriate. I don't think talking about feces is every really appropriate, but if and when I do, the idea that poo, poop, doo doo, etc. are acceptable words to describe it around some people, whereas "crap" and "shit" would not be around the same people, is ridiculous. You can't say "asshole" on broadcast television. Everyone who has every lived has one of those, but you can't call it by that particular name on television because it's offensive. You can say murder on television, which is something that is far less common and a lot more offensive. Now don't get me wrong, I love profanity, and wouldn't want to speak a language that didn't have swear words, I just don't think people should act scandalized when they hear it, because that is exactly what they are doing; acting. People are conditioned to respond negatively to those words, and to be "offended" by their use isn't a rational reaction, it's a conditioned response. So I guess what I'm saying, is that if you have a problem with swear words, scrote up, and watch Deadwood anyway, and you will learn how much vulgarity can elevate conversation when used deftly.
So yeah, Deadwood. It's good.
Friday, April 09, 2010
Some possible titles for future blogposts if my life suddenly became a lot more awesome...
1. Me and Edgar Wright; The Graveyard Adventure!
2. My New Robotic Exo-suit is pretty cool
3. What should I name my Tiger?
4. Lycanthropy isn't all it's cracked up to be (It's Better!)
5. So I guess I'll be posting a lot more about being a ninja now...
6. Good News: Stevie Spielberg asked me to write Indiana Jones 5. Better News: The Tendercrisp Bacon Cheddar Ranch is back.
7. Is it just me or have I developed magical powers?
8. I just met Jack White, and despite numerous dreams to the contrary, he doesn't hate me!
2. My New Robotic Exo-suit is pretty cool
3. What should I name my Tiger?
4. Lycanthropy isn't all it's cracked up to be (It's Better!)
5. So I guess I'll be posting a lot more about being a ninja now...
6. Good News: Stevie Spielberg asked me to write Indiana Jones 5. Better News: The Tendercrisp Bacon Cheddar Ranch is back.
7. Is it just me or have I developed magical powers?
8. I just met Jack White, and despite numerous dreams to the contrary, he doesn't hate me!
Monday, April 05, 2010
Clash of the Titans Sucks; or Pete Wissinger is an Idiot
So my very good friend Pete recently wrote a post defending Clash of the Titans. He agrees that it's not a good movie, but he says that it is exactly the kind of movie the preview led us to believe it would be. I suppose this is sort of true in as much as the preview was a series of out of context scenes and lines thrown together without any sort of coherence that looked really cool, but had no depth or characters to speak of or a plot that made sense, so in that respect the trailer was exactly like the movie in every way. Although I think, generally, we assume that the lines of dialogue and scenes shown in trailers will add up to something more when seen in the context of the entire film, but that wasn't the case with Clash of the Titans, what you see in the preview is pretty much exactly how you see it in the film. The film is a series of plot and dialogue non-sequitors strung together by Sam Worthington's horrible acting.
Everything about Clash of the Titans was bad (except for the special effects, most of the time), the acting wasn't good, the plot is inconsistent, the characters are unlikable, the screenplay seems like it was written by a committee of people who like cliches and who think that Transformers 2 is the greatest movie ever made. Nothing anyone does in the movie makes sense.
Hades: You know Zeus, since you are powered by people loving you, and I'm powered by people fearing me, it would probably be a good idea if I released a giant scary sea monster on a city of people that hate you, which would probably make them fear me more and make them love you even less.
Zeus: I can't see how that could go wrong.
Argosian Commander: We as a city have declared war on "the gods", who are fueled by us praying to them or something.
Sam Worthington: Yeah, the gods suck.
Argosian Commander: Totally. You know who is awesome and I wish was my best friend?
Sam Worthington: Zeus?
Argosian Commander: Yes. He is so awesome. Let's pray to him.
Sam Worthington: I'm already there, man.
Io: Ok, so here's what you need to know about Medusa. She turns you to stone if you look at her eyes, she's super fast, an incredible archer and she can't hurt women.
Sam Worthington: Oh, well this won't be too bad then, you can just go in there in take her out, no problem.
Io: Right, but I won't be joining you.
Sam Worthington: What?
Io: I won't be going in Medusa's cave.
Sam Worthington: Why not?
Io: Some sort of curse or something. It's not really explained all that well.
Sam Worthington: So wait, she can't hurt you?
Io: Not even if she tried.
Sam Worthington: And you won't be coming with us?
Io: Nope. And it's a double shame because not only am I immune to her powers, I'm a pretty good fighter as well, so... yeah. Your men are probably all going to die, really pointlessly too.
Sam Worthington: That's retarded.
Io: Yup.
I think it should be mentioned again that Sam Worthington is especially terrible in this film. Nothing he does in the movie is good. I don't understand why people keep putting him in their movies. He's not a particularly charismatic presence nor is he a particularly good actor. Also his accent is all over the place in the film. I know what he's doing is incredibly hard. Acting is not easy. Not everyone can do it, and I think Sam Worthington might just be one of those people.
Pete claims that it's acceptable for Clash of the Titans to be unabashedly terrible because it's a big dumb action movie, and big dumb action movies don't have to be good, but I think there have been enough big dumb action movies recently that have also been good (Pirates 1, Iron Man, GI Joe {yeah, I said it}, the last 2 Harry Potter movies, Sherlock Holmes, Batman Begins and Dark Knight) that we can start expecting more from our big dumb action movies.
So to put it in the immortal words of Tracey Jordan, "Yeah, suck it Pete."
Everything about Clash of the Titans was bad (except for the special effects, most of the time), the acting wasn't good, the plot is inconsistent, the characters are unlikable, the screenplay seems like it was written by a committee of people who like cliches and who think that Transformers 2 is the greatest movie ever made. Nothing anyone does in the movie makes sense.
Hades: You know Zeus, since you are powered by people loving you, and I'm powered by people fearing me, it would probably be a good idea if I released a giant scary sea monster on a city of people that hate you, which would probably make them fear me more and make them love you even less.
Zeus: I can't see how that could go wrong.
Argosian Commander: We as a city have declared war on "the gods", who are fueled by us praying to them or something.
Sam Worthington: Yeah, the gods suck.
Argosian Commander: Totally. You know who is awesome and I wish was my best friend?
Sam Worthington: Zeus?
Argosian Commander: Yes. He is so awesome. Let's pray to him.
Sam Worthington: I'm already there, man.
Io: Ok, so here's what you need to know about Medusa. She turns you to stone if you look at her eyes, she's super fast, an incredible archer and she can't hurt women.
Sam Worthington: Oh, well this won't be too bad then, you can just go in there in take her out, no problem.
Io: Right, but I won't be joining you.
Sam Worthington: What?
Io: I won't be going in Medusa's cave.
Sam Worthington: Why not?
Io: Some sort of curse or something. It's not really explained all that well.
Sam Worthington: So wait, she can't hurt you?
Io: Not even if she tried.
Sam Worthington: And you won't be coming with us?
Io: Nope. And it's a double shame because not only am I immune to her powers, I'm a pretty good fighter as well, so... yeah. Your men are probably all going to die, really pointlessly too.
Sam Worthington: That's retarded.
Io: Yup.
I think it should be mentioned again that Sam Worthington is especially terrible in this film. Nothing he does in the movie is good. I don't understand why people keep putting him in their movies. He's not a particularly charismatic presence nor is he a particularly good actor. Also his accent is all over the place in the film. I know what he's doing is incredibly hard. Acting is not easy. Not everyone can do it, and I think Sam Worthington might just be one of those people.
Pete claims that it's acceptable for Clash of the Titans to be unabashedly terrible because it's a big dumb action movie, and big dumb action movies don't have to be good, but I think there have been enough big dumb action movies recently that have also been good (Pirates 1, Iron Man, GI Joe {yeah, I said it}, the last 2 Harry Potter movies, Sherlock Holmes, Batman Begins and Dark Knight) that we can start expecting more from our big dumb action movies.
So to put it in the immortal words of Tracey Jordan, "Yeah, suck it Pete."
Sunday, April 04, 2010
Easter and What Not.
Today is Easter. Today is the day I end my Lenten resolution of not consuming sweets (technically I ended it after Easter Vigil Mass when I went to the BeeK and got a Dr. Pepper with my Tendercrisp). This is the second time I've given up sweets for Lent in addition to my normal giving up of soda and I would say that it was just as successful as my previous attempt. I didn't break my resolution, though I wanted to on many occasions, and I ate an s-load of apples. I pretty much increased my fruit and nut consumption by approximately 1000% this Lent, as I decided that they are not technically sweets.
Ok two things unrelated to Lent/Easter:
I'm listening to an album that Jimmy K gave me by a band called Chairlift. There is only one Chairlift song I'd ever heard before; it's called "Bruises". I first heard it when I went to Las Vegas (which I don't think I ever blogged about, sorry blog), it was kind of the unofficial theme song of my trip to Vegas. Not because it was particularly relevant to what I experienced on the trip, but just because of its ubiquity. It was featured in an I-pod commercial that was played repeatedly on an outdoor TV billboard outside of a mall that I walked by at least 5 times a day. It's the only song on the album that is worth listening to so far.
I've been reading some of the things I've written, short stories, blog posts, etc. and I've discovered, or more accurately rediscovered, that I really enjoy my writing. It really makes me laugh. Unfortunately, I don't think I can write like that anymore. I haven't written anything significant since I graduated, and all the incidental writing I do (like what I'm writing right now) is pretty dry and boring. This leads me to the conclusion that I am becoming less talented. I think that talent might be like a muscle, and it's been so long since I've used mine, it's atrophying.
I find it difficult to be productive when I have no real reason to be. I'm not hard enough on myself to make myself do anything I don't want to do. And it's not that I don't want to write, there's just other things I'd rather do. I think part of my problem is that I have too many distractions, too many things that I use as an excuse not to write. Perhaps, in order to become more productive I should remove some of those distractions. So I guess what I'm saying is that I should murder Justin Spaeth so I have more time to write.
Just kidding. Or am I? Who's to say really? I am. I am to say, and I'm saying; Your days are numbered Justin Blair Spaeth!
Ok two things unrelated to Lent/Easter:
I'm listening to an album that Jimmy K gave me by a band called Chairlift. There is only one Chairlift song I'd ever heard before; it's called "Bruises". I first heard it when I went to Las Vegas (which I don't think I ever blogged about, sorry blog), it was kind of the unofficial theme song of my trip to Vegas. Not because it was particularly relevant to what I experienced on the trip, but just because of its ubiquity. It was featured in an I-pod commercial that was played repeatedly on an outdoor TV billboard outside of a mall that I walked by at least 5 times a day. It's the only song on the album that is worth listening to so far.
I've been reading some of the things I've written, short stories, blog posts, etc. and I've discovered, or more accurately rediscovered, that I really enjoy my writing. It really makes me laugh. Unfortunately, I don't think I can write like that anymore. I haven't written anything significant since I graduated, and all the incidental writing I do (like what I'm writing right now) is pretty dry and boring. This leads me to the conclusion that I am becoming less talented. I think that talent might be like a muscle, and it's been so long since I've used mine, it's atrophying.
I find it difficult to be productive when I have no real reason to be. I'm not hard enough on myself to make myself do anything I don't want to do. And it's not that I don't want to write, there's just other things I'd rather do. I think part of my problem is that I have too many distractions, too many things that I use as an excuse not to write. Perhaps, in order to become more productive I should remove some of those distractions. So I guess what I'm saying is that I should murder Justin Spaeth so I have more time to write.
Just kidding. Or am I? Who's to say really? I am. I am to say, and I'm saying; Your days are numbered Justin Blair Spaeth!
Thursday, April 01, 2010
A brief discussion about what might be the most important moment in human history...
Last week (or maybe two weeks ago, I don't remember at this point), a movie trailer was released upon the webternet. The trailer fortells of a film that will come out in mid August that will, most likely, forever change the course of human history. The movie in question is called Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World, and with it's release, it has the very real potential of succeeding in a way no other film before ever has. Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World will very likely win the art of filmmaking.
If you haven't seen it, take a moment to now. I'll wait.
There have been many great films in the history of the artform, and very few that are perfect (there are five perfect films: The Godfather, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars: Episode IV, A Knight's Tale, and Shaun of the Dead), but Scott Pilgrim will very probably be the first and only film that will achieve a status that is beyond perfection. New adjectives will have to be invented in order to accurately capture the amount of goodness that exists within the film.
One might say that I'm setting the bar a little high, that my expectations are a bit too lofty, but to them I say this: If this world is a world wherein Edgar Wright can make a movie based on one of my favorite Comics, that stars Michael Cera and Jason Schwartzman and that movie is not the greatest film ever made, then this world is not worth living in. I can't even imagine a scenario in which I would not love this movie more than life itself. Normally when people say things like what I said in the previous sentence, they are being hyperbolic. Let me assure you, I am not. Trying to imagine Scott Pilgrim not being the greatest single work achieved by humanity is like trying to imagine a world where math doesn't work or where Zooey Deschanel isn't completely adorable.
Also I got a new computer.
If you haven't seen it, take a moment to now. I'll wait.
There have been many great films in the history of the artform, and very few that are perfect (there are five perfect films: The Godfather, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars: Episode IV, A Knight's Tale, and Shaun of the Dead), but Scott Pilgrim will very probably be the first and only film that will achieve a status that is beyond perfection. New adjectives will have to be invented in order to accurately capture the amount of goodness that exists within the film.
One might say that I'm setting the bar a little high, that my expectations are a bit too lofty, but to them I say this: If this world is a world wherein Edgar Wright can make a movie based on one of my favorite Comics, that stars Michael Cera and Jason Schwartzman and that movie is not the greatest film ever made, then this world is not worth living in. I can't even imagine a scenario in which I would not love this movie more than life itself. Normally when people say things like what I said in the previous sentence, they are being hyperbolic. Let me assure you, I am not. Trying to imagine Scott Pilgrim not being the greatest single work achieved by humanity is like trying to imagine a world where math doesn't work or where Zooey Deschanel isn't completely adorable.
Also I got a new computer.
Monday, March 22, 2010
I haven't blogged much lately mostly because I haven't had anything interesting to say. Here's a summary of the last three weeks of my life:
Work, Sleep, X-box.
That's mostly it. One weekend I went up to the Lou and hung out with Pete and Kaylen and learned how to play Munchkin (which is pretty fun) and tried to watch District 9 (which is significantly less fun). I've started running again, although I haven't been for the last couple of days do to weather and laziness.
I was actually off of work the last four days, which was sort of weird. It's the longest stretch I've gone without work for as long as I can remember. I can't say that I missed working, but I did miss being occupied. Today was sort of the culmination of my lack of productivity. I hung out with Matthew and the lads for close to 10 hours. I like hanging out with my friends, but I feel like I have to do something pretty spectacular to warrant that much leisure time.
Also today, I watched a lot of Archer, which is an incredibly funny show. I tried to imagine if it would be as funny if it were live action (since most of the voice actors play characters that are physically similar to the characters they voice, except for H. Jon), I determined that it probably wouldn't be, although I'm not really sure why.
Work, Sleep, X-box.
That's mostly it. One weekend I went up to the Lou and hung out with Pete and Kaylen and learned how to play Munchkin (which is pretty fun) and tried to watch District 9 (which is significantly less fun). I've started running again, although I haven't been for the last couple of days do to weather and laziness.
I was actually off of work the last four days, which was sort of weird. It's the longest stretch I've gone without work for as long as I can remember. I can't say that I missed working, but I did miss being occupied. Today was sort of the culmination of my lack of productivity. I hung out with Matthew and the lads for close to 10 hours. I like hanging out with my friends, but I feel like I have to do something pretty spectacular to warrant that much leisure time.
Also today, I watched a lot of Archer, which is an incredibly funny show. I tried to imagine if it would be as funny if it were live action (since most of the voice actors play characters that are physically similar to the characters they voice, except for H. Jon), I determined that it probably wouldn't be, although I'm not really sure why.
Sunday, March 07, 2010
Video
I finally figured out a way to edit the videos that I shoot with my little digital video camera. Unfortunately it's fairly time consuming as I have to first convert the files with a video converter then edit them using Window's Movie Maker (which is only has a slightly worse interface than Final Cut, but is a lot less powerful). It's not ideal, and I'm still figuring the system out, but here's something I made using it.
Also, they published an interview I did for Spinner.com. You can check that out too.
Also, they published an interview I did for Spinner.com. You can check that out too.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Let's take a moment to talk about Neil Diamond.
Take a moment and listen to this.
That song was written by Neil Diamond in 1966, and was probably the best non-Beatles pop song in existence until Abba recorded "Take a Chance on Me" in 1977.
I was first introduced to Neil Diamond by a film called "Saving Silverman". If you haven't seen Saving Silverman, or if you've only seen it on television, do yourself a favor and go rent it, but make sure you get the R-rated version. This movie features pre-School of Rock Jack Black, when he was funny and used F-bombs. In the film, the main character and his buddies have a Neil Diamond tribute band and Mr. Diamond plays a semi-integral part to the plot of the movie. I was a big fan of the movie and the soundtrack in particular so I ended up downloading a sizeable chunk of it (probably using Napster, back when every "funny" song on Napster was attributed to Weird Al).
Most of Neil's other songs lack the nearly effervescent joy of Cherry Cherry (except for Thank The Lord for the Night Time, which is pretty much the exact same song, which is to say, is completely awesome), but over the course of the 2 minutes and 40 some odd seconds that is Cherry Cherry, Neil Diamond crafted the quintessential pop song. It's got everything; a catchy, rhythmic guitar riff, clap along percussion, the hooky piano breakdown in the middle of the song, and most important of all, Neil's smokey, soulful voice.
I don't listen to contemporary pop radio. I've heard what "the kids" are listening to these days, and it doesn't interest me. There is something contrived about the music that gets played on the radio. It is music manufactured to sell records, to sell itunes, to sell Now That's What I Call Music. Granted, most artists would like to be able to make money performing their art, but a lot of contemporary music seems more like a product (or a production) than art. My cousin Katie once told me about the best concert she's ever been to. It was a Kylie Minogue concert in New York City. It was attended by mostly gay men and Australians (what's the difference, really?) and, by her account, was great because of the production value of the costumes, lights etc. Now, it is entirely possible that this was the best concert she's ever been to, (the only other concert I can say with certainty she attended was when Nickelback came to Cape) but in her retelling of the concert, the music didn't really even come up.
I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with liking musicians and music based on their aesthetic appeal (although I do think it's wrong with every part of my being... but I'm trying to be less judgmental), but all of the Lady Gagas, Taylor Swifts and Black Eyed Peas of the world can't compete with the three chord brilliance of Cherry Cherry because it has something that none of them will ever have the; unabashed talent and incandescence of The Jewish Elvis.
That song was written by Neil Diamond in 1966, and was probably the best non-Beatles pop song in existence until Abba recorded "Take a Chance on Me" in 1977.
I was first introduced to Neil Diamond by a film called "Saving Silverman". If you haven't seen Saving Silverman, or if you've only seen it on television, do yourself a favor and go rent it, but make sure you get the R-rated version. This movie features pre-School of Rock Jack Black, when he was funny and used F-bombs. In the film, the main character and his buddies have a Neil Diamond tribute band and Mr. Diamond plays a semi-integral part to the plot of the movie. I was a big fan of the movie and the soundtrack in particular so I ended up downloading a sizeable chunk of it (probably using Napster, back when every "funny" song on Napster was attributed to Weird Al).
Most of Neil's other songs lack the nearly effervescent joy of Cherry Cherry (except for Thank The Lord for the Night Time, which is pretty much the exact same song, which is to say, is completely awesome), but over the course of the 2 minutes and 40 some odd seconds that is Cherry Cherry, Neil Diamond crafted the quintessential pop song. It's got everything; a catchy, rhythmic guitar riff, clap along percussion, the hooky piano breakdown in the middle of the song, and most important of all, Neil's smokey, soulful voice.
I don't listen to contemporary pop radio. I've heard what "the kids" are listening to these days, and it doesn't interest me. There is something contrived about the music that gets played on the radio. It is music manufactured to sell records, to sell itunes, to sell Now That's What I Call Music. Granted, most artists would like to be able to make money performing their art, but a lot of contemporary music seems more like a product (or a production) than art. My cousin Katie once told me about the best concert she's ever been to. It was a Kylie Minogue concert in New York City. It was attended by mostly gay men and Australians (what's the difference, really?) and, by her account, was great because of the production value of the costumes, lights etc. Now, it is entirely possible that this was the best concert she's ever been to, (the only other concert I can say with certainty she attended was when Nickelback came to Cape) but in her retelling of the concert, the music didn't really even come up.
I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with liking musicians and music based on their aesthetic appeal (although I do think it's wrong with every part of my being... but I'm trying to be less judgmental), but all of the Lady Gagas, Taylor Swifts and Black Eyed Peas of the world can't compete with the three chord brilliance of Cherry Cherry because it has something that none of them will ever have the; unabashed talent and incandescence of The Jewish Elvis.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
The Deplorable State of Werewolf Cinema
For pretty much my entire life, I've wanted to be a werewolf. Of the monster pantheon, werewolves have always been the most bad-ass of the bunch. For the most part they live normal lives, but once a month they become superheroes (or villains, depending on where they chose to be when they change). Unfortunately, werewolves aren't real (or are they? No they are not), so I am forced to live my lycanthropic lifestyle vicariously through movies and videogames. Sadly, both of these mediums rarely do werewolves justice. Case in point: The Wolfman.
The Wolfman had a lot of things going for it; Benecio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, this trailer, the director of Honey I Shrunk The Kids... the title of best werewolf movie was ripe for the taking. But, instead of being 90+ minutes of lupine awesomeness, The Wolfman was a plodding, joyless, boring mess of inconsistent accents, stilted, cliche ridden dialogue, a complete lack of suspense and as much characterization as is shown in the aforementioned trailer. People have backstories and histories, but there previous lives do very little to inform their choices in the film. Lawrence, the main character, is an actor for some reason. This bit of information is never relevant. It doesn't have anything to do with what the character does or says, it's just an interesting bit of trivia (I suppose it's possible that it's a nod to the original wolfman movie, but I've never seen it, so I wouldn't know). Hugo Weaving is supposedly playing Inspector Aberline, the detective in charge of the Jack the Ripper murders. This too is mentioned in nothing more than a throw away line. In fact, most of the lines in this movie are just unresponsive bits of pronouncement. Benicio will walk into a room and, apropos of nothing, will say something like "I wish things were different" and that will be an entire scene.
This movie suffers from what a lot of werewolf movies suffer from (At this point I should probably mention that I have not seen that many werewolf movies. I've only seen one of the Howling movies, Silver Bullet, Van Helsing, all of the Underworld Movies, Both American Werewolf Movies, Trick r' Treat... that might be it), and that is having the plot of a werewolf movie. The plot goes something like this; Main character doesn't believe in werewolves, gets attacked by a werewolf, becomes a werewolf, kills people, feels guilty, becomes a werewolf again, dies. The exception to this rule are movies about werewolves that also involve other monsters, especially vampires (and maybe the Ginger Snaps movies, I've never seen those). The problems with this kind of plot are: 1. you know the main character is going to die, so it's difficult to have any sort of emotional investment in them, 2. because of the werewolf mythology (ie; the Full Moon) the movie has to take place over a long period of time (usually over 2 to 3 months, which will give you 3-4 transformations), and these movies aren't very good with dealing with that much time compression, so there's a lot of montages of being in a coma or walking around instead of building containment rooms or saferooms or driving to unpopulated areas. The movies just tread water until it's time for another transformation.
One of my life goals is to add something significant to the Werewolf movie Genre, which won't be too hard, since most werewolf movies blow.
The Wolfman had a lot of things going for it; Benecio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, this trailer, the director of Honey I Shrunk The Kids... the title of best werewolf movie was ripe for the taking. But, instead of being 90+ minutes of lupine awesomeness, The Wolfman was a plodding, joyless, boring mess of inconsistent accents, stilted, cliche ridden dialogue, a complete lack of suspense and as much characterization as is shown in the aforementioned trailer. People have backstories and histories, but there previous lives do very little to inform their choices in the film. Lawrence, the main character, is an actor for some reason. This bit of information is never relevant. It doesn't have anything to do with what the character does or says, it's just an interesting bit of trivia (I suppose it's possible that it's a nod to the original wolfman movie, but I've never seen it, so I wouldn't know). Hugo Weaving is supposedly playing Inspector Aberline, the detective in charge of the Jack the Ripper murders. This too is mentioned in nothing more than a throw away line. In fact, most of the lines in this movie are just unresponsive bits of pronouncement. Benicio will walk into a room and, apropos of nothing, will say something like "I wish things were different" and that will be an entire scene.
This movie suffers from what a lot of werewolf movies suffer from (At this point I should probably mention that I have not seen that many werewolf movies. I've only seen one of the Howling movies, Silver Bullet, Van Helsing, all of the Underworld Movies, Both American Werewolf Movies, Trick r' Treat... that might be it), and that is having the plot of a werewolf movie. The plot goes something like this; Main character doesn't believe in werewolves, gets attacked by a werewolf, becomes a werewolf, kills people, feels guilty, becomes a werewolf again, dies. The exception to this rule are movies about werewolves that also involve other monsters, especially vampires (and maybe the Ginger Snaps movies, I've never seen those). The problems with this kind of plot are: 1. you know the main character is going to die, so it's difficult to have any sort of emotional investment in them, 2. because of the werewolf mythology (ie; the Full Moon) the movie has to take place over a long period of time (usually over 2 to 3 months, which will give you 3-4 transformations), and these movies aren't very good with dealing with that much time compression, so there's a lot of montages of being in a coma or walking around instead of building containment rooms or saferooms or driving to unpopulated areas. The movies just tread water until it's time for another transformation.
One of my life goals is to add something significant to the Werewolf movie Genre, which won't be too hard, since most werewolf movies blow.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The Opposite of Clutch
If I was a DnD character (or a character from any pencil and paper RPG that uses a similar system of traits) I would have some sort of trait that allowed me to be slightly better than most people at most things initially, (so for instance, if the normal number for an untrained skill is 10, I would be an 11), but the downside would be that I improve at a much slower rate. The reason I would have this trait as a DnD character is because it is a trait that I have in real life (how's that for a segue).
I'm not lamenting this fact, nor am I complaining about it. That ability has it's uses, but it is also frustrating at times. It's especially frustrating at my new job. Learning to be a pharmacy tech is like learning a different language. There are so many different rules and tricks that one has to know and there really is no easy way to learn them other than doing them (or in my case, doing them wrong). I am constantly making mistakes at my new job. They are not big mistakes or life threatening ones, but they are mistakes that slow me and the pharmacy down. It is frustrating to feel more like a liability than an asset. I know that, with time, I'll figure out what I'm doing, and be better at things, but part of me isn't interested in learning all of these things.
I have been thinking a lot lately about knowledge of things. I am of the opinion that there is no inherent goodness in most kinds of knowledge. Knowing the capital of India (Mumbai... or is it Dehli... Crap. I just looked it up. It's New Delhi) isn't inherently better than knowing the name of the ship that Captain Ahab took to go after Moby Dick (the Pequod). Knowing one might be more useful, but usefulness isn't the same as goodness. Knowing either one of those things doesn't effect how I live my life. Although I could make the case that practical knowledge could lead to goodness or happiness. Knowing how to tie one's shoes is practical. Having your shoes tied makes it easier to get around. Being able to get around makes me happy. Epistemology was always my least favorite part of philosophy, but is also the part that has done the most lasting damage to my thought process.
I'm not lamenting this fact, nor am I complaining about it. That ability has it's uses, but it is also frustrating at times. It's especially frustrating at my new job. Learning to be a pharmacy tech is like learning a different language. There are so many different rules and tricks that one has to know and there really is no easy way to learn them other than doing them (or in my case, doing them wrong). I am constantly making mistakes at my new job. They are not big mistakes or life threatening ones, but they are mistakes that slow me and the pharmacy down. It is frustrating to feel more like a liability than an asset. I know that, with time, I'll figure out what I'm doing, and be better at things, but part of me isn't interested in learning all of these things.
I have been thinking a lot lately about knowledge of things. I am of the opinion that there is no inherent goodness in most kinds of knowledge. Knowing the capital of India (Mumbai... or is it Dehli... Crap. I just looked it up. It's New Delhi) isn't inherently better than knowing the name of the ship that Captain Ahab took to go after Moby Dick (the Pequod). Knowing one might be more useful, but usefulness isn't the same as goodness. Knowing either one of those things doesn't effect how I live my life. Although I could make the case that practical knowledge could lead to goodness or happiness. Knowing how to tie one's shoes is practical. Having your shoes tied makes it easier to get around. Being able to get around makes me happy. Epistemology was always my least favorite part of philosophy, but is also the part that has done the most lasting damage to my thought process.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
A post about the Office
I am probably the most vocal critic of the American Office in the world (Proove me wrong, I dare you). I love nothing more (not even breathing) than to pick apart each episode to find every possible flaw and logical and emotional disconnect that I can find in order to fuel my argument that the American Office is the most overrated show of all time, ever (except for MASH). It is a show that has forsaken its simple, but compelling premise of making insightful, subtle comedy about the tedium of working in an office into something that is about a laugh track away of being a Two and a Half Men lead in. The Office has become a bad show.
Or at least that's what I thought.
Then I saw an episode entitled "The Banker". This episode might be the single greatest work of comedy writing ever shown on television. Before the Christmas break, the gang at the Office were in a bit of trouble. Dunder Mifflin, which is a company traded on the New York Stock Exchange (Maybe you've heard of it?), but doesn't have a functional web site, was in for a big shake up. The corporate big-wigs were all getting fired and the future looked uncertain for our favorite Scranton workaholics. Office fans were full of questions heading into this weeks episode and the Office addressed all those questions with two simple, but powerful words: Clip. Show.
Were you wondering who was going to take David Wallace's position as the new CFO? Well, let me answer that question by showing clips of people saying "That's what she said".
Were you concerned about how Pam and Jim's baby is doing? Perhaps some footage of Jim playing basketball from the first season will allay your fears.
Is the Office going to continue to be better than the last two seasons, but nowhere near as good as the first three seasons? I think you'll find what you're looking for in these scenes of Michael hitting shelves with a fork lift.
I thought that we, as a society, were done with clip shows, especially in our sitcoms, especially in our sitcoms that are supposed to be one of the best shows on television (I don't know anyone who actually thinks this. I think The Office is becoming like the Simpsons; something that is beyond critical scorn, a television institution that is just watched and admired unquestioningly, despite how ridiculously bad it gets. Although, fortunately, The Office hasn't yet approached the level of mediocrity that the Simpsons has sunk to). I don't know why, but for some reason the idea of The Office doing a clip so is especially ludicrous to me. I think this is because in essence, the show is kind of clip show anyway. It's a highlight real of all the funny stuff that happens that day in the office. They don't need the excuse of an episode devoted to showing the "best of" every episode before it to make reference to previous episodes. When Michael says, "that reminds me of the time I wrecked my car", they cut to him wrecking his car. This kind of thing happens in every episode. Usually it's footage specific to that episode, but still, the concept is nothing new. However, because they rarely make references to things that happen in previous episodes (except for plot relevant stuff) and even rarer do they actually show footage from earlier episodes, the act of having an episode where they do nothing but show footage from old episodes is not only a break in the shows normal format, but incredibly lame.
In summation, clip shows are lazy and stupid and I'm glad the Office is starting to suck again, because it justifies my completely irrational hatred of it (which I think is just a reaction to it's popularity versus the popularity of the British version, which is far superior in almost every way, and I'm not just saying that because I'm an Anglophile, and also my general dislike of everything that is nearly universally liked).
Next time I'll talk about a book I just read called "The Time Traveler's Wife". Here's an excerpt:
"I thought that"
See you next time.
Or at least that's what I thought.
Then I saw an episode entitled "The Banker". This episode might be the single greatest work of comedy writing ever shown on television. Before the Christmas break, the gang at the Office were in a bit of trouble. Dunder Mifflin, which is a company traded on the New York Stock Exchange (Maybe you've heard of it?), but doesn't have a functional web site, was in for a big shake up. The corporate big-wigs were all getting fired and the future looked uncertain for our favorite Scranton workaholics. Office fans were full of questions heading into this weeks episode and the Office addressed all those questions with two simple, but powerful words: Clip. Show.
Were you wondering who was going to take David Wallace's position as the new CFO? Well, let me answer that question by showing clips of people saying "That's what she said".
Were you concerned about how Pam and Jim's baby is doing? Perhaps some footage of Jim playing basketball from the first season will allay your fears.
Is the Office going to continue to be better than the last two seasons, but nowhere near as good as the first three seasons? I think you'll find what you're looking for in these scenes of Michael hitting shelves with a fork lift.
I thought that we, as a society, were done with clip shows, especially in our sitcoms, especially in our sitcoms that are supposed to be one of the best shows on television (I don't know anyone who actually thinks this. I think The Office is becoming like the Simpsons; something that is beyond critical scorn, a television institution that is just watched and admired unquestioningly, despite how ridiculously bad it gets. Although, fortunately, The Office hasn't yet approached the level of mediocrity that the Simpsons has sunk to). I don't know why, but for some reason the idea of The Office doing a clip so is especially ludicrous to me. I think this is because in essence, the show is kind of clip show anyway. It's a highlight real of all the funny stuff that happens that day in the office. They don't need the excuse of an episode devoted to showing the "best of" every episode before it to make reference to previous episodes. When Michael says, "that reminds me of the time I wrecked my car", they cut to him wrecking his car. This kind of thing happens in every episode. Usually it's footage specific to that episode, but still, the concept is nothing new. However, because they rarely make references to things that happen in previous episodes (except for plot relevant stuff) and even rarer do they actually show footage from earlier episodes, the act of having an episode where they do nothing but show footage from old episodes is not only a break in the shows normal format, but incredibly lame.
In summation, clip shows are lazy and stupid and I'm glad the Office is starting to suck again, because it justifies my completely irrational hatred of it (which I think is just a reaction to it's popularity versus the popularity of the British version, which is far superior in almost every way, and I'm not just saying that because I'm an Anglophile, and also my general dislike of everything that is nearly universally liked).
Next time I'll talk about a book I just read called "The Time Traveler's Wife". Here's an excerpt:
"I thought that"
See you next time.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Chuck vs. Me hating him
Sometime last year I developed an appreciation for the NBC series C
huck.This appreciation had a lot to do with the sort of nerdy references that the show frequently made and also because of the interesting will-they won't they chemistry between the shows two leads, Chuck, played by Zach Levi, the one on the right, and Sarah, played by Yvonne Strahovski, the one on the left (and I would be lying if I didn't acknowledge the fact that Sarah's choice of attire, or lack there of, in some episodes is also a slight draw to the show, but totally not in a creepy way if you're reading this Yvonne... ok, maybe it's a little creepy, but still, if you wanted to go out or something I totally wouldn't be creepy at all. We could just go Panera or something, get some soup, maybe go catch a movie, talk for a bit then maybe go for a walk down by the river and then we'd both go our separate ways. Then maybe a couple days later I'd text you something like, "I had fun the other night" and you could text back something like "me 2 :)", and I'd be like "That's cool, we should get married. LOL" and you'd be like "that sounds awesome! LOL" then I'd be like, "No. I'm serious" and you'd be like "Me 2."). But recently I have fallen out of favor with Chuck.
The show is more or less a spy procedural, and as such, there aren't a lot that changes from week to week. The problem with this is that it's not a particularly good spy procedural. It seems like it was written back in the 90's before the general population had seen Jason Bourne movies or Munich; when the world believed, for the most part, that spying and counter-intelligence worked pretty much like it did in the Roger Moore James Bond movies (It's all about gadgets and witty comebacks and terrorists wanting to blow up the world unless they got paid a million dollars). Living in a post 9-11 (I hate using that phrase) world, Americans are (or should be) too smart to fall for this kind of nonsense. It's not that all TV should depict the world as it really is, but Chuck seems to take a remarkably juvenile approach to how the world works, and in a completely earnest way. There is nothing ironic about the depiction of the world in the Chuckverse (or the Chucktinuum as I sometimes call it). The struggle between the good guys and bad guys in Chuck is so painfully black and white that it approaches Disney levels of naivety. There are a couple of instances where the show veers off into slightly greyish moral areas (When Sarah shoots a guy in cold blood to protect Chuck) and, for me these are some of the shows high points.
Chuck (the show)'s inability to have any sort of significant changes to the main characters from episode to episode is also a bit frustrating to me. I don't know who along the line made the decision, but at some point, someone decided that at the end of every episode, the status quo should be immediately restored (unless it's the end of the season). Sarah gets fired? She comes back to save the day at the end of the episode. A new Intersect is made rendering Chuck (the character) unnecessary? The new intersect is actually a bomb and blows up the whole project so they have to start from scratch. The gang of bad guys from the first two seasons is defeated? It turns out they were just a puppet organization of the real enemies, The Ring. The lengths this show goes to not change absolutely anything about their formula for episodes is beyond ridiculous. It undermines any of the drama that could possibly be created because the audience knows at the end of the episode, all will be returned to normal. It punishing the fans of the show by essentially making them watch the same episode over and over again, which goes a little something like this:
Bad Guy: I'm going to steal something/kill somebody... In Los Angeles!
Meanwhile....
Sarah: So this bad guy and this thing the bad guy wants are in Los Angeles.
Chuck: I know where they are. I can stop them.
Sarah: Ok, let's go.
Chuck tries to stop them but fails, comically (usually because the bad guy isn't where he's supposed to be).
Chuck: I couldn't stop them.
Sarah: I don't believe the bad guy is really here anymore. Blah Blah Blah, boy who cried wolf.
Chuck: Well if you don't believe me, I'll just stop them myself.
Chuck runs away, gets into trouble, Sarah and Casey save him.
Chuck: Thanks guys, I guess I shouldn't have gone after them by myself.
Sarah: No, it's our fault for some reason.
Casey: Chuck, you know Sarah is in love with you.
Chuck: What!?
Chuck and Sarah have a moment, but it's cut short by some ridiculous bullshit. The end.
So to sum up, I don't like Chuck because it completely refuses to be postmodern. It his an extremely conventional TV show that has, somehow, amassed massive critical goodwill by mentioning Arcade Fire a couple times in its first season and occasionally playing Spoon songs. That being said, I will continue to watch it, because it's still funny frequently, it occasionally has awesome guest stars (Chevy Chase, Scott Bakula, Vinnie Jones, Brandon Routh...) and because Sarah walks around in her bra and panties every three episodes or so.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Late Night
This past week I worked an overnight shift at Walmart. I had never worked an overnight shift before. I'm experiencing the hardest part of working that shift right now, as it is 4:44 and I'm not asleep and have to get up at 9 tomorrow. I adapted pretty quickly to staying up late, and I'm not really sure how to unadapt. I fell asleep at 10 last night, but woke up at midnight and have been awake since. I'm going to be hella tired tomorrow, but that's alright. I'll catch up eventually. On the plus side, this experience has gotten me blogging about something that has been noticeably missing since I restarted this blog, sleeping. Riveting.
In other Walmart news that is also news about me Sunday will be my last day as a Lawn and Garden Associate (sad face), and Monday will be my first day as a pharmacy tech (conflicted face?). Wednesday night, whilst working the overnight shift, the pharmacy manager came up to me and asked if I was ready for an interview. Thursday night management was filling out my transfer paperwork (which doesn't really involve much paper). I had put Pharmacy as an option for career preferences because it pays better than my current position, but I thought I would be somewhere else before I actually got a chance to be in the pharmacy. As it turns out, I'm not somewhere else, so I guess I'll be going to Pharmacy.
Here's why I'm conflicted. Pharmacy is a full time job, which means I'll be making more money, but it is also a much bigger commitment than I had previously signed up for at Walmart. But more than that, I didn't really want to start working a full time job until I got a job in my field. Getting a full time job doing something that isn't video production or whatever feels like I'm giving up on doing what I want to do. I know this is a ridiculous thing to think, but it's difficult for me to see the short term benefits of taking a semi-serious job in a completely unrelated field when it feels like I'm giving up on my long term goal. I see a lot of people who take jobs they don't particularly like because of the short term benefits, then they get stuck doing that job for the rest of their life. A lot of them work at Wal-mart. The longer they do it, the easier it is to justify doing it.
This scenario is completely unacceptable to me. Mostly because work, for these people, becomes the means to their ends, and that's not what I want. They work to support their wives or husbands or children (or to buy more booze or guns or shoes or whatever, but it's usually the former). They work so they can live the rest of their life during the two days of the week they don't work and the one week of vacation they get a year, and what they have on those days is supposed makes it all worth it. There is no thing nor anyone that could make me spend 300 days a year something I don't want to do. I want work to be an end in an of itself, and although I do enjoy working at Wal-mart, it's not what I want to do. It's not an end.
I know this is a sentiment that most people have. No one is doing exactly what they want to do, and that's how life works. Giving up the dream is part of growing up. It's a concept captured nearly perfectly in a film I love to hate called Up, and maybe that's why I hate the movie. It's essentially about giving up on your dreams and then trying to recapture them later in life and realizing that your dreams were kind of crappy in the first place (and the talking dog says "Squirrel!" Hilarious!!! Dogs chase squirrels!). It's a reminder that part of growing up is realizing that you're not going to get to do everything you want to do and maybe that's not something I'm ready to concede just yet.
But for now, I'll be working 5 days a week in the Jackson Wal-mart Pharmacy and trying to figure out what I'm supposed to do with my life.
Damian Kulash (spelling?) does a pretty good Prince impression on the first track of OK Go's new album.
In other Walmart news that is also news about me Sunday will be my last day as a Lawn and Garden Associate (sad face), and Monday will be my first day as a pharmacy tech (conflicted face?). Wednesday night, whilst working the overnight shift, the pharmacy manager came up to me and asked if I was ready for an interview. Thursday night management was filling out my transfer paperwork (which doesn't really involve much paper). I had put Pharmacy as an option for career preferences because it pays better than my current position, but I thought I would be somewhere else before I actually got a chance to be in the pharmacy. As it turns out, I'm not somewhere else, so I guess I'll be going to Pharmacy.
Here's why I'm conflicted. Pharmacy is a full time job, which means I'll be making more money, but it is also a much bigger commitment than I had previously signed up for at Walmart. But more than that, I didn't really want to start working a full time job until I got a job in my field. Getting a full time job doing something that isn't video production or whatever feels like I'm giving up on doing what I want to do. I know this is a ridiculous thing to think, but it's difficult for me to see the short term benefits of taking a semi-serious job in a completely unrelated field when it feels like I'm giving up on my long term goal. I see a lot of people who take jobs they don't particularly like because of the short term benefits, then they get stuck doing that job for the rest of their life. A lot of them work at Wal-mart. The longer they do it, the easier it is to justify doing it.
This scenario is completely unacceptable to me. Mostly because work, for these people, becomes the means to their ends, and that's not what I want. They work to support their wives or husbands or children (or to buy more booze or guns or shoes or whatever, but it's usually the former). They work so they can live the rest of their life during the two days of the week they don't work and the one week of vacation they get a year, and what they have on those days is supposed makes it all worth it. There is no thing nor anyone that could make me spend 300 days a year something I don't want to do. I want work to be an end in an of itself, and although I do enjoy working at Wal-mart, it's not what I want to do. It's not an end.
I know this is a sentiment that most people have. No one is doing exactly what they want to do, and that's how life works. Giving up the dream is part of growing up. It's a concept captured nearly perfectly in a film I love to hate called Up, and maybe that's why I hate the movie. It's essentially about giving up on your dreams and then trying to recapture them later in life and realizing that your dreams were kind of crappy in the first place (and the talking dog says "Squirrel!" Hilarious!!! Dogs chase squirrels!). It's a reminder that part of growing up is realizing that you're not going to get to do everything you want to do and maybe that's not something I'm ready to concede just yet.
But for now, I'll be working 5 days a week in the Jackson Wal-mart Pharmacy and trying to figure out what I'm supposed to do with my life.
Damian Kulash (spelling?) does a pretty good Prince impression on the first track of OK Go's new album.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)