David Lynch Should Totally Write Batman

(stolen from Random Panels)

And I'm Sure We'll Think He's Going To Stay Dead Too

So, to anyone that watched the Vol. 3 finale of Heroes last night...

Jeph Loeb's way to make Sylar scary...is to rip off Saw?


Now, unlike Loeb, I'm not a terrible comic book writer, so I guess I can't really talk about homage vs. outright swiping, but if I may make a suggestion: the next time you want to make your audience feel a real kind of threat from a character, you may want to focus on better characterization, rather than relying on references to a well known movie franchise to provide it for you.

I can't wait until Brian Fuller returns...

I Laughed For Five Minutes Straight

Yeah, it's real...

Found via Geekologie

And I Was Doing So Well...

Yeah, I haven't posted in a while. I'll get on that as soon as I can. I have a post waiting that I just need to fact check. Seriously.

In the meantime, look at this. Somebody actually put together a video of all the worst moments in Joel Schumacher's Batman and Robin. Somehow it's only ten minutes long.



Also, I'm on twitter now. So...find me I guess.

Politicos Will Latch Onto Anything To Prove Their Point

This was sent to me:

"Liberals live in a world of “and.” Full security and full civil liberties. Universal health care and the best quality with no waiting. A dynamic economy and full welfare and unemployment benefits. Liberals, in other words, live in that scene in Spider-Man in which Spidey, forced to choose between saving a tram car full of innocent civilians and saving his girlfriend, chooses both. Liberals live in a fantasy.

Conservatives, though, live in a world of tradeoffs, of either/or. For having this relationship with reality, conservatives are caricatured as grumpy, stingy and negative. Surely all it takes is a bump in taxes on the wealthy and everything will be affordable? Where’s the Hope? Where’s the Dream? Yes, we can!"

Ouch.

And to think, the article was talking about the politics of The Dark Knight...

Can't Stop Now, This Is Bat Country

That Was FANTASTIC.

Fear and Loathing In 1903

Picture yourself in a movie theater in 1903. You've just sat down to watch this new "film" thingy called "The Great Train Robbery". The "film" starts, and you're skeptical. "The way that camera moved made me dizzy!". After an exhausting 12 minutes later, the film finally ends, except...suddenly, one of the bad guys from the movie faces you--THE AUDIENCE--and slowly raises a gun. Oh no! We're doomed! He's going to fire upon us! Nooooo!



Scared? No? Well, that's because we aren't idiots.

**********************************************************************************
I remember watching a great Simpsons 'Tree House Of Horrors' episode where they did their take on Edgar Allan Poe's "The Raven".

At the end of the story, Bart questions the poem's classification as horror:

Bart: Lisa, that wasn't scary, not even for a poem.
Lisa: Well, it was written in 1845. Maybe people were easier to scare back then.

Lisa suggests that people in the past were a lot more prone to easy scares than we are today. (How else could the romantic horror of "The Raven" ever give someone the chills they get today while watching something like "The Ring".)

Maybe using this theory, we could infer that in 1903, when Thomas Edison and Edwin S. Porter's "The Great Train Robbery" came out, people were still easily scared, and a fictional character on a movie screen could actually pose a real threat.

No, I'm sorry, I've got to call BULLSHIT.



I know film was a new medium at the time, and theoretically, many of the people in the theater probably didn't know what "the moving pictures" were capable of, but to honestly believe that a character on a screen can break the fourth wall and shoot you? Come on.

The movie-going audience of 1903 was more familiar with live theater like plays, and vaudeville, so maybe they though the same rules apply. In a live performance, yes, a guy holding a gun on stage has the ability to actually shoot through the fourth wall...but here's the kicker...I bet that if this was an actual live performance, the audience wouldn't have even blinked. I bring your attention to the Iroquois Theater Fire of 1903. At no more than a month old, the theater broke out into flames during a performance. As the fire spread out of control, THE AUDIENCE DIDN'T MOVE. They thought it was all part of the performance. The actors kept on acting and the dancers kept on dancing. It wasn't until comedian Eddie Foy told the audience that it's wasn't part of the act that anybody did anything.

602 people died because the audience wasn't scared of no heat and flames.

But a 2 dimensional movie character shooting through the fourth wall...well now, that's a pants pisser.


I also have to call bullshit on the idea that people were more prone to be scared back then than today. Case in point.

So, I'm calling every film professor in this country wrong. There ain't no way in hell the people of 1903 were scared of being shot by a two dimensional man. Unless of course, they were idiots.

The Career Of Will Ferrell

One of the biggest shames in the world of comedy is the slow decline of Will Ferrell.

Ok, maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but let me ask you, do you know anyone who has any interest in seeing this:




Yeah, and here's the sad part. At one time, this would have been the role that Will Ferrell was perfect for. Roles that involve pompous, windbag, over-acting/reacting, Ignatius J. Reilly-like man-childs, allowed him to shine.

Sadly, it's come to the point where no one cares anymore. After one bad sports movie parody after another (after another, after another), is there anything left to get excited about? The last time I really looked forward to a Will Ferrell movie was 2004, when Anchorman promised to be the most absurdest piece of surreal-ness to hit the cinema since Airplane 2: The Sequel. Now even a much-talked about Anchorman sequel doesn't even get a rise out of me. And that's a shame, because the man has so much talent, and has shown it before numerous times. So, here is the best 5 Will Ferrell projects, and the 5 most overrated.

The best 5:

5)Elf (2003)


Feel-good family Christmas films haven't exactly been works of high art in recent years, or for that matter, even good films (or watchable), but there was once a time when a Christmas film didn't have to insult your intelligence, and could be, dare I say it, good natured AND a fine film. While "Elf" is not cinematic gold, it is an enjoyable family film where Will Ferrell plays his role perfectly. That child-like spark of enthusiasm in his eyes when he sees something fun just makes the movie. When his overacting is not making a meta-joke about acting itself, it's perfect for keeping kids entertained.

4)Stranger Than Fiction (2006)


"Charlie Kauffman-lite" was among the insults that were thrown at this movie (and I can't deny that I was one of the insult-slingers), but amidst the not-uncalled for comparisons, the actual movie was lost. Is it perfect? No, most of Will Ferrell's movies are not perfect. The movie is notable though for being an experiment to see if Will Ferrell can work in a more restrictive environment, and the answer is a huge "yes". When he's not overacting, it appears that Will Ferrell can adequately act. Now, if only he can do this in a better movie.

3)"The Landlord" and "Good Cop, Baby Cop" (both 2007)




Alright, so the reason that both of these www.funnyordie.com skits were funny is because of little Pearl McKay. But, the joke would have fallen completely flat if not for Will Ferrell's reactions to Adam McKay's daughter. But you knew that already.

2) The Oblongs (2001-2002)


The critical reaction to The Oblongs was less than enthusiastic. In fact, I can't find one good review. On show creator Angus Oblong's website he makes a list of all the bad reviews and displays them proudly.

Oblong himself claims the show was a disaster. I disagree. Ok, I'm sure it could have been better, but from the episodes that I've seen airing on Adult Swim, I think it's genius.


1)Anchorman: The Story of Ron Burgundy (2004)


As I mentioned above, Anchorman was a mash-up of surreal gags, non sequiturs and Will Ferrell-style overacting that on paper seems like it should be the biggest mess in cinematic history. (In fact, the original script, which is more closely represented in Anchorman's "sequel" "Wake Up Ron Burgundy", is a huge unfunny mess. Most of what you see in Anchorman was the improvised scenes and last minute gags that happened on-set). Anchorman is the perfect example of Will Ferrell set free on screen to do whatever he wanted, his id just blazing about. The movie is one of the most spectacularly funny movies of the last decade, and possibly rivals the Marx Brothers for the wackiness content.

It's claimed that on the set of Dumb and Dumber, Jim Carrey's improvisations made a horrible script into a comedy classic. The actors of Anchorman did the same here.

Also great Will Ferrell projects: Most of his career on SNL, his supporting role in Zoolander, and his great cameo in Wedding Crashers. I'll mention Melinda & Melinda as well, as there was nothing particularly wrong with the concept of the movie, but Will Ferrell's acting was very held back, almost as if Woody Allen didn't know what he was getting into when he hired him.

The 5 Most Overrated:

I originally called this the "5 worst" until I looked at Will Ferrell's imdb page and remembered his was in Superstar, The Ladies Man, Boat Trip and Starsky and Hutch. Overrated is a lot better a choice than reliving those atrocities.

For something to be overrated people have to like it. At least more than a handful of people. So, something like "A Night At The Roxbury" doesn't count, because if you actually enjoy that movie, I think you can qualify for state aide.

5)Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back (2001)


It's been a little while since I've sat through this movie, but I remember that I hated it. Will Ferrell shouldn't have been anywhere around this. In fact, it should be a rule that unless Kevin Smith has worked with the actor since before they were really famous (Ben Affleck, Jason Lee), big stars should never be in a Kevin Smith film. They only end up distracting from the script and compromising characters. Granted, Will Ferrell wasn't what ruined this movie, but his presence totally didn't help.

4)The Producers (2005)


You know who likes this movie? Drama majors and people who have never seen the original.

3)Talladega Nights: The Ballad Of Ricky Bobby (2006)


Exec #1: Hey, you know what my son was really into this year? That Will Ferrell comedy. What was it called...Anchorman?

Exec #2: Yeah we should make a another movie that's a complete retread of that one, colon and all...but we should include that other thing that people like...NASCAR!

Exec #3: Yeah! I saw Jay Leno make fun of NASCAR last night! He's funny! *


*Note, all movie executives talk like badly written characters from first drafts of scripts. How else could you explain "Hide and Seek"?

2)Blades of Glory (2007)


My eyes still hurt.

1) Old School (2003)


Ok, here's the thing. This isn't that BAD a movie. It's just that if I hear one more person make a Frank The Tank reference, 5 YEARS LATER, I might strangle them. You know what, I take back what I said. This is a terrible movie. Yeah, ok, it made me laugh, that scene where Luke Wilson walks in on his wife having an orgy was hilarious, but other than that, every joke in this movie has been done by some other movie before in some form or another, and it was funnier then! This is the movie that defined the regrettable "Frat Pack" and that right there should define why I hate this movie...Frat humor. No, not humor about fraternities, but rather humor that people in Chris Miller-like fraternities would find funny. I have as much use for this movie as I do for another frat staple, Dave Matthews. So call me elitist, I don't care. Call me a film snob if it makes you feel any better, but don't call me a fan of this movie, because that insults me. God, it's even got a friggen Snoop Dogg cameo in it! And I love Snoop, but come on, could we be pandering to the frat boy demographic any more obviously here. These are the type of people that, when I was Managing Editor of Nonsense Humor Magazine, would come up to me and ask for more fart jokes. These are the type of people that...dhsdfhsbfjffdbfdznmAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

...

...

...

I'm sorry, but I'm angry. Damn you Will Ferrell. Damn you.

The Movies of 2007

Well this has just been a shitty year for me and movie theater going.

I know, I said that last year too. Well, I still haven't improved upon the amount of movies I see when they come out.

Sadly, because of this, my top 5 movies of the year list is horribly inaccurate. Major movies, many of which I'm sure would have made my list, aren't going to. I need to see more movies in theaters.

Usually the months of January and February are filled with me Netflixing the movies I missed from the previous year...and so it might be smarter to do this list in say March instead of now...but I already made the graphic. So here, horribly incomplete, is:



The more I stare at that bad graphic, the more I don't regret doing it in Paint...at work...while constantly hiding it from my supervisor.


5)Futurama: The Movie: Bender's Big Score



This should show how bad a year it was for me...a movie that only came out on DVD is making my top 5.

Is it just like the original show? No. Is it perfect? Not at all. Was it incredibly enjoyable and did it make me laugh for more than half of it? Absolutely.

My main problem with the movie was that it seemed like they were trying to cram as many cameos as they could into the movie, rather than actually creating a working plot. I'm not saying that the plot wasn't good (they made a time travel movie work with no plot holes...that's gotta mean something), it's just that I don't think it was worth a movie...egh, whatever.

4)The Simpson's Movie



Two cartoons, yeah. This movie suffers from the same problem that Futurama does...too many cameos, not good enough plot. It was funny, I can't argue with that (it probably has something to do with all of the old writers, sans Conan O'brien, coming back to take up the writing chores), but, once again, it wasn't as good as it could have been. Albert Brooks was amazing in his role though. And let's not forget about Bart's skateboarding scene, possibly the best joke in the movie. Too bad last season sucked...again.

3)Juno



Another script with a problem. This time though, the problem wasn't plot, but rather pretentious dialogue. Every time Juno said something like "Honest to Blog" or I don't know, that dog diggity down shit, I cringed. Diablo Cody obviously has talent, and she can write, I'll give her that, but cut the pretentiousness, please.

2)Superbad


I saw this movie in a theater packed with junior high kids.

I still loved it.


1)Knocked Up



Apatow takes the top two. Not only is the movie hysterical, it also taught a valuable lesson about growing up. Apatow's movies at the end give feel good messages that make you get a certain feeling that most people only get from watching a Frank Capra film. Seth Rogan is the new Jimmy Stewart, and Judd Apatow is the new Capra. There, I've said it.



Just so you can see how bad a movie year it's been, I'm going to rate the rest of the movies I've seen in an EW format (just like I did last year).


300: It looked beautiful, no one can argue that. It was crap though. Enjoyable crap...but crap none the less. Just another piece of Frank Miller's later era "all style and no substance" writing.

And before anyone says something about it being a pro-war film, let me remind you...it's a tale being told by a general trying to rally his troops. It's full of exaggerations and propaganda because, come on, he's got to get them hyped up about something. Either way, it still isn't as good as every guido in America claimed it was. B-

The Darjeeling Limited: And now, the sad truth. I don't want to call the movie boring...but it was yawn inducing, and drawn out (shockingly for a 90 minute movie). Anderson can still direct; and all the performance were fine; but the movie lacked something. Maybe it was a script that didn't seem like it had gone through all the drafts it should have. Maybe it was Wes doing the same thing he always does with his movies. Maybe the criticism has finally gotten to me that he makes the same movie over again each time/ minorities exist purely as fetishes for white characters. I'm not sure. I will say this, the only character that was fully characterized was Adrien Brodys' and maybe Owen Wilsons' (and not even until the very end). Every other character had to make due with 'quirks' being characterization. And that hasn't worked since Tenenbaums. I'm really sad that I didn't like this movie more, but I guess it was time for me to end my film-crush on Wes Anderson's films. He can comeback, of course, but right now Noah Baumbach is running circles around him. B


Farce of the Penguins: Well, this was just intolerably horrible. EVERY JOKE SUCKED. It mad me want to hurt comedians I like, just because of their association with this movie. Word of advice to Lewis Black : If Bob Saget comes to you asking to do a movie he wrote...again...don't do it. Please. F

Grindhouse: First off, if you didn't see this in theaters, then there's no point to see it. It was meant as a theater experience, and it won't be the same on your HD TV, no matter how much money you put into the system. It's all about the atmosphere, and that includes people too...

Basically this movie was the "Snakes on a Plane" for this year, only for some reason there was this delusion that it was good. Tarintino and Rodriguez are both great directors, yes, but...this sucked. They set out to make a homage to bad films, and they made...a bad film...no, strike that...two bad films. Egh. B

Spider-man 3: These are my problems with Spider-man 3:
1)Raimi tried to cram too much into this movie. It came to the point where nothing got enough time.
2) I hate to say it, but Sandman was not needed in this movie. It would have worked perfectly with just Venom.
3)That's if Venom was even in it.
4)You had to be familiar with the comics to even understand the Venom story, because they explained nothing. If you don't know the comics, you won't know why the suit does what it does, or why there is a sort of dependency between the symbiote and the wearer.
5)The thing that pissed me off the most was Raimi's constant use of homages. Now I'm not against homages (especially in a Spider-man movie), but Raimi went too far. He was using the homages to convey the emotions and state of mind of the characters, but it would have been much better suited to come up with something original (or at least from the comics)the non-stop references to Saturday Night Fever, Working Girl, Tootsie, Cabaret, etc just took me out of the movie.
6)The movie falls apart in it's second half.
7)The scene where Venom and Sandman team up is horrible. It reminds me of Joel Schumacher's Batman movies.

Here would have been a better movie: The relationship between Peter and Mary Jane is paralleled by the relationship between Peter and the black symbiote/Eddie Brock and Venom. Include the Gwen Stacy and Harry Osbourne parts of course. Make Venom the only villain. If you really want Sandman then fight him in the beginning while Peter is in the black suit. That might be a waste of Sandman though, so maybe it could be a smaller character. That's just my take. B-


The TV Set: It had so much potential, but blew it all by not developing characters. B-

Wild Hogs: Yeah, you read that right...I saw Wild Hogs. Some of my friends have REALLY bad taste in movies. I didn't pay for it though, so whatever...it wasn't my money that went to this. To sum it up: Yes, it was that bad. F


So, I haven't seen There Will Be Blood, No Country For Old Men, Lars And The Real Girl, Michael Clayton, Sweeney Todd, etc. I might see There will be blood soon, cause my friends want to go, so maybe I'll have a new number one. Same with No Country. Sweeney Todd apparently puts manlihoods in jeopardy cause it's a musical, so I guess that's one for the rental queue. And so are the others. I'll see them all eventually.


UPDATED!!!!:

I forgot a movie, and saw another, so I'm adding them here at the end:

Shoot 'Em Up: Clive Owens kills people using carrots, knives, helicopter blades, needles, and other blunt objects, and then complains that guns kill too many people. D-

Smokin' Aces: An attempt to mimic Tarintino, but forgetting what makes Tarintino great. D-

Insomnia and the impending apocalypse

It was around 5 in the morning last night. Or is that early morning? Whatever. I was laying in my bed; I couldn't sleep again. I was spinning around the sheets, constantly staring at my alarm clock. "Maybe if I stare at my clock the time will go backwards." Alas, that did not work. In fact it did the complete opposite...talk about your bad luck.

I started flipping through channels on my TV, thinking that maybe there would be at least something interesting to watch during my insomnia. There was an episode of the X-Files on...no shock there, there was also some show where they were selling ten year old pennies at 35 dollars a piece. I wonder if I can do that. I mean, I have a whole jar full of change...who knows what I can sell that for...

Random thoughts shifted in and out of my head. "I was sleepy right before I got to bed, how am I not tired now?", "Just wait, right when I find something to watch, I'll fall asleep", "Which is the worst news of the week...Boston being full of idiots or Joss Weeden not doing the Wonder Woman movie anymore? Boston...definitely Boston." And as I remembered how much I don't care about the Superbowl, Showtime flickered onto my TV...and then, well...I don’t know how to describe what I saw. It wasn't just ugly...it was exactly what we always feared American culture would succumb to. It was what we had been warned about, by everyone from T.S. Eliot to Mallard Fillmore... It was...horrible...it was...impossible...it was...Pauly Shore and Carrot Top in the same movie. I instantly hit the "Info" button on my remote to figure out what the hell this monstrosity was...I had actually heard of it before: "Pauly Shore is Dead"...in which his career hits rock bottom, so he fakes his own death to regain popularity. And it works...after everyone thinks Pauly is dead, he is hailed as a comedy legend...well, until they figure out he's still alive. Then they throw him in jail. I'm really not sure why either...

While in jail he hangs out with Todd Barry, Tommy Lee, Heidi Fleis and the ghost of Sam Kiniston...and I assume learns a valuable life lesson (ironically) and probably gets his "career" back...I'm not sure...I passed out around then...Believe me it was for the better, because if I had to hear one more "Heeeeeeeeey Budddddddddy" a blood vessel in my brain probably would have popped, and blood would have shot out of my ears.

The worse part was...this was a Pauly Shore movie, which with a little research I found out he directed...and featured cameos by the likes of Woopi Goldberg, Britney Spears, Kurt Loader, Matt Pinfield, Sugar Ray, Limp Bizqit, Tom Sizemore, Carson Daily, the aforementioned Carrot Top, Kato Kalin, and Ja Rule (none of which surprise me as they all suck), but also Bill Maher, Ellen Degenerous, Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughn, Dr Dre, and Snoop Dogg. Why guys, why?

Oh and he compares his own comedy lovingly to Sam Kiniston...either that or he really hates him.

Needless to say, this movie has scarred me for life. It was the equivalent of the Kent State Massacre on screen. They just kept on shooting at me for no reason at all. Over and over again. At the same time though, I couldn’t look away from it. I was amazed at Pauly Shore's ability to say, without even laughing, that he has a fan base. Maybe he is a better actor than I had previously thought. The movie did provide an interesting question, which I still am thinking about this minute...what is the difference between Pauly Shore and Adam Sandler? Not that much, other than Sandler's from New York...but they both do annoying characters and voices, and they both have done a bunch of shitty movies, and they both are comparably better when paired with Rob Schnider...so why does Adam Sandler have millions, while Pauly is parking the cars at his mothers Comedy Store? I don’t know...but I'm sure it has something to do with the fact that Adam Sandler made Happy Gilmore, and didn't make Encino Man. Oh, and people hate Pauly Shore.

My top 5 movies of the year

This year was probably the worst for me and movie theatres. I hardly went this year. I guess it was mostly due to lack of money, but there were so many movies I missed, and yet so many more that I had to finally watch on DVD.

So, this is hardly a complete list. If I saw some more of the "Critic Choice" movies that came out, maybe this list would reflect the years true outlook better, but for now, it's just my top 5 of movies I have seen that came out this year.

For the record I have yet to see: Borat, The Departed, Brick, Hard Candy, Full Nelson, The Good Sheppard, The Good German, The Science of Sleep, Stranger than Fiction, Searching for Comedy in the Muslim World, Factory Girl, plus many more essential movies of the year.

Here are my top 5:

1)Casino Royale
2)Thank You For Smoking
3)Perfume: The Story of a Murderer
4)Little Miss Sunshine
5)Clerks 2

3 of those five were adaptations from books (I don’t think Little miss Sunshine was a book first, right?) 3 are also technically comedies. 2 are sequels (or reboots), and 2 are foreign films (technically Casino Royale and Perfume). One is a film that most people addressed as simply "Not sucking" (Clerks 2).

These are the other films that I saw for 2006, and I'm gonna do an EW (Entertainment Weekly) letter grade and say a few words about each.


A Scanner Darkly
---It's a pretty intriguing movie and it almost made my top 5. The reason Clerk beat it out was because I enjoyed Clerks more. That and A Scanner Darkly could be kind of confusing for some. A-

Accepted
---Funnier than I thought it would be, but still kind of stupid. It was trying to be Animal House when there was no need for a new Animal House. And I jokingly blame the fact that I've seen this, but not should-be-right-up-my-alley Brick on Steph and her unrequited love for Lewis Black. (It's all your fault!). B

American Dreamz
---An attempt at satire that doesn't fall as flat on it's face as everyone says it does. Granted, it's no where near perfect, and does get somewhat stupid at a point, but I think it actually says some good things. I talk more about it in this article. B

Crank
---I called this movie D.O.A. meets Speed. That's really the perfect way to describe it. Well...that and add to it the fact that it's made for people who have no attention span and think The Fast and The Furious was the high point of American cinema. The only thing this movie has going for it is it's super fast pace. It makes it feel like it's only been 20 minutes you've wasted watching it, and not an hour and a half. C-

Inside Man
---Not the worst Spike Lee movie I've seen, and not even that controversial (ooh, they mention the Holocaust. Scandalous). But also not at all memorable. I guess it's an enjoyable, harmless movie. Spike Lee has made better work though. B-

Snakes on a Plane
---Forget about the movie. The thing everyone mentions with this is the internet hype and Samuel L. Jackson saying a line that will become the next "Get off My Plane!". (Or, as I said when I saw the trailer for that crappy Harrison Ford movie this year about criminals stealing money online: "Get off My Internet!"). Anyway, the hype wasn't all there, it's not as bad as it should have been, and if you see this movie without a large enthusiastic audience then you're stupid. C -

Superman Returns
---Bryan Singer was trying to make Superman this operatic character. And yes, it certainly has that operatic feel to it. Unfortunately it's also pretty boring. I don’t know, it just seems like this movie could have been so much better than it was. B-

V for Vendetta
---Now this was a travesty. If you've ever read the awesome graphic novel then you know they got everything all wrong. The fact that Evey wasn't a prostitute in here just messes up her whole characterization. The only reason she would hang out with a person like V is because she's so desperate a person! And what the hell is all this blaming America shit? So bad...C-

X Men 3: The Last Stand
---Most of my feelings for this movie can be summed up here. B


I'm trying to catch up. I just added Idocracy to my Netflix queue.

Late Night Ramblings

It's late, I'm sick, fuck spell check, I just have some random opinions and thoughts.

You wanna know what's weird...I just had a conversation with my Dad about Borat. That wasn't the weird part...the weird part was that he was able to quote bits from him verbatim. I had no clue my Dad knew who Borat or Sascha Baron Cohen even was. I've never seen him watch Da Ali G Show...does HBO show episodes of it at like 4 in the morning? That's the only time that I'd think he'd watch it...I don’t know. It just surprises me.


Alright, I just watch Revenge of The Nerds again. The last time I saw the movie had to be like 5 years ago, and just like I remembered, it was stupid, yet entertaining and funny. Something else I realized about it though: While a stupid college-teen comedy, it possesses a genius concept: Have a social commentary on racism, but instead of white people discriminating against blacks, have it be Nerds. Look at all the tell-tale signs--The Alpha Beta bad guys are all pure white (as are their Sorority counterparts); the Nerds are a amalgamation of every group from society that has ever been called an outcast, an outsider, or different in any way; The Nerds join up with the Tri-Lams, which is an all-black Frat, and they accept them; The Alpha Betas burn the word "Nerds" in front of their house (ala a cross), and throw bricks though their windows telling them to go away; plus much more.

Now, I know I'm not making points that haven’t already been brought out before, but that's not the point...what I really wanted to say about the movie was what pissed me off about it--specifically that the hot girl, Betty, decides to dump her jock Alpha-Beta boyfriend for a Nerd, just because he's good in bed. Now, aren't the Nerds suppose to be smart? Doesn't Lewis realize that she's just using him for sex and that she feels no feelings toward him what-so-ever? Maybe he just doesn’t care? Anyway, that's one hell of a message to send: Girls like you only for sex. That's almost as bad as the end of Grease: If you want to get the guy, be a slut.
Now that I think about it, if they were making a race commentary with that scene as well, then it is both hilarious and ridiculously offensive. It's hilarious because the stereotype of black men having huge dicks is being saddled with Nerds are good at sex and that by just having sex with a black man/Nerd, the white girl will instantly regret any previous sex with someone of less quality. You know, "Once you go black, you never go back"? That thing. It's offensive though because basically the movie says that that's the only reason why a hot girl would fall for a Nerd or white girl fall for a black guy. Apparently they have no other redeeming qualities.

I just finished reading Mark Evanier and Sergio Aragones' Fanboy graphic novel. It was pretty damn good. If you're a comic book nerd, or a fan of DC comics or of most of the classic artists, then you need to pick it up. It's hilarious, and true (mostly).

Being sick has allowed me to watch two classic cult shows that I never got the chance to really watch before hand. The Diana Rigg version of the Avengers and the original Star Trek. Now, I've seen both these shows before, but I guess I just never cared enough about either to really look at them and give them a chance. My Dad had a few VHS cassettes of the British spy show the Avengers, so I figured I might as well watch them while I'm sick (since Netflix suspended my account temporarily), since I can't really do anything else. I know that Patrick McNee's John Steed was a regular in the cast for almost the entirety of the show (a few first season episodes aside) and that he even came back for the short lived 1970s revival, but his (mostly) female counterparts changed quite a few times during the show’s 1961 to 1969 run. The most well known of his partners, and my favorite (and apparently my Dad's favorite too since he doesn't have an episode with anyone else) was the beautiful Diana Rigg as Emma Peel. The sexual tension between the two was the highlight of many episodes, especially the ones that boarder lined on plain silly in concept (super-intelligent robots taking over Parliament to make decisions for us? C'mon). Now while I have seen a few episodes with other female leads (Rigg's predecessor Honor Blackman being one), I really just can't imagine the show without the Steed/Peel chemistry. These two worked so well together; they acted like lovers but never got into bed (at least on camera)...that was the kind of mistake that ruined great shows like Moonlighting and the X-Files (well, bad writing and Robert Patrick ruined that). When the two leads finally do sleep together, you ruin all the sexual tension, and all the reasons for tuning in. Frankly, I could care less about Maddie and David after they fucked on Moonlighting. And Mulder and Scully...in that final episode when they kissed...no! For a show that's about the unexpected, that was the thing that everyone was expecting, but no one wanted! Anyway, check out some Emma Peel era Avengers.

Oh, I just realized Emma Peel is a pun. Emma Peel=M Appeal, or better known as MAN Appeal. Something Diana Rigg certainly had.

Now the original Star Trek. I like to thank TV Land for airing a marathon of the show, so I could finally watch some episodes. I have to say, I did enjoy them. I'm surprised how many episodes did not even take place in space, as well as how many actually had ironic morals for the real world (so many episodes were meant to make you think of the current situations and events of the 60s in a new light). The episode "City at the End of Time" was probably one of the best episodes I watched and made me laugh quite a few times. I was shocked. Now what does this make me. I'm certainly not a Trekkie. I'm also not running out to buy the show on DVD. I still say Star Wars is better too. It's a shame there's a stigma attached to Star Trek.


Michael Richards racist outbursts at the LA comedy club The Laugh Factory might have been the funniest things to come out of a LA Comics mouth ever.

Also since when does Michael Richards do stand up? I mean, I know his career was in the shitter, but stand up? Can't Weird Al make another movie or something?

Movies I still havent seen, but want to:
Casino Royal
Borat
The Fountain
The Departed

Maybe when I get money.

That new trailer for Spiderman 3 looks amazing. I can't wait for that movie. I hate Venom, and I never thought a movie with him would work, but Goddamn, it looks like Sam Raimi did it right. And friggen Sandman looks awesome!

Ok, that's it. I can hear my TV playing the theme song to Innuasha*, so I know I'm up too late. I can't breath through my nose, but I'm gonna try to sleep anyway.

*How the hell is it spelt anyway?

15 political movies for your Election Day fun

In case you don't feel like watching the polls this Election Day, how bout a politics themed movie night? (Wow, how lame did that sentence sound?). Here, for your approval, are a few of the best movies related to politics.

Mr. Smith Goes To Washington (1939)-Frank Capra
The old Standby. I was watching it again last night, and there's still something that bothers me about this movie: it's too optimistic. But I guess that's it's charm..virtue overcomes corruption. The Everyman succeeds in the political process and Aristotle's "Polity" comes true. Jimmy Stewart gives us hope for a brighter future in everything we do.

Citizen Kane (1941) -Orson Welles
On the other hand, Orson Welles Citizen Kane shows corruption. Or rather, tries to humanize a corrupt figure. Charles Foster Kane attempts a run for political office, but is caught in a sex scandal right before Election Day. After his bitter loss (to someone who was much more despicable than the morally questionable Kane), he has his newspaper print that the Election was tainted. What does this show? Even though Kane was hated by some (and rightfully so) and even though Kane is not a clean, pure, likable person (as was Jefferson Smith of the movie above), he was still probably a better politician than the winner, and probably cared more for the people than any of the politicians that he shook hands with, or married the daughters of.

The Manchurian Candidate (1962)- John Frankenheimer
Now we're getting into movies that are a touch more complicated. The original Manchurian Candidate focuses on the Cold War paranoia that was spreading around the country in the 60s. Here politics and fear come head to head and an uncomfortable relationship is made between the two. What does this movie say? Just because someone is preaching the values we want to hear, doesn't mean that they will vote that way (paging Hillary Clinton!). Never assume that you see the full picture of Washington DC. Never assume that the hero you admire really believes what they say, and never fall into voting for someone out of fear.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)- Stanley Kubrick
How absurd was the political chess game known as the Cold War? Very absurd. At least that's what Stanley Kubrick is telling us. The President might think he is in control of everything, but in reality, no one is in true control. A minor general could hold more power than the Commander-in-Chief, or an Air Force Pilot could determine the United States next facet of foreign policy. And what is driving all of these men? Well, of course: Sex! Sex! Sex! Don't be fooled, the President has no clue what's going on everywhere at once, and he has no way to stop what others do--that includes nuclear war!

All The President's Men (1976) -Alan J. Pakula
Or does he? Nixon had more power than any President since FDR (and that..s even debatable). The power kinda went to his head, as he and his staff thought they could get away with the Watergate break-in. So what is this movie telling us? Well, the President might think he..s a dictator, or in an "Imperial Presidency", but he's no different than you or I, and he can be taken down just as easily. Nixon was impeached, his staff was convicted, and their political careers ruined. One branch cannot become too powerful, because there's always a check and balance there to stop you. Here of course, it was the unofficial branch: the media.

Bob Roberts (1992) -Tim Robbins
Bob Roberts is about a musician that decides to run for Senate--and wins. His music takes the form of propaganda, grabbing a hold of and identifying with people. Bob Roberts didn..t just use pop culture, he was pop culture. People who vote for him are the same people who would vote for Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. Just because they're celebrities, and just because they have an opinion, doesn't mean they can run a nation or make laws. His catchy-tunes trick you just as his fake assassination attempt tricked the voters, just like TV tricks you into thinking Stewart can handle himself against the likes of Jon Ashcroft and John Kerry. This is the pop culture politician. This is Ronald Regan, this is Bill Clinton, this is George W. Bush, John Kerry, Sonny Bono, Jim Bunning, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Al Gore, Jesse Ventura. The list goes on. This is where America is heading. Pop culture and politics are the same thing now, and to understand one, means you have to understand the other.

Distinguished Gentlemen (1992) - Jonathan Lynn
How easy is it to get elected? Pretty easy it seems that even a criminal can achieve political office (see New Jersey's Senate race). As long as you have an endorsement, and a name, you can do anything. The people don't know who they're voting for, they probably also don..t care. They also don't listen to a word you say. As Eddie Izzard said: "It's not what you say but how you say it." As long as you sound like a politician, you are a politician, and therefore electable. This movie also shows us another thing: Who are the bigger crooks, the ones in jail, or the ones in the House of Representatives? In Washington, deception and corruption is King. The politics don't even matter.

Dave (1993) -Ivan Reitman
In a time when movies were filled with anti-political sentiment, it took one Republican screenwriter to bring optimism back to politics. Dave is the successor to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, in that the good guy can succeed and do well for the people. Dave Kovic is a populist. He wants to help others, especially the people that he now seems to be the President of. Well, technically Bill Mitchell is the President, he just looks like him, but that's a technicality. Dave shows that the mistakes of the past don't mean that someone can't do well for the people now. It's refreshing to see hope again in political movies.

My Fellow Americans (1996)- Peter Segal
Many probably think this movie is a joke that takes cheap shots at both The Republicans and The Democrats. Well, there's more there than that. Though the situation both main characters are put into seems a little overkill, and though one would think that none of this could possibly happen in real life, the message of it all is something that we hope can be true. Even though people have different political parties, and political beliefs, when it comes down to it, those differences can be cast aside to work together, and help those that need help. Republicans and Democrats are not that different in the end, they just like to pretend to be (mostly for comical zingers).

Air Force One (1997) -Wolfgang Peterson
When the situation seems at it's worst, a President can over come anything by ju--yeah, just kidding.

Wag The Dog (1997)-Barry Levinson
Wag The Dog follows in the tradition of Bob Roberts. The election of the President is basically the control of pop culture. The election process is like getting a movie off the ground, you need a pitch, a budget, a crew, a trailer, a soundtrack, product placement, everything--and on Election Day, the people will come out to choose what movie they want to watch for the next four years. The President is the greatest movie character of all time.

Primary Colors (1998)- Mike Nichols
The opposite of Dave--the past of the President will come up to haunt them later on. It adds to their character. In fact, everything the person does relates to their character. Does that make him a bad man? Primary Colors says no, but the voters might think so.

Bulworth (1998)- Warren Beatty
Do you ever wonder if a politician realizes his or her own ludicrousness? Do you think they ever feel bad for it? What if the politician has the same problems that a teenager trying to identify has? Granted, we might call it a mid-life crisis, but that..s only because they're fifty. Anyway, the theory is that the politician is a representative of their constituency. What if their constituency is absolutely nothing like they are? Well, as their representative, then the politician is then forced to fight for their causes, forced to be like them. How much is too much like them though?

Election (1999)-Alexander Payne
Election takes place in a high school--true. The major party politics of Election can best be defined as Coke vs. Pepsi--also true. But here's the thing, Election might be the best critique of democracy since The Prince. The person who is seems to be the best for the job, isn't always electable, and the person who is detested by all, is the one who will do the most good. Should politics be that way? Well, if you try to change it, you..re just going to get yourself in more trouble.

American Dreamz (2006) -Paul Weitz
Ok, so this movie wasn..t that good. There is something here that one can take from it though..the election of the President and the state of foreign policy is like the TV show American Idol. Ok, let me explain. TV is the place where everything comes together for all to see. We live in a world where people make decisions on who to vote for based upon an SNL sketch. To master politics means you need to master pop culture (something that this whole list is preaching). What..s the biggest pop culture sensation currently? American Idol. (Where more people voted for Justin Guarini than they did George W. Bush). The new political battleground will be audience-participation events, places where people can call in, or ask questions directly to the candidate. When Bill Clinton got asked "Boxers or Briefs?" on MTV we all called it stupid--now, that may be the most important question of the modern age.

Larry The Cable Guy-Politician

Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee has stated that Americans want politicians to be more like Larry The Cable Guy, because of his "Git-R-Done" catchphrase and attitude.

Note, he did not say he thinks Larry The Cable Guy should be a politician but rather that politicians should model themselves after the ideology that the character created by Dan Whitney preaches.

"Sometimes I think we need [a] Larry The Cable Guy running for office so we can just 'Git-R-Done' because that's what people really want out of us. They want competence. They want us to accomplish something,...I don't think the average voter is as ideological as he or she is practical."

Interesting. And not a surprise, since if you were to ask the people of Arkansas what comedians they can relate to most (and probably trust most) no doubt many will state Larry The Cable Guy and his blue-collar sense of humor.

Comedians and politics aren't two paths that haven't been crossed before. Prop-comic Gallagher tried running for Governor of California in their recall election. Doug Stanhope seems to be somewhat serious of his intentions to possibly run for President on the Libertarian Party ticket in 2008. Howard Stern (I know, not a comedian, but a shock jock that can be funny) tried running for New York City Mayor before. And lets not forget the obvious, the constant calls for either (or both) Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert to run for President based solely on the reasoning that they can read jokes about the news and politics off a script that were created by a bunch of professional comedy writers, sometimes without Stewart or Colbert's involvement at all. As Mad Magazine put it perfectly in issue ..467: "no appearance by a pandering politico is complete without the kiss-ass suggestion that Jon Stewart should enter politics. At which point, the same studio audience that doesn't think George W. Bush is qualified to handle his job, happily explodes at the notion of being represented by Adam Sandler's roommate in Big Daddy."

What is it about people trusting comedians more? Is it because they quote-unquote "tell the truth"? Is it because they say things most other people would never dream of saying? Is it because politicians are fools anyway, so as Gallagher put it, why not put a professional in that position? Maybe. I'd like to think that it has to do with the power of comedy. I'd like to think that people realize that via comedy, one can tackle a serious topic, and put it in a perspective where the absurdity of it is clear to everyone. More or less, the main purpose of satire. I'd like to think that people realize sometimes that only via comedy can anything truly be said.

Is that what Huckabee is saying? Is he claiming that politicians should be more like comedians in the sense that they tell the truth and cut the bullshit? No, I don't think so. I think he's implying that they would somehow get the job done faster (something, that no one can accomplish, unless you're Michael Douglas or Martin Sheen or possibly James K. Polk). Just because comedians can shine some light on a subject doesn't mean that the whole nation will agree with him or her on it. It doesn't mean that bills become law faster. All it means is that we'll have David Cross as our Press Secretary.

The "Git-R-Done" ideology Huckabee is ascribing to suggests they'll get the work done faster, and that's what people want. Well, it's a nice idea...won't happen.

It's fitting this comes up the same week when Robin Williams and Lewis Black's comedy "Man Of The Year", about a Jon Stewart-like comedian who runs for (and wins) the Presidency opens in box offices. Watch and see how he won't accomplish anything faster.

Being the Everyman is overrated

The film critics for the New York Times occasionally put out an article that provides intelligent insight into film theory. This article is no exception. I urge everyone to read With a Great Wink, Films Like 'Click' Trumpet One Message but Mean Another.

The article gives a few examples of where this is used in Hollywood, but falls short of pointing out that this is just their marketing trend. Almost every Hollywood movie does this.

But you don't need me to point that out for you, I'm sure you came to that conclusion yourself.

This thing I wanted to talk about with this article is the information that is given at the end: "Click" in it's opening weekend did better than "Eternal Sunshine On The Spotless Mind" in it's entire United States run. That is just sad.

I was at a College Graduation BBQ yesterday for a good friend of mine and one of the conversations that came up was movies. My friend, who's known me and my tastes for a little under ten years told me that I must see "Click" because it's the "funniest movie ever".

First, I admit I haven't seen "Click" yet, nor do I plan to. All speculation on this movie is made via previews, professional movie reviews and friends reviews. Secondly I have to admit that Adam Sandler has made some ridiculously funny movies in the past, and I've enjoyed them ("Billy Madison", "Happy Gilmore", "Big Daddy", etc) so the suggestion of an Adam Sandler movie to me is not the most horrible idea ever, but one has to admit, his movies ain't what they used to be.

Alright, the fact that people have made a movie like "Click" just shows how much good screenplays mean to Hollywood: Nothing. The fact that hack writing is considered the norm, and what people want to see is just horrible. Yes, I know the theory that sometimes people just want to see a "safe movie" or one that doesn't extract too much emotion either way out of someone, and to an extent I can understand that. But how can one sit through mindless bullshit?! "Billy Madison" was a safe movie, and was funny. But unlike newer Sandler fare like his interpretation of a Hollywood classic "Mr. Deeds" (ok, not so much new)"Billy Madison" was cleverly written and just outright absurd. Sandler played a slacker who was worth nothing, and not only won the girl and had fun (and learned a lesson blah blah blah) but also related to its audience and got us on his side. He did this all without using pure stock characters and falling into the mindless gap known as clichés. "Mr. Deeds" on the other hand had him playing a ready-made charming underdog who we knew from the beginning was going to get the girl. No lesson needed to be learned because he was already perfect, it was just the world around him that was insane. His biggest flaw was his black foot, which as we remember was used to his advantage. Yes, I know Sandler was playing the same role as Gary Cooper's version of the Everyman Mr. Deeds in "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town" but that's no excuse to make garbage. Hell, even the original was pure Hollywood smaltz, but at least I saw somewhat of a heart in it. Sandler's version was just garbage to keep him fresh in the public's image...I mean it wasn't as if the amazing "Punch Drunk love" didn't just finish it's theatre run, and "Eight Crazy Nights" wasn't about to come out two months later...oh wait.

Ok, this was supposed to be about "Click", right? Yeah...now this trend with Hollywood of course isn't just in Adam Sandler movies, but everywhere...I guess we can't stop that, because apparently it's what the people want. The fact that my friend not only suggested this movie to me, but also proclaimed it the "Funniest movie ever" is just outright sad. People want to see shit. Meanwhile gold like "Eternal Sunshine" is deemed "boring" by the masses. I don't know what to do anymore...nobody wants to work to understand a movie, nobody wants to learn anything, all anyone wants anymore is to be that everyman who from the beginning is predestined to get the girl and not change for the better at all.

Oh, and John Turturro's character was hysterical.

Dr Strangelove or: How I learned to write a paper comparing it to Lysistrata

I have a paper comparing Lysistrata to Dr Strangelove and Wag the Dog due tomorrow, and I’m having a really hard time writing it. I know what I want to say...I just can’t put it onto paper.

For all that don’t know Lysistrata is an ancient Greek comedy from Aristophanes. It’s a genius satire of war. The women of Athens, Sparta and the other city states are fed up with The Peloponnesian War. They decide to end it by withholding sex from their husbands and lovers until the men stop the fighting. They tease the men by dressing in masquerade and then refusing intercourse and force them to live with their painful erections and blue balls until the war ends. In the end, there is a (if my Greek terms are correct) Gamos, or ritual orgy scene, as all is reconciled and everyone’s happy. Basically a perfect example of 'make love not war'

These same satirical elements are seen in a modern war satire like Dr Strangelove. In that, the men (there is only one woman in the movie, and she’s a playboy centerfold turned into a secretary sex object) replace their sexual desires with notions of war. There’s sexual imagery all around Strangelove. The opening scene with the refueling of the plane is purely a symbol of intercourse. The long phallus like fueling pump going into the orifice on the lower plane...and then they’re moving, and shaking, and well, it looks like they’re fucking. What else: All of the powerful men have displaced sexual urges...Ripper, Turidson, Strangelove, The Russian Ambassador, hell even Mandrake have oral fixations. They’re all either smoking a cigar, cigarettes or chewing gum. Ripper's cigar is like an erect phallus to him. After he is defeated look how limp it goes. Also Ripper is worried of the Russians corrupting and stealing his 'natural bodily fluids'. He explains that he came to this conclusion while making love. And since then he doesn’t give his 'essence' to anybody (because that’s what the Russians want)...in other words, his going to war (to 'preserve our bodily fluids') is because of his impotence. (ironic due to his namesake Jack the Ripper destroyed female genitals, while he’s trying to preserve stuff from that area).

Further, there’s an allegory of war is like love making...so many symbols everywhere throughout the movie...the planes are infiltrating Russian airspace...if even only one gets through, then the Doomsday Machine will kick in, and that’s the end of the world (producing no babies that way, but it will in the plan the men have at the end...i’ll get to that later). In the survival kits, the soldiers are given condoms (as well as lipstick and stockings)...when the code to attack comes in, they’re interrupted from doing things like reading Playboy. On the inner door of their safe that keeps their secret codes there are pictures of naked women. The bombs are named "Hi There!" and "Dear John". The bomb doors won’t let anyone through, and when they finally do, Slim Pickens rides that bomb all the way down...feeling the power between his legs...like it’s a swollen phallic symbol.

Turgidson’s (George C. Scott) got a great line, when he’s talking to Tracy Reed, who plays his secretary. He’s going to the War Room, but she wants him to stay and have sex and he says "You just start your countdown and old Bucky will be back before you say BLASTOFF". Of course the sexual metaphors are all over that. Though the best part is the end when the men are more interested in the 10 to 1 ratio of women to men as they try to repopulate the world. Then they get worried that the Russians will try and steal their mine space (the place that will allow them to have sex with these women) and they almost start another war fighting over the idea that the Russians can steal the mine space. The desire for sex leads to war. Basically the 'make love not war' thing is turned on its head and now its War is like making love, but making love the old fashion way gets less people killed.

Then there’s Wag the Dog. One of my favorite satires...I don’t know if it fits well into this at all. Both Lysistrata and Wag the Dog discuss how war can be controlled by people. How it is insanity that can be fabricated by men. Basically the main points I’m going to use from Wag the Dog is the line "Why do people go to war?" "To ensure their way of life" (this is from a conversation between De Niro’s character and William H Macy’s). Basically War is used to keep the status quo...in some way, the women of Lysistrata were both trying to keep the status quo and trying to change it. While they did claim that they wanted to control the money for wars, they really just wanted their lovers and husbands to be home and not be killed anymore. The whole controlling the money thing was just politics...kinda like what was also happening in Wag the Dog.

There...this kinda helped...now if I could only make five pages out of this.