Showing posts with label Crapped the Floor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Crapped the Floor. Show all posts
Friday, March 21, 2008
Sunday, February 17, 2008
No Country for Vigilantes
Just watched The Brave One and recently finished a review of The Searchers--two revenge films (athough, properly, one melodrama and one western). I've always loved The Searchers because it divides audiences right about the moment when "Look" (the "squaw") is kicked down the hill. It's also one of those films that uses visual irony pretty consistently: John Ford's signature long shot flattens the hunting party against the buttes and the desert, each element a complement of the other, as if these white guys actually belong there, as if they are "integrated"--while in other shots they stick out like sore thumbs. In real life, Ford was politically the opposite to John Wayne, too, which is interesting. The film is critique of the white man's genocidal impulse, but John Wayne's mere presence in the film is an obstacle for many viewers. I'm reminded of how Faulkner's critique of Southern orthodoxy is also overshadowed by his uncomfortably harsh depictions of racism.
The Brave One takes all the obstacles away and makes sure you don't miss a single message. In fact, there's no subtext to the film at all. If you even try to imagine the film as a "comment" on the death penalty, there's an elevator scene to assure you that it is indeed: two people argue over endorsing the vigilante--"So you are FOR lethal injection, too?" snaps one. Foster's, a talk radio DJ, answers calls from listeners who pretty much sound like they are reading an after-school play about smoking--only it's vigilantism, of course. And if you try to think of the film as a conflict between the head and the heart, too bad: a scene between the detective and Foster spells that out too. Cut to Foster "dancing" with the memory of her murdered boyfriend, who also somehow plays guitar, both diegetically and extradiegetically. The film screams the message at you: you can't "feel" one way and "think" another, not in the end. You've got to make a choice. You've got to be John Wayne or better yet, the John Wayne of our times: Jack Bauer from Fox's 24. Even if you are rooting for Foster and just want to see her kick butt, Lilith fair den mother Sarah Mclachlin de-adrenalizes all her screaming and shooting with soft ballads throughout, as if to say "this is the real woman here-the one with the gun was just 'acting'. She didn't want to be the monster."
So give me John Ford. Give me something interesting, like, how did he deal with not being able to show the massacre of the whites in the beginning of The Searchers? The film begins from within the cool and dark safety of the cabin and then moves outward into the bright sublime desert--Ford bars us from re-entry.
Or give me the Coen Brothers, give me Faulkner. Give me subtext. Otherwise, art is simply a political cartoon. Since there was no real complexity to the art (I mean c'mon, Neil Jordan--taking lessons from Ron Howard?), I'd image one could encapsulate its content with something similar to this:
Or give me no art and politically laughable messages. Give me Charles Bronson in Deathwish III. Make it exploitively hilarious. Give me so much lack of subtext that I, the viewer, must invent it. One good thing The Brave One had going for it--Bronson and Foster have the same haircut!
The Brave One takes all the obstacles away and makes sure you don't miss a single message. In fact, there's no subtext to the film at all. If you even try to imagine the film as a "comment" on the death penalty, there's an elevator scene to assure you that it is indeed: two people argue over endorsing the vigilante--"So you are FOR lethal injection, too?" snaps one. Foster's, a talk radio DJ, answers calls from listeners who pretty much sound like they are reading an after-school play about smoking--only it's vigilantism, of course. And if you try to think of the film as a conflict between the head and the heart, too bad: a scene between the detective and Foster spells that out too. Cut to Foster "dancing" with the memory of her murdered boyfriend, who also somehow plays guitar, both diegetically and extradiegetically. The film screams the message at you: you can't "feel" one way and "think" another, not in the end. You've got to make a choice. You've got to be John Wayne or better yet, the John Wayne of our times: Jack Bauer from Fox's 24. Even if you are rooting for Foster and just want to see her kick butt, Lilith fair den mother Sarah Mclachlin de-adrenalizes all her screaming and shooting with soft ballads throughout, as if to say "this is the real woman here-the one with the gun was just 'acting'. She didn't want to be the monster."
So give me John Ford. Give me something interesting, like, how did he deal with not being able to show the massacre of the whites in the beginning of The Searchers? The film begins from within the cool and dark safety of the cabin and then moves outward into the bright sublime desert--Ford bars us from re-entry.
Or give me the Coen Brothers, give me Faulkner. Give me subtext. Otherwise, art is simply a political cartoon. Since there was no real complexity to the art (I mean c'mon, Neil Jordan--taking lessons from Ron Howard?), I'd image one could encapsulate its content with something similar to this:
Or give me no art and politically laughable messages. Give me Charles Bronson in Deathwish III. Make it exploitively hilarious. Give me so much lack of subtext that I, the viewer, must invent it. One good thing The Brave One had going for it--Bronson and Foster have the same haircut!
Friday, January 18, 2008
Oh Baby, I... I...I'm Gonna...I'm Gonna CLIFFHANGERRRR!!! {guys only}
Since I Know Who Killed Me has become my favorite movie since No Country for Old Men, I think we all know I have a high/low art problem (see my dissertation, in which I actually gave close reading to Boxing Helena--yes, Boxing Helena).
It's just so much fun knowing that if you had Hollywood connections, you'd be more successful than the hacks you skewer on a nightly basis.
The latest skewering goes to The Tudors (pronounced Choo-dors; say it with me: Tudors, tulip [choo-lip], tuna [choo-na], TUDORS!). Showtime is obviously trying to compete with Rome on HBO, but whereas Rome invented lower-class characters to contrast the heavies of history, The Tudors cares very little for the facts. They CGI crane shots over London, the sets are awkwardly small--even a joust takes place in what looks like my back yard--and each episode jumps the shark by either a) someone buggers a scullery maid/lady in waiting, or b) someone gets "the sweat," which, yes, is historically what they called the Sweating Sickness, a plague-like illness which slowly killed you with fever and had no no origin. In real life, you could fight it and win sometimes. On The Tudors, you DIE WITHIN ONE DAY. You'll be delivering food on a silver platter to His Highness when you suddenly trip, then fall to the ground, all the while ripping open your shirt so the that the sweat may escape like a demon clawing its way out. Everyone who shows symptoms dies--the gay character first, of course--but one person, Anne Boleyn.
As a good soul on imdb says of the show: "It doesn't look like a bit like England, the actors don't look English, the script manages to be both hideously turgid and blindingly prosaic at the same time and some of the performances hit a nadir we haven't seen on mainstream British TV since Crossroads came back. Ann Boleyn looks as if she's just come in from playing shinty, Sam Neill clearly thinks he's in an episode of Star Trek or Red Dwarf and Catherine of Aragon looks as if she could go fifteen rounds with a good light heavyweight and drink Boris Yeltsin under the table while Thomas More, instead of being one of the engines of the enlightenment, seems to have the IQ of a fruitbat. The sets are hilarious. You could fit their Tower of London set in a B&Q greenhouse and the jousting scenes, of which there are a lot, seem to take place in Charlton Athletic's car park. The episode with the Field of the Cloth of Gold, the most extravagant meeting in history meeting between two rulers of Christian monarchies, looks as if it were shot in an unloved corner of Legoland and will have you in stitches. And historical accuracy? Whoever was in charge of that has never read anything longer than a jamjar label. So I'm hooked. Can it get worse? You betcha . . . .
By the last episode, we know what history tell us: Henry cannot be seen with Anne until his illegal divorce goes through (damn those popes!), so they must meet in "the wood" (Many Europeans omit the 's': "I'm scared of what might be in the wood!"). They thrust together, bodices and codpieces ripping and unsticking, respectively; but then, right as Hank is about to spew his divine-right essence, Anne pushes him off her, crying, "We musn't!" or something to the effect of, "If I have a child by you, I'll be in big do-do; everyone knows who I am now." With giant blueballs, Johnathan Rhys Meyes does this:
Then...FADE TO CREDITS! I shit you not. They literally made the cliffhanger narrative blueballs. So if you want to tune in/come next season, rise out of denouement and re-harden, folks, and see:
You see, Showtime is great and all--thanks for The L Word, especially--but they're TOO sexy. And I'm sick of sexy. Watching The West Wing reminds me that some American TV uses real people with real faces, and people in their 40s and 50s go on dates and have actual sex appeal. But Showtime just doesn't get that they will be old news, and soon. Dexter may survive, but I dunno. The Writers' Strike is still in full force. The Tudors returns in March, somehow. What? I'm eating IN tonight, honey. Just be back before bedtime, okay?
It's just so much fun knowing that if you had Hollywood connections, you'd be more successful than the hacks you skewer on a nightly basis.
The latest skewering goes to The Tudors (pronounced Choo-dors; say it with me: Tudors, tulip [choo-lip], tuna [choo-na], TUDORS!). Showtime is obviously trying to compete with Rome on HBO, but whereas Rome invented lower-class characters to contrast the heavies of history, The Tudors cares very little for the facts. They CGI crane shots over London, the sets are awkwardly small--even a joust takes place in what looks like my back yard--and each episode jumps the shark by either a) someone buggers a scullery maid/lady in waiting, or b) someone gets "the sweat," which, yes, is historically what they called the Sweating Sickness, a plague-like illness which slowly killed you with fever and had no no origin. In real life, you could fight it and win sometimes. On The Tudors, you DIE WITHIN ONE DAY. You'll be delivering food on a silver platter to His Highness when you suddenly trip, then fall to the ground, all the while ripping open your shirt so the that the sweat may escape like a demon clawing its way out. Everyone who shows symptoms dies--the gay character first, of course--but one person, Anne Boleyn.
As a good soul on imdb says of the show: "It doesn't look like a bit like England, the actors don't look English, the script manages to be both hideously turgid and blindingly prosaic at the same time and some of the performances hit a nadir we haven't seen on mainstream British TV since Crossroads came back. Ann Boleyn looks as if she's just come in from playing shinty, Sam Neill clearly thinks he's in an episode of Star Trek or Red Dwarf and Catherine of Aragon looks as if she could go fifteen rounds with a good light heavyweight and drink Boris Yeltsin under the table while Thomas More, instead of being one of the engines of the enlightenment, seems to have the IQ of a fruitbat. The sets are hilarious. You could fit their Tower of London set in a B&Q greenhouse and the jousting scenes, of which there are a lot, seem to take place in Charlton Athletic's car park. The episode with the Field of the Cloth of Gold, the most extravagant meeting in history meeting between two rulers of Christian monarchies, looks as if it were shot in an unloved corner of Legoland and will have you in stitches. And historical accuracy? Whoever was in charge of that has never read anything longer than a jamjar label. So I'm hooked. Can it get worse? You betcha . . . .
By the last episode, we know what history tell us: Henry cannot be seen with Anne until his illegal divorce goes through (damn those popes!), so they must meet in "the wood" (Many Europeans omit the 's': "I'm scared of what might be in the wood!"). They thrust together, bodices and codpieces ripping and unsticking, respectively; but then, right as Hank is about to spew his divine-right essence, Anne pushes him off her, crying, "We musn't!" or something to the effect of, "If I have a child by you, I'll be in big do-do; everyone knows who I am now." With giant blueballs, Johnathan Rhys Meyes does this:
Then...FADE TO CREDITS! I shit you not. They literally made the cliffhanger narrative blueballs. So if you want to tune in/come next season, rise out of denouement and re-harden, folks, and see:
You see, Showtime is great and all--thanks for The L Word, especially--but they're TOO sexy. And I'm sick of sexy. Watching The West Wing reminds me that some American TV uses real people with real faces, and people in their 40s and 50s go on dates and have actual sex appeal. But Showtime just doesn't get that they will be old news, and soon. Dexter may survive, but I dunno. The Writers' Strike is still in full force. The Tudors returns in March, somehow. What? I'm eating IN tonight, honey. Just be back before bedtime, okay?
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Riddle Me This!
One day someone asked me if I'd eat raw hamburger off of Zooey Deschanel and I seriously considered it. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. The other day, I found out that M. Night Shyamalan's new movie, The Happening, will star her. Oh no. Now the riddle has come true! What do I do? I could stare endlessly at this hip girl-next-door beauty, but ever since Lady in the Water, I'm worried that the narrative will be simply painful and unwatchable, not good-bad, but bad-bad.
In related "Night News," I would like you all to read a hilarious group of flamers debate Night's tendency to rip off older texts. (If link doesn't work, go to his imdb page, click threads, and scroll down to the "which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits will he rip off next?" discussion.
UPDATE 1/17--OKAY: COPIED AND PASTED BELOW:
Board: M. Night Shyamalan
1234
View: thread | flat | inline | nest
which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by frankduxvandamme (Fri Nov 23 2007 15:18:05)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
hmm...
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Fri Nov 23 2007 19:39:46)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Which ones has he ripped off before? Hmmmm, NONE.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by frankduxvandamme (Sat Nov 24 2007 17:20:28)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Which ones has he ripped off before? Hmmmm, NONE.
the sixth sense.
there were at least 5 episodes of TZ where the main character was dead and didnt know it. then the big twist at the end of the episode was the character realizing he or she was dead the entire time.
The Village.
there were several episodes of both the TZ and the new Outer Limits involving the isolation of a community not aware of their own isolation, until the end.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Sat Nov 24 2007 20:40:19)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Shyamalan fans refuse to acknowledge that their messiah is a plagiarist.
By giving factual examples you force them to resort to denial (which they will, mark my words).
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Mon Nov 26 2007 06:29:42)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
UPDATED Mon Nov 26 2007 06:31:05
the sixth sense.
there were at least 5 episodes of TZ where the main character was dead and didnt know it. then the big twist at the end of the episode was the character realizing he or she was dead the entire time.
The Village.
there were several episodes of both the TZ and the new Outer Limits involving the isolation of a community not aware of their own isolation, until the end.
You have never seen an episode of TZ before have you? Direct me to the EXACT EPISODES in which you claim Night ripped off. Otherwise, I do not believe it. I want you to prove these ridiculous allegations, especially the "at least 5" and "several episodes." Also, if Night rips those off, pretty much EVERY twist movie ever made ripped off TZ as well. The Others, Fight Club, Usual Suspects, Jacob's Ladder, etc. I'd like you to point out a twist film where the twist hadn't been done in SOME way in the past. There is nothing completely original left, at least as far as the twists are concerned.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Mon Nov 26 2007 06:58:04)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
UPDATED Mon Nov 26 2007 06:58:47
Here are some examples of TZ episodes Shyamalan ripped off:
The Passerby - 10/6/61
A Confederate soldier rests with a weary woman waiting for her husband to return from battle. They realize they're dead along with the many soldiers walking down the road towards the afterlife.
The Hitch-Hiker - 1/22/60
A woman traveling across the country, keeps encountering the same mysterious hitch-hiker everwhere she goes. She later finds out that she had died on the trip and he's the Angel of Death.
He even stole his idea for LITW
The Bewitchin' Pool - 6/19/64
Two children escape through a magical portal in their pool, into a peaceful world for children.
Looks like In_Excess has to eat his words....AGAIN!
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Mon Nov 26 2007 12:56:15)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
UPDATED Mon Nov 26 2007 12:57:52
Looks like In_Excess has to eat his words....AGAIN!
You are an idiot. That is not "proof" of anything. In fact, anyone will be hard pressed to prove that Night ripped off any episode of TZ. What you have is two episodes where people realize they have been dead all along, so what? How does that BROAD realization prove that Night ripped off TZ? For all you know Rod Serling ripped off other sources for those episodes. I'm certain that Serling wasn't the first person on Earth to come up with the concept of someone realizing they were dead all along. Also, again, if that is enough "proof" for you to label Night as a plagiarist, you shouldn't have a problem labeling 90% of the filmmakers out there plagiarists as well.
Your last Bewitchin' Pool example is supposed to prove what exactly? Oh no, Lady in the Water has a pool that a Narf uses to live in, must be a rip of TZ!!! Yours and the OP's assertions are completely ludicrous. Again, you cannot take broad areas of a plot and say that it was ripped off. They are general enough to be mere coincidences. It's like saying Star Wars ripped off 2001 because they both took place in outer space. The only "rip off" criticism I am willing to entertain is the Running Out of Time v. The Village, which at least has some SPECIFIC detail that overlaps. Try again Jeremey.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Mon Nov 26 2007 13:53:18)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
I guess writing bogus posts defending your director keeps your mind off the fact that you still have to eat your words. I gave proof. You couldn't handle that, your angry rant proves it.
Hopefully your next attempt isn't as pitiful.
How do those words taste, "moron"?
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Mon Nov 26 2007 16:08:34)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
I guess writing bogus posts defending your director keeps your mind off the fact that you still have to eat your words. I gave proof. You couldn't handle that, your angry rant proves it.
Hopefully your next attempt isn't as pitiful.
How do those words taste, "moron"?
Just when I thought Jeremey couldn't get any more stupid, he gives us this classic post. Go look up the definition of "proof" before shooting your mouth of again idiot. I can't believe I have to explain these things to you. Again, when I asked for PROOF I asked for CONCRETE evidence to defend your moronic assertions. What you have provided as your "proof" is not even close to that. Your idiocy continues to astound me Jeremey.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Mon Nov 26 2007 19:47:10)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
What more concrete evidence do you want? I gave CLEAR EXAMPLES of TZ stories that MIRRORED Shyamalan films.
Of course, you're probably holding out for an audio recording of Shyamalan admitting his guilt. If that's the proof your holding out for, keep holding your breath.
Your redundant circular logic is amusing. I'm sure it gets you through the day.
1234
In related "Night News," I would like you all to read a hilarious group of flamers debate Night's tendency to rip off older texts. (If link doesn't work, go to his imdb page, click threads, and scroll down to the "which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits will he rip off next?" discussion.
UPDATE 1/17--OKAY: COPIED AND PASTED BELOW:
Board: M. Night Shyamalan
1234
View: thread | flat | inline | nest
which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by frankduxvandamme (Fri Nov 23 2007 15:18:05)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
hmm...
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Fri Nov 23 2007 19:39:46)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Which ones has he ripped off before? Hmmmm, NONE.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by frankduxvandamme (Sat Nov 24 2007 17:20:28)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Which ones has he ripped off before? Hmmmm, NONE.
the sixth sense.
there were at least 5 episodes of TZ where the main character was dead and didnt know it. then the big twist at the end of the episode was the character realizing he or she was dead the entire time.
The Village.
there were several episodes of both the TZ and the new Outer Limits involving the isolation of a community not aware of their own isolation, until the end.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Sat Nov 24 2007 20:40:19)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Shyamalan fans refuse to acknowledge that their messiah is a plagiarist.
By giving factual examples you force them to resort to denial (which they will, mark my words).
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Mon Nov 26 2007 06:29:42)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
UPDATED Mon Nov 26 2007 06:31:05
the sixth sense.
there were at least 5 episodes of TZ where the main character was dead and didnt know it. then the big twist at the end of the episode was the character realizing he or she was dead the entire time.
The Village.
there were several episodes of both the TZ and the new Outer Limits involving the isolation of a community not aware of their own isolation, until the end.
You have never seen an episode of TZ before have you? Direct me to the EXACT EPISODES in which you claim Night ripped off. Otherwise, I do not believe it. I want you to prove these ridiculous allegations, especially the "at least 5" and "several episodes." Also, if Night rips those off, pretty much EVERY twist movie ever made ripped off TZ as well. The Others, Fight Club, Usual Suspects, Jacob's Ladder, etc. I'd like you to point out a twist film where the twist hadn't been done in SOME way in the past. There is nothing completely original left, at least as far as the twists are concerned.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Mon Nov 26 2007 06:58:04)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
UPDATED Mon Nov 26 2007 06:58:47
Here are some examples of TZ episodes Shyamalan ripped off:
The Passerby - 10/6/61
A Confederate soldier rests with a weary woman waiting for her husband to return from battle. They realize they're dead along with the many soldiers walking down the road towards the afterlife.
The Hitch-Hiker - 1/22/60
A woman traveling across the country, keeps encountering the same mysterious hitch-hiker everwhere she goes. She later finds out that she had died on the trip and he's the Angel of Death.
He even stole his idea for LITW
The Bewitchin' Pool - 6/19/64
Two children escape through a magical portal in their pool, into a peaceful world for children.
Looks like In_Excess has to eat his words....AGAIN!
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Mon Nov 26 2007 12:56:15)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
UPDATED Mon Nov 26 2007 12:57:52
Looks like In_Excess has to eat his words....AGAIN!
You are an idiot. That is not "proof" of anything. In fact, anyone will be hard pressed to prove that Night ripped off any episode of TZ. What you have is two episodes where people realize they have been dead all along, so what? How does that BROAD realization prove that Night ripped off TZ? For all you know Rod Serling ripped off other sources for those episodes. I'm certain that Serling wasn't the first person on Earth to come up with the concept of someone realizing they were dead all along. Also, again, if that is enough "proof" for you to label Night as a plagiarist, you shouldn't have a problem labeling 90% of the filmmakers out there plagiarists as well.
Your last Bewitchin' Pool example is supposed to prove what exactly? Oh no, Lady in the Water has a pool that a Narf uses to live in, must be a rip of TZ!!! Yours and the OP's assertions are completely ludicrous. Again, you cannot take broad areas of a plot and say that it was ripped off. They are general enough to be mere coincidences. It's like saying Star Wars ripped off 2001 because they both took place in outer space. The only "rip off" criticism I am willing to entertain is the Running Out of Time v. The Village, which at least has some SPECIFIC detail that overlaps. Try again Jeremey.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Mon Nov 26 2007 13:53:18)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
I guess writing bogus posts defending your director keeps your mind off the fact that you still have to eat your words. I gave proof. You couldn't handle that, your angry rant proves it.
Hopefully your next attempt isn't as pitiful.
How do those words taste, "moron"?
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by In_Excess (Mon Nov 26 2007 16:08:34)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
I guess writing bogus posts defending your director keeps your mind off the fact that you still have to eat your words. I gave proof. You couldn't handle that, your angry rant proves it.
Hopefully your next attempt isn't as pitiful.
How do those words taste, "moron"?
Just when I thought Jeremey couldn't get any more stupid, he gives us this classic post. Go look up the definition of "proof" before shooting your mouth of again idiot. I can't believe I have to explain these things to you. Again, when I asked for PROOF I asked for CONCRETE evidence to defend your moronic assertions. What you have provided as your "proof" is not even close to that. Your idiocy continues to astound me Jeremey.
Re: which Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episode will he rip off next?
by RequiemForADyingPlanet (Mon Nov 26 2007 19:47:10)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
What more concrete evidence do you want? I gave CLEAR EXAMPLES of TZ stories that MIRRORED Shyamalan films.
Of course, you're probably holding out for an audio recording of Shyamalan admitting his guilt. If that's the proof your holding out for, keep holding your breath.
Your redundant circular logic is amusing. I'm sure it gets you through the day.
1234
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Crapped the Floor
The recent Sopranos episode was the worst I've ever seen. They let some co-executive producer write it and what did he do? He invented Tony's "gambling problem" and then decided to destroy his relationship with a long-time business associate with whom he most enjoyed a glass of Scotch. So I'm thinking, "This is all just a ruse, right? The writers are fucking with us, and they're going to do something amazing that will turn it all around and make it make sense." But no. What actually happened was **SPOILER* Vito's goth son is in standing in the shower at high school, getting picked on by the jocks, and he just CRAPS on the floor, jsut like that. Standing there. Then he steps on it. The jocks yell "Ewww" and run away. The end.
I propose we use "Crapped the Floor" the way we use "Jumped the Shark."
In other news, a student cleaned the board in my classroom today. This completely cliched act almost made me burst out laughing. I didn't ask her to do it, either. All I need is an apple on the desk.
Additionally, the show Work Out completely rocked my world recently. Besides the tragic story of Doug's passing, which I rank right up there with Pedro's very famous reality TV death, a brief side storyline brought together Jesse and a gay Iraq war veteran who happend to serve on the panel who decides if your misconduct gets you kicked out of the army. He told the story of a gay man whose troop accepted him and who the panel decided was OK, but then a higher-up canned him anyway.
I have not seen a SINGLE text that has brought together the two most 2005-election-contentious issues. You have your war documentaries here and your gay stories of the street or the home threr, but they are never conjoned. Anti-war Democratic candidates do not ever make the link. They're "separate" issues, apparently, even to Barney Frank, it seems. All it took was one random gay military side character in a B-channel reality show to say, "Yeah, the morale's gone down over there" in the same conversation as, "They kicked him out anyway" and this speaks volumes and volumes more than Brokeback Mountain and the latest NPR expose about funding or hidden death-toll statistics. As long as the war is talked about in purely DC-political or economic or nationalistic terms alone, and the gender politics are bracketed out, then that Elephant in the Room is going to stamp us all out. I refuse to express more outrage at the war or at global warming than I do at lack of gay rights. This is why Marxism and feminism never really "married," pun intended. This is why I'm not going to see the fucking 60s boomer Bread and Puppet Theatre do its "zany" Bush send-ups. I'm sick of those Vermont hippies because they, too, bracket gender out. Oh, maybe they'll have some abortion skit, but that'll be it.
Finally, I want to put forth a film that I like, and I am somewhat nervous to do it. It's, er, um, United 93, the story of the plane that crasked in Penn. on 9/11. Okay, wait, wait, stop, just listen. I saw that other film, the one with Nicholas Cage. Rather, Asenath and I "saw" it in 10 minutes by scanning through it and predicting everything. United 93 is completely different. There's no orchestral melos, first of all, and there's no exaggeration of heroism in the individualistic sense. Yes, they make all those who died into heroes--that's inevitable--but it's the pacing leading up to the end, the final crash, that's so amazing and makes the falws forgivable. Time is out of joint: we see the hijackers as they board and silently prepare, glancing at eachother nervously, but then we quickly cut to workers in the control tower who are beginning to freak out about all the off-course planes. There is no overstated or overacted line in the whole movie. It's mostly quiet bafflement, Altman-like murmer and overlapping dialogue, and general de-centralized character focus. Call me crazy, but I think it's a great fuckin' film, and perfectly sensitive to the victims without sentimentalizing anyone or anything, bereft of exalting anyone to heavenly status. In fact, there's a marked absence of meaning anywhere in this film.
I propose we use "Crapped the Floor" the way we use "Jumped the Shark."
In other news, a student cleaned the board in my classroom today. This completely cliched act almost made me burst out laughing. I didn't ask her to do it, either. All I need is an apple on the desk.
Additionally, the show Work Out completely rocked my world recently. Besides the tragic story of Doug's passing, which I rank right up there with Pedro's very famous reality TV death, a brief side storyline brought together Jesse and a gay Iraq war veteran who happend to serve on the panel who decides if your misconduct gets you kicked out of the army. He told the story of a gay man whose troop accepted him and who the panel decided was OK, but then a higher-up canned him anyway.
I have not seen a SINGLE text that has brought together the two most 2005-election-contentious issues. You have your war documentaries here and your gay stories of the street or the home threr, but they are never conjoned. Anti-war Democratic candidates do not ever make the link. They're "separate" issues, apparently, even to Barney Frank, it seems. All it took was one random gay military side character in a B-channel reality show to say, "Yeah, the morale's gone down over there" in the same conversation as, "They kicked him out anyway" and this speaks volumes and volumes more than Brokeback Mountain and the latest NPR expose about funding or hidden death-toll statistics. As long as the war is talked about in purely DC-political or economic or nationalistic terms alone, and the gender politics are bracketed out, then that Elephant in the Room is going to stamp us all out. I refuse to express more outrage at the war or at global warming than I do at lack of gay rights. This is why Marxism and feminism never really "married," pun intended. This is why I'm not going to see the fucking 60s boomer Bread and Puppet Theatre do its "zany" Bush send-ups. I'm sick of those Vermont hippies because they, too, bracket gender out. Oh, maybe they'll have some abortion skit, but that'll be it.
Finally, I want to put forth a film that I like, and I am somewhat nervous to do it. It's, er, um, United 93, the story of the plane that crasked in Penn. on 9/11. Okay, wait, wait, stop, just listen. I saw that other film, the one with Nicholas Cage. Rather, Asenath and I "saw" it in 10 minutes by scanning through it and predicting everything. United 93 is completely different. There's no orchestral melos, first of all, and there's no exaggeration of heroism in the individualistic sense. Yes, they make all those who died into heroes--that's inevitable--but it's the pacing leading up to the end, the final crash, that's so amazing and makes the falws forgivable. Time is out of joint: we see the hijackers as they board and silently prepare, glancing at eachother nervously, but then we quickly cut to workers in the control tower who are beginning to freak out about all the off-course planes. There is no overstated or overacted line in the whole movie. It's mostly quiet bafflement, Altman-like murmer and overlapping dialogue, and general de-centralized character focus. Call me crazy, but I think it's a great fuckin' film, and perfectly sensitive to the victims without sentimentalizing anyone or anything, bereft of exalting anyone to heavenly status. In fact, there's a marked absence of meaning anywhere in this film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)