Wow. So the Tigers magically pulled a deal out of their ass that landed them Miguel cabrera and Dontrelle Willis. I would bitch and moan about it but I'm impressed that the Marlins are stupid enough to trade away their two biggest draws, all the while bitching about how they can't get any fans. What's next? They trade Hanley Ramirez to the Angels for Reggie Willits and Jeff Mathis. As an Angels fan i'd be like, hell yeah, but as a baseball fan that would kind of suck. MLB should just hold an expansion draft with all of the Marlins players and send that team to wherever the Seattle Pilots and Washington Senators team logos are resting at this hour.
In other more, entertaining news, the Royals appeared to have signed Jose Guillen. They overpaid, of course, (I mean, are they going to go sign Reggie Sanders for 12 million dollars a year again too) but at least their acquisition brings me renewed hope that someday we will see Jose Guillen and Milton Bradley patrolling some outfield somewhere because, as we all know, the Royals are idiots and if they're willing to sign Jose Guillen perhaps they're willing to acquire Milton Bradley, perhaps for Mark Teahan and whatever other super-prospect they have going on over there.
I can picture it now - Bengie Molina hits a fly ball to center field
MILTON: I got it.
JOSE: No you don't you son of a bitch I got it.
MILTON: What's that mother fucker? You want to start some shit?
JOSE: Pendejo, let's go.
MILTON: Somebody toss me a water bottle so I can impale this mother fucker!
Mark Teahan runs over to corral the ball that has rolled to the center field wall
MILTON: What you doing white boy? You going to take my ball? You in with Jeff Kent, grand wizard or some shit?
JOSE: Wait a second, what's that SOB's name? Mike? Kick me off your team will you?
They both tackle Teahan and Bengie Molina gets the first extra base hit of his career.
Please baseball, gods, if you are willing to allow Johan Santana and Miguel Cabrera be traded for shitty prospects at least toss the rest of us non middle to east American baseball fans some kind of angry, easily aggravated bone. And toss Frank Francisco in that bullpen while you're at it.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Hall of Fame business
So every argumentative baseball fans annual wet dream - better known as the voting for the Hall of Fame - is fast approaching. Tomorrow or Monday I'll write who I think should make the Hall of Fame (while providing completely useless reasons why), but today, i thought it would be interesting to look at the random vote totals that some players have received in recent years.
2007: Harold Baines - In 2007, Baines year of HOF eligibility, he received a scant 29 votes (5.7%). Now Baines wasn't exactly the Jesus of baseball, but he was pretty damn good. He had a .289 career average, 384 homers and a respectable .821 OPS. However, the knock against him was that all he could really do was hit, and as a result, played DH especially after his original team, the White Sox, traded him (beginning his journeyman phase). He never hit more than thirty homers in a season, but he still, in my opinion, deserved to receive more votes that Don-fucking-Mattingly. Yay, Yankees are great, but Baines was his equal and for almost twice as long (and Baines' Baseball-reference page hasn't been turned into a cheap attempt at advertising).
Fun facts about Baines - he played for 22 season yet only managed to steal 34 career bases. Among the many players he was traded for were Sammy Sosa, Brook Fordyce, and the immortal Scott Chiamparino.
2006 Hank Morrison - Who the hell is Hank Morrison? I don't know if the baseball Hall of Fame has their own voting tallies incorrect but it says that a Hank Morrison received 5 votes in 2006 and I, for the life of me, have no idea who he is and neither baseball library or baseball-reference.com has any idea either. Maybe they mean, Hal Morris, but still, why the hell would you vote for a weak hitting Cincinatti Reds first baseman? That's like voting for Sean Casey.
2004 Cecil Fielder - In 2004 Cecil Fielder, yes the fat guy that I vaguely remember suiting up for the Angels - the one that hit 51 homers in 1990 and made all 25 remaining Detroit Tigers fans wet their pants received one vote for the Hall of Fame. That's one more than Bob 'dare you to pronounce my name correctly' Tewksbury and one less than Juan 'that ball is rarely gone' Samuel. If Chili Davis, a less fat, not as powerful first basemen that DH'ed for the Angels late in his career can get three votes, than why can't Cecil? It's those 2 years that Chili played for the Yankees I tell you. That makes the guy that votes for every Yankee on the ballot write his name in or something.
2000: Bill Gullickson - I was actually going to make fun of Bill Gullickson for receiving one Hall of Fame vote in 2000 because the only thing I remember about him was that he was a sub-par starting pitcher for those miserable early 90's Detroit Tigers teams. However, with a little bit of baseball-reference magic i found out that he was actually a relatively solid starting pitcher for the Montrael Expos during the 1980's and that he actually won 20 games one year! So now I think he should have gotten a couple more votes. I'm assuming that in 1987 when he pitched for the Yankees (albeit briefly) he must have crapped in Don 'we swear he's the new Dimaggio' Mattingly's shoes or something, otherwise he'd have like 17 votes.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Sean Taylor
This (I am almost 100 percent certain based on the mug shot the same name, similar location and random pictures of a seventeen year old with dozens of 100 dollar bills) is one of the guys that was arrested in the shooting of Redskins safety Sean Taylor.
$MR.FLORIDA$'s myspace.
Anyone else find it ironic that while he may be responsible for taking the life of Sean Taylor some of the friend's on his page have changed their photos to memorialize him?
UPDATE
His site was taken down. At least I can say i had it linked hours before the AP did, my gift to the 5 people that looked at my post!
$MR.FLORIDA$'s myspace.
Anyone else find it ironic that while he may be responsible for taking the life of Sean Taylor some of the friend's on his page have changed their photos to memorialize him?
UPDATE
His site was taken down. At least I can say i had it linked hours before the AP did, my gift to the 5 people that looked at my post!
Friday, November 16, 2007
I Posted something
I'm still alive, ready to speak volumes to my non-existent audience! YES!
Anyways my baseball obsession has kicked in again, and, well, I've decided to scribe out some BS about the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim - aka, the only sports team name that requires you to take more than two breaths when you say it.
Recent rumors out of LAA land suggest that the Angels are targeting a third baseman. Since A-God realized that his buxom she-male blonde lived in New York and that if he moved to Irvine he wouldn't have extensive access to her and resigned with the Yankees the Angels seem to have two new third basemen in their sights. One is the shitastic Mike Lowell and the other is Dominican Marlin himself Miguel Cabrera. Now, let me be frank, Mike Lowell sucks, and if the Angels give him 55 million or whatever the hell he's asking for they're idiots. He's 32 and managed 120 RBI, because, well, he's right handed and plays in Boston. Hell Dontrelle Willis could pound out 120 RBI in that situation. So, Arte, if you were to sign Lowell for 55 million he'll probably suck and you'll end up dressing him like Mickey Mouse or something for creative cross-marketing purposes just to recoup the losses.
Miguel Cabrera on the other hand - well actually I'm not to sure about him. All signs point to yes, yes, oh Jesus yes mortgage the farm, sell the Volvo and find some way to get him. 24 year old third basemen with his skills don't exactly grow on trees. However, the Marlins are psychotic or something because they seem to be expecting not only Howie Kendrick, our oft-injured jesus second basemen and Brandon Wood, the k-tastic power prospect but they also expect Nick Adenhart who, unlike Ervin "Magicless" Santana, might actually live up to the hype. Giving up that much should make any GM hesitate. And, it should, especially, make the Angels GM (whose name i no longer know - regan or something) hesitate considering how miserably these kinds of things have gone.
And so, after that lengthy tirade I present the worst deals the Angels have ever made (in my lifetime that is)!!
5. March 5, 1990; Released Robinson Checo:
Why Doug Rader why? How could you release a guy with a hardass name like that. Sure he didn't make it to the majors until 1996 and even then only played three years and had a sparkling 7.61 era, but still, his name was Robinson. He might not have struck out many batters but goddamnit, he struck a chord in my heart!
4. March 14, 1991; Traded Dante Bichette to the Milwaukee Brewers for Dave Parker:
This one made total sense. Let's see Dante Bichette is 26 years old and had the third most homers on our team in 1990. Dave Parker is like 72, really sucks and likes cocaine. How can you not make that deal? My theory is that they weren't trading for Dave Parker but they were, rather, trading for Dave Parker's beard.
3. June 3, 1991; Drafted Eduardo Perez, Jorge Fabregas, Chris Pritchett, Chris Turner, Mark Sweeney, Shad Williams and Jacob Cruz.
Ouch. Who was running this draft - Mitch Kupchack? On the plus side Chris Pritchett, while playing only 61 real major league games, was a total monster in Baseball Mogul 1998.
2. March 23, 2000; Traded Jim Edmonds to the St. Louis Cardinals for Kent Bottenfield and Adam Kennedy:
I guess Adam Kennedy only kind of sucked but for christs sake he was the afterthought in this deal. The center-pieces were Edmonds and Bottenfield, best known to Angels fans as that fat guy we traded for that other fat guy Ron Gant. I"m not sure what part of Bottenfield's track record made the Angels actually think he could replicate his infamous 18 win season of 1999. Maybe it was the 5.07 ERA he posted in 1993. Actually, i'm guessing they assumed Troy Glaus would share his stash with Kent or that the threat of Mo Vaughn devouring his left leg would motivate him or something.
1. Speaking of...
December 11, 1991; Sign Mo Vaughn for a hell of a lot of money:
At the time this deal had me moderately excited. Mo Vaughn after all kicked ass. But, he was also a fatass, and that was the part that bit the Angels in the ass when he took the tumble heard round the world down those dugout steps. Anyways, The Hit Dog played a couple years in Anaheim ate a couple hundred Angels dogs and was promptly shuffled off to the Mets for the almost as crappy Kevin Appier. But, at least they didn't spend that money on Kevin Brown right?
Anyways my baseball obsession has kicked in again, and, well, I've decided to scribe out some BS about the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim - aka, the only sports team name that requires you to take more than two breaths when you say it.
Recent rumors out of LAA land suggest that the Angels are targeting a third baseman. Since A-God realized that his buxom she-male blonde lived in New York and that if he moved to Irvine he wouldn't have extensive access to her and resigned with the Yankees the Angels seem to have two new third basemen in their sights. One is the shitastic Mike Lowell and the other is Dominican Marlin himself Miguel Cabrera. Now, let me be frank, Mike Lowell sucks, and if the Angels give him 55 million or whatever the hell he's asking for they're idiots. He's 32 and managed 120 RBI, because, well, he's right handed and plays in Boston. Hell Dontrelle Willis could pound out 120 RBI in that situation. So, Arte, if you were to sign Lowell for 55 million he'll probably suck and you'll end up dressing him like Mickey Mouse or something for creative cross-marketing purposes just to recoup the losses.
Miguel Cabrera on the other hand - well actually I'm not to sure about him. All signs point to yes, yes, oh Jesus yes mortgage the farm, sell the Volvo and find some way to get him. 24 year old third basemen with his skills don't exactly grow on trees. However, the Marlins are psychotic or something because they seem to be expecting not only Howie Kendrick, our oft-injured jesus second basemen and Brandon Wood, the k-tastic power prospect but they also expect Nick Adenhart who, unlike Ervin "Magicless" Santana, might actually live up to the hype. Giving up that much should make any GM hesitate. And, it should, especially, make the Angels GM (whose name i no longer know - regan or something) hesitate considering how miserably these kinds of things have gone.
And so, after that lengthy tirade I present the worst deals the Angels have ever made (in my lifetime that is)!!
5. March 5, 1990; Released Robinson Checo:
Why Doug Rader why? How could you release a guy with a hardass name like that. Sure he didn't make it to the majors until 1996 and even then only played three years and had a sparkling 7.61 era, but still, his name was Robinson. He might not have struck out many batters but goddamnit, he struck a chord in my heart!
4. March 14, 1991; Traded Dante Bichette to the Milwaukee Brewers for Dave Parker:
This one made total sense. Let's see Dante Bichette is 26 years old and had the third most homers on our team in 1990. Dave Parker is like 72, really sucks and likes cocaine. How can you not make that deal? My theory is that they weren't trading for Dave Parker but they were, rather, trading for Dave Parker's beard.
3. June 3, 1991; Drafted Eduardo Perez, Jorge Fabregas, Chris Pritchett, Chris Turner, Mark Sweeney, Shad Williams and Jacob Cruz.
Ouch. Who was running this draft - Mitch Kupchack? On the plus side Chris Pritchett, while playing only 61 real major league games, was a total monster in Baseball Mogul 1998.
2. March 23, 2000; Traded Jim Edmonds to the St. Louis Cardinals for Kent Bottenfield and Adam Kennedy:
I guess Adam Kennedy only kind of sucked but for christs sake he was the afterthought in this deal. The center-pieces were Edmonds and Bottenfield, best known to Angels fans as that fat guy we traded for that other fat guy Ron Gant. I"m not sure what part of Bottenfield's track record made the Angels actually think he could replicate his infamous 18 win season of 1999. Maybe it was the 5.07 ERA he posted in 1993. Actually, i'm guessing they assumed Troy Glaus would share his stash with Kent or that the threat of Mo Vaughn devouring his left leg would motivate him or something.
1. Speaking of...
December 11, 1991; Sign Mo Vaughn for a hell of a lot of money:
At the time this deal had me moderately excited. Mo Vaughn after all kicked ass. But, he was also a fatass, and that was the part that bit the Angels in the ass when he took the tumble heard round the world down those dugout steps. Anyways, The Hit Dog played a couple years in Anaheim ate a couple hundred Angels dogs and was promptly shuffled off to the Mets for the almost as crappy Kevin Appier. But, at least they didn't spend that money on Kevin Brown right?
Monday, July 30, 2007
An imagined conversation with Jerry Buss
Q: So, it's been a rough off-season what with Kobe and the legions of Lakers fans demanding some change. How do you intend to address his and their concerns?
A: Please, those concerns have already been addressed.
Q: Really? The only significant addition to the Lakers addition has been a 32 year old backup point guard...
A: That's right, ol Jerry went out and broke open the bank to bring back your beloved Derek Fisher. Everything's la la in Lakerland. That Derek, he has heart, that's all this team needs, is a little extra heart!!! And did you see who I drafted? That Sun Yen Son-of-a-bitch, he's got grit, and moxie, and he's not Smush Parker. I know you bastards hated that guy.
Q: Maybe but he doesn't even feature in the Lakers long term plans. If the only players we add are washed up veterans and foreign-contracted youngsters then how can you expect to remain competitive...
A: Competitive eh? You think I can't be competitive. Well old Jerry says stick it up your ass. Even when I was pulled over for being drunk and driving the wrong way down a one-way street I still had some hot 23-year-old tail wrapped around my arm. I'll give you competitive you son-of-a-bitch. Old Hugh's got nothing on Dr. Love.
Q: I didn't mean competitive in love. This isn't a reality show. I was referring to the sport. I mean have you even seen the team you've put together?
A: You're damn right I've seen the team. We got that beef guy, Kobe, Lomax, the chef dude-cookie's his name, Bynum, uh, the white fellow with the curly hair, and then we have vujavacicisous, he's my favorite. Hell we even have to second most famous Dr. Phil in Hollywood. That son-of-a-bitch, he's after my money. But I'll tell you what, if you think the action's good down on the court, well then, you should come on up to my suite. Everything there vibrates, I kid you not! That's where Dr. Love fills out his prescriptions.
Q: Yes, its good you're a horny old man, but what about the on-the-court action?
A: On-the-court action? I'll tell you what, I've thought about it, but jeez, so many people. I get performance anxiety you know. I mean a small crowd's ok, but 25,000? Give me a break! Mark Ruffalo couldn't take that kind of pressure, and I'm 72!
Q: Never mind then. I guess the only thing left to ask, since you've more than established your lasciviousness, is what do you plan on doing to improve this team?
A: Improve the team? Haven't you been listening? D-erek F-isher!! Mr 0.6! Do I have to spell it out for you? Ah, who the fuck am I kidding? I'm rich! I don't need you sons-of-a-bitches! Hell as long as we're not the Clippers you dumbfucks will keep on filling up my arena and I'll keep on filling my pockets with sweet mother money. The moolah, the cold-hard cash!! I could trot out a starting lineup of Vlade Divac, Travis Knight, Jon Barry, Ryan Minor and Sasha Vujavacicisous rain my feces down upon the crowd while wearing a klansmen outfit and you dumbasses would still pay me!! So Hah!!
Q: Oh, ok, thank you for your time Mr. Buss.
A: Anytime you dirty old whoring son-of-a-bitch. Say, you wanna drink?
A: Please, those concerns have already been addressed.
Q: Really? The only significant addition to the Lakers addition has been a 32 year old backup point guard...
A: That's right, ol Jerry went out and broke open the bank to bring back your beloved Derek Fisher. Everything's la la in Lakerland. That Derek, he has heart, that's all this team needs, is a little extra heart!!! And did you see who I drafted? That Sun Yen Son-of-a-bitch, he's got grit, and moxie, and he's not Smush Parker. I know you bastards hated that guy.
Q: Maybe but he doesn't even feature in the Lakers long term plans. If the only players we add are washed up veterans and foreign-contracted youngsters then how can you expect to remain competitive...
A: Competitive eh? You think I can't be competitive. Well old Jerry says stick it up your ass. Even when I was pulled over for being drunk and driving the wrong way down a one-way street I still had some hot 23-year-old tail wrapped around my arm. I'll give you competitive you son-of-a-bitch. Old Hugh's got nothing on Dr. Love.
Q: I didn't mean competitive in love. This isn't a reality show. I was referring to the sport. I mean have you even seen the team you've put together?
A: You're damn right I've seen the team. We got that beef guy, Kobe, Lomax, the chef dude-cookie's his name, Bynum, uh, the white fellow with the curly hair, and then we have vujavacicisous, he's my favorite. Hell we even have to second most famous Dr. Phil in Hollywood. That son-of-a-bitch, he's after my money. But I'll tell you what, if you think the action's good down on the court, well then, you should come on up to my suite. Everything there vibrates, I kid you not! That's where Dr. Love fills out his prescriptions.
Q: Yes, its good you're a horny old man, but what about the on-the-court action?
A: On-the-court action? I'll tell you what, I've thought about it, but jeez, so many people. I get performance anxiety you know. I mean a small crowd's ok, but 25,000? Give me a break! Mark Ruffalo couldn't take that kind of pressure, and I'm 72!
Q: Never mind then. I guess the only thing left to ask, since you've more than established your lasciviousness, is what do you plan on doing to improve this team?
A: Improve the team? Haven't you been listening? D-erek F-isher!! Mr 0.6! Do I have to spell it out for you? Ah, who the fuck am I kidding? I'm rich! I don't need you sons-of-a-bitches! Hell as long as we're not the Clippers you dumbfucks will keep on filling up my arena and I'll keep on filling my pockets with sweet mother money. The moolah, the cold-hard cash!! I could trot out a starting lineup of Vlade Divac, Travis Knight, Jon Barry, Ryan Minor and Sasha Vujavacicisous rain my feces down upon the crowd while wearing a klansmen outfit and you dumbasses would still pay me!! So Hah!!
Q: Oh, ok, thank you for your time Mr. Buss.
A: Anytime you dirty old whoring son-of-a-bitch. Say, you wanna drink?
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Damn Indonesians
As some that know me know I am a baseball obsessive. As such, I've decided to start writing about some baseball stuff on this site. Why? I don't know, just for kicks.
Anyways, today Mike Piazza was nailed in the head with a water bottle during a game (and i thought that kind of thing only happened in Oakland). Piazza called the fan "gutless" and then proceeded to press charges, saying he hoped the fan would spend the night in jail. I do too, he's obviously a retard. It's never really a good thing for fans to be throwing things from the stands but it does beg the question-which objects, when tossed with reckless abandon, would cause other major leaguers to press charges?
So, following, is a largely pointless list, yay!!
1. Richie Sexson: Judging by how insanely successful Sexson's year has not been (unless of course you consider having more strikeouts than hits as a full time player successful) I'm tempted to think that Richie Sexson would feasibly press charges if some over-zealous fan were to print out the Mariners season stats highlight Sexson's name ball up the paper and chuck it at Richie's goatee white shouting "I drafted you in the sixth round motherfucker!!" After all, only a mother could love a .202 average, and even then it would likely be a forced love, like the kind prisoners give each other.
2. Edwin Jackson: If some creative soul were to craft a foam W (like the talking ones you see on Sesame Street) and lob it at Edwin I would think he'd be terrified enough to call in the cops. After all, I don't think Jackson has seen a "W" in what seems like five years. He'd probably think it was a rabid seagull, or a horribly deformed, food-poisoning infected curly fry.
3. Barry Bonds: I'm sure this one has already happened (not in San Francisco of course) but if a syringe were to pelt Barry in the ass his sense of righteousness would definitely kick in causing him to cal in San Fran's finest. After all, Barry never did that shit.
4. Gary Sheffield: If a bird were to crap on Gary's head, if a mosquito were to buzz in his ear or if some malcontent were to throw 3 sticks of dynamite at his feet Gary's reaction would be the same-calling the fuzz. After all, the only reason any of those creatures were targeting him was because he's black.
Anyways, today Mike Piazza was nailed in the head with a water bottle during a game (and i thought that kind of thing only happened in Oakland). Piazza called the fan "gutless" and then proceeded to press charges, saying he hoped the fan would spend the night in jail. I do too, he's obviously a retard. It's never really a good thing for fans to be throwing things from the stands but it does beg the question-which objects, when tossed with reckless abandon, would cause other major leaguers to press charges?
So, following, is a largely pointless list, yay!!
1. Richie Sexson: Judging by how insanely successful Sexson's year has not been (unless of course you consider having more strikeouts than hits as a full time player successful) I'm tempted to think that Richie Sexson would feasibly press charges if some over-zealous fan were to print out the Mariners season stats highlight Sexson's name ball up the paper and chuck it at Richie's goatee white shouting "I drafted you in the sixth round motherfucker!!" After all, only a mother could love a .202 average, and even then it would likely be a forced love, like the kind prisoners give each other.
2. Edwin Jackson: If some creative soul were to craft a foam W (like the talking ones you see on Sesame Street) and lob it at Edwin I would think he'd be terrified enough to call in the cops. After all, I don't think Jackson has seen a "W" in what seems like five years. He'd probably think it was a rabid seagull, or a horribly deformed, food-poisoning infected curly fry.
3. Barry Bonds: I'm sure this one has already happened (not in San Francisco of course) but if a syringe were to pelt Barry in the ass his sense of righteousness would definitely kick in causing him to cal in San Fran's finest. After all, Barry never did that shit.
4. Gary Sheffield: If a bird were to crap on Gary's head, if a mosquito were to buzz in his ear or if some malcontent were to throw 3 sticks of dynamite at his feet Gary's reaction would be the same-calling the fuzz. After all, the only reason any of those creatures were targeting him was because he's black.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Song of the Week
Eh, I couldn't resist. Since imeem is so awesome i'm going to try and post some songs again. This weeks comes from alt-country mavens (well they're not really mavens but that word sounded so sweet that I needed to use it) The Roadside Graves. Their music reminds me of say Fingers Cut Megamachine or a country-fried Wolf Parade. Thusly they are pretty sweet. Anyways, this song has been stuck in my head, and I wanted to put it on my Myspace, however was derailed when I couldn't find it. The song is called Family Friends and is off The Roadside Graves 2007 release No One Will Know Where You've Been, which you can buy here.
Random list stuff
Reno 911!, Family Guy, Aqua Teen Hunger Force
In the next couple of weeks (since i'm not a movie aficionado i'm not sure of the exact time frame) The Simpsons movie will hit theaters. Now, I'm sure, as a result, all kinds of bloggers are furiously typing out rants about how the Simpsons is terrible, and, currently, a blight upon mankind then proclaiming Matt Groening to be the heir apparent to Satan or Alastair Crowley or something while eating cheezy doodles (like Stephen A. Smith) and reassuring themselves that they are the suavest of the suave. Or they're making a list or something about other TV shows that should be made into movies (Futurama anyone?). However, since I'm not suave, I won't be doing any of those things. I will be making a list however, of TV shows that should not be made into movies.
5. Robot Chicken: I guess some people find this show to be entertaining. I'm not one of them. I am however aware that recently the did a Robot Chicken themed Star Warsor something equally useless. Apparently, if that IGN cove story means anything, that little stunt has caused some kind of Robot Chicken fever that threatens to swallow up society and multiplexes alike. Please, comedy central, don't let that happen. I love me some claymation but this show fucking sucks.
4. Sealab 2021: One would assume that only a crack addicted meth monkey would even consider making a movie out of Sealab 2021, but since they made a movie out of ATHF I suppose anything is possible. Hopefully, however, Comedy Central will realize that any attempt to make a movie out of Sealab will result in something akin to a 90 minute fever dream that only mushroom popping burnouts will want to watch. And maybe this time they'll make the prudent decision and not make the movie anyways.
3. Friends: Considering the, in my opinion, completely unexplainable popularity of this show, it seems quite likely that the humorless bastards that own the Friendsbrand will someday try to beat a feature length film out of the dead horse that is Jennifer Aniston's "career". Honestly, I don't even know if Jennifer Aniston is in the show, but she seems like the kind of person that would be so I'll use her name here. The only way a Friends movie would be moderately entertaining would be if they took the cast to some deserted island and let Ted Nugent hunt them with high powered rifles. Or, alternatively, they could take six monkeys, all of different species and put them together in a posh Manhattan apartment then let them do stuff, like scratch and throw shit all over the place. It would be infinitely more entertaining then Joey mistaking Ross' statement that he's "hammering wood" as some kind of gay pass at him or Phoebe singing a stupid ass song about flowers and giving birth. Oh, and the acting would also be superior.
2. Seinfeld: As moderately entertaining as Seinfeld was making a movie out of it would be pointless. I just don't see what kind of storyline they could pull out their asses that will successfully cover 90 minutes. I suppose they could go Clerks style and make a series of vignettes, but, honestly, Jerry Seinfeld is no longer funny enough to pull that off. I never really understood what the hell the people were laughing at during those little stand-up skits that Seinfeld used to open each show. Maybe they were all thinking of Dane Cook. Or Carlos Mencia cuz those guys are flipping hilarious!!!! Anyways, my memories of this TV show are too good to be ruined by a movie so Jerry better not be getting greedy anytime soon. The only way a Seinfeld movie could be entertaining is if they replaced that fat guy that was eaten during Jurassic Park with either Michael Clark Duncan or Samuel L Jackson (when he's acting all crazy). Then, one of those two could share some screen time with Michael Richards. The racial unity that would then ensue would put a smile on the world's face or something.
1. Dukes of Hazzard: Jeez, I can only imagine how terrible a movie this show would make. I mean all the show featured was two retards driving around in a car on pointless. What the hell would they use to keep our interest for the whole two hours? They would have to really scrape the bottom of the barrel... maybe sign Johnny Knoxville and one of those American Pie rejects as the leads while pulling Willie Nelson out of his hemp coffin to play that old duke fellow. Then they'd have to make tedious jokes about how Willie smokes the cheebus and how it's funny to drive a car with a confederate flag in downtown Atlanta. The only way they could tarnish the "legend" (?) of Hazzard county is by hiring some talentless piece of white trash to play the iconic Daisy Duke!! They would never!!! Oh, wait. At least they never made a sequel.
In the next couple of weeks (since i'm not a movie aficionado i'm not sure of the exact time frame) The Simpsons movie will hit theaters. Now, I'm sure, as a result, all kinds of bloggers are furiously typing out rants about how the Simpsons is terrible, and, currently, a blight upon mankind then proclaiming Matt Groening to be the heir apparent to Satan or Alastair Crowley or something while eating cheezy doodles (like Stephen A. Smith) and reassuring themselves that they are the suavest of the suave. Or they're making a list or something about other TV shows that should be made into movies (Futurama anyone?). However, since I'm not suave, I won't be doing any of those things. I will be making a list however, of TV shows that should not be made into movies.
5. Robot Chicken: I guess some people find this show to be entertaining. I'm not one of them. I am however aware that recently the did a Robot Chicken themed Star Warsor something equally useless. Apparently, if that IGN cove story means anything, that little stunt has caused some kind of Robot Chicken fever that threatens to swallow up society and multiplexes alike. Please, comedy central, don't let that happen. I love me some claymation but this show fucking sucks.
4. Sealab 2021: One would assume that only a crack addicted meth monkey would even consider making a movie out of Sealab 2021, but since they made a movie out of ATHF I suppose anything is possible. Hopefully, however, Comedy Central will realize that any attempt to make a movie out of Sealab will result in something akin to a 90 minute fever dream that only mushroom popping burnouts will want to watch. And maybe this time they'll make the prudent decision and not make the movie anyways.
3. Friends: Considering the, in my opinion, completely unexplainable popularity of this show, it seems quite likely that the humorless bastards that own the Friendsbrand will someday try to beat a feature length film out of the dead horse that is Jennifer Aniston's "career". Honestly, I don't even know if Jennifer Aniston is in the show, but she seems like the kind of person that would be so I'll use her name here. The only way a Friends movie would be moderately entertaining would be if they took the cast to some deserted island and let Ted Nugent hunt them with high powered rifles. Or, alternatively, they could take six monkeys, all of different species and put them together in a posh Manhattan apartment then let them do stuff, like scratch and throw shit all over the place. It would be infinitely more entertaining then Joey mistaking Ross' statement that he's "hammering wood" as some kind of gay pass at him or Phoebe singing a stupid ass song about flowers and giving birth. Oh, and the acting would also be superior.
2. Seinfeld: As moderately entertaining as Seinfeld was making a movie out of it would be pointless. I just don't see what kind of storyline they could pull out their asses that will successfully cover 90 minutes. I suppose they could go Clerks style and make a series of vignettes, but, honestly, Jerry Seinfeld is no longer funny enough to pull that off. I never really understood what the hell the people were laughing at during those little stand-up skits that Seinfeld used to open each show. Maybe they were all thinking of Dane Cook. Or Carlos Mencia cuz those guys are flipping hilarious!!!! Anyways, my memories of this TV show are too good to be ruined by a movie so Jerry better not be getting greedy anytime soon. The only way a Seinfeld movie could be entertaining is if they replaced that fat guy that was eaten during Jurassic Park with either Michael Clark Duncan or Samuel L Jackson (when he's acting all crazy). Then, one of those two could share some screen time with Michael Richards. The racial unity that would then ensue would put a smile on the world's face or something.
1. Dukes of Hazzard: Jeez, I can only imagine how terrible a movie this show would make. I mean all the show featured was two retards driving around in a car on pointless. What the hell would they use to keep our interest for the whole two hours? They would have to really scrape the bottom of the barrel... maybe sign Johnny Knoxville and one of those American Pie rejects as the leads while pulling Willie Nelson out of his hemp coffin to play that old duke fellow. Then they'd have to make tedious jokes about how Willie smokes the cheebus and how it's funny to drive a car with a confederate flag in downtown Atlanta. The only way they could tarnish the "legend" (?) of Hazzard county is by hiring some talentless piece of white trash to play the iconic Daisy Duke!! They would never!!! Oh, wait. At least they never made a sequel.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Let's spin history like Rudy G
Rudy Giuliani is a bloody genius.
I was perusing through the AP news briefs as I am akin to do, and there buried among the reports of roided up wrestlers murdering their families was an interesting little nugget of news. Rudy Giuliana, whom I, along with what must be 95 percent of the nation, think is the smartest son-of-a-gun that currently exists in politics, apparently thinks that Bill Clinton was weak on terror. "Bill Clinton" you say, "what the hell does he have to do with anything happening in the world today other than that nifty campaign ad his wife ran that lampooned the Sopranos?" "Well," I would say, with drama and gusto and other stuff "Bill Clinton is important because..." well, honestly, I don't really know why he's important right now, other than the fact that his wife is probably going to metaphorically impale Rudy Giuliani's presidential hopes on some kind of medieval lance. As we all know, and as Giuliani seems to be kindly pointing out, presidential candidates are never hold their own political views, they simply take the views of their spouses and use them while holding the most important job in the world. A vote for Eisenhower was really a vote for Maimie, any half-wit knows that!!!
Anyways, enough with the rambling. What Giuliani said in his undeniably brilliant address (ok, just a little more sarcasm) was, essentially, that Bill Clinton was weak on terror and that he totally FUBAR'ed the 1993 WTC bombings that killed five people. Giuliani then revealed, AL QAEDA first declared war on us in 1993!!! When I read this I was, of course, almost moved to tears, so I can only imagine how dramatically engaging such an emotionally wrought speech was to whichever elitist Republican's he was addressing at the time. But since I, regrettably, wasn't there, I only have my imagination. Oh, and the transcripts. Oh, and a pregnant sense of Giuliani's idiocy. His point, according to what I've read from what he said, rests largely on the fact that he believes that Clinton's limp-wristed decision to treat the WTC bombings as a criminal act directly led to other terrorist attacks on American's. Specifically Giuliani cites terrorist attacks on the Khobar Towers, attacks on housing complexes in Saudi Arabia, Kenya and Tanzania and the strike on the USS Cole.
Of course Giuliani ignores several facts. First of all Clinton's (in Giuliani's mind) misguided approach to handling the WTC bombings only resulted in the arrests and convictions of those involved, including the alleged mastermind Ramzi Yousef.
So, damn you Clinton, all you were able to do after the first WTC bombing was bring the perpetrator's to justice!! Obviously what he should have done was fire-bombed a couple of random Middle Eastern cities then sent thousands of US troops to their deaths in the pursuit of FREEDOM (not ours but that of our close neighbors in the Middle East)! If only Clinton had seen the light and, say, appointed George W Bush as his secretary of defense then the US and its citizens abroad would finally be secure!! Dubya would have saddled up and doled out some Texas justice to the darkies. He would have gone Walker Texas Ranger on their asses and the US would have never been attacked again!! Except on September 11. Oh, and our citizens might have been attacked in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and countless times in Iraq in 2007 as has happened since Bush became president but as Giuliani seems to be insinuating, thats not very likely. After all, nothing appeases radical Islamic terrorists like a white bread Texan who wants their oil and hates their God. Because, obviously if Bush had been in power in 1993 his brilliant military strategies would have stopped Al Qaeda once and for all and he'd be like the Captain Kangaroo of the Middle East and would be appearing on kiddie TV shows. Or something like that.
I was perusing through the AP news briefs as I am akin to do, and there buried among the reports of roided up wrestlers murdering their families was an interesting little nugget of news. Rudy Giuliana, whom I, along with what must be 95 percent of the nation, think is the smartest son-of-a-gun that currently exists in politics, apparently thinks that Bill Clinton was weak on terror. "Bill Clinton" you say, "what the hell does he have to do with anything happening in the world today other than that nifty campaign ad his wife ran that lampooned the Sopranos?" "Well," I would say, with drama and gusto and other stuff "Bill Clinton is important because..." well, honestly, I don't really know why he's important right now, other than the fact that his wife is probably going to metaphorically impale Rudy Giuliani's presidential hopes on some kind of medieval lance. As we all know, and as Giuliani seems to be kindly pointing out, presidential candidates are never hold their own political views, they simply take the views of their spouses and use them while holding the most important job in the world. A vote for Eisenhower was really a vote for Maimie, any half-wit knows that!!!
Anyways, enough with the rambling. What Giuliani said in his undeniably brilliant address (ok, just a little more sarcasm) was, essentially, that Bill Clinton was weak on terror and that he totally FUBAR'ed the 1993 WTC bombings that killed five people. Giuliani then revealed, AL QAEDA first declared war on us in 1993!!! When I read this I was, of course, almost moved to tears, so I can only imagine how dramatically engaging such an emotionally wrought speech was to whichever elitist Republican's he was addressing at the time. But since I, regrettably, wasn't there, I only have my imagination. Oh, and the transcripts. Oh, and a pregnant sense of Giuliani's idiocy. His point, according to what I've read from what he said, rests largely on the fact that he believes that Clinton's limp-wristed decision to treat the WTC bombings as a criminal act directly led to other terrorist attacks on American's. Specifically Giuliani cites terrorist attacks on the Khobar Towers, attacks on housing complexes in Saudi Arabia, Kenya and Tanzania and the strike on the USS Cole.
Of course Giuliani ignores several facts. First of all Clinton's (in Giuliani's mind) misguided approach to handling the WTC bombings only resulted in the arrests and convictions of those involved, including the alleged mastermind Ramzi Yousef.
So, damn you Clinton, all you were able to do after the first WTC bombing was bring the perpetrator's to justice!! Obviously what he should have done was fire-bombed a couple of random Middle Eastern cities then sent thousands of US troops to their deaths in the pursuit of FREEDOM (not ours but that of our close neighbors in the Middle East)! If only Clinton had seen the light and, say, appointed George W Bush as his secretary of defense then the US and its citizens abroad would finally be secure!! Dubya would have saddled up and doled out some Texas justice to the darkies. He would have gone Walker Texas Ranger on their asses and the US would have never been attacked again!! Except on September 11. Oh, and our citizens might have been attacked in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and countless times in Iraq in 2007 as has happened since Bush became president but as Giuliani seems to be insinuating, thats not very likely. After all, nothing appeases radical Islamic terrorists like a white bread Texan who wants their oil and hates their God. Because, obviously if Bush had been in power in 1993 his brilliant military strategies would have stopped Al Qaeda once and for all and he'd be like the Captain Kangaroo of the Middle East and would be appearing on kiddie TV shows. Or something like that.
Monday, May 7, 2007
Ruminations on The Hold Steady
So yah, one thing about me is that i'm some terrible music obsessive. Because of that fact last year (and this year so far) was kind of depressing because, honestly, barely anything worth listening to came out. Or at least that's what i thought.
You see the last couple of weeks i've become obsessed with a particular album. That album is The Hold Steady's Boys and Girls in America. Yes, I heard about it last year, but i really didn't pay much attention to it because i really didn't like the Hold Steady that much. Of course, based the raving critics i gave it a chance, but as is usual was probably distracted, or watching TV or cursing those damn Lakers or something because i didn't really listen to it again. That is until maybe two weeks ago when i started listening to it obsessively.
So yah, I guess it's common knowledge, (or should be at least) that the Hold Steady rock. The only problem I had with the album, (and in retrospect probably the reason I didn't purchase a physical copy of the CD until last week), is that the freaking cover are is so bloody, unspeakably ugly!!! If you've seen it you know what I'm talking about. The "art" is ridiculous, it looks like one of Raffi's rejected album covers made up by some guy who was high on confetti drugs or something (perhaps explaining the strange excess of confetti plastered on the cover). The Hold Steady should be one of those CD's that you can proudly display and be like, BOO-YAH, brother, or sister, look how awesome this CD is, it has skulls and crossbones and flaming skulls and eerie landscape pictures of barren barns and wheat farms or something. But no, all the Hold Steady's "colorful" album art provides me is a quizzical look that seems to say, "so that's why your pants are so tight"-even though i don't wear tight pants. So yah, that kind of sucks obviously.
So my shortened point, is, curse you Hold Steady, I expect this out of The Polyphonic Spree but not you!!!!
Oh, and I really want to see them live in San Diego, that would be awesomer then awesome.
You see the last couple of weeks i've become obsessed with a particular album. That album is The Hold Steady's Boys and Girls in America. Yes, I heard about it last year, but i really didn't pay much attention to it because i really didn't like the Hold Steady that much. Of course, based the raving critics i gave it a chance, but as is usual was probably distracted, or watching TV or cursing those damn Lakers or something because i didn't really listen to it again. That is until maybe two weeks ago when i started listening to it obsessively.
So yah, I guess it's common knowledge, (or should be at least) that the Hold Steady rock. The only problem I had with the album, (and in retrospect probably the reason I didn't purchase a physical copy of the CD until last week), is that the freaking cover are is so bloody, unspeakably ugly!!! If you've seen it you know what I'm talking about. The "art" is ridiculous, it looks like one of Raffi's rejected album covers made up by some guy who was high on confetti drugs or something (perhaps explaining the strange excess of confetti plastered on the cover). The Hold Steady should be one of those CD's that you can proudly display and be like, BOO-YAH, brother, or sister, look how awesome this CD is, it has skulls and crossbones and flaming skulls and eerie landscape pictures of barren barns and wheat farms or something. But no, all the Hold Steady's "colorful" album art provides me is a quizzical look that seems to say, "so that's why your pants are so tight"-even though i don't wear tight pants. So yah, that kind of sucks obviously.
So my shortened point, is, curse you Hold Steady, I expect this out of The Polyphonic Spree but not you!!!!
Oh, and I really want to see them live in San Diego, that would be awesomer then awesome.
Friday, May 4, 2007
Unforgiven is forgiven...by me at least
So yah, the other week, or month or sometime in the recent but not too recent past Best Buy had like the most awesome sale ever where they essentially liquidated their special edition movie thingamajig and sold a bunch of awesome special edition movies for 10 bucks each. Understandably i was jazzed and bought a whole bunch...i got some good ones (amadeus, se7en) some totally terrible ones (chariots of fire...this garbage won best picture?!?) ones that i forgot (i can't paranthesize them because i forgot the titles) and one truly awesome piece of American cinematic acheivement -Unforgiven.
Now this is a movie I love. In fact, i already owned the crappy one disk slack cardboard case edition of it but still felt the need to buy the two disk special edition even though it lacked film commentary by Eastwood himself (which i would really like to hear but which he never seems to sit down and do for any of his movies). For those of you that don't know, Unforgiven won best picture in 1992 i believe and, in my opinion, definitely deserved the honor. There are, of course, those that decry and refuse to watch it because it is a Western (i would generally fall into this category, because i hate shit like Gunsmoke and Maverick) but in all honesty Unforgiven transcends simple genre labels. It's raw, emotional, gritty and uber Dirty Harry style violent in some places. In fact, that's probably the most gripping unique aspect of the film-the way in which it handles violence. The story revolves around violence and the film, in no way sanitizes the pain and bloodshed associated with violent acts. It's a daring approach that adds a new dimension to a story about the fall of a "good" man.
So the point is not really a point. I just thought the way that Unforgiven approaches violent situations was interesting, and, honestly, one of most intriguing parts of the film. I tried to think of other movies that tap into the same vein, but really could only think of a few. One obvious one was Saving Private Ryan, though it didn't have nearly the same emotional impact as the violence in Unforgiven. Another one i considered was Straw Dogs but honestly, after that, i really couldn't think of many films that don't glorify explosions in the like. On the same note, i'd really like to find a copy of David Croenberg's History of Violence because it sounds like it would explore similar themes (though croenberg is like borderline psychotic or something - because, after all, he came up with Videodrome). If anyone reads this (doubtful) or thinks of similar movies, i'l like to know the names.
So yah, go watch Unforgiven. Oh, and when i have more time i'll put more stuff up on here, since, i've obviously, let myself lag a bit.
Now this is a movie I love. In fact, i already owned the crappy one disk slack cardboard case edition of it but still felt the need to buy the two disk special edition even though it lacked film commentary by Eastwood himself (which i would really like to hear but which he never seems to sit down and do for any of his movies). For those of you that don't know, Unforgiven won best picture in 1992 i believe and, in my opinion, definitely deserved the honor. There are, of course, those that decry and refuse to watch it because it is a Western (i would generally fall into this category, because i hate shit like Gunsmoke and Maverick) but in all honesty Unforgiven transcends simple genre labels. It's raw, emotional, gritty and uber Dirty Harry style violent in some places. In fact, that's probably the most gripping unique aspect of the film-the way in which it handles violence. The story revolves around violence and the film, in no way sanitizes the pain and bloodshed associated with violent acts. It's a daring approach that adds a new dimension to a story about the fall of a "good" man.
So the point is not really a point. I just thought the way that Unforgiven approaches violent situations was interesting, and, honestly, one of most intriguing parts of the film. I tried to think of other movies that tap into the same vein, but really could only think of a few. One obvious one was Saving Private Ryan, though it didn't have nearly the same emotional impact as the violence in Unforgiven. Another one i considered was Straw Dogs but honestly, after that, i really couldn't think of many films that don't glorify explosions in the like. On the same note, i'd really like to find a copy of David Croenberg's History of Violence because it sounds like it would explore similar themes (though croenberg is like borderline psychotic or something - because, after all, he came up with Videodrome). If anyone reads this (doubtful) or thinks of similar movies, i'l like to know the names.
So yah, go watch Unforgiven. Oh, and when i have more time i'll put more stuff up on here, since, i've obviously, let myself lag a bit.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Virginia Tech
So as everyone knows today in Virginia Tech 33 people were shot and killed. As a recent college graduate things like this are frightening - they strike close to home, and, quite honestly, fill me with sadness and regret.
And, of course, as often is in America, there is something else compounding that feeling. What I'm talking about is our erstwhile President George W Bush's comments about the situation. Basically what he says is that, "we ask a loving God to comfort those who are suffering today." It sounds like I might be just grabbing choice pieces from his statement, but honestly, all he really talks about is how God is great, God is good, God can help us all etc, etc, etc. Now, I guess, this taken by itself is not much of a problem (though based on my college experiences not every single freaking college student believes in the same "God" as President Bush - after all colleges emphasize diversity meaning that its very unlikely that everyone affected by the Virginia tragedy is a hardcore Christian like Mr Bush [and thus by his beliefs damned to hell]).
However, the statement issued by his "spokeswoman" is just ridiculous. What she said was, "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed." Now that is just a bullshit, cold hearted thing to do. I'm imagining his mindset as he's preparing his statements about the incident. Let's pray for them but, at the same time, make sure we lose no ground with the NRA folks-that right pray for them with one side of the mouth, while, at the same time, making damn sure that it can happen again!! Nothing screams class like making turning a tragedy into a political statement on the very same day that the tragedy occurred (especially when the political statement supports the killer's right to bear arms).
So while I'm horrified and disturbed by what happened at Virginia Tech I am saddened to say that I'm also disturbed by my government's reactions (and i'm not even mentioning how badly Virginia Tech bungled the whole thing). I'm disturbed by the fact that Bush makes blatant statements that essentially ignore the diversity that our American college campuses feature (and thus the diversity of the victims) and I'm disturbed by the way the white house finds it necessary to spin such a tragedy in such a way that supports both their ideological and political beliefs (though the ideological spinning doesn't bother me quite as much). I guess my point is that Bush can praise God all he wants but approving a statement supporting guns is simply ridiculous.
And, of course, as often is in America, there is something else compounding that feeling. What I'm talking about is our erstwhile President George W Bush's comments about the situation. Basically what he says is that, "we ask a loving God to comfort those who are suffering today." It sounds like I might be just grabbing choice pieces from his statement, but honestly, all he really talks about is how God is great, God is good, God can help us all etc, etc, etc. Now, I guess, this taken by itself is not much of a problem (though based on my college experiences not every single freaking college student believes in the same "God" as President Bush - after all colleges emphasize diversity meaning that its very unlikely that everyone affected by the Virginia tragedy is a hardcore Christian like Mr Bush [and thus by his beliefs damned to hell]).
However, the statement issued by his "spokeswoman" is just ridiculous. What she said was, "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed." Now that is just a bullshit, cold hearted thing to do. I'm imagining his mindset as he's preparing his statements about the incident. Let's pray for them but, at the same time, make sure we lose no ground with the NRA folks-that right pray for them with one side of the mouth, while, at the same time, making damn sure that it can happen again!! Nothing screams class like making turning a tragedy into a political statement on the very same day that the tragedy occurred (especially when the political statement supports the killer's right to bear arms).
So while I'm horrified and disturbed by what happened at Virginia Tech I am saddened to say that I'm also disturbed by my government's reactions (and i'm not even mentioning how badly Virginia Tech bungled the whole thing). I'm disturbed by the fact that Bush makes blatant statements that essentially ignore the diversity that our American college campuses feature (and thus the diversity of the victims) and I'm disturbed by the way the white house finds it necessary to spin such a tragedy in such a way that supports both their ideological and political beliefs (though the ideological spinning doesn't bother me quite as much). I guess my point is that Bush can praise God all he wants but approving a statement supporting guns is simply ridiculous.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
AN ARMY OF 300!!! Or something...
So yeah, just the other day i went to see a little flick that just came out. I don't think it's very popular or anything, because it's like an avant garde art flick inspired by the works of Jean Luc Godard. Or that last sentence could be a total lie (which it is). The movie i saw was the blockbuster 300 and let me tell you it was an arm (and leg, and head( severing good time. But this isn't a movie review. If it was i would be using English major words like "brilliant", "good", and "totally fucking balls out nuts".
Rather I'd like to write about the reaction to 300. You see after I watch a movie some weird part of me demands that I go onto IMDB.com to see if my valuation of the movie compares favorably with all the other amateur cinephiles out there. So, after i saw 300 I went home and loaded up the old IMDB. For those of you who know IMDB, and everyone in the universe should, it has a function that allows IMDB members to post their thoughts and opinions about the movie. Usually these boards are filled with flamers, film-bashers, the easily offended and the straight up, certifiable insane (or at least people who play that part on the internet). So anyways, 300 had its big uppers and its flamers but to my surprise it also had some of the "easily offended".
So what were these people taking offense to? Was it the glorification of violence? Was it the slow motion decapitations? Was it the inferred paedophilia? No, it was Iranians getting irate about how Persians were portrayed in the movie!
The Iranians point is that the Persians in the movie were being paraded as bloodthirsty savage, barely human psychopaths whose only goal in life is to maim the enemy and be enveloped in the folds of flesh found in a Persian harem. Now, I'll be truthfull, that is how Persians were portrayed (though i thought they were totally awesome, i can understand how Persian people might be offended by the representation).
But we're not talking about Persian people that were offended here, we're talking about Iranians! What Iran doesn't seem to realize, apparently, is that America is full of dumbasses. While i was watching the movie I wasn't thinking, boy those Iranians are evil, we should go over to their country and rape their women and plunder the oil (and George Bush should drink the blood of every single Iranian man, woman and child while he's at it). No, I was thinking, boy those PERSIANS, sure do kick some major ass, even though they're evil. You see, i have a college degree; I've taken many world history courses (i really like history) and my best friend in junior high was even an Iranian-American named Javad Shekafroush who used to regale me with stories about how he and his uncles would wander the street in roving gangs back in the home country. And, despite this, while watching the movie 300, my mind never said, "hey wait a minute, Persia is ancient history's version of Iran-THOSE GREEKS ARE FIGHTING IRANIANS!!!! OMFG". I was thinking, wow, he just chopped off the head of that guy that looks like that guy from Mortal Kombat. And, after all, it's not like 300 is meant to be a though provoking piece filled with social commentary on why the world is as the world is; rather its simply an excuse to show various limbs being severed in slow motion. Now I know that Iran was once called Persia, but I didn't watch the movie for a geography lesson. I didn't even think about such ancestries until I saw the IMDB complaints. As such I'm pretty sure that the only way the average American is going to equate those evil Persians with modern day Iranians is if those Iranians kindly point out the facts on the IMDB message board.
After all, we didn't go to 300 to think, we went to see boobs and blood, and to hear that dramatic sounding British guy shout out cliches we can use in our everyday life.
So in conclusion, "madness, This is Sparta!!"
Ok that made no sense.
Rather I'd like to write about the reaction to 300. You see after I watch a movie some weird part of me demands that I go onto IMDB.com to see if my valuation of the movie compares favorably with all the other amateur cinephiles out there. So, after i saw 300 I went home and loaded up the old IMDB. For those of you who know IMDB, and everyone in the universe should, it has a function that allows IMDB members to post their thoughts and opinions about the movie. Usually these boards are filled with flamers, film-bashers, the easily offended and the straight up, certifiable insane (or at least people who play that part on the internet). So anyways, 300 had its big uppers and its flamers but to my surprise it also had some of the "easily offended".
So what were these people taking offense to? Was it the glorification of violence? Was it the slow motion decapitations? Was it the inferred paedophilia? No, it was Iranians getting irate about how Persians were portrayed in the movie!
The Iranians point is that the Persians in the movie were being paraded as bloodthirsty savage, barely human psychopaths whose only goal in life is to maim the enemy and be enveloped in the folds of flesh found in a Persian harem. Now, I'll be truthfull, that is how Persians were portrayed (though i thought they were totally awesome, i can understand how Persian people might be offended by the representation).
But we're not talking about Persian people that were offended here, we're talking about Iranians! What Iran doesn't seem to realize, apparently, is that America is full of dumbasses. While i was watching the movie I wasn't thinking, boy those Iranians are evil, we should go over to their country and rape their women and plunder the oil (and George Bush should drink the blood of every single Iranian man, woman and child while he's at it). No, I was thinking, boy those PERSIANS, sure do kick some major ass, even though they're evil. You see, i have a college degree; I've taken many world history courses (i really like history) and my best friend in junior high was even an Iranian-American named Javad Shekafroush who used to regale me with stories about how he and his uncles would wander the street in roving gangs back in the home country. And, despite this, while watching the movie 300, my mind never said, "hey wait a minute, Persia is ancient history's version of Iran-THOSE GREEKS ARE FIGHTING IRANIANS!!!! OMFG". I was thinking, wow, he just chopped off the head of that guy that looks like that guy from Mortal Kombat. And, after all, it's not like 300 is meant to be a though provoking piece filled with social commentary on why the world is as the world is; rather its simply an excuse to show various limbs being severed in slow motion. Now I know that Iran was once called Persia, but I didn't watch the movie for a geography lesson. I didn't even think about such ancestries until I saw the IMDB complaints. As such I'm pretty sure that the only way the average American is going to equate those evil Persians with modern day Iranians is if those Iranians kindly point out the facts on the IMDB message board.
After all, we didn't go to 300 to think, we went to see boobs and blood, and to hear that dramatic sounding British guy shout out cliches we can use in our everyday life.
So in conclusion, "madness, This is Sparta!!"
Ok that made no sense.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Song of the week...yet again
This week I'm going to feature a song from the pop/countryish band with the long cumbersome name. That band, of course, is The Snake, The Cross, The Crown. My knowledge of TSTCTC dates back several years when I randomly purchased their first EP. I liked it, and when their last full length Mander Sails was released in 2004 I eagerly purchased it on release day. Now, while Mander Sails was pretty good I couldn't help but shake the feeling that the band was more talented then their recording shows.
Now, just last week, TSTCTC has released its third album, and i can honestly say that any talent that seemed buried on Mander Sails shines through brightly on this new release, Cotton Teeth. The album is catchy twangy and just an overall good time
This particular song is from Cotton Teeth. It is named Behold The River and is one of my, personal, favorite tracks from the album.
You can buy The Snake, The Cross, The Crown's uniformly excellent Cotton Teeth
here.
Now, just last week, TSTCTC has released its third album, and i can honestly say that any talent that seemed buried on Mander Sails shines through brightly on this new release, Cotton Teeth. The album is catchy twangy and just an overall good time
This particular song is from Cotton Teeth. It is named Behold The River and is one of my, personal, favorite tracks from the album.
You can buy The Snake, The Cross, The Crown's uniformly excellent Cotton Teeth
here.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Radio Schmadio
Los Angeles Radio.
At one time it was a proud institution. We had The Real Don Steele (I wonder who the fake one was), Charlie Tuna, Phil Hendrie and that one psycho guy who always talks about alien invasions and the like. Honestly, though, despite my honeyed nostalgia I never actually listened to any of these personalities (with the exceptions being Hendrie and Steele) I just know they sound vaguely familiar and thusly provide a jumping off point for this post.
Which leads me to the purpose of this post - to skewer Los Angeles-based radio. Anyone that lives in Los Angeles knows that while LA does offer a wide variety of sounds for a diverse listening audience there is generally one commonality between all stations broadcasting to the large LA area. That commonality is that they all suck. Seriously, seriously suck. Now, I'll admit that my tastes don't really fall into the spectrum of what generally is played on the radio. After all, right now I'm listening to Arcade Fire (a band that's never played on LA radio despite the fact they aren't even close to being considered unknowns right now). As far as my knowledge of Los Angeles radio goes all stations that I've heard are either contemporary Christian, incessant mariachi, testosterone driven guitar riffs placed over raucous drumming or a veritable smorgasbord of crappiness being played on one of those damn "Jack" stations (I'll miss you Arrow FM).
Those that live in the LA area know that new rock/pop music (I'm ignoring R&B and Hip/Hop because I don't listen to those genres much) is only really played on two stations. Crappy KIIS FM and equally crappy KROQ. KIIS FM's crappiness is understandable - Ryan Seacrest is their morning DJ after all - so the less said about that mess the better. Suffice it to say that if you're not interested in independent though or find 14 year old girls calling in to report someone picking their nose while driving on the freeway stimulating than KIIS is definitely for you. And they play Nickelback - a lot!
KROQ, on the other hand, is a more sad display of the downfall of LA radio. For those who don't know KROQ is Los Angeles' "alternative" station. The stations has a long and storied history and, if I am to believe Wikipedia, played a large part in bringing bands like the Ramones and The Talking Heads to the public's attention. KROQ, however, has not aged well. They were once a station devoted to playing "all-cutting-edge-rock-all-the-time" and now all they do is put Fall Out Boy on ad-naseum briefly intercutting those songs with the fresh new sounds of Nirvana. Now, I don't know about the rest of the world but a band loses its "alternative" status once the fifth poorly acted biopic is released straight to video and the deceased lead singer's diary entries are packaged together and sold at Barnes & Noble on the cheap. The only on-air link to KROQ's storied past is DJ Rodney Biggenheimer (I think his show has a catchy name but I forget it) and, to be honest, that guy can get really annoying. He has deemed himself the "king of Hollywood" or something, despite the fact that his show has been relegated to the midnight hour on Sunday nights. His playlists, while the songs can be good, end up sucking because his personality is so grating. The "Prince of Pop" my ass (if you read that sentence without the quotes it sound kind of funny).
Apparently however, there is a ray of hope for Southern California radio. It is called Indie 103.1. It's supposed to be really great, they play all kinds of obscure music and even give away free t-shirts and stuff at Knott's Berry Farm. One of the guys from the Sex Pistols DJ's during the daytime and his show is supposed to be awesome. The only problem is that Indie 103.1 only broadcasts over what I must assume is a 10 square mile radius, because it seems that no matter where I go I can't get a fucking signal. I can be in Riverside, I can be in Anaheim, I can be 10 miles from Los Angeles because I just accidentally took the wrong freeway on-ramp and all I will be able to hear is static and the faded sounds of a Mariachi accordion.
So, to put it succinctly musical LA radio sucks! You'd be better off paying for it, or only listening to talk radio in my honest opinion.
Unless of course you really dig the guitarra. In that case you're golden.
At one time it was a proud institution. We had The Real Don Steele (I wonder who the fake one was), Charlie Tuna, Phil Hendrie and that one psycho guy who always talks about alien invasions and the like. Honestly, though, despite my honeyed nostalgia I never actually listened to any of these personalities (with the exceptions being Hendrie and Steele) I just know they sound vaguely familiar and thusly provide a jumping off point for this post.
Which leads me to the purpose of this post - to skewer Los Angeles-based radio. Anyone that lives in Los Angeles knows that while LA does offer a wide variety of sounds for a diverse listening audience there is generally one commonality between all stations broadcasting to the large LA area. That commonality is that they all suck. Seriously, seriously suck. Now, I'll admit that my tastes don't really fall into the spectrum of what generally is played on the radio. After all, right now I'm listening to Arcade Fire (a band that's never played on LA radio despite the fact they aren't even close to being considered unknowns right now). As far as my knowledge of Los Angeles radio goes all stations that I've heard are either contemporary Christian, incessant mariachi, testosterone driven guitar riffs placed over raucous drumming or a veritable smorgasbord of crappiness being played on one of those damn "Jack" stations (I'll miss you Arrow FM).
Those that live in the LA area know that new rock/pop music (I'm ignoring R&B and Hip/Hop because I don't listen to those genres much) is only really played on two stations. Crappy KIIS FM and equally crappy KROQ. KIIS FM's crappiness is understandable - Ryan Seacrest is their morning DJ after all - so the less said about that mess the better. Suffice it to say that if you're not interested in independent though or find 14 year old girls calling in to report someone picking their nose while driving on the freeway stimulating than KIIS is definitely for you. And they play Nickelback - a lot!
KROQ, on the other hand, is a more sad display of the downfall of LA radio. For those who don't know KROQ is Los Angeles' "alternative" station. The stations has a long and storied history and, if I am to believe Wikipedia, played a large part in bringing bands like the Ramones and The Talking Heads to the public's attention. KROQ, however, has not aged well. They were once a station devoted to playing "all-cutting-edge-rock-all-the-time" and now all they do is put Fall Out Boy on ad-naseum briefly intercutting those songs with the fresh new sounds of Nirvana. Now, I don't know about the rest of the world but a band loses its "alternative" status once the fifth poorly acted biopic is released straight to video and the deceased lead singer's diary entries are packaged together and sold at Barnes & Noble on the cheap. The only on-air link to KROQ's storied past is DJ Rodney Biggenheimer (I think his show has a catchy name but I forget it) and, to be honest, that guy can get really annoying. He has deemed himself the "king of Hollywood" or something, despite the fact that his show has been relegated to the midnight hour on Sunday nights. His playlists, while the songs can be good, end up sucking because his personality is so grating. The "Prince of Pop" my ass (if you read that sentence without the quotes it sound kind of funny).
Apparently however, there is a ray of hope for Southern California radio. It is called Indie 103.1. It's supposed to be really great, they play all kinds of obscure music and even give away free t-shirts and stuff at Knott's Berry Farm. One of the guys from the Sex Pistols DJ's during the daytime and his show is supposed to be awesome. The only problem is that Indie 103.1 only broadcasts over what I must assume is a 10 square mile radius, because it seems that no matter where I go I can't get a fucking signal. I can be in Riverside, I can be in Anaheim, I can be 10 miles from Los Angeles because I just accidentally took the wrong freeway on-ramp and all I will be able to hear is static and the faded sounds of a Mariachi accordion.
So, to put it succinctly musical LA radio sucks! You'd be better off paying for it, or only listening to talk radio in my honest opinion.
Unless of course you really dig the guitarra. In that case you're golden.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
A Tale of Two Cities - Set in One City
Anyone that lives in or around that buzzing metropolis called Los Angeles knows that it is essentially a two-faced city. The first face is the obvious one, that of the bleeding heart liberal championing environmental causes while promoting their newest "edgy" thriller/comedy/sexploitation film out of the back of their 50,000 dollar H3. This is affectionately known as the Hollywood face, and, though I'm generally dismissive of these people I also identify more with them then with Los Angeles' other face. After all, sometimes, when Hollywood celebrities and University professors aren't championing century old causes or adopting a harem of foreign children they do do some good to the world. More than me of course, but a single methane producing cow probably has more world impact then my sorry ass at this point.
The other face is one that most people would not readily associate with California. However, anyone that drives on California's maze-like freeway systems knows who I'm talking about. They're the guys (or girls) sporting a Jesus fish on the back of their mini-van as they drive home from work at 2 in the morning after banging their underage secretary. They're the jackasses with the shaved head and the goatee that have an Iron Cross plastered on the rear window of their car who only associate the symbol with a skateboarding company (though they themselves have never skated in their lives) blatantly ignoring the fact that the Kaiser's Germany used the same symbol during the devastating World War One. They're the guys that drive raised Chevy Silverado's who don't turn their fucking brights off when they're tailgating you in the far right lane of a three lane freeway at 2 in the morning. They are the people that take up three parking spaces at the local Target. They are the people that make California a miserable place to live.
The whole point of this tirade starts with the fact that California is a beautiful place. The sun shines almost year round (though it does get pretty miserable down here in the Inland Empire during the summer months)and when it rains its refreshing (and also exciting, apparently, as the local news have 24 hour storm-watches set up in case of a light drizzle) and the beach is close (though i hate the beach) and Disneyland is close (though i hate Disney) and the great interesting cities of Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco are always in (rather) close proximity. It ends with the fact that California is oftentimes a miserable place as well. People, for the most part, have no regard for each other. I saw this today when some 17 year-old broadsided a truck and both sides reacted by screaming and yelling at each other instead of asking whether or not the other party was hurt (though me and my friend Mark performed this role adequately enough). I mean, for christssake it's just a fucking car and you were both driving like fucking morons to cause the accident. At least show a little concern before bitching about the large hunk of metal you were driving in an idiotic manner. Though i must say, the guy in the truck was less reactionary, but he didn't speak a lick of English which probably explains his relative silence.
The point ends with this: the sad thing is that displays like this are not an uncommon thing in California. All one needs to do is drive on the 91 freeway at six in the afternoon. Not only will you get to see random unsignaled lane changes by cell-phone chatting motorists wearing sunglasses (though the sun is dropping down) but you'll also get to see the tags on the freeway signs (because that shiny silver plastic is obviously worth claiming) and the cop that pulled over a black guy because he has a hold in his rear headlight while blissfully ignoring the ad executive in the Toyota Tundra weaving in and out of traffic at 83 miles per hour. I guess the message is this: before you flip that one fingered salute out your window; before you yell some random racial epithet out your driver-side window and before you cut off that minivan with the seven kids that's only going 60 in the slow lane think - is this really the person I want to be? Would i want someone to act this way to me or to my sister or to my son? Is it really worth going out of my way to try and make someone else's life a little more miserable? Don't we all already have it bad enough? For Godssake just show a little courtesy - It's not that hard.
Oh, and you could get shot for those things too.
The other face is one that most people would not readily associate with California. However, anyone that drives on California's maze-like freeway systems knows who I'm talking about. They're the guys (or girls) sporting a Jesus fish on the back of their mini-van as they drive home from work at 2 in the morning after banging their underage secretary. They're the jackasses with the shaved head and the goatee that have an Iron Cross plastered on the rear window of their car who only associate the symbol with a skateboarding company (though they themselves have never skated in their lives) blatantly ignoring the fact that the Kaiser's Germany used the same symbol during the devastating World War One. They're the guys that drive raised Chevy Silverado's who don't turn their fucking brights off when they're tailgating you in the far right lane of a three lane freeway at 2 in the morning. They are the people that take up three parking spaces at the local Target. They are the people that make California a miserable place to live.
The whole point of this tirade starts with the fact that California is a beautiful place. The sun shines almost year round (though it does get pretty miserable down here in the Inland Empire during the summer months)and when it rains its refreshing (and also exciting, apparently, as the local news have 24 hour storm-watches set up in case of a light drizzle) and the beach is close (though i hate the beach) and Disneyland is close (though i hate Disney) and the great interesting cities of Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco are always in (rather) close proximity. It ends with the fact that California is oftentimes a miserable place as well. People, for the most part, have no regard for each other. I saw this today when some 17 year-old broadsided a truck and both sides reacted by screaming and yelling at each other instead of asking whether or not the other party was hurt (though me and my friend Mark performed this role adequately enough). I mean, for christssake it's just a fucking car and you were both driving like fucking morons to cause the accident. At least show a little concern before bitching about the large hunk of metal you were driving in an idiotic manner. Though i must say, the guy in the truck was less reactionary, but he didn't speak a lick of English which probably explains his relative silence.
The point ends with this: the sad thing is that displays like this are not an uncommon thing in California. All one needs to do is drive on the 91 freeway at six in the afternoon. Not only will you get to see random unsignaled lane changes by cell-phone chatting motorists wearing sunglasses (though the sun is dropping down) but you'll also get to see the tags on the freeway signs (because that shiny silver plastic is obviously worth claiming) and the cop that pulled over a black guy because he has a hold in his rear headlight while blissfully ignoring the ad executive in the Toyota Tundra weaving in and out of traffic at 83 miles per hour. I guess the message is this: before you flip that one fingered salute out your window; before you yell some random racial epithet out your driver-side window and before you cut off that minivan with the seven kids that's only going 60 in the slow lane think - is this really the person I want to be? Would i want someone to act this way to me or to my sister or to my son? Is it really worth going out of my way to try and make someone else's life a little more miserable? Don't we all already have it bad enough? For Godssake just show a little courtesy - It's not that hard.
Oh, and you could get shot for those things too.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Song Of The Week Redux
As promised here is part two of my famous (not really) two-part, Song of the Week marathon. This track comes from party animal/artiste Andrew WK. Yes, that Andrew WK -the one who was sporadically popular and, for some reason, reminded everyone of a dirtier/bloodier Lenny Kravitz like 3 years ago.
Anyways, this song is from Andrew WK's Close Calls With Brick Walls, which, at least to my knowledge, has only been released in Japan so far. There is however, a US release scheduled for June 19th of this year and, if what I'm reading is true, it will be a super-special double gatefold golden edition put out by Load records of all people (they do after all, carry noise rock savants Lightning Bolt). At some point in time you will be able to buy that super sexy edition
here.
So get your fists pumping and smash your head into the drunk guy next to you as you listen to Not Going to Bed from Andrew WK.
Anyways, this song is from Andrew WK's Close Calls With Brick Walls, which, at least to my knowledge, has only been released in Japan so far. There is however, a US release scheduled for June 19th of this year and, if what I'm reading is true, it will be a super-special double gatefold golden edition put out by Load records of all people (they do after all, carry noise rock savants Lightning Bolt). At some point in time you will be able to buy that super sexy edition
here.
So get your fists pumping and smash your head into the drunk guy next to you as you listen to Not Going to Bed from Andrew WK.
Song of the Week
I think i missed a song last week, so I'll post two for this week. The first one is a track from Englands The Crimea. It is from 2004's thoroughly excellent LP Tragedy Rocks. The album can be bought
here.
The song is called Bombay Sapphire Coma, and, fair warning, it's hella catchy so enjoy.
here.
The song is called Bombay Sapphire Coma, and, fair warning, it's hella catchy so enjoy.
Sunday, March 11, 2007
SXSW
Oh man, SXSW starts this weekend. I would give almost anything, even one of my legs (at least the left one) to be there. As a Californian i guess i am privileged to have the coachella festival so close by, but honestly, i've always been jealous of SXSW. Perhaps the reason is that almost every band that plays SXSW is independent, which would almost guarantee an attendee a chance to see at least one new band every night.
Also, based on my past investigations into SXSW, its fairly obvious that any band that i have any level of interest in plays there. Bear Vs Shark, when they existed, performed at SXSW, Ben Kweller, before he was fashionable like Ray Lamontagne, played there, The Glass, who are incredibly obscure, played there, and Zykos, whom i've never had a chance to see live, play there every year, probably because they are from Texas. I'm also relatively certain that Zookeeper, with the lead singer of Mineral, is playing there this year, which would be nice to see since i missed his recent show in LA.
So, to all you who live near Austin and get to experience the madness that is SXSW, let me just say, i'm very jealous, and you suck.
Also, based on my past investigations into SXSW, its fairly obvious that any band that i have any level of interest in plays there. Bear Vs Shark, when they existed, performed at SXSW, Ben Kweller, before he was fashionable like Ray Lamontagne, played there, The Glass, who are incredibly obscure, played there, and Zykos, whom i've never had a chance to see live, play there every year, probably because they are from Texas. I'm also relatively certain that Zookeeper, with the lead singer of Mineral, is playing there this year, which would be nice to see since i missed his recent show in LA.
So, to all you who live near Austin and get to experience the madness that is SXSW, let me just say, i'm very jealous, and you suck.
Friday, March 2, 2007
Song of the week
So, this week my favorite song happens to be from venerated indie rock band Cloud Cult. Cloud Cult is the project of activist/multi-talented artist Craig Minowa. In 2002 Minowa's two-year-old son died, and his work, since then, has been marked by his reflections on life and death. His group's new album, The Meaning of 8 is due out everywhere on April 10th, though you can already buy a digital copy of the cd
here.
So without further ado, here is is, Chemicals Collide from Cloud Cult's forthcoming album, The Meaning of 8.
here.
So without further ado, here is is, Chemicals Collide from Cloud Cult's forthcoming album, The Meaning of 8.
You know, a kid finds a dead bird, you give him 20 bucks for it
So today I was watching, what i believe, to be the most underrated cartoon in the existence of mankind.
I know, everyone's thinking HENTAI, he's talking about HENTAI, but, regrettably I'm not. Seeing a Japanamated Jasmine engaging in anal sex with Goofy just doesn't do it for some (myself included) i guess.
I'm talking about the erstwhile, the classic, MTV vehicle for moronic mischeif, Beavis and Butthead. I, personally, am a proud owner of all three DVD volumes of Beavis and Butthead, and, am slightly offended whenever anyone dismisses Beavis and Butthead as little more than celluloid garbage. Yes, the plotlines are fiber-thin, yes there is no redeeming educational or artistic value but you know what, sometimes those things aren't needed to enjoy something. Anyone that liked Independence Day will know what i'm talking about.
However, admitting that Beavis and Butthead has no "educational or artistic value" ignores the aspect of the show that even creator Mike Judge believes redeems it (or, at least, elevates it above the "celluloid trash" label). That aspect is, social commentary. For an example of this one only needs to watch the episode of Beavis and Butthead in which America's (at least at one point in time) two favorite neandrathals watch a discovery channel special on Benjamin Franklin and immediately decide to imitate Franklin's iconic lightning striking a key experiment. Beavis and Butthead are, predictably enough, struck by lightning and immediately taken to the ER, where a stereotypical crusader against violence in television accosts the two asking them what they were imitating when they were fried by lightning. Getting no answer (beavis and butthead are, after all, bumbling idiots) she assumes that their inspiration was evil, diabolical, music videos.
In fact the whole concept of Beavis and Butthead could be viewed as a sort of social commentary. The irony of the show is that no matter how stupid its main characters act there is, in all probability, someone just as stupid in the real world. After all, haven't we all known, as some point in time, someone stupid enough to stick a firecracker up their ass? And if you don't know someone like that how can you say you've truly lived? You see Beavis and Butthead's animated idiocy and you think, damn how stupid can you get, all the while conveniently forgetting that, after about eight shots of tequila, that tractor tire does look stable enough to ride down dead man's bluff.
It is things like this that i believe should place Beavis and Butthead into the higher echelon of animated television. Not on the level of the Simpsons (circa 1997), perhaps, but definitely up there with the Family Guy's of the world. Now go watch the episode where they decide which dog to adopt from the pound based on whether or not he bites Beavis' hand.
I know, everyone's thinking HENTAI, he's talking about HENTAI, but, regrettably I'm not. Seeing a Japanamated Jasmine engaging in anal sex with Goofy just doesn't do it for some (myself included) i guess.
I'm talking about the erstwhile, the classic, MTV vehicle for moronic mischeif, Beavis and Butthead. I, personally, am a proud owner of all three DVD volumes of Beavis and Butthead, and, am slightly offended whenever anyone dismisses Beavis and Butthead as little more than celluloid garbage. Yes, the plotlines are fiber-thin, yes there is no redeeming educational or artistic value but you know what, sometimes those things aren't needed to enjoy something. Anyone that liked Independence Day will know what i'm talking about.
However, admitting that Beavis and Butthead has no "educational or artistic value" ignores the aspect of the show that even creator Mike Judge believes redeems it (or, at least, elevates it above the "celluloid trash" label). That aspect is, social commentary. For an example of this one only needs to watch the episode of Beavis and Butthead in which America's (at least at one point in time) two favorite neandrathals watch a discovery channel special on Benjamin Franklin and immediately decide to imitate Franklin's iconic lightning striking a key experiment. Beavis and Butthead are, predictably enough, struck by lightning and immediately taken to the ER, where a stereotypical crusader against violence in television accosts the two asking them what they were imitating when they were fried by lightning. Getting no answer (beavis and butthead are, after all, bumbling idiots) she assumes that their inspiration was evil, diabolical, music videos.
In fact the whole concept of Beavis and Butthead could be viewed as a sort of social commentary. The irony of the show is that no matter how stupid its main characters act there is, in all probability, someone just as stupid in the real world. After all, haven't we all known, as some point in time, someone stupid enough to stick a firecracker up their ass? And if you don't know someone like that how can you say you've truly lived? You see Beavis and Butthead's animated idiocy and you think, damn how stupid can you get, all the while conveniently forgetting that, after about eight shots of tequila, that tractor tire does look stable enough to ride down dead man's bluff.
It is things like this that i believe should place Beavis and Butthead into the higher echelon of animated television. Not on the level of the Simpsons (circa 1997), perhaps, but definitely up there with the Family Guy's of the world. Now go watch the episode where they decide which dog to adopt from the pound based on whether or not he bites Beavis' hand.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Gary Matthews like to juice it up
So, this past summer, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (convoluted moniker isn't it?) decided to make their big Free Willy sized splash in the summer free agent market. Well, except that the splash was less Free Willy and more Uncle Walt belly-flopping during the last Fourth of July - awkward and obtuse.
That "big" free agent signing was, of course, Gary Matthews Jr.
There are of course several problems with this signing, some of these problems being more obvious than the others. Firstly he cost 50 millions dollars! 50 million - for a player who is already on the wrong side of thirty. Anyone that believes that Gary Matthews Jr will, in five years, be worth 10 millions dollars must be myopic, or delusional and believe that this Jr, is actually Ken Griffey Jr circa 1995. Or they believe that this is the original Gary Matthews who was, at least, a fairly serviceable major league player.
They couldn't possibly believe that this Matthews, the Jr, is worth the cash. He's been in the Majors for 7 years, had one fairly good year (coincidentally enough the one right before he hit free agency), and plays, as far as I know a pretty solid CF. He's played for seven major league teams which, entertainingly enough, is almost as many home runs as he's hit in his career (well maybe not that close but you get the general idea). Hell, he can't even cover up his steroid use properly!
All I know is that this reeks of another Mo Vaughn - except Mo Vaughn actually hit more than 30 homers in on of his years as an Angel.
But, as the eternal Angels fan, I realize that there is a bright side to this situation. That bright side being...Hey, at least they didn't sign JD Drew.
That "big" free agent signing was, of course, Gary Matthews Jr.
There are of course several problems with this signing, some of these problems being more obvious than the others. Firstly he cost 50 millions dollars! 50 million - for a player who is already on the wrong side of thirty. Anyone that believes that Gary Matthews Jr will, in five years, be worth 10 millions dollars must be myopic, or delusional and believe that this Jr, is actually Ken Griffey Jr circa 1995. Or they believe that this is the original Gary Matthews who was, at least, a fairly serviceable major league player.
They couldn't possibly believe that this Matthews, the Jr, is worth the cash. He's been in the Majors for 7 years, had one fairly good year (coincidentally enough the one right before he hit free agency), and plays, as far as I know a pretty solid CF. He's played for seven major league teams which, entertainingly enough, is almost as many home runs as he's hit in his career (well maybe not that close but you get the general idea). Hell, he can't even cover up his steroid use properly!
All I know is that this reeks of another Mo Vaughn - except Mo Vaughn actually hit more than 30 homers in on of his years as an Angel.
But, as the eternal Angels fan, I realize that there is a bright side to this situation. That bright side being...Hey, at least they didn't sign JD Drew.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
