Let's just be clear - when I say that the following people should be "shot into space", I do not mean that I want them to die. What I mean is that they are so obviously unhappy here on planet Earth that it would be better for everyone if they would just go away and start anew. Hopefully their final destination would be made known to the world and written in history, so that some poor future space explorer doesn't accidentally land on their planet and suffer immediate and permanent cognitive deterioration. I apologize in advance if these selections seem too heavy on a particular group of people, but it's my blog. Next time, you can shoot me into space.
10. Dean Cain
Generations from now, when school children start to look up the definitions to naughty words in the dictionary, Dean Cain's picture will appear next to the word asshole. I admit to laughing at a very select few of his jokes, but prolonged obnoxiousness is not the same as being funny. Cain is comedy in its lowest form. In fact, I would go so far as to call it anti-comedy, because most of what he says cancels out anything in his act that may actually be funny. His movies alone would have put him on this list.
9. Paris Hilton
This woman embodies everything negative about the female gender. She's mean - any episode of that stupid show The Simple Life makes it obvious that she doesn't give two farts about anybody else in the world, except for maybe her dog. She's spoiled. She's never really worked a day in her life, and she never will. Neither will her children, should she have any, or her children's children. Hilton is so much of the opposite of who I am and who I'd like to be, that I can't even look at her. Besides, a person's body mass atrophies in space, and one slowly attains a more ball-like shape. I would love to see a Paris-balloon.
8. Michael Moore
It doesn't matter if I agree with someone's point of view or not - I'm not going to listen to a person who is preachy, smug, and belligerent. Michael, don't call out "Stupid White Men" before taking a good long look in the mirror.
7. Carrot Top
I really don't think an explanation should be necessary for this choice. I don't know of any other person in the world who gives me the shivers as much as this guy - and I include brutal dictators in that statement. In fact, we wouldn't be sending Carrot Top into space as much as we would be returning him.
6. Stephanie Meyer
I realize that this won't be a popular choice with some of you, but as I said: You're free to theoretically shoot me into space any time. Here's my reasoning: this is a woman who has single-handedly convinced a generation of teenage girls (and women who are old enough to know better) of the following untruths:
A. Falling in love at seventeen is wonderful, natural, and works out fine in the end.
B. There's nothing wrong with your boyfriend breaking into your room to watch you as you sleep - it's not creepy, it's romantic!
C. Vampires sparkle in daylight.
5. Michael Bay
This is the brilliant artistic mind that brought you the following cinematic gems:
Transformers (1 & 2)
The Island
Armageddon
Pearl Harbor
The Rock
I could go on, but I'll spare you. I'll just leave you with this thought: there should be some sort of horrible, horrible punishment for putting truck nuts on a Transformer. Being shot into space is a mercy.
4. John Malkovich
As stated in a previous post, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Just say your damn lines, John! Quit waffling and just say the lines!
3. Michael Vick
As far as I'm concerned, his debt to society has not yet been paid - not to mention what he owes to the dogs who ultimately survived his cruelty. I know that Vick is not the first person to be busted for dog-fighting, and he won't be the last, but rather than let him back into the league, he should just be shot into space. Without a spaceship, if necessary.
2. Rush Limbaugh
It's hard for me to think of any radio personality I detest more than this man. I don't care what your political ideaology is - hate in any form is bad. This man embodies so many "ists" I can't even list them all.
1. Glenn Beck
I don't hate Glenn Beck. I pity him. His cognitive dissonance is so jarring that there has to be some sort of tragic underlying cause. I honestly think he'd be happier in space - I mean, he keeps bursting into tears on his program! The man is obviously unhappy here. In space, at least, he'd be able to make things up without looking like a complete idiot.
Wow. I sure was hard on the Michaels in this post. I can't be the name - I know several Michaels who are perfectly nice people.
Friday, September 4, 2009
Friday, July 3, 2009
The Top Ten Worst Book-to-Movie Adaptations (That I have seen)
There have been a few movies released recently (and rumors of movies to come) that have made me ask questions - questions like "Why?! Why?! Oh God! Why?!" And it boggles my mind that any of these movies make any kind of money at all. And then I think of the of the level of intelligence of the people who would pay money to see these movies. After doing the math, I get horribly depressed. There are lots of astoundingly stupid people out there - and some of them are allowed to make movies. This introspection led me to make a list of one of the banes of my existence: book-to-movie adaptations. Bad ones. I apologize if you happen to like any of the movies in the following list. If you think it's a good movie, I urge you to read the book and reconsider. If you have read the book and still think it's a good movie . . . then I have no hope for you. Live in peace. Readers, I give you the top-ten worst book-to-movie adaptations that I have ever seen.
10. Sherlock
This 2002 made-for-TV movie made me want to cry. I love Sherlock Holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle created a fascinating character that the general public does not fully appreciate. I believe that this is because (in America, especially) he is seen as a stuffy, boring British ponce with a pipe permanently wedged between his teeth. Some of the film adaptations do nothing to dispel this perception, Basil Rathbone notwithstanding. Therefore I was somewhat intrigued when I saw that there was a post-1990's film adaptation, and unwittingly decided to add it to my Netflix queue.
It was terrible. Sherlock was not smart (Moriarty was kicking his ass, as far as mental acuity goes). Moriarty was not smart, and only mildly evil (he got Sherlock hooked on heroin and killed his love interest. That was all). Watson was not a veteran of Afghanistan, but a coroner. Mycroft was terribly disappointing. Sherlock had a love interest, and she was not That Woman (hopefully those of you familiar with the Sherlock Holmes stories will know what I mean).
Who's to blame for this? Director Graham Theakston and writer Piers Ahsworth. Don't be gentle on them.
9. The Adventures of Huck Finn
Elijah Wood child-stars in this 1993 bastardization of Mark Twain's classic. I don't blame him for it; he was just a kid at the time. I do, however, blame Stephen Sommers for writing and directing it. As I understand it, Mark Twain began writing Huckleberry Finn in much the same spirit as he had The Adventures of Tom Sawyer - but ended up with something much more significant than a mere coming-of-age young male adventure. It is a brilliant description of a journey from ignorance to awareness and an intelligent commentary on issues that are still important to us today. Perhaps I set my standards too high for this movie, but I was nine years old when I saw this movie and I still hated it. Enough said.
8. The Cat in the Hat
A problem that many book-to-movie adaptations face is that the people writing the adaptation sometimes have to make hard choices about content. It's difficult to compress the average novel into a two-hour film. That being said, the opposite problem should be avoided like the plague: having to stretch a children's picture book into a full-length movie. Don't try it! And if you absolutely must attempt it, do not depend on your lead actor(s) to carry the film. Those types of films are called "star vehicles", and are never a good idea. You can almost hear Mike Meyers' back breaking under the massive weight of the scenes that Alec Burg managed to squeeze into Dr. Seuss' wonderful little story. And the less said about the art direction of the film, the better. Bo Welch has enough to apologize for in this 2003 monstrosity.
7. Chicken Little
Please see my review for #8, but substitute Mark Dindal for Bo Welch and Alec Burg, 2005 for 2003, and remove any reference to star vehicles. There are some otherwise talented people inexplicably connected to this movie. Try not to hold it against them.
(See also: Polar Express)
6. Pride and Prejudice
Subtitled "A Latter-Day Comedy", this one actually made me throw up in my mouth a little bit - and I didn't even watch the whole thing. Jane Austen is one of my favorite authors, and while Pride and Prejudice isn't my favorite novel by her, it deserves more than this. Much, much more. I'm not even totally against the idea of shifting the story from the Victorian era to modern times, but this film makes me pray that it never happens again. It's a good thing that imdb.com doesn't give out contact information for writers and directors, or else I would feel honor-bound to send director Andrew Black and writer Anne K. Black (husband and wife, perhaps?) irate letters. And even that may not stop me. Again, I didn't watch all of this 2003 film, so I may have missed something. But I doubt it.
5. Troy
This film technically fills my requirement because it is based on Homer's Iliad. Loosely. I will say this: I appreciate the scale of this movie. Those massive battles between the Greeks and the Trojans are impressive, I admit. That being said, the one character I liked dies long before the end of the film, so everything after Hector's death is completely unbearable, rather than just marginally unbearable. Orlando Bloom plays whiner Paris, and inexplicably attractive Brad Pitt plays asshole Achilles. I recognize that it would be difficult to make such selfish characters remotely sympathetic, but I don't believe either of these guys even tried. This film was vomited upon the world in 2004 by director Wolfgang Petersen and writer David Benioff.
4. Bicentenniel Man
Some short stories can be made into good feature-length films. For that to happen, do not cast Robin Williams. Robin can be extremely good as part of an ensemble (see The Birdcage), but if his character is the focus of the entire movie, watch out. He'll pass in star vehicles, but not in an Asimov short story. And not when it's directed by someone who obviously doesn't understand Asimov, and has possibly never even read the story (I'm looking at you, Chris Columbus). This 1999 film was a strange modge-podge of Asimov and Robert Silverberg.
3. Eragon
This is a rare case. I didn't even really like the book this movie was based on, which makes its disappointment that much more terrifying. I was actually hoping that the so-so novel would make a more entertaining movie, and I couldn't have been more wrong. Also, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Although the baby dragon was cute. We can lay the blame for this 2006 travesty at the feet of director Stefen Fangmeier and writer Peter Buchman. And I'll lump Christopher Paolini in there, too, for writing it in the first place.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
I tried so hard to like this movie! I really, really did, but eventually I came to grips with myself and admitted it: the movie sucked. The casting was okay (except, of course, for John Malkovich), and the look of it was all right (except for Marvin's look - wtf?!), but it completely lacked the brilliance of Douglas Adams. All of his wit, his intricate plotline - it was somehow lost in this trans-media translation, and now there are people in the world who will never read the book because the movie was bad. And that is unforgivable. I'm going to blame this on the director, Garth Jennings, because Douglas Adams collaborated heavily on the screenplay before he died. Perhaps it would have been different had he been alive during production - he died in 2001, and the film was released in 2005.
1. Ella Enchanted
There was and is so much wrong with this movie, I don't know that I have the courage to go on. I will do my best, however. I read Ella Enchanted when I was in junior high, which was a difficult period in my life. This book made me happy. It won a Newberry award. It is a wonderful story about a girl just about my age (at the time) who overcomes a terrible curse and saves herself, her country, and the boy she loves. Ella (in the book) is an intelligent, independent, and irrepressible person who achieves her goals and richly deserves the happy ending that comes to her. Ella (in the movie) is Anne Hathaway, and stinks of Disney. Nothing is right in the movie. There's an evil royal uncle that should not be there. The evil stepsisters succeed only in being annoying. There is a bizarre and unexplanable romance between a giantess and an elf. Basically, the only thing that this film has in common with the book is the names of the characters, and sometimes they don't even get that right. A thousand curses upon director Tommy O'Haver and writer (I use that term in the loosest sense of the word) Laurie Craig. May they and all their children, and their children's children be bitten by fleas. Repeatedly.
Okay, I'm through it. Now for the dishonorable mentions: Dune (1984), War of the Worlds (2005), The Hobbit (1977), The Lord of the Rings (1978), The Black Cauldron (1985), Matilda (1996), and Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban (2004).
10. Sherlock
This 2002 made-for-TV movie made me want to cry. I love Sherlock Holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle created a fascinating character that the general public does not fully appreciate. I believe that this is because (in America, especially) he is seen as a stuffy, boring British ponce with a pipe permanently wedged between his teeth. Some of the film adaptations do nothing to dispel this perception, Basil Rathbone notwithstanding. Therefore I was somewhat intrigued when I saw that there was a post-1990's film adaptation, and unwittingly decided to add it to my Netflix queue.
It was terrible. Sherlock was not smart (Moriarty was kicking his ass, as far as mental acuity goes). Moriarty was not smart, and only mildly evil (he got Sherlock hooked on heroin and killed his love interest. That was all). Watson was not a veteran of Afghanistan, but a coroner. Mycroft was terribly disappointing. Sherlock had a love interest, and she was not That Woman (hopefully those of you familiar with the Sherlock Holmes stories will know what I mean).
Who's to blame for this? Director Graham Theakston and writer Piers Ahsworth. Don't be gentle on them.
9. The Adventures of Huck Finn
Elijah Wood child-stars in this 1993 bastardization of Mark Twain's classic. I don't blame him for it; he was just a kid at the time. I do, however, blame Stephen Sommers for writing and directing it. As I understand it, Mark Twain began writing Huckleberry Finn in much the same spirit as he had The Adventures of Tom Sawyer - but ended up with something much more significant than a mere coming-of-age young male adventure. It is a brilliant description of a journey from ignorance to awareness and an intelligent commentary on issues that are still important to us today. Perhaps I set my standards too high for this movie, but I was nine years old when I saw this movie and I still hated it. Enough said.
8. The Cat in the Hat
A problem that many book-to-movie adaptations face is that the people writing the adaptation sometimes have to make hard choices about content. It's difficult to compress the average novel into a two-hour film. That being said, the opposite problem should be avoided like the plague: having to stretch a children's picture book into a full-length movie. Don't try it! And if you absolutely must attempt it, do not depend on your lead actor(s) to carry the film. Those types of films are called "star vehicles", and are never a good idea. You can almost hear Mike Meyers' back breaking under the massive weight of the scenes that Alec Burg managed to squeeze into Dr. Seuss' wonderful little story. And the less said about the art direction of the film, the better. Bo Welch has enough to apologize for in this 2003 monstrosity.
7. Chicken Little
Please see my review for #8, but substitute Mark Dindal for Bo Welch and Alec Burg, 2005 for 2003, and remove any reference to star vehicles. There are some otherwise talented people inexplicably connected to this movie. Try not to hold it against them.
(See also: Polar Express)
6. Pride and Prejudice
Subtitled "A Latter-Day Comedy", this one actually made me throw up in my mouth a little bit - and I didn't even watch the whole thing. Jane Austen is one of my favorite authors, and while Pride and Prejudice isn't my favorite novel by her, it deserves more than this. Much, much more. I'm not even totally against the idea of shifting the story from the Victorian era to modern times, but this film makes me pray that it never happens again. It's a good thing that imdb.com doesn't give out contact information for writers and directors, or else I would feel honor-bound to send director Andrew Black and writer Anne K. Black (husband and wife, perhaps?) irate letters. And even that may not stop me. Again, I didn't watch all of this 2003 film, so I may have missed something. But I doubt it.
5. Troy
This film technically fills my requirement because it is based on Homer's Iliad. Loosely. I will say this: I appreciate the scale of this movie. Those massive battles between the Greeks and the Trojans are impressive, I admit. That being said, the one character I liked dies long before the end of the film, so everything after Hector's death is completely unbearable, rather than just marginally unbearable. Orlando Bloom plays whiner Paris, and inexplicably attractive Brad Pitt plays asshole Achilles. I recognize that it would be difficult to make such selfish characters remotely sympathetic, but I don't believe either of these guys even tried. This film was vomited upon the world in 2004 by director Wolfgang Petersen and writer David Benioff.
4. Bicentenniel Man
Some short stories can be made into good feature-length films. For that to happen, do not cast Robin Williams. Robin can be extremely good as part of an ensemble (see The Birdcage), but if his character is the focus of the entire movie, watch out. He'll pass in star vehicles, but not in an Asimov short story. And not when it's directed by someone who obviously doesn't understand Asimov, and has possibly never even read the story (I'm looking at you, Chris Columbus). This 1999 film was a strange modge-podge of Asimov and Robert Silverberg.
3. Eragon
This is a rare case. I didn't even really like the book this movie was based on, which makes its disappointment that much more terrifying. I was actually hoping that the so-so novel would make a more entertaining movie, and I couldn't have been more wrong. Also, I hate John Malkovich, and I don't care who knows it. Although the baby dragon was cute. We can lay the blame for this 2006 travesty at the feet of director Stefen Fangmeier and writer Peter Buchman. And I'll lump Christopher Paolini in there, too, for writing it in the first place.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
I tried so hard to like this movie! I really, really did, but eventually I came to grips with myself and admitted it: the movie sucked. The casting was okay (except, of course, for John Malkovich), and the look of it was all right (except for Marvin's look - wtf?!), but it completely lacked the brilliance of Douglas Adams. All of his wit, his intricate plotline - it was somehow lost in this trans-media translation, and now there are people in the world who will never read the book because the movie was bad. And that is unforgivable. I'm going to blame this on the director, Garth Jennings, because Douglas Adams collaborated heavily on the screenplay before he died. Perhaps it would have been different had he been alive during production - he died in 2001, and the film was released in 2005.
1. Ella Enchanted
There was and is so much wrong with this movie, I don't know that I have the courage to go on. I will do my best, however. I read Ella Enchanted when I was in junior high, which was a difficult period in my life. This book made me happy. It won a Newberry award. It is a wonderful story about a girl just about my age (at the time) who overcomes a terrible curse and saves herself, her country, and the boy she loves. Ella (in the book) is an intelligent, independent, and irrepressible person who achieves her goals and richly deserves the happy ending that comes to her. Ella (in the movie) is Anne Hathaway, and stinks of Disney. Nothing is right in the movie. There's an evil royal uncle that should not be there. The evil stepsisters succeed only in being annoying. There is a bizarre and unexplanable romance between a giantess and an elf. Basically, the only thing that this film has in common with the book is the names of the characters, and sometimes they don't even get that right. A thousand curses upon director Tommy O'Haver and writer (I use that term in the loosest sense of the word) Laurie Craig. May they and all their children, and their children's children be bitten by fleas. Repeatedly.
Okay, I'm through it. Now for the dishonorable mentions: Dune (1984), War of the Worlds (2005), The Hobbit (1977), The Lord of the Rings (1978), The Black Cauldron (1985), Matilda (1996), and Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban (2004).
Monday, June 29, 2009
Little Green Bugs
Little green bugs are abundant where I live.
Tiny, short-range missiles of the insect world
Buzzing, crawling, sneaky little devils - what I wouldn't give
To get rid of them, all innocence with wings unfurled
Saying "Who could hate me? I'm so small and harmless."
Harmless, maybe, up to the point when one goes
Around and around my head, nothing is worse, unless
It's when it decides, after all, to fly up my nose.
Thank God for spiders, though not when they're inside
My home - No, when they craft their webs and set
Their traps. I can see the bodies of the bugs who died
Struggling in vain to free themselves, to glide
Up, up, and away. But the wise little spiders wait
Patiently, quietly, biding their time until bugs fly
Into their invisible, intricate snares made by eight
Clever legs - ready to suck them dry.
Thank God for the bats when they come out at night!
Little flying mammals navigating by the sound
Of squeaks and echos. I love the sight
Of them at dusk. I love watching them flit around
Darting this way and that. I never shared the fear
That these amazing nocturnal creatures change
Their taste for bugs into a taste for blood. It's clear
That they're happy with their diet, though it's strange.
Little green bugs are always landing in the pool
And drowning. On a long day when it's hotter than hell
I just want to come home, grab a book and cool
Off in the water - water filled with the bugs that fell
And couldn't get themselves out, but the silly things
Are at their most alarming when I'm asleep in my bed.
What are they doing when I'm unaware? A bug clings
To my hair, making its way to my ear to lay eggs in my head.
Or so I believe, when I wake up with a start.
I dig frantically at my ear, trying to get them out
Until I realize I'm dreaming, and my pounding heart
Goes back to its regular rhythm. I seriously doubt
Those insects intend to frighten me so.
They're just trying to live - the thought of them tugs
At my conscience. I feel sorry for them, though
I hate them. Damn those little green bugs.
Tiny, short-range missiles of the insect world
Buzzing, crawling, sneaky little devils - what I wouldn't give
To get rid of them, all innocence with wings unfurled
Saying "Who could hate me? I'm so small and harmless."
Harmless, maybe, up to the point when one goes
Around and around my head, nothing is worse, unless
It's when it decides, after all, to fly up my nose.
Thank God for spiders, though not when they're inside
My home - No, when they craft their webs and set
Their traps. I can see the bodies of the bugs who died
Struggling in vain to free themselves, to glide
Up, up, and away. But the wise little spiders wait
Patiently, quietly, biding their time until bugs fly
Into their invisible, intricate snares made by eight
Clever legs - ready to suck them dry.
Thank God for the bats when they come out at night!
Little flying mammals navigating by the sound
Of squeaks and echos. I love the sight
Of them at dusk. I love watching them flit around
Darting this way and that. I never shared the fear
That these amazing nocturnal creatures change
Their taste for bugs into a taste for blood. It's clear
That they're happy with their diet, though it's strange.
Little green bugs are always landing in the pool
And drowning. On a long day when it's hotter than hell
I just want to come home, grab a book and cool
Off in the water - water filled with the bugs that fell
And couldn't get themselves out, but the silly things
Are at their most alarming when I'm asleep in my bed.
What are they doing when I'm unaware? A bug clings
To my hair, making its way to my ear to lay eggs in my head.
Or so I believe, when I wake up with a start.
I dig frantically at my ear, trying to get them out
Until I realize I'm dreaming, and my pounding heart
Goes back to its regular rhythm. I seriously doubt
Those insects intend to frighten me so.
They're just trying to live - the thought of them tugs
At my conscience. I feel sorry for them, though
I hate them. Damn those little green bugs.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Don't-See TV
I promise that I'll try not to do this too often, but I'm going to have to rant - just a little bit. I promise that I'm not a major couch potato. I would rather read than watch TV, but I do turn the TV on for background noise while I'm cooking, and there are a few shows that I watch regularly. This posting is not about those shows - the good ones. This is about the bad shows. I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "Really? There are lots of awful shows on TV." Very true. I'm just going to focus on the ones that are particularly annoying to me at this time.
Jon and Kate Plus Eight:
I'm not ashamed to admit that I have never watched an episode of this show, but I sure am sick of hearing about it. I'm tired of all of the drama surrounding the parents on this show - did Jon cheat on Kate? What's the big announcement that the couple will soon make? How will this affect the show?
Can I respond with a question of my own? Thank you. Who the f*** cares?! These are people who took advantage of an opportunity - and who could blame them? Raising eight kids is no walk in the economic park. Still, they have brought this on themselves, and in my opinion have not considered the long-term effects of this stupid reality show on their children. I know that the children are reaping benefits indirectly, but I'm sure that no one asked their permission to appear in this show. What happens when they get older? If Jon and Kate do file for divorce, how are they going to be able to deal with that? My parents' divorce was bad, but it wasn't on national television.
Flavor of Love:
I swear to you that I'm not making this show up. Remember Flavor Flave, the guy who wears clocks around his neck and big Viking helmets? This show is all about him. It's like The Bachelor, with Flave as the Bachelor. This is a show that consists of Flave trying to choose from a bunch of pretty but psycho women, who obviously do not respect themselves or each other. It's cat-fight central. I only know about this show because it appears on the TV Guide channel, which also has the programming schedule, and I have to mute the channel whenever it's on - it's that bad. I assume that this ridiculous show is on the TV Guide channel because no other network would stoop so low.
Whale Wars:
I understand if none of you have heard of this show. Being the major geek that I am, I like to watch channels like National Geographic and Discovery. Whale Wars is on Animal Planet. It's a documentary show following the exploits of a group of activists who use every means short of outright violence to stop Japanese whalers from killing whales in the Antarctic. Please understand that I'm not expressing disapproval of their goals - I think that killing whales is a long-outdated and barbaric practice, and the Japanese whalers are using loopholes in the law in order to continue. They claim that they're conducting "scientific research". Killing whales for profit is obsene, okay? That being said, these activists are complete morons. They call themselves the "Sea Shepherds", and they were founded by a guy who was kicked out of Greenpeace. In fact, Greenpeace wants nothing to do with them at all. Basically, this is a ship full of idealists who are under the delusion that if they somehow manage to stop this particular whaling fleet, then whaling will be stopped, permanently, all over the world. Has the thought crossed any of their minds that there just might be more than one whaling ship in the world? And that's not even the worst part - for me, at least. The worst part is that most of these people have such a disdain for "the system" or "the Man" or any kind of authority that the way the ship is run is an absolute joke. In the first episode, three crew members were almost killed because the person who was lowering their small boat into the water had no clue what he was doing. If these people really cared about the whales, you'd think they would step up their game.
Okay. My rant is done now. Mostly. There will always be shows on TV that really suck. I'll just have to content myself with the good ones. I just had to rant a little in order to make myself feel better.
Jon and Kate Plus Eight:
I'm not ashamed to admit that I have never watched an episode of this show, but I sure am sick of hearing about it. I'm tired of all of the drama surrounding the parents on this show - did Jon cheat on Kate? What's the big announcement that the couple will soon make? How will this affect the show?
Can I respond with a question of my own? Thank you. Who the f*** cares?! These are people who took advantage of an opportunity - and who could blame them? Raising eight kids is no walk in the economic park. Still, they have brought this on themselves, and in my opinion have not considered the long-term effects of this stupid reality show on their children. I know that the children are reaping benefits indirectly, but I'm sure that no one asked their permission to appear in this show. What happens when they get older? If Jon and Kate do file for divorce, how are they going to be able to deal with that? My parents' divorce was bad, but it wasn't on national television.
Flavor of Love:
I swear to you that I'm not making this show up. Remember Flavor Flave, the guy who wears clocks around his neck and big Viking helmets? This show is all about him. It's like The Bachelor, with Flave as the Bachelor. This is a show that consists of Flave trying to choose from a bunch of pretty but psycho women, who obviously do not respect themselves or each other. It's cat-fight central. I only know about this show because it appears on the TV Guide channel, which also has the programming schedule, and I have to mute the channel whenever it's on - it's that bad. I assume that this ridiculous show is on the TV Guide channel because no other network would stoop so low.
Whale Wars:
I understand if none of you have heard of this show. Being the major geek that I am, I like to watch channels like National Geographic and Discovery. Whale Wars is on Animal Planet. It's a documentary show following the exploits of a group of activists who use every means short of outright violence to stop Japanese whalers from killing whales in the Antarctic. Please understand that I'm not expressing disapproval of their goals - I think that killing whales is a long-outdated and barbaric practice, and the Japanese whalers are using loopholes in the law in order to continue. They claim that they're conducting "scientific research". Killing whales for profit is obsene, okay? That being said, these activists are complete morons. They call themselves the "Sea Shepherds", and they were founded by a guy who was kicked out of Greenpeace. In fact, Greenpeace wants nothing to do with them at all. Basically, this is a ship full of idealists who are under the delusion that if they somehow manage to stop this particular whaling fleet, then whaling will be stopped, permanently, all over the world. Has the thought crossed any of their minds that there just might be more than one whaling ship in the world? And that's not even the worst part - for me, at least. The worst part is that most of these people have such a disdain for "the system" or "the Man" or any kind of authority that the way the ship is run is an absolute joke. In the first episode, three crew members were almost killed because the person who was lowering their small boat into the water had no clue what he was doing. If these people really cared about the whales, you'd think they would step up their game.
Okay. My rant is done now. Mostly. There will always be shows on TV that really suck. I'll just have to content myself with the good ones. I just had to rant a little in order to make myself feel better.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Story Central
Airports are interesting places. They are basically centers of flux. Everyone in an airport is in a state of transition. People are coming from everywhere and going everywhere else. It seems inevitable, at least to me, that with such a massive mash-up of origins and destinations there are so many individual stories coming together for one brief moment (or seven-hour layover, as the case may be) and then continuing on alone. Emotions run high in airports. People are leaving or returning, alone or together. The casual observer, sitting at the gate waiting for their flight to start boarding, can see many stories immediately surrounding them.
There's a single man sitting on his own in front of the large airport windows. I say single because he's traveling by himself, but it's obvious that he's involved with someone. He's holding a bouquet of flowers. Is he re-connecting with someone after a long separation? Is he on his way home or is he visiting her? She must be really important to him. Important enough to put up with the inconvenience of traveling with such a fragile carry-on item. He cares about her so much that he won't wait to buy these flowers after he arrives. He holds those flowers on his lap during the entire flight.
Another man is sitting on his own at the gate, himself and his possessions taking up all three of the seats in a short row. Though seats are scarce, both of his carry-on items occupy the seats on either side of him, and he has his laptop open and his headphones on, effectively closing himself off from the rest of his fellow travelers. A woman traveling on her own hovers hopefully near him and his seats, but if she expects a sense of chivalry to overpower the headphones she will be disappointed. He doesn't look up, doesn't acknowledge anyone outside of the bubble he's created, doesn't budge.
Two children traveling with their mother are obviously trying to make the best of a situation that they obviously believe could be improved upon. There's nothing with which to entertain themselves other than what they've brought, but children are inventive and adaptable when they need to be. One has a suspicion that this brother and sister would not normally willingly play together the way that they are, but beggars can't be choosers! Their improvised game of mis-matched toys (robots and dolls, respectively) spans the floor around their seats, the luggage sitting under the watchful eye of their mother, and sometimes even their mother, who puts up with their play with the obvious internal conclusion "It could be worse. They could be screaming."
A soldier in combat boots and desert fatigues is also sitting on his own, his last name stitched onto the back of his practical Army pack. Is he reporting to a base in the states, only to be shipped overseas? Is this his first tour? Unlikely, if his age is anything to go by. He looks like he's in his early thirties. My only thought, looking at him, is "Will he come back alive or in a box?" A wedding band on his finger makes me send a quick thought out to whatever gods may be listening - let him come home safely.
Airports are interesting places. I, for one, am glad that my time in this one was as short as possible. It may be fascinating to see the convergence of so many stories, but I have my own story to worry about.
There's a single man sitting on his own in front of the large airport windows. I say single because he's traveling by himself, but it's obvious that he's involved with someone. He's holding a bouquet of flowers. Is he re-connecting with someone after a long separation? Is he on his way home or is he visiting her? She must be really important to him. Important enough to put up with the inconvenience of traveling with such a fragile carry-on item. He cares about her so much that he won't wait to buy these flowers after he arrives. He holds those flowers on his lap during the entire flight.
Another man is sitting on his own at the gate, himself and his possessions taking up all three of the seats in a short row. Though seats are scarce, both of his carry-on items occupy the seats on either side of him, and he has his laptop open and his headphones on, effectively closing himself off from the rest of his fellow travelers. A woman traveling on her own hovers hopefully near him and his seats, but if she expects a sense of chivalry to overpower the headphones she will be disappointed. He doesn't look up, doesn't acknowledge anyone outside of the bubble he's created, doesn't budge.
Two children traveling with their mother are obviously trying to make the best of a situation that they obviously believe could be improved upon. There's nothing with which to entertain themselves other than what they've brought, but children are inventive and adaptable when they need to be. One has a suspicion that this brother and sister would not normally willingly play together the way that they are, but beggars can't be choosers! Their improvised game of mis-matched toys (robots and dolls, respectively) spans the floor around their seats, the luggage sitting under the watchful eye of their mother, and sometimes even their mother, who puts up with their play with the obvious internal conclusion "It could be worse. They could be screaming."
A soldier in combat boots and desert fatigues is also sitting on his own, his last name stitched onto the back of his practical Army pack. Is he reporting to a base in the states, only to be shipped overseas? Is this his first tour? Unlikely, if his age is anything to go by. He looks like he's in his early thirties. My only thought, looking at him, is "Will he come back alive or in a box?" A wedding band on his finger makes me send a quick thought out to whatever gods may be listening - let him come home safely.
Airports are interesting places. I, for one, am glad that my time in this one was as short as possible. It may be fascinating to see the convergence of so many stories, but I have my own story to worry about.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Agnostic
I wish that I could have an open and honest discussion about religion with my family. It's important to me. It's something that I give a lot of serious thought. The problem that I face with this kind of discussion (politics are the same way, actually), is that any sort of doubt that I may express about things that they believe is perceived as a symptom of profound mental imbalance, even brainwashing. And I understand, to an extent, why they feel that way. Their religious beliefs are extremely strong, and deal with such important ideas as existence before and after life on earth - things that are significant in an eternal, universal sense. I admire their faith. I would never try to persuade them not to practice their religion. I wish that they would extend me the same courtesy and respect.
These are the things that I think about the most:
Can anyone truly know God, God's will, and Its judgement while in this current mortal existence?
I'm not saying that everyone who claims to have communicated with God is lying or ill-intentioned - I don't believe that. What I have trouble with is that there are people who say that they know the way God wants us to do things. They know what is "right" and what is "wrong". They have no problem casting judgement themselves, so confident they are in knowing the mind of a Being who - by their own admission - is so powerful that It created the universe and everything in it. I'm asking in earnest - How do you know? I would quake at thinking that I know someone's eternal fate. I would shudder away from that kind of cosmic responsibility. I would have to be absolutely certain - no doubt whatsoever - to pass judgement like that, and I would also have to be sure that I had this Being's authorization to do so.
Is there only One True Religion, and will only those who believe in it go to Heaven (or whichever eternal paradise one believes in)?
This is tricky territory for any rational discussion of religion. No one wants to hear that their religion may not be the only one on earth with the real truth. This is the kind of thing that starts wars, that inspires killing in the name of God. It's funny that there are so many loopholes around "Thou shalt not kill". I'm pretty sure that it doesn't say "Thou shalt not kill, unless you do it to prove a point or get something you want". But aside from religious war/killings, what is it about any particular religion that makes them believe they are the only ones to be "saved"? I really find it hard to believe that if God knows us personally and loves each and every one of us, that It would condemn good people just because they didn't subscribe to a particular set of beliefs. This is something that I take very personally. I have been told that my particular and personal beliefs have no place in certain religions, and that I would need to change them if I were to be "saved". I don't appreciate being told, essentially, that I would be condemned for believing in different things. I don't claim to have communicated with God in any way that I can understand or recognize, but I don't get any feeling that God would disapprove of me or what I think. If I am one of Its creations, why would it be surprised when I question things? Am I somehow different than what It intended? And if so, who's at fault - me or God? I've been told that if I somehow don't receive confirmation from God that certain religious beliefs are true, then there is something wrong with me, not the beliefs. These beliefs indicate the existence of a Jealous God. I refuse to believe that a Creator could ever be such a Tyrant. People will tell you to stand up for what you believe in, but they're not so keen on the idea when your beliefs are not their beliefs.
How can holy books be the absolute Word of God when 1) there are so many of them, and 2) they have been handed down, revised, translated, re-translated, edited, formatted, and debated over thousands of years by so many different people?
This is one thing that I have a really hard time accepting (so I don't). I find it difficult to believe that people accept these texts as unassailable facts when there are so many inherent contradictions within the texts themselves, let alone what they preach and what people practice. This leads into my next big question:
What's with the inequality between men and women in most of the world's religions?
If God created us all, we should all be equal. And yet many religions insist on separation - sometimes to an extreme degree - of the sexes. "Separate" is not "equal". I believe that we have learned this in other areas of our history, but it's still something we struggle with. I won't believe that God ever intended women to be thought of as "lesser" or "inferior" in any way. I don't accept the roles offered me by some religions - roles that are entirely based on my gender. I don't like standards that are applied to women rigidly and men flexibly.
I hope that any of my religious friends who may read this posting will understand that I am not trying to tell them what to believe, or that any of their beliefs are wrong or bad. I'm just trying to articulate my personal spiritual questions. Please note that I tried not to indicate any religion in particular or by name, out of respect. Because I do respect your beliefs. I wouldn't dream of asking you not to practice. I know that there is a lot of good that comes from religion. But I don't feel comfortable subscribing to a particular belief system. I cannot commit myself to something that I don't know. I'm agnostic. I don't know - and I accept that.
These are the things that I think about the most:
Can anyone truly know God, God's will, and Its judgement while in this current mortal existence?
I'm not saying that everyone who claims to have communicated with God is lying or ill-intentioned - I don't believe that. What I have trouble with is that there are people who say that they know the way God wants us to do things. They know what is "right" and what is "wrong". They have no problem casting judgement themselves, so confident they are in knowing the mind of a Being who - by their own admission - is so powerful that It created the universe and everything in it. I'm asking in earnest - How do you know? I would quake at thinking that I know someone's eternal fate. I would shudder away from that kind of cosmic responsibility. I would have to be absolutely certain - no doubt whatsoever - to pass judgement like that, and I would also have to be sure that I had this Being's authorization to do so.
Is there only One True Religion, and will only those who believe in it go to Heaven (or whichever eternal paradise one believes in)?
This is tricky territory for any rational discussion of religion. No one wants to hear that their religion may not be the only one on earth with the real truth. This is the kind of thing that starts wars, that inspires killing in the name of God. It's funny that there are so many loopholes around "Thou shalt not kill". I'm pretty sure that it doesn't say "Thou shalt not kill, unless you do it to prove a point or get something you want". But aside from religious war/killings, what is it about any particular religion that makes them believe they are the only ones to be "saved"? I really find it hard to believe that if God knows us personally and loves each and every one of us, that It would condemn good people just because they didn't subscribe to a particular set of beliefs. This is something that I take very personally. I have been told that my particular and personal beliefs have no place in certain religions, and that I would need to change them if I were to be "saved". I don't appreciate being told, essentially, that I would be condemned for believing in different things. I don't claim to have communicated with God in any way that I can understand or recognize, but I don't get any feeling that God would disapprove of me or what I think. If I am one of Its creations, why would it be surprised when I question things? Am I somehow different than what It intended? And if so, who's at fault - me or God? I've been told that if I somehow don't receive confirmation from God that certain religious beliefs are true, then there is something wrong with me, not the beliefs. These beliefs indicate the existence of a Jealous God. I refuse to believe that a Creator could ever be such a Tyrant. People will tell you to stand up for what you believe in, but they're not so keen on the idea when your beliefs are not their beliefs.
How can holy books be the absolute Word of God when 1) there are so many of them, and 2) they have been handed down, revised, translated, re-translated, edited, formatted, and debated over thousands of years by so many different people?
This is one thing that I have a really hard time accepting (so I don't). I find it difficult to believe that people accept these texts as unassailable facts when there are so many inherent contradictions within the texts themselves, let alone what they preach and what people practice. This leads into my next big question:
What's with the inequality between men and women in most of the world's religions?
If God created us all, we should all be equal. And yet many religions insist on separation - sometimes to an extreme degree - of the sexes. "Separate" is not "equal". I believe that we have learned this in other areas of our history, but it's still something we struggle with. I won't believe that God ever intended women to be thought of as "lesser" or "inferior" in any way. I don't accept the roles offered me by some religions - roles that are entirely based on my gender. I don't like standards that are applied to women rigidly and men flexibly.
I hope that any of my religious friends who may read this posting will understand that I am not trying to tell them what to believe, or that any of their beliefs are wrong or bad. I'm just trying to articulate my personal spiritual questions. Please note that I tried not to indicate any religion in particular or by name, out of respect. Because I do respect your beliefs. I wouldn't dream of asking you not to practice. I know that there is a lot of good that comes from religion. But I don't feel comfortable subscribing to a particular belief system. I cannot commit myself to something that I don't know. I'm agnostic. I don't know - and I accept that.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Breaking News
Southwest U.S. resident Bri Buckley suffered a crippling ordeal commonly known as a "brain fart" Friday, May 8 when she tried and failed to remember how to spell the word "accommodations". The circumstances that caused Ms. Buckley's "brain fart" came about when she was trying to intelligently phrase an email to a consultant who is scheduled to visit her workplace later this May.
"Is it one 'c' and two 'm's, or two 'c's and one 'm'?" Co-workers report hearing the frustrated administrative/accounting assistant mutter to herself. Ms. Buckley allegedly refused to open a Word document or a Google tab for assistance in remembering how to spell the five-syllable word. "I can do this - I'm a good speller! It can't be two 'c's and two 'm's. That doesn't look right."
The word "accommodations" is a Latin-based term that, when used in the context that Ms. Buckley intended, means lodging or access to certain facilities. Whether the centuries of trans-continental influence and evolution of this word from Latin to American English happened in such a way as to make it particularly difficult to spell is still in question.
After several minutes of racking her brain, searching for any memory she had of vocabulary words or tests in which she would have learned the spelling of this word, Ms. Buckley reluctantly looked it up in an online dictionary. "Two 'c's and two 'm's?! Really?! That makes no sense. I could have sworn it was only one 'm'." Still, Ms. Buckley agreed that it was better to make sure of the spelling rather than send a professional email that contained a typo.
Experts say that though "brain farts" can be painful and frustrating, there is usually no lasting damage caused by the "brain fart" itself, only from any mistakes that may have been made under its influence. Ms. Buckley is expected to fully recover from the "brain fart", but the emotional and intellectual trauma she suffered in her failure to remember proper spelling may take more time.
"I know that it's not that important to most people, but I'm just disappointed in myself," Ms. Buckley told reporters. "It might take me a while to get over it, but I'm sure I'll get there eventually. I'll remember how to spell it next time."
"Is it one 'c' and two 'm's, or two 'c's and one 'm'?" Co-workers report hearing the frustrated administrative/accounting assistant mutter to herself. Ms. Buckley allegedly refused to open a Word document or a Google tab for assistance in remembering how to spell the five-syllable word. "I can do this - I'm a good speller! It can't be two 'c's and two 'm's. That doesn't look right."
The word "accommodations" is a Latin-based term that, when used in the context that Ms. Buckley intended, means lodging or access to certain facilities. Whether the centuries of trans-continental influence and evolution of this word from Latin to American English happened in such a way as to make it particularly difficult to spell is still in question.
After several minutes of racking her brain, searching for any memory she had of vocabulary words or tests in which she would have learned the spelling of this word, Ms. Buckley reluctantly looked it up in an online dictionary. "Two 'c's and two 'm's?! Really?! That makes no sense. I could have sworn it was only one 'm'." Still, Ms. Buckley agreed that it was better to make sure of the spelling rather than send a professional email that contained a typo.
Experts say that though "brain farts" can be painful and frustrating, there is usually no lasting damage caused by the "brain fart" itself, only from any mistakes that may have been made under its influence. Ms. Buckley is expected to fully recover from the "brain fart", but the emotional and intellectual trauma she suffered in her failure to remember proper spelling may take more time.
"I know that it's not that important to most people, but I'm just disappointed in myself," Ms. Buckley told reporters. "It might take me a while to get over it, but I'm sure I'll get there eventually. I'll remember how to spell it next time."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)