Archive for September, 2007
I can’t believe I’m actually saying this, but I was watching the ABC Fall Preview show tonight, and that show Caveman actually doesn’t look that bad. I’ll probably watch the pilot if nothing else. It looked funny enough from some of the stuff they showed, and it had a decent message attached to it as well. The premise is absurd, but maybe it’ll work? I hated the commercials personally. I didn’t find them funny in the least. Quite annoying, in fact.
This show MOONLIGHT (CBS) about the private investigator who also happens to be a vampire- I watched the premiere Friday night, and I was impressed. I watched it in HD, and it looked beautiful- I find I’m usually a fan of the visuals of slick shows filmed in LA- that LA skyline lit up behind really wonderfully setup shots…it adds a nice look to an already good story. The casting works well from what I’ve seen too.
Pushing Daisies on ABC looks very promising- they’ve been promoting this show big time. I saw a number of ads at the theatre for this, and I’ll definitely be checking it out.
Reaper on the CW is wonderful. Caught the premiere this past week, and wow- good stuff. The lead is the guy who plays Sam in Fox’s canceled sitcom, The Loop. That was a funny show, and that guy is just top notch when it comes to being likable. He plays a slacker working at a home depot-type store whose parents sold his soul to the devil once he turns 21. He’s turned 21, and the devil is here to get his payment. Sounds horrible to root for a guy working for the devil, but it seems they’re crafting the show in a way that this guy is sending bad people who have escaped from hell BACK to hell. In the first episode, he was on a mission to send an arsonist who was responsible for some deaths back to the fiery pit of wailing and gnashing of teeth. Because of this, it works and you don’t feel all that guilty. At least, I didn’t.
I’m sure there are some other great shows I have yet to see, or have yet to premiere, but that’s a bit of what I’m watching for now. The new season of the hit Showtime series DEXTER starts Sunday night (tomorrow). A whole new killer for Dexter to track down and try to outwit. I might just have to order Showtime in order to catch this series in high definition.
Anyone have any new or returning favorites?
Blogged with Flock
I always love it when a famous figure is quoted and there are no ellipses to be found anywhere. One would reasonably conclude that the quote, as written, was what was actually said. Silly me. I guess that’s not how it works with some media outlets, such as the disgraceful media matters or CNN. They will toss in a snippet of a quote to completely twist what the person was saying.
This is the case with media matters who twisted what Bill O’Reilly said on his radio show when speaking to Juan Williams about blacks in America, culture, and how black Americans are often portrayed negatively in the media, and that this portrayal is so common that some people actually think this is what most or all blacks are like. Juan’s new book is about this subjecft (from what I’ve seen of him being interviewed talking about the book), and some very good points were made.
CNN picked up the bogus media matters story and ran with it…tonight O’Reilly fought back on his radio show, and I flipped over to CNN to see some doofus (the guy on in the 7PM ET hour was a joke) claim racism again. They took his statements out of context as they did Monday night, so they clearly didn’t learn a thing.
Bill, however, posted the 35 min segment of his radio show on his site. I think for myself, so I listened to the segment, and it’s clear there was no racism. The comments being made weren’t at all ignorant, and there was some good, constructive discussion going on. O’Reilly was attacking racism not BEING racist himself…Williams (who, if you don’t already know, is black) was agreeing with what O’Reilly was saying. The main point was- we need to stop thugs like Ludacris and other rappers, comedians who use the N word nonstop, and these types of people from trying to portray themselves as truly black, as if this is what all blacks are like. We need to stop the idea that someone who is getting an education and moving up the ladder of success is somehow “acting white.” Good points, right?
If you take snippets of quotes and put them together however you want, you can distort nearly any conversation.
Fact is- if people could think for themselves and not parrot hate sites like media matters, we’d all be a lot better off.
I will post some FULL quotes, in context, later…
Here’s the scene at Columbia University:
They will not allow military recruiters onto the campus to invite young men and women to join the US military (this is enough evidence for me to suggest that liberals hate the military). But, they will gladly allow a terrorist to come and give a prepared speech.
I was thinking- one of the most common reasons I hear for banning military recruiters on college campuses is the don’t ask, don’t tell policy (signed into law by President Clinton)…I wonder if the liberals in question (Bollinger, for example) care to explain why this policy is so evil, yet they’ll gladly invite a man who leads a nation that takes homosexuals and STONES THEM TO DEATH!! ????
You’ll never get a straight answer on that or any other rational question, because the people that have invited Ahmadinejad are in no way “rational.”
Better yet- a man who calls for the destruction of the Iraeli state and all Jews is fine to come on campus and spread his hate…BUT, would Columbia allow a speaker who calls for the deaths of all blacks?? Even better- fitting their liberal ideology to accept any and all behavior as “normal”- what if the speaker called for the deaths of all gays? I guarantee you that speaker would never be allowed to speak!
Why did Bollinger allow students to rush the stage and attack the Minutemen founder when he came to speak? Why wasn’t he allowed to speak, allowed to finish his statements? Why weren’t the students who rushed the stage suspended or booted from the school altogether? Why the double standards?
These are all good questions. All very rationa queries. I go back to the fact that there is no rationality to be found here. That’s the most reasonable explanation. College campuses gone wild. It’s a sad day when frat parties are actually more rational than the university president himself.
I needed some new checks, so I ordered a box…not just any box. But a box of RATATOUILLE checks from the disney film of the same name (a great movie that I loved).
You’re all jealous, I know. The chicks totally dig it.
I was going to get the address labels, but that was extra, so I said forget that…
Liberals never cease to amaze. They bitch and moan about demanding that you tiptoe around “women’s issues” because dammit women are just as good as men in every level at every job. But, these idiots will gladly invite a terrorist to their college campuses to speak. A terrorist who presides over a regime that routinely stones to death women for any reason they so choose. Liberals are all for feminism and similar ideas, as long as it doesn’t get in their way of hating the US or appeasing terrorists.
Yes, by now I’m sure you’ve heard that prestigious (read: snooty and insane) Columbia University has invited terrorist president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of terrorist nation Iran to come and speak to (gullible and dazed) college students on campus. Yes, folks, as William Kristol pointed out in his piece in The Weekly Standard, Columbia Univ President Lee Bollinger’s reasoning behind the event makes little to absolutely zero sense. Bollinger claims it’s good to have a debate and to ask pointed questions of people, even if you might not fully agree with them (I have a sense these idiots agree more than they disagree with ol Iranian almond joy). This doesn’t make a whole heck of a lot of sense, because it just gives terrorists legitamacy they don’t deserve.
As the guest on The O’Reilly Factor pointed out, and it was my first thought as well- this is akin to inviting Adolph Hitler to talk or having Zawihiri live in a video teleconference for the campus.
There’s absolutely no reason to have Ahmadinejad on campus. Zip, zero, nada. Would they invite the KKK to campus to speak? Hardly. As Kristol points out- Columibia University will glady invite Ahmadinejad to speak, but they refuse to allow the ROTC on campus. Backwards? Only if you’re in the real world outside of the walls of the modern day liberal college campus.
Shame on President Bollinger and shame on Columbia University. Remind me to make sure none of the young adults I know never consider your university.
Drudge had this story linked on the main page…
Some idiot college kid from Central Connecticut State University wrote a piece for the school newspaper where he rants that Bush has taken away our civil liberties (nonsense- none of you can name a single person who has been denied any of his civil rights since 9/11)…he complains that we’re more apt to be attacked because of Bush’s actions (yes- islamic fundamentalists loved us until the Iraq war…ummm wrong!) He then says he basically agrees with much of what bin laden says:
As of late, if you were to bring up the president in a discussion you would find that many Americans disapprove of the decisions he has made. At the same time, Osama bin Laden presents many good arguments against the president and many of his reasons for disapproving of Bush are similar to those of anti-Bush Americans. Would it be wrong to assume that there is some kind of connection between feelings of the American people and those of Osama bin Laden? As I would love to make this connection, I ultimately cannot because of the actions of our president. If I were to say I agree with bin Laden, that would mean that I agree with a terrorist; under the Patriot Act, I could be labeled a potential terrorist and my phone could be tapped, and every move I make could be watched and analyzed.
Newsflash- the only possible way anyone would be listening to your phone conversations would be if you were talking to foreign terrorists. Now, if you don’t want the govt listening to foreign terrorists hatching plots with US citizens…well, let’s hope you never have any power, because we’d all be in a hell of a lot of trouble with your idea of security! No one is listening to a damned thing you say, because you’re too stupid to hatch any evil plots. So, no- you can agree with bin laden all day and the only thing anyone thinks is- “this guy is a nutjob.”
College kids can be so damned stupid sometimes.
Chris Matthews has always been a complete lunatic, but it’s always nice to see video where he continues to prove that on a near daily basis.
This guy is just out of his mind. We’re damned fascists for going into Iraq (we weren’t “invited” he says) and free the people from a murderous tyrant. I really fear for the sanity of these people. They harp all day long about situations like Darfur, but when we take out a brutal monster they go insane and blame America for the problems in a far away land. Yes, because we know Iraq was a friggin paradise under the Butcher of Baghdad! They called the “president” of the nation a butcher!!! Hello- wake up crazy folk!
He goes on about how Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch who owns Fox News…so, clearly in Matthews’ eyes- there’s some sort of evil conspiracy afoot. They censored Sally Field when she said “god damned”. The report from Hardball implies this is crushing free speech!! And why? Well, because Murdoch owns Fox which is more conservative than the commies like Matthews at MSNBC (the lowest rated cable news net on TV). News alert for dear Chrissy- ALL broadcast nets I know of censors the use of “god damned”. No conspiracy, idiot. You and ol’ Schuster are just out of your minds as usual.
This kid who was tasered at a John Kerry event…some people are saying the cops overreacted. Nonsense. If anything, they were too soft on this guy. Let’s be honest- idiots like this should be shot. And not with rubber bullets. Okay, I kid. But seriously- this guy is a pain in the ass child who threw a tantrum, resisted arrest for a long period of times, fought with the police, cursed at them, and did everything in his power to make sure he WAS tasered.
He deserved what he got- no doubt about it.
I’ve seen the tape, and the cops warned him repeatedly that if he continued to resist arrest and not put his hands behind his back that he WOULD BE tasered, end of story. He kept resisting, struggled with police, and he yelled curse words at them- if you do this, any sane person knows that the officers are going to follow thru with their threats of enforcement.
This is a petulant child who showed his ass- he got what he had coming, end of story.
Blogged with Flock
I went to see Rob Zombie’s remake of the classic horror film, HALLOWEEN, from brilliant director John Carpenter (well, he was brilliant with Halloween, at least.) I didn’t have very high hopes going in, having read that Zombie (whose real name is Cummings, I think) turned it into a film that shows Myers’ childhood and that his family is a white trash dream.
I’ll start off with a few complaints.
The first 40-50 mins of the film was taken up by Myers as a child and his wife trash family and his escape 15 years later. It’s nearly an hour in, from what I could tell, before we ever meet the original film’s main character- Laurie Strode, wonderfully played by Jamie Lee Curtis (I guess the plus side is that Laurie, in this version, is very cute in a dorky sort of manner with the ‘smart girl’ glasses and all).
That was just a bad move. I didn’t want to see William Forsythe scream drunken obscenities at anyone, let alone Sheri Moon Zombie (the director’s wife) who is 1. a terrible actress, and 2. annoying as all hell. She is the epitome of white trash in all three of the films Zombie has directed. That and her high pitched whiny, barely knows how to read a script, voice. Ick.
Why Zombie thought it would be a good idea to make Myers a victim of white trash family, I have no idea. The character shouldn’t be explained if you ask me. In the original, Carpenter was brilliant in making Myers a new person, a character that was called “the Shape”. He wasn’t a man who grew out of a boy who was semi-abused as a youngster. His family was well off and almost professional looking from what we saw of them in the 1978 original. He was made all that much scarier because he wasn’t explained, he never spoke a word, we didn’t know why he was evil, just that he was evil. That was truly frightening, and it’s what made the original so creepy. That and Myers was never in full open view in the first film. In Zombie’s film, Myers is out in front of the camera nearly the entire time. It made for a completely lame and not-so-scary boogeyman. I didn’t find this version the teeniest tiniest bit creepy. All I could do was sit there thinking- this is the ugly white trash kid with the bloated face. Big whoop.
Zombie is not only obsessed with white trash, he’s also obsessed with vulgarity. This film starts off with Forsythe’s character talking about his stepdaughters “dumper”. There is constant use of the F word and even worse. It seems that Zombie writes his films like he lives his own life if the tattoos and long hair are any sign of what he’s really like. I mean, does anyone look at Zombie and think anything outside of “this guy is scary white trash.”?? I know I sure don’t. So, the language is what you’d expect from a guy whose arms are covered in tattoos, makes music videos with the devil, and calls himself “zombie.” Still- way over the top. Also- why did every female in the film need to get naked? In Linda’s case it was bye bye to her top and her bottom! And why do actresses today so easily remove their clothes? It’s downright embarassing.
Sure, there was nudity in the original, but it wasn’t girl topless for 5 mins, it was just quick shots of Linda without her top in bed and Annie (I honestly don’t remember if they showed anything with her? I don’t remember them showing anything outside of her bare back when she was changing her butter-soaked clothes.)
So, white trash, over the top vulgarity, and nudity nudity nudity. Great start to destroying a horror classic.
Myers, as I mentioned, isn’t scary in this one. Why? There’s absolutely no tension. The film is horribly put together and edited. I have a feeling Zombie’s lexicon doesn’t include the word “pacing.” As many others have stated, it feels like 2 or 3 films put together. A story of young Michael, his escape and the nonsense that went along with that, and the remaking of the original with Laurie, Linda, and Annie…Tommy and Lynday added in as well. Because of that, I felt like I was sitting there forever, going through a horribly boring backstory, watching young Myers interact with a horrible remake of Sam Loomis (he’s not played by Caligula and is out to cash in on Myers with the book he authored on the subject!), waiting for ANYTHING remotely interesting to happen. Once the backstory and escape parts are over, it feels as if Zombie merely rushed through the parts that most closely match the original version in order to be allowed to call it Halloween. It seemed to me that Zombie never wanted to remake or reimage or re-whatever Halloween, but that he wanted to make yet another lame white trash-laden “horror” flick about a young boy who murders his family, to hell with the adult Myers and the original film.
For proof of this- take the scene of Linda, Laurie, and Annie leaving Haddonfield High after school. One- it’s too vulgar. Zombie seems to think that it’s a good idea for all his female characters to be as perverted and unlikeable as possible. Linda is telling the story of how she flashed her (insert gross term for vagina here) during cheerleading when she decided to wear no panties. I vaguely remember the word “snatch” in there somewhere. What a shocker- Zombie’s vocabulary is stuck in middle school. Second, the scene lasts maybe a minute. There’s zero character development, and we have no idea who these girls are. Nothing sets them apart at all. In the original, we knew Laurie was the smart, school-oriented girl scout-type, Linda was the somewhat slutty and dopy one, and Annie was a lesser version of Annie, but actually semi-Laurie in that she was babysitting too, though trying her best to get out of it to see her grounded boyfriend.
Sure, Deborah Hill’s “girl” dialogue in the original was halfway lame and not 100% believeable, but it wasn’t over-the-top anything, and it made sense within the context of the overall film. Zombie’s characters are one dimensional, and worse- they’re boring and no one cares what happens to them. We know very little about Laurie herself, so we don’t care much what happens to her. Plus, like I said before- the scenes in the end feel totally rushed and almost obligatory, as if Zombie said “I don’t want to add these scenes, but damn it we sort of have to to be able to call it Halloween.”
In the original, we spent time with Laurie, getting to know who she was. We had to care about her, because Hill and Carpenter made her the type of person we should care about. Zombie’s goal seemed to be to just brutally kill off any character who ventured into frame as gruesome and bloody as possible. Throwing in heaping doses of female nudity and vulgar language as a bonus. To hell with decent character development and good storytelling. That nonsense need not apply here.
He left out key scenes- like the closet, myers sitting up in the background, myers running into tommys bullies, myers driving, myers behind bush w/ laurie. These were all scenes that made the original a classic and a great work of art. The differences in the Zombie film stuck out like a sore thumb.
Zombie failed on all accounts here. Even without comparing it to the original- this film fails completely as a horror movie. It’s not one bit scary, it’s not exciting, it’s not entertaining. It’s dull, it’s lame, it’s boring…Myers beats up a house for about 10 mins in Zombie’s film if that tells you anything about its merits as a horror film in general.
I was actually looking forward to this remake for some time. But, I have to say I was definitely let down.
I am being threatened with legal action by Sharon Reed, a reporter from WOIO- a Cleveland, OH CBS affiliate for posting 2 pictures of her appearing in a news story she did where she posed nude with a group of people as part of the story itself. It was a sweeps stunt and she was ridiculed by many on the net and various journalism pundits for being part of the story instead of just reporting the story. I made the same criticism, and the 2 pictures were added to explain what I was commenting on.
Reed left a station in Philly after she supposedly threatened another female anchor named Alicia Taylor on various online message boards.
Anyhow- Reed sent me an E-Mail claiming I am violating the copyright on the images by posting them to this site. She demanded I remove the images or face other possible consequences. Of course, I have every right to use the images on my commentary, as fair use comes into play. Reed didn’t catch that part of the copyright law, I guess? Or she just feels like a fool for posing nude and wants to expunge the public record of her exploits. She also demanded I contact every search engine that has any cache of the page or the images and demand they remove them.
Well, I don’t take bullying very well- so I contacted the Electronic Frontier Foundation for help. I am awaiting a call from them with advice and information on what my options are.
The funny part is- I googled her a bit ago and found this quote in another article about her story where she posed nude-
“FTVLive.com, a TV news Web site, posted several nude Reed stills yesterday and reports registering more new members than on any other day in its history.
“Reed knew the pics would get around. ‘I know the images will be around forever. I’m personally comfortable having it out there,’ she told us Monday.
“Reed said posing nude was ‘about art,’ was ‘hard to do,’ and has changed her life.”
So, she knew the pics would get around and she’s comfortable having them out there. I guess she’s had a change of heart.
Anyway- I will be fighting for my first amendment rights of free speech without being bullied by a lame reporter from Cleveland. I won’t be intimidated by catty women who have nothing better to do than to send off bogus legal threats. I will try to update this…that all depends on what information I get from EFF.